Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

Subject: Re: Tragic technicaldiving
To: dlv@ga*.ne* (Dan Volker)
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 1998 09:29:41 -0500 (EST)
Cc: techdiver@aquanaut.com (techdiver)
From: zimmmt@au*.al*.co* (Mike Zimmerman)
> That's right. I trained for it, they didn't.

Ah, but that is your self-assessment.  Maybe they also think they have 
trained... 

Again, freedom includes the right to be wrong.

> I'm going to be relatively safe on a 250 foot dive. The 300 pound slob with
> no cardio training, will be at an enormous risk

You forgot the part about beer-guzzling and pot-smoking..

> Sure you can take risks. But there are "risks", and there is absolute
> stupidity.

Not in any absolute sense.  While you and I may actually agree much
on what we would each call a reasonable risk and what we we
both call stupidity, we disagree on what to do when we think something
is stupidity.  I fervently believe you can do no more than advise and warn,
after that it is up to the person making the choice to do the activity.

I'm not here to be the "stupid police", and Dan neither are you.

> You owe it to your family NOT to do things that are ABSOLUTELY
> STUPID AND SUICIDAL. This includes the 300 pound diver who is 5 foot, 8
> inches tall, and all fat with no cardio----he would be ABSOLUTELY STUPID AND
> SUICIDAL, if he attempted to go on a 300 foot deep dive for 20 minutes

In calm, wam waters, with plenty of deco gas.  Trivial dive, no, but
while his deco obligation might be greatly increased over you, I think
categorically calling it "suicidal" is just a bit of hyperbole.

> very same profile Guys like George Irvine and Bill Mee have done a hundred
> times without ANY incidents. The RISK is entirely different. The social
> implications of the activcity are entirely different for the two classes of
> divers. And they are SEPARATE CLASSES. THEY ARE NOT EQUAL.

They are on other ends of a scale perhaps, the scale of "risk level", but
it is ONE scale.

>  This has nothing
> to do with their value as a person--which of course, would be equal.

:-)

> Clearly you do not understand differences in ability levels between people,
> with their attendent safety differences. Kids should be allowed to snow ski
> and white water kayak---but they should not be allowed to ski down Mount
> Everst, and they should not be allowed to try to kayak down the Niagra Gorge
> in the class 7, 30 foot standing waves. 

Hey I don't think they should either, but then I'm not the one here who
would recommend arresting the parents next door if they decided differently
for their kids.  Again its their right to be able to make bad choices.

If Granny wants to ski Everest, well good luck to her.  Maybe she'll
ski past Mr. Robinson with his tent pitched on that slippery slope,
I dunno.  

> >This isn't about whether activities are risky or not, or if certain
> >people should do them or not, its about you thinking its ok to impose
> >your judgement upon them and trying to defend that stance.
> 
> Mike, your dead wrong. And if people listen to you, some will die. If they
> listen to me, fewer will die.

Sorry Dan, you are the one who is wrong.  Everyone dies, period.  The
question is how you want to spend the time while you are living...
making your own choices and taking responsibility for yourself, or
living safely, subject to Dan-the-risk-minimizer telling you
whether you can do this or can't do that.

>  And again, you're being melodramatic,

WHAT, hyperbole on techdiver?????? NEVER.  Sorry Dan ol boy, you guys
down in Fla started the hyperbole. 

A lot of (very) good knowledge came onto the lists from Fla in the past 3
years, but the exaggeration factor from hell came with it.  Everyone now who 
does something just outside what is considered "ok" is automatically a
pot-smoking, beer guzzling, FAS, force-fin wearing, overweight 1000lb slob, who 
stuffs their hose.  And everyone that dies diving was wearing bondage wings and 
breathes air to 300' out of a 20' stuffed hose.  That is all that
is said now, and people stopped questioning things b/c you can't without
getting torn up in response.  Someone just posted a note about someone dying
b/c of DEEP AIR, saying only that there was a stuck inflator at 150'.  Ok
maybe(?) mix would have given them more clear-headedness to survive?  Or
was the inflator stuck "on", and how the heck was mix going to
help then?  The death was blamed on "deep air", with no explanation
given... how the heck does that help anyone learn?  then again, with the
way things are now, its not surprising that someone wasn't diving mix at
150', there are too many hoops to jump thru to get the certification.

The hyperbole serves no productive purpose, except to muddy dialogue
and prevent anyone from challenging a position in a effort to learn.

If you are proposing an end to such tactics, then I accept :-)

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.


Mike
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]