Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 21 July 2006, 08:51   #41
Member
 
Country: UK - Wales
Town: swansea
Boat name: Too Blue
Make: BLANK
Length: 8m +
Engine: Suzuki DT225
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searider
No requirement in the code for passengers to wear lifejackets. You just need to have them on board.
Good point - don't see many people on ferries wearing them do you?

Having said that by the very nature of most RIB rides I WILL insist.
__________________

__________________
codprawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 July 2006, 08:52   #42
Member
 
Country: UK - Wales
Town: swansea
Boat name: Too Blue
Make: BLANK
Length: 8m +
Engine: Suzuki DT225
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searider
My 5 year old non swimmer has to wear his lifejacket as soon as we get onto the pontoons.
Good for you - they are probably far more at risk on the pontoon than they are on the boat.

I have seen numerouse near misses when people are wandering around marinas - they seem to think they are still on dry land - on the boat they tend to hold on tight!!!
__________________

__________________
codprawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 July 2006, 09:32   #43
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Southampton
Boat name: SMH Rib / War Shot
Make: Ribtec / Scorpion
Length: 4m +
Engine: 10hp Yam / 150hp opt
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,894
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by codprawn
Good point - don't see many people on ferries wearing them do you?

Having said that by the very nature of most RIB rides I WILL insist.
It seems to be the norm that in charter RIBs that all persons wear lifejackets - I guess that we've all done our risk assessments and agree that lifejackets are a must.
__________________
Searider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 July 2006, 11:49   #44
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: nr Lymington
Boat name: JU-JU
Make: Halmatic PAC22
Length: 6m +
Engine: 140.5 Mermaid
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by codprawn
Where on earth did you get your figures? No evidence at all to support them.Just found this on Wikipedia......
Should have said 'When fitting seat belts in car became mandatory’ as opposed to ‘wearing’ them This happened in 1967 before proper stats of road death were taken, however of the statistics that are available figures vary from 10k to 18k down to 5k which is significant however you look at the figures.

Compulsory lifejackets might save 10 people in sea boating related deaths. Go figure. Des
__________________
Scary Des is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 July 2006, 15:30   #45
RIBnet admin team
 
Poly's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Boat name: imposter
Make: FunYak
Length: 3m +
Engine: 2 stroke YAM 20 HP
MMSI: 235089819
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scary Des
Another issue is that this is an area of the law where people are punished because they ‘might’ do something wrong as opposed to being punished for ‘actually’ doing something. If, as a result of drinking, you always had an accident then a ban makes sense but that is not the case, the vast majority will not have an accident.
no I think it is wrong to drive a boat whilst drunk even if you happen not to have an accident - the same way as it is to drive a car when drunk.
Quote:
An analogy is, small businesses are very likely to fiddle there VAT so because this might happen all small businesses should be fined in anticipation., clearly this make no sense.
thats a crap analogy. and as the director of an SME I take umbridge at the claim we are very likely to fiddle the VAT.
__________________
Poly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 July 2006, 17:35   #46
Member
 
Country: UK - Wales
Town: swansea
Boat name: Too Blue
Make: BLANK
Length: 8m +
Engine: Suzuki DT225
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polwart
no I think it is wrong to drive a boat whilst drunk even if you happen not to have an accident - the same way as it is to drive a car when drunk.
thats a crap analogy. and as the director of an SME I take umbridge at the claim we are very likely to fiddle the VAT.
Quite right. If there is a legal way of avoiding paying even more than you are supposed to why not use it? The government's taxes aren't exactly "fair" are they?
__________________

__________________
codprawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.