Visit our Popular Forums

**boatman61** · 28-01-2016, 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Ann,
Without hijacking the thread, this link explains a Line of Duty Investigation
Military Line of Duty (LOD) Investigations

Why is this type of logic not applied even loosely to the civilian world?
My personal belief is in the US anyway there is a belief that because I exist and consume Oxygen, I am entitled to many things, I see it often confused as "Rights". That is just a personal opinion, the idea of personal responsibility is "Old Fashioned"
Where do you draw the line too, for example assume someone is diagnosed with AIDS, should they be marked somehow or even legally required to tell a partner?
How about a criminal, committing a criminal act that causes them to be injured, should Society pay that individual a monthly stipend for the rest of their life (Disability)?

If you do something really stupid and the rescuer gets hurt or killed, are you liable?
I think there is precedence here, if your being chased by a Cop, your liable for him.
US law, I have no idea about the rest of the World.

Should a Government agency be allowed to declare your Passage "Manifestly unsafe" and remove you from your vessel, causing it's abandonment?

Tough questions, too tough I believe to be answered, especially by a Politician.

I was under the impression the USCG already made one leave the boat.. if called out for a rescue.. whereas the RNLI will tow you in.. conditions permitting.. those boys do love a challenge...

Personally I will wait till the Fat Lady sings before I judge as I have been bashed on here in the past while on deliveries when events have started cascading... highly amusing to read later..

Kinda like the old guys at the dockyard shaking their collective heads and going "Tsk Tsk'... don't want to paint her black lad...

"
Then at the launch stand there going... "Always reckoned Black a great colour for a boat.. and that gold strip n brightwork really set her off..

"

**a64pilot** · 28-01-2016, 05:15

I don't know for sure what the USCG can do, and what they are allowed to do, and what they do, as there may be variations on all of that, depending on conditions?

Seems from reading a few years back the owner of the Westsail 32, Satori was made to abandon his vessel by the USCG. Quite possible his crew was crying "help we are sinking" etc. over the VHF unknown to him while he was on deck. CG shows up, he is forced to abandon his boat.
I don't like that, I would rather it be, we come once, you don't leave, your own your on. We'll take crew off etc., but we aren't coming back.
But I don't usually get things my way.

So with these Old guys, should the authorities impound their boat for their and others safety?

SaltyMonkey · 28-01-2016, 05:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by boatman61

Personally I will wait till the Fat Lady sings before I judge as I have been bashed on here in the past while on deliveries when events have started cascading...

Huh? Are you still grumblin' on about that? We all can't remember what the hell happen'd after that first beer.

conachair · 28-01-2016, 05:49

Knox-Johnstone doesn't seem to be the biggest supporter...

https://www.facebook.com/bbcspotligh...0136577718506/

**boatman61** · 28-01-2016, 05:50

If its up to the job... no.
Back in '02/3 we had another American Capt Calamity working his way along the S.Coast.. by the time he got to Salcombe I think he was on his 14th callout.. these guys are not the first and doubtful the last

ausnp84 · 28-01-2016, 06:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Should a Government agency be allowed to declare your Passage "Manifestly unsafe" and remove you from your vessel, causing it's abandonment?

Tough questions, too tough I believe to be answered, especially by a Politician.

The Government can section you if they deem you mentally unstable, so why shouldn't they be allowed to remove you from a vessel if they deem it unsafe?

There was a story a year or so ago of a "yachtsmen" trying to paddle (? sail?) across the Atlantic in what was pretty much a bath tub. The RNLI (a non-government coastguard) "persuaded" him to come back ashore... read into that what you will.

n

**a64pilot** · 28-01-2016, 06:51

Everyone has an opinion, they are like well you know

My opinion is if your not endangering the public, causing any undue hardship upon others etc. you should be allowed to do as you please.
Example, if you have always wanted to ascend to great heights in a lawn chair suspended by weather balloons, you should be allowed to, but not allowed to do it inside of LAX's airspace.

I guess any record setting attempt of any kind, made by anyone ought to be subject to a Government review to see if it's deemed safe to do so?

Not trying to Troll, just point out that Freedoms once surrendered, may be hard to get back. I believe I should be allowed to do something stupid, that will most likely result in my demise, but I do not believe I should be allowed to endanger others, or cause the Public to expend monies to come get me.
I know it would never happen, but instead of impounding their boat, I would like to see them be allowed to leave, after having explained we aren't coming to get you though, sign here to say you understand and agree.

On edit, as far as I know there has been no discussion of impounding their boat, That all came from me. Just to be clear.

Muckle Flugga · 28-01-2016, 06:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by boatman61

...
Once you cast off your just another seaman..
...

Well this is where we agree more than ever!

**boatman61** · 28-01-2016, 06:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by conachair

Knox-Johnstone doesn't seem to be the biggest supporter...

https://www.facebook.com/bbcspotligh...0136577718506/

Funny how perspective's change...

He was much more 'Gung Ho' in the '60s'..
Before the 'Guru' image...

Island Time O25 · 28-01-2016, 07:10

Perhaps someone here who has knowledge of the maritime/admiralty law can elucidate further.

I vaguely recall coming across this old description of traditional powers of the harbor authorities under the maritime/admiralty law as able to prevent any vessel or captain or crew deemed un-seaworthy to leave that port until the deficiencies are remedied, etc. Is that a fair short description of the law and if so does it still apply today? I understand that with the proliferation of boats and lack of budgetary funds, etc. such rules may not get any practical use but still be interesting to know if they still exist on the books.

**boatman61** · 28-01-2016, 07:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

Perhaps someone here who has knowledge of the maritime/admiralty law can elucidate further.

I vaguely recall coming across this old description of traditional powers of the harbor authorities under the maritime/admiralty law as able to prevent any vessel or captain or crew deemed un-seaworthy to leave that port until the deficiencies are remedied, etc. Is that a fair short description of the law and if so does it still apply today? I understand that with the proliferation of boats and lack of budgetary funds, etc. such rules may not get any practical use but still be interesting to know if they still exist on the books.

Practiced in marine law in Portugal for a variety of reasons.. including the skipper not having accredited qualifications.
Its the HM's choice to make.. often they just want you gone..
For example.. I got towed into Horta, Azores when the electric's failed on a Lagoon I was delivering.. clusterflock situation..

Result.. I had to be inspected and cleared by a Navy engineer before I could continue... ended up being inspected twice.. 1st for the elec's.. then when I went for my clearance as seaworthy papers they decided they should inspect the engines.. that the problem had been resolved by me within 48hrs of arriving and getting a good to go inspection by an electrical engineer counted for nought..
I ended up having to stay 19days before being cleared to continue.. good for the local economy but an expensive PITA for the owner and myself.