.05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
-
- Seadog
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:48 pm
- Location: Busselton WA
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
I hope you catch a few Scotty, look forward to the report
he fishes he fishes he fishes its the only thing in life all he ever gets is hell from his fed up wife
- Melv
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:35 pm
- Location: is everything
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
“Wet the boat, wet the throat” was always my mantra. Nothing better than a few tins on the water but at the end of the day most of us still have to drive home unless you’re lucky enough to have a sober bob on board. Unfortunately most of my deckies were A grade guzzlers.......scottmac wrote:Can’t wait for the traditional beer at first light tomorrow, as soon as the hull is wet. Followed by many more!
Melv
-
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 1918
- Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
Nothing beats breakfast beers tearing down Sampan or any where at first light .scottmac wrote:Can’t wait for the traditional beer at first light tomorrow, as soon as the hull is wet. Followed by many more!
Frig off and let us enjoy our beers responsibly while fishing, sleep overnight and drive home safely under the limit.
-
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 888
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 8:20 am
- Location: Darwin
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
Rum first then beer for lunch
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:05 pm
- Location: Palmerston
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
balou wrote:Nothing beats breakfast beers tearing down Sampan or any where at first light .scottmac wrote:Can’t wait for the traditional beer at first light tomorrow, as soon as the hull is wet. Followed by many more!
Frig off and let us enjoy our beers responsibly while fishing, sleep overnight and drive home safely under the limit.
Absolutely
Couldn't have said it any better.
-
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 629
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:25 am
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
Factors impacting achievement (of Royal Life Saving Australia's goal to achieve a 50% reductions in drownings by 2020)
Since 2002/03 there has been a:
• 24% population increase
• 50% population increase in people aged 65+
• 49% increase in overseas migration
• 22% increase in people born overseas
• 101% increase in overseas inbound tourism
• 108% increase in international students
This is from the Royal Life Saving Drowning Report 2017 that Natasha Fyles has been using to promote legislative change. Oddly enough there is no mention of BAC of skippers in Northern Territory waters in the entire report. She is quoting this report and it's finding that the Territory has the highest drowning rate per 100000 of population. What she fails to mention is that the Territory's actual drownings (8) was the second lowest in the nation. Lowest (4) ACT. Given the differences in climate, remoteness of locations etc I would have thought this would be applauded.
The only data that is presented on these figures is gender. There is no context in relation to age, location or circumstances of these drownings so in terms of the BAC of skippers is entirely useless in terms of supporting legislative change.
As for former Chief Justice Riley's 'there's no evidence to support it, but there's no reason not to introduce it' line, I'm stunned. I can only imagine what his reaction would have been if a defence or prosecution team used the same premise in the Supreme Court.
Who would have thought that the Westminster system of governance and making of law would be so simple???
Since 2002/03 there has been a:
• 24% population increase
• 50% population increase in people aged 65+
• 49% increase in overseas migration
• 22% increase in people born overseas
• 101% increase in overseas inbound tourism
• 108% increase in international students
This is from the Royal Life Saving Drowning Report 2017 that Natasha Fyles has been using to promote legislative change. Oddly enough there is no mention of BAC of skippers in Northern Territory waters in the entire report. She is quoting this report and it's finding that the Territory has the highest drowning rate per 100000 of population. What she fails to mention is that the Territory's actual drownings (8) was the second lowest in the nation. Lowest (4) ACT. Given the differences in climate, remoteness of locations etc I would have thought this would be applauded.
The only data that is presented on these figures is gender. There is no context in relation to age, location or circumstances of these drownings so in terms of the BAC of skippers is entirely useless in terms of supporting legislative change.
As for former Chief Justice Riley's 'there's no evidence to support it, but there's no reason not to introduce it' line, I'm stunned. I can only imagine what his reaction would have been if a defence or prosecution team used the same premise in the Supreme Court.
Who would have thought that the Westminster system of governance and making of law would be so simple???
- dannett
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 10:37 am
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
Might as well have used last months Bunning's flyer.smed wrote:Factors impacting achievement (of Royal Life Saving Australia's goal to achieve a 50% reductions in drownings by 2020)
Since 2002/03 there has been a:
• 24% population increase
• 50% population increase in people aged 65+
• 49% increase in overseas migration
• 22% increase in people born overseas
• 101% increase in overseas inbound tourism
• 108% increase in international students
This is from the Royal Life Saving Drowning Report 2017 that Natasha Fyles has been using to promote legislative change. Oddly enough there is no mention of BAC of skippers in Northern Territory waters in the entire report. She is quoting this report and it's finding that the Territory has the highest drowning rate per 100000 of population. What she fails to mention is that the Territory's actual drownings (8) was the second lowest in the nation. Lowest (4) ACT. Given the differences in climate, remoteness of locations etc I would have thought this would be applauded.
The only data that is presented on these figures is gender. There is no context in relation to age, location or circumstances of these drownings so in terms of the BAC of skippers is entirely useless in terms of supporting legislative change.
As for former Chief Justice Riley's 'there's no evidence to support it, but there's no reason not to introduce it' line, I'm stunned. I can only imagine what his reaction would have been if a defence or prosecution team used the same premise in the Supreme Court.
Who would have thought that the Westminster system of governance and making of law would be so simple???
- scottmac
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 1636
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:30 pm
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
As seemingly with every decision by governments, state and federal these days, I smell a rat! Hidden agendas everywhere. There is no such thing as people power anymore.smed wrote:Factors impacting achievement (of Royal Life Saving Australia's goal to achieve a 50% reductions in drownings by 2020)
Since 2002/03 there has been a:
• 24% population increase
• 50% population increase in people aged 65+
• 49% increase in overseas migration
• 22% increase in people born overseas
• 101% increase in overseas inbound tourism
• 108% increase in international students
This is from the Royal Life Saving Drowning Report 2017 that Natasha Fyles has been using to promote legislative change. Oddly enough there is no mention of BAC of skippers in Northern Territory waters in the entire report. She is quoting this report and it's finding that the Territory has the highest drowning rate per 100000 of population. What she fails to mention is that the Territory's actual drownings (8) was the second lowest in the nation. Lowest (4) ACT. Given the differences in climate, remoteness of locations etc I would have thought this would be applauded.
The only data that is presented on these figures is gender. There is no context in relation to age, location or circumstances of these drownings so in terms of the BAC of skippers is entirely useless in terms of supporting legislative change.
As for former Chief Justice Riley's 'there's no evidence to support it, but there's no reason not to introduce it' line, I'm stunned. I can only imagine what his reaction would have been if a defence or prosecution team used the same premise in the Supreme Court.
Who would have thought that the Westminster system of governance and making of law would be so simple???
-
- Jedi Seadog
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:26 pm
Re: .05 for NT boaters ... here we go !!!! What's next ???
I wonder what the difference between ya boat skippers and those riding quad bikes andside by sides.
Both have no rego or licensing. Both are “large machines that have the potential to cause injury”
If you looked at the stats I’m sure there are a lot more deaths caused by quads than boating whilst under the influence.
For me the issue is not about the actual law. It wouldn’t affect me at all. I don’t drink whilst I’m boating. But it’s the fact that we need to bring in a law because it’s in down south.
The report about damage caused by alcohol recommend it. But it should be put up as a success not a failure. There is no damage or death coming from this. There is a law saying if you stuff up and also happen to be drunk you will be in even more poop.
What they are trying to bring in is not what happens down south. But the reason they have what they have is because what the labour is proposing (altho I think they are still unsure them shelf what they are proposing) simply can not be enforceable and is a law for laws sake.
What they should say is, if you abuse the responsibility that the government is giving you, than we will have no choice but to bring in laws like down south (along with boat rego, license etc etc)
So it’s up to you (the boaters) to be responsible, and not be the fark head that ruins it for the whole of the territory.
Both have no rego or licensing. Both are “large machines that have the potential to cause injury”
If you looked at the stats I’m sure there are a lot more deaths caused by quads than boating whilst under the influence.
For me the issue is not about the actual law. It wouldn’t affect me at all. I don’t drink whilst I’m boating. But it’s the fact that we need to bring in a law because it’s in down south.
The report about damage caused by alcohol recommend it. But it should be put up as a success not a failure. There is no damage or death coming from this. There is a law saying if you stuff up and also happen to be drunk you will be in even more poop.
What they are trying to bring in is not what happens down south. But the reason they have what they have is because what the labour is proposing (altho I think they are still unsure them shelf what they are proposing) simply can not be enforceable and is a law for laws sake.
What they should say is, if you abuse the responsibility that the government is giving you, than we will have no choice but to bring in laws like down south (along with boat rego, license etc etc)
So it’s up to you (the boaters) to be responsible, and not be the fark head that ruins it for the whole of the territory.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 52 Replies
- 10903 Views
-
Last post by nomad
-
- 11 Replies
- 4006 Views
-
Last post by nomad
-
- 0 Replies
- 763 Views
-
Last post by Matt Flynn