Would mandatory licensing change things?

[Cpt Pat]

Originally Posted by billknny

Actually, there is a third reason. To collect fees, which are then spent checking to see if you have a license, which is really all that state programs are.

For all you licensing advocates, here how about this example of a boat driven by a fully licensed by the Coast Guard Captain...

I used to teach sailing professionally. I had one young lady as a student who had a license from Germany to sail a boat. From what I could see, the German license exam was about as rigorous as the USCG Captain's exam. She passed. She had no idea how to sail a boat. (Note: Good on her she recognized it and took lessons!)

Referring to the photo: if the motorboat was "actively engaged in fishing" or if the sailboat was "being propelled by machinery" (regardless of whether it had a sail up) -- then the motorboat was the stand-on vessel (had the "right of way"). They're both at fault, of course, based on only the evidence in the photo.

[evm1024]

Originally Posted by Pete17C

I'm sure there are differences, but NY law says "At intersections not controlled by signs or signals, or where two or more drivers stop at STOP signs at the same time and they are at right angles, the driver on the left must yield the right-of-way to the driver on the right."

please note the "where two or more drivers stop at STOP signs at the same time" which would mean if one car stopped first, the rule does not apply, and defaults back to first come, first served

Much the same in Washington and Oregon.

You will need to look up case law to decide what at the same time means. To assume it means if one car stopped first, the rule does not apply is what we are talking about.

For example: Driver A (on the left) says I clearly stopped first so I went first. Driver B (on the right says) I was clearly in the intersection first so I went first. Who is right?

The Judge says "You were both in the intersection at the same time so the driver A was required to yield to driver B. Driver A you are charged with failing to yield right of way."

Further in Washington they get by this thus:

RCW 46.61.180
Vehicle approaching intersection.
(1) When two vehicles approach or enter an intersection from different highways at approximately the same time, the driver of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right.


Apologies to Cpt Pat. This is a side thread that is looking at US driving laws which were used as an example of well intentioned people who do not understand the "full" meaning of the rules of the road.

[Cpt Pat]

Originally Posted by jrbogie

oh my, yes, we need more government intervention into our lives so we can all feel safe. so many unsafe boaters and all because we don't have licenses. I mean, just look how licensing motorists has kept unsafe drivers off the road?

I think last year a mere fifty thousand deaths happened on the highways. maybe licensing boaters we can hit similar safe numbers out on the water.

Does it bother you at all that I could buy a mega yacht, register it as a "recreational" vessel, and put practically anyone at the helm to drive it around at 25 knots? As it is now, it appears only the insurance industry is controlling competence (poorly). Are you happy with your insurance rates? If the insurance industry was on top of things, they could require exams, or give discounts to properly-trained boaters.

So far as safety is concerned, I wouldn't be opposed to a threshold for displacement and speed that would exempt most sailboats. Some point above which, the vessel becomes a real menace to others. But I do object to paying for rescues that should never have happened due to pure ignorance. Why not make the license free? We'd still save money on avoided rescues.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by jrbogie

oh my, yes, we need more government intervention into our lives so we can all feel safe. so many unsafe boaters and all because we don't have licenses. I mean, just look how licensing motorists has kept unsafe drivers off the road?

I think last year a mere fifty thousand deaths happened on the highways. maybe licensing boaters we can hit similar safe numbers out on the water.

Lol, with that level of reasoning all you need to become a dentist, is a pair of pliers [emoji1]

There is no magic pill that will cure idiots or drunk drivers, but government efforts to make their dangerous actions less attractive..... is a good thing!

[evm1024]

It does not appear that the fishing boat was actively engaged in fishing. But the point is well taken.

3(d) The term "vessel engaged in fishing" means any vessel fishing with nets, lines, trawls or other fishing apparatus which restricts manoeuvrability, but does not include a vessel fishing with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict manoeuvrability.

[akprb]

Originally Posted by dkenny64

instead of Gov't regulations what about working through insurance companies to provide good discounts to boaters with licenses.. this would leave the gov't red tape out -dkenny64

This was my first thought.

Keep the government out of it, let the market adjust behavior.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Cpt Pat

Referring to the photo: if the motorboat was "actively engaged in fishing" or if the sailboat was "being propelled by machinery" (regardless of whether it had a sail up) -- then the motorboat was the stand-on vessel (had the "right of way"). They're both at fault, of course, based on only the evidence in the photo.

actually the power vessel was required in this instance according to colregs give way to the sailboat. The section on fishing vessels does not apply to sport fishing.

But yes both are at fault . P the rules say that ultimately all vessel skippers are to do what is necessary to avoid a collision

[Siberian Sea]

Not really sure, some of the biggest idiots I’ve encountered have fancy PHD’s hanging on their office walls. I’m a simple kinda guy but it seems to me that all that education didn’t help them too much with competence nor achieve intellect

[Cpt Pat]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Lol, with that level of reasoning all you need to become a dentist, is a pair of pliers [emoji1]

...Or to fly an airliner -- a fancy uniform.

[Cpt Pat]

Originally Posted by Siberian Sea

Not really sure, some of the biggest idiots I’ve encountered have fancy PHD’s hanging on their office walls. I’m a simple kinda guy but it seems to me that all that education didn’t help them too much with competence nor achieve intellect

I'm a flight instructor. And I believe the point is: you can't teach judgement. But it's still better that a fool has the skills to get out of some of the messes he gets himself into.

[Pete17C]

Originally Posted by evm1024

Much the same in Washington and Oregon.

You will need to look up case law to decide what at the same time means. To assume it means if one car stopped first, the rule does not apply is what we are talking about.

For example: Driver A (on the left) says I clearly stopped first so I went first. Driver B (on the right says) I was clearly in the intersection first so I went first. Who is right?

The Judge says "You were both in the intersection at the same time so the driver A was required to yield to driver B. Driver A you are charged with failing to yield right of way."

Further in Washington they get by this thus:

RCW 46.61.180
Vehicle approaching intersection.
(1) When two vehicles approach or enter an intersection from different highways at approximately the same time, the driver of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right.


Apologies to Cpt Pat. This is a side thread that is looking at US driving laws which were used as an example of well intentioned people who do not understand the "full" meaning of the rules of the road.

Who is right? Driver B in the car on the right, because he is (was) already in the intersection (per your description of events) and a car already in the intersection has the right of way over those who have not yet entered

first hit on google searching for "yield to car on the right" is this

"Always yield to the car that arrived first. If you and another driver reach the intersection at the same time, yield if the car is on your right."

and lawyers would have a field day with "at approximately the same time" (3 seconds? 20 seconds? 5 minutes?)

but you do you, I'll be on my way down the road

[evm1024]

Originally Posted by Pete17C

first hit on google searching for "yield to car on the right" is this

"Always yield to the car that arrived first. If you and another driver reach the intersection at the same time, yield if the car is on your right."

and lawyers would have a field day with "at approximately the same time" (3 seconds? 20 seconds? 5 minutes?)

but you do you, I'll be on my way down the road

As a bold driver who insists on your right on way I offer this quote from a driving school.

Originally Posted by DriversEd.com

Never insist on taking the right-of-way. Note that the law does not allow anyone the right-of-way. It only states who must yield. When a driver is legally required to yield the right-of-way but fails to do so, other drivers are required to stop or yield as necessary for safety. So, if another driver does not yield to you when he or she should, forget it. Let the other driver go first. You will help prevent accidents and make driving more pleasant.

So in the case of the "bold" sailor mandatory licensing would not change things. The bold will insist that they have the right of way.

[HBrew]

As we know, the amount of knowledge required to be a responsible boater is quite significant. I don't think a govt issued license is the answer. Most people who buy a boat buy insurance (personally I think third party insurance should be mandatory).
The training needed is already there Asa, yachtmaster etc
Anyway, what if the insurance companies gave substantial incentives to get qualified? Maybe a carrot rather than stick approach would work better.

[Island Time O25]

It's a little clearer in MA.

"When two vehicles approach or enter an intersection of any ways, as defined in section one of chapter ninety, at approximately the same instant, the operator of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right."

[rabbi]

We have mandatory licensing in Germany, including written & practical exams. Not too hard to pass but enough that need to study a few days to weeks. You also need some experience to pass the practical exam, which includes getting a MOB safely onboard under sail.

And guess what: You won't notice a difference in the level of seamanship. They all do the same stupid mistakes as everywhere.

Reason: Most folks get certified but don't practice. They go out on a one week charter trip every other year in a group of 6-8 people.
Now how much time at the helm does each of these have after ten years? A few hours.
How many quick & critical decision does each one of them have make as an individual (not as a group)? One? None?


The good thing about this thread: I learned how to survive a 4 stop sign intersection - which we don't have in germany.