 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / February 2005Diver says boat crew left him at sea...
LOS ANGELES, California (AP)  SignatureA diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at sea has sued the diving company for $4 million. Daniel Carlock Jr. filed a lawsuit Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court against Ocean Adventures Dive Co. and its employees, accusing them of negligence, inflicting emotional distress and fraud. Carlock, 46, alleges Ocean Adventures left him off Santa Catalina Island on April 25, 2004, then lied about his location, delaying his rescue for five hours. He was eventually rescued by Boy Scouts in the area. He developed skin cancer as a result of extended exposure to the sun that day, according to the lawsuit, which also asks for an unspecified amount in punitive damages. The president of Ocean Adventures, Stephen Ladd, did not immediately return a call for comment Thursday. His wife said he is leading a diving expedition to the Coral Sea in Australia. Others named in the suit said they had not yet seen it and could not comment Kimber --- Is it enough to love? Is it enough to breath? Somebody rip my heart out and leave me here to bleed. Is it enough to die? Somebody save my life. I'd rather be anything but ordinary please. > A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at > sea > has sued the diving company for $4 million. A bit excessive, but what the heck, if they left him at sea, they deserve what they get. He, however, is not likely to get much, if anything. No dive operations I know of have $5,000,000 to spare. > Daniel Carlock Jr. filed a lawsuit Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court > against Ocean Adventures Dive Co. and its employees, accusing them of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > April 25, 2004, then lied about his location, delaying his rescue for five > hours. He was eventually rescued by Boy Scouts in the area. Left him, OK, negligence works and, having seen my share of shark movies, I can accept emotional distress. Fraud? I don't think so. Lied about his location? Sounds really unlikely. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for this trial . . . if it ever gets to trial. > He developed skin cancer as a result of extended exposure to the sun that > day, according to the lawsuit, which also asks for an unspecified amount > in > punitive damages. Hmmm, my dermitologist tells me that my skin cancer has nothing to do with the sun I get these days. He claims it's a product of damage done 20 years ago. If he's right, then Mr. Carlock ain't. Lee > > A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at > > sea [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > what they get. He, however, is not likely to get much, if anything. No > dive operations I know of have $5,000,000 to spare. I guess it's a good thing he only asked for 4 then... :-) > A bit excessive, but what the heck, if they left him at sea, they deserve > what they get. He, however, is not likely to get much, if anything. No > dive operations I know of have $5,000,000 to spare. How many dive operations do you know of that lack insurance? >> A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at >> sea [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >what they get. He, however, is not likely to get much, if anything. No >dive operations I know of have $5,000,000 to spare. 1- it wasn't Catalina. It was the oil rigs. There be STRONG current. 2 - He separated from his "buddies" during the descent. During roll-call, one of his "buddies" either answered for him, or said he was below deck... something... the DM had him checked off as being present before the boat moved on. --- Rich http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ >>> A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at >>> sea [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > 1- it wasn't Catalina. It was the oil rigs. There be STRONG current. Did I say something about Catalina? > 2 - He separated from his "buddies" during the descent. During > roll-call, one of his "buddies" either answered for him, or said he > was below deck... something... the DM had him checked off as being > present before the boat moved on. Maybe they'll learn to count people a bit more carefully. The fact is, there's no excuse for accidentally leaving a diver behind. You count people when the boat leaves the dock and you count them when it's about to leave a dive site. That's people, not here's, not he's in the head, just people. It's a simple concept, really. Lee >>>> A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at >>>> sea [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Did I say something about Catalina? No... it was in your quote. >> 2 - He separated from his "buddies" during the descent. During >> roll-call, one of his "buddies" either answered for him, or said he [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >dive site. That's people, not here's, not he's in the head, just people. >It's a simple concept, really. Not that simple when people are milling about the deck. The only way to pull a head-count is if you can herd the cats out of the head and galley and bunk room and on-deck long enough to count them. There's always someone who figures that since they sat out the dive, they don't need to report. Every charter I've ever been on simply does a roll-call. Right or not right, that's how it's done, so to single out one dive operator as doing wrongly when he is doing exactly the same thing as every other operator is not right. --- Rich http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ >>Maybe they'll learn to count people a bit more carefully. The fact is, >>there's no excuse for accidentally leaving a diver behind. You count [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>dive site. That's people, not here's, not he's in the head, just people. >>It's a simple concept, really. > Not that simple when people are milling about the deck. The only way > to pull a head-count is if you can herd the cats out of the head and > galley and bunk room and on-deck long enough to count them. There's > always someone who figures that since they sat out the dive, they > don't need to report. You're exactly right. That's the only way to get a good head count. You know it, I know it, everybody here knows it. Why doesn't a dive operator know it? > Every charter I've ever been on simply does a roll-call. > Right or not right, that's how it's done, so to single out one dive > operator as doing wrongly when he is doing exactly the same thing as > every other operator is not right. My mother used to say, "if everybody jumped off a bridge, would you?" In many cases, you're probably right, that's how it's done, right or wrong. Fact is, we know it's wrong. When those that are paid to provide a service, chose not to provide it, or do it wrong simply because they're too lazy or incompetent to do it right (damn, I can't believe my fingers typed those words), they get what they deserve when doing it wrong puts somebody's life at risk. You only get one chance to try to kill me. Lee > Every charter I've ever been on simply does a roll-call. > Right or not right, that's how it's done, so to single out one dive > operator as doing wrongly when he is doing exactly the same thing as > every other operator is not right. He didn't do the same thing other operators do. He didn't do a head count, or he would have discovered that he had a missing diver. Signature"We're going to rush the hijackers." -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 > He didn't do a head count, or he would have discovered that he had a > missing diver. Headcount isn't enough. In cattleboatanian waters divers climb foreign boats from all over( under, really). Just make sure you take home your own passengers. Matthias > Headcount isn't enough. > In cattleboatanian waters divers climb foreign boats from all over( > under, really). > > Just make sure you take home your own passengers. Yeah, that would be nice, but as long as everyone takes home the same number as they started with at least no one is going to be left... It's the difference between a minor inconvenience and having a *really* bad day... >> Headcount isn't enough. >> In cattleboatanian waters divers climb foreign boats from all over( [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > as they started with at least no one is going to be left... It's the > difference between a minor inconvenience and having a *really* bad day... I don't know. I remember one time off Key Biscayne when the Fantasea, the one that docks in Miami, was pulling away when their last diver came to the surface. I was looking forward to picking him up and returning him to the dock almost as much as I was looking forward to demanding that the boat's operator pay me for providing half of the service he had contracted for. Alas, somebody aboard spotted the diver waving madly and the captain returned for him. Shucks. Lee >>> Headcount isn't enough. >>> In cattleboatanian waters divers climb foreign boats from all over( [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Alas, somebody aboard spotted the diver waving madly and the captain >returned for him. Picking up a person from the water is covered in the skippers's course. You alert the coast guard, and report name, vessel [s]he came from, and you may or may not have to cope with immigration. These are standard international rules. There is also a full investigation. AFAIR the US has a national regime that is almost a blueprint of the international ones; except licensing for boats/radios/captains has lots of waivers. You are entitled to "assistance fees" if it was not a life-threatening situation, or full rescue fees if it was. This is settled by the inquest. Guess who pays? -- mrr > You are entitled to "assistance fees" if it was not a life-threatening > situation, or full rescue fees if it was. This is settled by the inquest. > > Guess who pays? The operator of the other boat would pay . . . to avoid all the problems that would occur if he chose not to. Lee > > He didn't do a head count, or he would have discovered that he had a > > missing diver. > > Headcount isn't enough. No, it's not enough. It's just the thing he didn't do, and the claim was that he did what every other boat does, and that claim isn't true. Signature"We're going to rush the hijackers." -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 >>>2 - He separated from his "buddies" during the descent. During >>>roll-call, one of his "buddies" either answered for him, or said he [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > operator as doing wrongly when he is doing exactly the same thing as > every other operator is not right. don't know which charters you ride then. If all they do is a roll call I'll never use em again. Let me ask you - how many dive ladders ( return points) on these boats? yeah! you account for everybody that comes up that ladder. pretty damn simple - if they went in the water the only way back out is up that ladder. >don't know which charters you ride then. If all they do is a roll call >I'll never use em again. >Let me ask you - how many dive ladders ( return points) on these boats? >yeah! you account for everybody that comes up that ladder. pretty damn >simple - if they went in the water the only way back out is up that ladder. Only one way on the boat, but may times there's two or three ways OFF of the boat. --- Rich http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ >>don't know which charters you ride then. If all they do is a roll call >>I'll never use em again. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > --- Rich > http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ if you let any diver roll in anywhere than, yes, you can loose someone. one exit - one entry point, divers go off by giving a name and being checked as out on the roster - divers are checked back in by name on the roster as they board. It does require that the DM does a little work (besides makeing coffee). you can be sure this was done at the dock as the money was collected and people were boarding! I bet no boat does a head count and says - well we collected 10 fees and I have 10 people so lets go. >>A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at >>sea [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > what they get. He, however, is not likely to get much, if anything. No > dive operations I know of have $5,000,000 to spare. Surely, they have insurance, don't they? > Hmmm, my dermitologist tells me that my skin cancer has nothing to do with > the sun I get these days. He claims it's a product of damage done 20 > years ago. If he's right, then Mr. Carlock ain't. Your dermatologist is right. Friggin' attorneys will try anything ... Buck >> Hmmm, my dermitologist tells me that my skin cancer has nothing to do >> with the sun I get these days. He claims it's a product of damage done >> 20 years ago. If he's right, then Mr. Carlock ain't. >> > Your dermatologist is right. Friggin' attorneys will try anything ... Not without an expert witness backing him up. Some MD will undoubtedly testify for the plaintiff or the lawyer would never have brought the claim. > A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at > sea > has sued the diving company for $4 million. Here's a long article on "Drifting Dan". The local diver BBS is excoriating him, claiming that the lawsuit will hurt local diving. The position is that, while it was regrettable for the DM to count him in when he was still out, the diver should never have drifted off the rigs in the first place. I've dove the rigs before and have to agree. When you're underwater it's easy to keep the confines of the rigs in view. Heck, you can hold onto it if you need to and if the boat isn't there for some reason when you ascend, you can always climb out and sit on a platform with the sea lions. http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/bulldog/20040811-leftatsea1.html The defense lawyers need to get the case dismissed well before trial on the basis of the waivers and contributory negligence. Otherwise a non-diving jury who will be instructed by the plaintiff to watch Open Water as homework will screw them good. >> A diver who says he drifted for five hours after a boat crew left him at sea >> has sued the diving company for $4 million. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > be instructed by the plaintiff to watch Open Water as homework will screw them > good. I disagree. The final responsibility rests with the crew to make sure everyone is accounted for before they leave. Adam > I disagree. The final responsibility rests with the crew to make sure > everyone is accounted for before they leave. So if he dove too deep and died would that also be the crew's fault because they didn't account for him? Worst case scenario if the boat was gone was that he would have climbed aboard the rig and waited. How is it the crew's fault that he drifted off? Do you really think the boat would have been able to find him in the fog if they had discovered him missing before leaving the rig? > > I disagree. The final responsibility rests with the crew to make sure > > everyone is accounted for before they leave. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > able to find him in the fog if they had discovered him missing before > leaving the rig? There were enough mistakes made duing that dive to go around. Yeah, the boat shouldnt't have left him. Yeah, his buddies should've paid closer attention. Yeah, the diver should've paid closer attention to his buddies, and further shouldn'tve drifted off the oil rig. Of course since the captain thought the chap had turned up missing aftr the seocnd dive, it may've been awhile at the rig unless another boat came along. From what I can tell, all that can be traced to that incident is that the chap lost some lead weights. Getting 4,000,000 for that would be an alchemists dream come true - changed lost lead into gold. Dennis > There were enough mistakes made duing that dive to go around. > Yeah, the boat shouldnt't have left him. Yeah, his buddies should've paid [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > it > may've been awhile at the rig unless another boat came along. That's assuming that the rig was truly abandoned as some reports claim. The one I've dove, Grace to the north, is a working rig, manned 24/7. Even if it were abandoned, I'd much rather be sitting on the water than in it if I'm to wait a long time for help. Dehydration is the only major worry and another boat would probably be along in a day or two at the latest. >> I disagree. The final responsibility rests with the crew to make sure everyone is >> accounted for before they leave. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > off? Do you really think the boat would have been able to find him in the fog if > they had discovered him missing before leaving the rig? Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The crew cannot prevent accidents, but if an accident happens they must be aware of it, call for help and attempt rescue if appropriate. Taking off is negligent. Adam > Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come > back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The > crew cannot prevent accidents, but if an accident happens they must be > aware of it, call for help and attempt rescue if appropriate. Taking off > is negligent. Why should the crew have to account for everyone? Shouldn't people be accountable for themselves? For instance, I understand that if you are on a cruise ship and set up your own dives without using the ship's people, you are accountable if you miss the boat. This guy went off on his own and 'missed the boat'. The boat left. It would have been nice if they had stuck around a bit and waited for him, but they had places to go. They should probably refund half of what the guy paid since he missed a dive and his ride home, but they certainly didn't cause him to drift out to sea in the fog. >> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come back, but >> they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The crew cannot prevent [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > and his ride home, but they certainly didn't cause him to drift out to sea in the > fog. I don't know about you but when I go diving I assume the boat will pick me up at the end of the dive, or at least attempt to pick me up, even if I get lost, have an accident or am slow in getting back. I believe this is the assumption when one goes diving with a commercial boat crew. If the crew tells me they may leave without me if I'm not back on time, I definitely would not dive with them. The crew has the responsibility of not puting anyone's life in danger, even if a mistake is made by a diver. Adam > I don't know about you but when I go diving I assume the boat will pick me > up at the end of the dive, or at least attempt to pick me up, even if I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > definitely would not dive with them. The crew has the responsibility of > not puting anyone's life in danger, even if a mistake is made by a diver. And when I travel, I assume there's a plane to pick me up at the airport at the end of my trip. I've been bumped and delayed many times, but I never asked for $4,000,000. Do you really believe his life would have seriously been put in danger had the boat left and he was stranded at the rig? No, his life was put in danger because he chose to leave the confines of the rig and set off in the open ocean on a foggy day. I've been on dives where the boat wasn't there when I returned. Well, just one actually. The Aquatica had slipped anchor and decided to park in the next cove over which looked pretty far away when I surfaced. And their chase dinghy was out of operation due to a busted engine. So I swam for it. And I didn't sue them for $4,000,000, though I did yell a bit when I finally clambored aboard. But what I didn't do was drift off into the open ocean and then expect them to find me. And I had a buddy with me. If I had to, I could have eaten her to survive. > one actually. The Aquatica had slipped anchor and decided to park in the Sorry, I meant the Pacific Star. > Why should the crew have to account for everyone? Shouldn't people be > accountable for themselves? Want to take a ride on my boat? Lee > Want to take a ride on my boat? Can I drive? >> Want to take a ride on my boat? > > Can I drive? On the way out. I'm not promising you'll be there for the return trip. It's not my responsibility to worry about that. Lee > On the way out. I'm not promising you'll be there for the return trip. > It's not my responsibility to worry about that. If I find out you drank all my beer before I swim back, I'll sue. >> On the way out. I'm not promising you'll be there for the return trip. >> It's not my responsibility to worry about that. > If I find out you drank all my beer before I swim back, I'll sue. See how important it is to make sure terms are understood before the boat leaves the dock? Under normal conditions, all Bud Light, Budweiser, Killian, Dos Eques, Carta Blanca, Kirin or Old Peculiar beverages abandoned aboard my boat become ships stores of the vessel and may be used at the discretion of the vessel's captain. Since you made this a condition of our contract, I will modify my normal policy and take responsibility for the return of any beverages which we agree, prior to leaving the dock, fall into the category "beer," that we agree, prior to leaving the dock, fall into the category "yours," to the dock from which we departed. Returning said "beer" to the dock is the full extent of the responsibility of the captain of the vessel in question. The captain's responsibility, in any event, is limited to replacement of an equal amount of the same beer if available. Should the same beer not be readily available from Publix or Winn Dixie grocery stores, it will be replaced with the closest available beer or like or similar quality as determined by solely by the captain. Should you desire further service relative to said beer of yours, arrangements and fees must be agreed in advance. Such services may include such things as maintaining said beer at a temperature range reasonably suitable for consumption of US beer after departure from the dock and before the ice melts, reasonable protection from pilferage and reasonable protection from consumption by unauthorized individuals until such time as the captain departs the vicinity of the doc. Please don't forget to tip. The captain doesn't pay his crew. If you want service, lavish tips may be necessary. Lee > Should you desire further service relative to said beer of yours, > arrangements and fees must be agreed in advance. Such services may [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > reasonable protection from consumption by unauthorized individuals until > such time as the captain departs the vicinity of the doc. What you won't know until the ride home is that I'm gonna take your Capt. Morgan down with me as security that you come back. > What you won't know until the ride home is that I'm gonna take your Capt. > Morgan down with me as security that you come back. No problem. I will, of course, require a credit card imprint as security. Captain Moragan has friends who will take care of me, Dewars, Jose Cuervo, Gordons and Smirnoff. Lee > Want to take a ride on my boat? Have parked 100 miles off the mouth of the Mississippi later this month... I'll "drop" him off for ya'... <evil-grin> >>Why should the crew have to account for everyone? Shouldn't people be >>accountable for themselves? > > Want to take a ride on my boat? > > Lee If he does, I want to go, I answer for Greg in the roll call! :-) (It will be a very short dive. >> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come >> back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Why should the crew have to account for everyone? Shouldn't people be >accountable for themselves? Dammit Greg, you're starting to sound like a responsible conservative! --- Rich http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ >>>Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come >>>back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > --- Rich > http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ How can he be accountable for himself when he's in the water? And yeah, I'm starting to worry about Greg... ;-) SignatureMichael Wolf ----- Cthulhu For President. Why settle for the lesser evil? remove stopspam to reply >>> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come >>> back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dammit Greg, you're starting to sound like a responsible conservative! No, he's sounding like a truth twisting liberal. Somebody that is not there, can not be responsible for the Captain and DM not knowing he/she's not there. Lee > No, he's sounding like a truth twisting liberal. Somebody that is not > there, can not be responsible for the Captain and DM not knowing he/she's > not there. Of course they can. They can stick with the dive plan and stay on the rig. They can make sure their buddies know that they have separated from them. They can make sure their buddies even know they exist. They can make friends on the boat so that someone actually misses them. They can get better signaling devices (the diver said he saw the boat when he surfaced - why didn't they see him?). > >> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come > >> back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dammit Greg, you're starting to sound like a responsible conservative! damn the nra membership is starting to have an effect. > --- Rich > http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ > > >> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come > > >> back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > damn > the nra membership is starting to have an effect. Maybe he's actually reading "The Rifleman" instead of just using it as toilet paper like I figured he would. >> damn >> the nra membership is starting to have an effect. > > Maybe he's actually reading "The Rifleman" instead of just using it as > toilet paper like I figured he would. The paper's too slick to make good TP. Personally, I chose America's First Freedom. The article Can Britain Be Saved? is worth reading. Lee > damn > the nra membership is starting to have an effect. A gun makes an excellent scuba signaling device. If the boat couldn't spot a sausage or hear his whistle (the diver supposedly carried and supposedly used both), a few well-placed shots across the bow would have done the trick. I am the NRA! > A gun makes an excellent scuba signaling device. If the boat couldn't > spot a sausage or hear his whistle (the diver supposedly carried and > supposedly used both), a few well-placed shots across the bow would have > done the trick. > I am the NRA! You're not the NRA until you know which gun is the right gun for the job, but you're headed in the right direction. Lee > > I am the NRA! > You're not the NRA until you know which gun is the right gun for the job, > but you're headed in the right direction. He will also have to understand that disarming law abiding citizens is wrong, and I am sure that revelation is no where near the horizon. >> A gun makes an excellent scuba signaling device. If the boat couldn't >> spot a sausage or hear his whistle (the diver supposedly carried and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You're not the NRA until you know which gun is the right gun for the job, > but you're headed in the right direction. Flare guns aren't as loud and might cause the entire boat to catch fire. A rifle is too unwieldy to take underwater. What's wrong with a little pistol that can fit in my BC pocket? It would also come in handy against sharks and out of air DIR divers trying to take my primary. >>> A gun makes an excellent scuba signaling device. If the boat couldn't >>> spot a sausage or hear his whistle (the diver supposedly carried and [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > pistol that can fit in my BC pocket? It would also come in handy against > sharks and out of air DIR divers trying to take my primary. You're getting closer all the time. In this context, a pistol is probably the right kind of gun, but all pistols are not created equal. You'll want one with as few parts as possible that can rust and, preferably one that is designed specifically for use both above and below the water . . . like my Glock. I'm not a big fan of carrying guns underwater. It takes too much time to clean them after the day's diving is done. I have, however, been known to carry a bangstick or powerhead. So far, I've never fired either. Some day. Lee <snip> > I'm not a big fan of carrying guns underwater. It takes too much time to > clean them after the day's diving is done. Why not encase it in a gallon sized baggie. That way, it doesn't get wet unless you need it. ;-) >> I'm not a big fan of carrying guns underwater. It takes too much time to >> clean them after the day's diving is done. > Why not encase it in a gallon sized baggie. That way, it doesn't get wet > unless you need it. ;-) For starters, I don't expect to need one underwater. If I did think I'd need something like that, my powerhead and/or bangstick are as good a choice as anything. A more important reason, however, is that I don't think a gallon sized baggie would do the trick. I've taken mints and fish food in a baggie before and, no matter how careful I am to try to get the air out of the bag and seal it tightly, I always seem to wind up with mush. Perhaps if I were to fill the bag with oil, or even fresh water, it would work well enough . . . if it was worth the effort to carry a handgun instead of the devices made for underwater service. Lee > I'm not a big fan of carrying guns underwater. It takes too much time to > clean them after the day's diving is done. I have, however, been known to > carry a bangstick or powerhead. So far, I've never fired either. Some > day. But how accurate is a bangstick? I thought it's only point blank. You'd never hit a boat that was 50 yards away. > You're getting closer all the time. In this context, a pistol is probably > the right kind of gun, but all pistols are not created equal. You'll want > one with as few parts as possible that can rust and, preferably one that is > designed specifically for use both above and below the water . . . like my > Glock. Let that be a HK P11. If you can get one. But then again, it is silent. Matthias >> A gun makes an excellent scuba signaling device. If the boat couldn't >> spot a sausage or hear his whistle (the diver supposedly carried and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Lee 45 acp can do the trick. The sound of jacking a cartridge into the chamber can calm aggressors into complacency. Chambered is better than not if not. >> A gun makes an excellent scuba signaling device. If the boat couldn't >> spot a sausage or hear his whistle (the diver supposedly carried and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Lee This is my rifle This is my gun One is for fighting And one is for fun Signaturedillon "When the French are against it, you know we can't be far wrong." - Adm. Bobbie Ray Inman >> >> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come >> >> back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >damn >the nra membership is starting to have an effect. KEYBOARD! --- Rich http://richlockyer.tripod.com/ >> Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come >> back, but they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >own dives without using the ship's people, you are accountable if you miss >the boat. As long as you are underways, and conducting diver operations from a boat is considered underways, the captain is responsible. Pure and simple. The captain is also given policing powers to enforce his responsabilities. The moment the ship/boat is docked different rules apply. If you choose to stay onboard the responsability shifts to yourself, to the harbour authorities, or may remain with the captain depending on circumstances. The moment you step off the boat the captain is no longer responsible for you. >This guy went off on his own and 'missed the boat'. The boat left. It >would have been nice if they had stuck around a bit and waited for him, but >they had places to go. They should probably refund half of what the guy >paid since he missed a dive and his ride home, but they certainly didn't >cause him to drift out to sea in the fog. I am sorry, but the moment the dive time is up you either see divers on the surface, have a 100% fix on them below (regular bubbles or SMBs) or you start rescue. For these reasons we always have two rosters. One is the ship's manifest, and details everyone onboard. This roster is the captain's responsability. It is also the basis of billing. For each dive it has one time when everyone is supposed to be out of the water. This is the manifest the law demands. Each dive also has a roster, dove by the DM. People are checked in and out of the water; with times, and a check list for divemasters. Once the divemaster says OK the _captain_ does a roll call [may be waived with less than 10 people on board, and everyone is spotted and identified]. In the view of the law, the divemaster is just a coffee-making crew member that may have somehing to offer in terms of diving assistance. The captain is the one responsible. -- mrr > >> I disagree. The final responsibility rests with the crew to make sure everyone is > >> accounted for before they leave. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Your argument is faulty. The problem was not that one diver did not come back, but > they falsely assumed everyone was accounted for and left. The crew cannot prevent Ever been on a dive boat where they just do a roll calls to see if folks are back aboard? From the article: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/bulldog/20040811-leftatsea3.html The owner of Ocean Adventures Dive Co., Steve Ladd, said in a written statement that Carlock's "dive buddy," who had only met him that morning and who has not been identified, did not report him missing. At the end of the first dive, a dive master called roll and heard everyone answer, Ladd's statement said. "A visual verification was not done," the statement added. And the Sundiver moved on. > accidents, but if an accident happens they must be aware of it, call for help and > attempt rescue if appropriate. Taking off is negligent. Are poor buddy skills also negilgent? "Fifteen minutes into the dive, at about 30 feet, pressure started to build in Dan Carlock's ears. He stopped, waiting for his ears to equalize, or "pop." If he continued down without equalizing, he risked damage to his eardrums. Carlock waited. The other three in his group continued without him." How about ignoring the dive brief? "Once under the rig, Carlock and the others were told to stay within the rig's structure during their dive. That way, they could use the rig's columns to keep from being swept along." and yet..... "The oil rig was in the wrong place. The current had pushed him out from under it, and was still pushing him. In the fog, he thought he could see the outline of the Sundiver - but then it disappeared." so why wasn't he still within the rig? And....is 4 hours in the fog, along with some lost lead weight, worth $4,00,000.00? A million bucks an hour? a hundred-thousand per pound? I'll note that the chap is still alive, and that the captain had already undergone a one-month suspensiojn of his license. > Adam Dennis > And....is 4 hours in the fog, along with some lost lead weight, worth > $4,00,000.00? A million bucks an hour? a hundred-thousand per pound? Don't forget the skin cancer. Assuming it's not the fatal kind (and I'm sure the newspapers would have reported it as such if they had the chance), it means he has to wear a bandaid for a week until it heals. I'll bet this guy would have sued the boat if he spilled coffee on himself. Sure the DM might have made it too hot, but on a rocking boat you gotta anticipate an occasional spill. > > And....is 4 hours in the fog, along with some lost lead weight, worth > > $4,00,000.00? A million bucks an hour? a hundred-thousand per pound? > > Don't forget the skin cancer. Assuming it's not the fatal kind (and I'm > sure the newspapers would have reported it as such if they had the chance), > it means he has to wear a bandaid for a week until it heals. Yeah, but since these things to take time to develop, I rather doubt that the 4 hour episode is enough to give him the cancer. Or was this his firs tforay out of the house in years? When I dove in San Diego I was in dry suit, thick gloves, dry hood, mask. Heck, there waas no way the sun could've reached exposed skin. > I'll bet this guy would have sued the boat if he spilled coffee on himself. > Sure the DM might have made it too hot, but on a rocking boat you gotta > anticipate an occasional spill. Indeed. Dennis > Don't forget the skin cancer. Assuming it's not the fatal kind (and I'm > sure the newspapers would have reported it as such if they had the chance), [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Sure the DM might have made it too hot, but on a rocking boat you gotta > anticipate an occasional spill. Wow, a lawyer arguing *against* a lawsuit... Didn't think that I would *ever* hear that... Maybe that NRA membership is doing you some good, Greg... >>Don't forget the skin cancer. Assuming it's not the fatal kind (and I'm >>sure the newspapers would have reported it as such if they had the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > *ever* hear that... Maybe that NRA membership is doing you some good, > Greg... Exactly - who is this Greg? and what have you done with Mossman? > > Don't forget the skin cancer. Assuming it's not the fatal kind (and I'm > > sure the newspapers would have reported it as such if they had the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Sure the DM might have made it too hot, but on a rocking boat you gotta > > anticipate an occasional spill. > Wow, a lawyer arguing *against* a lawsuit... > Maybe that NRA membership is doing you some good, and thus you win "The Laugh of the Day Award" > Wow, a lawyer arguing *against* a lawsuit... Didn't think that I would > *ever* hear that... Maybe that NRA membership is doing you some good, > Greg... Actually, yes. I'm busy working out how I can sue the NRA (big bucks) so I'm letting these pissant cases slide. >> >> I disagree. The final responsibility rests with the crew to make sure > everyone is [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > I'll note that the chap is still alive, and that the captain had already > undergone a one-month suspensiojn of his license. Obviously the dive master could not have heard everyone if the diver was not there, so his statement is an obvious lie. His only defense may be if someone deliberately called out the missing diver's name during the roll call, which is unlikely. I doubt he'll get 4 million and the skin cancer thing will get thrown out, but I bet he'll win, or more likely the insurance company will settle. The fact that the captain was found at fault to be suspended will only help the diver with his lawsuit. Then I'm no lawyer. Also he can argue it was fortuitous that he was picked up, and had the boy-scout boat not passed by he could have died. Adam <snip> > Obviously the dive master could not have heard everyone if the diver was not there, > so his statement is an obvious lie. His only defense may be if someone deliberately > called out the missing diver's name during the roll call, which is unlikely. A lie? Incorrect. Presume there are two folks named Dan aboard DM: "Dan?" passenger: "Yo" DM: "Dan?" same passenger: "Here". Another situation: DM: "Dan?" passenger: "He's down below" You've never seen, during a roll call, one diver answering for another? > I doubt he'll get 4 million and the skin cancer thing will get thrown out, but I bet > he'll win, or more likely the insurance company will settle. The fact that the whcih is a sad thing, since the insurance companies will then charge more, which means that dive fees will increase. Further, folks who mayve been interested in diving, get scared off by the story. too bad. > captain was found at fault to be suspended will only help the diver with his lawsuit. > Then I'm no lawyer. Also he can argue it was fortuitous that he was picked up, and > had the boy-scout boat not passed by he could have died. But he didn't die. This is indeed a good thing. Which is why they;re going with "emotional distress". Still, you seem to've ignored the part Dan & his buddies played in this. Lack of buddy skills, not staying within the rig. Dennis > Adam > <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > You've never seen, during a roll call, one diver answering for another? It's a point it may not be a lie, but if the above is true then the DM is negligent. It's as if a surgeon were to operate on the wrong patient with the same first name or even the same full name. Could he say, "but your honor they have the same names, it's not my fault". In the end it's the crew's responsibility to make sure everyone is back on board before they leave just as the surgeon has to make sure he's operating on the right patient. Adam > > <snip> > >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > It's a point it may not be a lie, but if the above is true then the DM is negligent. So we've gone from "obvious lie" to "may not be a lie". We're making progress. Still, note that ts not the DM (at least not the DM anlone) who's being sued. > It's as if a surgeon were to operate on the wrong patient with the same first name or > even the same full name. Could he say, "but your honor they have the same names, it's > not my fault". Well, if the charts got switched, sure. Some hospitals will ut a wristband on the patient with their name, but if they're the same that would not help. :-) > In the end it's the crew's responsibility to make sure everyone is back on board > before they leave just as the surgeon has to make sure he's operating on the right > patient. And if they followd standard practices of a roll call, and another diver answere dfor the person, then they did what they could to assure that everyone was aboard. Still, you seem to've ignored the part Dan & his buddies played in this. Lack of buddy skills, not staying within the rig. When analyzing an accident, its a good thing to look at all the events that lead up to it as well. Dennis > Adam > And if they followd standard practices of a roll call, and another diver > answere dfor the person, then they did what they could to assure that > everyone was aboard. Except, of course, to count. You're a computer guy, right? Surely you've heard of counting? You know, onesies, twosies, threesies... Then you come back to the dock with the same number of divers that you put to sea with, or figure out why the number is different. Signature"We're going to rush the hijackers." -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 > ? And if they followd standard practices of a roll call, and another diver > ? answere dfor the person, then they did what they could to assure that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You're a computer guy, right? Yep. > Surely you've heard of counting? > > You know, onesies, twosies, threesies... > > Then you come back to the dock with the same number of divers that you > put to sea with, or figure out why the number is different. And they did catch the error at the second site. Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? Dennis Dennis (Icarus) wrote: > > ? And if they followd standard practices of a roll call, and another diver > > ? answere dfor the person, then they did what they could to assure that [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > And they did catch the error at the second site. how many miles and minutes away? > Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "We're going to rush the hijackers." > > -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 IOn Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:33:07 -0800, Crownfield <Crownfield@cox.net> wrote: >Dennis (Icarus) wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >> > "We're going to rush the hijackers." >> > -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 I really think how many minutes and how far away is irellevent. The fact is the boat crew didn't even count heads. Very irresponsible if you ask me. And to the other point, of course Greg is against the law suit, it isn't his, no slop going in his trough. > IOn Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:33:07 -0800, Crownfield <Crownfield@cox.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > >> > -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 > I really think how many minutes and how far away is irellevent. I disagree. if they caught their error within 5 minutes, or 500 feet, rather than 10 miles and 90 minutes later, I would understand it. > The > fact is the boat crew didn't even count heads. Very irresponsible if > you ask me. And to the other point, of course Greg is against the law > suit, it isn't his, no slop going in his trough. >> IOn Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:33:07 -0800, Crownfield <Crownfield@cox.net> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> you ask me. And to the other point, of course Greg is against the law >> suit, it isn't his, no slop going in his trough. But in the context of this discussion the diver was in the water 4 hours. > Dennis (Icarus) wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > how many miles and minutes away? pribably an hour and, if I recall the article, 7 miles away. Mistakes do happen - is it worth $4,000,000.00? Dennis > > Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > "We're going to rush the hijackers." > > > -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 > pribably an hour and, if I recall the article, 7 miles away. > Mistakes do happen - is it worth $4,000,000.00? Is a grown-up little-leaguer worth $4,000,000 a year to bat at little white balls? > > pribably an hour and, if I recall the article, 7 miles away. > > Mistakes do happen - is it worth $4,000,000.00? > > Is a grown-up little-leaguer worth $4,000,000 a year to bat at little white > balls? If the grown up little leaguer (along with the others) can get enough folks willing to pay enough Sure. Heck, if I could fill a stadium with 50,000 each paying, say, 35.00 on average 75 times a year to watch me program..... Dennis > > pribably an hour and, if I recall the article, 7 miles away. > > Mistakes do happen - is it worth $4,000,000.00? > > Is a grown-up little-leaguer worth $4,000,000 a year to bat at little white > balls? Sure mistakes happen and this one ended well. Still one has to wonder how much the family would have launched a suit for, had it not ended so well. > Sure mistakes happen and this one ended well. Still one has to wonder how > much the family would have launched a suit for, had it not ended so well. I kind of like the present value of his projected income stream over the term of his presumed life. Lee > > Sure mistakes happen and this one ended well. Still one has to wonder how > > much the family would have launched a suit for, had it not ended so well. > > I kind of like the present value of his projected income stream over the > term of his presumed life. Yup, I'd leave out the present value . . . at least other than a starting point. One would assume that his income stream would increase over time. > > > Sure mistakes happen and this one ended well. Still one has to wonder > > > how much the family would have > > > launched a suit for, had it not ended so well. >> I kind of like the present value of his projected income stream over the >> term of his presumed life. > Yup, I'd leave out the present value . . . at least other than a starting > point. One would assume that his income stream would increase over time. We suffer from differing context. Present value does not refer to his current income. Present value takes all projected income, including anticipated increases, applies some presumed of interest rate(s) and discounts everything to the current period. It's the current value of a future stream of income. It's the reverse of what happens with a loan. You borrow $100,000 (present value) and pay it back via a stream of future payments at either a fixed or a variable interest rate. You can take the projected stream and rates and work it in reverse. Present value is a normal part of settlements to compensate for future income streams, broken contracts, you name it. Adjustments for assumptions about the future that prove inaccurate can be included, as they often are in alimony agreements, but aren't particularly common for most lump sum settlements. Lee >>pribably an hour and, if I recall the article, 7 miles away. >>Mistakes do happen - is it worth $4,000,000.00? > > Is a grown-up little-leaguer worth $4,000,000 a year to bat at little white > balls? he take a pay cut? Just imagine Roger Clement getting $1M a victory. owners crying bankruptcy then giving out $1B, yes $1b in new salaries and arbitration. Wonder if any of them have guns! > Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? That's not what the four million is about, and you know it. The boat, the "captain" and the DM will never pay four million. It's about putting that boat, "captain" and dive "master" on the beach, permanently, and replacing them with people who won't leave divers at sea. And that's certainly worth it. Signature"We're going to rush the hijackers." -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 > It's about putting that boat, "captain" and dive "master" on the beach, > permanently, and replacing them with people who won't leave divers at > sea. One would not think that it would be rocket science to ensure that the number of divers that were on the boat *before* the dive equaled the number *after* the dive... I could understand if there were a lot of boats at the dive site and you didn't leave with the exact same group of divers that you started with, but as long as each of the boats retrieves the same number they started with, it's a minor inconvenience for the diver at worst... I remember once on the Nimitz, we had a pilot who inspecting his tail hook one night and didn't realize that his aircraft was parked TOW (Tail Over Water)... He took a step and all of a sudden, there is no flight deck underneath him anymore... He bounced off the catwalk and landed flat on his back -- about an 85 ft drop... Luckily, someone saw him fall overboard... The called "man overboard" and everyone is supposed to muster / check-in with their group / division... Turns out that no one was missing... One of the other pilots had said that he had saw him down on the mess deck a few minutes ago... Everyone goes back to their bunk, gets nearly back to sleep and "man overboard" called again... Same routine... After the THIRD time this occurs and there is still no one missing of the 6000 personnel that are supposed to be aboard, they call it a FOURTH time and require EVERYONE to physically go to their group / division... Finally they figured out who was missing... Of course, they are searching for this guy the whole time, but carriers don't exactly turn around all that quick... The launched the helos, but it's a big ocean and a dark night... > ? Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And that's certainly worth it. Then just have the coast guard do it. They can permanently revoke the license. Dennis > Then just have the coast guard do it. They can permanently revoke the > license. They can't take his boat. They can't take his gear. They can't make in impossible for him to run a boat, they can only make it illegal. Four million will make it very close to financially impossible. Signature"We're going to rush the hijackers." -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 >> ? Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Dennis I think he should be allowed to work, just make bigger insurance payments. Why take his livelihood away just because of a mistake? Adam > >> ? Mistakes happen. Is it worth 4,000,000? > >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I think he should be allowed to work, just make bigger insurance payments. Why take Ask J6 - after all he's the one who wants the chap on the beach permanently. As for the bigger insuranc epremiums, he alone would not be paying the higher cost. Insurance cost would go up for the customer base. > his livelihood away just because of a mistake? Dennis > Adam "Dennis (Icarus)" wrote > Ask J6 - after all he's the one who wants the chap on the beach > permanently. > As for the bigger insuranc epremiums, he alone would not be paying the > higher cost. Insurance cost would go up for the customer base. The auto insurance industry doesn't have a problem charging people more when they've had accidents. The home insurance industry does not have a problem charging people more if they live where hurricanes are considered a normal part of life. The medical insurance industry doesn't have a problem canceling insurance for those who have used it. Why would the dive insurance industry have problems charging more to somebody who cost them $4,000,000 plus costs? Lee > "Dennis (Icarus)" wrote > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > insurance industry have problems charging more to somebody who cost them > $4,000,000 plus costs? Would he be alone in paying the increased premiums? Nah. It'd be spread out over the customer base. Everyone'd pay more. Dennis > Lee > I think he should be allowed to work, just make bigger insurance > payments. Why take his livelihood away just because of a mistake? Because of the line of Captains behind him who WON'T make that particular mistake. No one's taking his "livelihood" away, Adam. He can make a living. Just not running a dive boat. The notion that one has to do what one has always done is as foolish as the notion that we should buy American. Or Green. Or whatever the flavor of the month is. "We can't take his livelihood away! He's a great teacher, and he only hurt one little girl..." Signature"We're going to rush the hijackers." -Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001 >>> It's about putting that boat, "captain" and dive "master" on the beach, >>> permanently, and replacing them with people who won't leave divers at [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I think he should be allowed to work, just make bigger insurance payments. > Why take his livelihood away just because of a mistake? I think he should be allowed to work too, just not as a captain or dive master. He has no right to his profession and every right to be fired should he fail to perform adequately. That's how life is. Lee >>>> It's about putting that boat, "captain" and dive "master" on the beach, >>>> permanently, and replacing them with people who won't leave divers at [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Lee It's like a doctor who makes a mistake and loses a lawsuit. Usually the lawsuit is recorded in his record, he pays a higher premium and is allowed to practice. The same is true for a driver, even a professional driver who makes a mistake and has an accident. It's also true of life that no one is perfect and we all make mistakes. Even the wise men of the bible made mistakes. Adam > It's like a doctor who makes a mistake and loses a lawsuit. Usually the > lawsuit is recorded in his record, he pays a higher premium and is allowed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > It's also true of life that no one is perfect and we all make mistakes. > Even the wise men of the bible made mistakes. There are mistakes and then there are mistakes. A captain who leaves a diver at sea without knowing it has failed the fundamental element of his contract. As for doctor's making mistakes, I think any doctor, or lawyer, or any other highly paid professional that makes such a fundamental mistake should also have his license revoked. We pay these people a lot of money specifically because they are expected to have the skills, knowledge and dedication not to make such mistakes. I suppose, however, there is an alternative to depriving them of their livelihood. Let's call it an eye for an eye. First, they must pay the victim the same fee that the victim paid them. They could then be taken back out to the same location, chucked over the side and left behind. If they get back, all is forgiven. Bet they wouldn't make that mistake more than once. Lee PS: There's only been one perfect man and there's never been a perfect woman. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message