Scuba Shack's Boat Get Wet Sinks in Key Largo
- Thread starter The Chairman
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
conchrandy
Contributor
There is absolutely no confusion with me. I own an insurance agency, so I am well aware of the difference between legal liability and morality. My question was 100% about morality, not legal liability.
I 100% agree with this statement. However, I am a certified scuba diver and these two people were not. I fully understand, and accept, the risks involved with my choice to go underwater.
I was just wondering about this because I have read every post on this thread since the beginning and no mention has ever been made about the Scuba Instructor that was on the boat.
I have reason to believe that the credentials of the Instructor/DM are questionable. It is my understanding that he or she did not participate in CPR attempts on the victims on the return trip to the port. Rather, behaved in an uncollected manner, riding on the bridge of the rescue vessel.
Question-was this individual even skilled in CPR procedures?
SolarStorm
Contributor
I come from a family of pilots and the one lesson I learned real good is that "Airplanes don't crash, Pilots do". If the pilot feels the aircraft is unsafe, don't fly it. Irrespective of insurance and legal liability I believe the captain has the final veto to sail or not. The captain who does not do an inspection of his boat before heading out with a load of passengers, is not a good captain, if not negligent. This sounds harsh, but you cannot rightfully expect the untrained passenger to know if a boat is safe or not. They trust the captain and crew. In this case that trust was violated. If the owners conspired to hide an existing condition that is a whole different story.
copperhead357
New
Mmm . . . source, please? How are the credentials questionable? Were they expired?
All the instructors I know have to take CPR / 1st / Ox and Rescue. What the instructor did after had nothing to do with anything. Each rescuer has a choice to make - he may have been too shook up to provide assistance.
conchrandy
Contributor
Mmm . . . source, please? How are the credentials questionable? Were they expired?
All the instructors I know have to take CPR / 1st / Ox and Rescue. What the instructor did after had nothing to do with anything. Each rescuer has a choice to make - he may have been too shook up to provide assistance.
That's ridiculous logic. You don't eschew your basic responsibility to your divers just because you are "shook up."
So, let me see if I got this straight. Because the instructor wasn't doing what YOU think he should be doing at that time, he is eschewing his basic responsibility?
So, no matter how well suited, or unwell suited, or whatever current state the instructor was in, you think s/he should have been working on the victim(s)?
Do you know what the quals were of the people who were working on the victim(s)?
Why do you think the instructor is better qualified than those already there?
How do you know the instructor did not offer his services?
Maybe the instructor was relaying the events from his point of view to the vessel's captain?
Maybe the instructor made the determination that s/he was unfit to perform the duties of first responder.
How many people were working on the victim(s)?
Was there room for anyone else?
Please, tell us what we are missing from this ideal?
Are you medical? Specifically, what rank order of medical are you?
Last edited:
ScubaSteve
Wow.....what a DB
Similar threads
