[ Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Mike Spears
Category: Shipwreck Research
Date: 23 Oct 2007
Time: 00:05:47
Remote Name: 67.38.31.22
Tim - I think you're getting a little too emotional on this one. I support Ric Mixter's comments. If I understand you correctly, you've made an unqualified "blanket" statement that whoever sinks a vessel, or ultimately the State, is responsible for any and all injuries that may happen with regard to the vessel after the sinking. I totally disagree. Noone is asking anyone to dive a wreck whether or not the sinking was intentional. It is the diver who makes the decision to dive a wreck, in an of his own free will and the diver assumes all responsibility for whatever may happen, good or bad. I do agree that with an intentional sinking, that whomever sinks the vessel for divers must adhere to "due care" with regard to those few forseeable potential accidents or issues - but nothing more. A diver is also responsible to adhere to "due care" to prepare himself or herself for any and all forseeable risks that may result from the dive. Failure to do so is not someone else's fault.
A diver makes his or her dives at their own risk. Divers are responsible for their own safety. Almost all potential diving accidents on a wreck site are forseeable for the diver, himself. INDIVIDUAL DIVERS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO PREPARE THEMSELVES FOR FORSEEABLE RISKS TO THEMSELVES. THIS IS NOT THE STATE OR ANYONE ELSE's RESPONSIBILITY!!!!
For example, it is forseeable that a diver could penetrate a wreck, stir up silt, get lost and run out of air. Is this somenone else's fault? I don't think so!!!!!
It is forseeable that a diver could mismanage his air supply in some other fashion and run out of air prematurely. It is forseeable that there could be equipment malfunctions or that the diver could exceed his capablilities on a given dive. If an accident happens, Who's fault is this????
Many wrecks have other confined spaces, obstacles or other hazards that could cause a diver to get hung-up and create potential for injury or death. In virtually all cases, this type accident is forseeable for the diver, before the dive. If an accident should result because the diver fails to forsee these risks , again, I say it is the diver's fault.
If there are fishnets on the wreck being dove, the diver had better have EMT Scissors or whatever is required to cut himself loose, should an unplanned entanglement occur. It his his or her problem not the original owner's or the State's, should he or she be injured or killed, as a result of such an incident. When diving a wreck, if is certainly forseeable that one could become entangled with fishnets for fishlines.
The diver must prepare himself beforehand for those forseeable consequences of the dive. and should he or she fail to do so, it is not the responsibility of the original owner or the State. It is TOTALLY the responsiblity of the diver.
It seems to me, Tim, that you are advocating a totally unacceptable precident. We, the taxpayers, can't afford to pay for everyone's accidents, especially those where the diver fails to exercise "due care" himself or even where the diver is clearly negligant. John V's comment regarding self-regulation is quite appropriate, here.