Senate Bill 629

[ereediver]

Sec. 80155a. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not jump, dive, or swim from a pier, jetty, breakwater, or other similar structure, or a buoy or other navigational device, that is located in the Great Lakes or their connecting waters

I don't know the words Dive, and Swim seem to be very broad or open to a lot of interpretation to me. I also have to include the word buoy. Any marked wreck up here in Thunder Bay has a NOAA buoy attached, and we dive from them. We also dive from a area that has a pier, which we swim and dive around. There's my interpretation of the law, from a non-law enforcement point of view. So I guess I'm a prime candidate for getting quite a few tickets.

In Ohio at Least when a word is not specifically defined by ordinance or code you use Merriam Websters dictionary.Main Entry: 1dive
Pronunciation: \ˈdīv\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): dived \ˈdīvd\ or dove \ˈdōv\; dived also dove; div·ing
Etymology: Middle English diven, duven, from Old English dȳfan to dip & dūfan to dive; akin to Old English dyppan to dip — more at dip
Date: before 12th century
intransitive verb
1 a: to plunge into water intentionally and especially headfirst; also : to execute a dive b: submerge <the submarine dived>
2 a: to come or drop down precipitously : plunge <the temperature is diving> b: to plunge one's hand into something cof an airplane : to descend in a dive
3 a: to plunge into some matter or activity <she dove into her studies> b: to plunge or dash for some place <diving for cover>; also : to lunge especially in order to seize something <dove for the ball>
transitive verb
1: to thrust into something
2: to cause to dive <dive a submarine>
usage Dive, which was originally a weak verb, developed a past tense dove, probably by analogy with verbs like drive, drove. Dove exists in some British dialects and has become the standard past tense especially in speech in some parts of Canada. In the United States dived and dove are both widespread in speech as past tense and past participle, with dove less common than dived in the south Midland area, and dived less common than dove in the Northern and north Midland areas. In writing, the past tense dived is usual in British English and somewhat more common in American English. Dove seems relatively rare as a past participle in writing.

Main Entry: 1swim
Pronunciation: \&#712;swim\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): swam \&#712;swam\; swum \&#712;sw&#601;m\; swim·ming
Etymology: Middle English swimmen, from Old English swimman; akin to Old High German swimman to swim
Date: before 12th century
intransitive verb
1 a: to propel oneself in water by natural means (as movements of the limbs, fins, or tail) b: to play in the water (as at a beach or swimming pool)
2: to move with a motion like that of swimming : glide <a cloud swam slowly across the moon>
3 a: to float on a liquid : not sink b: to surmount difficulties : not go under <sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish &#8212; Daniel Webster>
4: to become immersed in or flooded with or as if with a liquid <potatoes swimming in gravy>
5: to have a floating or reeling appearance or sensation
transitive verb
1 a: to cross by propelling oneself through water <swim a stream> b: to execute in swimming
2: to cause to swim or float
&#8212; swim·mer noun

Which in my opinion include Scuba. I am in no means condoning the Law. My point is blaming the Officer for doing there job frankly annoys the @#$% out of me. What his thread seems to be doing is generating oposition to the Law which can change or repeal it. A good thing. Getting ticked of at the person who has to drive or boat or whatever to you because some stick in the mud does not like what you are doing and calls whatever authority has jursidiction is get you out of there. Not a good thing. By all means get this thing stopped I agree it is not a well thought out law. Just put your energy in the right place. Thats all I wanted to say.

 

[Riverrat Dave]

Good point "Erie", the whole point of this thread is to generate discussion on a Bill that is meant to have good intentions "saving lives" but may have dire "side effects" like restricting our access to the water.
Please notify your state reps and tell them that this is not a well written Bill.
Call them on the phone, write your e-mails, or best of all send a letter, that, always seems to get their attention.
We divers need to flex what ever political muscle we have and change/stop this Bill.
I don't know about you folks but Jenny gets enough of my paycheck.

 

[SOkie]

Sec. 80155a. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not jump, dive, or swim from a pier, jetty, breakwater, or other similar structure, or a buoy or other navigational device, that is located in the Great Lakes or their connecting waters

Doesn't seem like a lot to have to broadly interpret. Don't like the law have it stopped or changed. Don't bring down Law enforcement because you have trouble following rules.

I disagree.. Most laws can be interpreted multiple ways. I know this and if you are in law enforcement then you also know it. Look at how (just on this thread) we've torn the potential law apart. If it was straight forward, then we couldn't do this. Imagine what a lawyer could do to the law?? Course, that would depend upon which judge you get for the day since they also interpret differently. (And of course what kind of a day they are having).

"Don't bring down law enfocement because you have trouble following the rules" -- As it stands, law enforcement is bringing itself down. Many don't trust law enforcement. For me it came when I witnessed 2 police officers lie to a judge while under oath. (by the way, I was just a witness in that trial) How can I now trust law enforcement when I've witnessed them lie in court? Is it unfair that most people simply group all law enforcement together. Well yes, but that's the way the world works. Get screwed by a car salesman and you'll never go back to the dealer..

As for not being able to follow the rules: I'm one of those people who make an attempt. However, I can't possibly know every rule and it seems it gets harder every year. Federal laws, State laws, County Ordinances, City Laws. (mental note to self, check State, County and City laws for next vacation to Ft. Lauderdale to make sure I can smoke a cigarette on the sidewalk while facing north at high noon. Otherwise I'll receive a ticket and be lectured about not wanting to follow the rules)

Well, gotta go down to the local pier and use my scooter. (mental note: check to see if that pier is privately owned or government owned. Then see attorney to find out if using a scooter could be interpreted as swimming)

 

[caymaniac]

I lost respect for lawyers when : I seen one of my neighbors who is a lawyer file a false police report about another nieghbor then led an insurance company to try and sue his neighbor that he made a false police report on. I realize that the police have no idea if this was a false police report but as a lawyer this guy has taken an oath to uphold the law and then he he lies to the police as well as an insurance company. And yes, I got involved, and no - what I said made no difference, that lawyer needs to loose his license. These are the type of people we have running our State and making the laws that I distrust and think that the job of the State legislature should be term limits only & a part time job (as much as they are in session it is anyway) and the benefits should quit once they are out. There are too many that are looking ONLY for their own interest and not whats best for the people or the State. - - - My rant!

 

[ComputerJoe]

I have been known to perform some civil disobiedence, but then I knew what I was doing and the consiquences, I accepted the ticket not holding it against the officer. But with this proposed law, and the latitude it gives the Law Enforcer, only builds public resentment when one official may interpet it as allowing the activity and the next as not, while handing you a ticket. I firmly believe that if the Law would just prevent unsupervised minors on such structures it would stop the activity which it intends and allow us adults the freedom which we deserve.

 

[SOkie]

But with this proposed law, and the latitude it gives the Law Enforcer, only builds public resentment when one official may interpet it as allowing the activity and the next as not, while handing you a ticket. I firmly believe that if the Law would just prevent unsupervised minors on such structures it would stop the activity which it intends and allow us adults the freedom which we deserve.

EXACTLY - very well said...

 

[ereediver]

I think some here a confusing Officer Discrection with interpteting the Law. The way the lw is written, "swim" incompasses scuba. According to Merriam Websters definition, using a scooter would be allowed. Not well thought out. Find holes in law is what Defense Attorneys are for, whole differnet subject.
Should this law go into affect, and you still go out "Knowingly", and everyone reading this Knows what the law states, and I'll bet there will be signage to go with the law,and you get caught. Why is the the Officers fault if they cite you. If there where no penalties to law they would be useless. If they are never enforced again useless. Sometimes a warning will work. Sometimes it won't. Again my point why shoot the messenger? So good luck, I hope this law does not make the books. As many of you pointed out, it is not well thought out for what the intended purpose. Please just remember with all walks of life, There are the good the bad and the ugly. If you feel things were unjustly delt out go to court, thats why it's there.

"Bouy" (pun) this thread took a left eh?

 

[Riverrat Dave]

1. The Bill is poorly written.
2. While the Bill says dive and means the "jumping off of a pier or similar structure" it could be understood as SCUBA diving too.
3. Contact your Legislature Representative and tell them your concerns.
4. Change or stop this Bill

 

[JEScholz]

Here is a link to the MI.gov web site and the detail of the bill.
Michigan Legislature

Here is link to locate the address of your State Senator.
By Name

 

[ComputerJoe]

Here is an excerpt from the Kalamazoo Gazette which lets us know how dangerious our waters are and hope we need to be "kept safe" from it.

Mayor fears pier-jumping bill will die
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
BY CHRIS KILLIAN

Special to the Gazette

SOUTH HAVEN -- South Haven Mayor Dorothy Appleyard is worried that the Michigan Legislature might not pass a bill that would outlaw jumping from piers and other structures into the Great Lakes.

A bill that prohibits jumping, diving or swimming from a pier, jetty or other similar structure in the Great Lakes, or their connecting waters, was passed by a Senate vote of 35-2 on Oct. 17.

But the bill has been stuck in the House of Representatives' Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources Committee ever since, where a majority of members do not support the bill in its current form.

``If it doesn't pass I think it's going to be incredibly tough to get this brought up again,'' Appleyard said. ``You only get one chance.''

Appleyard is urging citizens and community leaders from across southwestern Michigan to write to committee members to urge them to get the bill through the hearing process and onto the House floor for a vote.

Committee Chairman Rep. Joel Sheltrown, D-West Branch, said he thought the bill would fly through his 11-member committee as fast as it did through the Senate. Then the state budget crisis began to take center stage and most of lawmakers' time. As the budget crisis began to subside, committee members began to take issue with the bill, originally submitted by Sen. Ron Jelinek, R-Three Oaks.

Under the bill, violators would be subject to a maximum fine of $500. Some members want amendments to exempt divers and surfers from the proposed law, Sheltrown said, and others want local municipalities to be able to decide for themselves whether to enact the law.

Also, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources opposes the bill.

``I hope I can get it out of committee if we can agree on some amendments,'' Sheltrown said. ``It's going to take some work, but I think we can do it. It wouldn't pass in its current form.''

Jelinek asked that the committee delay any hearings on the bill until he has had a chance to review proposed amendments, Sheltrown said. Hearings could take place next month, the chairman said.

Rep. Tonya Schuitmaker, R-Lawton, whose constituency includes several Lake Michigan beach communities in Allegan and Van Buren counties, has been advocating for the bill from the beginning.

``People that don't live by the beach really don't know how dangerous our waters can be,'' she said. ``I hope this bill can emerge from the committee and still have some teeth to it.''

Appleyard, one of the original members of a water-safety task force that was formed more than a year ago to address the safety concerns of beach communities along Lake Michigan, agrees.

``All the safety elements we've added here, from the life rings to the signs, are tied together,'' she said. ``But this bill is the key element, and it needs to be passed in a form that will keep people safe.''