Legal & other issues from SG Mishap

[Boatlawyer]

I don't recall the specific post you're talking about above, but when lawyers say things like this, they usually don't mean non-lawyers are morons.

Rather, the law *is* very complex, and I can guarantee you that nearly (if not over) 99% of laymen have no idea how approach a legal issue, simply because intelligence and common sense do not define the authority that courts follow. This isn't helped with well-known doctrines and legal "shorthand" that most people have heard of (like "attractive nuisance," "trade secret," "emotional distress," etc.) and that seem like clear concepts, but which may have very specific applications and definitions, vary by jursidcition, are subject to numerous exceptions (and exceptions to exceptions), etc. Nonlawyers lack the training to know all this, not because they're not smart enough, but rather because they usually have better things to do with their time (like diving)

That is exactly the point I was making and it was in response to a "provocative" and incorrect statement made by a non-lawyer.

Dive Waivers are the product of a lot of litigation and the idea is to fully inform the divers of the risks they are waiving liability for. In addition, they contain certain promises and representations on the part of the diver.

The issues invite oversimplification because most people just don't have the time, training or desire to fully examine the issues, whereas lawyers, who make a living at analysis and application of the law, have every reason to.

As an aside, after 14 years in practice, I have noted that the people who are the first to criticize the legal profession, are ironically the first to run to the courts for help.

 

[Blueskys4ever]

That is exactly the point I was making and it was in response to a "provocative" and incorrect statement made by a non-lawyer.

Dive Waivers are the product of a lot of litigation and the idea is to fully inform the divers of the risks they are waiving liability for. In addition, they contain certain promises and representations on the part of the diver.

The issues invite oversimplification because most people just don't have the time, training or desire to fully examine the issues, whereas lawyers, who make a living at analysis and application of the law, have every reason to.

As an aside, after 14 years in practice, I have noted that the people who are the first to criticize the legal profession, are ironically the first to run to the courts for help.

I have managed for 47 years without the services of an attorney, thank you kindly. Routinely, I sign contracts and obligations of large amounts of consideration. So, I would think there would be ample opportunity to implicate myself in some sort of legal entanglement. Strike that, I did get divorced. My ex-wife and I get along fine though. In, fact, I am at her house right now.

I do in fact read do boat waivers, but I will admit that I am some what of a maverick.

Did someone delete one my posts? A more reasonable person might consider that a form of censorship. Joseph Stalin would not. Did you read my peace on Reason's Model?

 

[Boatlawyer]

All the speculation and self righteous posturing, much from folks who never have dived the grove or knew the divers involved, will now, sadly, be in the courts. I'm sure the parties on all sides will have multiple offers of "help" from ambulance chasers. This will go on for quite awhile. In the meantime, the ship is still there and divers will be diving it on Monday and the days after that. May they all be safe.

Why is that necessarily "sad." The Upper Keys Artifical Reef Commitee collects $10 a head for every diver who dives the SG, Duane, and other wrecks in the area. Presumably this money is to maintain the divesite. Assuring that unsafe entries are blocked from the public seems to be a fundamental responsibility for anyone claiming to maintain a site. If they have not done their job, then don't they bear some responsibility?

 

[dumpsterDiver]

Why is that necessarily "sad." The Upper Keys Artifical Reef Commitee collects $10 a head for every diver who dives the SG, Duane, and other wrecks in the area. Presumably this money is to maintain the divesite. Assuring that unsafe entries are blocked from the public seems to be a fundamental responsibility for anyone claiming to maintain a site. If they have not done their job, then don't they bear some responsibility?

So now governmental agencies are supposed to make a rusting steel structure "safe" for divers to explore on the inside?

 

[H2Andy]

So now governmental agencies are supposed to make a rusting steel structure "safe" for divers to explore on the inside?

that's a very good question

when does someone say, look, dude, you went into a ship in a penetration dive, you take responsibility for what happens to you?

it's not like every OW diver out there isn't told (and re-told) they're not qualified to go into overhead without further training

perhaps a series of signs, like those in the Florida caves, reminding divers of the dangers? i could go for that

 

[dumpsterDiver]

They also definitely need to fence off the deep part of the ocean

 

[Rick Murchison]

it's not like every OW diver out there isn't told (and re-told) they're not qualified to go into overhead without further training

Before their first scuba dive, I have my students write, sign and date this statement in their logbooks.
"I have been briefed on the hazards of overhead environments and I will not go into any cave, or other structure underwater."
Hopefully by writing it out by hand, it'll sink in a little better.
So far, so good...
Rick

 

[AXL72]

well, in the words of an old woodworker who won a multimillion settlement on the grounds of insufficient warning lables on a table saw, even though he admitted in court that, "Yes, I been sawing lumber for 30years, and I knew better than to stand behind that board on the table saw before it kicked back at me and took my leg", umm, yes, the state hasthe repsonsibility to make things safe for the public on shipwrecks


**runs and hides before andy opens a can of law whoopass on me**

one of the voices in my head said "don't do it man don't do it,...andy will make you cry"

 

[H2Andy]

one of the voices in my head said "don't do it man don't do it,...andy will make you cry"

lucky for you, this is my "make people giggle at the size of my *******" day

:10:

 

[Gombessa]

Did someone delete one my posts? A more reasonable person might consider that a form of censorship. Joseph Stalin would not. Did you read my peace on Reason's Model?

I think the law-related tangent (that I was participating in as well) got quashed without comment. That's actually fine by me, as the forum is specifically intended for accident talk (as to your "censorship" comment, it technically is, but at the risk of reviving an off-topic legal discussion, remember that Scubaboard has no obligation to allow you to say whatever you want on their forums, just as you have no obligation to allow a guest to say whatever they want while in your house).