Do you think recreational boats should be licensed?

[first wind]

Originally Posted by rwidman

Every time this subject comes up, it brings the nut cases out of the woodwork. Against my constitutional rights! Won't solve anything, look at the crazy divers out there! It's just a government money grabbing scheme!, etc.

I don't see how anyone of sound mind can think that testing and licensing won't make things safer on the water. Testing and licensing won't make the waterways accident free but by having people at least exposed to the rules and requirements, most will be safer operators.

For a forum that can argue for twenty pages on the importance of knowing and following the COLREGS, I can't understand any objection to requiring other boaters to know them.

it's amazing that people who love big government and are for more government control can't seem to be in a discssion with people who disagree without making it personal. it is a sure sign that you don't have a very strong argument if you have to resort to name calling, otherwise you'd stick to debating the issue.

to address your last statement, it's one thing to say that people should educate themselves. it's entirely another to say the government should have even more control over our lives. it's easy to scoff and laugh at people who are concerned about personal liberty....until yours is at risk.

[first wind]

Originally Posted by deblen

The PCOC simply shows you have been exposed to basic boater "stuff" before you jump off the turnip truck & into a boat.

Cheers/Len

you have turnips capable of sailing in canada? wow. talk about genetically modified food.

[rgscpat]

The US does not require * Licensing * but almost all states require or are phasing in a minimal mandatory * Education * requirement. What's the difference?
It's a once-only requirement, doesn't have any eyesight, old age, or physical limits, does not expire, does not have a driving or on-water test, and in my experience so far is not intended as a real revenue source for state government. (In my state, our state parks dept. offers the clssses at no cost to participants ... that's no cost as in Nada, null, nichts, non, zilch, zero.) Of course, private and other providers do usually charge, but even these tend to be cheap ... Especially compared to the cost of a citation or accident.
So, in the US, all together now... Education, not License.
Here, our boaters do Not need a Lie-sonse for their Meen-kees. (So sorry, Mr. Blake)

[first wind]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Sorry for not being clearer. My position is:
- basic personal transportation is a human right, in my opinion. No-one should be prevented or hindered from using any self-propelled means of transport: walking, running, biking, skateboards... and this includes small watercraft. and to me that includes sailing dinghies. Of course we prefer that they be somewhat educated and safety-conscious about it. And it's reasonable to restrict an activity where it would be patently unsafe, like bikes on a freeway, or kayaks in a shipping channel.
- driving powered vehicles - automobiles, aircraft, watercraft - which uses a shared infrastructure and where there is risk to others and the general public - is closer to a privilege (that cannot be arbitrarily withheld), and it's reasonable to demand a level of competence and responsibility to exercise this privilege.

[ - and voting is a right of citizenship in a democracy, full stop. and any burden placed on the exercise of that right is anti-democratic. Or are we over democracy now?]

judging by the way things have been going in the country for the last few decades, i sometimes wonder that, myself. however, i wasn't actually advocating a license to vote. i was using the example to make a point. people do a lot of things that can be harmful if done without understanding or competency but, you don't have to have a license for most of them....yet. give it time, though. people, these days, are just begging for government to have a hand in everything.

[first wind]

Originally Posted by rjgmt1

I may not say this correctly and will surely offend someone. We do not understand the freedoms we are giving away. Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand.

If you need someone to blame, we could have learned much more in school than was deemed necessary by those controlling education, so it is all of our, our parents, and our societies fault. Better to start from here and go forward with positive steps.

Apparently, by the responses so far, many in the cruising citizenry of America think we could use a little more government control. Because we all lack a reasonable understanding of our own national history, and what we are currently doing to ourselves, I pass on the following quotes from the beginning of our nation;

"It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it." George Washington
This is the reason man turns eventually to revolution.
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” attributed to George Washington
We (all) have been derelict in our responsibility to control our servant government, and now they seem to control us, the creator of this government.
Perhaps using the moment in teaching others, children, consumers, etc., about use and personal responsibility could be accomplished without licensing for private Citizens. Even this will not prevent some from irresponsibility.
We are feeding the legal and insurance industry instead of addressing our own personal responsibility. Will we learn before we destroy ourselves and our unique nation while trying to find a little safety?
Commercial operators is another story as the state gives them life; they can license commercial operators all they want.
Well, this will get some interesting replies.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by first wind

i refer you to the quote by Banjamin Franklin, in an earlier post.

I am extremely familiar with that quote. It gets dragged out in every single discussion I have ever read that touches on any kind of government regulation.

Let me say officially that I am NOT in favor of more government, more rules, more laws. I think the government has no right to regulate what I do as long as it doesn't harm or infringe on the rights of others.

Which brings up another tired quote, your freedom ends where my nose begins.

It is an unfortunate consequence of the world we live in that there must be rules governing our behaviors and necessarily some way to enforce those rules. Without some rules there is chaos. If you are opposed to any government interference with a person's freedom to live as they choose look at how well that works in countries without any rule of law, Somalia for instance.

The problem is to find a balance between too much government and not enough. I assume you are in favor of some government regulations, say the law against stealing? Otherwise I might decide I like your boat so I can just come and take it.

What about speed limits and no wake zones on the water. I resent the fact that I can't drive my power boat at speed past marinas. That is infringing on my boating rights. So what if my wake causes your boat to smash into a piling.

I've been boating for over 40 years and I have seen a lot of clueless idiots on the water. I don't have some magic answer and I'm not anxious to have to apply for a boating license but requiring some proof of competency before allowing someone to drive a boat seems like it might make sense. How is driving a boat any different in that regard than driving a car? Are you in favor of repealing the requirement to have a driver's license?

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Sorry for not being clearer. My position is:
- basic personal transportation is a human right, in my opinion. No-one should be prevented or hindered from using any self-propelled means of transport: walking, running, biking, skateboards... and this includes small watercraft. and to me that includes sailing dinghies. Of course we prefer that they be somewhat educated and safety-conscious about it. And it's reasonable to restrict an activity where it would be patently unsafe, like bikes on a freeway, or kayaks in a shipping channel.
- driving powered vehicles - automobiles, aircraft, watercraft - which uses a shared infrastructure and where there is risk to others and the general public - is closer to a privilege (that cannot be arbitrarily withheld), and it's reasonable to demand a level of competence and responsibility to exercise this privilege.

[ - and voting is a right of citizenship in a democracy, full stop. and any burden placed on the exercise of that right is anti-democratic. Or are we over democracy now?]

Anyway, yeah I still think drivers need licences and boaters need some proof of competency. I would hope that a sensible card scheme would have reasonable allowances for uncarded people to be able to helm under controlled conditions.

Well said.

[first wind]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I was actually trying to make a point about the plain fact that the idiot driving the plane is likely to do damage only once. The other one will likely do the damage again and again.

The worst one is the one that has a license. Some of us will tend to think they are competent because they hold a license.

b.

yes. i fully understood what you meant. i think it's a valid point. and i also agree with your additional statement, above.

[first wind]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

The very few nutcases and yahus who are speeding down no wake zones drunk out of their minds will stop doing that whether or not they were licensed. And the responsible boaters will still be responsible boaters, only now a few dollars poorer and hassled for their time to take the course.

Once again we are looking for a lost coin not where it possibly fell but under a lampost because the area is lighted and we feel better looking there. Instead of dealing with the nuts, we are going to burden the responsible ones while patting ourselves on the back for a good job we're doing keeping our waterways safe. While the nuts will continue their unabated craziness because we do not have testicular fortitude to really come down hard on their antics. 'Cause more often then not these nuts are the children of local LEO's, prominent businesspeople, politicians, state and local owrkers, etc. Very few poor youthful shmucks can afford their own boat to play with and with this licensing proposal even fewer will be able to afford them. And 20 years from now we will all be wondering where did all the boaters of the next generation go?

If this proposal gets implemented chuck it up as another win for the long hand of the big government. Old Ben's warning is still as relevant today as it was 250 years ago. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

very good points

I wonder how the US survived so far withothe ut boaters being required to be licensed.

the same can be said for seatbelt and helmet laws, bicycle helmet laws, and a lot of other nanny state regulations.

[jkindredpdx]

I voted yes and consider the Boater Safety class required in our state to be an operators license. I believe it is only required for motorized boats (including jet skis), or you can't get insurance or registration.

I think it should include canoes and kayaks since the primary focus is on rules of the road, PFDs etc. Although not required, I asked my girl friend to study and take the test also.

There is a big difference between intrusive bloated government and requiring basic training. I grew up in a boating and hunting family. I also endorse hunter training courses and believe anyone owning a gun should pass a safety/competence test. It is no different than a drivers test.

[Moonos]

Originally Posted by first wind

sorry if i misunderstood you.

i don't live where you live. i don't know that your licensing law has an effective educational element

Fair enough mate.

Btw here is the licensing requirements for boats in NSW, Australia
Page 8
Other states likely similar

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/documents/maritime/licence/boating-handbook.pdf

In summary. It's only required when commanding a motor vessel over 10 knots. It includes education. Seems like a reasonable system to me.

[weinie]

I'll agree to a new law for this if any two other laws are repealed.

[DefinitelyMe]

I really wish they would introduce licensing for recreational boats here in Bermuda. Every nice day in the summer the water is just full of idiots who have never heard of collision regulations. My favourite is when they start shouting at me that i'm an idiot because their boat is bigger than mine and i'm standing on as i'm required to. It doesn't need to be anything arduous, just an online test perhaps, but i think it could make a big difference here at least. Don't they have something like this in Canada?

[Polux]

Quite surprising the pole results. Hearing the opinions of many members on this forum, that strongly oppose any mandatory boat licence, I thought that wile on Europe the need of some sort of licence is recognized on many countries, on the US most would not see with good eyes a mandatory boat licence.

It seems I was wrong. A majority think that recreational boats should have a licence (56%), at least when exceeding some length and horsepower.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by weinie

I'll agree to a new law for this if any two other laws are repealed.