In that case I'd just throw them overboard for insubordination - no PFD is required. . .
Dave - avast C27 #5212 Windabout Cape Cod, MA http://dpbcc.home.comcast.net -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ahoyther Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 5:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: catalina27-talk: Mandatory PFD usage in Maryland Well, that seems to definitely make the captain or the operator of a water craft the responsible individual, which I believe is correct and appropriate. Is there not already something on the books that says that? So why do you need something else that says basically the same thing. If a crew member falls overboard without a pfd isn't that the liability of the skipper? I suppose there might be some strength for a new statute in a situation where a crew member refuses to wear a pfd when told to do so by the skipper. Just curious. Dave Hoy WYANOKEE #6295 Camden, Maine Tim Ford wrote: > the skipper of the craft!! > tf > > ahoyther wrote: > >> Tim, >> >> Isn't there some thing in Maryland statutes that says something like, >> "The captain or operator of a water craft is responsible for the >> safety of passengers and crew?" It just seems to me that that >> should be sufficient. In this instance is it the intention of the >> proposed Maryland law to cite the individual(s), or the skipper of >> the craft? >> >> T >> >>> >>> >> >> > > >
