Most Wanted Diver Found...

[Christi]

I'm not confusing the issue. I understand that the situation you are referring to was a client response and was indeed more serious than just turning off their air, but the similarities between that incident and your response in the other thread about turning off your client's air are chilling.

I don't know how the laws work in Mexico, but if you escalate the situation into a life threatening one then you become responsible as well. If they refuse your order to come to the surface, don't make the situation worse than it already is. Handle it on the surface. That's what the laws are for. Not for you to take the situation in your own hands.

Randy, begin here: http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=104152

I did not and would not have turned his air off. You're taking this WAY out of context. I didn't say I would turn his air off if he refused to go to the surface...read it again. Besides, that was a totally hypothetical situation IF (again that is in capital letters) the situation had become a life threatening one to me.

 

[sharky60]

AD: Still a pirate...still have knives...still willing to travel

 

[Tim Ingersoll]

Okay the horse is now officially deceased. Stop the beating!

 

[ReefGuy]

Sorry, I believe I do understand. I understand that you have not turned off anyone's air and would do so only as a last resort. I'm saying that's not appropriate unless he's hurting someone. Not just on refusal to surface.

I believe that I have the context correct.

That wasn't meant to be funny. Let me clarify that...I absolutely would have escorted him safely to the surface...IF he fought me and began attacking me, I would have turned his air off as a defense for my own safety and gotten away from him. He would HAVE to go to the surface rather than come after me, which he could have safely done. He was in less than 50 feet of water. May sound harsh, but it is a rescue technique if attacked underwater. and of course would have been a last resort option.

I did not and would not have turned his air off. You're taking this WAY out of context. I didn't say I would turn his air off if he refused to go to the surface...read it again. Besides, that was a totally hypothetical situation IF (again that is in capital letters) the situation had become a life threatening one to me.

 

[ggunn]

I can’t condone “slapping” the idiot but I understand the DMs reaction. I dove with a fellow photog buff, and Dive Instructor, who laid waste to the reefs. At one point the diver was crushing a stand of coral to get a seahorse shot. The DM motioned him to get up but was ignored. I couldn’t take it so we lifted him by the tank off the reef and had a long talk with him after. The problem is for everyone we catch there are two we don’t. I don’t see it as vigilantism it is protection of a resource we all share and hope to preserve for future generations. I applaud Christi and her staff’s efforts.

As do I. However, there is a lot here that is about the altercation at depth between the diver and the DM (which is not a good idea under any circumstances); the DM is angry, and some portion of her anger has nothing to do with the seahorse. Where it has the possibility of going over into vigilanteism is when we take action against someone solely on the basis of information from the other participant in the fight.

Or should we treat this guy like we used to treat pirates, and hang him from a scaffold out on the dock until the frigate birds eat his body with a sign on him that reads "I touched a seahorse"? ;^)

 

[Christi]

Sorry, I believe I do understand. I understand that you have not turned off anyone's air and would do so only as a last resort. I'm saying that's not appropriate unless he's hurting someone. Not just on refusal to surface.

I believe that I have the context correct.

I did not and would not have turned his air off. You're taking this WAY out of context. I didn't say I would turn his air off if he refused to go to the surface...read it again. Besides, that was a totally hypothetical situation IF (again that is in capital letters) the situation had become a life threatening one to me. which would have meant he was hurting me!

I absolutely would have escorted him safely to the surface...IF he fought me and began attacking me, I would have turned his air off as a defense for my own safety and gotten away from him.

 

[Diversion]

Sorry, I believe I do understand. I understand that you have not turned off anyone's air and would do so only as a last resort. I'm saying that's not appropriate unless he's hurting someone. Not just on refusal to surface.

I believe that I have the context correct.

ReefGuy:

Sorry sir, you do not have the context correct. The original reference is at:

http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=104152&page=3&pp=10

You are jumping in in the middle of a long discussion - without bothering to do your research.

 

[ReefGuy]

Please explain how I'm taking this out of context.

1. Diver does something to upset the dive master.
2. DM gives command to surface.
3. Diver refuses command to surface.
4. DM attempts to escort diver to surface.
5. Diver resists DM to point of violence.
6. DM turns off divers air and vacates immediate area.

Is this not what Christi's post says? I understand that she's saying this is a last resort, but why not back off. The diver is going to surface sometime, and isn't going anywhere unless s/he gets back on the boat. The captain then can notify the authorites without endangering anyone's life, and Mexican LAW can take over.

In my opinion, Turning off someone's air is never acceptable and amounts to attempted murder.

Don't just tell me I have it out of context and didn't read it. Where do I have it wrong?

ReefGuy:

Sorry sir, you do not have the context correct. The original reference is at:

http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=104152&page=3&pp=10

You are jumping in in the middle of a long discussion - without bothering to do your research.

 

[Diversion]

Please explain how I'm taking this out of context.

1. Diver does something to upset the dive master.
2. DM gives command to surface.
3. Diver refuses command to surface.
4. DM attempts to escort diver to surface.
5. Diver resists DM to point of violence.
6. DM turns off divers air and vacates immediate area.

Is this not what Christi's post says? I understand that she's saying this is a last resort, but why not back off. The diver is going to surface sometime, and isn't going anywhere unless s/he gets back on the boat. The captain then can notify the authorites without endangering anyone's life, and Mexican LAW can take over.

In my opinion, Turning off someone's air is never acceptable and amounts to attempted murder.

Don't just tell me I have it out of context and didn't read it. Where do I have it wrong?

Sure, you have created a scenario of your own.

Where do you have it wrong: That is not the context of Christi’s original post. She spoke of turning off air only in a defensive situation, and never suggested it should have been done in this case.

It sure is easy to say “I win” if you're not really playing the game….

If you want to debate about how to surface an unwilling diver, or any other issue of hypothetical Divemaster conduct - Great - start a thread. Judging by some of the posts here, it should get a lot of dicussion... If you want to comment on this issue, address what has been actually stated!

 

[Diver Dennis]

I really don't want to get involved but in Reef's scenario it was a defensive action....