Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
dan
you know a few years ago there were a few people who wanted to dive on a
wreck. the wreck was under the control of a government office & there
attitude was that:
no diver could :dive to those depths safely without the use of surface supply
or inside a sub". they also would not let anyone dive to those depths on air.
***********NOW DON'T GET INTO A SNIT JUST YET- I AM NOT GOING TO ADVOCATE DEEP
AIR DIVES HERE I AM JUST RELATING A HISTORY LSSON TO YOU********
they finaly lost there case & the judges remarks were quite interesting
he quoted a statement from the Idaho law review in his decision
"a venturesome minority will always be eager to get off
on there own, and no obsticles should be placed
in there path; let them take risks, for godsake, let
them get lost,sunburnt,stranded,drowned,eaten by
bears,buried alive under avalanches.
--that is the right and privilege of any free amewrican."
the wreck was the monitor the decision allowed Gary Gentile to defeat the
federal governments attempt to control the way & where we dive. i find it
intersting that you seem to think it's okay to control what people do using
what you and some others find as "appropriate'' rule of behavior.
just a few cents fro the sidelines
hank
In a message dated 98-02-25 12:32:01 EST, you write:
<< Subj: Re: Divers Supply, IANTD, Tom Mount and tragic technicaldiving
-Reply
Date: 98-02-25 12:32:01 EST
From: dlv@ga*.ne* (Dan Volker)
To: zimmmt@au*.al*.co*, techdiver@aq*.co* (techdiver)
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Zimmerman <zimmmt@au*.al*.co*>
To: techdiver <techdiver@aq*.co*>
Date: Wednesday, February 25, 1998 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: Divers Supply, IANTD, Tom Mount and tragic
technicaldiving -Reply
>> apparently tried to go back down to save Andre, who was NOT fit.). You
may
>> feel its the right of an obese diver without aerobic fitness to dive
deep,
>> but IF WE KNOW HIS CHANCES OF DEATH ARE EXPONENTIALLY GREATER than that
of a
>
>It doesn't matter what WE know, it matters what HE knows. If HE knows
>of the added risk and still chooses to push forward that is HIS decision.
>
>Who are YOU to decide what risk level is too much. The risk of divers
>in general is EXPONENTIALLY GREATER than those who stay on land to
>play golf. Should someone come along and tell us we can't dive
>at all? Or should we be grown-ups and let those involved decide
>what risk level they choose to assume?
>
>> fit diver, then is it RIGHT to endorse his potentially suicidal choice by
>> certifying him???
>
>It is not your RIGHT to play big brother, only an advisor.
>
>> And is it right to allow him to be lost to his wife and
>> children, just because he wanted to "prove" he could do something. And
if
>
>Talking in general here, you seem to be saying that a fit diver can
>get certified b/c they want to progress, but an unfit diver only
>wants the certification to "prove" something?
>
>As I've said before (in rec.scuba), caring about people is a damn worthy
>and laudable trait, but part of that caring means not trampling their
>rights to make decisions for themselves. Make them aware of the risks,
then
>make them aware again. After that its up to them. You either respect the
idea
>of personal repsonsbility, or you decide people can't handle it, and thus
>are not responsible for themselves. Frankly I can't endorse the latter
even
>though we see it every day. The only way to encourage the former is
>to demand it and accept nothing less. If you want people to be responsible
>for themselves then you have to let them do it, not keep stepping into
>their lives and trying to make their decisions for them.
>
>
>Mike
Mike,
All I'm really doing is adding one more training aspect to the
certification. I imagine you will agree that EVERY new diver should be
"forced" to go through a "training class" and "training dives" to ultimately
be granted the certification----your opinion above could be taken out of
context, to imply the "personal Freedom" loving divers want to have their
deep certification cards mailed to them, and they don't feel they should
have to learn any skills, any information, or demonstrate any ability---it
is simply their right to dive deep if they want, and IANTD or TDI ought to
just mail them a card if they pay for it.
I do not think this is what you are suggesting, but it is still related. All
I want to do is add a fitness standard to the skill set that must be
completed. Anyone willing to "train" to become a tech diver, should be able
to accomplish the minimum fitness standards, if they want to tech dive bad
enough. The ONLY divers that will get excluded, are the horrible fat slobs
with zero aerobics, no will power to fitness train for their goal, and the
ones that smoke several packs of cigarettes or ounces of pot daily---these
need to be excluded for their fitness failures, or the rampant deaths their
certifications will result in, will cause dive charter boats to equate all
tech diving certification as suspect, and they will deem it unsafe for them
to take tech divers out. Mike, this is ALREADY happening. I can give you
the names of MANY dive boats in Florida who have seen so many deaths, they
will NOT take tech divers out any more. If you don't want to adress this
problem, because of the personal freedoms it conflicts with, you will be
working toward forcing each of us to have to buy their own boat, and dive
with an unskilled crew sitting on our own boat. This will get scary.
Regards,
Dan
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aq*.co*'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aq*.co*'.
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <owner-techdiver@aq*.co*>
Received: from relay19.mail.aol.com (relay19.mail.aol.com [172.31.106.65])
by air08.mail.aol.com (v39.9) with SMTP; Wed, 25 Feb 1998 12:32:01 1900
Received: from bighorn.terra.net (bighorn.terra.net [199.103.128.2])
by relay19.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id MAA13440;
Wed, 25 Feb 1998 12:31:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: (mail@lo*)
by bighorn.terra.net (8.8.6/jr3.8) for
id LAA00829; Wed, 25 Feb 1998 11:02:25 -0500
Precedence: bulk
Errors-To: owner-techdiver@aq*.co*
Received: from bighorn.terra.net (root@lo*)
by bighorn.terra.net (8.8.6/jr3.8) with EXEC for techdiver
id KAA00089; Wed, 25 Feb 1998 10:54:13 -0500
Received: from osage.gate.net (root@os*.ga*.ne* [198.206.134.25])
by bighorn.terra.net (8.8.6/jr3.8) with ESMTP for <techdiver@aq*.co*>
id KAA00073; Wed, 25 Feb 1998 10:54:02 -0500
Received: from gate.net.gate.net (wpbfl3-35.gate.net [199.227.125.226]) by
osage.gate.net (8.8.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA92780; Wed, 25 Feb 1998 10:42:57
-0500
Message-Id: <199802251542.KAA92780@os*.ga*.ne*>
From: "Dan Volker" <dlv@ga*.ne*>
To: <zimmmt@au*.al*.co*>, "techdiver" <techdiver@aq*.co*>
Subject: Re: Divers Supply, IANTD, Tom Mount and tragic technicaldiving
-Reply
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 10:48:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1008.3
X-MimeOle: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE Engine V4.71.1008.3
>>
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]