Okay, this isn't about drinking and driving, BUT...

I have no idea how many hundreds of people that I've arrested for D.U.I.
who've said, "But I wasn't hurting anybody!", or "I would've gotten home
okay!". Sure, they probably/statistically would have. They have in the past
probably dozens or even a hundred times. But impairment does begin with the
first drink, markedly with the third or fourth. The problem is judgment and
primarily reaction time. After two to four drinks, you simply can't react
quickly when that bonehead pulls in front of you at the intersection, or
burns the red light. Because of your slow reaction time you're suddenly
involved in an accident that you perhaps were not instigating, or were not
at fault, but simply could have avoided if you had been sober. Bingo, you're
screwed because you were the one who was drinking.

And of course it takes no rocket scientist to know that the drinker himself
is absolutely the worst judge of whether he is "Good to go" or not.

Deep air is just the same. You'll get away with it probably dozens or even a
hundred times. But perhaps you didn't get enough sleep that night, or
through no fault of your own, you blow an 0-ring, or have any number of
little problems that could crop up, then on top of that you get hung up or
entangled. The little problem that you could take care of even under the
influence, turns into a life-or-death struggle because you couldn't react
quickly or appropriately when the second problem appeared. Now your really
screwed. Instead of just getting in an accident, you die cause you're
underwater.

Why stack the odds against yourself when it's not necessary? Deep air is
STUPID. Drinking and driving is STUPID. Get over it. Nobody has to do stupid
things forever... unless they can't learn because of a disability, or unless
they are just STUPID. : )

Doesn't take a brick to fall on my head.

Scott Gudmundsen
Vernal, Utah




----- Original Message -----
From: Sean M. Cary <smcary@mi*.co*>
To: <bdi@wh*.ne*>; techdiver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 8:58 AM
Subject: Re: deep air death at 40 fathom grotto


> Party On Billy!
>
> :-)
>
> Thanks for the translation btw...Mark was uttering such moronic statements
> that I thought I was reading it wrong...but you clarified it for me!  I
now
> know that we has speaking _Australian_ English...not good old American
> English!  Hence my utter confusion, at the statements that deep air is
safe,
> and a good practice.  Funny is that Big Von still sounds the same no
matter
> what you do to it.
>
> Sean
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <bdi@wh*.ne*>
> To: techdiver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 7:54 PM
> Subject: Re: deep air death at 40 fathom grotto
>
>
> > At 08:35  29/11/99 , mcz wrote:
> > >     Sean, please allow me to respond.
> > >
> > >>The same
> > >>Mark Zurl who states deep air is a good thing, and acceptable, despite
> > >>OVERWHELMING evidence of it dangers...
> > >     I did not say Deep Air was a good thing ... We all recognize the
> advantages
> > >     helium has, but I believe dives to 200feet can be done safely (on
> air).
> >
> > I did not say that driving drunk is a good thing... We all recognise the
> > advantages sobriety has, but I believe driving can be done safely (after
a
> > few drinks).
> >
> > >  There are
> > >     many people in the world who do not have access to helium and
their
> > >     safety record is impressive.  Many dives have been done (maybe
> millions)
> > >     on deep air  before generating a helium table became common
> knowledge
> >
> > There are many people in the world who do not have access to taxis, and
> > their safety record is impressive. Many partygoers  (maybe millions)
> > have driven home while drunk before breathalysers and tough anti
> drink-driving
> > laws became commonplace
> >
> > >and
> > >     the statistics would not indicate that air (to 200') is
compromising
> safety to a large degree.
> >
> > And the statistics would not indicate that drinking (up to, say 4)
before
> > driving is compromising safety to a large degree.
> >
> > >     I was upset when I saw the statement that teaching deep air is
> tantamount
> > >     to murder.  It was irresponsible and slandered individuals who
have
> made
> > >     significant contributions to the industry.  In addition, it was an
> > >     assumption that the recent death was a direct result of the diver
> breathing
> > >     air instead of a helium mixture and this is open for debate.
> >
> > I was upset when I saw the statement that teaching drunk driving is
> tantamount
> > to murder. It was irresponsible and slandered individuals who have made
> > significant contributions to driving. In addition it was an assumption
> that a
> > recent death was a direct result of the drunk driver drinking alcoholic
> beverages
> > rather than soft-drinks and this is open for debate.
> >
> > >    That was an old picture of me when I started doing deeper dives.
> Since
> > >     that time I have embraced many DIR techniques and have improved my
> > >     equipment configuration considerably.  Thanks are in order for all
> those
> > >     who have given us this knowledge.
> > >   All the best,
> > >     Mark Zurl
> >
> >
> > Mark, the part of DIR which you have not yet embraced is
> > possibly the most important one.
> >
> > rgrds            billyw
> >
> > --
> > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>
> --
> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>

--
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]