thoughts on fine

[thumps]

Gazza


i didnt make comment on the Fuel ...or the size of the boat

i made no statements on the fact or not if he was unprepared.

my comments were made purely on the fact that he had two small Children...in ill fitting PFD's

and im sick to death of this "she'll be right Mate...as long as me meet the Law in the way of a minimum".

i also made mention of COMMON SENSE......which to me...is fitting and testing a PFD to the child...not simply buying a piece of foam and sticking it in the locker onboard.

IN the State i come from ...it is compulsary for everyone onboard to wear a PFD at all times a boat is underway...and i advocate this....and make mention of uniform State laws.

so before you make twilight zone..and pissing in the wind comments...maybe a little reread might be in order
and dont read between the lines.

i also said that a combination of events lead to the circumstances he found himself in....but the basis for his conviction is with regard to his Kids not having the correct Saftey gear fitted
and as Kingtin states...IT WAS HIS RESPONSIBILTY....and he FAILED...in a reckless fashion...according to the LAW and a Judge



and a man who gets rescued twice in one day because his PWC runs out of fuel cost the rescue teams more than this guy got fined

and i'm Bloody well sure it cost more to rescue him and his Kids as well

IS a CHILDS LIFE WORTH LESS THAN $5000????

i dont bloody think so


IMHO

[bidkev]

Thumps me old mate You've returned to the fray despite the lump on your head getting bigger and bigger [smiley=bigcry.gif] That brick wall will still be standing when we've knocked ourselves unconscious, so let's bale out while we can If it's made a few people think, then that's all that can be expected sometimes.

Juicy..........take him to bed, or take him fishing before he gets *really* exasperated

My final word on this is that yes, the law may be an ass when it comes to sentencing, but just because most sentences for violence etc seem too lenient, that doesn't mean a sentence for endangerment is too stiff. How many times have the public and media screamed for stiffer sentences in order to set an example, and how many times is it said that if someone is found guilty then the *full* force of the law should be applied? Now, just because a fisho is involved, it's *too* stiff. [smiley=shocked2.gif] [smiley=shocked2.gif] What if another vessel (through no fault of it's own) went down with loss of life because the services were too busy with this fiasco? Would you still feel the same then? The mind boggles!



kev

This applies here: Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's already made up.

[Gazza]

IN the State i come from ...it is compulsary for everyone onboard to wear a PFD at all times a boat is underway...and i advocate this....and make mention of uniform State laws.

Which state? Thumbs......t-h-i-s state??....or NOT!!
(and i dont givash!t if in "that state" they carry machineguns in public either)

M8..change hands, if you believe..

my comments were made purely on the fact that he had two small Children...in ill fitting PFD's

you could cruise any school, anyday ,and see mum and a couple of young kids in the back , with "incorrect" seat-belting ,due to babyseats or just plain seatbelt MIS-adjustment..........who can also quite easily run into the back of another vehicle ,crush their radiator ,and require a tow......end-of-story

"mum" pays an excess of say $500 ,to fix BOTH cars ,keeps her "no-claim" bonus ,and is real nice to dad for a couple of weeks

p.s. NO ,the kids didn't get whiplash or a serated throat....LUCKY!!

Back-to-reality M8...sh1t happens (yes Kingtin ,even with planning )

[rough_shag]

Might as well bung in my 2 cents worth!.Familiarity breeds contempt-the guy was a deckie.We all take risks every day,cars passing strangers head on on two lane rds,flying at 900kmh @ 30000ft in jets,voting John Howard in as PM,cheating on our girlfriends and of course setting ourselves afloat on Moreton Bay-a notoriously dangerous stretch of water!.
More than anything else the most important safety device is a good dose of common sense and reasoning.Bureaucrats and law makers like to think they can control everything with laws and theoretics but in the real world the odds will always catch up with you eventually no matter how many rules,laws or airbags you have!.We all learn by our mistakes and if there's a copper around we pay for 'em too,but this is the human way-no one is perfect and hindsight is a wonderful thing.I reckon there would be plenty of ausfishers condemning this bloke for his mistake who regularly break other laws designed to protect us on a daily basis.
Placing yourself and loved ones in a piece of pressed alloy and floating off into shark infested waters is not exactly a safe practice regardless of how many pfds you have-it could be called an unnecessary risk too. Some people take calculated risks on the water and get away with it and some don't-he didn't and gave us all a reminder to be more careful and use our commonsense but if he hasn't learnt from it then that's another thing.Jace.

[Owen]

All together now
ooooooooommmmmmmmmmmmmm
In through the nose - out through the mouth

May as well put my 2 cents in.

Firstly I don't think we can assume a change of heart, or anything else on the fact that he plead guilty.
Lot's of people do that because they can't afford to risk pleading not guilty and risk the costs associated with a conviction under those circumstances.

Secondly, it matters little whether he broke any specific law. As I see it, his primary failing was that he failed to properly execute his duty of care.

I can concede that things may have gone pear shaped for him and that he had not intended to put his kids in danger. If it was a couple of adults with him, then I'd say the fine was a bit steep. However the kids were not old enough to make an informed decision as to their safety during the trip. Therefore it is the parent's responsibilty to ensure that his actions must not put them in harms way.

I agree with Kev. Far too many people are assuming that the world owes them a favour and they shouldn't have to be responsible for their own actions.
It's out of control.

I quite often do safety coarses for fully qualified boilermakers and other tradesmen in which I have to step by step instruct them on how to safely operate an angle grinder, welder or even a chipping hammer.
Their employers are required to ensure that they are aware of this as part of their duty of care.
I find it demeaning to have to stand in front of grown men and have to tell them basic things that they should all know.
The problem is, that we have bread a society that thinks that if they do something stupid and someone didn't tell them specifically that they shouldn't do that, then they have grounds for compensation.

Personally I think we a flying in the face of evolution by saving too many stupid people.
We just have to make sure they don't take the kiddies out with them

cheers,

Owen

[Feral]

[quote author=Feral link=1138699525/0#7 date=1138711734]

Possibly, but PFD1's are pretty uncomfortable for kids to wear, so getting them to keep them on is generally hard.

add that to the list of [s]ineffective[/s], no, lazy parenting quotes.


[/quote]

I take offence at that.

I see no reason to make a kid uncomfortable when it is not required. If PFD1's are not required, there is no need to wear them.

Boating is supposed to be a fun thing for the kids, one of the reasons I did not go fishing for 10 or 15 years after I left home was the attitude my old man had to kids in the boat, he was very much from the old Kids should be seen and not heard, you shall obey my every rule while in my boat school, and fishing with him was nothing short of painful, certainly never enjoyable.

If you force a kid to wear a jacket they find to be uncomfortable, all that will result is a kid that does not want to go fishing, or a kid that tries to slip out of the jacket when ever you are not looking or are busy, which is often the exact time you need the kid securely in the jacket.

The reason there are 3 grades of Jackets, is because each grade of jacket is suitable for the conditions it is rated for. I have nothing against being "safer than required", but only when it does not reduce the enjoyment of the activity you are there for in the first place. I consider it my duty to encourage my kids to enjoy the sport of fishing, not turn them off it.

[CHRIS_aka_GWH]

...as you agree, there is NO LAW ,regarding carry ample fuel.....
i.e. no law = no fine

soooo , what l-a-w did he break??.....for $3000 ....waiting

The....

Transport Operations (Marine
Safety) Act 1994
Reprinted as in force on 2 November 2005


the principles of which certainly appeared in the booklet I got years ago when I got my licence & basically say....

Safety - General safety obligation

As the fundamental principle of the Transport Operations (Marine Safety) legislation, the general safety obligation transfers the responsibility of safety to owners and operators and encourages risk management. The Act imposes general safety obligations on:


Ship designers, builders and surveyors about the condition of ships.


Persons involved with the operation of a ship to operate it safely.


Owners and masters about safety equipment.


All owners and operators, masters and crew members must ensure the ship is:


Safe.


Properly equipped and crewed.


Operated in a safe manner.


In short, these general safety obligations prohibit a ship from going to sea if it is not properly built and maintained, equipped, crewed and operated in accordance with its proposed operating environment.

The Act provides penalties for breach of safety obligations of up to $A37,000 or one year imprisonment. Should the breach cause death or grievous bodily harm to a person, the penalty is up to $A375,000 or imprisonment for two years.


from the Act itself…. (freely available in the public domain,


43 General obligation on persons involved with operation of
ship to operate it safely
(1) A person involved with a ship’s operation (including the
owner, master, pilot and crew members) must not cause the
ship to be operated unsafely.
Maximum penalty—500 penalty units or imprisonment for 1
year.
(2) Without limiting subsection (1), a person causes a ship to be
operated unsafely if the person causes the ship to be operated
in a way that—
(a) causes a marine incident; or ….

....
Part 11 Marine incidents
123 What is a marine incident
(1) A marine incident is an event causing or involving—
(a) the loss of a person from a ship; or
(b) the death of, or grievous bodily harm to, a person caused
by a ship’s operations; or
(c) the loss or presumed loss or abandonment of a ship; or
(d) a collision with a ship; or
(e) the stranding of a ship; or
(f) material damage to a ship; or
(g) material damage caused by a ship’s operations; or
s 124 64 s 124
Transport Operations (Marine Safety) Act 1994
(h) danger to a person caused by a ship’s operations; or
(i) danger of serious damage to a ship; or
(j) danger of serious damage to a structure caused by a
ship’s operations.

One penalty point in Qld is currently $110.

He didn't get the maximum.

[Sportfish_5]

Maybe wearing a life jacket at all times underway is OK in a small tinnie where you can push it off you when you are in the water if it capsizes on top of you - Maybe

But to say in all boats no matter what size you are required to wear a life jacket is ridiculous. Have you actually tried to swim under water with one of the standard jackets on ? I bet not. If a large trailer boat capsizes and you are trapped having them on is a death sentence.

There are certainly better options if you are serious about safety


Ohh - he certainly deserved a fine but if that is now the standard I hope they keep it consistant and start nailing some of the warriors out there with the same type of $$$$


Cheers

Greg

[subzero]

Gidday Gazza, no offence mate... but thank god you aint a pilot, planes would be falling out of the sky left right and centre running out of fuel because you APPEAR not to consider running out of fuel to be all that important

You mentioned and quoted the requirements for Life Jackets from a site, scroll down further, you are wrong, the Jackets must fit correctly.

Lifejacket

A lifejacket for each person on the boat. Choose from these lifejacket standards: SOLAS, COASTAL, PFD Type 1 or the Australian Standards AS1512.

They must be of a suitable size for the people onboard, as an adult sized jacket works very poorly on a child.

From the actual Qld Maritime site states about Life Jackets

Compulsory equipment for all registrable recreational ships

PFD's/lifejackets
One of the appropriate size for each person (12 months and over) onboard, except if a person is wearing an inflatable diver jacket and wet suit.

They do not specify INTENTIONALY sizes of people, they generally specify weights for the intended user. Short of a long story, children grow into their heads, they are disproprtionate to an adult and you will kill your child if you put a small person in a large Jacket, it will turn them face down in the water... no ifs or buts... THATS A FACT!!!

With regards to the GENERAL SAFETY OBLIGATION

All owners and operators, masters and crew members must ensure the ship is:
- Safe.
- Properly equipped and crewed.
- Operated in a safe manner.

In short, these general safety obligations prohibit a ship from going to sea if it is not properly built and maintained, equipped, crewed and operated in accordance with its proposed operating environment.

The Act provides penalties for breach of safety obligations of up to $A37,000 or one year imprisonment. Should the breach cause death or grievous bodily harm to a person, the penalty is up to $A375,000 or imprisonment for two years.

I was active on the Rescue scene untill recently, I am still a member of the unit and actively participate where ever I can.

In all the time I was there, I attended countless flat batterys, run out of fuel's, lost people, helping boats to shelter. I NEVER GOT UPSET WITH THE PEOPLE because of this, as said, we all make mistakes.... BUT HOWEVER... when you are talking 1 adult in a boat doing absolutely everything wrong.... to hell with him...
MR TROY WINCHESTER WAS CHARGED, PLEADED GUILTY TO AND WAS CONVICTED OF UNSAFE OPERATION OF A VESSEL
He was not charged with being lost, (He was not sure where he was apart from between Morton and the mainland) out of fuel, (As I understand it he didnt even make it half way back, thats good judgement on fuel and only just ran out), having ill fitting Life Jackets for his kids, (Which was the shops fault) possibly/probably not having flares (Conveniently explains the lack of flares on the vessel when they were found as he said he let them off but said they werent seen by anyone... yea right... my opinion only though) Why was he singled out and made an example off... I dont believe he was... havent seen or heard that mentioned anywhere except in here...

Why was he charged under the General Safety Obligation "Unsafe Operation Of A Vessel", because he was so far removed from having made 1 or 2 mistakes... he broke practicly every rule in the book and risked those that he should have held dearest to him... he wouldnt accept responsibility for his actions and was a supposedly experienced deckie on a Commercial Vessel who SHOULD have known better than most of the people on this site how to do things the right way... Those that do these things in a proffesional environmeant MUST take responsibility for their own actions especially and should be expected to maintain a higher standard than a rec boater... I am Commercial, I HAVE MADE MISTAKES, WILL MAKE THEM AGAIN, hopefully not the same ones, and certainly not multiple stupid mistakes at once....

If this was a Cop who blew over .5 on a brethyliser you would all be saying good job, he should have known better.., a Commercial Skipper who ran through our fishing lines, a Jet Skier who cut across our bow, a dive boat that pulled up beside us, a Trawler that rapes and pillages the Bay of fish... its shoot the bast@rd, throw rocks at him, cut his lines... F3@k, even meet in a car park and smash his f-n head in and so on... all comments I have seen in here over the last year or so....
BUT GOD PERISH THE THOUGHT, dont fine an absolute blo@dy clown because he is a solo dad who is taking his kids fishing and is being picked on by the Cops and the Courts... Bullsh@t, the bloke got everything he deserved and that is why he plead guilty....

Their are accidents and their are accidents, if your family was killed by a person that lost control in the rain on a greasy surface... you could understand to a certain extent if you know what I mean... if they were killed by some pr@ck racing another car, you would want his balls in a bag. This guy should have handed over the bag if his kids were killed and wether you like to believe it or not, we are only talking about a difference of minute or two in the outcome being different... YES SUPPOSITION, YES GUESSWORK, YES OPINION from me

Comments such as why are the laws harder or any different on the water than on the land speak for themselves, just as the laws for Aircraft are stricter than those for on the water, you cant get out and walk if you run out of fuel etc!!. These laws are put in place to guide those that can not act sensibly, they are desighned to protect the stupid, but more importantly to protect the innocent, especially young children from those stupid people whom are responsible for them....

Thumps, their is not 1 comment from you I find fault with, you are a person whom previously has had to look upon the horror of carnage on the roads caused by stupidity, not by mistakes, to delliver that news to the parents that their kids are dead all being part of the role of all Coppers as they progress through the ranks... I recognise the strong and just beliefs you hold as a result of what you have been through, I further recognise what your wife Juicy would have had to put up with from you on the nights that you came home from a scene, devastated in the horrors of the day that you have had to face and her being their for you if you could bear to bring yourself to talk to her....
AND DONT ANYONE TELL ME, whats this got to do with this topic, this is what some poor Cop could very well have had to delliver the news to the Mother of these kids that had entrusted them with her dick head husband...

OK, fire away.... I am as ready for it as I will ever get I suppose
Cheers Lloyd

[bidkev]

<snip>


OK, fire away.... I am as ready for it as I will ever get I suppose
Cheers Lloyd

Not from me mate. You have recently been applauded and I applaud you further. Anyone who disagrees with what you say need only to remind themselves that is you, and your kind, who picks up the pieces and wjho we rely on when things go pear shape. Good on yer for being a lot more diplomatic than I could ever be.

kev

I asked for strength and life gave me difficulties to make me strong.

[lunar_c]

By participating in this thread, I was hoping that collectively we could work up a rational analysis of the events of that day.

Subzero -
Do you know for a fact that the children were wearing adult size PFD's?
Do you have better information than us as to his location when he received assistance?
If you know that there were no flares - are you aware of any other safety items not present?
Do you recommend that hot flares be dropped in the bottom of the boat after use?
If he was communicating via SMS, how did you conclude that he was lost?
Why are Coastal and SOLAS PFD's available in only one size?

You state "he broke practicly every rule in the book"
For the benefit of myself and anyone else who wants to review their safety preparedness and decision making in light of this conviction - could you be more specific?

You also use the phrase "ill fitting" and "appropriate size".
Do you have a workable definition?

Thanks

Ben

[subzero]

lunar_c, I will reply to your questions tommorrow night when I get home from work as this will take some time to do.
I dont want to take short cuts as people will pick me up on some things not explained fully and take me to task.
I rise at 4am so I dont have the time just now as I had better get some sleep.
Cheers Lloyd

[cooky]

IN the State i come from ...it is compulsary for everyone onboard to wear a PFD at all times a boat is underway...and i advocate this....and make mention of uniform State laws.

you are kidding I hope. I can absolutley guarantee you 110% that if this law is introduced to QLD, a lovely 5.4glass boat (mine) will be listed for sale the next day - I'd want to get in early before all the others. If I get wrapped in cotton wool anymore in this country I don't know what i'll do.
I like using my common sense and the laws, etc are one of the main causes for the decay of common sense (something or someone will tell me what to do surely).

Oh and I have two kids that haven't ever been in my boat (3 and 1.5yrs) because my wife believes it's too dangerous for young kids in a boat. Does that mean that her opinion is that everyone else who does is reckless? I'm hoping to change this soon - bought the flash lifejackets the other week.

[thumps]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200....htm?gippsland

http://www.themercury.news.com.au/co...5E3462,00.html

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...796710125.html

http://www.safeboating.org.au/Equipm...kets/index.asp

[Gazza]

Hi Subzero, as you know 'Thumps' is WRONG in even suggesting PFD's "must" be worn at all times in Q'ld
(although you didn't pick this up, it's o.k.)

the other issue, was if 10L of petrol was given, was there an incident?
(i take it ,by your post, he intentionally expected to run out of petrol 1/2 way and get a "top-up"...on purpose ,to me hard to believe that was his intent)

Subzero.....prac. test 4 U

How many times does VMR?/water-police when they do a safety-equip. "check", make the occupants put on their PFD's to ensure errrrrr....correct fit!!!

you know ,i know....it's e.g. 3 boaties, and a 1,2,3 pfd's counted ,with seeya mate ,have a nice day.

do you ever do a petrol "check" ??? at the pin , to ensure every one makes it back to JW or CT pt or what if they launched from carbrook??

Have U failed in a "duty of care" ....of course you haven't
Mate ,you guys do an excellent job ,but unfortunately it's to get people out of the sh!t ,not to prevent shit happening.

p.s. Mods ,please delete picture if any offence is taken ,out-of-context.

Gazza.....top gunnnnnnnn- aaahhhhh