Individual Rights, and other Myths

[NAM001]

This post is probably the one i most agree with oyou on. BZ for it. Any organizationoor procsss has its flawed outcomes.

What we have to decide is whether or not is .... Does our very few flawed outcomes crosss the reasonable persons threshold of out of control. If yes then control has to be placed at a higher authority or controling group. If no then we all have to get involved to reduce what few problems we have in a way that outsiders and insiders see the steps being taked as processes whose rooted in integrity and sincere application. We also have to accept that if 99% of all trainees follow common sence behaviors then we are a success and not a failure because of the 1% that will not conform. I for one will not associate with one who willfully destroys our diving invironment. i also understand that accidents happen and when such things accure one should exhaust all avenues at the lowest level before exclating to the control of others. Thanks for that post..

QUOTE=Mike Boswell;6112752]One of the trends in international scuba diving has been the protected areas where fish populations thrive and divers can enjoy a natural, unspoiled environment. Governments create and police these underwater parks and levy fees for park entry, local businesses and populations benefit from the visitor spending, and pretty much everyone has a legitimate interest in regulating what is done in them.

Today there are few rules in these wonderful places, but inevitably, I fear that a few people will do stupid things and kill themselves or others, lawsuits will be filed, businesses will suffer, and governments will have no choice but to step in and curtail everybody's freedom.

The only people who can prevent this scenario is the dive community itself. And the only way we can do it is by education - sharing our hard-won wisdom with the next generation of divers.[/QUOTE]

 

[drbill]

During the few years I was doing deep (200 ft) air dives to film for an episode of my cable TV show, I made sure that the dive boat crew understood that if something went wrong at depth they were NOT to attempt a rescue or recovery. I did these dives solo so as not to potentially involve another diver directly. Yes, my son and my family would have been affected by an incident but I made sure they understood I was doing something I felt was important and that I enjoyed.

I may have had a greater chance of dying while driving Lost Angeles' freeways, yet no one suggested I didn't have an "individual right" to do that. There is some risk in everything we do.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

During the few years I was doing deep (200 ft) air dives to film for an episode of my cable TV show, I made sure that the dive boat crew understood that if something went wrong at depth they were NOT to attempt a rescue or recovery. I did these dives solo so as not to potentially involve another diver directly. Yes, my son and my family would have been affected by an incident but I made sure they understood I was doing something I felt was important and that I enjoyed.

I may have had a greater chance of dying while driving Lost Angeles' freeways, yet no one suggested I didn't have an "individual right" to do that. There is some risk in everything we do.

... but driving on the freeway is a highly regulated activity ... with police to give you a ticket if you violate the regulations. I dunno about you, but I don't want scuba diving to be like that ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[gcarter]

you miss the point all together, whether you or i agree or disagree with the search aspect of teh airlines the fact remains that it is thier airlines, you do not have the right to force them to transport you. you only have the right to request them to transport you.. this is an issue of what is a right and what is apriviledge. you do not have the right to "not be offended". every issue in society is a touchy issue to someone no matter what side of the issue they are on. the idea that because one is born the have the right to dive is not to me sencable. i have said that because you are born you have toe right to persue diving. You have the right to persue being an astronaut, you don not have the right to become one.. rights begate obligations. priviledges do not. it is clear your position on the tsa policies are personal to you. because of that your views are clouded by the personal and blur the process. Every panhandler has the right to ask for food. you do not have the obligation to give him food because he does not have the right to get food from you. from the beggers point of veiw he has a right to get food by begging. he does not he has the right to ask only and hope for a charitable act.

BTW i do not trust the airlines because they searchgrandma and at the same time foroce you to submit bags unsecured for who know what anyone wants to insert in them. That is my personal position. i donnot have the right to demand how they do business. I do have thte right to not use thier business and go elsewhere. And i do. i transport myself. When i get to my destination i do not have the airlines to blame, it was my decision to drive and my price to pay for making tht decision.

Fair enough, I concede the point.

 

[Mike Boswell]

... but driving on the freeway is a highly regulated activity ... with police to give you a ticket if you violate the regulations. I dunno about you, but I don't want scuba diving to be like that ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I don't either. I don't think anybody does, but we may be moving in that direction. Any cop will tell you driving is a privilege, not a "right".

Like our highways, our oceans and lakes are regulated by the government, and whether we like it or not, they can tell us what to do, and how to do it.

Since "rights" cannot be infringed (in theory), I therefore conclude that all aquatic activity, including diving, is a privilege, not a right.

 

[Mossman]

Note: there is no explicit instruction that we're talking about an American scuba diver, who is diving in America. So, whilst the American definition of 'freedom' and 'rights' should be entertained - the progression of the discussion would be more universally beneficial if it didn't deal with the question solely on that basis. After all, America only accounts for approx 5% of the global population (1).

While that might be the case, any idea of how America fares when considering only the world population of certified scuba divers? I'd guess that far more than 5% of the world's certified divers are American.

I think we'd all agree that each individual country has the rights to police its own coasts and govern the activities of its citizens and visitors. I don't deny that Bonaire has the right to tell me not to wear gloves any more than I would deny that the U.S. State of Hawaii has the right to tell me I have to tow a flag when shore diving. Some countries may forbid diving altogether or severely restrict it. If the United States or any one of the 50 placed a maximum depth limit for recreational certified divers, I have no doubt that our Supreme Court could find a way to uphold the law as not violating our constitutional American "rights".

It might not be "right" that a country violate our "rights" but there's not much we as individuals can do about it, whether it's in the U.S. or Malaysia or wherever.

 

[DeepSeaExplorer]

Devon, it would be a waste of time to get into it with you since you obviously have a financial stake and cannot be objective. However, there are many examples where a new class was invented (to make money) and then became a requirement to dive. You can't honestly deny it happens, because it's done for your benefit, the Instructor, so you have more products to sell. Just look at your signature, it says it all. You're in this to make money and you're posting on here to try and build a rep for your business.

I also disagree with you definition of regulation. Try getting on a boat without the necessary required certifications. Isn't that the definition of REQUIRED!?

 

[Mike Boswell]

Devon, it would be a waste of time to get into it with you since you obviously have a financial stake and cannot be objective. However, there are many examples where a new class was invented (to make money) and then became a requirement to dive. You can't honestly deny it happens, because it's done for your benefit, the Instructor, so you have more products to sell. Just look at your signature, it says it all. You're in this to make money and you're posting on here to try and build a rep for your business.

I also disagree with you definition of regulation. Try getting on a boat without the necessary required certifications. Isn't that the definition of REQUIRED!?

Hunh??? The only "required certifications" I'm aware of are OW, and Nitrox if you plan to use it.

And to tell you the truth, my wife and I have all the cards, up to and including Master Diver, and it's kind of disappointing when nobody asks to see them.

 

[Mike Boswell]

...

What legislations are in place around the world? How are they 'enforced'? How effective are they? Should they be applied globally?

...

Interesting question: I have the feeling some places are more regulated than others....

 

[TMHeimer]

During the few years I was doing deep (200 ft) air dives to film for an episode of my cable TV show, I made sure that the dive boat crew understood that if something went wrong at depth they were NOT to attempt a rescue or recovery. I did these dives solo so as not to potentially involve another diver directly. Yes, my son and my family would have been affected by an incident but I made sure they understood I was doing something I felt was important and that I enjoyed.


I may have had a greater chance of dying while driving Lost Angeles' freeways, yet no one suggested I didn't have an "individual right" to do that. There is some risk in everything we do.

Hits the nail on the head. You can easily die on the highway regardless of how well it's (speed, etc.) is regulated due to other drivers' errors. As you said, there is risk in almost everything. Diving/driving...apples/oranges. Pick your poison.