Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Kali's Law
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Hooverfb View PostWhy wouldn't someone be for this? Operating a boat on public waters is dangerous,and if people are too dumb. There sho hold be consequences.
Comment
-
I think wearing a PFD and the kill switch should be required just like a seat belt in a vehicle.
Nanny state...whatever. It saves lives. The recent thread just on here about the tragic loss of the Kemah Police Chief is a good reminder that accidents can happen to anyone at anytime. Had he been wearing a PFD, there may have been a different outcome.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jds247 View PostI'm against any new law. A law us just a feel good gesture that allows the government to make money off of you.. if a person is not smart enough to wear the kill switch then this won't change a thing.. Just like feel good gun laws do nothing to stop criminals.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jds247 View PostI'm against any new law. A law us just a feel good gesture that allows the government to make money off of you.. if a person is not smart enough to wear the kill switch then this won't change a thing.. Just like feel good gun laws do nothing to stop criminals.Last edited by Hoggslayer; 06-11-2019, 12:46 PM.
Comment
-
I think I can side with the OP. I absolutely oppose any legislation that's based on emotion, rather than factual data. Seatbelts: There's actual to data to support that yes, they do in fact save lives and are effective. The same precedent should be set for this law. Show the data that supports that this law is effective and that wearing a killswitch would have actually mattered. Without evidence(More than 1 singular incident) we should not be creating new laws. We all would agree that banning supressors after 1 mass shooting would be pretty ludicrous; why is it any different in this situation.
Comment
-
I’m ok with this one. Boats don’t stop on their own if the operator gets thrown out. It happens more often than people realize. If the kill switch was worn that boat probably won’t circle back around and kill you while you’re in the water.
Don’t wear a seatbelt and that’s on you. But if you get thrown out of your boat and it kills someone else that’s where I have an issue.
Comment
-
Originally posted by gb22250 View PostI’m ok with this one. Boats don’t stop on their own if the operator gets thrown out. It happens more often than people realize. If the kill switch was worn that boat probably won’t circle back around and kill you while you’re in the water.
Don’t wear a seatbelt and that’s on you. But if you get thrown out of your boat and it kills someone else that’s where I have an issue.
Endangering yourself is one thing, creating an externality that endangers others is very different
Comment
-
Originally posted by TexasArchery_27 View PostI think I can side with the OP. I absolutely oppose any legislation that's based on emotion, rather than factual data. Seatbelts: There's actual to data to support that yes, they do in fact save lives and are effective. The same precedent should be set for this law. Show the data that supports that this law is effective and that wearing a killswitch would have actually mattered. Without evidence(More than 1 singular incident) we should not be creating new laws. We all would agree that banning supressors after 1 mass shooting would be pretty ludicrous; why is it any different in this situation.
I'm for the new law.
Comment
Comment