How to handle violation of a dive site rules (Solo Diving)

[String]

Where did we start bringing criminal law duties into this?

We have a diver who is (i) breaking no law and (ii) having absolutely no effect at all on the other divers day, welfare or enjoyment.

Really, interfering with someone law abiding going about their private business that in no way affects you at all is a good way to get your nose broken or at least some well deserved abuse. I'd be tempted to follow the said complainant around and vocally and publicly criticise anything i could find regarding their diving skills, practices and equipment as well just to see how they like it.

 

[Bob DBF]

And by your rational if someone ever breaks into your neighbors house then you should just ignore it. After all you are only myob.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The diver did not break in, he paid like everyone else.


Bob
---------------------------------
The day I can't dive anymore, I will really need some other good reasons to stay alive. DarkAbyss

 

[doctormike]

And by your rational if someone ever breaks into your neighbors house then you should just ignore it. After all you are only myob.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't follow that at all. In your example, your non-action will facilitate a definite harm to an innocent third party. That's nothing at all like the activity observed by the OP. Although your analogy isn't quite as bad an analogy as the one about the child-rapist, earlier in this thread...

Leaving aside the unlikely possibility that this solo diver will get the whole quarry shut down, in the OPs example, you are assuming that (1) you can make an accurate assessment of the risk that diver is assuming, and (2) that you have determined that this risk is over some arbitrary threshold that you feel is acceptable.

I see people diving rebreathers all the time. Those scare me, but I don't try to talk them out of it. Anybody have numbers about the risk of solo diving in non-overhead environment using a no-stop profile to recreational depths without a redundant gas supply?

Here's some interesting viewing, a talk by Mark Powell (author of the terrific "Deco for Divers")

[VIMEO]49259855[/VIMEO]

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

It is more likely the offending diver, if caught, will be banned from the site. If I was in the op's position I would somewhere in our chat point out the site rules, in case he didn't know, and call it good. When the owner starts paying me for enforcing his rules, then I would be obligated to do something.

Yup ... if it bothers you, politely point out the rule and let it go at that. Assume that we're all adults and capable of living with the consequences of our decisions.

For consistency sake, the next time you see a jaywalker or a driver parking in an unauthorized space, use your same action plan.

I'd do that too ... and commonly do at my local mudhole, especially this time of year. I do it for jaywalkers to point out that crossing at places other than the crosswalk can (and do) result in driver/pedesterian "interactions" ... which can really hurt, especially if you're wearing scuba gear. I do it with people parking illegally simply to point out that the parking tickets at this place ain't cheap ... and to offer some alternative places to park that a lot of people who don't use the place regularly may not know about.

More often than not, people thank me for mentioning it ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[agilis]

And by your rational if someone ever breaks into your neighbors house then you should just ignore it. After all you are only myob.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. Absolutely not. That is not the rationale being used.

There is a huge difference between appointing yourself cosmic class monitor by involving yourself in situations that are in no way violations of law and that are not immediate threats to life and property, and reporting a burglary in progress. If you witness a burglary or a mugging you call 911. If you see someone parking in a no parking zone, or taking up two spaces in a parking lot so their precious new SUV doesn't get scratched, that is not really your business.

It's a matter of common sense, of being able to understand the difference between laws and rules, and more than anything, having a sense of proportion, the ability to distinguish between something that you disapprove of and something that requires intervention.

As was pointed out, these things can backfire when litigation may become involved. The law, especially tort law, is like a giant tar baby. There are excellent reasons to avoid involvement in the kind of issue described by the OP.

I was in a college parking lot one night and saw a jacked up huge tires truck speed around the end of a row of parked cars and clip the corner of one, doing some real damage. He immediately sped off. I jotted down the plate number of the truck and provided it to the student whose car was hit. That level of involvement is about as far as I'm willing to go. I had to file a report with campus police, but that did not bother me especially. It's all a matter of proportion.

 

[flots am]

One thing IS certain though....we should all be somewhere diving instead of reading or posting responses!

Unfortunately, I'm working. Nobody cares much if I pop in a post now and then, but I'm pretty sure they would notice if I simply didn't show up and decided to go diving.

 

[NAM001]

Bob its not realistic to think that all students are trained as well as yours are. I agree with you premis in your second paragraph adn that is why I geve the benifit of the doubt that others know what they are doing UNLESS I am diving with them and then that benifit is shifted for my protection. Thats why I dont play police tattle tale when it comes to other groups affairs and consider myself solo with another when i am diving with them. I would strongly suspect that if you were to come to my neck of the woods (THE GULF) and get stuck with an insta buddy who gets stumped about which way the tank points you also would take the diving solo posture for self preservation. I say this because i have no doubt about your diving abilities, I would dive with you anytine without concern. But you and the many others who are out there are far from your calibre. While i respect you and your abilities I must also accept that not everyone is the same.

... but in the case of the original post it wasn't an unproven assumed condition. The man clearly didn't have the redundant air supply that the owner of the property said he was supposed to have in order to dive solo at that site. That's a visibly verifiable condition. Whether or not he's competent to solo dive without it is another matter ... but clearly he was not following the rules established for solo diving at that site.

That's quite different than your general statement that "when you dive with a new diver that you are diving solo but with someone else present". That's a judgment call based on nothing more than a bias against new divers. You cannot accurately judge someone's competence by looking at them, or by knowing how many dives they've done. You need to talk to them enough to determine that they have a good attitude about dive safety, and you need to see them in the water to determine their actual skill set.

As an instructor, if I were to assume that any of my students were incompetent to be a dive buddy because they were new, what I'd really be assuming is that I failed to train them properly. Under no circumstances would I certify an OW student if I felt that they were an incompetent dive buddy. Certainly there's an expectation that they'll have a lot to learn ... but if you don't have the skills or attitude to be a reasonable dive buddy then you shouldn't be getting a c-card that says you do.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

... and that last phrase is my point ... not everyone is the same. One should not be judged based on their experience level ... because attitude, natural abilities, and the quality of training often have far more to do with a diver's abilities than the number of dives they have done.

Yes, we are all unique ... both in our abilities as divers and in our perspectives of what is right and wrong. And this whole thread rather bears that out.

I think by now everyone understands that I'm hardly an MYOB type of person ... if I see something I think isn't right, I'll say something about it. That doesn't make me any more or less "correct" than those who say "MYOB" ... it's simply a difference in who we are. What matters isn't what you do, but the way you go about it. Be polite ... basic courtesy seems to have fallen out of favor in this country these days ... just look at some of the responses in this thread to what I saw as a pretty reasonable question on the part of the OP. I've found that people are far more prone to want to hear what you have to say if you say it with a bit of courtesy. Most times they'll understand you're not trying to be a busybody, but rather are just trying to be helpful. Most divers I've met in real life (as opposed to those I've only met on the internet) strike me as genuinely helpful people ... regardless of their experience or ability or what agency they trained with or what gear they're wearing ... or any of the other things we so frequently like to "argue" about on the internet.

Not everyone is the same ... you are absolutely correct. What everyone deserves, however, is some basic respect. That's not conveyed by what you do ... it's conveyed by how you do it. And that pretty much encompasses all the issues that have been brought up in this thread ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[TONY CHANEY]

Where did we start bringing criminal law duties into this?

We have a diver who is (i) breaking no law and (ii) having absolutely no effect at all on the other divers day, welfare or enjoyment.

Really, interfering with someone law abiding going about their private business that in no way affects you at all is a good way to get your nose broken or at least some well deserved abuse. I'd be tempted to follow the said complainant around and vocally and publicly criticise anything i could find regarding their diving skills, practices and equipment as well just to see how they like it.

Please read Edd Speaks...he only had to risk his life to save 4 divers who were not trained for the dives they were undertaking. http://www.nsscds.org/files/uws/v40n2/uws40vol2web.pdf

School sink closed due to two dives who died without proper training. One heck of a story here to include a hugh lawsuit.

Eagle's Nest has been closed before due to an untrained diver dying there and this father wants it closed again. Diver's Father Wants Tampa-Area Eagle Nest Sink Cave Closed After Deaths | NBC 6 South Florida

Theories about Collierville diver's disappearance swirl in vortex of unanswered questions » The Commercial Appeal Ben was not trained for the dive he was doing.

These are just a few examples of how someone's, "We have a diver who is (i) breaking no law and (ii) having absolutely no effect at all on the other divers day, welfare or enjoyment" does in fact have a direct effect on others lives to include placing their life in harms way!

If you really do not like the "rules" just wait until it becomes "laws" as explained before.

Also, threating to break someone's nose or causing some well deserved abuse for pointing out the rules is not the right message we should be trying to get across.

 

[DaleC]

When I took OW training one of the "rules" was "never dive alone" yet I began solo diving after 20 dives. I taught myself because another rule was a 100 dive prerequisite for solo certification - which I would have taken at that time if I had been allowed.

So I broke a rule, and was excluded from formal training because of another rule, yet continue to do that activity regardless. Was I "wrong" to do so or did the "rules" fail to address the reality of some peoples approach to diving.

Where I live we have a bicycle helmet law, which is ignored by the vast majority of bicycle riders. Curiously, we do not have a skateboard helmet law or a rollerblade helmet law. Imagine Johnny longboarder, cruising down a steep hill in traffic, calling 911 on his cell to report Mabel riding her Schwinn without a helmet.