Re: WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?

In article
<700dc218-4374-41ac-b1cb-6f1df0760903@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
-hh  <recscuba_google@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>KingOfTheApes <comandante.ban...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and
>> couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions.
>
>Kind of an interesting self-contradiction you're making, by first
>talking about how these boats are huge and expensive, yet now they're
>owned by uneducated high school dropouts, which is a demographic with
>very low incomes.  With just a McDonald's job, how can they afford the
>gas to be constantly running their boats?

The "salarimen" have taken to motorboating, with cabin cruisers. 
They have the cash, but less time to learn to operate the craft.

Most marinas are built for boats up to 39'/12m length, 11'6"/3.5m
wide. The new cigar boats and cabin cruisers are too big for them, 
so they are often forced to anchoring.


>> But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You
>> can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim
>> in the intracostal anymore.
>
>You sure that you're not smelling naturally occurring organics?
>Afterall, the ICW runs through a lot of muddy marshes and estuaries.

There is remarkably little pollution from watercraft of any type
around here.

>> Their main threat though is to life and property...
>>
>> "Here are some startling statistics regarding boating accidents from
>> the United States Coast Guard:
>>
>> In 2005, states and jurisdictions re****ted a total of 12,942,414
>> registered recreational boats compared with 12,781,476 in 2004.
>> The 4,969 boating accidents ...
>
>0.04% incidence.  Yes, very 'startling'.  You would have to boat for
>over 25 years just to get up to a 1% risk.

There are some "peak" risk groups. The insurance for a cigar boat
without a proper skipper exam and practice is now about $100 per
horsepower per year. With proper traning do***ented you can almost
cut a digit from those prices. Some insurance agencies refuse to
insure > 100 hp, 12 tons or 13 m/42' without skipper certifications.

>> The most common types of boats involved in re****ted accidents were
>> open motorboats (45%), personal watercraft (PWC) (26%), and cabin
>> motorboats (14%).
>
>And 15% missing.  FYI, this data is statistically meaningless without
>the context of the relevant contributing base population also being
>provided.
>
>> Increases were observed in the number of re****ted
>> fatalities involving PWC, cabin motorboats, inflatables, sailboats,
>> and houseboats from 2004.
>
>With 160,938 more registered watercraft, is this really surprising
>that the observed total also increased?
>
>> A decrease was observed in the number of fatalities
>> involving canoes/kayaks and rowboats...
>
>Was this because they as a group became safer, or because they as a
>group became fewer?  You don't know because that can only be answered
>if the relevant contributing base population context was included ...
>which here it is not.  As such, you have  "true statements" being made
>that are functionally meaningless because they fail to determine
>causality.

Indeed.

Authorities here are reviewing ideas of zone separation for different
craft. 5kn speed limits proposed for motorboats outside zones, and
licensing for larger crafts with a point system for revoking the
licence.

-- mrr