Restricting access

[John_B]

Originally Posted by wedivebc

If feds say the engine room and boiler room have to be welded shut or you don't sink the ship, they have to comply.

These things have a way of becoming unwelded, by natural means or otherwise.

[wedivebc]

Originally Posted by JeffG

Then quit looking at making more rules.

Where do you get that I am in favor of regulation? I am in favor in allowing as much access as realistically possible within the government permits. Right now they have left us alone but if you look at other examples, Empress of Ireland for example if people start dying, the feds start getting involved. I am hoping to thwart gov intervention not promote it. But letting Darwin sort them out is not a practical solution.

[TSandM]

Short of prohibiting diving on the wrecks altogether, how do you enforce ANYTHING? Once a diver gets in the water, he's got infinite flexibility in what he does, no matter what he said he was going to do before going in. You can weld doors over places you don't want divers to go, but I believe Steve Donathan died in a passage that had had a welded door in place at one time.

You cannot legislate away stupidity or recklessness, and unfortunately, the same people who think that government should decide where you can work or what insurance you should be able to buy, also think that they should write rules to replace the good sense that people don't have. Invariably, that restricts what people WITH good sense are able to do. But it makes even LESS sense to write regulations that are unenforceable.

[amascuba]

Originally Posted by b1gcountry

I would disagree with that.

I have no right to demand a percentage of my neighbors money for any means. I have no right to forcibly imprison them if they do not give it to me. People do not claim these rights, Governments do. Where they think they get them from is beyond me, but if government was simply a collection of individuals, it would have no greater rights than any of those individuals that comprise it.

Tom

There are many things within the US government that are unconstitutional and shouldn't be in place. For instance, every single department that lays outside of the jurisdiction of the executive, judicial, and legislative branches. Even the US run military is unconstitutional. The individual states are supposed to provide a militia (national guard by todays standards). Taxes are unconstitutional and weren't put in place until World War II as a way to support the war effort. They were only supposed to last as long as we were in War. Since 1942, can you tell me how long we haven't been in a 'war' of some sort? WWII, Korean, Vietnam, War against Drugs, etc.

[SailNaked]

To answer this question you first have to understand how the world works.
First an insurance company has to pay a claim, and then they get their lawyers to write a law protecting them from paying such a claim in the future, that is how regulations are done in this country. It takes money to enact laws. Insurance companies have plenty and will use it to protect their interests.

Assuming there is no one with deep pockets to sue in the event of a wreck diving accident then there will never be any regulations on it. If however the diving industry can be proven at fault in court and someone paid a large sum then the Insurance industry will force regulation.

Another look at it. You can not sue the government for negligence. However if you can sue padi or another agency with some money and prove that they were negligent in not enforcing strict training guidelines for wreck diving and it directly contributed to someoneÃÔ death then the insurance companies will make it illegal to dive a wreck without a certification so that they do not have to pay the claims against padi or other agency in the future. Of course the legislators may not care on the details and just make it so that it is illegal to dive on a wreck at all save on lots of non-sense lawsuits.