Quote:

---

This is really about the role of rules in managing risk.
<snip>
Guidelines are better than rules.

---

Sure.

A good example in support of my previous comment about 'safety' being the rationale often used by authorities to impose restrictive legislation, is the case of Sven Yrvind (Lundin), who had sailed his small boat BRIS across the Atlantic and even around Cape Horn, only to be told on his arrival in Canada that his boat was considered too small to be seaworthy (i.e. a safety issue), and he was forced to transport his boat into the USA by road in order to continue his journey.

I can understand an antagonistic attitude towards wholesale irresponsible behaviour - especially if the rescue services are likely to be involved. But when the seaworthiness of a craft has been amply demonstrated along with the seamanship of it's skipper, then I really can't see any justification for such prohibition.
Providing a skipper is prepared to sign a disclaimer - accepting full responsibility for his (or her !) actions, then one ought to be granted the basic human right to risk injury or death - providing of course that this doesn't impinge on anyone else's right to safety and security in the process.
Isn't this right automatically granted to mountain climbers, pot-holers, hang-glider pilots, free-fall parachutists and the like ?

Colin

Post Extras