BUI: It's anyone operating the vessel right?

[hummingway]

Allowing students to bring beer doesn't seem terribly professional. It would seem different were it a sunset cruise or such.

[psneeld]

Funny...only one generation ago and the 2-3 martini business lunch drove this country to unbelievable greatness after WWII...where did we go wrong????

[hummingway]

Liver failure and heart attacks thinned the herd!

[psneeld]

Bottom line...did it make them any better or worse? More professional or not? More capable or not?

Todays stigma of alcohol has transcended reality in my opinion....it's NOT the root cause of so many ill's it's associated with. It may amplify...but it's not always the cause.

[tallyhorob]

how about the way we do it down in the keys, bring the beer and once you drink you are done for the day. No more running lines, no more swimming. Some people are done in an hour and drinking and laying out, others never have a drink. Set the ground rules and let them decide.

[lorenzo b]

Todays stigma of alcohol has transcended reality in my opinion....it's NOT the root cause of so many ill's it's associated with. It may amplify...but it's not always the cause.

Causality is virtually impossible to prove in an individual accident, but broad statistical analysis of various factors can guide us to safer behavior. 50% of all car fatalities involve at least one driver being drunk. Alcohol and drug abuse are involved in 70% of emergency room admissions.
That said, I recall a great article in the New Yorker about a horrendous car accident apparently caused because a driver simply didn't see a stop sign. The driver didn't expect a stop sign to be there. In lab studies they sat people down in front of a screen to count how many times they saw a red or green light. Every so often they flashed a picture of an elephant, and nobody saw it. Accidents do happen and indeed are just that.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by lorenzo b

Todays stigma of alcohol has transcended reality in my opinion....it's NOT the root cause of so many ill's it's associated with. It may amplify...but it's not always the cause.

Causality is virtually impossible to prove in an individual accident, but broad statistical analysis of various factors can guide us to safer behavior. 50% of all car fatalities involve at least one driver being drunk. Alcohol and drug abuse are involved in 70% of emergency room admissions.
That said, I recall a great article in the New Yorker about a horrendous car accident apparently caused because a driver simply didn't see a stop sign. The driver didn't expect a stop sign to be there. In lab studies they sat people down in front of a screen to count how many times they saw a red or green light. Every so often they flashed a picture of an elephant, and nobody saw it. Accidents do happen and indeed are just that.

Having been the head of a safety branch in the military...I can assure you that the drinking and driving statistics are nearly worthless...for a period of time and maybe to this day...drunk driving statistics (alcohol related incidents) were tallied even if one passenger in the back seat had a drink and the driver was a non-drinker.

Another lessoned learned military safety circles...accidents "don't" just happen...most if not all can be avoided some well placed effort to eliminate or modify human error/behavior...

and lastly I would say the danger of using broad statistical analysis forces us to pass sweeping legislation that doesn't really solve root cause issues....an example...some studies have shown that many "drunk driving" accidents were more fatigue related than actual alcohol related. The studies show that the accident would have never occured had the "drunk driver" been driving during the day even with the same BAC. Unfortunately these studies rarely get wide attention because of the "stigma" I was refering to.

[Lancerbye]

I think that trying to rationalized drinking while operating any vehicle, boat or equipment is absurd. Any amount of alcohol will take the edge off your senses. Some are affected more than others, also having eaten, outside temperature, and a variety of other catalysts will either help or hurt the situation. We will soon see a zero tolerance law brought in because of the number of incidents that have alcolhol or drugs as a common contributing factor. I enjoy a glass of wine at anchor but fear that this right may be removed because people wish to abuse the present system.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by Lancerbye

I think that trying to rationalized drinking while operating any vehicle, boat or equipment is absurd. Any amount of alcohol will take the edge off your senses. Some are affected more than others, also having eaten, outside temperature, and a variety of other catalysts will either help or hurt the situation. We will soon see a zero tolerance law brought in because of the number of incidents that have alcolhol or drugs as a common contributing factor. I enjoy a glass of wine at anchor but fear that this right may be removed because people wish to abuse the present system.

You made my point...one size doesn't fit all... but because of irrational fear that alcohol in general is the culprit...it's that mentality that breeds zero tolerance policies.

Just because alcohol is present...doesn't mean that it had ANYTHING to do with the accident....otherwise we should outlaw boating for slower reactioned or slower witted people.

It's the individual that's responsible for their drinking habits...it shouldn't be the government. The "safe speed" rule in the navrules follows the same mentality rather than setting worldwide speed limits...it allows the "full judgement" of the skipper to determine safe speed...not some arbitrary number.

Plus for all the "zero tolerance" advocates...the govenment has spent a lot of time and money determining the "legal limit" to safely limit alcohol consumption and the operation of machinery. In fact they set it once in most places but accidents were still happening...so they lowered it again...guess what? If they may make it zero tolerance or one drink a day...do you really think accidents will stop? Of course not...that wouldn't be rational.

[Blue Stocking]

Originally Posted by psneeld

Funny...only one generation ago and the 2-3 martini business lunch drove this country to unbelievable greatness after WWII...where did we go wrong????

We allowed the Peter Principle to promote them to manage our banks, investment houses, major corporations,etc-to where they screwed us, and destroyed the world economy.

Err on the side of caution, and let the crew have a few on the sail back to the mooring

[psneeld]

To get back on track for the OP.....just because someone is at the helm of a vessel does not mean they are in charge or the operator....but they are partly responsible for operating if they have an "essential role" in addition to the skipper's duties such as lookout or linehandler, etc... However...it's really never perfectly clear on a small boat unless it's in writing or "common knowledge" of the crew how "resposibility" is spread around.

It's funny...on an uninspected vessel there is the BAC limit of .04%. On an inspected vessel it's no consumption prior to 4 hrs of assuming watch.

Here's a link to the alcohol rules.............

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations:

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by Blue Stocking

We allowed the Peter Principle to promote them to manage our banks, investment houses, major corporations,etc-to where they screwed us, and destroyed the world economy.

Seems to me it was AFTER that generations rise and rule that the downturn occurred... to me, more on the "baby boomer" watch with all the new "yuppie" rules that the downfall occurred.

Who was actually "in charge" would be difficult to say.

[David_Old_Jersey]

I would not only take the beer, but I would make sure everyone had some Except you

Why? Well, if there is an incident - makes the folk onboard less likely to grass the skipper up for running an unlicenced and uninsured training vessel as the alcohol makes them clearly in the line of fire (whether a factor in the incident or not).

They may still mention it , but the response is they were under the influence of alcohol (woo! ) and therefore there recollections / judgements easier to question by you.......and also law enforcement like plucking low hanging fruit

Risk Management - not always about the obvious answers . nor a simple no

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by psneeld

Who was actually "in charge" would be difficult to say.

Nobody. Indeed, if even an alcoholic drug user had been in charge things would have turned out far better - from laziness and not being so "clever" , if nothing else

[lorenzo b]

I think it is interesting to note that recreational cruisers are far more tolerant of alcohol use while boating then professional captains on commercial vessels. I have never seen a tug boat captain enjoying a casual beer on board. It just isn't done, ever. Even fishing boats that spend long boring days going and coming from fishing grounds will not allow any alcohol on board.