Diver Death in Cayman

[letterboy]

My apologies to the board. I thought OP said said DM and deceased were buddied. That being the case, DM had no special level of care that exceeded his duty to the rest of his group.

Thanks for clearing that up, Fostermom

she had said that early on in this thread, it has been clarified, SEVERAL TIMES by her and quoted at least 3 times in the last ~50 posts for you...

 

[pilot fish]

Again, apologies to the members of this thread, all of you. I was mistaken in thinking OP had said they were buddied. :doh2::doh2: on me!

OK, now that OP has given some more info that is a bit more clear, to me anyway, Like: not a verticle wall with 346 ft bottom, he was in FACT not buddied with DM, wanted to go to 100 ft, this changes my view on who is at fault and to what degree.

PF....scan back.. ...she has clarified this a dozen times so please stop with the useless posts. I was on your side....I believe you are now on your own. You are now just trying to annoy and be offensive. She has said this in VERY CLEAR terms so please stop asking.

Either that or just click the FLUSH button on the toilet and finish us all off.

 

[ScubaSteve]

Good we are moving on.

 

[pilot fish]

blanket apology to this thread. I now see the clarification that op posted since the inception of this thread. It is now clearer that dive op and dm are not as much to blame as i originally thought. Diver now has a bigger part of the blame.

 

[Dtaine]

:wave:

 

[JCAT]

cave bum

A couple of ways I can approach your post.

The first thing is please read my posts in context. That means basically, go back and read all the posts by pilot fish where he/she was making the argument that all new divers act a certain way. I was merely pointing out to Pilot Fish that this was not wise as everyone's diving experience starts and continues differently.

Second thing is the location of my check-out dives was Devil's Den. Yes, I know there is a hole in the ceiling, but I bet it can't be climbed. Depth as I remember was 40' or so. We can argue all day if it's a real cavern, if that's what you want.

Third thing is I said I dive on a near vertical 175' deep wall. I did not say I went to 175' deep. There are many depths one can dive at, again I'm not being mean, but please attempt to read in context.

Fourth thing, It was not my call to move this thread to Basic Scuba, it was the owner of the board. I'm still just attempting to understand why the diver in question died.

Either way, for all the folks on here looking for accurate information I would take what this diver says with a grain of salt.

Again, please go back and read everything I've posted. Dispute anything I've written on this thread, just make sure you are actually comprehending what is being said.

cheers

 

[Riger]

Nope - Login required. I am still trying to find the same data at Euro..

 

[letterboy]

I understand and that's why I signed up with DAN the day after I finished my OW (before then I was covered under a student policy that my LDS gets for all divers in training). My point there was that if you need special insurance for this activity, it may not be the safest thing to do.

you need special flood insurance when you live near the water. does that mean its not the safest thing to do?

 

[rsldonk]

you need special flood insurance when you live near the water. does that mean its not the safest thing to do?

Yes, because there is a greater chance of flood. Insurance companies are out to make money, so if something requires a special type of insurance coverage and is excluded from other types of policies, that means that whatever is excluded and requires that special insurance is rated at a higher risk of loss. The idea of insurance is to bring in enough premium payments to cover any of the expected losses that they will sustain. By charging an extra premium for dive insurance and by excluding diving s from many standard policies, that means that diving is rated as a higher risk to insure than say hiking (or whatever else does not require special coverage).

 

[Dtaine]

Yes, because there is a greater chance of flood. Insurance companies are out to make money, so if something requires a special type of insurance coverage and is excluded from other types of policies, that means that whatever is excluded and requires that special insurance is rated at a higher risk of loss. The idea of insurance is to bring in enough premium payments to cover any of the expected losses that they will sustain. By charging an extra premium for dive insurance and by excluding diving s from many standard policies, that means that diving is rated as a higher risk to insure than say hiking (or whatever else does not require special coverage).

That depends on how high you hike. Even injuries sustained hiking on a "walk-up" mountain are not covered by many insurance policies.