Conference vicki::boats

    Jeff,
    
    	I heard about it also.  I understand one of the commercials
    showed an oil tanker running over a 30ft sail boat with the camera
    mounted on the bow of the oil tanker.  Ouch!  Not sure if it deals
    on DWI and accidents only, but it's probably going to be the focal
    point of the show.  Should be interesting if not a learning experience.
    
    Bob
    

    It was reported with the true sensationalism that only a quality
    show like 20/20 could do. It was sick tho....but very slanted. It
    portrayed boaters as drunken crazies. The point of boater safety
    could have been done better.      

     RE .2
    
    I also thought they made us boaters out to be drunken fools.
    
    One thing that 20/20 showed is, that it isn't just power boaters,
    like that sail boat that cut in front of that ferry boat, where
    were his brains at? 
    
                                             Jeff

    I thought the show fell short in one major aspect. They did not offer
    any solutions or recomendations! They should have had the CG Aux
    and USPS phone numbers for people to get educated!!!! One simple
    boating course for many of these folks would make a big difference.
    
    The show scared the *&** out of my wife when she saw some of these
    nuts...I have to admit I have not seen anything that crazy on the
    North Shore but I can only imagine what some of the lakes are like.
    
    I am still all for a boat operators license even if the requirement
    is just passing the USPS basic boating course.
    
    Bruce

    ABC used lots of photo "tricks" to make the situations seem worse
    than they really were (example: LOTS of very long focal length shots
    that made boats seem extremely close). It worked. I've been in boats
    since I could walk and it scared the h*** out of me. I haven't seen
    as much crazy driving in all my life as they showed in those few
    minutes. It was very good sensational journalism.
    
    But, there is a problem as stated in the Lake Restrictions topic
    in this conference. A boat drivers licence sounds like a good idea
    to me. To get it you have to take a CG safe boating course. It wouldn't
    cure all the crazies but it might keep a great deal of uneducated
    boaters of the water. 
    
    What do you think?
    
    Nelson
    

    re .5	I think that licencing hasn't made road users any less
    likely to indulge in suicidal behavior and I don't think it would
    do anything to make boat users any safer.  It WOULD create another
    buearocracy for the tax payers to support, whether by licencing
    or registration fees or the common tax base, and then comes the
    enforcement and fine collection costs and court case load for those
    that are contested...., etc.  I often believe that people get a
    false sense of security when they are issued a driver's licence,
    it seems to imply to them that they are safe on the roads, "I passed
    first time, must be GOOD, good enough to speed like my big brother
    does, gotta get a radar detector now, so I can get away with it.",
    etc.
    
    	R
    

    
    Re .6
    
       I'll agree that there are a lot of people on the road with valid
    driver's licenses that shouldn't be allowed to drive. And I'll agree
    that adding a lot of bureaucratic (sp?) paper work and other nonsense
    in not a welcome thought to myself and many, many other boaters. But,
    SOMETHING has to be done to increase the level of training of boaters.
    If licensing and mandatory boating classes is the only solution,
    then I'll have to support it.
    
       While the 20/20 episode (or at least the portion I saw, anybody
    tape it?) certainly sensationalized the situation, there was a lot
    of truth in what was shown and said. The waterways are getting
    overcrowded and a lot of new boaters don't know diddly about how
    to handle a boat in even simple matters. Hell, there's this one
    guy at Grumman (where I'm a resident) who almost proudly talks of
    the many times he's gone aground on the south shore, or times when
    he's radioed the Coast Guard because he got lost at night and didn't
    know how to read a chart (or recognize bouys for that matter). One
    Coast Guard or Power Squadron class would increase his boating
    knowledge a 1000 times, and make him a slightly safer boater.
    
       One solution (I forget whether it was mentioned on 20/20 or if
    I read it somewhere), while being rather drastic, is to put some
    burden on boat dealers by making it illegal to sell a boat to someone
    who does not show proof of taking a boating course (either by
    presenting a boating license or some type of certificate). This
    is similar to you're not being able to buy a car without presenting
    a license and insurance certificate. While it doesn't guarantee
    that the buyer has the level of education or experience (or common
    sense) needed to pilot a boat, it at least gives an indication that
    the person MIGHT be somewhat competent and has at least had some
    kind of training.
    
    
    Frank
    

    re .7
    
    Frank, I taped the show.           
    
    One thing that hasn't help is cutting the Coast Guard's budget.
    More and more boats, less patrols. 
    
    As far as 20/20's camera effects I agree that they were exagerated,
    however if you have ever been on lake winni and been by Weir's beach
    on a saturday afternoon it's close to reality.
    
                                                 Jeff

    I don't think restricting the sale of boats would be wise, That
    would be just like the stupid gun laws they have. Then you would
    have a bunch of "criminal" boaters running around. 
    How would you like it if some bureocrat told you that you can't
    sell your boat unless you find a licenced buyer??
    
    I do think that all boaters should take a course, But requiring
    a lic would entail enforcement. And that means more Taxes. Something
    we have to much of allready.
    
    How about letting more people know that you get a discount on your
    insurance for taking a course. I've been boating for years and this
    encouraged me to take a power squadron course. I even joined !
    
    How about teaching your friends the right way, Before they run out
    and kill themselves. Most people who buy boats ,do so after seeing
    how much fun it is on a friends boat.  Maybe they won't run over
    you next time out?
    
    Theres lots of ways to smarten people up. Without taxing all the
    other people who have allready paid there dues.
    
    

    	I totally agree with .9. This licensing thing seems to come
    up a lot and it's usually associated with and around phrases like
    "as much as I don't like to admit it" and "something has to be done".
    
    	One other point is that if you MAKE someone do something they
    may tend to take up space and get little to nothing out of a course.
    This applies to any safety course. If for example the object of
    taking a hunter safety course is to get a hunting license and not
    to become a safer hunter, how much impact do you thing the course
    will have 1 month or 1 year from taking it.  In this case it is
    looked at only as an obstacle to be hurdled.
    
    	The bottom line is safe boaters are safe because they WANT to
    be. I feel there are sufficient laws on the books already and if
    there is going to be any more money spent to make boating safer,
    it should be in the area of enforcement vs. education. If someone
    WANTS to be educated, courses are available.
    
    	I did not see the 20/20 show so I'll have to ask, "How many of 
    those stupid/dangerous situations would have resulted in a ticket/fine
    if someone in a position to enforce the current laws was there ?"
    
    	I'm guessing very few without even seeing the show. The show
    did what it was supposed to - produce the knee jerk response (i.e.
    we have to do SOMETHING !!!)
    
    	RAYJ

    I agree we already have enough intervention from the Beaurocrats
    as it is. Licensing, at what cost, and will the funds be used
    for safer boating purposes ? DOUBT IT........ We'll find that
    we have given them another tax avenue.  Give them an inch and they
    will take a mile.
    
    Am i disgusted with what i see on the waterways, absolutely,
    but i'm not sure there is an effective enough way to prevent
    it. In the salt water, once you get about 3 miles from
    the coast line, i think enforcement will become a little
    more difficult.
    
    Recall the unfortunate incident in New Bedford Harbor july 4th,
    4 people drowned, in addition to the boat being overloaded,
    15 people in a 20 foot boat, there are accusations that 2 larger
    boats wakes caused  the smaller to overturn.
    
    I was in that harbor 2 weeks ago, nothing has changed, they're
    still racing around inside the dike, no one is around to enforce
    any speed limits, or levy a fine. The only noticable change
    were signs at the harbor entrance, posting a 5 m.p.h.
    spped limit.
    
    If you go after the offenders, and hit them where it hurts, in the
    pocket, they'll slow down and observe.
    
    
    jim

    If a person has NEVER had a safe boating course how much of a chance
    is there that that person CAN be safe, want to or not. If you fly
    a plane, you must get a license. If you drive a car you must get
    a license. If you want to drive a boat you go get in one??? These
    laws were not thought up just to get revenue, there was a reason.
    I would bet that reason was to regulate untrained operators from
    endangering themselves and others. Does it really make sense to
    let anyone who wants to get in a 3000 lb boat and drive as they
    like at 40-60 MPH? Sure, there are laws but if you don't know what
    they are, how can you follow them? 
    
    It's no consolation after an accident to know "well, at least 
    boating is still unregulated by the bureaucrats. Too bad he's dead."
    
    Nelson

    re:12
    
		Although you make a valid point, I can't say I agree
    with it, mainly because of your opening statement.
    
    > If a person has NEVER had a safe boating course how much of a
    > chance is there that that person CAN be safe, want to or not.

    	Do you really think someone NEEDS a boating course to tell them
    not to go 50 mph through a congested area, or to adhere to a no wake 
    zone, or keep a safe distance, or pay attention to what they're
    doing, or not get intoxicated and operate, etc., etc..?????
    
    	It would be nice if you could say that the money taken in from
    licenses would be used for safer boating, but you can't. Even if
    it were possible to guarentee that it would, I still don't agree
    with it because I feel the biggest part of safety is common sense
    and that no amount of education can teach common sense. The available
    money would be better spent in enforcement.
    
    	RAYJ
    
    BTW - I can walk into any store in N.H. and purchase a firearm
    with nothing more than a drivers license. Do you also think that
    I need a license for this also ???

RE: Note 132.13   

>>  Do you really think someone NEEDS a boating course to tell them
>>  not to go 50 mph through a congested area, or to adhere to a no wake 
>>  zone, or keep a safe distance, or pay attention to what they're
>>  doing, or not get intoxicated and operate, etc., etc..?????
    
>>  The available money would be better spent in enforcement.
    

I don't think that anyone believes that mandatory licensing or boating
courses will prevent the yahoos from doing anything stupid. What it will
do is to *KEEP* them off the water if they continue to act that way. Do
you really think that a $25 fine will prevent the type of boater you
mentioned from doing it again? I seriously doubt it. He's not going to
park his expensive toy because of a slap on the wrist. Threaten him with
the loss of his operating *privilege* and he will think twice next time.
And if he still refuses to play by the rules you would then have the 
leverage to keep him off the water and make things safer for those who
do follow the rules.

This only follows the same rules as already exist on the road. I'm sure
more drunks would continue to drive while intoxicated, and more Porsche
owners would regularly drive 150 mph if they knew the only penalty was
a small fine. It is the threat of the loss of license that prevents the
roads from becoming more dangerous than they already are.

No amount of enforcement is going to prevent the idiots from being idiots.
Try spending a Saturday out on Lake Winnipesaukee and you'll see this for
yourself. If a person continues to violate the rules of the road and refuses
to take the time to learn them, the loss of a license is the only way of
preventing him from endangering everyone else out there.

Rick W.

    Whilst I am not an advocate of licensing, I feel that a safety course
    is neccesarry for more than just speed control.  When these people
    go out and buy a boat and do not know what the red/green light is
    for, or do not know the difference between aft and starboard, to
    me this is just as much as a concern as excessive speed.   Being
    that they are putting themselves in danger as well as their passengers,
    and other boaters, swimmers, etc.
    
    What I am surprised at is the insurance companies not taking a more
    active role, such as requiring the safety course for first time
    buyers of boats of a certain size, to be completed during a certain
    time frame, on top of the rate reduction.  I know of one instance
    up here where a first time buyer took out is outdrive on a marked
    reef with his brand new Larson on his first day.  The Insurance
    took care of it, but his friends remind him of it every time he
    is out on the lake, and I believe he is signed up for the next course.
    Insurance reduction, of course.
    
    RE: .13  While I too can go out and buy a gun, I cannot hunt legally
    without a license, as well as I can buy a fishing pole but cannot fish
    legally without a license.  Keyword being legally.  And if I am
    caught hunting or fishing without a license, I forfeit that right
    for a period of time, or soemthing very illegal, forever!!
    
    craig
    

    re:14
    	You can revoke theirs and/or the owners registration. This is
    just as effective and doesn't create more bureaucratic crap. It still
    comes down to a matter of enforcement.
    
    re:15
    	The point with the firearm is that it is generally considered
    a weapon and a boat is not. I can purchase and use something (not
    necessarily for hunting) which is designed as a weapon and do not 
    need a license. The hunting license was designed as a vehicle to 
    produce revenue for game management. After all, how dangerous can 
    you get with a fishing pole vs. a baseball bat.

    	I am in complete agreement that taking a safety course is an
    intelligent thing to do and that there are valuable things that 
    can be learned. I am opposed however to this licensing crap. 
    
    Nuff said......Ray

    My suggestion of a license was to provide a way to get people to
    CG classes to get them educated. People new to boating don't have
    the experience to make common sense desicions. Boating rules of
    the road don't always follow those for cars. Example: bouys/channel
    markings, what my 24' boat's wake will do to that guy in the 10'
    aluminium boat, who has the right of way when meeting at a 90 degree
    angle. I did not expect the money to do anything. (My GA drivers
    license cost $5-6 for 4 years.) 
    
    None of this is to say that people will now not DUI or drive like
    idiots but maybe, just maybe, they will think about what they are doing.
                                 
    No flaming of anyone here. Just my opinion.
    
    Nelson
    

    ONE ATABOY TO RAY!
    
    You hit the solution right on the MONEY. The Coast Guard allready
    has the authority to revoke a boats registration for " Unsafe
    operating" among other things. They can call a halt posthaste to
    a vessels use.
    I'm not sure if inland waterways people can do the same, But I'm
    sure they could come up with somthing equally nasty ? Like impound-
    ment for the summer pending hearings??? And charge you for hauling
    and storage to boot.
    
    
                                               Walt
    

    The state of New Hampshire can revoke you registration for reasons
    of extreme idiocy.
    
                                  Jeff

RE: Ray's comments

	Strongly Agree.  More Gun Control Laws just provide more jobs our
"elected" officials can give out to family members. Here in Mass our Registry
of Motor Vehicles is known to be guilty of that practice.  There is already
a boat REGISTRATION process in place in every state and by the FEDS.  Use and
improve that process rather that piling new, tough-to-enforce laws.  BTW
I would support registering ALL boats (sail, row, canoe, as well as power). 
After all lets apply it evenly and fairly to ALL Boaters right?

	Boat registration is visable and enforcable from the OUTSIDE of a boat
and allows the "enforcment people" to only intervien when:

	1) there is no VALID registration visable

	2) Someone viloates a law requiring revoking of their Registration
	   (after "due process" in followed I HOPE...)


Na, its too simple. We need a way to get more $$ from the people!  This idea
will never make it to practice.

    re .20
       > Boat registration is visible and enforcable from the OUTSIDE of
         a boat...
    
    What about documented boats--no registration numbers??
    
    
    Also, do you mean that no matter who operates the boat and violates
    some law (your kid, a friend, whomever), that the BOAT's registration
    is revoked for a period of time and the owner cannot use it?  This
    is the exact opposite of how the motor vehicle laws work, but maybe
    boats are different enough that this is OK.  You know, the Captain
    is responsible for everything and all that.
    
    I think Maryland is the only state with any sort of law on the books
    and theirs is a mandatory education type law.  Any one out there
    from Maryland care to comment on how the law was received when it
    went into effect last year, and how it's perceived today?
    

    re .20
    
    Why would you want to register canoes and row boats? That would
    be like having to register a ten speed bicycle for the road!
    
    The bottom line is BOATER EDUCATION!!!

    re -.2  Ditto
    
    I agree that mandatory boater education is the key. It would enable
    a new avenue for business without increasing the bureaucracy; simply
    allow civilian schools to be licensed, like drivers ed. schools.
    
    Also- the reason you don't (and shouldn't) have to register non-motor
    propelled boats is that you can do much less damage to *others*
    in a passive propelled boat than in a motor boat. I say leave well
    enough alone here. 
    
    Mark

    RE: .20
    
    I don't quite understand the theory behind revoking the registration
    rather than than an operator's permit. By that reasoning, if I let
    you drive my boat while towing me on skis, and you make a mistake,
    my boat is off the water for the season. Same thing if you let your
    son take the boat for a spin around the lake. If he screws up, he
    should be the one to pay the consequences. Otherwise you're teaching
    him that he can screw up and someone else will pay for it.
    
    Another point, if I drive irresponsibly in my boat and the state
    pulls my registration, what's to stop me from jumping right into
    a friend's boat, or re-registering in another state and going out
    and doing the same thing? Compare it to an autmobile driver's license
    and it just doesn't make any sense. You want to yank my registration
    for drunk driving? No problem at all, I'll just get another car.
    Rent one, borrow one, if I'm rich enough I'll just buy another one,
    whatever, I'm right back on the road again and perfectly legal.
    
    I think it's time that people be forced to take responsibility
    for their own actions. The only way to do that is to revoke the
    permit of the operator, not the registration of the boat. After
    numerous close calls over the years with operators who haven't
    got a clue as to the rules of the road, my opinion is that the
    ones who are against mandatory education or licensing are the ones
    who would be the most affected by it; the ones who refuse to take
    the time and effort to learn the rules for safe operation of a boat!
    
    Sure it's a hassle to take a safety course, then take a license
    test and renew it every 4 years or so. But it's less of a hassle
    than being dead, or having your friends or family killed or injured
    by some Bozo who doesn't have any idea as to what he's doing out
    there.
    
    Rick W.

    
    Re: -1
    
    I agree....if you're going to own a boat, you should know the
    rules of the road/water.  
    
    I think its just a matter of time till' we see manditory licensing happen.
    These rules usually don't happen until after enough people have
    died....like the way bridges arn't fixed until they fall apart
    during rush hour.   
    
    Jeanne
    
    
    

RE: .21-.26

	What I was trying to get at is that licencing is NOT the answer.  It
only adds another layer of red tape that is not applied to everyone evenly.
Maybe Registration is NOT the appropriate method, but lets explore and
consider using and improving existing processes and "controls" before we
give our legislator's another means of screwing up our lives.

	SET OFF /FLAMES /PLEASE

Follow my thoughts here for a minute:

	Clearly education is what is needed and boat Registration is already
a checkpoint of very limited "credentials" (bill of sale, tax, etc).  IF the
owner of a boat IS responsible for the liability and damage of that boat, the
owner is ALREADY responsible for the driver's action.  If the owner allows
untrained operators (mybe himself) to operate it the Insurance companies ALREADY
hold the OWNER responsible.  Be revoking his registration and requiring the
OWNER to go thur some hassel to get back on the water (USCG course again)
one ***COULD*** inject education and more responsibility into the current
system w/o alot of NEW overhead and rules.


	Now the proposal above has flaws, but at least it doesnt add alot of
new laws to the books that STILL won't solve the problems.   Clearly as we
see on the news at night licencing of auto drivers does not solve the incompetence
problem on our highway.

	Assuming my proposal won't work, lets all think about solving the REAL
problem w/o making our boating lives as bad as our AUTO life is.

	Here I am, standing in the Mass Registry of Motor Boats line for
	2 hours only to find out my Ins. agent forgot to dot a i.  After another
	trip to the Insurance agent the form goes thru only to find I have
	to take my boat to lake swampy and wait in another line for some
	cousin of "the Duke" to return from their lunck break to admin. the
	boating test.  Remember the current Mass DMRV hours are MONDAY and
	FRIDAY ONLY 8:45-4:30.

	This is what you people are thinking about.  Clearly this is not fun!

    1)  Make licensing mandatory.
    
    2)  Make education a requirement for licensing.
    
    3)  Make an equivalency exam available (credit real world education
        and/or self-study)
    				J

    	re:analogy to auto registration
    
    	1. If I remember correctly, the owner AND/OR operator are responsible
    in the event of a violation. Remember, the problem here is enforcement.
    IF an officer apprehends someone, you know who the operator is and there is 
    nothing stopping them from writting that person a ticket and taking down
    the boat registration numbers so that if it happens again, you revoke
    the registration. If the violation was severe, then you revoke the
    registration on the spot. 
        
    	2. If you let someone drive your boat and they screw up and
    you lose your registration temporarily, are you going to let them
    get behind the wheel of YOUR boat again ???? I doubt it. If you
    didn't let them drive it in the first place there wouldn't be a
    problem so you are partially responsible whether you care to admit
    it or not.
    
    	3. People can and do drive without or on revoked licences. It's
    not legal, but it has been done many times.

    	4. Driver ed for autos is NOT mandatory, at least not in NH/MASS.
    It will allow you to get your license earlier and reduce your insurance
    but it is not mandatory. So why do you want to impose more bureucratic
    nonsense for boats than you do for cars ?????
    
	Revoking the registration CAN work. Sure you can find problems
    with it but you can also find problems with licensing boaters. There
    are also ways to make this work. One is that the operator have at
    least an auto drivers license/permit or be accompanied by a RESPONSIBLE
    person with a drivers license. If they don't pay the fine, you yank
    their auto license. Mass. currently does this if you don't pay your
    excise tax. It works !!!!
    
    	RAYJ
    

re:    < Note 132.29 by VICKI::DODIER >

>    One is that the operator have at
>    least an auto drivers license/permit or be accompanied by a RESPONSIBLE
>    person with a drivers license. If they don't pay the fine, you yank

    
    	No thanks! How many times have you let a 15-16 year old pull
    you skiing? I've had many occasions to do it and that would put
    an end to that.
    
    Rick

    re:30
    
    	I don't know how to interpret your response. Are you saying
    that you shouldn't be responsible for a 15-16 year old that you
    allowed to drive your boat ??? 
    
	RAYJ

    
    
re: < Note 132.31 by VICKI::DODIER >
    
    	What I'm saying is that I certainly should be responsible
    for anyone driving my boat, but if I were skiing I wouldn't
    *be* in the boat...
    
    Rick

Rick,

EXAMPLE:
	Then (just to pursue a point and "my opinion may vary" disclaimer) if
that 15-16 year old screws up, and you are responsible for that person driving
your boat, should not your your registration be revoked to solve the problem?
If not the 15 year old will be ticketed, their parents not allow (s)he back in
your boat, you will find another 15-16 year old and the problem goes on w/o end.
Clearly if the problem is you are guilty of bad judgment, ticketing the
driver will not solve that problem.  Revoking your registration will solve the
problem.


SOAPBOX:
	Now I use young, competent drivers all the time as you do, so that I
can ski.  The problem is that the "young terriors" on the lakes are also using
boats and jet ski's WITHOUT adult supervision (a big hot button with me).
Their used to be a law on the books (MASS) that limited hp usage based on age
until you were licenced to drive an Auto.  I think it went like this:

		< 5hp   10-12 only with adult supervision
		< 25hp  12-16, anything larger under adult supervision.

What happened to this?  No enforcement (both parents that dont care and
the local "Barney Fife's" on each lake) right!


OPINION:
	Enforcement thru registration is the best trade-off of freedom, saftey,
age vs maturity factors, etc.  Licencing only restricts usage based on some
minimal age and testing factors usually a trained chimp can meet.  All the
alternatives proposed mean less freedom for us responsible boaters.   All I
want is a means of getting the problem-makers OFF the water with minimal impact
to ME.  To me than means beefed-up registration-based enforcement, not new
laws and restrictions.

	Garry