# Boating, Passagemaking, and Licensing



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I think many of us have been following the adventures of Ronnie. If not, take a peek at this thread: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...-related/47882-bfs-proponent-rescued-sea.html

We have discussed licensing on this board many times. I bring it up again now as this is a perfect example of leaving the shore unprepared and not equipped for the passage ahead. I have read many threads lately on this board and get the feeling that some people wake up one day, decide to sail around the world, purchase something that floats... and are on their way. Either they are too ignorant of the sea or do not care about the potential impacts on life, possessions, or money to take the time to be a responsible boater. In essense, they could care less about seamanship.

Some of these people make it. Fortune smiled on them. Some are killed. The others rely on the technologies of today (EPIRB, for example) for someone to come and save them. It is these people that primarily concern me.

I for one have weighed the whole licensing issue for some time and have finally come to the conclusion that it is warranted. I think the licensing should be based upon length/tonnage. I feel it should include PWC and bass boats and ski boats. They are not immune from being killed by the water.

I realize many of you dissagree with this as you are likely those that have taken the time to apprecaite the sea. You value seamanship. You realize your lack of preparation or education can kill yourself or others. However, there are many people that do not and will never care unless forced to take some responbsibility for their actions. I feel a license is that first step. You cannot fly a plane without a license. You should not be able to drive a boat without a license. Is a plane really that much more dangerous that it should require a license while a boat should not? I do not think so.

THoughts?

- CD


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Please please please do not invite the government to involve itself into more areas of our lives.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

And unlike a plane, a boat is not going to fall from the sky and land on an otherwise un-involved person or their property. So the comparison is not entirely apples to apples.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Unfortunately, the government is not well suited to judging who is and isn't capable of boating safely, and as such will tend to set the bar fairly low. Unless all of the fees from the boater licensing process are going to improving waterway infrastructure and safety... I'm really not in favor of wasting more money on the government.

As for the comparison of a plane to a boat... planes always fall out of the sky if the fuel runs out or you do something majorly wrong. Boats do not always sink, nor do they always hit someone else... comparing a boat, especially a sailboat, which generally has a relatively low top speed, to a plane is sheer fallacy. With the exception of multihulls and some of the larger boats, like GUI's, most of the sailboats found out there are going to be lucky to get up past seven or eight knots... Not exactly fast enough to be a menace in most cases.

Licensing and mandatory education for powerboats, which have the ability to get up to ridiculous speeds, where control and skill is a factor, especially on things like PWC, would make far more sense. *

When was the last time you heard of a fatality involving a speedboat and a sailboat, where the sailboat killed someone on the powerboat and the sailboat was at fault???*-Never, at least as far as I've heard.

_*When was the last time you heard about a powerboat killing someone on a sailboat, where the powerboat was at fault*_-Clear Lake, Ca; Buzzards Bay, MA; etc.. *that's far too common*.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Licensing doesn't work with cars and it won't work with boats. The old line, being certified does not mean you are qualified. If this was untrue then the death rate of teenage drivers would not be the highest in percentages.

Some people buckle up and some people don't, but when they get into a crash they both call 911. 

That being said, I am all for more boating education as I feel it is the only way things will get better and safer.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

painkiller said:


> And unlike a plane, a boat is not going to fall from the sky and land on an otherwise un-involved person or their property. So the comparison is not entirely apples to apples.


REALLY?

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/8103-can-happen.html


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

Maybe it's not sail-boating that should be licensed, but EPIRB's.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

bubb2 said:


> REALLY?
> 
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/8103-can-happen.html


Yeah. I can explain it to you if you'd like. Shouldn't take but a minute. ;-)


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

painkiller said:


> Yeah. I can explain it to you if you'd like. Shouldn't take but a minute.


Please do!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

painkiller said:


> And unlike a plane, a boat is not going to fall from the sky and land on an otherwise un-involved person or their property. So the comparison is not entirely apples to apples.


It may not fall from the sky, but it can sure sink quickly. That makes it dangerous. You can make someone else sink quickly. As such, you are a liability to others. Also, most planes can, in theory when there is an emergency, find a place to land. That may or may not save them. When at sea, in an emergency, you cannot simply find a safe port.

I do not find comparing cars to boats apples to apples at all. Cars do not sink. Cars do not get beyond a safe port. When your car gets a hole in it, you can get out and walk. In general, you cannot swim back from a boat.

- CD


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Here's what I found on the Interweb, Bubb:

"Uneven pressure. The pressure pushing up from the water is greater than the pressure pushing down in the air. Because of this, I stay atop the water but below the air. This is why boats don't fly."


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

I agree wholeheartedly. Licenses will solve the problem. It's works so well with vehicles after all. 
I also agree with your other post about having survivors sit through a tribunal so that a bunch of strangers can second guess every decision they made in a life threatening situation before activating the epirb. 
Oh, only landowners should be allowed to vote too.:hothead


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Unfortunately, the government is not well suited to judging who is and isn't capable of boating safely, and as such will tend to set the bar fairly low. Unless all of the fees from the boater licensing process are going to improving waterway infrastructure and safety... I'm really not in favor of wasting more money on the government.
> 
> As for the comparison of a plane to a boat... planes always fall out of the sky if the fuel runs out or you do something majorly wrong. Boats do not always sink, nor do they always hit someone else... comparing a boat, especially a sailboat, which generally has a relatively low top speed, to a plane is sheer fallacy. With the exception of multihulls and some of the larger boats, like GUI's, most of the sailboats found out there are going to be lucky to get up past seven or eight knots... Not exactly fast enough to be a menace in most cases.
> 
> ...


Sailboats can kill people too. I remember reading not too long ago about a sailbnoat strking another sailboat at night while at anchor and killing almost everyone who was down below asleep (because they were anchored at night). Also, should I bring up our friend Ronnie or others that have followed in his footsteps??

Putting together a license like we use for cars would not be the most helpful thing in the world... but it would help. It would stop the impulse boaters. I dissagree with anyone who thinks it would not help some. At least they might learn rightr or way and basic navigation.

However, I think for boating, it should be as stringent as flying or like a 6 pack/captain's license. I think it should be involved based upon the tonnage you carry. I think for a ski boat... a "drivers license" type of license. For a large Sea Ray, a tonnage type of license.

- CD


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

painkiller said:


> Here's what I found on the Interweb, Bubb:
> 
> "Uneven pressure. The pressure pushing up from the water is greater than the pressure pushing down in the air. Because of this, I stay atop the water but below the air. This is why boats don't fly."


Say what you want, but one landed on the cabin top of my boat!!!!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

I'm afraid I'm in agreement with most here. Certification and licensing are not anything helpful in many cases.

Certainly if someone is providing a SERVICE we all want to be assured they are qualified and competent and definitely "requiring" them to pass a TEST to get their license is one thing.

If you're going to carry paying passengers, I can certainly see the need.

However, if you're like me and all I want to do is get out from under already stifling regulation in everything I do then licensing people to "drive a boat" is silly. 

On the other hand I've no problem with someone taking a boating safety course and so forth. The Coast Guard offers them I noted on a couple of sites I was just reading.

I'm in the IT/Security field these days. The GOVERNMENT is starting to REQUIRE you have good old Microsoft Certified Security Engineer certifications. This is the most idiotic thing they can do at this time in history.

Computers are everywhere, and everyone 'drives them'.

It isn't the people like me who maintain networks and physical security systems that NEED THE TRAINING! It's the USERS. But are the users being required to have certification? They are the ones who get the viruses. They are the ones that pour coffee in my remote access panels. They are the ones who break things.

Why do *I* need a certification to prove I can (and have been for years) maintain(ing) the equipment?

No... licensing boaters with a drivers license is a silly idea.

The Government can't even take care of it's own "ship" - what makes them or anyone else think they can make me "better take care of mine"?

Government needs to get the HELL out of my life and everyone elses.

The job I do is protect this country. I do it in the background, without asking ANYONE for help. The government needs to take a long, hard look at the lessons the military can teach them. Do your job, do it in the background, keep the bad guys out, and leave the people ALONE.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> It may not fall from the sky, but it can sure sink quickly. That makes it dangerous. You can make someone else sink quickly. As such, you are a liability to others. Also, most planes can, in theory when there is an emergency, find a place to land. That may or may not save them. When at sea, in an emergency, you cannot simply find a safe port.
> 
> I do not find comparing cars to boats apples to apples at all. Cars do not sink. Cars do not get beyond a safe port. When your car gets a hole in it, you can get out and walk. In general, you cannot swim back from a boat.
> 
> - CD


The world is dangerous. You can't legislate it all away.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

bubb2 said:


> Say what you want, but one landed on the cabin top of my boat!!!!


Whoa!! Hey, you should create a wikipedia entry to refute my claim that a boat cannot fall from the sky!! You have proof!


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Anybody who forces their children to accompany them on a boat is putting their children in a dangerous situation and the children should promptly be removed from that irresponsible family.:hothead


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

This may be a little off-topic, but what is up with that new puking emoticon??

uke 

:laugher


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

knothead said:


> Anybody who forces their children to accompany them on a boat is putting their children in a dangerous situation and the children should promptly be removed from that irresponsible family.:hothead


People should be licensed to even HAVE children!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> It may not fall from the sky, but it can sure sink quickly. That makes it dangerous. You can make someone else sink quickly. As such, you are a liability to others. Also, most planes can, in theory when there is an emergency, find a place to land. That may or may not save them. When at sea, in an emergency, you cannot simply find a safe port.
> 
> I do not find comparing cars to boats apples to apples at all. Cars do not sink. Cars do not get beyond a safe port. When your car gets a hole in it, you can get out and walk. In general, you cannot swim back from a boat.
> 
> - CD


Ummm.....

If you're going to compare things, then emergencies happen in cars and trucks too.

Planes are a little different than anything else. The laws of physics keep them in the air. Break the 'rules' (by attempting maneuvers that they aren't built for as an example) and they crash.

The exact same thing applies to both cars and boats - and bicycles and skateboards and roller skates. Why don't we have license for cellular telephones? People are 1) using radio systems.... I have to have a license to use MY radios. And they use them in cars and crash because of them. 2) People on skateboards and roller skates crash all the time on sidewalks, running old people down (in my area especially for some reason). They have licenses. They can crash...

and the lists go on.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

knothead said:


> Anybody who forces their children to accompany them on a boat is putting their children in a dangerous situation and the children should promptly be removed from that irresponsible family.:hothead


I don't get it.

- CD


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Cruisingdad said:


> I don't get it.
> 
> - CD


Stupidity should be outlawed.:hothead


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Legislating problems doesn't fix problems. Period.

You're all about to find that out depending on the elections in the next few days.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

painkiller said:


> Whoa!! Hey, you should create a wikipedia entry to refute my claim that a boat cannot fall from the sky!! You have proof!


Every boat I have ever seen in the air fell. It's a Einstein thing!!! Try taking your boat your through some big breakers, you will get air time.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> Ummm.....
> 
> If you're going to compare things, then emergencies happen in cars and trucks too.
> 
> ...


That's a silly comparison. I am being serious.

Is boating really that much less dangerous than flying a plane?? Licensing will not suddenly stop the idiots nor will it suddenly stop all fatalities. However, it would help.

How many times have you been cut off by a motor boat that did not know right of way?

How many times have you been buzzed by the wake of a sport fish while at anchor and broken things dopwn below?

How many times have you been clipped at anchor by a motor boat over your rhode?

How many times have you seen a boat on the hard bacuse they did not understand the cans/nuns?

Now THAT list does go on and on...

A simple license, while not stopping all of this, will at least make them aware of them. Break the law, hurt people, etc... pull them off the water.

Did you know: you can go out, today, and buy a 65 foot Hatteras (assuming you have the money). You can hop behind the wheel and start immediately. They do not check credientials, time on the water, or whether you even know how to steer. You bought it... you own it... you can drive it - anywhere.

You cannot even do that with a car. Yet, you are driving an absolute killing machine. You could take out someones family in seconds, including your own.

You cannot even do that with a car... and a boat is much more dangerous than a car. Yet you are required to have a license with a car. With a boat?? Nothing.

- CD


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

I can also buy a chainsaw without a license at the local home depot. That's dangerous.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Might want to watch your step here a bit...since the boat that Bubb is talking about nearly killed him and his wife...


painkiller said:


> Whoa!! Hey, you should create a wikipedia entry to refute my claim that a boat cannot fall from the sky!! You have proof!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Listen CD, I never said it wasn't silly.

I said if you're going to compare things, then realize that ALL things are dangerous to some extent, and if that is the case, then ALL things should be registered, legislated, locked, put in safes, and licensed.

It's a ridiculous concept - which is my point - A boat is NOT more dangerous than a car.

I'll explain. How many times have police officers ever shot a boat driver dead because he attempted to run them down with the boat? A handful of times?

People are killed by police more than a dozen times a year in the US because a dumbass attempted to drive a car over a cop.

That ALONE makes a car dangerous and the driver STUPID.

If I learn all I can learn about boating and I take my boat out carefully and thoughtfully, and I take the time to make sure my safety gear is checked and functional and I don't do anything "stupid" I should be fine. Certainly accidents happen and I can't stop some one else from doing a dumb thing and colliding with me.

I can't do anything about it on the "high seas" except attempt to avoid collision.

I can't do anything about it on the "High WAY" except attempt to avoid collision.

But, CARS go FASTER than boats.

Further more:

The average number of US traffic fatalities during the 2001 to 2005 calendar period is 42,873.

I can't give you exact numbers on airplane fatalities, because there's apparently not a precise count in any one place - but in the US alone, there are on average between 21,000 and 40,000fatalities in cars ( no exact count as there are varying figures at various sites.

For planes:

Year/Accidents

1988 30/ 1989 28/ 1990 24/ 1991 26/ 1992 18/ 1993 23/ 1994 23/ 1995 36/ 1996 37/ 1997 49/ 1998 50/ 1999 51/ 2000 56/ 2001 46/ 2002 41/ 2003 54/ 2004 30/ 2005 40/ 2006 33/ 2007 26/

Basically, it appears in my quick research that there are about 200 deaths per year (on average) associated with flying.

According to one site in the year 2000 there were 791 fatalities - and over 4000 injuries. Not all boating accidents are reported and less than 10% of all accidents result in fatalities.

So... in that respect, flying in a plane or riding in a boat are about "the same" on average - but cars are vastly more dangerous.



> Is boating really that much less dangerous than flying a plane?? Licensing will not suddenly stop the idiots nor will it suddenly stop all fatalities. However, it would help.


No it won't help. You can't make a law about everything, nor do you want to. There's already too damned much governmental interference in EVERYONE's lives.



> You cannot even do that with a car... and a boat is much more dangerous than a car. Yet you are required to have a license with a car. With a boat?? Nothing.


According to the simple and quick research I did, you're incorrect. Boat is NOT more dangerous than driving a car.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

CD - Though it may shock you, I plan on going through the various ASA certifications this spring and summer in preparation for cruising the gulf in the very near future. I know I don't have to (I mean PB didn't for crying out loud) - and I think I would probably get a more thorough education if I crewed with many of the sailors here for a while, but I don't have that kind of time yet. And no one here would let me on their boat. So there's that.

So, personally I'm all about the licensing idea because it will teach me a lot in a shorter period of time. Then maybe I'll crew prior to my big jaunt when I actually know how/when to deploy a drogue and not just use it as a big clothes hamper.

But believe me, those instructors will be praying to get me off their boat by the end of these courses cause I'll continually heckle the hell out of them about sailing with stones. Now that will be fun!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> I can also buy a chainsaw without a license at the local home depot. That's dangerous.


Between my wife and I who are both avid (and damned good) shooters, we have nearly two dozen guns.

I have thousands of rounds of ammo for these weapons.

I carry a gun almost daily on my person.

I have never shot and killed anyone with a personally owned weapon.

( I can't say the same in regards to a personally carried and government owned weapon..... sorry).

It has never been my intent to use a gun in any manner it wasn't intended and practice safety with them.

I'm not "licensed" to "own or use guns".

Should I be?

I do have a "concealed carry permit" that enables me to walk around armed without anyone know it.

On the other hand, our state laws do not prohibit the open carrying of weapons in most areas (there are a couple of idiotic places like Denver and Boulder where they are so afraid of guns they've even tried banning them from cops... /sigh)

So... my point is thus - my guns have never killed anyone. In fact, nearly everyone I know with a weapon has NEVER killed anyone and yet certain people would like to legislate my guns out of my hands.

Why is that?

Why license my guns? What is it stopping?

Ok, same question on boats now.

if people are MOSTLY safe and secure in the use of their boats - why would you want to create more laws to interfere with your own self?

Because you take the time to be safety conscious and do what you're supposed to do - they should make a law to force "common sense" on people?


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Might want to watch your step here a bit...since the boat that Bubb is talking about nearly killed him and his wife...


Bubb can speak for himself, dog. He probably knows that I don't know his history.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

sailingdog said:


> Might want to watch your step here a bit...since the boat that Bubb is talking about nearly killed him and his wife...


Thanks Dog, but I thought I was holding my own with my post #25


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Anytime bubb... just looking out for my friends..


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

> Licensing and mandatory education for powerboats, which have the ability to get up to ridiculous speeds, where control and skill is a factor, especially on things like PWC, would make far more sense.


I missed that.

Sure let's license people with boats that go over, say, 7 knots.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

I once hit 8.25 knots. Can we make it 9?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Causes of Personal Injury. Statistics, Numbers & Types of Personal Injury Cases.

LOL, perhaps, according to THAT site (which says over 1000 fatalities per year in boats as opposed to some other sites I read) DOGS ought to be licensed now....

hahaha



> Of these 5 million dog bites, over 800,000 people need medical attention and dozens of people die every year.


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

I come from a place where if you want to use a boat, you need to go to a boat school, learn stuff, then seat exams..the courses depend, but go from 3 months from the basic Sailing permit (sail within 12 miles of the harbour, boats not longer than 35 feet, less than 70HP). then as you need to get further away or move up in boat, you need other courses.

If you get caught outside your "water" bubble, or with a boat different from what you are qualified, boats gets arrested by NAVY (allways NAVY, or MAritime Police, never Government)..but you are free to go..

This system is in place as far as I remeber, I have a Skipper's licence given to me at age 16, had to wait to be 18 to do the rest..Fred is now sailing under a "minor Competitive waiver" given by his club, but had to show he is preofficient to sail alone.. Fred can't go more than 6 miles out, and must be with the other kids, who are followed by a coach.

While I understand my American friends feeling that the licence maybe a cut of freedom...let me just tell you this..

Howe many boating accidents, or "Ronnie's" stories you hear coming from our side of the Ocean?

For the record, my licence, was given to me after I sat the exams and went to sea with an instructor, and the Government doesn't care where I go or what I do..They are re-issued after 10 years, time on which you just request a new one..

No one including the government controls me..but for sure..it makes me happy to know that the idiot with the 45 foot Sea Ray had to go to a school to learn how to operate his toy...

By the way..Maritime Police can board to check you have a permit for sailing that particular boat, no issurance company insures if you do not have a licence for that type of boat and area/type of sailing, and no marina accepts you inside without a licence...

Seems to me that more others than the Governement control it..

Me?? as far as I am concerned?? I agree with licencing..makes me better, safer, and above all, makes me confident that the idiot coming staright at me knows which way to turn...

The governement doesn't really care..you guys should see licencing as a proof of scolarity, not as cut to freedom...

BUT ABOVE ALL by licencing I am not saying the piece of paper..to me licencing means EDUCATION...the course, the learning, the going to a school for months to learn...the paper is just to prove you went and did it..

Kind alike European driving licences, takes us 6 months, and 25 driving hours with a car with 2 wheels, and 25 classroom hours, plus 3 exams, to get a driving licence, which by the way, is not an ID document, like in the US, for that we have ID cards.

Exams are done by the NAVY


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> CD - Though it may shock you, I plan on going through the various ASA certifications this spring and summer in preparation for cruising the gulf in the very near future. I know I don't have to (I mean PB didn't for crying out loud) - and I think I would probably get a more thorough education if I crewed with many of the sailors here for a while, but I don't have that kind of time yet. And no one here would let me on their boat. So there's that.


You mean you plan on attempting to get the various ASA certifications...  Whether you can and do remain to be seen... I'd bet against it at the moment though... :laugher



> So, personally I'm all about the licensing idea because it will teach me a lot in a shorter period of time. Then maybe I'll crew prior to my big jaunt when I actually know how/when to deploy a drogue and not just use it as a big clothes hamper.
> 
> But believe me, those instructors will be praying to get me off their boat by the end of these courses cause I'll continually heckle the hell out of them about sailing with stones. Now that will be fun!


Licensing doesn't give a person common sense or experience... and lots of people have licenses that have no business driving....don't see that changing with boaters just cause they license boats.


----------



## lbdavis (Apr 23, 2007)

Careful with statistics people.

95% of all statistics can be made to say whatever you want. 50% of the time.

On its face, a statistic is nothing. I wonder WHY more people die in cars than in boats?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> I once hit 8.25 knots. Can we make it 9?


Let's make it an even 10 then. LOL

(I hope people see the humor in this and understand that attempting to set some kind of limits will involve this VERY sort of thinking from people who DON'T KNOW CRAP about boats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Come on, our Legislators really DON'T for the most part know anything about boats, airplanes, cars, or bicycles. Do we REALLY want them setting the standards and limitations?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Giulietta, that is precisely right. EDUCATION is important in anything we do. A little piece of paper that gives one a phd, license or certificate are worthless.

It's not who you know, or how well you know them, it's how well one can demonstrate one's skills.

The doubtful part here is that ANY GOVERNMENT that gets involved with such things usually fouls it up beyond all repair.



> Licensing doesn't give a person common sense or experience... and lots of people have licenses that have no business driving....don't see that changing with boaters just cause they license boats.


This was my point. Doesn't matter how smart someone is, or educated, or how many pieces of paper.

If they don't temper their skills and abilities or actions with good common sense, then they title "Failure" will blink above their heads for all to see.



> Careful with statistics people.
> 
> 95% of all statistics can be made to say whatever you want. 50% of the time.
> 
> On its face, a statistic is nothing. I wonder WHY more people die in cars than in boats?


Trust me I am very careful with them... remember Mark Twain said, "There's lies, there's damned lies and then there's statistics...."

I agree with him completely (but on occasion to prove a point you have to cite SOMETHING... )


----------



## tomaz_423 (Feb 5, 2006)

We do need a licence in Slovenia (and countries around).
You can only operate a boat without a licence if the engine is less then 5 HP and the boat is shorter then about 10 feet (both conditions must be fulfilled)
If the boat is longer then 10 feet you can operate it without a licence only if it has no engine. But you are not allowed more then 1km (bit more then 1/2 nautical mile) from shore.
There are several levels of licences (for different max lengths and engine power).
It ensures that everyone on the water at least once in their life knew rules of the road. 
It does not prevent stupidity.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Give me a freaking break. Have any of you had to go to traffic school after getting a ticket. 
That's the kind of quality education you are going to get when the government gets involved.uke

And Gui. Just because it seems to work in your little country. Doesn't mean it will work here. 
There are people, like me, who want nothing more than that the government just do it's damn job and stay the hell out of my life. It's getting worse everyday and it's pretty sad that there are so many lemmings who not only will jump over the cliff, but are happy about it.:hammer


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

> It does not prevent stupidity.


Another case in point. It does not prevent stupidity.

What licensing does do:

1) Gives the government agency or entity that is making you get the license get money from you.

2) might force someone to take classes.

3) might force someone to take a test.

4) Certainly WILL prevent me, Tomaz and others from perhaps teaching someone else to sail.

5) will make it more difficult on the owners of boats who are responsible, because they too much be licensed as well - thus costing them money, time and more effort to cross the T and dot the I to "remain legal".


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

I don't want any more help from the government. I think they've done enough already.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

smackdaddy said:


> CD - Though it may shock you, I plan on going through the various ASA certifications this spring and summer in preparation for cruising the gulf in the very near future. I know I don't have to (I mean PB didn't for crying out loud) - and I think I would probably get a more thorough education if I crewed with many of the sailors here for a while, but I don't have that kind of time yet. And no one here would let me on their boat. So there's that.
> 
> So, personally I'm all about the licensing idea because it will teach me a lot in a shorter period of time. Then maybe I'll crew prior to my big jaunt when I actually know how/when to deploy a drogue and not just use it as a big clothes hamper.
> 
> But believe me, those instructors will be praying to get me off their boat by the end of these courses cause I'll continually heckle the hell out of them about sailing with stones. Now that will be fun!


I may hate myself for what I about to say next.

Smack, certifications are not licenses. a ASA cert. is worth the frame you put in. It is just a introduction in to sailing. You take that little bit of knowledge gained in the class and run with it.

If you are ever in New York let me know. I will be happy to take you out on my boat. We will wait for a day it's blowing 30+. I will have you crying for your mama, but you will be perfectly safe. The reason I know this, is I hold a 100 USCG Masters of Oceans licenses. In order get that license I had to sit for a 8 hour test and prove 5 years of sea time. Also. I spent 10 years of my life delivering boats up and down the east coast and islands and teaching sailing. I also 40+ years sailing experience.

So if you get to New York let me know. It should be great fun fun for the both of us.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

In the US, would mandatory licensing increase or decrease the number of Coast Guard boardings?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

knothead said:


> There are people, like me, who want nothing more than that the government just do it's damn job and stay the hell out of my life. It's getting worse everyday and it's pretty sad that there are so many lemmings who not only will jump over the cliff, but are happy about it.:hammer


lol

That's what I said!

Our government has a very limited job - that is defense of this country and those things therein related.

They have GIVEN themselves MANY JOBS more than they should have.

They have taken money from people they feel "make too much money" to give to those "less fortunate".

Hell, even where I live locally in Colorado Springs, CO I have been visited by the police BECAUSE I HAD SOME WEEDS GROWING IN MY YARD in the past. No, not the kind you smoke... just weeds. This is a bloody DESERT and all kinds of strange things blow in from everywhere. They want to ticket people for having weeds growing along a fence line (of course there was a woman in the neighborhood who goes around making things difficult for others and made the calls to get the cops there....)

Point being... Stay the Hell out of our LIVES. if I let weeds grow up when I don't have time to get to them, TOUGH. Pull them yourself if you don't LIKE them! LOL


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

knothead said:


> And Gui. Just because it seems to work in your little country. Doesn't mean it will work here.


Ahh nice...

Thanks for the nice remark about the size of my country..we say here, its the quality..not the size that matters...

But...let me retribute the sarcasm...yes..Portugal is small, but these rules apply all over Europe, so consider Portugal as a State in you ENORMOUS country...


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

jwms said:


> In the US, would mandatory licensing increase or decrease the number of Coast Guard boardings?


I will answer that question, having NEVER sailed a boat.

The answer is NO.

Why not? It's called "Homeland Security".... duh. lol

Given the world situation and what happened to us sometime back, I don't think anyone in their right mind will let their guard down. (I said in their right mind, I know there are those who've already forgotten, but I never will and I don't forgive easily either.)


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

CD- Maybe next time you could open a bigger can of worms?????

Since there is no point in putting laws in place that can't be enforced, how would you enforce a licensing law. On land police have to out number shore patrol, CG, DNR, etc... something like 10,000 to 1. Last I checked people still die in cars WAY more often than on boats. So, how do you enforce it? Do you have to file a float plan with the harbor master everytime you leave the dock? Even if its a daysail? How about if you only have a mooring and not a slip?

In the state of MN there are more than 5.2 million people. There are more boats in the state of MN than people. Exactly how would you propose to get all those people licensed? How long would it take simply to administer the tests. Now multiply that by 50 states. 

There is a lot more to this than simply requiring a license. If you want to advocate this idea, you better be prepared to get out your checkbook.


----------



## noreault (May 14, 2008)

*Benefits of simple license*

I think there is benefit of have a relatively simple licensing. It allows a new boater to be learn the bare minimum and to be exposed to the challenges of operating a boat. Someone new to the activity needs to know what they don't know.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

noreault said:


> I think there is benefit of have a relatively simple licensing. It allows a new boater to be learn the bare minimum and to be exposed to the challenges of operating a boat. Someone new to the activity needs to know what they don't know.


If someone would come up with a skills test when it comes to boating, I might sign on to the the idea!!!


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

Really, this discussion is largely moot because more and more states in the United States DO require boaters to be "licensed." In my home state of New Hampshire, they call it a "Safe Boating Certificate." During the phase-in period, I was able to obtain mine by passing an online test, but I believe that you are no required to sit through an actual class to get one. Many other states have similar requirements, and reciprocity may become an issue. For example, I think I just saw a notice that a NASBLA approved course would not meet the requirements to operate a PWC in New York State... (NASBLA is the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators) Furthermore, the minimum standards for these licenses do not necessarily qualify one to undertake ocean crossings! (kind of like your driver's license doesn't nessarily qualify you to race in the Paris-Dakar or the Baja 500)


----------



## lbdavis (Apr 23, 2007)

N0NJY said:


> Our government has a very limited job - that is defense of this country and those things therein related.


Job Description:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

lbdavis said:


> Job Description:
> 
> "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."


lb - yeah, I've heard that before. Isn't that like fitty cent? No Trent Reznor? No, ahmmmmm....Kinky Freidman? I just can't place it.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

catamount said:


> Really, this discussion is largely moot because more and more states in the United States DO require boaters to be "licensed." In my home state of New Hampshire, they call it a "Safe Boating Certificate." During the phase-in period, I was able to obtain mine by passing an online test, but I believe that you are no required to sit through an actual class to get one. Many other states have similar requirements, and reciprocity may become an issue. For example, I think I just saw a notice that a NASBLA approved course would not meet the requirements to operate a PWC in New York State... (NASBLA is the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators) Furthermore, the minimum standards for these licenses do not necessarily qualify one to undertake ocean crossings! (kind of like your driver's license doesn't nessarily qualify you to race in the Paris-Dakar or the Baja 500)


In New York the answers for PWC test are given to the kid in the show room while dad is paying for his new toy. Dad is not required to take the test as he is grandfathered due to his age.


----------



## lbdavis (Apr 23, 2007)

smackdaddy said:


> lb - yeah, I've heard that before. Isn't that like fitty cent? No Trent Reznor? No, ahmmmmm....Kinky Freidman? I just can't place it.


Nah, just some hack that tried to warn us about lobbyists. He defined here:

_"...a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."_

He went on to ramble this BS. Can you believe this idiot?:

_"There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests."_

Perhaps off topic. Sorry.

More here, though if anyone's interested.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I've had it with idealism too, man. That Jimmy - what an idiot.


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

bubb2 said:


> In New York the answers for PWC test are given to the kid in the show room while dad is paying for his new toy. Dad is not required to take the test as he is grandfathered due to his age.


I agree, the standards for these state issued "safe boating certificates" are not very stringent, but the point remains that "boater licensing" is already here (in many states, anyway)!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

bubb2 said:


> If someone would come up with a skills test when it comes to boating, I might sign on to the the idea!!!


I would too. I was planning on taking ASA classes. Maybe I'll just put the boat in the water, put the mast up, raise the sails and see what happens, while reading my "How to Sail a Big Boat" book...



Hell, at least *I* will understand it even if the other dozens of folks on the lake don't know what a jib is from a mizzen mast.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Giulietta said:


> I come from a place where if you want to use a boat, you need to go to a boat school, learn stuff, then seat exams..the courses depend, but go from 3 months from the basic Sailing permit (sail within 12 miles of the harbour, boats not longer than 35 feet, less than 70HP). then as you need to get further away or move up in boat, you need other courses.
> 
> If you get caught outside your "water" bubble, or with a boat different from what you are qualified, boats gets arrested by NAVY (allways NAVY, or MAritime Police, never Government)..but you are free to go..
> 
> ...


That's exactly what I am saying and I totally agree with you.

Why should you have to have a license to operate a boat? Because you are a liability to yourself and others. Let me emphasize the others part... a liability to others.

Regarding more boating driving accidents versus boating accidents, that is not a valuable statistic because: You are not showing a percentage of boat drivers/accidents to car drivers/accients. Also, I see the ski boaters smacking trailers all the time or the PWC'ers banging up their watercraft. Are those reported? However, what percentage of car acidents are reported?

Boating is more dangerous than driving a car... period. Yes, your car may be able to go faster, but it is also considerably safer than a boat. Boats do not have minimum crash requirements (especially a Tartan 34 where you cannot go fast enough to crash it). When you step out of your car, you step on dry land. Seat belts. Air bags. The list goes on. And need I mention one other point: it could be argued that a car, if not necessary, ALMOST necessary for 95% of Americans. No one has to have a boat. It is a luxury item.

And again, you cannot go buy a moped and drive it in our country without a license. Why in the world would you let people have a 10 ton killing machine??

And another thing, when I say a license, you guys seem to keep thinking about some crappy little drivers license course. I say, with increased tonnage, its gets serious - more like a Catpains License or similar. As far as I am concerned, make it the same test as with a 6pack. Have it administered and written by the USCG.

It would work. I have seen the bow ripped off a boat. I have seen a sunk boat with people hanging on. I have seen a burning boat. I have seen countless trailering accidents. Make them have a license, period. You want to weed out stupidity? Here's your chance.

- CD


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

If the license was coupled with serious boater education...then yes, I'm for it... too many clueless idiots out there with too much horsepower behind them.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

The NAVY examines you for your driving license in Portugal?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

catamount said:


> Really, this discussion is largely moot because more and more states in the United States DO require boaters to be "licensed." In my home state of New Hampshire, they call it a "Safe Boating Certificate." During the phase-in period, I was able to obtain mine by passing an online test, but I believe that you are no required to sit through an actual class to get one. Many other states have similar requirements, and reciprocity may become an issue. For example, I think I just saw a notice that a NASBLA approved course would not meet the requirements to operate a PWC in New York State... (NASBLA is the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators) Furthermore, the minimum standards for these licenses do not necessarily qualify one to undertake ocean crossings! (kind of like your driver's license doesn't nessarily qualify you to race in the Paris-Dakar or the Baja 500)


Which of the 57 states require licenses?

(Sorry, Obama told me there were 57!)

Some of those require you to have a DRIVER'S LICENSE.

Some require boater's safety course (that isn't a license, it's a card they issue you when you're finished with the course, just like the little orange card I have in my wallet for hunter safety course here in CO. No matter that I've hunted in 5 other states, and taken similar courses, I STILL HAD TO PAY THE GOVERNMENT TO GIVE ME A CLASS... )


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

lbdavis said:


> Job Description:
> 
> "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."


 thank you!

There is understanding out there. I wish others could get it.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

CD,
Figures don't lie, but liars are always figuring.

Get real! The odds, and the odds are what we're really talking about here, are that you will be involved in a serious car accident some time in your lifespan. I didn't say injured or killed, I said involved. The odds are that you will never be involved in a serious boating accident in your lifespan.

You need a different argument.

You might look for one in the last thread we had on this....a few months ago!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Hey CD there were roughly 18,000,000 boats in the US in 2005.

There were roughly 243,023,485 cars in 2004.



> Have it administered and written by the USCG.


There are currently 41,000 men and women in the USCG.

Good luck with that.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> Hey CD there were roughly 18,000,000 boats in the US in 2005.
> 
> There were roughly 243,023,485 cars in 2004.
> 
> ...


And what is a boat in that figure?? A canoe a boat? A kayak? Like I said, real figures. I don't see how you feel that a boat is not more dangerous than a car. And again... you haver to be licensed for a car.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> CD,
> Figures don't lie, but liars are always figuring.
> 
> Get real! The odds, and the odds are what we're really talking about here, are that you will be involved in a serious car accident some time in your lifespan. I didn't say injured or killed, I said involved. The odds are that you will never be involved in a serious boating accident in your lifespan.
> ...


Oh, give me a break Captain Tonnage. I actually thought you, with your Masters License et all, might see tghe benefit in others being educated (and having to pass a test). Maybe if they were all licensed, you might have your way and get everyone to sit up all night watching their anchors bob.

Now, print something useful or go buy a cleat and some super glue. (smile)

- CD


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

I'm trying to understand what CD thinks a certficate like a pilot certificate (we don't have licenses)would have prevented in Ronnies case. He could have got the certificate, and still gone to sea in an unprepared boat, and unless the standards were pretty darned high for a recreational boater, would still have damn little of the knowledge a bluewater sailor should possess. 

Private, Commercial, and ATP rated pilots kill themselves doing stupid stuff in airplanes all the time, despite having spent years of their time and $10's of thousands of dollars to aquire their ratings. Despite the expense and difficulty in obtaining them, pilot certficates have not barred idiots from becoming pilots and they likewise wouldn't prevent idiots from becoming boaters. 

The only real difference is, idiot pilots generally kill themselves (and too often their unsuspecting passengers), before anyone can get hurt trying to rescue them from their stupidity. Unfortunately, a boaters bad decsions are more often revealed over a prolonged episode, providing time for non-idiots to get hurt or killed trying to save them from the process of natural selection.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> And what is a boat in that figure?? A canoe a boat? A kayak? Like I said, real figures. I don't see how you feel that a boat is not more dangerous than a car. And again... you haver to be licensed for a car.
> 
> - CD


What difference does it make? You were saying cars don't count, but you brought up mopeds! LOL

Come on man, pick a spot and stand it so I can hit you with tomatoes. 

Seriously, Boats is Boats. That is the number of boats in this country according to some good stats I found.

I suggest you do some more looking.

Your alias here is "CruisingDad"... that lets me assume you've got kiddies with you.

Do they operate the boat at all? Do they know how? Have you taught them to take over if something happens to you other adults on the boat?

Are they competent? Do you think they are? Can the become competent?

Can you see where I am going with this. if they are under 18 yrs old in this country they are considered minors (unless you're a Liberal and guns are involved then they can be as old as 29 for statistics... figure that one out).

If they are minors under 16 (15 in some states) they can't even get a learners permit to drive a car. If they are 13 do you think they could be considered competent to drive a boat (Any boat, sail boat, row boat, power boat)?

If so, then are could they legitimately be competent at the age of 8 or 7 or even 6? If NOT then why should they even BE on a boat?

Let's get serious now. Something happens to you and the other adults on the boat. What do the kids do if they are 9 and don't have a 'boat drivers license' because they couldn't get a "learner's permit" and now they have to ILLEGALLY drive the boat to get you and others to safety?

Will you be fined? will they? and on and on.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

*Why should you have to have a license to operate a boat? Because you are a liability to yourself and others. Let me emphasize the others part... * I personally don't care if someone is a liability to themselves. Sorry, just a bit of natural selection so don't count those.

*Regarding more boating driving accidents versus boating accidents, that is not a valuable statistic because: You are not showing a percentage of boat drivers/accidents to car drivers/accients. Also, I see the ski boaters smacking trailers all the time or the PWC'ers banging up their watercraft. Are those reported? However, what percentage of car acidents are reported?*Ah, you're the one asking to implement change (Mr. Obama) the liability of showing statistics as a percentage of the whole is yours. If you hit your garage door while pulling in do you report it to the police? Then why would a PWC have to report it if they bang it up? I think you're taking this big brother thing way too far.

*And again, you cannot go buy a moped and drive it in our country without a license. Why in the world would you let people have a 10 ton killing machine??*Actually you can. In most states mopeds and scooters below a certain HP do not require a license. (I thing it is 50-80 cc cut off)

*And another thing, when I say a license, you guys seem to keep thinking about some crappy little drivers license course. I say, with increased tonnage, its gets serious - more like a Catpains License or similar. As far as I am concerned, make it the same test as with a 6pack. Have it administered and written by the USCG. * Again, who is going to enforce this?????

*It would work. I have seen the bow ripped off a boat. I have seen a sunk boat with people hanging on. I have seen a burning boat. I have seen countless trailering accidents. Make them have a license, period. You want to weed out stupidity? Here's your chance.*I've seen cars with the front ripped off, burning, and even underwater with people sitting on the roof. And that was just this week!!!!! All owned and operated by licensed drivers. Didn't stop anything. BTW- You gotta stop hanging out at those Catalina Owners get togethers, its clouding your judgement.


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

I don't know about the US but in Auckland, there is a launch ramp on every beach there are literally hundreds of them. And every third driveway has a boat of some sort parked on it. On a good Sunday there are hundreds of boats fishing, skiing, sailing, just sight seeing, who controls this? Who stops these boats and checks that they're licenced? I guess like with cars, we wait till someone dies then we check licences so that we can feel good about kicking someone's @ss.

While our CG does encourage education, there is no legal obligation here. However, if you screw up there WILL be a thorough investigation and whoever is responsible WILL be held accountable.

What about the 8-year-old kid who starts on his Optimist off his local beach then migrates to something bigger, gets a spot crewing on a racing boat and sails actively with good mentors for 15 years before he gets his own boat. He needs to get a licence?

Then what about the cruising visitor to the US or Portugal for that matter? What if the country he comes from doesn't have the same licence requirement? Does he have to do a local licence? Or do they just say "Nah, he'll be OK"? And don't say that he's crossed an ocean, he should be good, Ronnie may have made it to your shores!!

No, I don't support any official licencing because it will end up being revenue generation with no further benefits and each sailor should be responsible for his own education. Just my view.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

> Ah, you're the one asking to implement change (Mr. Obama) the liability of showing statistics as a percentage of the whole is yours. If you hit your garage door while pulling in do you report it to the police? Then why would a PWC have to report it if they bang it up? I think you're taking this big brother thing way too far.


Due to the "change in lifestyle" my wife and I are going through - as well as the current political crap.. er sorry, I mean... "change"... we are naming our new-to-us-never-been-named boat "Winds of Change".

Thank you. 

No, I don't like Obama and won't vote for him

I WILL "vote" for "change" though if he tries to tax me or touch my IRAs as he recently promised....


----------



## Skipper519 (Nov 16, 2007)

These postings have all expressed several good points. I myself do not favor a boating license, but would accept one if the licensing fees would be reserved for upgrading our waterways, i.e. the ICW and not just added to general revenues. However, before we as a country contemplate regulating the recreational boating community I believe we should be regulating the large financial and lending institutions much more strictly first. I am in favor of severe penalties including substantial fines and prison time for offenders.
I don't mean to take this discussion off topic; my point is regardless of your opinion of boating licenses there are other higher priority areas which require government regulations first.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Oh, give me a break Captain Tonnage. I actually thought you, with your Masters License et all, might see tghe benefit in others being educated (and having to pass a test). Maybe if they were all licensed, you might have your way and get everyone to sit up all night watching their anchors bob.
> 
> Now, print something useful or go buy a cleat and some super glue. (smile)
> 
> - CD


Sweetie,
The reason being that I've offered nothing constructive is that I engaged in the last thread on the subject not so long ago and, unlike some, didn't restart a thread just to reiterate what I'd already said.

Having said that, I'll shorten it up for you and replay it. Any license worth the paper it's printed upon you probably couldn't pass. But what the heck do I know? I only spent four years in one of the country's toughest academic institutions whose sole purpose is to graduate people with those types of licenses. Oh yeah, it then took five years of sea time and three more license upgrades before I could serve as the vessel's master. Not five years; five years at sea! Or do you actually believe that the driver's license program we have produces safe drivers? Or does experience produce safety?

Yeah, I'm in favor of education. We can't teach our kids to read, write, or do arithmetic and you think we'll get 'em up to speed on the RoR?

If your anchor is bobbing you mistook your fishing pole for your bowsprit again. You gotta lay off the Beaumont homemade hooch! (g)


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Omatako said:


> I don't know about the US but in Auckland, there is a launch ramp on every beach there are literally hundreds of them. And every third driveway has a boat of some sort parked on it. On a good Sunday there are hundreds of boats fishing, skiing, sailing, just sight seeing, who controls this? Who stops these boats and checks that they're licenced? I guess like with cars, we wait till someone dies then we check licences so that we can feel good about kicking someone's @ss.
> 
> While our CG does encourage education, there is no legal obligation here. However, if you screw up there WILL be a thorough investigation and whoever is responsible WILL be held accountable.
> 
> ...


And in the US with our tendancy to cater to the lowest common denominator the test would have to be structured so that the illiterate could pass it. And the blind, deaf, guy in a wheel chair, guy with no arms, guy who just got released from prison (we'll call him smacky-), etc.... The test would amout to having to identify a boat by picture from other types of transportation. Multiple choice: A) car B) plane C) boat D) train


----------



## Matt Galo (May 3, 2006)

I'll chime in..

I don't think that comparing a drivers license for a motor vehicle and a license for operating a boat are the same. It's been said here... it's about the liablity to yourself and others. Well, to that point. There are hundreds and thousands more chances on a daily basis to injure yourself or others driving a car every single day. I don't think even the busiest waterways are close to the kind of traffic we face on the streets of our major metropolitan areas.

I do however see the point in getting boaters educated on the same level to a degree. I just don't think is should be through a license.

It would make a lot more sense to require one to pass an exam before registering a vessel though.

The idea for this thread came out of another thread dealing with SAR and the fact that any old "Joe" can fire up the EPIRB and everything else that comes along with it. Point being, which no one has really mentioned except Cat in post #7.

In order for someone to purchase and register the EPIRB they should pass an exam and the vessel should be inspected. I don't own one so I'm not really sure what's involved. But, I would imagine that the EPIRB is associated with the vessle that it's on, right?

If you're going to go sailing around the world or big passage making and would need the EPIRB as a last resort to save you if you can't save yourself. Then you should be held to a higher degree than say just sailing around in local waters. i.e. greater level of education, respect, and responsibility to what's involved!


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

That's a damn good idea, Matt. But it would never stand up to the various legal challenges. People would look at it as if you were denying them lifejackets!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> What difference does it make? You were saying cars don't count, but you brought up mopeds! LOL
> 
> Come on man, pick a spot and stand it so I can hit you with tomatoes.
> 
> ...


Boats is not boats. You would be pretty hard pressed to hurt anyone with a canoe except yourself. I am advocating a tiered test based upon tonnage and motor, etc. It would be a rediculous notion to have soneone ona canoe take the same test as someone on a 65' hatteras.

It is wild out there, especially down the ICW. Ansd what Capt Tonnage has failed to realize because he looks down at all other boats from 300 feet in the air, is that most boats (especially, sorry, motor boats) do not even understand the basic rules of the road. They do not understand piloting. They do not understand lights or markers, etc. Yet, they are driving a killing machine.

In SW Florida, there is a place called the Miserable Mile. Many know it. Driving a boat through there is like Russian ROulette - sooner or later you get run off by a motor boat or or knocked around by his wakes. Cannot tell you how many times it happened to us. That is only one example.

Comparing boating to cars is not fair. Comparing it to planes is fair.

I also dissagree with Captain Tonnage that it has to be some 5 year course at sea for it to be worthwhile. I do thik it can be thorough enough and brief enough to make sense for what 99% of the people do.

And you guys make so much fun of cars and their wrecks and how they are licensed. Now can you imagine being on the road with all those cars if they were not licensed?? Now THAT.. is a scary thought.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Matt Galo said:


> I'll chime in..
> 
> I don't think that comparing a drivers license for a motor vehicle and a license for operating a boat are the same. It's been said here... it's about the liablity to yourself and others. Well, to that point. There are hundreds and thousands more chances on a daily basis to injure yourself or others driving a car every single day. I don't think even the busiest waterways are close to the kind of traffic we face on the streets of our major metropolitan areas.
> 
> ...


I would be against anything that would discourage people from getting an EPIRB. Makwe taht easy because dumb people might want to do without it and that might be the very thing that saves their life(s)!

- CD


----------



## Matt Galo (May 3, 2006)

Sail, you may be right... it's a shame that people could think that. 

The "right to" have a lifejacket and "right to" push the button of a machine that brings in SAR are very different.

You've got to pay if you want to play.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

No, it's no more scary a thought than if you were trained to drive on the farm by your father. The only assurance you have on the road of safety is the other driver's experience...the license procedure had little enough to do with it.

And the DL is just what you'd end up with when you decided to issue licenses for the boating that 99% do.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Dad, When you test do you mean a skills test. I agree!!! Was not to many years ago that the New York mortgage and stock brokers would take their year end bonuses and go to the New York boat show(which opens on Jan.1).

Buy 40, 50 and 60 footers, as long as the check clears they are Captains. the bad economy does have benefit's!!!


----------



## Matt Galo (May 3, 2006)

Cdad, I understand that point.. 

All I'm saying is that if you want to go sailing you should be able to. If you feel the need to involve SAR to save you then you should have been tested somehow before getting it. 

Don't read into what I'm saying. It's about the education.

People have been sailing a lot longer then EPIRBS and Licenses have been around.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Yes, education and passing a test... not some piece of paper.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> What difference does it make? You were saying cars don't count, but you brought up mopeds! LOL
> 
> Your alias here is "CruisingDad"... that lets me assume you've got kiddies with you.
> 
> ...


My oldest son was on a sailboat at 5 days old and lived aboard there after. He has probably logged more miles on a sailboat than 3/4 of the people on this forum. Though it is under my tutelage, he can sail and they know what to do in an emergency.

All that being said, no matter how great a sailor he is, I would still tell him to get a license to do it - even if he could teach the course. Me too.

- CD


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

*Some of us are licensed*

I haven't read this entire thread yet, so I don't know if its already been brought up. In maryland if you were born after 1972 (me thinks) you have to have a "licence" to legally operate a water craft (unless human powered). I know all you oldies are grandfathered in D ) so it never came up on your radar.

I took the test online and had to pay something like $20 or less. If i get boarded I have to have the paper with me or I can be fined. The test was about 100 question multiple guess, mostly about PWC.


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

N0NJY said:


> Which of the 57 states require licenses?
> 
> (Sorry, Obama told me there were 57!)
> 
> ...


According to my computer's dictionary, the definition of a license is:

"a permit from an authority to own or use something, do a particular thing, or carry on a trade"

and in the thesaurus:

"ex. a driver's license -- permit, certificate, document, documentation, authorization, warrant; certification, credentials; pass, papers."

If you are required by law to have a Safe Boating Certificate in order to operate a power boat in a given state, is not that certificate in fact a "license"?

You can not (legally) operate the power boat without it.

How is this different from a driver's license?


----------



## mtboat (Oct 14, 2007)

I have two cents worth exactly. NO MORE government intrusion into my life. No more.


----------



## Banshi (Jul 4, 2007)

While some seem willing to forfeit their individual God given freedoms and liberty to make sure the guy next to them knows the difference between a bow and a stern, I for one am not. 

Government is the problem not the solution.


----------



## vadimgo (Feb 23, 2007)

Since I used to live in countries where everything and everybody needs some "license"… And I still do not have an American attitude towards personal freedom…

Alex, yes, you would MAYBE weed out some people that do not have IQ ability or basic physical ability to sail. 
Yes, by making it a complicated and lengthy process, 
MAYBE few people would be able to attempt an ocean crossing with no experience whatsoever. (could not you achieve same purpose by giving them for a test, say, 20 pages of Japanese poetry, and only the most committed would pass the test???)
But, from I’ve experienced, 
FOR SURE the cost licensing and enforcing it would be passes on to the boaters.
FOR SURE all government agencies (And Alex, Navy, Coast guard or in US Department of Homeland Security is a government, call it what you want, it means that Customs, Criminal Police and any State of Federal branch, like the one dealing with taxes will access that database too) will have me on their list as a person licensed to sail which means a person that should be regularly checked for compliance and the fact that his license could be revoked could be used as leverage.
FOR SURE the fees will be increased regularly (So “the quality of services to the boating public could be improved”)
And I WOULD BET MY BOAT they will cause a lot of restrictions on the boating people. 
BTW, I really doubt Marinas, Insurers and all the businesses around ask for your license because they consider it good practice. No, they are required, (somebody with more knowledge in the business law would explain it better, but, if the activity you are practicing is licensed by government, you can not do business with unlicensed individuals, that’s it, your contract for boat storage would be invalid …- even if there is no sanctions, there is no protection from the law…)

I would try to summarize my feelings on the issue

Yep, some bad folks could be kept from certain activity by some governing body, but inevitably, it will cause a lot of problems and inconveniences to good people too.
I would rather see once in a while some Sea Ray backing into me at the dock and hope they have sufficient insurance that spent my time and money proving to some bureaucrat I can handle my boat.

(and that was my definition of liberal believes before, as I understood, in US they call it Libertarian…??? )


If licensing of drivers is any reference, its effect on the safety on the roads is really marginal. And I am talking about EU countries where it is really hard to get a driving license.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Sapperwhite said:


> I haven't read this entire thread yet, so I don't know if its already been brought up. In maryland if you were born after 1972 (me thinks) you have to have a "licence" to legally operate a water craft (unless human powered). I know all you oldies are grandfathered in D ) so it never came up on your radar.
> 
> I took the test online and had to pay something like $20 or less. If i get boarded I have to have the paper with me or I can be fined. The test was about 100 question multiple guess, mostly about PWC.


I took that test too, and it was stupid. For those that don't know, you can take it online. The questions are taken directly from the online test-prep material WHICH YOU CAN HAVE OPEN IN ANOTHER BROWSER WINDOW AS YOU TAKE THE TEST.

Dumb-asses. The test is essentially worthless, but it cost me money, it taught me nothing (except that you shouldn't take a PWC off a dam, which I suspected, but didn't know for certain), I can get fined for not having done it, and some stupid politician can brag to his constituents about increasing boater safety.

Every law is a restriction of someone's freedom. If you're going to pass a law, make it a damn good law that actually accomplishes something.

Boater Licensing = uke


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

painkiller said:


> I took that test too, and it was stupid. For those that don't know, you can take it online. The questions are taken directly from the online test-prep material WHICH YOU CAN HAVE OPEN IN ANOTHER BROWSER WINDOW AS YOU TAKE THE TEST.
> 
> Dumb-asses. The test is essentially worthless, but it cost me money, it taught me nothing (except that you shouldn't take a PWC off a dam, which I suspected, but didn't know for certain), I can get fined for not having done it, and some stupid politician can brag to his constituents about increasing boater safety.
> 
> ...


I didn't mention the fact that it is indeed a money making scheme that isn't worth a fat turd, I thought was implied.

As for the PWC off a dam thing....how the hell else are you supposed to become a Youtube star??? Be gay and cry about Britney Spears


----------



## vadimgo (Feb 23, 2007)

Off course, it is just that, feelings. Since I intent to get my 6-pack license and the state of NJ requires the Safe Boating Certificate for the next year anyway.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Sapperwhite said:


> I didn't mention the fact that it is indeed a money making scheme that isn't worth a fat turd, I thought was implied.


No, I got that. I was just adding on.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

vadimgo said:


> Off course, it is just that, feelings. Since I intent to get my 6-pack license and the state of NJ requires the Safe Boating Certificate for the next year anyway.


Dear god!!!! You need a license to buy a 6-pack now??????? What's the world coming to? I'm installing a kegerator right now. No more six packs for me.


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

painkiller said:


> Dear god!!!! You need a license to buy a 6-pack now??????? What's the world coming to? I'm installing a kegerator right now. No more six packs for me.


If you are already a booze hound you are grandfathered in.....whew


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> I would be against anything that would discourage people from getting an EPIRB. Makwe taht easy because dumb people might want to do without it and that might be the very thing that saves their life(s)!
> 
> - CD


You assume dumb people should be saved.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Sapperwhite said:


> As for the PWC off a dam thing....how the hell else are you supposed to become a Youtube star??? Be gay and cry about Britney Spears


THIS is the stuff that YouTube stardom is made of (I hope his insurance is paid up):


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Omatako said:


> What about the 8-year-old kid who starts on his Optimist off his local beach then migrates to something bigger, gets a spot crewing on a racing boat and sails actively with good mentors for 15 years before he gets his own boat. He needs to get a licence?
> 
> *Yep..even him needs a licence...that is the country law...you sail, you need a licence according to what you sail...my son will have his first licence at 16, now he is proudly sailing with a certificate of competence provided by the Sailing Federation...that would be what the kid in your example needs, that certificate...*
> 
> ...





vadimgo said:


> (could not you achieve same purpose by giving them for a test, say, 20 pages of Japanese poetry, and only the most committed would pass the test???)
> 
> This you say above, makes absolutely no sense at all...don't joke about our system..I am not joking about yours..ours is done by extremely competent examiners, hired by the NAVY, the material and stuff we leran is actually quite usefull and serves us good...don't like it,. don't eat it..but don't mock it, please..
> 
> ...


Again...no sense....I drive in the US, in Brasil, in Argentina, Chile, Colombia you name it....don't even go there....


----------



## J36ZT (May 18, 2008)

After reading all of the postings in this thread, I've come to the following conclusions:

1) Boats do fly and fall from the sky.

2) A license should be required in order to breed.

3) Children that go boating should have their parents revoked.

4) We should have outlawed flying in the year 2000 (too many deaths that year).

5) Dogs should have to take a test before they bite humans.

6) Europe is a country.

7) There are 57 States.

8) Boats are not boats&#8230;but, comparing boating to planes is fair.

9) All stock brokers used to be "Captains."

10) If you don't get a license, you can drive a PWC off a dam.

This thread was started by someone expressing their opinions. Opinions are like @ss holes, everyone's got one and they think theirs doesn't stink. If you guys and gals feel so strongly about instituting a boating license or certificate requirement, what have you done to start the process?

Personally, I don't think the answer is licensing. I think there are already enough rules (ie laws) that govern boating. The real problem is the enforcement of the rules.

But, most importantly, you simply can NOT legislate intelligence, common sense, nor experience. If you think a license and taking a test will solve much, let me ask you this, "Why do I have to have Uninsured motorist coverage?" Hmmm...maybe because there are people out there that break the rules... The key is in enforcing the rules that we already have!

Don't get me wrong, I think the @ss hole that zooms around the marina because he likes to see all the pretty masts swing back and forth should be locked up as much as the next guy; but I don't think making him take a test will slow him down any.

However, I do think it would be a good idea to have some sort of Open Ocean certification for boats. If one would elect to get this certification for their boat, the USCG, USCG Auxillary, or another agancy would inspect the boat to make sure it was seaworthy enough and had the right safety equipment. One would need this certificate in order to purchase an EPIRB. I don't think that my idea would get very far though.

Oops...my @ss was starting to show there...sorry.

Skipper, J/36 "Zero Tolerance"


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

CD, Now that I am feeling a little better, (SD was right, I just needed a little medication) let me have another crack at this. 
I respect and truly admire your desire to make the world a better place. 
I would really like to think that there could be steps taken to make our waterways safer. 
Education and experience is what makes a person good at whatever they do. Oftentimes people exhibit a natural talent for certain disciplines and some are better at certain things than others. But most anyone can learn to drive and most everyone can learn to sail. Not sure about flying. 
But let me ask you. What makes someone a good driver? If you ask me, the most important aspect is a person's temperament. Followed closely by their experience. Education is close behind. 
If you want to see the waterways become safer, then befriend a stupid sailor. If, or should I say when, you come in contact with someone who needs some guidance and support, then give it to them. If they won't be helped then at least warn everybody else to keep an eye out.

Don't continue to live in a world where you can just maintain your little bubble of privacy and isolation and expect your government to protect you from every careless sailor, driver or pet owner.

People can learn to sail without the government's help. They can learn from their dad's. They can learn from their friends or their lovers. They can even learn to sail all by themselves.
But don't try to *take away their freedom* to learn their own way.

Do you know why we have welfare. We have welfare because we have failed as a decent people. 
Families don't take care of families. Neighbors don't take care of their neighbors. Churches are more concerned about doctrine and legalism than about loving and caring for each other.
Even here on SailNet, people are content to judge and ridicule others before taking the time to listen and even pretend to try to make a connection. 
We can have debates that go on for days on how to respond to the guy who makes a stupid first post while in the mean time he's already said screw it, I'm just going sailing.

On every level we are failing to take care of our own and *You can't legislate the problem away. *

The USHGA was the best model I've personally seen where a sport regulated itself. I haven't been involved for many years so I don't know how they are doing now but back in the day. You couldn't fly off a hill anywhere in the area without someone looking for the sticker on your helmet. While you were looking for his. 
If we as sailors were better about regulating and supporting each other we could solve the perceived problem ourselves.

Please, don't advocate more government regulation. Let's just each try to be better sailors ourselves. And maybe better people too.

Don't try to legislate morality, and don't put the government in charge of something that we as people should be doing ourselves.

If you want to make the world a better place, then get your hands dirty. Open your hearts and try to understand that we are a pretty crowded little planet here and not everyone looks at things the same.

.


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Now..I posted here in this thread to show what my country does, not to criticize, or even getting criticized by anyone..just as a mere information....don't like it..don't read it..I thought viewing other options would be good for you...I didn't ask you to crticize or vote if its good or not..for me where I live with what we do and the waters we have DAMN RIGHT IS GOOD

I couldn't care less if the US gets a licence or not...really..I don't care..you have other more important things that need fixing before that..I really don't care..I don't even care if McCAin wins or Obama does...I don't...

My post was simply to show what we do, and have and are happy with...why all of the sudden do I get this??


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

J36ZT said:


> .....
> 10) If you don't get a license, you can drive a PWC off a dam....
> 
> Skipper, J/36 "Zero Tolerance"


Legally yes.....wait no....wait..... I thought Europe was a province..


----------



## Sapperwhite (Oct 21, 2006)

Giulietta said:


> My post was simply to show what we do, and have and are happy with...why all of the sudden do I get this??


Sailnet is the reason

I appreciate your insight and first hand experience in the way things are done elsewhere in the world.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

knothead said:


> Anybody who forces their children to accompany them on a boat is putting their children in a dangerous situation and the children should promptly be removed from that irresponsible family.:hothead


 Yup,
And more kids are killed while riding in cars than with the deadly GUN.So wo need to remove them from cars.The GOVERNMENT sitting service will drop by your house to babysit
train them while your out to the market....For a FEE.
mARK


----------



## T37Chef (Oct 9, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> CD,
> Figures don't lie, but liars are always figuring.
> 
> Get real! The odds, and the odds are what we're really talking about here, are that you will be involved in a serious car accident some time in your lifespan. I didn't say injured or killed, I said involved. The odds are that you will never be involved in a serious boating accident in your lifespan.
> ...


WTF...most of us, if not all drive a car everyday, how many boaters drive their boat everyday? Come on...are you serious?

I would be for licensing that would produce competent boaters, unlike what Maryland has in place, what a joke. If insurance & marinas would require the documentation as well I think that would help with monitoring it.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

licencing shure helped those guys on the titanic


----------



## T37Chef (Oct 9, 2006)

*What?*



knothead said:


> Anybody who forces their children to accompany them on a boat is putting their children in a dangerous situation and the children should promptly be removed from that irresponsible family.:hothead


I assume that your screen has something to do with bumping your skull on a steel beam and it left a huge knot on your head?

Please define "forces" for me? I must be misunderstanding such a ridiculous statement.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> That's a silly comparison. I am being serious.
> 
> Is boating really that much less dangerous than flying a plane?? Licensing will not suddenly stop the idiots nor will it suddenly stop all fatalities. However, it would help.
> 
> ...


 oK Dad,
Is boating more dangerous than flying?
MY Piper Twin Comananchie Stalls about 95mph.So you need to go faster than that or you drop like streamlined bird dodo....
I propose first you give the healm of your boat to a child and let them dock it with instruction from you....see how many are injured.Then we take same child...or adult for that matter and see it they can land my piper without totaling it/all aboard/and anythng 1000 yards down the runway.

As for licensing...nope..i do not have one.But do have enough training to fly.Pasing the test is not a problem...to me it is the total stupidity of said test.If you go up and try to fly something you do not know how to fly you probably will not survive the takeoff.

Instead of a licence i propose a DUMBASS fee.If something you do requires a rescue.You get BILLED FOR BEING A DUMBASS.Fee is Paid to People that put there necks on the line to rescue said DUMBASS....
This includes driving in snow storm,hang gliding,mountain bikes,,,gee..just about anything you or anyone else does that society considers you a DUMBASS for doing.

That being said what should C COLUMBAS be charged?
He left himself and crew maronned.....

Just another DUMBASSES opinion.
Mark


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

travler - you sound like a pretty smart dumbass to me, dude. Of course, that's coming from me - a dumb smartass - so take it for what it's worth.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

smackdaddy said:


> travler - you sound like a pretty smart dumbass to me, dude. Of course, that's coming from me - a dumb smartass - so take it for what it's worth.


 Sorry,
Can not think of anything right now.Am currantly adding up all the currant FEES i am paying.If my DUMBASS FEE is implicated.Does getting electrocuted while typing in a thunderstorm make you pay DUMBASS points???
Goes to the MANLY MANS book to reference it..will let you know later smarty.....
Mark


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

T37Chef said:


> I assume that your screen has something to do with bumping your skull on a steel beam and it left a huge knot on your head?
> 
> Please define "forces" for me? I must be misunderstanding such a ridiculous statement.


Why are you pretending to miss the sarcastic nature of the post?


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

knothead said:


> Why are you pretending to miss the sarcastic nature of the post?


 Hint,
He is not pretending.
Mark


----------



## T37Chef (Oct 9, 2006)

Obviously I don't get your sense of humor.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

CD, here in Australia we have mandatory licensing for powerboats, PWC's and in most states(only a matter of time before all I feel) sail as well. We also still have plenty of accidents and irresponsible powerboaters/sailors. Over the past couple of years we have had some major high profile incidents in Sydney harbour involving multiple deaths.We still also have plenty of issues with powerboaters not understanding right of way.

I just don't know if licensing works.

I think you also need to make a distinction between general boating and offshore, in your OP you mention Ronnie, he wasn't in a skiboat in sheltered waters he was beginning a circumnavigation...Here in Oz after a very tragic Sydney Hobart race a few years back the authorities developed a sea safety and survival course that is mandatory for crew in offshore races but has a benefit for all seeking a BFS. Maybe education rather than licensing is the key?
And I feel to make education compulsory for those heading offshore is to miss the point that if they're stupid enough to think the don't need it then they're chances in the blue yonder aren't great regardless.


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

travler37 said:


> MY Piper Twin Comananchie Stalls about 95mph.So you need to go faster than that or you drop like streamlined bird dodo....


Yep, comparing boats with aircraft is really stretching the imagination.

As far as I recall, most boats that stop motoring/sailing stay on top of the water. Most aircraft that stop working don't stay in the air (at least not long enough to be rescued).

And as Travler implied, most folks without any experience can negotiate a boat back to shore, very few (if any) people without any experience can bring an aircraft safely to the ground.

And I know that I'd far rather be on my boat in a violent storm than in Travler's Twin Comanche.


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

Quote:
Any visitor, and we have many "licence less" sailors from the US here, have come and have gone..the law here is clear..the rules of his country legislation regarding the handling of his boat applies...he can't however operate any other boat than the one he cam in...

Alex, my point I guess is that a law is only as good as the exemptions that apply to it. Whenever there is someone who is legally exempt from a regulation (in this scenario, me), it makes the regulation a little moot.

You see, in New Zealand there is no legal requirement for any formal training. And before there is an assumption that this fact leads to bad habits or poor seamanship, let's remember that NZ has had and continues to turn out some of the best sailors in the world.

Our dear friend Ronnie and I both have the same formal training - zip. We could both end up in Portugal (God forbid at the same time  ) and be exempt from the legal requirement that binds you.

To me it's far more important that the vessel is brought under regulation and be made to comply to a standard. In NZ every sea-going vessel (including yours or SD's if you came here) is subject to an inspection by the maritime authority before you leave. Their view is that if you get into trouble, they have to come and fetch you so they reserve the right to determine the seaworthiness of your vessel. To me that makes a whole lot more sense than trying to regulate knowledge.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

travler37 said:


> Instead of a licence i propose a DUMBASS fee.If something you do requires a rescue.You get BILLED FOR BEING A DUMBASS.


Geesh.. the problem with DUMBASSES is that they usually do not have money. So that is kinda like restructuring a "already broke system". DUMBASSES usually do not have actual money as evidenced in Ronnie - he had disposable income to buy HD video cameras but could not afford to do a survey...

I say let Darwin do its course and let the CG do a google search on the boat, skipper, etc when that emergency call is made and let them make the decision if you should be excluded from the Darwin theory...It works in politics and the media right ?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Jody-

That's a bit harsh...funny, twisted, but harsh... unfortunately, evolution is broken in many ways... people who don't have the common sense to get out of the way of the truck get rescued from themselves...when in reality, they really should just be left alone to get run over...


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

T37Chef said:


> Obviously I don't get your sense of humor.


Don't feel bad. Not too many do. However, I was not trying to be funny. I was being sarcastic.
I was saying that If we continue to give government control over the aspects of life that we have traditionally handled ourselves. Then soon even the freedoms that we hold sacred are going to start slipping away. Like the freedom to take your kid out of school, put him on a boat and sail across an ocean.

Here read my last post on the subject at hand and see if you are able to _get _my point.



;Knothead said:


> CD, Now that I am feeling a little better, (SD was right, I just needed a little medication) let me have another crack at this.
> I respect and truly admire your desire to make the world a better place.
> I would really like to think that there could be steps taken to make our waterways safer.
> Education and experience is what makes a person good at whatever they do. Oftentimes people exhibit a natural talent for certain disciplines and some are better at certain things than others. But most anyone can learn to drive and most everyone can learn to sail. Not sure about flying.
> ...


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

T37Chef said:


> WTF...most of us, if not all drive a car everyday, how many boaters drive their boat everyday? Come on...are you serious?
> 
> I would be for licensing that would produce competent boaters, unlike what Maryland has in place, what a joke. If insurance & marinas would require the documentation as well I think that would help with monitoring it.


That's just the point there, Chef! And the reason I criticized the Dock Monitor for restarting this imbroglio. The whole thread is based on proposing a solution to a non-existent problem! If your odds of being involved in a boating accident resembled anything like that of an automobile accident then this thread might make sense. Although, based on our experience with driver's licenses, the question ought rather be why we continue to fund a driver's license program that does nothing tangible for safety. Yes, I am in favor of eliminating driver's licenses. They're a joke. Jokes should not be a part of public policy.

What started this thread was a desire to do something about people too dumb to know what they don't know and how that affects us through things like SAR. The short answer is that there is nothing we can do, we should resist the impulse to do something-even if it's wrong, and chalk up ouir SAR expenses for the rescuing of idiots to being just the cost of living in a democracy with great freedom. Which is pretty much the policy we have now.

I'll make it simple, once again, for those congenitally emotional. Licensing does not produce safety or good judgment; only experience does that.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

*Run while you still can...*

Sweet holy hockey pucks. Maybe CD is right to be concerned...


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

pain,
we got video of that around here someplace. Sapper..line two for you!


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

sailaway21 said:


> That's just the point there, Chef! And the reason I criticized the Dock Monitor for restarting this imbroglio. The whole thread is based on proposing a solution to a non-existent problem! If your odds of being involved in a boating accident resembled anything like that of an automobile accident then this thread might make sense. Although, based on our experience with driver's licenses, the question ought rather be why we continue to fund a driver's license program that does nothing tangible for safety. Yes, I am in favor of eliminating driver's licenses. They're a joke. Jokes should not be a part of public policy.
> 
> What started this thread was a desire to do something about people too dumb to know what they don't know and how that affects us through things like SAR. The short answer is that there is nothing we can do, we should resist the impulse to do something-even if it's wrong, and chalk up ouir SAR expenses for the rescuing of idiots to being just the cost of living in a democracy with great freedom. Which is pretty much the policy we have now.
> 
> I'll make it simple, once again, for those congenitally emotional. Licensing does not produce safety or good judgment; only experience does that.


Holy crap - somebody pinch me. I actually agree with a lot of what you say above Sway.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

N0NJY said:


> I would too. I was planning on taking ASA classes. Maybe I'll just put the boat in the water, put the mast up, raise the sails and see what happens, while reading my "How to Sail a Big Boat" book...
> 
> 
> 
> Hell, at least *I* will understand it even if the other dozens of folks on the lake don't know what a jib is from a mizzen mast.


Read a book on sailing and boating, You are in the upper 20% of intelligence on our water ways.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> Holy crap - somebody pinch me. I actually agree with a lot of what you say above Sway.


Holy ****e, someone should just lock this thread now. That's about as close to concensus as we're likely to get around here.

I've truely hear everything now!


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

artbyjody said:


> Geesh.. the problem with DUMBASSES is that they usually do not have money. So that is kinda like restructuring a "already broke system". DUMBASSES usually do not have actual money as evidenced in Ronnie - he had disposable income to buy HD video cameras but could not afford to do a survey...
> 
> I say let Darwin do its course and let the CG do a google search on the boat, skipper, etc when that emergency call is made and let them make the decision if you should be excluded from the Darwin theory...It works in politics and the media right ?


 I agree.DUMBASS useally does have money.At least with my system the people get some of said DUMBASSES money.That is the American way latly me thinks.Share the wealth...As in "FEE'S" for so many things it make my cheakbook crawl to the back of the desk drawer.
Just a thought for the world.
Mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Skipper519 said:


> These postings have all expressed several good points. I myself do not favor a boating license, but would accept one if the licensing fees would be reserved for upgrading our waterways, i.e. the ICW and not just added to general revenues. However, before we as a country contemplate regulating the recreational boating community I believe we should be regulating the large financial and lending institutions much more strictly first. I am in favor of severe penalties including substantial fines and prison time for offenders.
> I don't mean to take this discussion off topic; my point is regardless of your opinion of boating licenses there are other higher priority areas which require government regulations first.


For some reason, I don't think we need to be "regulating" banks either.

What we NEED to regulate is CONGRESS, POLITICS and the damned intrusion so many people want in our personal lives. Screw that crap.

Boats are boats. Cars are heavier, move faster and kill a hell of a lot more people in any given year than boats do.

Regulate Congress first, then you can discuss the rest of this stuff.

When the government gets the HELL out of my pockets I might start listening to them because they will have shown common sense. Until then, the government, and "controls" on everything in our lives is crap and as far as I am concerned null and void.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Boats is not boats. You would be pretty hard pressed to hurt anyone with a canoe except yourself. I am advocating a tiered test based upon tonnage and motor, etc. It would be a rediculous notion to have soneone ona canoe take the same test as someone on a 65' hatteras.
> 
> It is wild out there, especially down the ICW. Ansd what Capt Tonnage has failed to realize because he looks down at all other boats from 300 feet in the air, is that most boats (especially, sorry, motor boats) do not even understand the basic rules of the road. They do not understand piloting. They do not understand lights or markers, etc. Yet, they are driving a killing machine.


nonsense. You can easily, accidentally kill someone in a canoe. I've seen it happen. Taking the wrong rapids, with the wrong gear, not having the right flotation equipment or canoe not built for the river. Give me a break. People have died in them too.



> In SW Florida, there is a place called the Miserable Mile. Many know it. Driving a boat through there is like Russian ROulette - sooner or later you get run off by a motor boat or or knocked around by his wakes. Cannot tell you how many times it happened to us. That is only one example.


You've been advocating a license for boats. What you've really been saying is that people with MOTOR BOATS should have to undergo testing and comprehension testing as well as competency testing - RIGHT? If so, I agree that if you're going to be pushing something with more than 8 or 10 horsepower through the water, at high speed, you should know what the hell you're doing.

Do I agree there ought to be some testing before someone can take a boat out? No. Do I agree the government should get involved? HELL NO. They aren't even competent to do their finances and budgets right, let alone tell someone else how to do things.



> Comparing boating to cars is not fair. Comparing it to planes is fair.


How is it "not fair"? Because I showed that there are many more deaths associated with cars/trucks and other moving vehicles than boats>? It's perfectly Fair. Boat are moving vehicles. Both are usually controlled by human beings. Both have (or usually do) have engines. Both of them travel on highways or waterways. There are "rules of the road" for both. They both require lighting systems and markers and have traffic signals.

If I were you, I'd have been using that as a reason to HAVE licensing... but ok.



> I also dissagree with Captain Tonnage that it has to be some 5 year course at sea for it to be worthwhile. I do thik it can be thorough enough and brief enough to make sense for what 99% of the people do.


You can disagree all you like, but for you to GET a Coast Guard Captain's license... but let me give you some information...



> Title 46 of the U.S. Code (USC), Chapter 89, Sections 8902 and 8903. The implementing regulations are in Title 46 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 15.605 and ~5.805. The regulations that describe the requirements for obtaining a license are found in 46 CFR, Part 10. 46 CFR 10.205 details the specific prerequisites for a license. A copy of the regulations can be purchased from the U.S. Government Printing Office at (202) 512-1800. Some public and law libraries also hold these regulations.


 That covers "licensing requirements".



> BASIC REQUIREMENTS OPERATOR OF UNINSPECTED PASSENGER VESSELS (6 passengers or less)
> 
> (18 years old): *360 days of experience in operation of a vessel. 90 days of the 360 days on ocean or near coastal waters or may be limited to inland. *License will be limited to vessels of less than 100 gross tons and limited to near coastal waters not more than 100 miles offshore. If not U.S. citizen, the license will be limited to undocumented, uninspected vessels.
> 
> ...


That covers the basic requirements... did you know this?

Ok... so, there are licensing requirements for if you're going to do something commercial. This is to protect passengers.

Are you suggesting that all people who go on the water follow this?

if so, basically you're stating you want no recreational boating at ALL because the requirements to be license mean they HAVE TO BE ON THE WATER FIRST to even GET A license....


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> My oldest son was on a sailboat at 5 days old and lived aboard there after. He has probably logged more miles on a sailboat than 3/4 of the people on this forum. Though it is under my tutelage, he can sail and they know what to do in an emergency.
> 
> All that being said, no matter how great a sailor he is, I would still tell him to get a license to do it - even if he could teach the course. Me too.
> 
> - CD


You make my point for me.

He's not licensed, but he knows what to do. You've trained him properly. He certainly has much more time logged that I have or probably ever will. I'd enjoy having him TEACH me to sail.

But the point is simple. If you advocated a license, it would be that he couldn't actually sail until he was licensed. It would mean paying for classes and it would mean that eventually there'd be a whole new venue for taking people's money (oh, that exists now with the ASA for instance).

The fact is, I don't need a license to take my boat down to the water right now, rig it and go. Period. I'd be a danger to myself and others should I do so, without "knowing how". I have plenty of book knowledge and I bet you I can probably pass some tests even now.

But, book learning, as I know (having been a college teacher and military man) is not any answer to a test, whereas practical experience is something everyone needs if they wish to excel at something.

Learning and PAYING to learn is something you're basically advocating. This would certainly limit people from taking course, who simply can't afford to do so. Already the impression I've gotten from the two forums I'm reading is that "sailing" is a "rich man's leisure activity" - and people who can't afford to pay to play ought not be allowed to do so.

Sorry, I don't buy that.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

catamount said:


> According to my computer's dictionary, the definition of a license is:
> 
> "a permit from an authority to own or use something, do a particular thing, or carry on a trade"
> 
> ...


A LICENSE is a legal document that gives a person the right to OPERATE something (be it a car, business or machinery). A Certificate is merely a piece of paper stating you "completed a course of study".

If a state requires the certificate then they ought to just call it a "license" and be done. My state, and indeed the vast majority of states in the US do NOT require such a thing. Some do, usually states that have large numbers of boats.

They (the state) did this because they feel there are too many accidents.

If you have a "certificate" did it decrease your insurance? Should have. But it doesn't.

It's merely another means for a state to get some money out of the folks living there. It's a TAX.

By the way...

Here's a scenario. You run a business, you have alot of computers. You need to hire an "IT professional" to take care of your stuff.

You have your choice of hiring a College kid who has a Masters in Computer Science and Technology. A degree.

Or you can hire a guy my age, who has been working on the computers since they were using vacuum tubes. He's got the experience, knows the systems inside and out and might have a "certificate" - say an MCSE.

Who would you hire?

Oh yeah, the kid is looking for money, experience, and he's new.

The older guy is, well, older and might only be around for two more years because, like you he is a sailor and planning an early retirement to cruise.

NOW who do you hire?

Think about that carefully.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> Dear god!!!! You need a license to buy a 6-pack now??????? What's the world coming to? I'm installing a kegerator right now. No more six packs for me.


I make and keg my OWN beer, mostly stouts... and the occasional "Belgian Wheat" for my wife and daughters. I also make mead.

They can't license that stuff...


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Giulietta said:


> Again...no sense....I drive in the US, in Brasil, in Argentina, Chile, Colombia you name it....don't even go there....


LOL

Giulietta...  You were bitching about politics in the other thread and now you show your true colors my friend. You're a Conservative and don't like others telling you what to do, do you? 

I have been to 45 countries in my life, and driven in more than half of them. I have a US driver's license.

Thus, I can go over to AAA or someone and get my "International Drivers License"... and the foreign country (to me) has to let me drive.


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

If only some of the dunderheads out there applied the same rules that they drive their cars by, they will be safer on the water. There is some similarity between land & water rules if you pay attention to them... But then that dunderhead when he gets in his boat he leaves all common-sense ashore and sails off willy-nilly thinking that there is no law on the high seas... THE IDIOT!!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

travler37 said:


> oK Dad,
> As for licensing...nope..i do not have one.But do have enough training to fly.Pasing the test is not a problem...to me it is the total stupidity of said test.If you go up and try to fly something you do not know how to fly you probably will not survive the takeoff.
> 
> Instead of a licence i propose a DUMBASS fee.If something you do requires a rescue.You get BILLED FOR BEING A DUMBASS.Fee is Paid to People that put there necks on the line to rescue said DUMBASS....
> ...


Snipped some out to reply to specific things here. lol. I love that.

You know, I think I can take off in your plane (I've flown a LOT of simulators, and flown one small Cessna, but I didn't LAND it). Can I land it? If it were a sopwith camel yeah, probably could land it in one piece without having ever flown one.

On the other hand....I can park a car, drive a semi-tractor-trailer combo and park that, move a military deuce-and-half, and pretty much any other vehicle I'm behind the wheel in.

Can I "park a boat"? With an engine I can. (I have many times).

Can I "sail a boat"? Not yet. I know the SCIENCE and THEORY behind it, I know pretty much WHAT to do, but haven't tried it. So, I'm even less certain than I would be about a plane. That's pretty funny.

but you're right, the kids can NOT do it.

Passing a test, any test is not a guarantee that someone is competent.

That means any licensing would have to include a driver's test that would put all the possible scenarios into play, including emergency conditions on a boat, sinking, whatever.

Licensing via legislation is wrong. Anything letting the government control something is WRONG. (Ok, not nuclear weapons, I trust the military to do that, but I don't trust congress!)


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Sorry, Nonjy, I do not buy it. I have read your threads and would still vote for and advocate the "right" licensing. I think it will save lives and reduce the idiots on the water. I think it could be structured in a manner that would be highly educational and all round raise the level of seamanship.

I feel that the issue you face is that you practice good seamanship. You have taken the time to learn rights of way, markers, etc. Now you are irritated because someone wants you to be tested on something you already know - when your level of knowledge is probably better than what the test is?
I agree. That would be the same with me. I have been boating a long time.

HOWEVER...

I feel (no take back I feel, change that to there are... I have met them or run across them) that there are way too many peole that will not take the time to do what should be done unless forced to. I feel they are a danger to themselves (who cares) and others (I care). They are a liability to me and my family and other boaters due to their carelessness and lack of knowledge. In that respect, I feel a licensing (educational and tiered based upon tonnage and HP) would be very beneficial. 

My opinion.

- CD


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Omatako said:


> Yep, comparing boats with aircraft is really stretching the imagination.
> 
> As far as I recall, most boats that stop motoring/sailing stay on top of the water. Most aircraft that stop working don't stay in the air (at least not long enough to be rescued).
> 
> ...


Comparing sailboats to planes is a stretch? Ummm no. Sails act as airfoils. Keels counter act the forces of the water and wind to keep the boat stable. Physics on boat is exactly the same except that sailboats are operated upon by two natural forces, wind and water, whereas planes are acted upon by only the wind... except in dire emergencies, planes usually don't land in the water (unless they were designed to do so).

Yes planes crash. Boats don't do that on their own. But they can.

The forces of gravity will operate on bringing a plane down, unless it is a highly stable plane (like a bi plane or high-winged aircraft - then it will tend to glide into the ground rather than nose down).

The forces of wind and water will force an uncontrolled boat into a reef or beach it.

So... both can certainly crash without control.

MOST boats, planes and vehicles CRASH under CONTROL though.


----------



## jrd22 (Nov 14, 2000)

Unfortunately I don't think licensing boaters will produce any safer, or soberer, skippers than it does auto drivers. Passing laws without being able to enforce them is just a feel good idea. There aren't enough local, state or USCG enforcement officers to even begin to patrol the boaters now, so who is going to insure that everyone out boating has a license? It's a nice idea that licensing will save a significant number of lives, but I just don't see another government program handing out licenses, or private driver education diploma mills doing the trick and you know that's how it would turn out even with the best of intentions (geez, am I getting cynical in my old age, or what?).


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

travler37 said:


> oK Dad,
> Is boating more dangerous than flying?
> MY Piper Twin Comananchie Stalls about 95mph.So you need to go faster than that or you drop like streamlined bird dodo....
> I propose first you give the healm of your boat to a child and let them dock it with instruction from you....see how many are injured.Then we take same child...or adult for that matter and see it they can land my piper without totaling it/all aboard/and anythng 1000 yards down the runway.
> ...


When you boat is safe and in the hanger, and your same child steps out of it, is she safe? If you turned your head and did something else, is he/she safe? Certainly. He/she steps on hard ground. Turn that same head and let your child step off while anchored or in the slip, you could lose them.

Now, can you imagine what the skies would be like if they did not require any licensing? A nightmare. What about the roads? The same. They are bad enough with licensing. Yet, we still allow boating, which I feel is not as dangerous as flying though more dangerous than driving a car, go without a license.

It has been suggested that I am primarily focusing my "licensing" fervor on motor boats. THat is true. However, I certainly know a lot of sailors that could learn from it. It may not make them a lot better at sailing, it will not save all lives, but it would help. Still, it is the motor boaters that are, in reality, the bigger issue. When a motor boat can travel at 40+ knots, weighing 10 tons or more, and be operated anywhere by anyone not matter their background, that is an issue.

- CD


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

bubb2 said:


> Read a book on sailing and boating, You are in the upper 20% of intelligence on our water ways.


So I read three...

Does that put in 60% yet? LOL


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Just yesterday, I was taking my boat in to a marina that has a narrow channel going in. To my port, I see a guy, motor sailing (you could see his exhaust) with his main up and this guy wants to cross my bow. I keep a eye on him and put my boat in neutral and he cross about 25 feet in front me. we are only doing 3 kts or so heading in to the marina, but I yell to him. "Hey, partner you were the give way boat. HE yells back, "NO I am NOT, MY SAIL IS UP." It never ends.


----------



## CGMojo (Jul 6, 2007)

*Pay as You Go*

The originial thread was about the dumb asses that go offshore and get in way over their heads, and don't have the good graces to just die. These folks probably fall into two classes:
Those with they money to buy a decent boat but don't have the time or sense to learn to navigate, communicate, know their vessel, or interpret weather reports, and
Those serious DAs who beg/borrow/steal a not-so-decent boat and don't have the sense to learn to navigate, communicate, know their vessel, or interpret weather reports.
Although the DAs probably don't understand how it works or what happens when they trigger it, they have an EPIRB and they light it off. Numerous USCG and perhaps USN folks that have better things to do then get to research DA's plight and arrange to assist. A handful of folks then get to risk their lives in order rescue DA.
Risking your life for those that are prepared and simply get caught in catastrophic conditions is one thing. Risking your life for people that are clueless is incredibly frustrating to say the least.
Perhaps the the Coast Guard should start charging for it's rescue services. Last time I checked, a helicopter and it's crew cost about $4K an hour.
The National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service have started doing this. If you park your RV with its hot exhaust in tall grass by the side fo the road and start a forest fire, the cost of the response is on you.


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

The licensing requirement could be Insurance driven in that you would have reduced premiums if you hold a license, and much higher premiums if you don't.
Wait!! Isn't that happening now?? If not it should.
But then look below...I am not worried as to whether they require one or not.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Sorry, Nonjy, I do not buy it. I have read your threads and would still vote for and advocate the "right" licensing. I think it will save lives and reduce the idiots on the water. I think it could be structured in a manner that would be highly educational and all round raise the level of seamanship.
> 
> I feel that the issue you face is that you practice good seamanship. You have taken the time to learn rights of way, markers, etc. Now you are irritated because someone wants you to be tested on something you already know - when your level of knowledge is probably better than what the test is?
> I agree. That would be the same with me. I have been boating a long time.


Thank you. CD - I am LEARNING the rights and wrongs, rights-of-way, the lighting systems, the signals. I'm 51 years old, and I've been in places a lot of people haven't. I KNOW what "Common Sense" is - Dad called it "Horse Sense" - and I practice it. I never picked up a weapon in my life without treating as if it were loaded, even my first "gun" (a BB gun). I take LIFE seriously... because, you know why? NONE of us gets out alive!

I grew up around the Great Lakes. I've been on boats. I never had a desire to ride a jetski, or even for that matter water ski. Looks dangerous to me. I didn't jump out of airplanes for the same reason. I have climbed mountains, been in combat and had to fight my way out of places in the past. Nothing I could have done or said would have prevented such a thing. However, I train and prepare for the most uncertain things in life.

In short, I'm not the average every day "power boater" any more than you appear to be an average every day "Military Guy". Each of us has experiences that others do NOT have.

It's that understanding I'm using - and I DO understand where you're going with this. From MY point of view, I simply don't agree. I'll explain in a second.



> HOWEVER...
> 
> I feel (no take back I feel, change that to there are... I have met them or run across them) that there are way too many peole that will not take the time to do what should be done unless forced to. I feel they are a danger to themselves (who cares) and others (I care). They are a liability to me and my family and other boaters due to their carelessness and lack of knowledge. In that respect, I feel a licensing (educational and tiered based upon tonnage and HP) would be very beneficial.
> 
> ...


YOUR experiences are currently different from mine. I haven't run into those guys yet, and certainly I might change my thinking if one were to damage my personal property or hurt someone dear to me (including me) - or God Forbid, kill someone around me (not even someone I know).

It is a very sad thing that people do stupid things and hurt themselves or others...

BUT - here's my point. This has been and remains the point, regardless of the idea of "licensing" or "training".

You can NOT prevent stupidity in people who refuse to learn.

At the risk of taking this too far politically, I'll say I've been around the government for more than 30 years now. There are people in it who are too stupid to even breathe and shouldn't be there - yet, they could pass a test, or write a good resume. I'm afraid that the idea of legislating "stupidity out" is maybe not the good idea you think it is.

Licensing can and does get 'cheated' every day. Many states require licensing in business, for plumbers, electricians and other such jobs. Why? Because they are supposed to protect the consumer. What's it really do? Prevents people who don't have the money on hand from getting their licensing.

There's a push in the US government right now to FORCE "certification" of people like - computer and electronics technicians (Look at my signature, CET means something) but why? Because they somehow FEEL it would be better for people to be "certified".

how does one get certified? They take tests on computer systems that adapt to the test taker. The MCSE testing costs you 300-600 dollars a pop for various levels. Each time you test, the test remembers your last answers and figures our where you're weak, then it attacks you.

In other words many people do NOT pass the test the first 2-5 times. And they spend lots of money, and it's not YET government mandated, but they are trying!

So - tell me, is it better for me to go pay out of my pocket to get this certification that will 1) NOT give me a promotion, 2) not give me a raise, 3) Keep me employed and 4) stress me to the point of running my blood pressure up the pipe?

None of it is worth it to me.

Screw the people who want to force this (Microsoft) on the US Government to get them MORE money. Come on.

Now - back to boating. I'm not "truly a sailor". I know the physics, the lingo, and I can probably pass some testing now. But do I have experience? Nope.

I'm not going to drop my boat in the water till both the wife and I are ready - when we feel we're competent to take the boat across a lake and back without hitting something.

THAT is common sense.

You can't license it, you can't legislate it, and there's no way that most of the "dumbasses" who need such a thing would bother with it.


----------



## padean (Jul 5, 2001)

catamount said:


> Maybe it's not sail-boating that should be licensed, but EPIRB's.


I like this idea! If you want to risk your life operating a several thousand pound wind/engine powered piece of equipment against some of the most severe elements nature can through at you, have a good time but don't take others with you (e.g. the nuts climbing Everest without adequate training). If, on the other hand, you expect to have access to emergency rescue care and ask others to risk their life for you, at least prove you have made the effort to obtain the knowledge and experience to accomplish what you are attempting. Why not license EPIRB's?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

padean said:


> I like this idea! If you want to risk your life operating a several thousand pound wind/engine powered piece of equipment against some of the most severe elements nature can through at you, have a good time but don't take others with you (e.g. the nuts climbing Everest without adequate training). If, on the other hand, you expect to have access to emergency rescue care and ask others to risk their life for you, at least prove you have made the effort to obtain the knowledge and experience to accomplish what you are attempting. Why not license EPIRB's?


Very good idea. I'm a ham radio operator. I have to be licensed to borrow (Yes BORROW) the radio spectrum. Everyone else using radio spectrum has to be licensed (with the exception of things like CB radio, FRS and some ELF stuff) so why not?

If you're going to carry one with you - then you have to pass a test on it.

Which includes what to do in an emergency and HOW TO PREVENT THEM.

There - we solved the problem.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

It won't help. Nope. It won't. Nuh uh. No way, no how.

People with driver's licenses still drive cars and trucks like reckless idiots. Licensing them doesn't help.

Boaters generally do operate their vessels more responsibly than auto drivers. They do. I'll take the occasional boating idiot over more regulation of my life. I'd feel safer drifting blindfolded in a bucket near the Annapolis Naval Academy seawall on Memorial Day Weekend than I do any day of the year in a car on the Washington beltway.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

*And another thing!*

I'd also feel safer sailing through a convoy of poker-run powerboaters than I would sailing through a sailboat race. THOSE guys can be more reckless and more inconsiderate and they supposedly "know better".


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Wow - them's some good points dude!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> Thank you. CD - I am LEARNING the rights and wrongs, rights-of-way, the lighting systems, the signals.


I'll tell you Rick: I have seen SOOOOOOOO many examples. It is not isolated. The worst are the "Sea Rays" and their knock-offs. The PWC's are really bad too, but they are so small they do not affect my boat much. The pontoon-ers and ski boats are a serious issue too.

I do not mean they are all problems, but more than not.

Her is the absolute truth: The licensing will never happen. It will never happen _*not *_because we do or do not need it. It will never happen because the manufacturers will lose business out of it and will fight it to the end. I kid you not, Sea Ray might go out of business. As soon as a potential buyer walking the boat show one Saturday afternoon realizes that he actually has to do more than write a check to drive his 65 foot Pimp mobile, he will walk and choose the RV or take a cruise.

Here is a funny read, and true: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/33388-should-boating-licensed.html

Also, someone suggested that I started this thread over ones person lack of preparation as stated in another thread. Nah, not really, It just got me to thinking more about a wider problem and one possible solution.

- CD


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

*How do you do it?*



Cruisingdad said:


> When you boat is safe and in the hanger, and your same child steps out of it, is she safe? If you turned your head and did something else, is he/she safe? Certainly. He/she steps on hard ground. Turn that same head and let your child step off while anchored or in the slip, you could lose them.
> 
> Now, can you imagine what the skies would be like if they did not require any licensing? A nightmare. What about the roads? The same. They are bad enough with licensing. Yet, we still allow boating, which I feel is not as dangerous as flying though more dangerous than driving a car, go without a license.
> 
> ...


 The sky without a licence is self culling....
YouTube - Helicopter Crash

As the water is if COMMON SENCE is not used.Sadly this is not something that can be licensed.Just asked for.And sadly can take a inocent bystander with.

So your docked next to someone that is packing for a extended cruse...You talk to them and realize they might not know what they are doing.As Ronnie obously did not.All you can do is try to give advice and hope for the best.A "LICENCE" to do a blue water passage?How do you intend to enforce this?Just this one case.How do you stop it?How big a government agency do we set up to protect someone and ourselves from not having common sence?
Answer that.Do we have mandantory black boxes in our boats and a "LIMIT" on where we can sail them?The teck is there to do it.Is this the direction you want your country to go?
My question to you DAD..
Mark


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

travler37 said:


> The sky without a licence is self culling....
> YouTube - Helicopter Crash
> 
> As the water is if COMMON SENCE is not used.Sadly this is not something that can be licensed.Just asked for.And sadly can take a inocent bystander with.
> ...


Certainly not. Your license is based upon tonnage/HP. It does not nor can it teach you blue water. I also do not think it should. However, your license, at that tonnage, will go over the many functoning parts of that boat, plotting, dead reckoning, etc. What you do once you leave the territorial waters of the US is your own business. That is international water. The point of this license is not to save you from yourself (though one must hope that may happen too), but to save you from others and likewise.

- CD


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> I'll tell you Rick: I have seen SOOOOOOOO many examples. It is not isolated. The worst are the "Sea Rays" and their knock-offs. The PWC's are really bad too, but they are so small they do not affect my boat much. The pontoon-ers and ski boats are a serious issue too.
> 
> I do not mean they are all problems, but more than not.
> 
> ...


Guy across the street from me has been coming over to talk to me for the past week since I brought the boat home. He's a "poontooner" 

His wife is the woman that hates me for some reason and calls the cops at the drop of a hat. She has been over heard telling him to "stop talking to that white trash"... /sigh. lol

Anyway, he came over yesterday and asked permission "to come aboard" while I was doing some work. In the course of looking the boat over, he said I got a good deal, and he had heard that "Your IQ goes up at least four points if you switch from a power boat to a sail boat"....

/chuckle

I told him in my case it wouldn't help. I never owned a power boat. He seemed offended.

I'm not against licensing. I'm against allowing the government to interfere ANY MORE in our lives. Period.

That's the bottom line.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Certainly not. Your license is based upon tonnage/HP. It does not nor can it teach you blue water. I also do not think it should. However, your license, at that tonnage, will go over the many functoning parts of that boat, plotting, dead reckoning, etc. What you do once you leave the territorial waters of the US is your own business. That is international water. The point of this license is not to save you from yourself (though one must hope that may happen too), but to save you from others and likewise.
> 
> - CD


I'd agree with the other sentiment. Black-Boxes are available, why not force everyone to have one? Airplanes have to have them no matter which country they fly out of.

As I pointed out earlier. If you're going to carry passengers, paying passengers, legally you've got to have that "Captain's License" in US waters. I'm not so sure about other places, but I'm pretty certain place like BVI would require it (British? Socialism? Think about it...) as would other places. Some don't care. Some only want to get what they can get out of tourists... been there, seen it, told them to piss off or arrest me and let me make a call to my Consulate first... and while dialing, they left me alone... anyway, other stories another time.

Seriously, those who are RESPONSIBLE for passenger safety are required to prove they are responsible. I see your point (don't agree with it completely) but do know that adding states governments into the mix, as well as the US Government is a seriously wrong-headed solution to simply helping people who appear to be less qualified to do something, to motivate them to get qualified. Sometimes, as well placed statement will do wonders. Sometimes it just causes a bar fight. lol


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Certainly not. Your license is based upon tonnage/HP. It does not nor can it teach you blue water. I also do not think it should. However, your license, at that tonnage, will go over the many functoning parts of that boat, plotting, dead reckoning, etc. What you do once you leave the territorial waters of the US is your own business. That is international water. The point of this license is not to save you from yourself (though one must hope that may happen too), but to save you from others and likewise.
> 
> - CD


 Great,,
Now were back to the specific person...Ronnie.
From what i have read he had no clue.And a few people that had another agendia..
So again...how do you stop him in your licensed world?He went from a dock to international waters.
I agree with you entirly about the skills you SHOULD have to operate a boat.But how do you enforce it and at what cost to we the people?

And again...is this where you want our country to go.
Do you understand what a black box can do?
Senerio:
You get on your boat and grab the wheel.Drop the lines/fire the motor.The scanner in your onboard black box sacans the RFID tag on your LICENCEand says your not allowed to test drive a 20 ton sailboat.....it sends a signal that your in violation.You get a ticket in the mail.
Very easy but EXPENSIVE to do.And Unckle Sam would love the revinue.Do we PAY for COP TO COME AND ARREST YOU?If not is just a form of revinue enhancement for big brother.

So there is how it could be done..Except we all have to PAY for a LICENCE and PAY for a BLACK BOX.

So Mr Dad.
How do we enforce this in your world? And what does it cost.Currantly uncle is talking about putting boxes on my trucks.At my expence of about $7000 per year per truck to make sure drivers abide by hours of service laws.Ok by me.I run a legal company.But i will be passing that cost on to you.How much are you willing to pay for a loaf of bread?????

Back to the question Mr Dad...
How do you enforce this?And back to the specific how do you keep Ronnie from violating your licencing law on his way to blue waters that he had to be saved from?
My question to you
Mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

> Back to the question Mr Dad...
> How do you enforce this?And back to the specific how do you keep Ronnie from violating your licencing law on his way to blue waters that he had to be saved from?
> My question to you
> Mark


I'll point out again, there are only a grand total of 41,000 Coast Guard personnel.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

*Bar Fight*



N0NJY said:


> I'd agree with the other sentiment. Black-Boxes are available, why not force everyone to have one? Airplanes have to have them no matter which country they fly out of.
> 
> As I pointed out earlier. If you're going to carry passengers, paying passengers, legally you've got to have that "Captain's License" in US waters. I'm not so sure about other places, but I'm pretty certain place like BVI would require it (British? Socialism? Think about it...) as would other places. Some don't care. Some only want to get what they can get out of tourists... been there, seen it, told them to piss off or arrest me and let me make a call to my Consulate first... and while dialing, they left me alone... anyway, other stories another time.
> 
> Seriously, those who are RESPONSIBLE for passenger safety are required to prove they are responsible. I see your point (don't agree with it completely) but do know that adding states governments into the mix, as well as the US Government is a seriously wrong-headed solution to simply helping people who appear to be less qualified to do something, to motivate them to get qualified. Sometimes, as well placed statement will do wonders. Sometimes it just causes a bar fight. lol


 I used to live here.

Map of NY by MapQuest

Weekends we had 3 jets and at least 1 powerboat run by the LAW.They made alot of revinue on weekends.Weekdays there was no law unless they were called and they did not show up with a watercraft.

We had a few young men that likes to run the narrows between the upper and lower lakes at high speeds.{read racing boats}Mostly on weekdays cause they knew that the law was there on weekends.

Next to me is a girls camp with at least 15 canoes in the narrows.THE COMUNITY HAD A PROBLEM.10 of the residents of the comunity went to these young mens docks and POLITLY asked them to slow down.Also invited them to a party on sat night.Gee,They were realy nice familys.Just no common sence untill it was pointed out to them..No LAW OR LICENCE INVOLVED.This would work 90% of the time me thinks...The other 10%...you have them in any group.
Just my dumbass thoughts
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

N0NJY said:


> I'll point out again, there are only a grand total of 41,000 Coast Guard personnel.


 Great,
We the people should do away with half of them and install black boxes on every tiller.Saves money.Increases revinue.

Opsy...that darn safty thing keeps coming up.Was that what those 41,000 personel were for?Sorry.Will have a comitty formed to study that.
Mark


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

*And ANOTHER thing!*

The WORST boater I've seen on the Chesapeake is the skipper of the Lady Sarah in Annapolis (Watermark: Fleet: Lady Sarah). That guy (well, whoever is driving that boat) has damn near run me down TWICE. And I wasn't even doing anything stupid or crossing his course or anything like that. And that guy IS licensed and was carrying passengers. He just didn't give a crap (allegedly).

So instead of licensing, I'd prefer torpedoes or maybe a 50cal mounted on the foredeck.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

bubb2 said:


> Just yesterday, I was taking my boat in to a marina that has a narrow channel going in. To my port, I see a guy, motor sailing (you could see his exhaust) with his main up and this guy wants to cross my bow. I keep a eye on him and put my boat in neutral and he cross about 25 feet in front me. we are only doing 3 kts or so heading in to the marina, but I yell to him. "Hey, partner you were the give way boat. HE yells back, "NO I am NOT, MY SAIL IS UP." It never ends.


 Well his answer probably shows his ignorance. BUT is it POSSIBLE his engine was running but NOT in gear?

I will jump in here and say that I am fundamentally opposed to more government interference. That just leads to more fees/taxes and more Barney Fife types that want to exert their "authority". 
AFA Portugal and other European countries requiring licenses, all I can say is the mentality in Europe is NOT the same as in the US. Namely, to generalize, Europeans are much more compliant and less inclined to individuality and autonomy. (I say this not to start a fight but just an observation, one that has been made many times before by sociologists)

FWIW I work in the aviation field and despite very stringent licensing and severe penalties for noncompliance there are some real idiots out there flying their "coffin". Some of whom I really question how the hell they got their license.

IF, and this is a big if the US were to move towards some type of licensing I would support a limited type of license, say for one to operate a boat over a certain size (length 75', gross tonnage, or speed- say 20 knots) B/c the facts show that it's USUALLY someone hauling @ss in a boat that causes the accidents.

Just a few weeks ago I was out sailing on the Bay; Starbd tack course about 100 degrees. Here comes another good sized boat, port tack, course about 225-230 degrees. We are on a definite collision course. When it becomes obvious that this turkey isn't going to alter course I fall off a bit to about 75 degrees. We pass off his stbd quarter by about 50 feet and as we pass I made a comment to my crew in a slightly louder than necessary voice. The guy practically JUMPED out of his skin.  He was so intent on looking down the port side of his boat he NEVER SAW us.

I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have known the RoR; I think he just wasn't looking. Can't legislate that.

Basically I think we need to SELF REGULATE our passion. Teach our friends. SHOW our children how to safely operate the boat.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Unfortunately, negligence can't be prevented... or legislated away...

When it comes to showing children how to safely operate a boat, I think that happens far more on sailboats-due to the inherent teaching process that is pretty much required on a sailboat, than it does on powerboats-where anyone can get in, start her up and stomp the throttles and away they go.



> I think he just wasn't looking. Can't legislate that.
> 
> Basically I think we need to SELF REGULATE our passion. Teach our friends. SHOW our children how to safely operate the boat.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

sailordave said:


> Well his answer probably shows his ignorance. BUT is it POSSIBLE his engine was running but NOT in gear?


The Coast Guard definition: 
The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.

I just made a phone call to a coastie I know. He said if it is running it is being used. Gear selection makes no difference. In a board of inquiry we would both be considered power boats, sails up or not. I thought this was the case, but I wanted to be sure.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

bubb2 said:


> The Coast Guard definition:
> The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.
> 
> I just made a phone call to a coastie I know. He said if it is running it is being used. Gear selection makes no difference. In a board of inquiry we would both be considered power boats, sails up or not. I thought this was the case, but I wanted to be sure.


I would get another opinion. This answer goes against EVERYTHING I have ever been taught. That includes an active duty CG officer as well as USNA instructors.

By this definition anytime you turn on your engine to charge your batteries you're no longer a sailboat. The "propelling machinery" is NOT being used to propel the vessel.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Bubb's definition is about the same as what I've been told...


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Dave, yes we talked about that, "the other boats exhaust conveys that he is under power and he should conduct himself accordingly." Being used, does not say for propulsion, it was written that way for a reason.

How is another boater to know if he is steaming or just charging batteries or just in neutral?


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

bubb2 said:


> Dave, yes we talked about that, "the other boats exhaust conveys that he is under power and he should conduct himself accordingly." Being used, does not say for propulsion, it was written that way for a reason.
> 
> How is another boater to know if he is steaming or just charging batteries or just in neutral?


Bubb, The only thing that come to my mind is that if someone is running their gen set, motor off and sailing. 
Someone could mistake the exhaust for the auxiliary. 

The prudent attitude is to always drive defensively. No matter what you are driving.

I don't know about the CG regs. But it seems to me that "I saw his exaust vapor" is a pretty flimsy line to hang a defense from were one involved in a preventable collision.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

knot, I yes if you go to my first post regarding this, I did back off even though this guy was breaking my port(red) light. I don't like boats to go bump either.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Just remember that avoiding a collision takes precedence over everything else...


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> When you boat is safe and in the hanger, and your same child steps out of it, is she safe? If you turned your head and did something else, is he/she safe? Certainly. He/she steps on hard ground. Turn that same head and let your child step off while anchored or in the slip, you could lose them.
> 
> Now, can you imagine what the skies would be like if they did not require any licensing? A nightmare. What about the roads? The same. They are bad enough with licensing. Yet, we still allow boating, which I feel is not as dangerous as flying though more dangerous than driving a car, go without a license.
> 
> ...


CD,
What evidence do you have that either the skies or the roads would be a nightmare were pilots and drivers not licensed. You've the cart before the horse, my friend. You get the license because you are competent; the license does not bestow competence.

If the USCG stopped issuing licenses tomorrow, is there a shipping company out there that would not demand some other certification of competence for their officers on their ships? Their insurance would mandate it, if nothing else. As intense as the USCG exam is, it is till just an exam and only touches on a fraction of what must be known by a competent ship's officer.

And I think you'll also notice that the USCG license differs greatly from the driver's license. The USCG demands that you get some level of experience *before* you sit for the license...two years on deck to sit for a Third Mate's license. The driver's license is issued based upon little practical experience, almost none of it verifiable, and apparently they hope you'll get better as you drive more.

You're quite willing to swipe our liberties for the promise of unverifiable safety advances. I defy you to cite one area where licensing actually was directly responsible for saving one life. Any form of transportation you like.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Sway-

You're obviously delusional if you think most of the drivers on the road today are competent... they're not.. as someone who has driven over 350,000 miles in the United States... most of the drivers I've seen are lucky to stay on the road at all.... much less when the weather goes south or other things crop up.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

The Amazing Sailingdog. Is there nothing he hasn't done? Is there anything he doesn't know? Is there anything he can't exaggerate?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Pain-

Driving on average 20,000 per year, as evidenced by the odometer readings on my various cars/trucks... not hard to rack up 350,000+ miles. Do the math, or are the numbers too big for you??? Most drivers with 20+ years of driving have managed at least 200,000, since the insurance companies estimate most drivers do 10,000 per year or so.

But, of course, a tricycle, the only road vehicle you could possibly own, can't go very far, so your thinking of distance beyond a couple of miles is limited at best.. 

Give you a hint... A cross-country trip in this country is over 6000 miles round trip... I've done at leaset a dozen of them... and used to travel from missouri to new england eight-to-twelve times a year... which is 2500 miles round trip... 

BTW, lucky you, you just made my ignore list.. You're up there with the likes of ConchyJoe, CapeCodPhylliss.. rarified ranks...


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

And the Dog lets his cage get rattled again.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> The WORST boater I've seen on the Chesapeake is the skipper of the Lady Sarah in Annapolis (Watermark: Fleet: Lady Sarah). That guy (well, whoever is driving that boat) has damn near run me down TWICE. And I wasn't even doing anything stupid or crossing his course or anything like that. And that guy IS licensed and was carrying passengers. He just didn't give a crap (allegedly).
> 
> So instead of licensing, I'd prefer torpedoes or maybe a 50cal mounted on the foredeck.


Found a 50 foot boat that is a Privateer. Looks like an 1800s pirate ship. Comes complete with two black powder canons. My kinda ship


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Nice! Is it for sale on Yachtworld? I have some privateering to do (I'm coming for YOU, Lady Sarah!).


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

sailaway21 said:


> You're quite willing to swipe our liberties for the promise of unverifiable safety advances. I defy you to cite one area where licensing actually was directly responsible for saving one life. Any form of transportation you like.


This is the gist of this issue.



> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," once wrote Benjamin Franklin.


This is where I have an issue with giving the government ANY MORE control OVER ANYTHING.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> Nice! Is it for sale on Yachtworld? I have some privateering to do (I'm coming for YOU, Lady Sarah!).


Find it here


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> The Amazing Sailingdog. Is there nothing he hasn't done? Is there anything he doesn't know? Is there anything he can't exaggerate?


by my calculations, I've driven over 640,000 miles in 32 years - and its likely more than that.

I've got nearly 2 million miles on my ass in airplanes.

Apparently, I like to travel


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> CD,
> What evidence do you have that either the skies or the roads would be a nightmare were pilots and drivers not licensed.
> 
> You're quite willing to swipe our liberties for the promise of unverifiable safety advances. I defy you to cite one area where licensing actually was directly responsible for saving one life. Any form of transportation you like.


Sway,

What a crock. If you think the US would be safer if we did not make people get a drivers license you have utterly lost it. iF you think the same with airplanes... I woudl love to see you hop on a plane with someone without a license.

Once again, I feel your perspecitve is from 300 feet in the air. Mine is eye level. This reeks of the whole 'stand up all night and watch your anchor' debate.

It is not just a license, it is an education. It is not some, "Pay $25 here and get your license". It is an involved educational program that allows you to operate the vessel you have been qualified for. It does not have to be some 12 month course, but I think it should be more involved than 5 multiple choice questions.

And like it or not, you drivers license test, which I assume you have, provided the basics for you to be a driver. Ther est you learned on the job. Same with you captains license. If you are telling me that you were just born with the ability to drive both boat and ship without any educational process, I would lvoe to see your proof for that.

How do we learn it now? How do we learn how to drive a boat now, rules of the road, navigation, piloting, safety, etc? We read a book, have someone else teach us, or just get out there and take a shot at it. It is the last section of people who endager lives.

I still wholeheartedly support licensing and mandatory education, where I see the two combined. Sorry. I do.

- CD


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

SD - I would suggest that you might have hit the exact reasons for your wish to see some kind of change... let me quote you here...



> It is not just a license, it is an education. It is not some, "Pay $25 here and get your license". It is an involved educational program that allows you to operate the vessel you have been qualified for. It does not have to be some 12 month course, but I think it should be more involved than 5 multiple choice questions.


Let's not call it a license then, let's call it a "Diploma".

You successfully have completed a college level set of courses that train you on every bit of sailing - from winds, to waves, to weather, to the use of GPS, Celestial Navigation and you must have courses to show you know your terminology and there's a final exam where you must crew, skipper, cook, clean and maintain a boat in compliance with all rules and regulations in all countries and states.

Now you're talking. Every person who owns, uses or is considering sailing must take these courses offered by local colleges. So, you know you don't have to go to Yale for instance, but you can go to your local community college.

This of course includes you, me and everyone in between.

The courses will cost, in todays US dollars between 500-900 dollars a class (break that down in to either semester hours or quarter hours, depending on the college).

There will likely be some pre-reqs like, say mathematics - since you need to calculate your hull speed on whatever boat or ship you're on, a few classes on radio theory (how and when to best use an HF rig when you want to make a distant contact) and of course a complete USCG regulation course that gives you the low-down on current, historical and pending regulation.

When you're all done you walk the runway, get your diploma and a Captain's hat....

Then you proudly post your "BS of Sailing" on your Captain's Quarters Bulkhead go merrily on your way.

Of COURSE we have to take everyone OUT of the water for the time being as NO one is really qualified to either be teachers, Captains or have the proper training at this point in time.

What do you think?

Let's get everyone "educated".


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Pain has trouble with his basic math skills... my estimate is probably a bit low, considering I've been driving more than 20 years... but that's beside the point.


N0NJY said:


> by my calculations, I've driven over 640,000 miles in 32 years - and its likely more than that.
> 
> I've got nearly 2 million miles on my ass in airplanes.
> 
> Apparently, I like to travel


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

sailingdog said:


> Pain has trouble with his basic math skills... my estimate is probably a bit low, considering I've been driving more than 20 years... but that's beside the point.


I've been driving 32 years now. I considered the average of 20k per year. Some years is was much, much more than that, and I've made multiple cross-country trips many years running, plus normal driving. I do an average of 10,000 miles a year JUST driving to work. I make one or two 5000+ mile trips a year across country. So, 20k is roughly average. I do a lot more daily driving than just work and made four 180+ mile trips in the past three weeks (looking at boats! so well worth it).

I just took it as an average of 20k * 32 years. I didn't count travel in foreign countries (been in 45 of them, driven in about half of those, and some of them were BIG countries like Egypt).

So... basically MOST people drive an average of slightly less than both of us I'm betting.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Pain has trouble with his basic math skills... my estimate is probably a bit low, considering I've been driving more than 20 years... but that's beside the point.


By my calculations, you've posted twice to Sailnet for every mile you've driven. Of all messages posted in response to one of your posts, you've blown the issue out of proportion 38.7% of the time.

Can somebody check my math?

Too bad Dog is ignoring me. He LOVES correcting other people's posts. In fact, if he read this, he'd be itching to post a response.

Let's test him:

* Dog sails a monohull
* Dog is a staunch supporter of Obama
* Dog thinks 2 + 2 = 5

Oh, and here's a smiley to indicate that I'm continuing to tease, not attack, ol' sailingdog:


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

sailaway21 said:


> You get the license because you are competent; the license does not bestow competence.


I think I'm going to need to chew on this one a while. I'm sure there's a salient point here.

CD - I just want to say thanks for starting a mod-sponsored "Fight Club for Sailors"!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I do not understand why this keeps getting blown out of proportion. To discredit the idea, it has been suggested that:

1) We would all be safer and better if pilots and those driving cars did not get licenses?? And, I should do a study on the effect of how much better or worse it would be with pilots or automobile drivers not driving with a license. That is a completely disingenuous suggestion.

2) It would be a rediculously simple test that would do nothing to educate boaters or qualify them to drive a boat.

3) (Sarcastic) Maybe we ought to just get a diploma to drive a boat??

It is a lot of MELODRAMATIC and absurd notions to make the idea seem rediculous - which it is not. It would help and it would save lives. It would educate. It would not, how was it put, "Swipe away all of our civil liberties..." whatever. It is a freaking educational license. I am not asking you to work in the coal mines, give up voting, and throw away the constitution. * I am saying that as you operate on waterways which have rules, you should be required to learn them - AND, it should be verified that you have an understanding of them.* That is what I call a license.

That's it. Keep the guns. Save the Bill of RIghts. I am just talking about a educational license which would, at the very least, based upon tonnage, make SURE you have AT LEAST SOME basic understanding of what you are doing. You do not simply put your life in jeopardy, you put others livs in jeopardy.

- CD


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

But CD... we know you're all for the jackbooted boat control people...


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Pain - that was one savage tease. Sweet.

And after crunching your numbers with my trusty TI H-2900 Calculator, I've realized that Dog must be an insanely lousy driver since he's continually posting while at the wheel. CD, get him a license.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> I do not understand why this keeps getting blown out of proportion. To discredit the idea, it has been suggested that:
> 
> 1) We would all be safer and better if pilots and those driving cars did not get licenses?? And, I should do a study on the effect of how much better or worse it would be with pilots or automobile drivers not driving with a license. That is a completely disingenuous suggestion.
> 
> ...


Dude, welcome to my world. You asked for it.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> I do not understand why this keeps getting blown out of proportion. To discredit the idea, it has been suggested that:
> 
> 1) We would all be safer and better if pilots and those driving cars did not get licenses?? And, I should do a study on the effect of how much better or worse it would be with pilots or automobile drivers not driving with a license. That is a completely disingenuous suggestion.


No one has suggested not having licenses for planes and cars actually. I think that you even pooh-poohed the idea they were even in the same category as boats. I think that operators of cars and planes should be licensed because they 1) fall out of the sky (or into other objects)when unpiloted, or 2) crash at higher rates of speed than any sailboat can go.



> 2) It would be a rediculously simple test that would do nothing to educate boaters or qualify them to drive a boat.


No one suggested any such thing. They showed in one case there IS such a ridiculously simple test in one state that is required.... and there are still dumbasses driving fast boats who've taken the test. In other words, there IS a license as you're suggesting there ought to be across the board, but it's not helped any.



> 3) (Sarcastic) Maybe we ought to just get a diploma to drive a boat??


I wasn't being sarcastic AT ALL, I was being serious. You need to go back and re-read that post. I quoted you... The part about "it's not a license, it's an education".

I AGREE with you. But at the same time, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If *I* (as a new sailor) should have to be "educated" and "prove it" - so do all the older folks who've been sailing for 20 or more years. I don't believe in "grandfathering" especially where the government is involved. I think it should be equatable - and that means everyone should have to be educated, regardless of their abilities at this point.

Let's start a fresh slate and everyone has to take courses. Those who are obviously experienced ought to have NO problems paying for the courses and testing right out of them. As long as they have to pay the same fees as *I* do. No problem.



> It is a lot of MELODRAMATIC and absurd notions to make the idea seem rediculous - which it is not. It would help and it would save lives. It would educate. It would not, how was it put, "Swipe away all of our civil liberties..." whatever. It is a freaking educational license. I am not asking you to work in the coal mines, give up voting, and throw away the constitution. * I am saying that as you operate on waterways which have rules, you should be required to learn them - AND, it should be verified that you have an understanding of them.* That is what I call a license.


No one is trying to make your idea sound ridiculous. Rather, we're trying to show you something very important here.... and that is turning over your right to pack up and get on your boat and go where the hell you want to go, when you want, the freedom to do so without going through a bunch of government regulation over and above what you already have to deal with.

Any time someone comes up with a grand idea to "fix" something, that idea will ALWAYS affect many more people than the person who comes up with the idea. We're trying to explain that, while you certainly have a good idea, we want you to understand who you're trying to turn the idea and implementation of that idea over to. The US government (or for that matter other governments!)

Say you were to be able to push this through, the US government commits the USCG to implementing the task of licensing all of us on any sort of water craft that is powered or over a certain length. They have to make those determinations first based on insurance information, data they collect, accidents, deaths and many other factors.

That means a lot of money is going to go to the Coast Guard from the Government, which, by the way comes out of my pocket and yours in the form of taxes.

Next they CHARGE us AGAIN to test, get our license and be inspected... that's two costs now.

Every time someone gets found running a boat without a license, they get fined, arrested, go to court and in the dire cases of accidental deaths related to accidents, they might have to go to jail for an extended period of time. More tax monies out of the Public Pocket.

Look, SD while you certainly have a POINT about bad boat drivers (just as others have a point about bad truckers, car drivers, plane pilots and the like) implementing such a concept isn't as simple as saying, "There ought to be a law...."

It's NEVER simple. It affects millions of boat owners. It is going to cost everyone MORE money. Do you think it is a good thing that "just cuz so and so has a boat and it's a big boat, they can afford that!"

It doesn't work that way.



> That's it. Keep the guns. Save the Bill of RIghts. I am just talking about a educational license which would, at the very least, based upon tonnage, make SURE you have AT LEAST SOME basic understanding of what you are doing. You do not simply put your life in jeopardy, you put others livs in jeopardy.
> 
> - CD


You're right. Those of us who have them, guns that is, will keep them. We will, if necessary save the Bill of Rights. As far as licensing, remember that if you're a commercial boat for hire, you've got to already have a license ANYWAY, or you can't carry pax. If you haven't gotten your time in on the water, don't meet with USCG regulations, you can't get your license yet.

That stuff is IN PLACE now.

As for the rest of us, just learning - I for one won't take a sail boat onto the water under sail UNTIL I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPTS OF OPERATION - but that's me.

Don't try to punish me because I'm new at it. I might start ignoring all the regulations.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Cruising dad said:


> I do not understand why this keeps getting blown out of proportion. To discredit the idea, it has been suggested that:
> 
> 1) We would all be safer and better if pilots and those driving cars did not get licenses?? And, I should do a study on the effect of how much better or worse it would be with pilots or automobile drivers not driving with a license. That is a completely disingenuous suggestion.
> 
> ...


Dad I support you %100 as long there is some short and simple skills test. Like a driver test. Little things like demonstrate you can dock the boat. MOB procedure. Knowing the difference between a fuel fill and rod holder. The on the water test could be conducted by USCG licensed Capt's.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

bubb2 said:


> Dad I support you %100 as long there is some short and simple skills test. Like a driver test. Little things like demonstrate you can dock the boat. MOB procedure. Knowing the difference between a fuel fill and rod holder. The on the water test could be conducted by USCG licensed Capt's.


I'd add knowing the basic rules of the road and basic courtesies, like not wake rocking an anchorage.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Rome fell 3 days after they instituted chariot licensing. I'm just sayin'...


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Please no more government control, were up to are nicks in it as it all ready is.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

painkiller said:


> Rome fell 3 days after they instituted chariot licensing. I'm just sayin'...


But before they got those licenses, they had to show, they could parallel park them.!!!!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

bubb2 said:


> But before they got those licenses, they had to show, they could parallel park them.!!!!


Did you also know that most of them failed that test? Yep. Fact. They were so used to driving through with those rotating blades on the wheels taking out infantry they practically killed all the government testers before they could redesign the testing.

The next few testers were newbs who didn't know much about government, chariots or driving them, but they took bribes and kickbacks.

That's a fact!


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

sailingdog said:


> Sway-
> 
> You're obviously delusional if you think most of the drivers on the road today are competent... they're not.. as someone who has driven over 350,000 miles in the United States... most of the drivers I've seen are lucky to stay on the road at all.... much less when the weather goes south or other things crop up.


Dog,
You and CD seem bent on presenting opinion as statistical fact. We prove demonstrably that automobile driving is a very safe activity. In fact, statistically speaking, one is safer in an automobile than a fetus is in the womb in terms of being killed! When you look at the miles traveled, driving is far safer than either walking, jogging, or riding a horse.

Just because your subjective perception is that the average driver is incompetent does not make it so. He may not have the skills of the long-haul trucker or the situational awareness of the Grand Prix driver but he is certainly capable of operating a motor vehicle in a safe fashion. And the proof is shown by the fact that millions of Americans get up each day and drive to work. If they thought they were doing something unsafe, they wouldn't do it. If they thought that everyone else was unsafe they would not risk it either.

Of course, most drivers think that they are safe drivers while the rest of the planet's drivers are incompetent morons.

350,000 miles...heck, I've got underwear with more miles than that!


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Is that really what you think? Well I've pissed more asphalt than you've driven and I have a drivers AND motorcyclist license - so I think I know a thing or two about not knowing how to drive. Good day to you sir.

Heh-heh.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

sailaway21 said:


> 350,000 miles...heck, I've got underwear with more miles than that!


And you've got the skid marks to prove it!!:laugher:laugher:laugher


----------



## KODAD (Jan 9, 2008)

too funny, cam [vbg]


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Sway,
> 
> What a crock. If you think the US would be safer if we did not make people get a drivers license you have utterly lost it. iF you think the same with airplanes... I woudl love to see you hop on a plane with someone without a license.
> 
> ...


As usual, CD plays fast and loose with my argument in a futile attempt to bolster his own. I did not comment on the desirability or undesirability of licensing pilots, drivers, or merchant mariners. What I plainly said was that licensing, in and of itself, does not produce safety. That is not an argument for licensing or against licensing. I happen to be in favor of licensing the above three categories of operators.

I am not in favor of licensing, or certifying, boaters for many reasons not the least of which is the libertarian argument. But that takes a back seat to the fact that I see no evidence that the vast majority of boaters operate in nothing but a responsible manner.

You're willing to create an immense bureaucracy to solve a problem of small magnitude and significance. For instance, do you need one license/certification up to 20' and then an upgrade if you buy a thirty footer?

"...your driver's license test...provided the basics for you to be a driver." Actually, no it did not. Driver's ed. did that. For some it was accomplished by learning from Dad on the farm. The license was a few easy questions and a drive around the block with the road lieutenant coupled with a promise to learn how to parallel park.

I'm also reminded of something I heard about scuba diving. Novice divers suffer a disproportionate number of the air embolisms that occur in divers while the bends are suffered mostly by experienced divers. That both can become injured in what can be a hazardous sport is indisputable. But the nature of injury has little to do with certification and everything to do with experience.

I also hope you're not color blind...any reasonable license would preclude you from operating a boat, as it does receiving a USCG issued license. As rigorous as the CG license is, it only tests you on book or paper problems. You have to be able to reduce a sun line and noon observation and derive the latitude and longitude but you need show no evidence of actual ability with the sextant itself. Another words, all you're tested on is classroom knowledge. I'd submit that a crash jibe looks one way on paper, or in print, and quite differently on board.

Lastly I'd offer that the vast majority of accidents that happen are not a result of lack of license, lack of training, or even lack of experience. They are the result of simple misjudgments that developed into something much more consequential. Most of the guys I've rescued with fuel/water issues with their motor knew they had water in the fuel before they left! They figured they'd deal with it; then the wind came up!

And you know, I'm also getting that old feeling again about one of your posts. The one where one of the enlightened liberal persuasion is about to take away some of my basic liberties in pursuit of the greater good as viewed by himself and other's like him. I'm just waiting for you to ask, "what about the children?" You seem to have a pretty specific idea of just the right level of training for the sailor. I'm surprised at that because I have absolutely no idea of what level of mandated training is reasonable, and I'm not only licensed but have taught those seeking their license.

I don't care much that you mock my notions of a proper anchor watch. I do care that you blithely invoke the idea of licensing without an understanding that anyone licensing you is going to tell you that you must have a visual anchor watch and that solo sailing is inherently unsafe. But then, that's what you get when you invite the government in to regulate you. And we call those people who persist in thinking that it'll be different in this case liberals. Their faith in government knows no limits, nor any reality.


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

This how it will work :

The boat owner will have to submit for a licence test, and that will have to involve both salt-water and freshwater navigation, real time. There will also be a written test. 

Also, the boat will have to be submitted for a minimum safety standard, involving inspection, write-up and correction. They will have statutary right to board to check for it too, and to sieze the boat until it is corrected. Wait for the eyesight tests too, and declarations of state of health, and insurance, and you will need a wee sticker to display every year and tax.... yes, tax, tax, tax.... and a big fine to make sure you pay it. 

Total cost, perhaps £500, perhaps double that. It will do wonders for participation!!!!!! Just imagine, only you can sail your boat!!!! You could not possibly sail someone else's boat. It might not be licensed. Rock on safety!!!!

You will have to carry your license with you too.

When you do, somehow remind yourself that you are less likely to be torpedoed by some boozy speedboat that crashes into you at 35 kt. 

Not to worry.... if it happens, feel better that you have got a license already, and he did too.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Sighhhhhhaway21. Okay - talk about pretzel logic, dude. Here's where you started...



sailaway21 said:


> You get the license because you are competent; the license does not bestow competence.


Now that eye-opener got a break. Yes the word "bestow" buys you a little room - but not enough. But then, you jump on CD with your particular knack for smarminess - and I just felt the movement of that old FC spirit. So, yes, a couple of good points, but drastically overshadowed by more gordian thinking.

To wit!



sailaway21 said:


> As usual, CD plays fast and loose with my argument in a futile attempt to bolster his own. What I plainly said was that licensing, in and of itself, does not produce safety.
> 
> "...your driver's license test...provided the basics for you to be a driver." Actually, no it did not. Driver's ed. did that. For some it was accomplished by learning from Dad on the farm. The license was a few easy questions and a drive around the block with the road lieutenant coupled with a promise to learn how to parallel park.


Dude, one question...why is driver's ed currently necessary if not to prepare for a licensing test? Bing! CD wins this one. Bestow, require, whatever...the relationship works.

And then, I'm truly appreciative of the fact that you continue to illustrate my point in the Anti-BFS debate...



sailaway21 said:


> I'm also reminded of something I heard about scuba diving. Novice divers suffer a disproportionate number of the air embolisms that occur in divers while the bends are suffered mostly by experienced divers. That both can become injured in what can be a hazardous sport is indisputable. But the nature of injury has little to do with certification and everything to do with experience.


Those experienced divers should know how to track time at depth by now shouldn't they? Especially if they hound the novices about getting those pesky embolisms! Experience doesn't seem to be helping those guys. Bing! Still CD's game.

But then, you turn around and start quoting me to prove your argument - without proper footnotes. Very disappointing...



sailaway21 said:


> Lastly I'd offer that the vast majority of accidents that happen are not a result of lack of license, lack of training, or even lack of experience. They are the result of simple misjudgments that developed into something much more consequential.


It's called the "cascade effect". And I appreciate the props, but....Bing! I think maybe I should get this point if you don't mind CD.



sailaway21 said:


> And you know, I'm also getting that old feeling again about one of your posts. The one where one of the enlightened liberal persuasion is about to take away some of my basic liberties in pursuit of the greater good as viewed by himself and other's like him. I'm just waiting for you to ask, "what about the children?" You seem to have a pretty specific idea of just the right level of training for the sailor. I'm surprised at that because I have absolutely no idea of what level of mandated training is reasonable, and I'm not only licensed but have taught those seeking their license.


It always comes down to politics with you. Surely you're not a one trick pony too? Bing! I think this point should go to.....ahm....TDW!



sailaway21 said:


> I don't care much that you mock my notions of a proper anchor watch. I do care that you blithely invoke the idea of licensing without an understanding that anyone licensing you is going to tell you that you must have a visual anchor watch and that *solo sailing is inherently unsafe*. But then, that's what you get when you invite the government in to regulate you. And we call those people who persist in thinking that it'll be different in this case liberals. Their faith in government knows no limits, nor any reality.


The wicked truth finally comes out! Now the question is whether solo sailors are predominately liberal or conservative. And I have no interest in discussing that one.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

One question for you Sway... and answer this carefully: What about the children???

You never think about the children.

HEHE!

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Oh God... I have Smackdaddy agreeing with me. Kinda like McCain on a photo shoot with George Bush...

Sorry, Smack. Just making fun.

- CD


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I know George McCain, I've served with George McCain, and you sir, are no George McCain! 

BTW - which one am I in your analogy. And can you please drop the freakin' politics thing? We're all dyin' here!

Anyway - Sway's watching my posts to give me the final verdict on whether or not I'm a troll. I'm trying my best to be pleasant to a fellow troll. He just makes it so difficult!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Trolls are trolls. You guys aren't trolls. lol

Trust me, I've battled my share.

But the licensing argument doesn't hold water and can't displace any. A license, whether for driving, flying, boating, being a plumber or an electrician, or like me a ham radio operator, does NOTHING at all to demonstrate your true abilities in real-world situations. Nothing.

Anyone and I mean ANYONE can pass a test, all they have to do is study and understand the basics.

Boating safety is a state of mind, just as is flying safety and driver safety.

Getting a license to drive, by the way, does NOT require "drivers training" in ALL states. Sorry, only some.

We're talking about something here that affects all people using boats. Not just US citizens. But incoming foreign boaters, and Americans going elsewhere.

The basic and bottom line here is putting a government in control of anything and everything you do. That's what CD is suggesting.

It's not something that *I* will go for. As for "dropping politics" - no, you really can't. That's what this is all about.

One man's beliefs is his politics. When HIS politics get in the way of MY politics then he's asking for trouble.

Just because ONE person likes something a certain way, to make him FEEL safer doesn't mean it will work, anyone else likes it, or that it is right.

Sorry.

I say no to any licensing requirements. So... there.

If someone else wants one, feel free to print one up.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I have tried to fill in with responses below Sway. Before you lose your temper, read to the bottom!!



> What I plainly said was that licensing, in and of itself, does not produce safety.


Certainly not... but the ability to get a license, which requires education, will increase safety.



> That is not an argument for licensing or against licensing. I happen to be in favor of licensing the above three categories of operators.


Sorry, from your previous post it seemed that you were implying that licensing did nothing to promote their safety. Now you are saying that you ARE in favor of licensing for those categories, but not for boating. That makes no sense as a boat is as dangerous, or more dangerous, than a car. And let us not forget that a boat requires rules to be followed (right of way, safety, piloting, etc) and as we all must follow those rules, it serves as a disadvantage to all that there is no formal licensing and training required to VERYIFY that you know what you were doing... or your dad knew what he was doing... or anyone that taught you. Has the thought ever occured to you that the man teaching his son on the farm might no know what the heck he was doing??



> I am not in favor of licensing, or certifying, boaters for many reasons not the least of which is the libertarian argument. But that takes a back seat to the fact that I see no evidence that the vast majority of boaters operate in nothing but a responsible manner.


Sorry Sway, but I ahve seen much the opposite. How many examples would you like? Remember the partner of mine that spent the night on a shoal because he drove by his charplotter and had no idea how to operate his boat? Remember the picture I posted here of a blue sailboat with the bow cleary removed after being struck by a motor boat when the sailbaot had right of way and could not avoid the collision? As for the many other experiences, sorry - I did not have a camera and would not have been able to shoot a pic if I did because I was too busy avoiding a collision.

I may be wrong here, and I am sorry if I am, but I feel that your time on ships where the majority take what they are doing seriously has swayed your judgement on the reality of what it is like for smaller boats and in crowded areas where the larger number of vessels requires more knowledge or becomes more unsafe.



> You're willing to create an immense bureaucracy to solve a problem of small magnitude and significance. For instance, do you need one license/certification up to 20' and then an upgrade if you buy a thirty footer?


In my opinion, it should be based upon tonnage and HP. I do not think someone that operates a ski boat should have to keep the same license as one who operates a 30-40 foot sea ray.



> "...your driver's license test...provided the basics for you to be a driver." Actually, no it did not. Driver's ed. did that. For some it was accomplished by learning from Dad on the farm. The license was a few easy questions and a drive around the block with the road lieutenant coupled with a promise to learn how to parallel park.


EXACTLY. Drivers ed. And you would NOT pass your test today if you had not had drivers ed and/or spent the time reading the book on how what a stop light is, where to stop at a stop sign, signals, etc. And I would wager you that the boy whose dad taught him to drive on the farm would not pass the test if he did not read that same book as MOST of the test is based upon where to stop for the stop sign, how to steer in ice, how many seconds to stay behind the vehicle in front of you... etc. You do not learn that with pops teaching you. He teaches you how to drive... not the law. Our laws govern driving. Without a firm knowledge of them, you are a dnager to yourself and others. I know, first hand, of many examples of those getting motor boats (and many in sail boats) that woudl not have even passed the simple drivers test that you despise. They could not so much as get their boat in and out of the slip, much less knew anything about piloting or right ow way. Our current laws do not care. They assume that if you are smart enough to start the boat, you are competent to drive it. What a joke, and nothing is further from the truth. Do you think that Sway? Do you think that if they are smart enough to start ANY (read ANY) boat, they are competent to steer it, pilot it, safety, etc?? Certainly you do not. Would you want to be on the water around them, where a collision may very likely kill you and those aboard with you? No? Well guess what? You are when you enter the water right now. The fact that you have not been hit or hurt has nothing to so with the current system working, and has everything to do with you being lucky.



> I'm also reminded of something I heard about scuba diving. Novice divers suffer a disproportionate number of the air embolisms that occur in divers while the bends are suffered mostly by experienced divers. That both can become injured in what can be a hazardous sport is indisputable. But the nature of injury has little to do with certification and everything to do with experience.


As a certified and licensed PADI diver, I will answer this: without a formal education in scuba (which allows you to take a test for a license), you would almosty certainly be dead. You only get one oops - like forgetting to exhale on the way up or staying down too long and running out of bottom time, before you are dead. Sorry Sway, you picked a terrible example to support your point and in fact reinforce mine. If you would prefer your dad teaching you this who also may have no certification or ability to teach it, you take your life in your hands. Again, has it occured to you that dad might not know what he was doing? Even with the education and certification, people are killed diving. I cannot imagine it the deaths without it.



> I also hope you're not color blind...any reasonable license would preclude you from operating a boat, as it does receiving a USCG issued license. As rigorous as the CG license is, it only tests you on book or paper problems. You have to be able to reduce a sun line and noon observation and derive the latitude and longitude but you need show no evidence of actual ability with the sextant itself. Another words, all you're tested on is classroom knowledge. I'd submit that a crash jibe looks one way on paper, or in print, and quite differently on board.


Color blind people have been operating boats since the beginning of time. Why would you not let them have a license? And yes, I agree that the practical side is as important or more important to the book side - but you need a basis to start from. Learn from the "book" the way it should in theory be done and polish your skills from there. The alternative is to not learn the book and just hop out on the water and go for it - learning as you go. That is what we have today. And how many peoples lives and property do we (as a people) risk so that some yo-yo can get out there and learn - assuming he wants to learn at all? Not everyone is as interested in taking the time to learn good seamanship as you and I, Sway. At least this way when you see someone heading toward you at 40 kts in their new 40' Sea Ray, you know that have at least had some education and should know the right of way. Whether they remember or care - that is uncontrollable. But like driving a car, they SHOULD know. And you will be put in positions as a sailor that you sinmply cannot get out of their way and your property and life is based upon them knowing right of way and caring enough to usde the seamanship skills they have learned. The first we can correct with education. The latter we cannot. I prefer to do what we can.



> Lastly I'd offer that the vast majority of accidents that happen are not a result of lack of license, lack of training, or even lack of experience. They are the result of simple misjudgments that developed into something much more consequential. Most of the guys I've rescued with fuel/water issues with their motor knew they had water in the fuel before they left! They figured they'd deal with it; then the wind came up!


There is NO license or education to stop stupidity. I agree that the majority of accidents happen due to what you said above. However, I feel that MANY fo the accidents that happen would be avoided if people were required to know the rules of the road. At the very least, as I said before, you would know that the perons heading toward you has had some formal education and license to operate that vessel and SHOULD know the right of way. Whether he chooses to do it or not will be up to him.



> And you know, I'm also getting that old feeling again about one of your posts. The one where one of the enlightened liberal persuasion is about to take away some of my basic liberties in pursuit of the greater good as viewed by himself and other's like him. I'm just waiting for you to ask, "what about the children?" You seem to have a pretty specific idea of just the right level of training for the sailor. I'm surprised at that because I have absolutely no idea of what level of mandated training is reasonable, and I'm not only licensed but have taught those seeking their license.


I am not sure why a viable education and verification process is considered liberal. I consider it intelligent, as we BOTH do on automobiles and planes. I am not sure what you mean by the children comment. That made no sense to me.



> I don't care much that you mock my notions of a proper anchor watch. I do care that you blithely invoke the idea of licensing without an understanding that anyone licensing you is going to tell you that you must have a visual anchor watch and that solo sailing is inherently unsafe. But then, that's what you get when you invite the government in to regulate you. And we call those people who persist in thinking that it'll be different in this case liberals. Their faith in government knows no limits, nor any reality


How do you know that anyone licensing me is going to require an anchor watch? Without digging up that old thread again, the issue with anchor watches was that it is not realistic for anything short of a ship and crew. This again reinforces my notion that your bias is based upon years of being a merchant marine and not piloting a small vessel. As I have said before, the reality that I have seen, piloting a small vessel, is that motor boats do run you over and do not know right of way. The reality I have seen is that few of them understand seamanship or have any education in it. I have been, in a sailboat, put in many circumstaces where they other person did not know what he was doing and I was forced to make emergency manuevers to avoid a collision. I question whether anyone that has spent any time on the water has not also been put in those circumstances. I feel a formal educational process would have avoided many of those.

And as I have said, I am not a liberal, though I carry many of their ideals. I also carry many conservative ideals. I look at the issues based upon their merit and not whether it has a liberal tendency or a conservative tendancy. I could give a crap whether my views are accepted by the Republicans or approved by Obama. I stand back and look at them logically.

I can only assume that my experiences on the water have obvioulsy been different than your experiences on the water and we have seen different things. I am making an effort to fix the problem - some type of solution. You do not see a problem - either because you have not witnessed it or because you wish to do nothing about it in fears that it might actually affect you too.

No matter what, I respect your opinion on the matter as you have logged countless miles at sea and have gone through more formal training than I have. I also respect your opinion on anchoring. I think that your views, more than most people that have weighed in on this thread, carry a lot of weight. That does not mean that I agree with those views, and I have tried to explain why. I mean no hard feelings - and do not take this final paragraph as a suggestion that I am buying in Chicago. After having to put up with you for as long as I have, the tab is on you!!

Cordially,

Brian


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Okay - then let's look at this from another angle. This thread is about controlling admission. And that seems like it's a fairly hopeless endeavor in the long run. But let's go back to the other end of the argument with one more hypothetical...beyond the issue of just bad driving, and to the issue of rescue, which spawned this thread.

What if everyone, everywhere, every time was charged for the full costs of their rescue as some have stated? Take the SeaTow idea and apply it globally. Maybe this is already the case in some areas - I don't know. But it's a wonderfully capitalistic approach. So...

What would that do for safety on the seas for pleasure boaters? Would it be better than licensing?

Think about the implications...everyone would now carry the insurance to cover these potential costs, then the actuaries inevitably find that some form of licensing/inspection program is necessary to control those costs, then the insurance companies themselves institute a privatized industry for licensing/inspection (or co-opt the governments'), then another private industry comes along for cost-controlled SAR (like today's ambulance service industry), etc.

Now spread that scenario out globally. What do the current government sponsored SAR programs become? How are they standardized? How do they bill/collect in this system? How do they prioritize rescues and "compete" with privatized organizations (based on ROI)? How do any of them pay those valiant merchant vessels that step in to help because they are bound by tradition to do so?

Sure would make me think twice before jumping out of the lake. But, man, what a mess!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> Trolls are trolls. You guys aren't trolls. lol
> 
> Trust me, I've battled my share.
> 
> ...


Read this carefully...

Education provides the basis in which you have the knowledge to get a license. The license verifies that you have *some *level of understanding of that education. That license then provides the basis upon which you will master your skills in the real world.

What we are currently doing allows removing the first two steps, grabbing a beer, turning the key, and hoping out there and learning on the fly - while risking anyone's and everyones property and person by doing it.

It did not work for airplanes. It did not work for automobiles. It should not work for boats.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> Okay - then let's look at this from another angle. This thread is about controlling admission. And that seems like it's a fairly hopeless endeavor in the long run. But let's go back to the other end of the argument with one more hypothetical...beyond the issue of just bad driving, and to the issue of rescue, which spawned this thread.
> 
> What if everyone, everywhere, every time was charged for the full costs of their rescue as some have stated? Take the SeaTow idea and apply it globally. Maybe this is already the case in some areas - I don't know. But it's a wonderfully capitalistic approach. So...
> 
> ...


I suggested making those who boat irresponsibly pay for their rescue in another thread. Irresponsible is the key.

- CD

PS Ghosh, Smack, you are making nice, intelligent posts. Are you ok?? Did you lay off the booze or are you drinking? If drinking, could you send Sway some??


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Read this carefully...
> 
> Education provides the basis in which you have the knowledge to get a license. The license verifies that you have *some *level of understanding of that education. That license then provides the basis upon which you will master your skills in the real world.
> 
> ...


You've got me wrong here. I agree that education is important. I nowhere, ever said anything differently. I was a college teacher for a time, training people in electronics. It's easy enough to kill yourself with electricity if you don't have an understanding of what it can do to you, and how it works.

My job, obviously, first and foremost in all my courses was to TEACH SAFETY FIRST and make sure students abide by all of course requirements as well as my OWN personal safety standards (which were fairly more stringent than the course requirements).

The point I was attempting to make before, when you called it sarcasm, was that I certainly believe education is important. A license is nothing more than a piece of paper saying you've met some requirements.

Therefore - those EDUCATION requirements ought to be a DIPLOMA and NOT a license.

ALL of my students would have passed a safety test - probably only 80% of them ever really made it into the field, and a smaller percentage won't remember a thing they learned when I was teaching them now (today).

The fact is - I don't care who you are, your most important lessons are not learned in a classroom or from a book, they are learned from the mistakes one makes.

Unfortunately, sometimes those mistakes are costlier than if they simply took the time, slowed down and used some simple common sense.

I'll say this again, you CAN NOT LEGISLATE common sense and you can't legislate stupidity.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> I suggested making those who boat irresponsibly pay for their rescue in another thread. Irresponsible is the key.
> 
> - CD
> 
> PS Ghosh, Smack, you are making nice, intelligent posts. Are you ok?? Did you lay off the booze or are you drinking? If drinking, could you send Sway some??


Naa - that won't work. That's the easy way out, yet makes a widely accepted definition of "irresponsible" necessary. Then you fall on the sword that you've been wielding above.

As for making nice. I'm just feeling somewhat gruntled lately. It could go "dis" at any moment if someone says something stupid.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> I suggested making those who boat irresponsibly pay for their rescue in another thread. Irresponsible is the key.
> 
> - CD


This is the only real answer to the question. People who act responsibly should NOT be made to pay for everyone else's mistakes. Those who act irresponsibly should be held accountable.

I think we all agree on this, right?

If that's true - then licensing will absolutely NOT help those who are irresponsible because they will continue to be that way.


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

As I said before If/When the Insurance companies start giving reduced rates for those with a license, then you will see more license people out there. 
But a trip to the Pharmacy still show that there is no cure for stupidity. And I have know some people with a license, who have forgotten everything they have learned and think they know it all. No cure for that either....


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> This is the only real answer to the question. People who act responsibly should NOT be made to pay for everyone else's mistakes. Those who act irresponsibly should be held accountable.
> 
> I think we all agree on this, right?
> 
> If that's true - then licensing will absolutely NOT help those who are irresponsible because they will continue to be that way.


We agree totally... except about the licensing. I do NOT believe a license will stop those acting irresponsible. That is not its point. The point of the licesne is to make sure the people that are on the water have a certain level of education and competence. No one can control what they do with it. But at the least, they should know WHAT to do. That gives them the starting point upon which to build abnd better their skills.

Right now, there is none.

- CD


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Amen to that... 


Cruisingdad said:


> We agree totally... except about the licensing. *I do NOT believe a license will stop those acting irresponsible. *That is not its point. *The point of the licesne is to make sure the people that are on the water have a certain level of education and competence.* No one can control what they do with it. But at the least, they should know WHAT to do. That gives them the starting point upon which to build abnd better their skills.
> 
> Right now, there is none.
> 
> - CD


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> We agree totally... except about the licensing. I do NOT believe a license will stop those acting irresponsible. That is not its point. The point of the licesne is to make sure the people that are on the water have a certain level of education and competence. No one can control what they do with it. But at the least, they should know WHAT to do. That gives them the starting point upon which to build abnd better their skills.
> 
> Right now, there is none.
> 
> - CD


While we are at it:

Lets make sure that before someone does an electrical upgrade they have the minimum knowledge to do it so that if they minimize their boat, harbor, and surrounding boats from catching fire. Let's make them have a license before they perform a DIY upgrade.

Before someone can replace or install a seacock, lets make sure they have the minimum knowledge before we as a society allow them to perform such. Lets have a license.

Heck lets have a license to ensure that people know what is expected of them prior to cruising the internet - lets make them have a license.

A boat is a recreational - keyword, recreational enjoyment for most of us. Those that do make a living from one, they do have the required tests and papers for the job they do. You want to see the boating shrink even more - go after a licensing agenda.

How about we license bicyclists, skateboarders, roller bladers, etc.

Licensing is not the answer - education is. How about before someone buys a boat that can provide proof that took an online BoatUS course or sponsored "Introductory Seminar to Boating"...

But no - licensing is just another way to extort money and add it to the coffers. Just like a drivers license. There really is no need to have every 4 years a renewal so that you can fork over monies for a new one because you recite the memorized eye test...

Just like driver licenses do not stop that idiot from doing 120 mph on a motorcycle or a car and killing innocent victims..Nor would a boaters license prevent those that want to go around the world in a 3K boat...Those who are gonna do it - will just do it...


----------



## Rockter (Sep 11, 2006)

Cruisingdad :

You are making a big mistake here. You could licence the entire boating populace in the UK here until their ears pop. Yes, and safety would improve.

No doubt "if it saves one life, it's worth it"?

That's not the fear here. The fear is that you unleash a great swathe of interference in the affairs of the boat owner. Fewer people will die, but many fewer people will be able to use a boat, either because they cannot afford the boat, or cannot afford to license it, or cannot get crew so they would have to sail alone, and are not permitted to.

Is there any soul on this website with anything other than sawdust for brains that cannot see what will happen next. A whole industry will spring up around it, and it will cost, and cost, and cost.

Sway, I am with you on this one. Some fire in your belly is needed to resist these merciless do-gooders.

I have seen them in action before. I have seen them in motorcycling. Beware the do-gooder promising improved safety. I have even seen some of them that want to ban motorcycling entirely. Think of the lives it would save!!!! Gosh!

I have 5 motorcycles, and one boat.

I am going to defend them.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

I for one as a person who had to sit for an 11 hour deposition and a week long trial as a result of a boating collision, would urge you to get all the boating education you can. There were times I felt sorry for the guy that run us down while he was being worked over by our attorneys and was looking real stupid when he could not answer simple boating questions.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

*Post #159*

Dad,
Am still waiting for your answer to this...
Basically what is the cost to keep us safe fron someone with NO COMMON SENCE?????
Would the air be mortal combat without licence.....nope.Self culling.With some admitted colateral damage.Laughing,Obously you do not hang out at landing strips.There is NO sky police untill you screw up.......
Would the roads be safer without a licence program...Short run no...Long run WITHOUT mandantory insurance{another subject entirly}.Do the reserch and make your own determination.All i have seen on that is the insurance carriers are cleaning up.
As for Floating licences....I am back to the same question....AT WHAT COST. In theroy it sounds good.Now what does it cost WE THE PEOPLE?And how far does it go teck wise?
I do not mean this to be a wise ass post.Seriously think your heart and mind is into this.And aplaude you for that.But have you done the math?And have you thought about how far the teck can restrict YOU personally?
Patiently waiting. 
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

*18 inches...ouchy*

Seems this thread has gone the licence limit for me.
Do i have a licence to fly...Nope.Was taught by my grandfather at the age of 12.After rebuilding and getting enought weight on me to START that darn rotary royce..Read biplane.
Gramps sat behind me {bi-plane} with a 18 inch steel ruller.Judiciously making sure i learned how to do it right.Still have the scares on my head to prove it.Am now 46 and am comfortable in any fixed wing that i can study the book on for a day.Excluding jet powered but if there is someone close thats buying the fuel....grins.Currantly have had no accidents besides a poor bambi that decided to stand on the runway.Hindquarters were tasty on said bambi.Not much left of the forend.
Do i have a CDL licence to drive a 18 wheeler?Yup,But only because the FEDERAL GOVE made the CDL.Started driving beside gramps with that same darn 18 inches of steel in his hand.Did not actually get a licence untill it was clear CDL was going to happen.The the government sent me the TEST FOR MY CDL LICENCE ALONG WITH THE ANSWERS SO I COULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN....Gee,that was hard to do..Sends them a CHEAK FOR THE FEE!!!!!!!!!!! 
Currantly have ben driving since i was 14 and have 1 accident.Motercycle when i was dumb and healed fast.All my fault.The licence i had making me compentant to drive it was a joke..... 
So i look back on life and realize GRAMPS and that darn 18 inch steel rule was a good thing.Taught me common sence.
Me missing the old fart. 
Mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

artbyjody said:


> While we are at it:
> 
> Lets make sure that before someone does an electrical upgrade they have the minimum knowledge to do it so that if they minimize their boat, harbor, and surrounding boats from catching fire. Let's make them have a license before they perform a DIY upgrade.
> 
> ...


This is an excellent point.

I am a radio man. Been doing it nearly forty years professionally. I have held the requisite licensing to do so on more than one occasion as well. My Ham Radio license gives me the permission to use certain radio spectrum as well as experiment all I want pretty much unfettered. My old First Class Radio Telephone license gave me the LEGAL permission to operate things like 50,000 watt transmitters, and maintain, as well as tune and test the equipment. A little more work and I could have had a radar endorsement, a ships radiotelephone and telegraphy endorsement and a few other things.

Then I could have charged folks out the ying-yang for pretty much any radio work that needed doing.

So, that begs the point. How many of you are qualified to build an antenna, install it properly and ensure that you meet the minimum RF exposure limits?

Almost none. A few hams here are, but even most of them are not.

So... how about electrical mods? I can do them. I'm qualified. I'm not LICENSED to do house wiring, but I could be. I don't want to be, don't chose to be, and I can still do the wiring.

So... the point made by the above poster is legitimate.

How about engine work? Hmmm lots of certified mechanics out there and most of you wouldn't want to go to a mechanic who isn't certified, so why are you working on your own engines?

and on and on an on and on.

So - before you decide it's good to require a license for boating, perhaps you ought to consider how much other stuff you might be affecting...


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

> Originally Posted by *artbyjody*
> 
> While we are at it:
> 
> Lets make sure that before someone does an electrical upgrade they have the minimum knowledge to do it so that if they minimize their boat, harbor, and surrounding boats from catching fire. Let's make them have a license before they perform a DIY upgrade.


Although they could possibly burn down the harbor, the reality is that they are primarily only a risk to themselves. However, if you do it comercially, you DO have to have a license. I am sure you know that though.



> Before someone can replace or install a seacock, lets make sure they have the minimum knowledge before we as a society allow them to perform such. Lets have a license.


A danger to themselves, not others.



> Heck lets have a license to ensure that people know what is expected of them prior to cruising the internet - lets make them have a license.
> 
> A boat is a recreational - keyword, recreational enjoyment for most of us. Those that do make a living from one, they do have the required tests and papers for the job they do. You want to see the boating shrink even more - go after a licensing agenda.


For many people, flying and driving cars is recreational. I would still expect them to have a license as the roads and skies they fly on are used by the general population and require education. To verify that they are at least partially competent, that education is tested and they are issued what we call a license.



> How about we license bicyclists, skateboarders, roller bladers, etc.


Now you are being silly and blowing it out of proportion, again.



> Licensing is not the answer - education is. How about before someone buys a boat that can provide proof that took an online BoatUS course or sponsored "Introductory Seminar to Boating"...


Education IS the answer. In order to verify that the person actually stayed awake or attended the educational program, they will take a test. When they pass that test, they will be licensed. Why a license over a certificate of accomplishment? Because a license CAN BE REVOKED. It also verifies that they have some level of mastery of the education that they have received.



> But no - licensing is just another way to extort money and add it to the coffers. Just like a drivers license. There really is no need to have every 4 years a renewal so that you can fork over monies for a new one because you recite the memorized eye test...


My intent for a license, as I have stated many times now, is to verify some level of mastery of the education which they have received. It is not about money, and certainly not the extortion of money.



> Just like driver licenses do not stop that idiot from doing 120 mph on a motorcycle or a car and killing innocent victims..Nor would a boaters license prevent those that want to go around the world in a 3K boat...Those who are gonna do it - will just do it.


For some reason, I get the feeling no one is reading wht I am writing. I am NOT advocating licensing to keep someone from being an idiot. I am advocating licensing to ensure that when a person(s) takes contfrol of a vessel, they have had some level of education on the operation of that vessel, safety, piloting, rules of the road, etc. Right now, we have nothing but rules with no program required to make sure you even know them... any of them. Nothing. Notta.

Let me say again, you could, today, (assuming you had the cash) head out and buy a 40 foot Sea Ray. You could hop in the seat. You could turn the key. You could do speed off down the ICW or wherever. Now, you could do all this without the foggiest notion of what you are doing or who you are endangering. You could do it and NO ONE could stop you. And, you could do it with a beer in one hand and both eyes on your chartplotter.

That is the reality of where we are. I have come to apprecaite that there are parts of the country where this is not an issue. However, I have not been so lucky. Many others have not either.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

cardiacpaul said:


> Ok, I get it. Civil liberties and all that, got it. I'm not going to take your flag or anything, alright?
> 
> As it stands today, NO ONE needs a "D/L" to operate a boat. Forget sailboats for a second. In many states, if you're over 16, you plop down 75k, you too can hike your spankin' new to you 30 ft. scarab with twin 600HP i/o's in the water, and make it past the no wake zone.
> 
> ...


Funny. I have the feeling Paul that many people have not seen what we have. The power boat races... the idiots on Sea Rays in Texoma... the Hatteras and sprt fish running you over in S Florida.

I honestly believe there is no way anyone that has been in these shoes of mine would not be for licensing if they had seen what I had. Would it stop the idiots? Nope. But at least it would stop those that did nto know they were idiots - or keep them from buynig a boat in the first place.

- CD

PS Read Rosa's writeup on the Political thread. What a life, eh? And people wonder why we lose it when they bring up [email protected]???


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

cardiacpaul said:


> Ok, I get it. Civil liberties and all that, got it. I'm not going to take your flag or anything, alright?
> 
> As it stands today, NO ONE needs a "D/L" to operate a boat. Forget sailboats for a second. In many states, if you're over 16, you plop down 75k, you too can hike your spankin' new to you 30 ft. scarab with twin 600HP i/o's in the water, and make it past the no wake zone.
> 
> ...


 Good for you,
Now straight LOGISTICS....
Say unckle thinks this is a good idea.We currantly have the teck to put a BlackBOX on your boat that will only allow LICENCED operators to drive it[READ RFID tag}Unlicenced operators will be fined by mail.If there is no licenced operator scanned by the system the COST TO THE OWNER WILL BE FINED AT.....Name a price.
The price of operating said system so you can go SAILING is $7000 a year!!!!!!! Paid for by the owner of the boat.

Can this happen.Yup,They are currantly talking about my roadboats.{read trucks} having to pay this price for said system....

So i put it to you SIR..
ARE YOU WILLING TO PAY $7000 A YEAR EXTRA FOR THIS?
No putting on a federal GRANT that we all pay for.The entire price for this program is going to be funded by you the boat owner.To you....ARE YOU WILLING?
My DUMBASS THOUGHTS
Mark


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

travler37 said:


> Seems this thread has gone the licence limit for me.
> Do i have a licence to fly...Nope.Was taught by my grandfather at the age of 12.After rebuilding and getting enought weight on me to START that darn rotary royce..Read biplane.
> Gramps sat behind me {bi-plane} with a 18 inch steel ruller.Judiciously making sure i learned how to do it right.Still have the scares on my head to prove it.Am now 46 and am comfortable in any fixed wing that i can study the book on for a day.Excluding jet powered but if there is someone close thats buying the fuel....grins.Currantly have had no accidents besides a poor bambi that decided to stand on the runway.Hindquarters were tasty on said bambi.Not much left of the forend.
> Do i have a CDL licence to drive a 18 wheeler?Yup,But only because the FEDERAL GOVE made the CDL.Started driving beside gramps with that same darn 18 inches of steel in his hand.Did not actually get a licence untill it was clear CDL was going to happen.The the government sent me the TEST FOR MY CDL LICENCE ALONG WITH THE ANSWERS SO I COULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN....Gee,that was hard to do..Sends them a CHEAK FOR THE FEE!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...


It was the education, Mark, that made you competent. Not everyone has a competent grandfather to walk them through this. And Mark, as hard as it might be to believe this, some people simply do not care and will not care unless forced to. They will not learn the rules until forced to. The license, is a verification of your education. It is meant to make sure you have at least some mastery of the craft you will soon pilot. It is not meant to stop stupidity, it is meant to educate those that pilot the water with the basics and make sure they know them.

Regarding the costs... does it matter? THey will never do it. It will never happen. In that respect, I guess our little conversation is hypothetical. The reason they do not do it has nothing to do with what should or should not be done. It has nothing ot do with civil liverties. It is simply the old mighty dollar and a massive loss of sales for Sea Ray. "What? What do you mean I have to have a license and know how to run this? I can drive a car, can't I?"

Pfft.

- CD


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> That is the reality of where we are. I have come to apprecaite that there are parts of the country where this is not an issue. However, I have not been so lucky. Many others have not either.
> 
> - CD


I think what you are missing CD - is that it we all run into those that can hop into a Searay and go powering around. Doesn't mean they do not know what they are doing. I am willing to bet there is an equal amount of sailors that do spend 40K on a sailboat and didn't know what they were doing. Are you saying speed is the issue here?

Because from what I can tell - I have a license and everyone else on the road does to. People constantly cut me off, zig zag within inches to go flying by me, or stop all traffic in a four lane stretch of road because a school bus is in the opposite lane dropping off children (the law is only those behind the bus not the other opposing lanes).

That is the problem with society today is all this "we have to legislate a mandated license for you to do this that or the other". Why do we do this? Because we like others to take care of the problem for us. When was the last time that you volunteered at your marina to give a lecture on just what ails you in terms of what must be rampant in your neck of the woods. Wouldn't that be more effective and save taxpayers and your fellow boaters the grief, money and aggravation?

If it is really that important to you - then why not YOU take the initiative to setup free or low cost seminars on boating safety and etiquette at your marina instead of trying to force the government (society) to manage your idealism of how things could change. You want change and you can be that Change and do the first step and it won't take an initiative or ballot - educate a few around you and like Obama support - will grow and grow into a more knowledgeable environment. Then this discussion wouldn't be hypothetical and think of the reports from you on how the program works and other sailnetters do it etc...

Boating is recreational - and just because we as sailors do not have 200 HP engines doesn't give us the right to mandate training, licensing, and the likes because a few yahoos.

Don't we already have enough regulation to worry about in our daily lives - why add another for the sake of thinking that mandated licensing will make other boaters be unlike what they probably do when they drive anyways....


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> This is an excellent point.
> 
> So - before you decide it's good to require a license for boating, perhaps you ought to consider how much other stuff you might be affecting...


I am not for licensing or mandating anything where you are simply a danger to yourself, only when you become a danger to others. This insludes the seat belt law, helmets, etc. While I think you should wear them, I certainly do not thionk the government has any right to tell you to wear them.

Same with boating. If your boating and act of piloting could only endanger yourself or those stupid enough to get on with you, I would say it was not a good idea. I do not need the government in my life. However, when someone else can easily endanger me and my family and you and yours, that is an issue.

- CD


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Funny. I have the feeling Paul that many people have not seen what we have. The power boat races... the idiots on Sea Rays in Texoma... the Hatteras and sprt fish running you over in S Florida.
> 
> I honestly believe there is no way anyone that has been in these shoes of mine would not be for licensing if they had seen what I had. Would it stop the idiots? Nope. But at least it would stop those that did nto know they were idiots - or keep them from buynig a boat in the first place.
> 
> ...


 Patiently waiting DAD,,,,
At what cost to you? Personally. It is availble for $7000 a boat a year.Not including government {union} cost of living raises....Can you afford to sail at this price?
My Dumbass Comments 
Mark

My


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

artbyjody said:


> I think what you are missing CD - is that it we all run into those that can hop into a Searay and go powering around. Doesn't mean they do not know what they are doing. I am willing to bet there is an equal amount of sailors that do spend 40K on a sailboat and didn't know what they were doing. Are you saying speed is the issue here?
> 
> Because from what I can tell - I have a license and everyone else on the road does to. People constantly cut me off, zig zag within inches to go flying by me, or stop all traffic in a four lane stretch of road because a school bus is in the opposite lane dropping off children (the law is only those behind the bus not the other opposing lanes).
> 
> ...


Funny, Jody, but I thought it was you that was missing the point - and I do not mean that disrespectfully.

Why don't I sit dopwn and educate them? I do - to two little boys and my parents. The point in this that YOU are missing is that the people that would atend my educational class, are the ones that already care about seamanship and right of way and being a good boater. They are not the ones that are the problem. It is the others that would not attend unless forced to that are the problem. Can't you see that?

I have seen it Jody, first hand, many times, people buying these boats with no clue what they are doing and shooting off across the water. I have been cut off and done emergency manuevers to avoid them. I am not exhagerating, Jody. Ask Paul. He will have seen the same.

I strongly believe that the people that operate in this manner would and will have no intention of attending my course since they have done nothing to better their understanding... not even a book with basic rules of the road. No, it has to be mandated and required.

- CD


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Back to COST..
$7000 A YEAR PER BOAT.And licencing problem is solved....

My Dumbass Ideas
Mark


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

travler37 said:


> Patiently waiting DAD,,,,
> At what cost to you? Personally. It is availble for $7000 a boat a year.Not including government {union} cost of living raises....Can you afford to sail at this price?
> My Dumbass Comments
> Mark
> ...


I do not understand the $7,000? Where did you come up with that figure? You assume the little black box is the only answer? Nah. I do not agree with that. I think a license taht you carry on board as with your USCG cert would be fine. When you screw up or break the rules and get pulled over (which happens a lot where I am from), they check license. Maybe they do random checks like the USCG on safety?

- CD


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> It was the education, Mark, that made you competent. Not everyone has a competent grandfather to walk them through this. And Mark, as hard as it might be to believe this, some people simply do not care and will not care unless forced to. They will not learn the rules until forced to. The license, is a verification of your education. It is meant to make sure you have at least some mastery of the craft you will soon pilot. It is not meant to stop stupidity, it is meant to educate those that pilot the water with the basics and make sure they know them.
> 
> Regarding the costs... does it matter? THey will never do it. It will never happen. In that respect, I guess our little conversation is hypothetical. The reason they do not do it has nothing to do with what should or should not be done. It has nothing ot do with civil liverties. It is simply the old mighty dollar and a massive loss of sales for Sea Ray. "What? What do you mean I have to have a license and know how to run this? I can drive a car, can't I?"
> 
> ...


 THEY WILL NEVER DO IT.....
Do you live under a rock somewhere...Or not inclined to wonder why the cost of a loaf of bread is so hiigh?????Transportation costs...They allready have my friend.

As to my qusstion that all say will never happen in my world{trucking}.It is going to and we the people will pay for it.....

Now i put it to you bluntly....The cost of your program will cost every boat owner without exception no matter what size...Because uncle has to be able to plot this on there chart...

The cost will be $7000 PER boat.Does not matter what size[Read tender}.They need to chart all of them.....

It can and will be done in the stroke of a pen if you do not think it through...and all will think it will be a good idea......

Now think of the 100% yaught tax in the 70's...Darn...all the SHEEPLE thought that was a good idea to...............
My Dumbasss Thoughts
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> I do not understand the $7,000? Where did you come up with that figure? You assume the little black box is the only answer? Nah. I do not agree with that. I think a license taht you carry on board as with your USCG cert would be fine. When you screw up or break the rules and get pulled over (which happens a lot where I am from), they check license. Maybe they do random checks like the USCG on safety?
> 
> - CD


 Dad,
The $7000 figure is what the it will cost me to installl an maintain....like paying for a security system...for a year so the DOT can access my drivers hours of service


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Why don't I sit dopwn and educate them? I do - to two little boys and my parents. The point in this that YOU are missing is that the people that would atend my educational class, are the ones that already care about seamanship and right of way and being a good boater. They are not the ones that are the problem. It is the others that would not attend unless forced to that are the problem. Can't you see that?


I don't think so there mate. A low cost or free seminar hmmm How many courses are out there for getting certifications? Many people think about attending them (as in myself would) but the costs is prohibitive or the scheduling is at the worst time etc... You are assuming your audience would be those that do not need it, but actually the ones that already have a gist on handling a boat, right of way etc - wouldn't be interested in it to begin with.

But you'll never know who actually attends, until you actually try it 



Cruisingdad said:


> I strongly believe that the people that operate in this manner would and will have no intention of attending my course since they have done nothing to better their understanding... not even a book with basic rules of the road. No, it has to be mandated and required.
> 
> And even if they were licensed - the types you describe would do the same behavior. just like drivers do thinking because they have a big truck, a fast car, or that they are just entitled - will speed, not use turn signals, etc... those are the types you are trying educate and they have already been "educationally endorsed" but choose to do it anyways.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

travler37 said:


> Dad,
> The $7000 figure is what the it will cost me to installl an maintain....like paying for a security system...for a year so the DOT can access my drivers hours of service


Honestly, I think a system like that would not work well for a boat. And who is to know that the person driving it actually is the licensed captain and not someone else?

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

artbyjody said:


> I don't think so there mate. A low cost or free seminar hmmm How many courses are out there for getting certifications? Many people think about attending them (as in myself would) but the costs is prohibitive or the scheduling is at the worst time etc... You are assuming your audience would be those that do not need it, but actually the ones that already have a gist on handling a boat, right of way etc - wouldn't be interested in it to begin with.
> 
> But you'll never know who actually attends, until you actually try it
> 
> ...


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> I do not understand the $7,000? Where did you come up with that figure? You assume the little black box is the only answer? Nah. I do not agree with that. I think a license taht you carry on board as with your USCG cert would be fine. When you screw up or break the rules and get pulled over (which happens a lot where I am from), they check license. Maybe they do random checks like the USCG on safety?
> 
> - CD


 Dad,
Thank you foe the belly laugh...That LICENCE thing you thinking about is back in the 70's....Darn,,i feal old....Gee...When i first started to run the roads UNCKLE thought paper LICENCE would be fine to..You had better get with the program.

This is year 2000+
We have the teck to RFID you as your going down the road...or the waterways...And fine you for it...And they are going to do there best to keep us DIRTY/NASTY/UNSAFE/..trucks drivers off the road...And make us owners of said trucks pay per Q-Com aprox $7000 per year for the privilage of making sure my drivers are complying to hours of service laws....If you want i can email you with basic math why a OWNER OF A COMPANY can not figure out how legal his drivers are running...it does not take a collage degree to do time and distance.calcs.

This does not realy apply to this thread except to let you know how far tec has come...From a indivudual state licence to if i want to put 18 wheels on the road i am looking at paying this....$7000 per truck.Again...i will pass this on to you...how much do you want to pay for a loaf of bread..sail...winch handle...they all get trucked my friend.

So i am back to YOUR BOAT...
Your licenceing enforcement is not so different from what the DOT wants to do for the DREADED big trucks.......And the Teck is here right now....

You pay $7000 eXtra per year to make sure the man at the helm is LICENCED.....

Personally,,,Per boat including tenders.....How much are you willing to pay?$7000 and rising..
My Dumbass Question to you DAD... 
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Honestly, I think a system like that would not work well for a boat. And who is to know that the person driving it actually is the licensed captain and not someone else?
> 
> - CD


 Opens a Labats and thanks you for the LAUGH...Same thing we the OWNERS/DRIVERS have ben saying to UNCKLE for years....they are still going to do it to us...Laughing my ass off...You fell nicly into this my friend..
My Not So DUMBASS COMMENT
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Honestly, I think a system like that would not work well for a boat. And who is to know that the person driving it actually is the licensed captain and not someone else?
> 
> - CD


 So why does this not work well forEVERYBODY that needs a LICENCE to operate anything that moves?

The TECK is here now....I am asking you as to enforcement..and the price.....For all moving licences..from forklift to F-16"s..In your would what is the problem?
My Dumbass Thoughts
Mark


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Mark,

It will not work for a boat because the transponders that you drive under are not possible (or not easily doable) in the ocean. 

I am nottrying to collect a fee. I am trying to implement licensing that verifies education.

- CD


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Maybe they do random checks like the USCG on safety?


Because there's nothing I like better than being stopped by the cops on my day off. Awesome.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Cruisingdad said:


> Mark,
> 
> It will not work for a boat because the transponders that you drive under are not possible (or not easily doable) in the ocean.
> 
> ...


Dad we do have it all ready!!!
Live AIS NEW YORK HARBOR Data


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Regarding the costs... does it matter?
> 
> - CD


And you wonder why you get called a liberal? 

You missed a few salient points along the way there, Dockie.

Colorblindness. You cannot receive a deck license issued by the USCG if you're colorblind. They've got this odd idea that you should be able to tell the difference between red sidelights and green sidelights. See, this half-baked idea of your's is barely off the ground and you cannot see any reason for denying certification to people physically incapable of operating safely. Don't bother launching into a discussion of daylight operation only....you've brought up safety as the issue and I'm just informing you of the standards that have been adopted by the federal regulatory body designated to draft marine safety regs.

At least in Michigan, there are safety requirements for boaters. You ignored my manning, as well as anchoring, examples in my previous post. No doubt you think that these will not be issues in any licensing. But how can they not be when the state or federal government is tasked with drafting the regs? What makes yiou think they are going to adhere to your version of "safety"?

Manning requirements. No more solo sailing. Patently unsafe. In my state you cannot tow a water skier without a second person in the boat to observe the skier. That's a manning requirement. We recently had a poster question us on how we keep a lookout with that big sail in the way. Anywhere from 30-90 degrees of vision is obstructed. Sailing thus by yourself might be viewed as unsafe as you cannot keep a proper lookout. New manning requirement: if you fly anything over the size of a yankee you need a lookout forward in the bows.

If you're going to anchor overnight you must have an anchor watch. Hey, what about those children sleeping below that could be killed when another boat allides with you? Now we need more adults so we can have an anchor watch.

Boat must be inspected annually or bi-annually. You're not just at risk of harming yourself putting in that transducer...you're carrying innocent friends and family members that trust you when you say Duco cement can seal anything.

Your arguments remind me more than a little of the great liberal movement to license bicycle riders back in the eighties. All the adults were grandfathered of course because _we know_ that they know what they're doing. (Yeah, right!) All the little Johnny's and Janies had to walk their bikes down for their training classes and got their certifications. It didn't stop any of them from pulling out from between parked cars and getting whacked. In the end, nobody wanted to pay for something so patently foolish that could be accomplished better and more thoroughly by parents anyway. And there were real costs involved.

Sure those tragic accidents happen, as CP refers to. And that's the point; they happen everywhere, whether licensed people are involved or not. It's unfortunate but it doesn't mean we should not resist the great liberal impulse to do something-even if it's not much good, or pass a law. All of life in a democracy is a cost-benefit analysis. It sounds heartless but that's the way it is. We set speed limits based on a cost benefit analysis. We could set the speed limit to 10 mph on residential streets and 20 mph on interstates and reduce accidents and certainly fatalities. But then some wag would say, what's the point to transportation in the first place. (!)

You keep saying that boating is more dangerous than driving, yet I've seen no evidence presented other than your anecdotes.

Every time one of you silly little sailboaters decided to cross under my bows close aboard I always muttered the old Clint Eastwood line, "are you feeling lucky today, punk?". Even though _my_ license was at risk if they didn't make it. And I sometimes thought as you do; there ought to be some training. But then common sense reasserted itself and I remembered that most boaters do not make a habit of getting into close quarters situations with 100,000 tons of steel...at least not more than once! And I remembered something even more important, and timeless, currently being expressed rather well by a comedian from your neck of the woods; you can't cure stupid.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

cardiacpaul said:


> Now, should this guy be ticketed, or just allowed to continue on his way...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


IIRC, this was the guy who went on a high-speed Poker run about two years ago in a boat that had KNOWN MECHANICAL PROBLEMS with the steering... yeah, he qualified for a Darwin.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> And you wonder why you get called a liberal?
> 
> You missed a few salient points along the way there, Dockie.
> 
> ...


Sway,

I understand what you are saying. I appreciate it. However, I do not agree with it at all. And I find you are pointing out all the negatives of it instead of looking at the positives.

You certainly can solo sail - and I do not see why a licnse would stop that. If solo sailing and not keeping watch while coastal, you are a candidate for the Darwin Award. WHile out at sea, you are beyond the restrictions of the US and you could even put that stipulation on the license. Regarding the colorblindness, we let people that are colorblind drive cars... the same could be done with boats. And you are also suggesting that this would be a USCG Captain's license which would be way overboard. It does not need to be that in-depth.

Also, do not take my comment about the cost out of context, as you just did. My point there was that the cost is irrelevant if it is never going to be implemented. And regarding your challenge on proving that boating is more dangerous than driving, you know darn good and well that the proposal was not in good faith. Did they do a study before passing a drivers license or flying license?

The bottom line is that you are operating your private vessel on public waterways. Those waterways have rules. You are not required in any way, shape or form to know them... at all. Yet, the lives of those around are dependent on you knowing them.

I would wholly support a educational license program. You have said nothing that would change your mind. I have found most of the arguments against it based upon people desire not to have to do anything extra or take away from their time. Sorry. When you hit the waterways, you are a liability to yourself (which I could care less about) and others (which I do care about). As such, you should be required to know the basics and it should be verified that you know them and are at least partially competent in them. Period.

I would be affected no less than you or anyone else Sway. I am not suggesting that everyone should do something that I would not. i am trying to make the waterways a safer and better place for everyone, not turn my eyes away from the problem.

- CD


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Mark,
> 
> It will not work for a boat because the transponders that you drive under are not possible (or not easily doable) in the ocean.
> 
> ...


 Dad,
Qualcomm inc allready has the teck installed on millions of trucks.They use a sat uplink and work darn near anywhere in the world.The system basically is a keyboard/Black box,and a small radar dome.Can be installed on anything with a 12/24 volt power supply.Very easily doable on ANY BOAT.

Your trying to inplement licencing.Great.I am asking you how far you are willing to go and at what cost to make sure all have the proper licence.The teck is here now to make sure all are licenced..Costs &7000 per truck/boat/car per year.Are you willing to spend this kind of money to make sure we are all safe? How do you plan on enforcing your licence plan?And what does enforcement cost?
Mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> It was the education, Mark, that made you competent. Not everyone has a competent grandfather to walk them through this. And Mark, as hard as it might be to believe this, some people simply do not care and will not care unless forced to. They will not learn the rules until forced to. The license, is a verification of your education. It is meant to make sure you have at least some mastery of the craft you will soon pilot. It is not meant to stop stupidity, it is meant to educate those that pilot the water with the basics and make sure they know them.
> 
> Regarding the costs... does it matter? THey will never do it. It will never happen. In that respect, I guess our little conversation is hypothetical. The reason they do not do it has nothing to do with what should or should not be done. It has nothing ot do with civil liverties. It is simply the old mighty dollar and a massive loss of sales for Sea Ray. "What? What do you mean I have to have a license and know how to run this? I can drive a car, can't I?"
> 
> ...


AH HA!!!!!!!!!

I Caught YOU! YOU FINALLY SAID IT!!!!!!

Forced TO. There you go. FORCING people to do what YOU WANT.

Thank you for finally, finally coming clean and making our point.

Screw that. NO ONE is going to FORCE me to do something I don't want to do. It doesn't matter if it is an education, or pay more taxes, or give up my guns. No one.

I don't think you are quite understanding the reason I'm opposed to such things as forcing "licensing" on a field where there has been none in the past. NOW you are admitting that you want to FORCE people to do things the way YOU want them done.

Now we're clear.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

travler37 said:


> Dad,
> Qualcomm inc allready has the teck installed on millions of trucks.They use a sat uplink and work darn near anywhere in the world.The system basically is a keyboard/Black box,and a small radar dome.Can be installed on anything with a 12/24 volt power supply.Very easily doable on ANY BOAT.
> 
> Your trying to inplement licencing.Great.I am asking you how far you are willing to go and at what cost to make sure all have the proper licence.The teck is here now to make sure all are licenced..Costs &7000 per truck/boat/car per year.Are you willing to spend this kind of money to make sure we are all safe? How do you plan on enforcing your licence plan?And what does enforcement cost?
> Mark


Mark,

I do not understand the insistence on the transponder thing??? WHy do you keep bringing that up? I thought the point of that transponder was to make sure truck drivers were not driving beyond their hourly, legal stipulation. A black box does not make sure you are licensed. I do not understand the coorelation.

Also, though it may be intstalled anywhere, where is it RECEIVER? I thought that was what you drive under at the check stops.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> AH HA!!!!!!!!!
> 
> I Caught YOU! YOU FINALLY SAID IT!!!!!!
> 
> ...


Force you? You do not pay taxes? I bet you do.

No one is forcing you to go boating or drive a car or fly a plane. But if you do, you better be licensed.

- CD


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

This is a simple story of lack of education, the Operator didn't know witch side to leave a green buoy!!!
Deadly boat accident on the Hudson River : New York News - 7/29/08 - New York News and Tri-State News - 7online.com


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> artbyjody said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think so there mate. A low cost or free seminar hmmm How many courses are out there for getting certifications? Many people think about attending them (as in myself would) but the costs is prohibitive or the scheduling is at the worst time etc... You are assuming your audience would be those that do not need it, but actually the ones that already have a gist on handling a boat, right of way etc - wouldn't be interested in it to begin with.
> ...


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Mark,
> 
> I do not understand the insistence on the transponder thing??? WHy do you keep bringing that up? I thought the point of that transponder was to make sure truck drivers were not driving beyond their hourly, legal stipulation. A black box does not make sure you are licensed. I do not understand the coorelation.
> 
> ...


 Dad,
Next time your driving next to a big truck look on the back of the cab on the top.If you look at enough of them you will see what looks like a small radar dome.This is actually a real time sat uplink.Sends all kinds of information like location, speed,engine rpm,oil pressure/temp..ext.And who is driving at the present time. All in real time anywhere the sky is open to see the sat.

As to my insistance to the "transponder thing" as you put it.It is a great way to enforce you licence idea....But it costs bucks.

So will ask one more time then drop it as it looks like your not going to answer anyway.How is your licence going to be enforced and at what cost?
Mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Force you? You do not pay taxes? I bet you do.
> 
> No one is forcing you to go boating or drive a car or fly a plane. But if you do, you better be licensed.
> 
> - CD


Don't change the subject or try to obfuscate. Answer my question.

(I said, and you can CLEARLY READ it, 'pay MORE taxes')

you said FORCE people.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Bubb-

Sounds like speed was also a factor. If they had been going slow enough for the conditions-11:16 PM at night-chances are they would have gotten stuck aground, but not flipped the boat. *If they're going too fast for the conditions... bad things tend to happen, and they're generally far worse than if they were going the speed they should have been...* Also, doesn't appear that they had a VHF aboard... which would have probably been a bit more useful than a drowned cell phone. Most cell phones don't do well when mixed with water.



bubb2 said:


> This is a simple story of lack of education, the Operator didn't know witch side to leave a green buoy!!!
> Deadly boat accident on the Hudson River : New York News - 7/29/08 - New York News and Tri-State News - 7online.com


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

Do you guys know how many "Cracker Jack" boxes I had to open before I got my license? 

At least a zillion of them....


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Mark,
> 
> It will not work for a boat because the transponders that you drive under are not possible (or not easily doable) in the ocean.
> 
> ...


Umm... sorry, CD, absolutely INCORRECT here. RFID is used on a local basis, however, it's not difficult for me to wire up pretty much anything to send out a signal, hit a satellite and relay that information to a host computer system somewhere in the world.

In fact, my friend, that's EXACTLY what I DO, and it's not going to be any more difficult on the OCEAN than it is on land. In fact, it will be easier.

However, I'd point out we're not really talking about licensing boats on the OCEAN now, are we? You're talking about the people who drive their speed boats too fast in no-wake zones, around others, and in tight areas with lots of boats. THOSE areas are quite EASILY wired up to collect data.

For your information though, "black boxes" on Airplanes (and it appears on trucks now) do NOT broadcast such information, rather they merely keep the data within - which gives someone a collection point and then they can fine the "bad guys" later.

So every time you've driven your boat, you will have to pull up, have a cable plugged into your box and the data downloaded. I expect that will cost you money each time too....


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Yeah, but you are old enough so that the Cracker Jack boxes still had decent prizes in 'em when you were doing so... the wouldn't have a license in them today... nowadays, you're lucky to get a sticker as prize... BAH!!



Boasun said:


> Do you guys know how many "Cracker Jack" boxes I had to open before I got my license?
> 
> At least a zillion of them....


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

"Sway,

I understand what you are saying. I appreciate it. However, I do not agree with it at all. And I find you are pointing out all the negatives of it instead of looking at the positives."

Which ignores the fact that the negatives might outweigh the positives.

"You certainly can solo sail - and I do not see why a licnse would stop that. If solo sailing and not keeping watch while coastal, you are a candidate for the Darwin Award."

How do you know what a license would stop? For some reason, you seem to think that you would be writing the requirements for licensing, or someone like you with your outlook. If it's considered by most states to be unsafe to tow a water skier by yourself what do you think their attitude will be towards sailing solo.

"WHile out at sea, you are beyond the restrictions of the US and you could even put that stipulation on the license. Regarding the colorblindness, we let people that are colorblind drive cars... the same could be done with boats."

As a US citizen on a US boat you are nowhere on the briny globe beyond the restrictions/ regulations of the US government as they apply to you and your vessel.

"Also, do not take my comment about the cost out of context, as you just did. My point there was that the cost is irrelevant if it is never going to be implemented. And regarding your challenge on proving that boating is more dangerous than driving, you know darn good and well that the proposal was not in good faith. Did they do a study before passing a drivers license or flying license? "

Most of those license requirements were passed after accidents and for reasons similar to what you cite and support. The practical effect was to ensure that education was obtained. The unintended effect has been to restrict people's liberties as well as grant _a prima facie evidence of competency._ A competency that well may not be there due to the inadequacy of the test. Here in Michigan we have a pamphlet available at the Secretary of State office on driving for the blind! Is that the _competency_ you want on the water?

Licenses currently exist for one reason and one reason only, and it isn't really about competency anymore. They are there to be taken away when you screw up so that you cannot repeat the activity again. And _that_ is closing the barn door after the horse has left!

"The bottom line is that you are operating your private vessel on public waterways. Those waterways have rules. You are not required in any way, shape or form to know them... at all. Yet, the lives of those around are dependent on you knowing them."

Our Constitution delineates rules on what the government can and cannot do and what your rights are. You are in no way required to know them..at all, in order to vote. Yet, the lives of those around are dependent upon your vote.

And those public waterways are reserved for the people's use absent a compelling reason for government restriction of their use. I do not believe you've enumerated one here.

"I would wholly support a educational license program. You have said nothing that would change your mind." (!)

Surprisingly, I sometimes do talk myself out of a position. I've heard nothing here though to cause me to initiate that conversation with myself. (g)

"I have found most of the arguments against it based upon people desire not to have to do anything extra or take away from their time. Sorry. When you hit the waterways, you are a liability to yourself (which I could care less about) and others (which I do care about). As such, you should be required to know the basics and it should be verified that you know them and are at least partially competent in them. Period."

Now you're willing to settle for partial competency. It's sounding more and more like the joke that driver's licenses have become.

"I would be affected no less than you or anyone else Sway. I am not suggesting that everyone should do something that I would not. i am trying to make the waterways a safer and better place for everyone, not turn my eyes away from the problem."

"-cd"

Perhaps you'd settle for a requirement that each boat sold came with a manual suitable to the operation of that type boat and that it would be required that it be on board for the life of the boat? It's do-able; unlike step-ladders, I doubt they'd run out of room on a boat for the necessary information to be conveyed. You could keep it with your other important papers like your Weber Grill warranty.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

> You certainly can solo sail - and I do not see why a licnse would stop that. If solo sailing and not keeping watch while coastal, you are a candidate for the Darwin Award. WHile out at sea, you are beyond the restrictions of the US and you could even put that stipulation on the license. Regarding the colorblindness, we let people that are colorblind drive cars... the same could be done with boats. And you are also suggesting that this would be a USCG Captain's license which would be way overboard. It does not need to be that in-depth.


How do you FIGURE getting a USCG license is overboard?!?!?! They have proven their abilities, haven't they?????????

How much does your boat weight, CD, out of curiosity?


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

CD - not really understanding your "one track mind" on licensing. I mean really, it is rumored you are nothing but a Dock Monitor anyways - are you really that afraid to move your weber grilling dock candy from your slip to the pump out station?


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Hey, CD.

Why don't you contact some of the manufacturers and dealers of these boats to see if they will give instruction to the skippers before handing over the keys? To be most effective, you should have a solution prepared before talking to them about the problem. Get community support when they resist. I bet every boater that is against the licensing issue (myself included) would have no problem signing a petition.

You might also contact relevant industry groups and Boat US for support.

It's against all of their best interests to have knuckleheads running each other down. With pressure from the community and a solution in hand recommended by the legendary Cruisingdad, it will be easy for them to agree.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

N0NJY said:


> How do you FIGURE getting a USCG license is overboard?!?!?! They have proven their abilities, haven't they?????????
> 
> How much does your boat weight, CD, out of curiosity?


A USCG license is a commercial license for those who wish to take passengers for hire. I don't need a CDL to drive my car is what CD is trying to say.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

> Cost IS the issue. I note for instance that many on this forum and the "other forum" I've been frequenting aren't "poor folks". They spend a lot on their boats and they have the money to do so.


Yes, boats are very expensive. Licensing or not licensing is not going to change that. The very small cost of licensing would be insignificant compared to the cost of the boat. However, It is impossible , as you very well know, for me to give you a number on the cost. Impossible. Period. The research involved in that would be more than one person can do and I am not writing the legislation and I am did not run for President of the US.

What I AM doing, is advocating licensing and education. If you cannot afford to spend the time or the money to get educated, I can guarantee you that you cannot afford to drive or own a boat.



> Having spent my entire life working in the military or as a contractor, I can assure you with complete accuracy that my wife and I are "anything but rich". I can't afford an extra chunk of change to drop on licensing fees, or for that matter extra taxes. Assuming you don't have to "pay out of pocket" expenses for USGC administration of a licensing system - the money is coming from somewhere. Probably the US government. That means TAXES.


Are you telling me that you do not want people to be licensed because you want to buy a boat and cannot afford the extra fees (which would likely be very small) to go boating? SOrry, I do not buy that. If you are that broke how are you going to pay for a bottom job or fill up your tank with gas or buy a new winch handle, insurance, slip, etc?? Just a freaking winch handle costs $50+. I would certianly prioritize safe waterways and educated boaters over the small cost of doing it. If you cannot afford to get a license, you certainly cannot afford to boat.



> If you force people to go to courses - which is what you appear to be advocating, then they pay for the classes. Who's going to teach those courses? Other boaters? What happens if the boaters teaching the courses haven't yet gotten licenses (or educated)?


The courses would be set up to educate. What I am advocating is nto rocket science or a USCG Captains license. It is basic education on piltoing, right of way, saftey, etc. You could qualify a group of instructors to teach them. The USCG, sailing instructors, the Power Squadron... their are MANY people qualified to teach them. Have you not taken a Power Squadron course??



> You're trying to set up a system of "proof" that people are "competent" on the one hand, but yet you're dismissing things like licensing for all that electrical or radio work done on a boat, in a marina around other people and other boats. You said in one post they were only a danger to themselves.
> 
> That's not true. A boat fire in a slip could cause other fires, explosions, and catch other boats, docks or people on fire. Come on, you're completely ignoring the facts here.


No, I am not. And FYI, just so you know, in many states you cannot even work on your house and do electrical work unless you are licensed. Did you know that? Check out Florida laws. Be that as it may, the real reality is that what someone does to their boat is more of a hazard to them and not you. To decide what a person can or cannot do to their boat is not relevant to this discussion and is a whole other thread. I am advocating making the water ways safer and advocating education those that operate on them and verifying that education and basic competence through licensing. I do not and would not advocate licensing what you do to your own boat. Licensing boating does not mean licensing everything that is done to boats - no more than licensing automobile driving excluded working on your car.



> When it comes right down to it, CD, anything ANYONE does could constitute a danger to others. Something as simple as just crossing the street could endanger others. You might step out in front of an on-coming vehicle you didn't see, causing him to swerve and hit a bus stop full of people.
> 
> Tripping and falling can injure others.
> 
> If you don't want to risk being hurt by others - your absolute best bet is to stay away from other people. Not license them to walk, run, ride, swim, boat, skydive, or pretty much anything else.


I am not advocating licensing walking down the street or swimming or riding a freaking bike. And those activities are not a danger to anyone but themselves. I am NOT (READ NOT) trying to save people from themselves. I am trying to save others from them. However, I do believe that by licensing boating, you will find that you will also save people from themselves.

However, to say that "I do not want to license boating because riding a bike or walking down the steet is unsafe," is a poor example of why not to license boating. As we say in Texas, "What does that have to do with the price of bread?"

- CD


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

painkiller said:


> Hey, CD.
> 
> Why don't you contact some of the manufacturers and dealers of these boats to see if they will give instruction to the skippers before handing over the keys? To be most effective, you should have a solution prepared before talking to them about the problem. Get community support when they resist. I bet every boater that is against the licensing issue (myself included) would have no problem signing a petition.
> 
> ...


One more suggestion, CD... if you honestly, HONESTLY want to do something about making people safer... instead of taking the 'easy way out' to try to get licensing, why don't you join the local Coast Guard Auxiliary? They are looking for volunteers. I called, and checked.

They are looking for volunteers in ALL areas of the country. Perhaps you could put your skills to better use assisting people with free boat safety checks and training in your local area instead of arguing a losing point about licenses?

I think that is your best bet.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

> Which ignores the fact that the negatives might outweigh the positives.


I dissagree. I find the lives saved and the safer waterways a good trade off for a little time spent educating yourself on why they put those little green makers out there or why that guy with his sails up won't get out of my way. Also, the negatives you point out in general are what you feel it will turn into. I do not agree. My boat will be in South Florida shortly. I will bring you down for a sail or motor down the miserable mile. Let's see if you change your mind after that!!!!



> How do you know what a license would stop? For some reason, you seem to think that you would be writing the requirements for licensing, or someone like you with your outlook. If it's considered by most states to be unsafe to tow a water skier by yourself what do you think their attitude will be towards sailing solo.


The rules for water skiing have already been set down by many states, including the requirement to have a mirror installed. However, it was YOU and a couple of others that pressed me for specifics, including costs. Yet, when I present my version you dismiss me and it for trying to set down specifics. You cannot have it both ways. Still, I think a level-headed approach to the matter would be possible. I think you dissagree and feel it would become a beaurecratical nightmare. I will admit that you are right... it might turn into that. But I feel you should also admit that I am right... it might not. And I think if you honestly stop and think about what you are writing and consider what I and Paul and others have written, you will realize that it is a good idea and the time has come.



> Most of those license requirements were passed after accidents and for reasons similar to what you cite and support. The practical effect was to ensure that education was obtained. The unintended effect has been to restrict people's liberties as well as grant _a prima facie evidence of competency._ A competency that well may not be there due to the inadequacy of the test. Here in Michigan we have a pamphlet available at the Secretary of State office on driving for the blind! Is that the _competency_ you want on the water?
> 
> Licenses currently exist for one reason and one reason only, and it isn't really about competency anymore. They are there to be taken away when you screw up so that you cannot repeat the activity again. And _that_ is closing the barn door after the horse has left!


Sway, to me, a license (or this license) is a verification of a certain level of competency of what you are doing. It is a verification of education. And being able to keep people from doing the same stupid thing twice is a plus. I do agree, though, that much of it will come to that. But instead of seeing it as a negative, I regard stopping repeat offenders as a positive. And the fact also exists that you may not get as many of them out there in the first place!!



> Our Constitution delineates rules on what the government can and cannot do and what your rights are. You are in no way required to know them..at all, in order to vote. Yet, the lives of those around are dependent upon your vote.
> 
> And those public waterways are reserved for the people's use absent a compelling reason for government restriction of their use. I do not believe you've enumerated one here.


Sway, my friend, that argument fell off the reservation!! I don't even think I will go there. Please get something a little closer to home!??

"I would wholly support a educational license program. You have said nothing that would change your mind." (!)



> Surprisingly, I sometimes do talk myself out of a position. I've heard nothing here though to cause me to initiate that conversation with myself. (g)


Then you have failed to understand that I am always right, like on the oil discussion, the anchoring discussion.... (smile)


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

N0NJY said:


> Umm... sorry, CD, absolutely INCORRECT here. RFID is used on a local basis, however, it's not difficult for me to wire up pretty much anything to send out a signal, hit a satellite and relay that information to a host computer system somewhere in the world.
> 
> In fact, my friend, that's EXACTLY what I DO, and it's not going to be any more difficult on the OCEAN than it is on land. In fact, it will be easier.
> 
> ...


 Nope,
No cable required.System i am talking about works real time.Would be easy to cheakcall boats when they enter between a certain set of gps waypoints.Say the points at eather end of a no wake zone.If your speed it to fast UNCKLE automatically mails you a ticket.Easy to cheakcall within 300 yards of a gps point...say the exit to a marina.Your licence says your not allowed to operate a boat that tonnage or that horsepower...Fines in the mail my friend.

The teck to do this is here and now.Would work for cars to.You speed.Unckles comp automaticallly mails you a fine.Somebody who wont come up with a price for his licencing idea stated cost didnt matter or something to that effect.It matters to me.And i know what it will be if mandated for my trucks.Currantly $7000 per truck per year with this system.
I say we just go for it and mandate this for any moving vehicle.Think of how safe we would all be.Cost wouldnt matter.We will be SAFE....
Mark


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Dockie,
So you do see the threat that the licensing bureaucracy could become? And that it might end up no better than the driver's license we have now? And that those with a libertarian bent, like me, might say in the future that, for all the good it does it might as well be eliminated?

Except there is one thing we surely do know. No intrusion by government or any government program is ever eliminated, least of all for ineffectiveness.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

N0NJY said:


> One more suggestion, CD... if you honestly, HONESTLY want to do something about making people safer... instead of taking the 'easy way out' to try to get licensing, why don't you join the local Coast Guard Auxiliary? They are looking for volunteers. I called, and checked.
> 
> They are looking for volunteers in ALL areas of the country. Perhaps you could put your skills to better use assisting people with free boat safety checks and training in your local area instead of arguing a losing point about licenses?
> 
> I think that is your best bet.


You think arguiing with you guys is the easy way out???? (smile) Also, in addition to moderating this site I am the technical editor for Catalina Mainsheet. I am very involved in helping out (for free... both of them).

What do YOU do, for free, to help your fellow boater?

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> Dockie,
> So you do see the threat that the licensing bureaucracy could become? And that it might end up no better than the driver's license we have now? And that those with a libertarian bent, like me, might say in the future that, for all the good it does it might as well be eliminated?
> 
> Except there is one thing we surely do know. No intrusion by government or any government program is ever eliminated, least of all for ineffectiveness.


The best made plans of mice and men...

I keep an open mind on all things, Sway. It could become that, COULD being the operative word. But I have always felt that just because bad things COULD happen - it should never stop man from trying to implement GOOD things. It is only when we stop trying that we truly fail.

- CD


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

What's technical about a Catalina? How does encouraging the proliferation of Catalina's improve the situation? We await your involvement within the MacGregor community!


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> The best made plans of mice and men...
> 
> I keep an open mind on all things, Sway. It could become that, COULD being the operative word. But I have always felt that just because bad things COULD happen - it should never stop man from trying to implement GOOD things. It is only when we stop trying that we truly fail.
> 
> - CD


The assumption that you are pursuing a good thing is your own. It's a good thing as defined by you. Of course, who can be against boater safety? This is how it always starts in the liberal mind..we're going to improve man and thus mankind. Never seems to happen.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Cruisingdad said:


> You think arguiing with you guys is the easy way out???? (smile) Also, in addition to moderating this site I am the technical editor for Catalina Mainsheet. I am very involved in helping out (for free... both of them).
> 
> What do YOU do, for free, to help your fellow boater?
> 
> - CD


I for one, teach a boating safety course!!!


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> Yes, boats are very expensive. Licensing or not licensing is not going to change that. The very small cost of licensing would be insignificant compared to the cost of the boat. However, It is impossible , as you very well know, for me to give you a number on the cost. Impossible. Period. The research involved in that would be more than one person can do and I am not writing the legislation and I am did not run for President of the US.


Fortunately, the President has nothing to do with this and should not. Neither does Congress. Each state, in case you've forgotten has the right to set up and do their own regulation. So, my suggestion is you stick with getting your local issues corrected on a local level.

This also tells me that you certainly have NOT properly researched this, and as I can tell you from personal experience in doing research, if you DON'T do it, no one else will. Why do you think we are asking these questions?

If you don't consider all the ramifications you place yourself and everyone else at RISK of becoming just one more "number" in a computer somewhere, paying out more more money, and being tapped by the government as a well of cash.

Do you NOT quite get the idea that IF you have enough money to pay for the upkeep of a big boat, you're going to wind up being in the list of "Rich that aren't paying their fair share"??? Most of those in the political discussions who have been advocating socialism aren't getting it either. Sure hope you wake up soon.



> What I AM doing, is advocating licensing and education. If you cannot afford to spend the time or the money to get educated, I can guarantee you that you cannot afford to drive or own a boat.


Ah, more elitist remarks I guess make this all ok. I can't AFFORD more money out of my pocket than I already pay in taxes, service charges, and dumbassed things my city is doing. Oh, they don't call them "taxes" they call them "Fees" - So far, I've refused to pay for "rainfall collection" - and will continue to do so until hell freezes over. An illegal tax is still an illegal tax even if someone calls it a fee.

I advocate education too. But, you know what, you do NOT have to PAY anyone to learn ANYTHING. And I don't believe that I need to PAY someone to go to a class to learn something and I DON'T NEED to pay some government agency to give me a piece of paper. Oh - and I won't.



> Are you telling me that you do not want people to be licensed because you want to buy a boat and cannot afford the extra fees (which would likely be very small) to go boating? SOrry, I do not buy that. If you are that broke how are you going to pay for a bottom job or fill up your tank with gas or buy a new winch handle, insurance, slip, etc?? Just a freaking winch handle costs $50+. I would certianly prioritize safe waterways and educated boaters over the small cost of doing it. If you cannot afford to get a license, you certainly cannot afford to boat.


I own a boat. I'm planning on owning other boats too. I save my money, I'm frugal with it, I don't waste it on idiotic things (ok, I have a computer or six, a lot of radio equipment, I buy beer, I make beer, I make wine, I have a lot of equipment to do those hobbies too- I make bows and arrows, I shoot lots of guns, and buy and use lots of ammo. Lots of hobbies. I spend lots of money, perhaps some would actually say unwisely. But I do so because it's MY money, I earned it. Putting a fee on me to own weapons, radio gear or anything else is just as ridiculous as putting a fee on me to own a boat)

Wonder why all that stuff that says "Marine" on it costs so much? Because, it's a "Rich Man's Sport". Always has been and is perceived as one, that's why. You won't make that any easier if you push licensing either.

Why would you want to make something that is expensive enough COST MORE?



> The courses would be set up to educate. What I am advocating is nto rocket science or a USCG Captains license. It is basic education on piltoing, right of way, saftey, etc. You could qualify a group of instructors to teach them. The USCG, sailing instructors, the Power Squadron... their are MANY people qualified to teach them. Have you not taken a Power Squadron course??


Set up by whom? How much will it cost? I can already go take courses through the ASA... and have been planning to do precisely that. UNTIL THIS THREAD started. Now, you've convinced me that this licensing thing, along with "education" is really just a scam as it is exists right now and obviously NO ONE is capable of driving any kind of boat without YOUR idea of what education happens to be.

In fact, I think I will be like Abraham Lincoln, self-taught. He was a lawyer. Then he was a President. One of the Greatest of all American history. Went as far as the 3rd or 4th grade and then was self-taught. If he can do it, growing up without libraries of easy access or the internet, you betcha I can do the same.



> No, I am not. And FYI, just so you know, in many states you cannot even work on your house and do electrical work unless you are licensed. Did you know that? Check out Florida laws. Be that as it may, the real reality is that what someone does to their boat is more of a hazard to them and not you. To decide what a person can or cannot do to their boat is not relevant to this discussion and is a whole other thread. I am advocating making the water ways safer and advocating education those that operate on them and verifying that education and basic competence through licensing. I do not and would not advocate licensing what you do to your own boat. Licensing boating does not mean licensing everything that is done to boats - no more than licensing automobile driving excluded working on your car.


Actually, even in Florida I don't think that's precisely true. In MOST states you CAN do that work, it just needs to be INSPECTED by a licensed electrician or whatever. There are National Codes in effect.

And look what that has done. It's certainly forced people to abide by safety codes, but you can't take a Master Electricians test without being in the field for 25 or so years in most cases. That means no one should, according to your own standards be able to master a boat or ship until they've had pretty much the same number of years of experience.

Look - what you're advocating is, as both of us have said, is SIMPLE SAFETY. I wholeheartedly agree. So does EVERYONE here I think. Seems to me this is about SAILING and not motorboating though. Sure there are lots of unsafe people. I think, perhaps I'll just take me a little "boater's safety course" and get my little card. Then, I can be happy knowing I've fulfilled one of your check boxes.



> I am not advocating licensing walking down the street or swimming or riding a freaking bike. And those activities are not a danger to anyone but themselves. I am NOT (READ NOT) trying to save people from themselves. I am trying to save others from them. However, I do believe that by licensing boating, you will find that you will also save people from themselves.
> 
> However, to say that "I do not want to license boating because riding a bike or walking down the steet is unsafe," is a poor example of why not to license boating. As we say in Texas, "What does that have to do with the price of bread?"
> 
> - CD


No, you're not. Others have though. But, please, bear with me a moment, while I show you something about why what you are saying sounds so silly to some of us.

All of these are for the "public good" or "safety" just like your particular 'want' of a license.



> Should bicyclists be licensed to ride?
> 
> Should bicyclists be licensed to ride?
> They share the road, so some say they should share costs


Here's someplace that licenses bikes, skateboards and skates...

http://foxpoint.govoffice.com/verti...ds/{5D02E975-9A84-400E-8B55-EBF84783C99B}.pdf

New laws for 2008 in California.

Can't use your cell phone in the car.

Can't smoke in your car (I don't smoke, hate it with a passion, but I don't want to LICENSE or STOP others!)

People who have cars less than 6 yrs old there have to pay a new fee, to seek alternative fuels.... wow (why don't they make the folks with OLD cars do this?)

Another bill requires the state to study the effects oftemperature on fuel deliveries. Another waste of time and money. Haven't they heard the debate is over - there is no Global Warming. Global warming (at least man made) is a crock of stinky stuff. It's BS.

It is illegal, for example, to catch fish with your bare hands in Kansas.

Wyoming has a law forbidding you from wearing a hat that obstructs a person's view in a theater or event.

You need a permit to be a fortune teller in South Carolina.

In Kansas City, Missouri, children can't legally buy toy cap guns. BUT, they can buy real shot guns at the gun store.

Texas, Louisiana and Georgia have laws on the books about packaging FEATHERS.... yep... you know, they might be used as "Sex Toys" or something!

Did you know that in Colorado to be a barber or hairstylist, you have to be licensed?

All of these, and there are thousands more I didn't bother to bring up, are because someone said... "You know there ought to be a law, or a license for this or that"... and lo and behold, someone passed a law requiring these stupid things to be licensed, or a law against them.

My point throughout the whole thread is simple - along with another half dozen or so who've said it, GOVERNMENT IS TOO INVOLVED IN OUR LIVES NOW. Don't give them an out to get involved in YOURS TOO.

This is a warning. I've watched this crap happen for a half century now, more and more political correctness, let's license things, let's "make a law", let's "create a homeowners association", Let's "ban guns because they are unsafe".

ALL of these premises and those laws are built upon these premises are FALSE and yet they affect normal, everyday people for no real reason.

Finally - after this, I have one more stupid law I want to bring up.

It nearly all states the drinking age is 21. You can join the military at 17 (with a signature from mom and dad). You can vote at 18, die for your country at 17, but you can't have a stinkin' beer legally in a public (or, for that matter non-public) place.

We just had a ballot initiative to change the age from 25 to 21 for state legislator. Why isn't it 18? They are legal ADULTS, so why can't they drink?

Anyway - still, the point is, stupid laws come out of then innocent want or desire to "make everyone safe".

This want of yours is no different.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*South Florida huh.*

Hey CD I will chip in and help other boaters by passing the word around down here that there is a crazy sailing Catalina heading are way so watch out lol  Just kidding, Have a good safe trip down.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

travler37 said:


> Nope,
> No cable required.System i am talking about works real time.Would be easy to cheakcall boats when they enter between a certain set of gps waypoints.Say the points at eather end of a no wake zone.If your speed it to fast UNCKLE automatically mails you a ticket.Easy to cheakcall within 300 yards of a gps point...say the exit to a marina.Your licence says your not allowed to operate a boat that tonnage or that horsepower...Fines in the mail my friend.
> 
> The teck to do this is here and now.Would work for cars to.You speed.Unckles comp automaticallly mails you a fine.Somebody who wont come up with a price for his licencing idea stated cost didnt matter or something to that effect.It matters to me.And i know what it will be if mandated for my trucks.Currantly $7000 per truck per year with this system.
> ...


I wasn't 100% sure about the truckers using satellite connections - thanks for the correction. I figured it was the case, but I know airplane black boxes don't NORMALLY use this sort of thing. There are other sorts of transponders in them for other reasons, but usually not to pass voice and data traffic regarding the plane "Now". might be wrong on that too.

I KNOW that *I* can pick up a hand held radio I have, make a couple of frequency changes and be in touch with someone in Europe by voice in a matter of seconds on a VHF/UHF radio though - based on satellites. I also know I can send, digitally, pretty much whatever data I need to, via satellite on a few watts of power from a small radio - and have even communicated with the ISS and the space shuttle in this manner on several occasions.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

bubb2 said:


> A USCG license is a commercial license for those who wish to take passengers for hire. I don't need a CDL to drive my car is what CD is trying to say.


I know what he is trying to say. I want him to say it.

I understand this. I have been going over those USCG regs on licensing and to be completely honest, they are no different from what CD is advocating - except perhaps the amount of time one has to have behind the wheel or tiller.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> You think arguiing with you guys is the easy way out???? (smile) Also, in addition to moderating this site I am the technical editor for Catalina Mainsheet. I am very involved in helping out (for free... both of them).
> 
> What do YOU do, for free, to help your fellow boater?
> 
> - CD


My list of public service, CD, is pretty well known in my local area. I'm a new sailor. In fact, I'm not even a sailor yet. I think I've made that clear here, I'm a "noob" when it comes to sailing. I have a lot of book knowledge but no practice experience yet. I don't know it all.

On the other hand, I am part of the local Skywarn mission, Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES). I've been, for many years, involved with Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, I've taught (for free) course on survival and emergency communication. I actually AM considering the Coast Guard Auxiliary and have been in contact with the local folks (I'll be attending the next meeting in fact to see if it's something I can help with - they have already offered to get me set up to help with their HF nets since I have the skills....)

I'm a forum Administrator on two other sites and my military training has been put to good use in the civilian sector on many occasions. I've helped the Police and Search and Rescue over the years and spent plenty of time training people on radio systems who had no business operating them either (just like your 'idiot boater' problem you have).

Golly, lemme see... Neighborhood Watch Captain...and none of this takes into account my "extra duties" at my job, for which I do NOT get paid (including something we call "block captain" - which is the fancy name for 'getting everyone out safely', "Security Manager" and I'm the unofficial weather tracker here - that's an extra duty, because I volunteered for that as well - since I have the training.

Oh - in Addition to Skywarn with the hams, I'm a National Weather Service trained weather spotter for the NWS and I am the guy you hear about when the radio says "Weather Spotters have verified a tornado in our county at location X". Yup, that's me.

During the Hayman fire here in Colorado, I took several days of vacation to run emergency communications up in Woodland Park Colorado (about 40 miles from my home) to assist firefighters in their efforts to put out the fires.

I've been the liaison between the United States Air Force and the ARES folks on multiple occasions - since I served in both positions, both in uniform and out of uniform.

Other public services? Oh... lemme see... there's plenty more, but that's enough for now.

My main public service though, the most important I've ever had is to question when people decide "there ought to be a law".

There are too many laws now, and too many of them are ignorant. Too many of them force people to pay money for no reason (can you say CAR INSURANCE and all the little things like 'do you have child in your house of driving age? Then we increase your insurance by x amount')


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

Licensing? Bad idea. 

People will take a class followed by a test and be issued a card or certificate and think they have been granted good judgment. They will waive their license at you and say things like "Don't tell me about seamanship. I am a licensed captain!" 

A cottage industry will spring up so people who buy new boats can (For a nominal fee folded into the loan) get a license. 

People who have crossed oceans in command of their own vessels will be denied a license by a government boob who's maritime experience consists of fifteen years of walking past the water cooler four times a day. 

The reality is that it is just another way for the government to get in your pocket.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Paul, I have a good friend who is a surveyor also and does a lot of Insurance work. One of the stories he likes to tell, is the power boater who ran into the lighted buoy at 25 knots. When asked how did this happen, the boater's answer was that the buoy was defective. "It was only staying lit intermediately."


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

> Just for some clarity...
> I do at least one insurance claim survey a week.
> MORE THAN 75% of them are because the boat owner had no sweet flippin clue as to...
> a) where he was at the time (run aground, sandbar, blha, blah, blah)
> ...


Not to belabor the point much, but, sounds a lot like daily car accidents to me.....

Don't think Driver's Training has helped there EITHER... sorry.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

cardiacpaul said:


> And, for waht its worth, yes, barbers and hairstylists in most, if not all states are licenced. Know why? it ain't no gubbmit conspiricy to make money, the lic. fee is 15.00 per yr in texas.
> 
> The main issue is not if you can color a blue hair to puse.
> it sanitary conditions knowledge. You know that blue stuff they put the combs in? its a disinfectant. I assume its not ok to use scissors on you that were last used on someone else before they were autoclaved. Pffft, have the lil woman cut yours and all your kids hair. No worries right? now, have her cut 30 heads a day... I'd rather make sure that the shears have been at least wiped off, maybe its just me. I don't get it.. I really don't regardless of the personal freedoms we do have, not every act of regulation is meant to pop a pimple on your backside. Some actually have a couple of smigeons of merit.


never said I didn't think it was a good idea to license Doctors and Barbers, now did I? LOL

Anyone who is doing something with your personal body, other than you, ought to have some kind of license. lol

People on another boat aren't touching me. If they hit me and I did everything I could to avoid the collision, and they are at fault for it, they should get a ticket. That doesn't mean they should be licensed.

Just like a person crossing a street in the middle (Jay-Walking) get tickets, but aren't licensed.

This isn't rocket surgery either. lol

Hell, I got a freakin' ticket for having WEEDS IN MY YARD cuz some neighbor complained.

Think that's right? I think it's hilarious that people think they can call the cops for anything and cops can find a reason to write a ticket out, even for something as stupid as a dandelion. Give me a break


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

painkiller said:


> Hey, CD.
> 
> Why don't you contact some of the manufacturers and dealers of these boats to see if they will give instruction to the skippers before handing over the keys? To be most effective, you should have a solution prepared before talking to them about the problem. Get community support when they resist. I bet every boater that is against the licensing issue (myself included) would have no problem signing a petition.
> 
> ...


I have to say - this is a pretty damn good idea. And I didn't even have to watch an entire 11 minute video to get the point. Nice Pain. Nice.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Hmmmmm

Texas....

Funny.....



> Mandatory Boater Education Requirements
> 
> A TPWD certified boater education course and photo I.D. is required for any person born on or after September 1, 1984 to operate (1) a vessel powered by motor of 10 horsepower or more; or (2) a windblown vessel over 14 feet in length. **Boater Education courses from other states are acceptable if NASBLA (National Association of State Boating Law Administrators) approved.
> 
> ...


So - CD, there's where you need to start. Since you live in Tx, you need to convince local legislators to change the law LOCALLY.

Have fun with that.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

cardiacpaul said:


> "Don't think Driver's Training has helped there EITHER... sorry"
> 
> And I do...
> You certainly can't operate a lambo, ferrari, or a ford on a public hiway without an opperators lic. without breaking a myriad of laws, and I'm rather sure your parents, or that guys grandfather would whack you with that ruler if you took off without a modicum of "behind the wheel" training.
> ...


Actually, none of you really know "where my head is at" lol

It's certainly not up you know where.

The fact is, I think safety in ANYTHING we do is not a "don't worry about it" proposition.

In fact, I agree completely that safety courses are a good thing. I had to take a hunter's safety course here in Colorado, even THOUGH, I have been a safe hunter all my life, ACED the test - but I still had to pay for the course - which by the way, was mandated by regulations here, BUT not put on by the State. Instead, it is put on by a certain group of sporting goods stores, the teacher is... "Plumber Joe" or "Electrician Phil" or "Radio Guy Rick" (or whomever they can find who can read most of the words on a page)....

The store gets the money, the "teacher" gets a cut, and the students get a second chance to pass the test for their card if the fail.

I agree safety is first.

I agree that there ought to be a course that every dealer in Marine products ought to HAVE TO teach for safety, for State regulations. I note that both my state and TX have regulations that mirror the USCG regs for everything from safety and lighting equipment to boat designations.

Seems like the regs are already in place, in most places that boating safety is paramount.

How is a license going to make this better? I still don't get it.


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

N0NJY said:


> Not to belabor the point much, but, sounds a lot like daily car accidents to me.....
> 
> Don't think Driver's Training has helped there EITHER... sorry.


I've not been sure where I stood on this discussion until I just read the above. I am a small government fiscal conservative in the purest sense of the word. I hate the daily intrusion of government into our lives, the endless bureaucracy, taxes, fees, etc.... I was a paramedic for 14 years and now work in emergency rooms, I have seen the results of "licensed" drivers performing stupid stunts more times than I can count.
Now here is the big *HOWEVER*, it is of comfort to me when I drive down the road at 30, 40 mph in a 2000# hunk of metal, I can safely assume that the vast majority of individuals coming at me seperated by a yellow line on the pavement in their own hunk of metal have; at least at one point in there life, been taught that they need to stay on their side of the line. It doesn't always happen, but could you imagine the chaos that would exist if (pick your percentage 50, 60, 70) drivers of cars didn't know that a red light meant stop, a green light go, stay to the right of the yellow line.... 
That is the situation we have in boating, the majority of people out there couldn't tell you on which side two boats coming head on are to pass, much less understand channel markers, give way vs. stand-on etc. I am going to have to come down on the side of some form of mandatory education to operate a watercraft. uke

Michael


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

N0NJY said:


> I agree safety is first.
> 
> I agree that there ought to be a course that every dealer in Marine products *ought to HAVE TO teach* for safety, for State regulations.


Dude, dude, dude. Are you asking government to FORCE these guys to do something now? Heh-heh.

You know that noose you were trying to put around CD's neck? You're hanging by it now. This is like freakin' pinball.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

cardiacpaul said:


> Alrighty...
> 
> lets look at this in a different light, try to keep up
> 
> ...


 "no high in the sky qualcomm is going to restrict me"
And i will give you a break.

I have no problem with getting people qualified for whatever...
Sounds realy great.Now how do you enforce that licence?The teck is here now to make sure you do not speed in restricted zones.To make sure your "LICENCED" to operate your vehicle..be it boat,car,truck,just about anything anything that has a powersource and a place to stow the equipment.

So i want me and my "SPAWN" to be all safe in the big world.And i am willing to go with the safty police and do the licence thing....great.
Now i want it ENFORCED FOR ALL.....The teck is here now to do it.It costs you $7000 per vehicle to keep me and my spawn safe...but i dont care...the SPAWN will be safe....why do the spawn and keeping them safe allways get thrown in?I have a clue but you can figure it out.

So i say to you sir...yes...we will keep the "SPAWN" safe and licenced.And i want ENFORCEMENT...FOR EVERYBODY...AND THIS IS WHAT IT WILL COST YOU PER VEHICLE..$7000.Thats right...no more speeding.Unlicenced operators..Unsafe operation.Gee.For the measly price of $7000 we will and our SPAWN will all be safe.

So do you still want a break so all of our SPAWN going to be SAFE?
No? You mean your not willing to pay that measly privce to keep ALL OF OUR SPAWN SAFE.....shame....

Now this sounds bad you not willing to keep all of us safe with modern teck.I am confused...obously.Please explain your Give me a break statement and why you do not want to keep all SPAWN safe...
Thank You
Mark
PS..with everybody mandated to buy and use this equipment it will get cheaper.I know this is so because when my car insurance went from VOLANTARY to mandantory it was cheaper..as UNCKLE said it would.Opsy..let me fine a different example.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

TxLnghrn said:


> I've not been sure where I stood on this discussion until I just read the above. I am a small government fiscal conservative in the purest sense of the word. I hate the daily intrusion of government into our lives, the endless bureaucracy, taxes, fees, etc.... I was a paramedic for 14 years and now work in emergency rooms, I have seen the results of "licensed" drivers performing stupid stunts more times than I can count.
> Now here is the big *HOWEVER*, it is of comfort to me when I drive down the road at 30, 40 mph in a 2000# hunk of metal, I can safely assume that the vast majority of individuals coming at me seperated by a yellow line on the pavement in their own hunk of metal have; at least at one point in there life, been taught that they need to stay on their side of the line. It doesn't always happen, but could you imagine the chaos that would exist if (pick your percentage 50, 60, 70) drivers of cars didn't know that a red light meant stop, a green light go, stay to the right of the yellow line....
> That is the situation we have in boating, the majority of people out there couldn't tell you on which side two boats coming head on are to pass, much less understand channel markers, give way vs. stand-on etc. I am going to have to come down on the side of some form of mandatory education to operate a watercraft. uke
> 
> Michael


 Yup,
MSR MOBILE..heading east bound in a convoy 14k's outside of Bagdad,IRAQ.Did it every other day for 3 months.A 6 lane highway with no laws other than who has the biggest balls or the biggest guns.There is no LICENCE there to drive a car.And less wreacks than any city in the US as far as i could see.People drive with common sence knowing if they wreak they will at the least loose there vehicle.

Darn...Sounds like it works without licences and insurance...go figure. 
Mark


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

cardiacpaul said:


> Some of you have spawn. You know, those headless bodies sticking out of the fridge.


Dude, I gotta say - that's just a bit creepy. Maybe even deserves a warrant.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

Previous post does not include IED'S 
Mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

smackdaddy said:


> Dude, dude, dude. Are you asking government to FORCE these guys to do something now? Heh-heh.
> 
> You know that noose you were trying to put around CD's neck? You're hanging by it now. This is like freakin' pinball.


I reckon I'm going to have to add a /sarcasm tag from now on.

LOL

I don't want the GOVERNMENT forcing anyone to do anything.

Here in Colorado it is REQUIRED that you go through boater safety... IF you are 14-15. If you're 16 or older, it's not required. Matter of fact I WROTE them and asked the question. Here's the response.



> Rick,
> The boating Safety class is mandatory for 14-15 year olds, 16 and older it is optional.
> Thank you for your question.
> 
> ...


No, I'm not attempting to "hang a noose" around anyone's neck.

It's pretty clear where some folks stand on this.

Fortunately, none of you either has the power to implement the procedures to force licensing and/or courses.

I see it this way, if the GOVERNMENT is going to MANDATE something like this the people running the new little bureaucracy needs to come up with the money to run it. Not out of public funding, but out of the pockets of those whom already own boats. After all they seem to have plenty of money to spend, right?

Hell, they make more than 250K a year and obviously aren't paying THEIR fair share are they?

That way, those who are living in the projects can get their boats and PWCs and get out there and enjoy life too - but they get to have free courses, since they can't afford them.

What the hell, why not?

/sarcasm_off


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

travler37 said:


> Yup,
> MSR MOBILE..heading east bound in a convoy 14k's outside of Bagdad,IRAQ.Did it every other day for 3 months.A 6 lane highway with no laws other than who has the biggest balls or the biggest guns.There is no LICENCE there to drive a car.And less wreacks than any city in the US as far as i could see.People drive with common sence knowing if they wreak they will at the least loose there vehicle.
> 
> Darn...Sounds like it works without licences and insurance...go figure.
> Mark


Mark, this is not Iraq. No insurance do as you please, but if you cause injures or kill someone I hope you can write the check.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

smackdaddy said:


> Dude, I gotta say - that's just a bit creepy. Maybe even deserves a warrant.


 Obously you have not had the privlage of having SPAWN..... 
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

bubb2 said:


> Mark, this is not Iraq. No insurance do as you please, but if you cause injures or kill someone I hope you can write the check.


 Well,
How about this.If you were worried about it YOU should of had insurance on YOURSELF or your possesions.Was the way it used to be and worked just as well as the currant mandantory system.Was just cheaper.

And i put to you sir..I want all vehicles tracked by the teck in the sky so we can all be safe.Obously you thought you would be better off with MANDANTORY insurance...By the way do you know the teck in the sky can disable you vehicle if it is moterized?No more unsafe high speed chases by the law eather.Keeping all our SPAWN safe...of course.
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

bubb2 said:


> Mark, this is not Iraq. No insurance do as you please, but if you cause injures or kill someone I hope you can write the check.


 Now here is my point on Licence.There are none there.No insurance eather.And alot of working poeple trying to get to there jobs.It is no mahem on the road.I would rather drive rush hour there than in LA...Minus the IED'S.

The lack of system there works just as well as this countrys system. 
mark


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

TxLnghrn said:


> I've not been sure where I stood on this discussion until I just read the above. I am a small government fiscal conservative in the purest sense of the word. I hate the daily intrusion of government into our lives, the endless bureaucracy, taxes, fees, etc.... I was a paramedic for 14 years and now work in emergency rooms, I have seen the results of "licensed" drivers performing stupid stunts more times than I can count.
> Now here is the big *HOWEVER*, it is of comfort to me when I drive down the road at 30, 40 mph in a 2000# hunk of metal, I can safely assume that the vast majority of individuals coming at me seperated by a yellow line on the pavement in their own hunk of metal have; at least at one point in there life, been taught that they need to stay on their side of the line. It doesn't always happen, but could you imagine the chaos that would exist if (pick your percentage 50, 60, 70) drivers of cars didn't know that a red light meant stop, a green light go, stay to the right of the yellow line....
> That is the situation we have in boating, the majority of people out there couldn't tell you on which side two boats coming head on are to pass, much less understand channel markers, give way vs. stand-on etc. I am going to have to come down on the side of some form of mandatory education to operate a watercraft. uke
> 
> Michael


This is utter and complete nonsense. First off you said, " I am a small government fiscal conservative in the purest sense of the word. I hate the daily intrusion of government into our lives, the endless bureaucracy, taxes, fees, etc...."

THEN you go on to say, " it is of comfort to me when I drive down the road at 30, 40 mph in a 2000# hunk of metal, I can safely assume that the vast majority of individuals coming at me seperated by a yellow line on the pavement in their own hunk of metal have; at least at one point in there life, been taught that they need to stay on their side of the line. "

Now.. let me ask you, and I want you to think about this HONESTLY and perhaps check it out... How many illegal aliens are in the United States? Now, how many have killed, maimed and murdered people in this country in the past ten years?

How many of those that did so did it with a vehicle and how many of those had legal drivers licenses?

NOW... why do some states want to GIVE illegal aliens a license again?

Furthermore, I can go to almost ANY country in the world and drive a car, on an international driver's license. Because I have a Colorado License. No, I never took a test here.

No, I never took a test ANYWHERE.

I learned to drive when I was 20 years old, in a big, empty field in a M-35 when the Sgt. told me I needed to know how to drive a vehicle with a stick-shift.... He handed me the keys and told me to figure it out.

My next lesson was a couple weeks later, AFTER I'd gone down, took a written test and was driving home from work in an ice storm.

I've never had an accident where I hit someone. I've been hit three times by people running lights, all of whom were younger than me, went through drivers training courses and were random genders.

Life is what it is, and accidents happen because people do dumbassed things.

Taking a class, getting a license and passing a written test do NOT give them common sense.

Those guys on the other side of the yellow line from you probably can drive fine, whether they have a D/L or not. But how many of them are stupid as bricks and will make a mistake one day?

A close friend of mine was killed about 4 years ago coming home from a vacation. He was driving home, about 20 miles from here coming from Missouri, in a large van. The day was sun shiny, bright and it was around noon and rather warm.

A kid, 16 years old who just had gotten his license, not his learners permit, had a car full of friends.

He hit Les head on. The accident killed Les instantly, and even his airbags didn't save him. The kid, and his buddies walked away. Les is dead.

Licensing didn't save him. Neither did drivers training. Neither did MANDATED AIR BAGS. Neither did good weather, NO snow, and neither did Les' own training and attempt to avoid the accident.

Les is dead and buried, and a 16 yr old has to live with himself the rest of his life.

For all you people that want to mandate things, why don't we mandate the age of Maturity at 40, or 50 or even 60. Why don't we mandate that people can't let their kids on the streets until they are 25?

There are a billion things that can kill you, all of which won't be your fault.

Shall we legislate ALL those things and make them illegal to "make you feel safer"?

I said it before, and will say again....

*They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.* Ben Franklin


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

travler37 said:


> Well,
> How about this.If you were worried about it YOU should of had insurance on YOURSELF or your possesions.Was the way it used to be and worked just as well as the currant mandantory system.Was just cheaper.
> 
> And i put to you sir..I want all vehicles tracked by the teck in the sky so we can all be safe.Obously you thought you would be better off with MANDANTORY insurance...By the way do you know the teck in the sky can disable you vehicle if it is moterized?No more unsafe high speed chases by the law eather.Keeping all our SPAWN safe...of course.
> Mark


I do and I also have to pay for uninsured motorist coverage for guys that think like you. I don't know about your insurance Co. but mine does not like to pay for things that are not my fault and neither do I.


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> I have to say - this is a pretty damn good idea. And I didn't even have to watch an entire 11 minute video to get the point. Nice Pain. Nice.


Thanks!

I've been skipping over most of the bigger posts on the thread. Has anyone quoted Cicero yet?


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

travler37 said:


> Yup,
> MSR MOBILE..heading east bound in a convoy 14k's outside of Bagdad,IRAQ.Did it every other day for 3 months.A 6 lane highway with no laws other than who has the biggest balls or the biggest guns.There is no LICENCE there to drive a car.And less wreacks than any city in the US as far as i could see.People drive with common sence knowing if they wreak they will at the least loose there vehicle.
> 
> Darn...Sounds like it works without licences and insurance...go figure.
> Mark


Mark,
First, thank you for your service. But I feel this is an apples and oranges comparison. (Although a 50cal would look nice on my bow  ). If common sense was common, we wouldn't need laws, although I would bet that most if not all the drivers in Iraq were educated by someone before being given the keys. It pains me to say, but I feel that education or proof of knowledge needs to be mandatory before someone can plop down the gold card and pull out of the marina in the Sea-Ray, PWC, or even sailboat. Unfortunately we cannot trust private business to regulate this (it would be against there best interest "wrecked your boat, that's too bad, let me show you this hot little number we just got in"). That leaves it up to government entities. Personally I would much rather see it happen at a state level then federal, with reciprocity between states just as there is for drivers licensing.

Rick,
I completely understand your sentiments on government intervention, and basically agree with them. I would ask that you think about this in a slightly different way though. You have a hobby as a Ham Radio operator. In order to operate your station (excuse me if my terminology is off) you have educated yourself, shown competence and been granted a license. How would you feel if anyone with a spare $xxxx thousand dollars, could buy the equipment and start broadcasting on any channel they liked? Chances are there broadcasts wouldn't kill or injure anyone else (although it could if they tied up the wrong channel as often happens with VHF 16), but it would interfere with your pastime and may interfere with your ability to coordinate rescue efforts as I believe you posted you do.

There is a definite line between too much government interference (which I believe has been crossed numerous times) and regulation of public areas for the general good. If you (public at large, not Rick or Mark specifically) want to kill yourself go ahead, however, when your ignorance places my family or me at risk, unfortunately, the government needs to step in and start regulating.

Michael


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

One can never have too much Cicero - or even Sartre. How about a quick treatise?


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

painkiller said:


> Thanks!
> 
> I've been skipping over most of the bigger posts on the thread. Has anyone quoted Cicero yet?


Philisophical bunch that we are, I haven't seen it yet. :laugher


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

bubb2 said:


> I do and I also have to pay for uninsured motorist coverage for guys that think like you. I don't know about your insurance Co. but mine does not like to pay for things that are not my fault and neither do I.


 Not wanting to take this to insurance,
But think of this.YOU knew there is a chance YOU or your PROPERTY could be damaged.And YOU bought it or drove it anyway.And it was damaged.Tough,Go hire a lawer and sue them person the damaged.Thats the way it used to be.Worked for me and most others.

Notices you have nothing to say on Licence and or enforcement ENFORCEMENT to me. 
Mark


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

travler37 said:


> Not wanting to take this to insurance,
> But think of this.YOU knew there is a chance YOU or your PROPERTY could be damaged.And YOU bought it or drove it anyway.And it was damaged.Tough,Go hire a lawer and sue them person the damaged.Thats the way it used to be.Worked for me and most others.
> 
> Notices you have nothing to say on Licence and or enforcement ENFORCEMENT to me.
> Mark


People can cause damages far more than they are personally worth. I carry insurance in case for some reason I don't see a stop sign and run into a school bus.

Where I live if you are stoped and can not provide proof of insurance you get your license pulled.


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

TxLnghrn said:


> Mark,
> First, thank you for your service. But I feel this is an apples and oranges comparison. (Although a 50cal would look nice on my bow  ). If common sense was common, we wouldn't need laws, although I would bet that most if not all the drivers in Iraq were educated by someone before being given the keys. It pains me to say, but I feel that education or proof of knowledge needs to be mandatory before someone can plop down the gold card and pull out of the marina in the Sea-Ray, PWC, or even sailboat. Unfortunately we cannot trust private business to regulate this (it would be against there best interest "wrecked your boat, that's too bad, let me show you this hot little number we just got in"). That leaves it up to government entities. Personally I would much rather see it happen at a state level then federal, with reciprocity between states just as there is for drivers licensing.
> 
> Rick,
> ...


 Iraq is a blown to crap country with no government Licencing.They all seam to get to work just as well as we do.And pay no Fees or insurance or anything else.And they get to work as we do.A line between government interfearance...Iraq and driving to work each day is a prime example of how much UNNESSARY gov we in the US have.

side note....i sailed in IRAQ...STICKS OUT TOUNG.
mARK


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Didn't Cicero drive an REO 6X6 through Bacuba back in the day? Or was it a Buffalo MPV?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

TxLnghrn said:


> Rick,
> I completely understand your sentiments on government intervention, and basically agree with them. I would ask that you think about this in a slightly different way though. You have a hobby as a Ham Radio operator. In order to operate your station (excuse me if my terminology is off) you have educated yourself, shown competence and been granted a license. How would you feel if anyone with a spare $xxxx thousand dollars, could buy the equipment and start broadcasting on any channel they liked? Chances are there broadcasts wouldn't kill or injure anyone else (although it could if they tied up the wrong channel as often happens with VHF 16), but it would interfere with your pastime and may interfere with your ability to coordinate rescue efforts as I believe you posted you do.


Actually, I have mentioned this already - in a round-about sort of way. Anyone CAN go out and purchase any sort of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment and do just what you said. In fact, they have done so. Could they kill someone? They might not be directly able to do so (unless they were flying say, radio controlled airplanes... by the way did you all know that you have to have a million dollars worth of insurance to do this? Did you know that you have to have a Ham Radio Operator's license for most of the transmitters, except the cheap crap?)

Could someone flying a small model plane kill someone? Yup.

So... my hobby is no different from boating in that respect. The only difference is, I borrow my spectrum from time to time, use it and give it back - just as you borrow the channel on the way out to the sea, and then give it back.

I have to be licensed not to borrow or use the radio - but to know when it is ok to use that spectrum and how not to interfere with other services on the air.

If there were no licensing (and by the way there are people who advocate NO LICENSING in ANY part of the RF spectrum!) then anyone could go willy nilly across and through the whole spectrum with dirty transmissions preventing everyone from using it.

I've already compared my licensing a bit with a "boaters license" - and to some extent I agree that there should be some kind of classes for safety. But that's all. Not a "license".

In the 1970s a young boy got on a ham radio and stated that he and his dad were in a car accident. They had crashed. The car was upside down, dad was either injured or dead and he was trapped in the car.

The broadcasts went on for days and days and finally faded out. I wasn't a ham in those days, but I understood what was happening.

The media began to believe it was a hoax. It took about two weeks before the calls died out completely.

The car, the dad and the perpetrator were never found. To this day, no one knows who the kid was, why he did it, but in the end he claimed to be starving to death.

This activity tied up search and rescue, helicopters, airplanes, the Civil Air Patrol and hundreds of searchers for many days, cost many thousands of dollars.

The point is - he had the equipment to cause the problems and he was most likely NOT licensed (if he was he'd have lost his license, been fined heavily and most likely he'd have been arrested for other legal issues). Because he had the equipment and was able to broadcast for so long on and off without being found, I think he probably had a lot education on how to avoid being found.

So - a little knowledge goes a long way, in both directions. I don't remember enough details about the incident to know if he was VHF or HF radio, but I suspect given my knowledge now it was HF.

I suppose - all in all - learning and knowing are all part and parcel to being safe in your respective and chosen hobbies. Don't forget there are dangers in RF radiation as well and part of our 'training' includes knowing something about that. But, it doesn't prevent me from doing something stupid if I chose to ignore either regulations or common sense.



> There is a definite line between too much government interference (which I believe has been crossed numerous times) and regulation of public areas for the general good. If you (public at large, not Rick or Mark specifically) want to kill yourself go ahead, however, when your ignorance places my family or me at risk, unfortunately, the government needs to step in and start regulating.
> 
> Michael


I think this right here is certainly part of the issue here.

We had a discussion on another site I frequent about someone shooting his bow and arrow in the back yard. The area was a rural area and the boys shooting the bow were being completely safe.

It turned out the neighbor didn't like weapons of any sort. He called the Sheriff. There was no law against what the boys were doing... so the neighbor who turned out to be on the country commission proposed a new "ordinance" to make it illegal to shoot bows and arrows. No one could see a reason to NOT pass the law.

The next time the kids were practicing, they were arrested.

Simple, easy fix. huh?


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

In a way Rick, you are making my point for me. I agree that a license doesn't guarantee that the licensee will operate in a safe manner. But it does show that at least at one point in time the individual was able to demonstrate an understanding of the material considered most important. So if we agree that some sort of education should be mandated, I don't care if we call it a certificate of attendence, proof of educational attainment in the art and science of lighter than water **** sapien transport vehicles, or whatever. The fact remains, only an objective third party can establish the criteria (read not boat salesmen), and ensure that individuals on the water abide. This falls back to government organizations (or in a slightly more ideal world) private enterprise contracted to the government. 

BTW, I did realize it took a million dollar policy to fly model airplanes, but I believe mine cost me about $50/year back when I flew them.  

Michael


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

"I think this right here is certainly part of the issue here.

We had a discussion on another site I frequent about someone shooting his bow and arrow in the back yard. The area was a rural area and the boys shooting the bow were being completely safe.

It turned out the neighbor didn't like weapons of any sort. He called the Sheriff. There was no law against what the boys were doing... so the neighbor who turned out to be on the country commission proposed a new "ordinance" to make it illegal to shoot bows and arrows. No one could see a reason to NOT pass the law. 

The next time the kids were practicing, they were arrested.

Simple, easy fix. huh?"



This is also where we agree, ordinances like this are why I hate government intervention. They always seem to side with the vocal minority over the majority. But my question to you remains, should anyone be allowed to operate a HF radio, or only those that have demonstrated education to do so?
(eg would you want SD with his 28,000 posts on this site alone on your favorite radio frequency without any training?  )

Michael


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

travler37 said:


> *Iraq is a blown to crap country with no government Licencing*..


Thanks for agreeing


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

TxLnghrn said:


> This is also where we agree, ordinances like this are why I hate government intervention. They always seem to side with the vocal minority over the majority. But my question to you remains, should anyone be allowed to operate a HF radio, or only those that have demonstrated education to do so?
> (eg would you want SD with his 28,000 posts on this site alone on your favorite radio frequency without any training?  )
> 
> Michael


Anyone CAN operate a radio, without any training at all.

Allowed? Well, who's going to stop them?

About once a month WE the ham radio operators in this area are hit with illegally operated transmitters. They lock up and interfere, sometimes maliciously, with transmissions of legal operators.

It's against the law.

The FCC doesn't stop it.

Ham radio operators "SELF POLICE" meaning we track down and report the offenders.

I'm thinking, it works pretty well, since the FCC almost ALWAYS hands them a ticket after documentation.

In an emergency ANYONE can LEGALLY operate ANY transmitter, being that a Marine VHF, HF radio, Ham radio, Police Radio, Fire radio, ditch digger radio - don't matter, if it's an emergency. So, seriously the point is moot.

My thinking is, if there is such a problem in Texas that one person, a vocal minority, thinks it's time to license everyone and he's not researched the costs and complexities of this whole subject (as he freely admitted) then he is one loud voice and only one.

Furthermore he might be running a forum or moderating it or whatever, but that is not teaching safety classes. It's NOT self policing either.

He and other Mariners in the area ought to be forming a group to take down numbers on the little boats, big power boats and taking pictures of incidents and making POLICE reports to curtail the problem, LONG before anyone gets a government entity into the mess.

That's my point. If he hasn't done this then he has not exhausted all the possibilities yet.

In answer to your question, yes, I would LOVE to have CD or any of the rest of you on the air, and will gladly put you on the radio at my station. But, I would be supervising (control operator we call it) and you would still have to abide by regulations!

Why? because there are regulations. (And it's legal for me to act as control operator for '3rd party traffic' that is someone who is not licensed and doesn't have a clue).

Most of you, I would assume have some abilities at operating a radio though.

Were he to go on the air illegally? That's out of my hands. 

But, we're also talking about a "Regulated Service" and not an unregulated leisure activity.


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

N0NJY said:


> Anyone CAN operate a radio, without any training at all.
> 
> *However this is illegal*
> 
> ...


*So you are okay with the government "regulating" one of your hobbies, but not another. This is exactly my point, you have come to accept and appreciate the regulation of HF radio to the point that you report unlicensed operators or those violating a set of standards, yet you oppose the government turning another of your hobbies into a regulated endeavour. Activity number 1 (HF radio) has limited chance to cause physical harm to another when improperly used, Activity number 2 (sailing/boating) has a much higher chance of causing morbidity/mortality*


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

TxLnghrn said:


> Thanks for agreeing


 Ben there,
Still a place with alot of good people in it.They just dont have a LICENCE  
Mark


----------



## travler37 (Mar 30, 2007)

bubb2 said:


> People can cause damages far more than they are personally worth. I carry insurance in case for some reason I don't see a stop sign and run into a school bus.
> 
> Where I live if you are stoped and can not provide proof of insurance you get your license pulled.


 Well hey neighbor,
Seems we live in the same state.

When i was 16 years old living in Minesota it was not mandantory.When i was 17 in same state turned mandantory.At 18 prices doubled for same vehicles/coverage.

So now am a older fart paying way to much for way to little coverage and wishing for the good old days WHEN IF I WORRIED ABOUT IT I INSURED IT.If it was totalled was my opsy for not insuring it.MY FAULT for not paying premiums.Not me paying for insurance and also paying for
uninsured motorist...as in car insurance.

Notices you ignored how we can all be safe.Nice try. 
Mark


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> Didn't Cicero drive an REO 6X6 through Bacuba back in the day? Or was it a Buffalo MPV?


He has a timeshare in Boca now. He drives a Rascal.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

TxLnghrn said:


> *So you are okay with the government "regulating" one of your hobbies, but not another. This is exactly my point, you have come to accept and appreciate the regulation of HF radio to the point that you report unlicensed operators or those violating a set of standards, yet you oppose the government turning another of your hobbies into a regulated endeavour. Activity number 1 (HF radio) has limited chance to cause physical harm to another when improperly used, Activity number 2 (sailing/boating) has a much higher chance of causing morbidity/mortality*


No... not at all. As I stated, and you apparently missed, the two things are not the same.

Boating, as a commercial interest requires licensing. That already is there.

There are also regulations regarding rules of the road, safety etc. The regulation is ALREADY THERE.

Using any frequency on the spectrum isn't regulated by the US GOVERNMENT, it's regulated by an international organization called the International Telecommunications Union.

The ITU standardizes the use of an a renewable natural resource - the radio frequency spectrum. Licensing is an international requirement that has been around since about 1912. This was to identify stations. Prior to that, amateurs as well as "professionals" made up call signs.

In 1927 the forerunner of the ITU came into existence to help straighten out the world of call signs, especially Maritime stations, ships, shore stations and to set some international regulation to assist in emergency operation. HMS Titanic is one of the first ships to have actually used a distress call in 1912 and the idea was to later, make it easier to get assistance. That's how regulation of radio waves began.

The regulation covering your SSB transceiver on your boat is based on international law regulations, just as my Amateur Radio call sign regulation is based on international law.

In the case of radio, we're talking about STANDARDIZATION of the USE of a natural resource which has implications internationally if you want to use HF radio.

In the case of a boat, sitting in Tampa Bay, or the Gulf of Mexico being a US flagged boat simply means you're in both US territorial waters (and therefore do NOT affect France, Germany or anywhere in Australia - UNLESS you key your HF transmitter) and you're subject to LOCAL LAW.

Therefore, in terms of "captain's license" the USCG and US Code requires that those who are operating "for pay" be licensed.

There's nothing in the law about licensing pleasure craft (which most of you admit your boats are precisely that) except as STATE laws indicate.

So - you're arguing two entirely separate and unrelated issues here.

My use of an HF radio can affect people internationally (and could indeed interfere with distress calls, thereby being the cause of death were I to operate the station with such disregard).

The use of your boat affects local people only.

I think if you want to get a Captain's License, you should.

I think if you want to be called "Skipper" or "Captain" you can be TRADITIONALLY if you are the master of your ship.

I think if you are speeding recklessly through a harbor with complete disregard for the safety of others that someone needs to call the cops on your ass and have you arrested based on the laws of the local state and jurisdiction and not apply one person's personal issues to every man, woman or child who sails a boat.


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

By the way, let me clear something.

Amateur Radio isn't "just a hobby". Certainly there are some who do nothing at all but get on the radio and jabber-jaw to buddies in another state, or country.

However, note that I stated "Amateur Radio Service". I said that for a reason.

Under ham radio, we operate, certainly to experiment and for fun, but we also provide a SERVICE.

Most of you are familiar with stuff like Sailmail and Airmail, Pactor I, II, and III, Packet Radio and Single Sideband. All of those things were invented by Amateur Radio Operators. So was RTTY (Radio Teletype). So was Amplitude Modulation, Frequency Modulation and Phase Modulation.

We have satellites in space - so NASA ain't the only ones capable of launching such things and the various governments around the world don't have one thing over Amateur Radio when it comes to communication.

Finally, and most importantly, the Amateur Radio SERVICE does serve the public by providing a conduit through which MANY messages pass daily.

I think some of you might be aware that the very last "Telegram" through Western Union was sent a few years ago. They no longer do that service. Amateur Radio still provides, for FREE that service and we practice it.

We have the Amateur Radio Emergency Service (I'm a member). The Radio Amateur Communications Emergency Service (A government MANDATED and FUNDED program to assist local authorities in disasters, attacks and other such emergencies). We have Skywarn, a National Weather Service program in which Hams play a vital role in assisting in spotting tornadoes and severe weather, doing measurements and helping to WARN people of incoming weather. (we have prevented many deaths because we warned small towns before they were hit by tornadoes). I'm a member of Skywarn as well.

So... the point to this is, you are equating a radio set and some 30-something-year old geek sitting in his mama's basement with ham radio and then comparing it to boaters who are sitting in a slip, or mooring someplace in the middle of nowhere.

They simply are not the same thing.


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

Rick,

Thanks for the information on the ITU, I did not know that part of it. I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. As I stated earlier, I do believe we are way over-regulated in the US. I would love to see many of the ordinances, laws, mandatory licensing and certification go away. However, in this case; and it pains me to say it, I have to come down on the side of some proof of education/knowledge of the "rules of the road" before anyone with a gold card can pull out of a marina with a 10 ton bomb.

Thanks for your respectful and well thought out arguements,

Michael


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

TxLnghrn said:


> Rick,
> 
> Thanks for the information on the ITU, I did not know that part of it. I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. As I stated earlier, I do believe we are way over-regulated in the US. I would love to see many of the ordinances, laws, mandatory licensing and certification go away. However, in this case; and it pains me to say it, I have to come down on the side of some proof of education/knowledge of the "rules of the road" before anyone with a gold card can pull out of a marina with a 10 ton bomb.
> 
> ...


I agree that many of our laws should have a "Sunset" limit on them. With them expiring after X number of years.  
But then again I feel that anyone who purchases/charters a vessel should show some training on Marine safety and a knowledge of the rules. A one or two day course should cover this. Even if you have to:hammer into their brains.


----------



## TxLnghrn (Apr 22, 2008)

N0NJY said:


> By the way, let me clear something.
> 
> Amateur Radio isn't "just a hobby". Certainly there are some who do nothing at all but get on the radio and jabber-jaw to buddies in another state, or country.
> 
> ...


Rick,
Please do not take offense of my use of the word hobby. I have worked in the past with HF radio operators in emergency situations and have nothing but the highest respect for ya'll. I plan someday on gaining my own license. I absolutely meant no disrespect.
Michael


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

Boasun said:


> I agree that many of our laws should have a "Sunset" limit on them. With them expiring after X number of years.
> But then again I feel that anyone who purchases/charters a vessel should show some training on Marine safety and a knowledge of the rules. A one or two day course should cover this. Even if you have to:hammer into their brains.


If you want to rent a truck to move, you have to show a driver's license and a credit card.

If you want to rent a bareboat - as I understand it (since I've never done this and likely would not) you show them your credit card - and perhaps a certificate from US Sail or ASA or someone who gave you one, and that's usually sufficient to get you a boat.

Of course, you're paying a hell of a lot more than 19 bucks a day for a boat, aren't you?

If I want to jump into a tractor-trailer rig and haul ass across country, I have to show them a Commercial Driver's License. I don't have one now (or ever) since I don't need one.

Can I drive a tractor-trailer rig? You betcha I can. I have plenty of experience in it. Can I LEGALLY haul a load across the country? Nope.

How much regulation was put on that industry? A lot.

Ok.. let's apply it now to boats.

If I want to rent a big boat to take my wife across a long stretch of ocean, can I do it right now? I probably can, even without experience. I could likely find the right people, for the right amount of money and get it done. Could I do it? UNLIKELY without "learning on the job" and being a wee bit dangerous.

Could I rent a boat and carry paying passengers? no way. no one would rent me the boat for that. it's not legal.

I guess it comes down to this.... if it is a paying service, you have to be licensed. If you're out on the highway, everyone has to have a license anyway (BUT THEY DON'T which some of you fail to mention).

If you're going to be boating around out in a big ocean this is a waste of effort, time and definitely will be a waste of money.

Should everyone be able to prove they know the rules of the road and are safe? Yep.

Do I want to have to pay in taxes to make sure? Hell no.

Licensing is a GOVERNMENT thing. Keep the government OUT at all costs, or you all will end up regretting it in the long run.

Simple and as common sense as that. If someone is operating a boat in a reckless manner and you see them, and DO NOT take the time to contact the authorities then you are as culpable as they are for not trying to get them stopped. YOU each of you, has a moral obligation to help protect lives and property when you want to believe this or not. If you do nothing but ***** and moan about "how there ought to be a law" then you've done nothing but waste breath, air and time.

My suggestion is, especially to CD, if indeed there are people are dangerous as you say, that you ought to be documenting the incidents and making police reports. Asking to create a law (which is what you will have to do to get licensing or mandatory safety classes put in place) is the FINAL step to fixing the problem.

As I stated before, self policing goes a very long way in any field or industry to keep things "clean".

Do it yourself before you ask the government to do it for you and above all, remember, you're PART of the government.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Hey NONJY - where do you ski?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

TxLnghrn said:


> Rick,
> Please do not take offense of my use of the word hobby. I have worked in the past with HF radio operators in emergency situations and have nothing but the highest respect for ya'll. I plan someday on gaining my own license. I absolutely meant no disrespect.
> Michael


I was not and did not take it that way. I posted that message for clarification only.

I have a "title" with the American Radio Relay League. I ALSO belong to the ARRL Field Organization called "Technical Specialist". My job, such as it is with the ARRL (again, MORE volunteer work) is to assist people with technical information, installations, radios, antennas and anything that helps them follow the FCC regulations as well as keep their transmissions "clean" and prevent interference to other Amateurs or other services. I don't get a lot of requests for assistance because most folks are pretty good about it.

But, one other thing that is stated clearly in the FCC regulations are:



> The rules and regulations in this Part are designed to provide an amateur radio service having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles:
> 
> (a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications.
> 
> ...


I take these things seriously and would hope that other amateurs do as well.. besides, it would be nice to add a few dozen or hundred more hams to the field 

You're all invited. lol


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

smackdaddy said:


> Hey NONJY - where do you ski?


I don't ski. I sword fight.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Well there you go. My point exactly.

Cutlass, saber, foil? Or just a big freakin' medieval hunk of metal?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

smackdaddy said:


> Well there you go. My point exactly.
> 
> Cutlass, saber, foil? Or just a big freakin' medieval hunk of metal?


All of the above. 

Ever heard of the Society for Creative Anachronism?

It's a "Medieval Re-Creationist Society" where the folks involved "recreate various portions of the middle ages... not the plagues and poverty, just the good parts!"

Haha. I spent twenty years of my military career traveling about, usually carrying my armor and weapons to various parts of the world to demonstrate and practice with others. Over the years we put on a lot of shows - all of course not associated with my actual JOB - but for fun, and I learned several weapon types.

My armor currently is retired to the Armor Tree in my rec room and I don't do it any more (except on occasion to show up with the youngsters that are doing it now, and kick some of their asses to show that old people can still win a fight.....)

Why?


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Hey, N0NJY! You're not one of these guys, are you?


----------



## N0NJY (Oct 19, 2008)

If there's an image there, apparently it's blocked here hahaha 

guess I will have to respond later


----------



## painkiller (Dec 20, 2006)

Hah! OK. You can enjoy it when you get home.


----------



## LupodiMare (Dec 23, 2011)

*Boater*

A "Boater" is a hat. Not someone that goes to sea!


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

LupodiMare said:


> A "Boater" is a hat. Not someone that goes to sea!


If the English language only allowed one definition per word, the _Oxford English Dictionary_ wouldn't have so many volumes (or be so expensive).


----------



## Capt.aaron (Dec 14, 2011)

As a merchant marine who spends a lot of time in a commercial wheel house, I can tell we that we stand in awe over some of the stupid **** we see self taught, un-licsenced, pleasure boater's do. Should you be required by law to have credentials? NO. Required by common sense to seek out seamanship training? ABSOLUTELY!!


----------



## LupodiMare (Dec 23, 2011)

I agree!


----------



## smillinjack (Aug 13, 2009)

Well O balmo and the forty thieves will be glad to take your money and make your day miserable at the same time, but He will give you a big smile


----------



## CapnBilll (Sep 9, 2006)

I think we can all agree getting a license has never stopped an idiot before, why do we think it will now? Most other areas of life have required licenses, to get one you can just pay the tax. 

The test, if there even is one, mostly covers regulations, not real world skills needed to do the task safely.

Even on a good day anyone can pay a bribe and get any license required with no qualifications, or even citizenship.

The quoted millionaire that drops a check for a megayacht and rams through the marina at full throttle, no matter how wealthy can only do this a few times, eventually the loss of his boat, the lawsuites from other boats damaged, the prison time for manslaughter, will get him off the water. taking his license wont remove him any quicker. He will pay someone to take any required classes for him anyway. 

Right now there are individuals that will take the driving test and any required defensive driving classes for you for a small fee, they get enough work to live off of the income. Some take the class several times in the same day, apparently the beaurocrats at the DMV don't think anything is odd, that all of the test attendees look exactly the same every day. In a minority community near you 1/3 to 1/2 of the licensed drivers have exactly the same persons picture on it...and they are driving next to you on the freeway.

The same idiots that waked you in the miserable mile, will still wake you after this law passes, they will just have a plastic card in their wallet with someone elses picture on it that they bought on a street corner.

Still think it is a good idea, just wait...there is legislation pending right now to make AIS mandatory for everything that floats. Go too fast through a no wake, or manatee, or marine sanctuary zone, they will mail you the ticket. Cross any of these zones while possessing a fish, they will take your boat. Here in Texas boaters have had their boat seized and GPS data pulled in court to determine of they caught the right fish at the right position, posses both fish they assume you caught them at the illegal place, it is up to you to prove different. 

Right now AIS is dropping in price, wait and see what the price does when you are forced by law to buy one.

If boating was so dangerous insurance co's would not insure you without proof of a boating course. Right now mine will not even give me a discount, and I am USCG licensed.

The biggest loss (over 90%) is from named storms, so do we require a license to tie up to a slip???

Boater Licensing = uke Boater Licensing = uke Boater Licensing = uke


----------

