Alcohol limits for non-professional mariners

[carlt]

Fortunately none of my boats carry three or more masts, therefore, they are not ships.

It seems strange that the govt. thinks it can just change long established definitions when it feels like it.

[JohnO]

This section applies to a person who— (a)is on board a ship which is under way,(is exercising, or purporting or attempting to exercise, a function in connection with the navigation of the ship,

 

(a)“ship” includes every description of vessel used in navigation, and(a reference to the navigation of a vessel includes a reference to the control or direction, or participation in the control or direction, of the course of a vessel.

that will be the navigator too then.

so could you be "drunk in charge" of a Nicholson's?

[mayalld]

Fortunately none of my boats carry three or more masts, therefore, they are not ships.

It seems strange that the govt. thinks it can just change long established definitions when it feels like it.

 

They have always done it.

 

Your boats have long been defined as ships in law.

 

that will be the navigator too then.

so could you be "drunk in charge" of a Nicholson's?

 

Quite so.

[bottle]

I believe the law on 'drink driving' is worded so that driving does not have to be involved, the charge is 'drunk in charge' so if they bring in similar wording for 'ships'.

 

You will not be able to be intoxicated at any time.

[NB Alnwick]

I believe the law on 'drink driving' is worded so that driving does not have to be involved, the charge is 'drunk in charge' so if they bring in similar wording for 'ships'.

 

You will not be able to be intoxicated at any time.

 

The next stage will be to make it illegal to be 'in possession' of such substances when in charge.

 

Is it me or is this government obsessed with introducing new laws, restrictions and regulations just for the sake of it . . .

[BigRoj]

There are few drink related incidents on the canals, and those there are, I believe, generally involve inexperienced hire-boaters, not us old hands who know our boats handling characteristics whether very slightly sober or completely off our faces.

I hope this proposal is aimed mainly at the GinPalace Coastal Patrol lot who go out once a year in their corporate owned penis extensions to see how wet the sea is and to make sure the wet-bar is still stocked up.

The sea is a far more unforgiving body of water than the waterways, and a lot less predictable too. It can catch the most sober helmsman out, so anyone with slightly more than single vision due to over-refreshment can be caught totally unaware.

[Sir Nibble]

Is it me or is this government obsessed with introducing new laws, restrictions and regulations just for the sake of it . . .

All governments are.

I hope this proposal is aimed mainly at the GinPalace Coastal Patrol lot who go out once a year in their corporate owned penis extensions to see how wet the sea is and to make sure the wet-bar is still stocked up.

I think you're right, but we are caught up in it nonetheless.

The problem with this is that this law, or rather the limit set by it, does not come over as a rational response to a real problem, and as a result many will not support it. Add to that the fact that it is in the words of the RYA spokesman "Unenforcable"and the overall effect is to bring the law into disrepute and further knock the confidence of the people in their lawmakers.

Those of us who ignore this new law will in doing so be mocking the rule of law itself, since there is niether the will nor resources to punish our mockery the whole thing becomes a farce detrimental to the rule of law, which will have no option but to slink away red faced, its authority compromised.

Once again, without thinking, we all dance the knee jerk jig.

[RupertG]

All governments are.

 

I think you're right, but we are caught up in it nonetheless.

The problem with this is that this law, or rather the limit set by it, does not come over as a rational response to a real problem, and as a result many will not support it. Add to that the fact that it is in the words of the RYA spokesman "Unenforcable"and the overall effect is to bring the law into disrepute and further knock the confidence of the people in their lawmakers.

Those of us who ignore this new law will in doing so be mocking the rule of law itself, since there is niether the will nor resources to punish our mockery the whole thing becomes a farce detrimental to the rule of law, which will have no option but to slink away red faced, its authority compromised.

Once again, without thinking, we all dance the knee jerk jig.

 

Not only that, but such laws are liable to abuse by the authorities. If they want to cause you hassle - either because they think you're up to something or they Just Don't Like You, then all they need do is wait until the top's off the Gordons and bang, you're nicked. That's why the cannabis laws are so popular among the plod, not because they see the stuff as a great social scourge but because it gives them a very useful hook to reel in scrotes without having to go to the bother of finding out what they're really up to.

 

Bad laws are bad in many ways.

[Dr Bradley]

My (dodgy) memory tells me there are far more alcohol/canal related incidents involving people walking along the towath than on boats so "drunk in charge of a towpath" should be a first step.

 

The plan is to make everything so utterly safe that the whole population is restricted to home (where most accidents happen) and work (the second most popular place fore accidents) and we become a subdued, docile population that slaves away at work to pay our taxes and don't cause the rich and powerful any trouble.

[mayalld]

There are few drink related incidents on the canals, and those there are, I believe, generally involve inexperienced hire-boaters, not us old hands who know our boats handling characteristics whether very slightly sober or completely off our faces.

I hope this proposal is aimed mainly at the GinPalace Coastal Patrol lot who go out once a year in their corporate owned penis extensions to see how wet the sea is and to make sure the wet-bar is still stocked up.

The sea is a far more unforgiving body of water than the waterways, and a lot less predictable too. It can catch the most sober helmsman out, so anyone with slightly more than single vision due to over-refreshment can be caught totally unaware.

 

Regardless of who it is aimed at, it catches canal boaters, and you can be sure that some smart arse copper who needs to boost his stats will make full use of it.

[CanalWalker]

I dont have the power to see into the future so I dont know what or who will be covered by any law that may be written and passed in the future (unlike some here) but does anyone know if the current law for commercial mariners covers the canal network, if so were people upset about that in 2004 when that law was passed?

[AllanW]

I wouldn't worry about getting caught by the police...

 

When a 43 foot long, 6'10" wide canal boat with a top speed of 4mph went missing the police were utterly baffled as to its whereabouts. Given that such a vessel was confined to the canals and that your average canal boat is about as stealthy as a hod of bricks in the middle of the road, one must conclude that the art of detection is not what was.

 

Allan

[John Orentas]

Lets make it clear to everyone that we are talking about inland waterways here, sea boats have their own set of rules and conventions, there are very few sea boats that are not 'dry', when out of harbour anyway. If for no other reason the last thing you want is a pint when you are being tossed about whilst crossing the Channel, it can be difficult enough retaining the contents of your stomach at the best of times.

 

Surprisingly there are very few 'laws' relating to what you get up to when at sea, thats why we see those idiots trying to cross the Atlantic in a bathtub, nobody has the authority to stop them.

[DaveR]

With road vehicles the "drunk in charge" routine does not involve actually driving, some cases have come to court where the driver has gone to his car to collect his coat to walk home but the law took the view he could have been intending to dive it.

 

So what happens to the dinner party onboard, or even the barbie on the canal side, where numerous nectars are inbibed and you step onboard to offload some ballast - could that be a chargeable offense? Would you have to ensure that someone stayed sober to look after the ignition keys, what about the lock keys would they need to be secured also?

 

At sea on the big ships it is easy, no drink allowed - it is the floating gin palaces that can be a problem and the desire to curtail their drunken antics may be the desired effect but one wonders if this piece of legislation is enforceable.

[NB Alnwick]

At sea on the big ships it is easy, no drink allowed - it is the floating gin palaces that can be a problem and the desire to curtail their drunken antics may be the desired effect but one wonders if this piece of legislation is enforceable.

 

Are you suggesting that gentlemen in charge of Her Majesty's Ships are not allowed a 'Pink Gin' ?

[CanalWalker]

Too Many Pink Gins get you in Court!

[StoneHenge]

I would be happy to see those who overload boats or have 20 raging hormone females all drunk of alco pops stopped and made to at least moor up for the rest of the day if they are all over the place, or happy blokes on a stag do etc.

 

Whilst PC plod would find it damn near impossible to find me drunk in charge of the point end of a tiller, as I don't generally drink whilst steering (personal choice, apart from tea (obligatory), I don't think there is any harm in a pint or two whilst cruising or stopping off for a pub lunch.

 

They really do their best to take the fun out of everything. I completely hate with a passion drink drivers on the road, but I've yet to see someone chugging along in a 15 ton vessel cause major problems other than bump the odd bridge or mis-judge a bend.

[carlt]

Regardless of who it is aimed at, it catches canal boaters, and you can be sure that some smart arse copper who needs to boost his stats will make full use of it.

Presumably, Dave, once it becomes law, you will regard it as your duty to report anyone you believe to be under the influence. In the same way you would report a licence dodger?

[mayalld]

Presumably, Dave, once it becomes law, you will regard it as your duty to report anyone you believe to be under the influence. In the same way you would report a licence dodger?

 

As those who flout this law are not actually doing any harm to anybody, then no.

 

I dont have the power to see into the future so I dont know what or who will be covered by any law that may be written and passed in the future (unlike some here)

The law has already been written, and enacted.

 

All that is awaited is the Statutory Instrument to bring that section into force, and to make exemptions.

 

We have now been told exactly what the exemptions will be by a government minister.

 

I see no crystal ball gazing here.

[carlt]

As those who flout this law are not actually doing any harm to anybody, then no.

That's exactly the answer I expected.

[CanalWalker]

The law has already been written, and enacted.

 

The news today says that "The government will publish draft regulations shortly" and that "The Department will be consulting on a set of draft regulations later in the Summer" but you say the this is not a draft and has already passed through parliament and is now law?

 

An RNLI spokeswoman said it expected to be consulted by the government before any legislation is put to Parliament.

She added: "The RNLI is not opposed to the proposed legislation but believes it may be difficult to enforce.

 

The RNLI seem to think that it has not been enacted and is just a draft proposal.

Edited June 14, 2007 by redstarafloat

[mayalld]

That's exactly the answer I expected.

 

Glad to oblige!

 

The news today says that "The government will publish draft regulations shortly" and that "The Department will be consulting on a set of draft regulations later in the Summer" but you say the this is not a draft and has already passed through parliament and is now law?

 

The Act has been passed. It is s80 of the Railway and Transport Safety Act 2003.

 

That section has not yet been brought into force.

 

So, all that is now required is a commencement order, and regulations to specify exemptions.

[carlt]

As those who flout this law are not actually doing any harm to anybody, then no.

Of course the was the time the patrol officer told me of where a well known jakey, upset when not given right of way at a bridgehole, spun his boat round ,raced after the elderly couple, caught up with them at Hillmorton locks, jumped on their boat and assaulted them with a mooring pin.

 

Oh and the seven stitches in my head after looking at a boating pisshead 'in the wrong way' so he clubbed me with his tiller bar.

 

The drunken lads coming through Braunston tunnel one night on a hire boat and hitting the grp cruiser moored along from me so hard they popped the rubbing strakes and would have sank the boat, if I hadn't been there to keep it afloat until the owner returned.

 

The drunk who flooded the garage on Hatton flight when he drained the pound above them.

Edited June 14, 2007 by carlt

[mayalld]

Of course the was the time the patrol officer told me of where a well known jakey, upset when not given right of way at a bridgehole, spun his boat round ,raced after the elderly couple, caught up with them at Hillmorton locks, jumped on their boat and assaulted them with a mooring pin.

 

Oh and the seven stitches in my head after looking at a boating pisshead 'in the wrong way' so he clubbed me with his tiller bar.

 

The drunken lads coming through Braunston tunnel one night on a hire boat and hitting the gpr cruiser moored along from me so hard they popped the rubbing strakes and would have sank the boat, if I hadn't been there to keep it afloat until the owner returned.

 

The drunk who flooded the garage on Hatton flight when he drained the pound above them.

 

All of whom were already breaking existing laws.

 

They should try enforcing the laws that already exist before coming up with new ones that are too broad brush and which impinge upon peoples lives where it isn't necessary.

[harleyj]

Good to see "The Old Dart" becoming a nanny state just like it's antipodean offspring (Australia). If we had narrowboats and canals in Ozz you would have to wear a helmet, seatbelts, lifejackets and there would have to be signs all along the canals warning of the possible danger of falling in the drink when drunk.