since the thread about bad boaters was so interesting, i think it is time for a real poll. i'm interested if anyone would have a problem with a mandatory boat safety course and something like a boat driver's license. i realize all of the boat rental companies would have a serious problem with this, but what about the people that are on the water most of the time and have to deal with dangerous operators?

It is mandatory to take and pass safe boating class in CT. Special license needed for PWC. But bad boaters can take the class and pass.. now you have a bad boater with a license. Safe boating classes are great, but the solution is not that easy.

IMHO, this is and should be a difficult choice.



On the one hand:



I'm always leery of encouraging our wonderful bureaucracy to get its mitts into another area where petty bean counters can clog up the works with forms and fees. What starts out as a well-intentioned (if a tad paternalistic) initiative to protect people from.... each other becomes a mind-numbing grind of fees, whining for more funding, enforcement of ridiculous regulations by control-freaks with badges, etc.



I've read enough "you wouldn't believe the BS I jsut went through" stories on this forum arising just from existing levels of regulation and enforcement.



On the other hand:



The problem is real, and undoubtedly got somebody injured or killed somewhere this summer.



Oddly, though it's a far cry from the current debate on terrorism, the same issues are at stake, "Would you surrender some of your freedom for protection from someone dangerous?" Clearly, we should be prepared to surrender far fewer freedoms and submit to far fewer intrusions in the name of beer-boobs than in the name of international terrorism.



More importantly than the severity of any punitive measures, IMHO, is the percieved likelihood of being caught and punished. Any parent or pet owner can tell you that if your subject thinks they can get away with it "Just this once" or god forbid "some or most of the time" they will be undiscouraged by the attempt at regulation.



But who wants our inland and near-shore waterways crawling with gendarmerie, madly scribbling boat id's in their little pads?



I'm attempting to propose a solution which bends the forces in conflict here into a direction so that they opppose each other in a productive way:



How about legislation of some kind empowering boaters to report each other to a "Petty Adjudication", at the expense of either the plaintif or the defendant, whomever loses? Instead of licensing everybody, make their right to boat no less accessible initially, but revokable or penalizable for proven bad conduct. Thus, presumed innocent, but "on notice" that irresponsibility will result in real loss of property or privilege.



While this is impractical right now for most cat sailors, consider the number of video cameras in the general population, particularly in the demographic segment which can afford yachts. Let those guys start taping and reporting each other, and thus creating a perception of real risk of likely penalties for stupidity. See how fast Toshiba et. al. come up with a comparitively cheap waterproof camcorder (or case) having only 10 mins of memory, marketed to boaters.



With the proper enabling legislation, crafted to keep this in the civil sector, (Government voluntarily foregoing a chance to grow into another area? Hah!!) lawyers could apply for the certification to be an approved "Petty Adjudicator" to which a plaintiff could go to seek redress for an alleged infraction, costs borne by the loser, penalties assesed according to legislated standards by an attorney whose fees are likewise stipulated.

as a professional, i know that one of the things that keeps most professionals honest (easy there, i'm not saying professionals are not honest) is the fear of being hauled in front of the licensing board and having the priveledge to practice taken away. boating licenses will also have this affect.

Respectfully, Ed, Wouldn't thou be better off with a mandatory limit on the amount that they had to know before they endeavored on a circumnavigation of their island. Best that thy know the difference between "Land Ho!", and "Ahoy Mate!" before ye sets forth on a sail. Shivver me timbers, and godspeed.

Please......No More Rules. I'm sick of the suggestion that if only we train em and license em our problems will go away. One need only take a short drive down the road to see how well that works.



Never give up your freedom. Even if you think you'll be safer. You won't.



Mike Catley

i do not advocate more rules, just enforcement of the ones we have. in florida we have licenses for driving, fishing, hunting, just to name a few. generally, the requirement for licenses has helped to educate people. florida also requires a driver education course before issuing a learner's permit.



in most cases, license fees are used to fund education and enforcement. tampa bay is as big as tampa and st pete put together yet there are only a fraction of law enforcement employees on the water.



i know, i hear it now... more taxes. i would gladly pay a little to be safer when boating.



why is it that nobody with any sense would take out an airplane without lessons, but offer them a small water vehicle that can move as fast as a car and off they go. i'll tell you what, i feel much safer flying an airplane where everyone in the air is educated and licensed.



the water is getting more and more crowded and this is only going to get worse as time goes on.

NEVER EVER vote for a tax increase. If more money is needed let the people you vote into office put their butts on the line and make the decsion. Thats their job.



There is plenty of enforcement in this area. You would have to require everyone to get a capitans license in order to effect a worth while change. And still you would have problems.



It will never be a perfect world.....sorry



Mike

when i said more taxes, i was referring to the license fee.

Of course licensing will have a positive effect; (though not all licensed car drivers seem to fear this eventuality - I posit the "percieved liklihood of consequences" is lower on the open water than on the roads, where a police car may be hiding around any corner. Lower real fear of being caught will engender higher rates of beer-boobing-with-impugnity.)



My question goes to the cost in freedoms lost and annoyances engendered, fees collected and officious officials put on the payroll.



I bethought myself of an unlikely, utopian even, solution which would ratchet up the "percieved liklihood of consequences" more than the real likelihood of the costs above. I still maintain it is more effective to make people expect very likely correction than to expect unlikely-but-horrendous consequences. If the latter affected most of us, we wouldn't fly airplanes, drive cars etc etc. Yet the very-likely-but-only-mildly-painful consequences of catching a bee in cupped hands is quite convincing to just about anybody. A bit extreme, but it serves to illustrate the trendline.



That in a nutshell is what's wrong with our entire criminal justice system - huge punishments almost entirely unlikely for a first or second offender. Peole start com;laining about anew kind of infraction, our legislators just proudly pass a bill to increaase the penalty - which in the short term is cost-free to the state. $500 fine for dropping a coffe cup, and the road is littered with them. But if Mrs. Grundy on the corner could snap a poloroid of you and cause you to spend an afternoon cleaning up, with no chance to appeal, (except "mistaken identity") that road would be pristine, one way or another. Swift and certain is way more usefull than unlikely but earthshaking.



But like I said, we Americans don't wish to live in a police state, crawling with people eyeballing us for infractions, so balance is in order.

Last week Tuesday the Alachua County Commission (N. Central Florida listened to its secretly commissioned "Water Zoning Advisory Committee" make its recommendations on new controls on use of public waters in the county. One was a "curfew between 10 PM and 7 AM on boats". When the air boaters attended and complained about secret meetings and unknown members, it was ALL EXPLAINED....... "Oh we didn't mean all boaters, we meant a curfew for Air Boats" ---It turns out---because they don't have mufflers despite an unenforced state law that they have mufflers. So- Don't ever give up ANYTHING to the damn government, the fact is that their Staff Lawyers are looking at everything that is free trying to find ways regulating and then TAXING YOUR @&^^## BUTT!

i suspect this is a way for the commission to say they did something good so they can get more votes come re-election time. despite the fact that the laws are already in effect and just not enforced. passing a new law is less expensive than enforcing an existing law (and someone can take credit for the new law).



does anybody remember bob buckhorn and his 6 foot rule at nude bars because of "the spread of VD due to lap dances" despite the fact that tampa already has a law against prostitution. (a lap dance is prostitution because money is paid for the stripper to get you off.)