1943 Navy Dive Suit

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

That's great but the auction listing says: "1943 COMPLETE NAVY DIVING SUIT." and does not mention reproduction anywhere in it's description. I notice it also does not carry a warning such as the site I linked does.

SAFETY WARNING

NEVER, EVER DIVE A HELMET UNLESS YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY SURE IT IS GENUINE AND IN PROPER WORKING CONDITION. Replica helmets are not designed or built for actual use. Attempting to dive a replica helmet could result in serious injury or death. Only dive after you have received the proper training.

 
Don't worry. There is a fine print section on the website. Unfortunately, we live in a world where we need to state the obvious to protect ourselves from crazy lawsuits.
 
I guess part of the "fine" print - if you don't go into the actual T&C's - is that it says " BELL HELMET WHICH IS MARKED U S NAVY DIVING HELMET MARK V. MORSE DIVING EQUIPMENT CO. INC. BOSTON MASS. DATE 8-29-43." - vs claiming the Bell Helmet (and some of the other pieces) are ACTUALLY the diving equipment they are marked as.

I don't think that is about living in a world where need to state the obvious to protect ourselves from crazy lawsuits - I think it's deceptive. If it's a reproduction, "mark" it is as such.

No skin in this game, other than I thought it was neat until I kept reading. Glad there are some people on this forum who can set things straight, if people know enough to research here.
 
Last edited:
Don't worry. There is a fine print section on the website. Unfortunately, we live in a world where we need to state the obvious to protect ourselves from crazy lawsuits.

Please explain how either is different. Both involve someone wanting to make money for something that honest people would shake there heads about.

Justify all you want, but you know it's a reproduction, and if you tell your dad he knows too, and if he tries to sell it without informing the bidders as such he's being purposefully deceptive.

"Caveat emptor" is meant to be an admonition to the buyer; not a license to the seller.
 

Back
Top Bottom