Drinking and Boating

Art said:

Stoners drive slower!

Click to expand...

I had a friend who would sometimes "do a bowl". He had a Winnebago motor home, and enjoyed blue grass festivals. He had been to one down on the coast, and a NC Trooper stopped him on US 70 somewhere between MC and New Bern.
My friend said to the trooper, "what's the problem officer. I was not speeding".

The officer responded, "No you weren't, son. You were doing 15 mph".

If you know someone has been drinking heavily and then decides to take his/her boat for a spin...contact the authorities and get that individual arrested. Same for drinkers who are clearly intoxicated at 2 AM and depart the slip at 8AM. Same for owners who boast that they regularly drink while driving their boats.

skidgear said:

If you know someone has been drinking heavily and then decides to take his/her boat for a spin...contact the authorities and get that individual arrested. Same for drinkers who are clearly intoxicated at 2 AM and depart the slip at 8AM. Same for owners who boast that they regularly drink while driving their boats.

Click to expand...

"F" em - Cuff em Dano!

BandB said:

We're presented with the picture of the person who occasionally shares a joint with a friend. But that's not what we see. We see those who abuse it.

Click to expand...

And that's because it's still a federal crime. What is not seen are the millions or responsible users who lead normal, productive lives and keep their weed use under wraps. I expect that within our lifetimes the weed prohibition will end and these people will come out of the closet. And they will continue to lead normal, productive lives.

Some people cannot handle their alcohol, weed or for that matter, prescription drugs. It's not the intoxicant that's the issue. It's the irresponsible screw-ups that are used as examples/excuses by the busybodies who want to tell everyone else how to live their lives.

"I" won't drink and drive or command a boat. But if others choose to do so, well, that's their choice and they have to accept any consequences that go along with it. But I try my best not to tell others what they can and can't do.

BaltimoreLurker said:

............. But I try my best not to tell others what they can and can't do.

Click to expand...

The problem is, and this is what this thread is all about, sometimes what others chose to do can endanger us. If you want to drink, smoke, whatever and it's no danger to others, fine. If it is a danger to others, not fine.

rwidman said:

As a former performing musician (bars, clubs, dances, etc.) I have a lot of experience dealing with drinkers and drug users. I used to comment about a guitar player I had that he took medicine to allow him to hear sounds that other folks couldn't hear.

The practical difference between alcohol and drugs - Alcohol takes a while to consume and have an effect. Drugs can have an almost immediate effect.

Put another way, someone drinking alcohol will go from sober to impaired to more impaired and to drunk over a period of time. Someone taking drugs can be fine one minute and out of his/her mind the next.

Recreational drug use while operating a boat is no better or different than drinking alcohol.

It's also possible to have your boat impounded if illegal drugs are found on it even if they aren't yours.

Click to expand...

Each drug has a very different effect and timing. Some immediate. Some build like alcohol with more consumption. Some take a few minutes and they often are the most dangerous as for 20 minutes the person thinks nothing is happening so keeps consuming. Prescription narcotics taken as pills are time release. Ground, they are instant. They also react differently each time and on different people. One huge problem is that you don't know what you're getting. May come as a shock but the FDA isn't overseeing these "pharmaceuticals." Best example is Ecstasy. It once was a legal drug and the danger is quite minimal. However, MDMA (Ecstasy) is more expensive to producers than other drugs. So toss in everything from B-12 to Meth to Speed to Acid, maybe even others for good measure. Their ethics are often questionable. So no one has any idea what they're getting unless they have test equipment to check it out. Yes, there are kits out there to test purity and while I'm not encouraging use of ecstasy, if anyone plans to they better get a kit. And the synthetic imitation drugs are even worse. One time nothing and the next time wild hallucinations, hospital, death. Then those using Adderall as speed, xanax as a downer, ambien, you name it.

Yes, the things that can happen to your boat if they find someone hid one joint in a cabin. They've been known to be quite destructive in their search for more. Drugs on a boat are serious trouble. And any of you who think none of your friends would ever use anything, think again. You don't know.

SaltyDog said:

It is worth keeping up with this thread just to see Janice's aphorisms.

Click to expand...

Why thank you SaltyDog. I've been collecting aphorisms for a long time. There's even a page on my website devoted to Aphorisms.

Janice aboard Seaweed's Aphorism Collection

I know it's probably a weird thing to collect. Decades ago I had a cigar box filled with those blurbs from Reader's Digest, New Yorker cartoons, and articles that interested me. I still have them, except they are now in home-made books.

The Kidlet has them. It is easier to tell children (mine) something second hand. For instance one piece told them what to do if they were ever in a vehicle with someone inebriated or driving recklessly. Instead of saying "slow down" the article advised them to say they were sick and going to throw up -- thus the driver would stop and they could get out.

Simple enough advice, but how often would a drunk pull over if you say "slow down"? Let them think you're going to vomit in the vehicle and the brakes will go on immediately!

As for a way to stop a drunk running a boat in an imprudent manner, I suspect the same warning of impending sickness would have a similar effect.

***********

One thing I did do in this area is get the phone number for the FWC (Fish & Wildlife -- basically Florida's water cops) ... if I see you acting like an idiot I WILL CALL.

As a soloist I don't know that I would make a call on the VHF -- but a simple phone call? In a heartbeat.

BaltimoreLurker said:

And that's because it's still a federal crime. What is not seen are the millions or responsible users who lead normal, productive lives and keep their weed use under wraps. I expect that within our lifetimes the weed prohibition will end and these people will come out of the closet. And they will continue to lead normal, productive lives.

Some people cannot handle their alcohol, weed or for that matter, prescription drugs. It's not the intoxicant that's the issue. It's the irresponsible screw-ups that are used as examples/excuses by the busybodies who want to tell everyone else how to live their lives.

"I" won't drink and drive or command a boat. But if others choose to do so, well, that's their choice and they have to accept any consequences that go along with it. But I try my best not to tell others what they can and can't do.

Click to expand...

I don't care how much weed anyone uses, just don't want them driving a car or boat on it.

And yes we do have a right to tell others what not to do when it endangers us or others. I have a definite right to say I don't want anyone driving a car in Florida over a .08 alcohol level. That's the law. I'd like to say .05 but I don't by law have that right. And when it's my boat or my car I can definitely tell them what to do. It's not enough to say if someone wants to use or drink it's their choice and they have to accept any consequences. Because there are some they can't accept. They kill a mother and three children, they don't suffer the real consequences, the father does. The consequences fall to the one losing their family. As long as it doesn't endanger me I don't tell others what to do. But the moment it does, I will tell them. I'll accept the legal guidelines however, even if I wish I could go further. I know people who have lost family and friends and I sure wish someone had told the driver then not to.

I have friends over to my house who drink. We even have parties. But before their first drink they give up their keys. They are locked up. If I'm serving you alcohol you will not drive. I'll get you a taxi or a limo or you can stay at our house. Don't like the rules of my house, don't come. Our friends are fine with them. The other night a friend opened a bottle of champagne, handed me her keys, drank a glass and said, well now you're officially stuck with me for the night.

There's a problem. We don't drink the most of any country. But we do have the most deaths per capita caused by alcohol and driving of any country.

rwidman said:

The problem is, and this is what this thread is all about, sometimes what others chose to do can endanger us. If you want to drink, smoke, whatever and it's no danger to others, fine. If it is a danger to others, not fine.

Click to expand...

Agree 100%. And that's what I was getting at with, "... that's their choice and they have to accept any consequences that go along with it ... "

And those consequences could be enormous.

BandB said:

I don't care how much weed anyone uses, just don't want them driving a car or boat on it.

And yes we do have a right to tell others what not to do when it endangers us or others. I have a definite right to say I don't want anyone driving a car in Florida over a .08 alcohol level. That's the law. I'd like to say .05 but I don't by law have that right. And when it's my boat or my car I can definitely tell them what to do.

Click to expand...

We're mostly in agreement. As in; no, you can't drive my car or boat if you're drinking or smoking.

Where we may disagree is on where do we draw the line? You mention .08 BAC vs. .05 BAC. Why not .01 BAC? Or, 1.0 BAC?

How about large sodas, trans fats and cigarettes? Society pays the costs for the obese and cancer ridden through higher medical costs that get transferred to the responsible, health conscious population.

Everything we do has risks associated with it. I want to make the decisions on how much risk I'm willing to take, I don't want others doing it for me.

I'll admit that I don't have answers. So therefore I don't tell other people what to do, unless they are members of my immediate family or close friends, in which case I feel obligated to do so. Everyone else - carry on.

But as someone mentioned earlier - if you cause me pain through your irresponsibility, it will be a dark day for you. And I expect no kinder treatment if I cause a disaster.

BaltimoreLurker said:

We're mostly in agreement. As in; no, you can't drive my car or boat if you're drinking or smoking.

Where we may disagree is on where do we draw the line? You mention .08 BAC vs. .05 BAC. Why not .01 BAC? Or, 1.0 BAC?

How about large sodas, trans fats and cigarettes? Society pays the costs for the obese and cancer ridden through higher medical costs that get transferred to the responsible, health conscious population.

Everything we do has risks associated with it. I want to make the decisions on how much risk I'm willing to take, I don't want others doing it for me.

I'll admit that I don't have answers. So therefore I don't tell other people what to do, unless they are members of my immediate family or close friends, in which case I feel obligated to do so. Everyone else - carry on.

But as someone mentioned earlier - if you cause me pain through your irresponsibility, it will be a dark day for you. And I expect no kinder treatment if I cause a disaster.

Click to expand...

I draw the line where the law does at .08. I personally think it should be .05, but I accept whatever the law is for the given area.

I still think you're missing something though. It doesn't matter how much the one being irresponsible suffers, it in no way reduces the suffering of the innocent. I do and will continue to tell people not to operate under the influence and that includes prescription drugs. If you've had no sleep, don't. But the only thing I can really do is tell them to follow the law.

And sodas don't affect me, although I don't drink them. Trans fat doesn't either. Cigarettes do and you better not try smoking one next to me where it's not legal nor on my property or boat. Now one other very odd thing not allowed in my office, house or on my boat. Oranges. Yes, they are legal. But I've so very very very very allergic that if someone peels one in the room I'm in, it's immediate drugs and getting out. Fortunately all those around me are aware and respectful. I hate having to impose that one but I have no choice. Throat immediately starts closing, congestion, 103-104 degree fever within 20 minutes.

My wife and I were driving along a country road and it became clear the car in front of us was a drunken driver or somehow impaired. She called highway patrol and they got the road closed from the other direction before the car coming up behind him got to him. He proceeded to drive in the wrong lane, back across then shot all the way across. Yes, we made it our business. The patrolman said we probably saved lives. I don't know that. But I sure know if we'd done nothing and there had been a horrible crash I would have felt responsible. Oh, he was at .28.

So I take it allergy medicines such as Benadryl are forbidden too?
How about heavy caffeine such as Red Bull or several cups of strong coffee or a few Mountain Dews?

SaltyDog says:
[It is worth keeping up with this thread just to see Janice's aphorisms.

CanI we all drink to that................responsibly?]

By the way, I take this opportunity to propose a new title from TF to Janice:
Philosopher
A thread without Janice’s opinion is empty of brilliance

sunchaser said:

The mood of the country is now legislated that getting stoned is OK no matter what the consequences. But my goodness lets not drink to one's definition of excess.

Click to expand...

Nicely put.

Marinas had better take a look at their liability regarding drinking/toking in/on shared spaces...including shared docks.

I missed the beginning of the thread ..but in Canada there is zero tolerance...no drinking on board by the captain or the crew or even the passenger... no one while cruising.. and I applaud that!

Delia Rosa said:

I missed the beginning of the thread ..but in Canada there is zero tolerance...no drinking on board by the captain or the crew or even the passenger... no one while cruising.. and I applaud that!

Click to expand...

There's no drinking prohibition for passengers on cruise ships.

You are correct about cruise ships
(cash pasenngers)... but any one else is subject to the rules!

I sure am glad I get so much guidance here on how to live my life though I have not created even the symbol of a threat to others. Now, just as for "those" that feel they should control others lives including the relationship of women with their Dr's involving a woman's control over their own bodies, are you in the same room? What ever happened to mind your own fkin business? I live my life, I leave others alone to live their lives, what ever happened to live and let live??? Leave me alone and I will do the same.

Mule said:

What ever happened to mind your own fkin business? I live my life, I leave others alone to live their lives, what ever happened to live and let live??? Leave me alone and I will do the same.

Click to expand...

I don't think most of the people in this discussion are denying you the right to live your life the way you want. What they (and I) are saying, is that you have no right to live your life in such a way that it endangers them, their families, friends, etc.

Speaking strictly for myself, if you choose to drink while you drive your boat, and you get run over by a tanker or slam into a tow cable between a tug and its barge and get chopped up into crab bait by the tanker's prop or drown when your boat comes apart on the towline, I am not going to care one whit. Af far as I'm concerned, you will have just added more proof to the fact that Chuck Darwin knew what he was writing about.

But if you endanger someone else's ability to live their life the way they want, then we've got a problem.

Are you okay with an impaired boater slamming into your boat as has happened to some of the posters on this thread? Are you okay with an impaired driver swerving across the median and hitting you or your family going the other way and killing or injuring some or most of them?

You can't have it both ways.

That, I believe, is where the proponents on this thread of no alcohol use before or while operating a vessel are coming from. Ron and the others have made it very clear that they are NOT suggesting that their own feelings about alcohol use in general should apply to everyone else. Only as it applies to being a potential threat to themselves or others.

If you choose to do something stupid and kill yourself I'm going to say good riddance, but I'm certainly not going to lift a finger to prevent you from doing it. But whatever stupid things you choose to do, don't involve or affect anyone else in the process, particularly people who are simply minding THEIR own business.

I went out yesterday with a sailboater, 38 ft. about 3 hours. Went into the Atlantic, 90+ degrees. We each consumed 3beers each. At no time did I feel he was impaired.. I know I was not. The reflex time concerned me though at the blazing speed, under sail at 4 knots....get a grip people... BTW, he docked his boat w/o a hitch in a crowded small slip. The temperance women with axes of pre prohibition I thought went away..... I was wrong...

BandB said:

I draw the line where the law does at .08. I personally think it should be .05, but I accept whatever the law is for the given area.
My wife and I were driving along a country road and it became clear the car in front of us was a drunken driver or somehow impaired. She called highway patrol and they got the road closed from the other direction before the car coming up behind him got to him..... he was at .28.

Click to expand...

In NSW, Australia it is .05, on the road or a boat. Around .3 you can be in real trouble, driving or not, unless an "experienced" regular/constant drinker.

It has been my observation over many years that people who most vehemently defend unintelligent behavior are, for the most part, trying to rationalize their own inability to differentiate between intelligent and unintelligent behavior.

Marin said:

But if you endanger someone else's ability to live their life the way they want, then we've got a problem.
Are you okay with an impaired boater slamming into your boat as has happened to some of the posters on this thread? Are you okay with an impaired driver swerving across the median and hitting you or your family going the other way and killing or injuring some or most of them?

Click to expand...

That IMO, nails it. In this situation, personal freedom reaches its limit when it adversely affects others. If you won`t or can`t apply that limit, someone or something else has to, in this case the law, as best it can. If citizens can assist by alerting authorities, they should, to help avert real and present potential danger to fellow man.
If that has not got through by now to those opposed to restrictions on drinking and boating, it will never get through.

Marin said:

It has been my observation over many years that people who most vehemently defend unintelligent behavior are, for the most part, trying to rationalize their own inability to differentiate between intelligent and unintelligent behavior.

Click to expand...

And who gets to define what "intelligent" means?

caltexflanc said:

And who gets to define what "intelligent" means?

Click to expand...

The people who don't have to defend not knowing.

Seems to me that this thread has gone from the rational (Ron's original post) to the silly (this post). Perhaps it's time for the moderators to step in and put a bullet in its head....

caltexflanc said:

So all you zero tolerance types think Richard on Dauntless is a lousy, irresponsible boater, failing Marin's standards of credibility for seamanship?

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the fact he has wine on board and it sounds like he is having a drink from time to time?

BandB said:

I draw the line where the law does at .08. I personally think it should be .05, but I accept whatever the law is for the given area.

Click to expand...

Who else feels it's ok then to also have one or three beers, and drive in broad daylight at 7 mph??

caltexflanc said:

And who gets to define what "intelligent" means?

Click to expand...

You do. Go for it.

We seem to have diverted from, BUI or not, to defining "intelligent". Anyone interested has contributed more than once, differing ideas are well established, and it is getting snarkey. Time Gentlemen, Time.