Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac
OK, now I'm baffled. You stated that if you can't see, "you don't go" and that the responsibility to avoid unlit objects (swimmers, boats, canoes, etc) lies with the boat operator. Yet you state above you've crossed the lake many times when you could have easily run down a swimmer (assuming there had been one in your path) because "it isn't possible to see every obstacle in the water at night". So what would have been your story should such a thing have occurred to you some dark, rainy night ? What makes your unsafe speed different from the unsafe speed in this incident ?
|
I'm not suggesting the powerboat was going to fast. I don't know if the powerboater was at fault at all. What I disagree with is the idea that because the kayaker was at fault the powerboater is AUTOMATICALLY innocent. I also disagree with the idea that if you hit something without a light it is no problem.
Perhaps I should have said "if you can't see well enough, you don't go" it is not possible to see everything at night. This is in contrast to the "I don't see any lights, so I can go" theory I disagree with.