We need Change!!

[bumpdraft]

I'm not necessarily against requiring locater devices on all off shore boats. What size boat would be considered, or would it just be if you are caught offshore. I sometimes see people in jon boats out further than 3 miles.
The op implied that the devices should be made affordable and required. My point about that is, affordable and required is not how things work out.
I just checked the price of 4 boat flares at WM, almost $28. Six not for boat flares, about $14 (plus a handy traffic vest). What is it that makes the boat flares so much more money, the uscg approval, the way they are made (they burn differently), or could it be the requirement.
I carried a box of 30 minute flares around for years (not the same ones) and never had a problem getting them to light. They stayed lit in the rain. Like anything else, you had to check them once in a while. If the whole box got soaked, it would need to be replaced. I keep my boat flares in watertight container, but I would imagine they need to stay dry as well.
That stated, I see the day coming that every boat will need to have a locator that is on at all times.

[Copper Collar]

Originally Posted by kmoose

We could go all day on tit for tat... building codes, bridges, planes,.... pic your topic. Bottom line PLDs are already mandated for documented and commercial vessels regardless of size so there is no big stretch or unreasonable expense to apply that to recreational vessels venturing offshore past state waters. It's reasonable, applicable and you won't find a seasoned mariner that has spent any amount of time offshore denying their value.

I read an interview with a SARs team Coastie stating that EBIRBs and type 3 pfds with strobes provide the best chance you will sleep in your own bed if faced with an maritime emergency. There is a lot of weight in that statement and it should bare consideration to those owning vessels capable of venturing beyond the last channel marker.

The point of going tit for tat is that while my example is proven and the PLD is proven, people believe one isn't ridiculous while the other they believe is. To me that means that this reaction isn't really about taking life saving measures, it's about feel good measures, which also inadvertently mandate a purchase of a product and chip just a little more freedom away from the populous.

Think of it this way, You see a girl at the bar and you offer her $1,000,000 for a BJ. She says yeah, but then you tell her you don't have the mil, you only have $5. She gets all offended.

You already know where her morals are at the $1,000,000 offer, past that you are just negotiating the price. Same goes here and with every other topic of giving the government more power/authority.

Originally Posted by Trayder

Also just for the record, I would not be against the mandate by any means, I have had an EPIRB or equiv for well over 20 years along with a few PLB's, never leave the dock with them, on my boat or others. I am just not for more govt regulations on items that should be common sense. As for reducing search and rescue, sure, but much like everything else there will always be folks that do not adhere to govt rules and will need help regardless. all of this seems like a knee jerk reaction to the recent events, which suck (the events not the knee jerk)

As I said before if it's because the two are 14yo, say it was two 34yo men, would we really be having a multi page thread on here? Would we really be demanding PLDs on all boats?

Originally Posted by bumpdraft

What size boat would be considered, or would it just be if you are caught offshore. I sometimes see people in jon boats out further than 3 miles.
The op implied that the devices should be made affordable and required. My point about that is, affordable and required is not how things work out.

Preciously, it's easy to jump to an over the top mandate without going into the details about it. When you get in the weeds of how to apply that mandate, punishments for breaking that mandate, who will monitor the mandate, how will they monitor it, who will be governed by that mandate, how exceptions are given out, why those exceptions are given out. It turns complicated fast, just like everything else the government touches.

[ssscotty]

Originally Posted by Copper Collar

The point of going tit for tat is that while my example is proven and the PLD is proven, people believe one isn't ridiculous while the other they believe is. To me that means that this reaction isn't really about taking life saving measures, it's about feel good measures, which also inadvertently mandate a purchase of a product and chip just a little more freedom away from the populous.

Think of it this way, You see a girl at the bar and you offer her $1,000,000 for a BJ. She says yeah, but then you tell her you don't have the mil, you only have $5. She gets all offended.

You already know where her morals are at the $1,000,000 offer, past that you are just negotiating the price. Same goes here and with every other topic of giving the government more power/authority.




As I said before if it's because the two are 14yo, say it was two 34yo men, would we really be having a multi page thread on here? Would we really be demanding PLDs on all boats?






Preciously, it's easy to jump to an over the top mandate without going into the details about it. When you get in the weeds of how to apply that mandate, punishments for breaking that mandate, who will monitor the mandate, how will they monitor it, who will be governed by that mandate, how exceptions are given out, why those exceptions are given out. It turns complicated fast, just like everything else the government touches.

if every time the gov tries to enforce new safety laws and it was taken as the gov chipping away at our rights, we would have none of these regulations in place. and peoples common sense varies so yes there needs to be something in writing for everyone to reference. look back at history, most of these types of laws are usually put in place after a tragedy. maybe that's not the best feeling because we like to think we are smarter then that and should have already put something in place to prevent the tragedy. I would support anyone in this tragic situation no matter their age, etc... yes it hits harder when it has to do with children, I think that's a given. but not an excuse to ward off talk of making things a little safer out there. things only get complicating to people who refuse to understand them...

[Copper Collar]

Originally Posted by ssscotty

if every time the gov tries to enforce new safety laws and it was taken as the gov chipping away at our rights, we would have none of these regulations in place. and peoples common sense varies so yes there needs to be something in writing for everyone to reference. look back at history, most of these types of laws are usually put in place after a tragedy. maybe that's not the best feeling because we like to think we are smarter then that and should have already put something in place to prevent the tragedy. I would support anyone in this tragic situation no matter their age, etc... yes it hits harder when it has to do with children, I think that's a given. but not an excuse to ward off talk of making things a little safer out there. things only get complicating to people who refuse to understand them...

So you have never thought that the government over regulates?
http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/florida

If these mandates are so good why do they always pass them after a tragedy when emotions are high versus letting them stand on their own merits?

Complicated only to those who refuse to understand? Why don't you begin to address the issues I raised:

punishments for breaking that mandate, who will monitor the mandate, how will they monitor it, who will be governed by that mandate, how exceptions are given out, why those exceptions are given out.

[kmoose]

Originally Posted by Copper Collar

If these mandates are so good why do they always pass them after a tragedy when emotions are high versus letting them stand on their own merits?

Complicated only to those who refuse to understand? Why don't you begin to address the issues I raised. "punishments for breaking that mandate, who will monitor the mandate, how will they monitor it, who will be governed by that mandate, how exceptions are given out, why those exceptions are given out." :

Safety rules, warnings and regulations are always written in blood. While I understand your desire to have Darwin fix things by removing or maiming life participants too dull to comprehend operative dangers, I on the other hand believe there is a balance in which an organized republic should set standards to preserve life and prevent serious injury through reasonable means including regulation.

Implementation.... That's easy. All boats entering or leaving federal waters will be equipped with at least one form of PLB. If you get caught without it you get a warning or fine. Same as flares, life jackets or other required safety devices. Same folks that enforce the latter should enforce the PLB requirement. Rant away..

[Islandtrader]

Originally Posted by kmoose

Same as flares, life jackets or other required safety devices. Same folks that enforce the latter should enforce the PLB requirement. Rant away..

I agree with you...simple is better.

No Bones...same as gun control...we do not want to many mandate...if you know what I mean.

[Copper Collar]

Originally Posted by Islandtrader

I agree with you...simple is better.

No Bones...same as gun control...we do not want to many mandate...if you know what I mean.

Gun control, you mean the shall not be infringed, that's infringed upon "for the greater good" with "common sense controls"?

[Copper Collar]

Originally Posted by kmoose

Safety rules, warnings and regulations are always written in blood. While I understand your desire to have Darwin fix things by removing or maiming life participants too dull to comprehend operative dangers, I on the other hand believe there is a balance in which an organized republic should set standards to preserve life and prevent serious injury through reasonable means including regulation.

Implementation.... That's easy. All boats entering or leaving federal waters will be equipped with at least one form of PLB. If you get caught without it you get a warning or fine. Same as flares, life jackets or other required safety devices. Same folks that enforce the latter should enforce the PLB requirement. Rant away..

So who keeps track of the warnings? Who collects the fines? What do you do if they don't pay the fine? Who will carry out that action? What testing does the pld have to meet?

You all think I am being ridiculous, but I work for the government. I get to see this first hand every week. You do not want this.