ABC islands are among the safest of the world

[Kukuisa]

An article is published naming Bonaire as being safe.

The first alinea of the article said "... list of the world’s safest places to travel". One hundred percent safety is ideal but not realistic. It would be paradise.

Although the article is about the ABC islands, everyone here seems to narrow it down to the B island.

Some of the reasons for this safety is the absence of earthquakes, no erupting volcano's, the islands are lying outside the hurricane belt and flooding doesn't occur.
Life threatening wild animals such as crocodiles, man-eating sharks, tigers or rhinoceros are absence. There is a democracy and there are no (cival-) wars.

The ABC islands are not perfect. What we do have is humans and that species comes with it's own problems...

K.

 

[gypsyjim]

If one is to go by what one reads in the news or on the net when picking a destination, NOBODY would dare risk their lives by visiting the United States! Have you seen how much crime they have there! Why I've read that in some cities even the olice: are criminals!

There are more crime stories about the US than any other place on the face of the earth. Even their TV entertainment is all about their crime: CSI, Cold Case, Bones, Cops, shows about judges in the courtrooms, it goes on and on.....been that way as long as I can remember; Murder She Wrote, Hawaii 5-O, Perry Mason. The list is endless.


They have criminals they just let out of everywhere, and most the municipalities try to keep a lid on news about their true crime rates for fear it will keep businesses and people from moving there! I know it's true cause I read it on the net!


Sounds like it's almost as bad as some poeple seem to think Bonaire is!!!!

 

[BDSC]

Excellent!

 

[DiverVince]

I am so scared by all this talk of crime that I'll be hiding out....
Look for me on the 2nd reef by the lake at 100 feet cruising south.. If you see my Suzuki Jimny parked on the beach, you're more than welcome to the contents therein. I would however suggest that you wash the T shirt before putting it on. Be careful of those ratty sandals, I think I might have athletes foot! But please just do me 1 favor, stay away from my water. After all I do need to stay hydrated.

 

[BDSC]

I would however suggest that you wash the T shirt before putting it on.

That's the difference with you guys up north and us folks down south. If I knew you were going to steal my t-shirt, I'd go ahead and wash it for you first!

 

[jd950]

Well not quite. I've been doing negligence work for 35 years now. In the U.S. there is a concept called comparative negligence or in some states an even more restrictive concept called contributory negligence.

My auto accident scenario was spot on. Depending upon what state has jurisdiction in the red light/green light scenario, the "innocent driver" can theoretically get nothing in a contributory state; perhaps 75%-85% in a mod comparative negligence state depending on the facts etc. So what I indicated in my analogy, was that it takes 2 to have accident. There is negligence on both sides in this scenario.

Negligence can be defined as the failure to exercise the degree of care a reasonable & prudent person would do under the same or similar circumstances, this could be a mission or omission of acts.

If divers adhered to the "leave windows down, no valuables at dive site rule" this petty stuff would disappear. Reasonable & prudent folks on Bonaire adhere to this at dive sites.

This argument is purely for demonstrative purposes to illustrate that there is a degree of negligence on the victim in this scenario. Clearly & unequivocally, the action of breaking into a vehicle is criminal behavior and can never be condoned.

I am well aware of the principles of comparative negligence and contributory negligence. Putting aside the fact you are not on sound legal ground in your analysis, those principles simply are not applicable to crimes, which are intentional acts. Injecting that concept into a discussion of crime is silliness. I suppose a woman wearing revealing clothes or getting drunk bears some responsibility for being a rape victim? I suppose wearing an expensive watch means I deserve to be robbed? If those darned banks didn't keep so much money around, no one would try to rob them. Well, gee, next time I am on Bonaire I guess I should steal whatever isn't locked down in my room, since the property owner is just asking for it! Are you really saying that this is the mentality on Bonaire? No wonder there is such a problem.

 

[gypsyjim]

 

[DiverVince]

I am well aware of the principles of comparative negligence and contributory negligence. Putting aside the fact you are not on sound legal ground in your analysis, those principles simply are not applicable to crimes, which are intentional acts. Injecting that concept into a discussion of crime is silliness. I suppose a woman wearing revealing clothes or getting drunk bears some responsibility for being a rape victim? I suppose wearing an expensive watch means I deserve to be robbed? If those darned banks didn't keep so much money around, no one would try to rob them. Well, gee, next time I am on Bonaire I guess I should steal whatever isn't locked down in my room, since the property owner is just asking for it! Are you really saying that this is the mentality on Bonaire? No wonder there is such a problem.

JD: As you are aware of the difference between comparative and contrib., rest assured I am also quite aware of the differences between civil & criminal acts of behavior (which is why I ended by saying "clearly for demonstrative purposes"). Really, this isn't brain surgery.

I firmly believe that all folks should be proactive in keeping themselves safe (as they should be when they drive a vehicle). If you disagree, hey that's fine. As far as addressing the remainder of your posting, in actuality I'm going to refrain from doing so since I believe it would be a complete waste of time. You continue to think whatever you want. Have fun diving.

 

[bqualls]

Prof.Vince,
You refuse to adress the substance of JD's arguments because your arguments are weak.

 

[jd950]

Actually, shortly after posting my comment I wondered why I felt compelled to say anything. This topic has been around forever and no one ever changes their mind and nothing changes. I think I was just irked at the idea of blaming people who are crime victims. Vince, I realize as the owner of a rental unit on Bonaire you have a stake in the issue. I have no financial stake and can speak freely. I agree people should take reasonable steps to avoid being victims but I think you go way too far with you comparative negligence stance.

I like diving Bonaire, but I refuse to pretend the crime isn't a problem or blame someone who leaves their truck locked. For me, it isn't enough of a problem to stay away, but I respect the fact that others have concerns and/or are unwilling to go there. I also simply resent what I perceive as a lack of interest in the problem on Bonaire by some of those who live there or own businesses/property there.

I still go there at this point. I doubt the crime situation will change there, because so few who could change things really care much. So, I will continue to leave nothing of value in the truck and leave the doors unlocked and windows down, because that is how it is on Bonaire. I guess I will look for rental properties with improved security, and never rent an individual condo or house to avoid being a burglary victim. It is sad, and someday I may get tired of not being able to take lunch with me on multiple dives, or being able to leave sunglasses or a cap or towels in a truck, or grow weary of worrying someone may come into my condo during the night. Then I guess I will stop going.