Posted by kelphead on August 09, 2000 at 12:25:33:
In Reply to: Re: mike, i believe you missed some of the sentiment from below... posted by Jim Hoffmann on August 08, 2000 at 20:19:55:
for your gracious offer, i will take you up
on it if i need more local diving history. i
will add your info to the info i have gotten
and will continue to get from other long time
cal divers.
re:your opinion that govt rules are less flexible
than industry rules, i can understand your point
there, but if a lobby is strong enough, it tends
to get its way w/the legislature and in that
regard govt is flexible towards very strong lobbies.
however, i disagree w/you that industry self regulation
should be held as some high standard when instructors,
as i'm sure you very well know, are certifying people
who are not proficient in their diving skills and
have not yet mastered them.
many divers are even shocked and concerned that some
agencies have started to certify junior divers at
age 10, trying to bring in more $$ to a tiny and
limited growth industry. ultimately, the industry
is just that: an industry, a business concerned w/profit and
growth potential first and foremost. safety would
either be equal to profit interest, or will come in
a close 2nd; either way, i certainly don't delude
myself that the industry is more concerned about
its financial survival.
self-reg only works if it is enforced vigorously,
and i don't predict that end results would be any
better than if a govt agency did the same thing.
end results, i believe, is the focus (or should be the
focus) instead of how flexible or inflexible laws
can be.
i think we both would like the same end result--safer
divers and fewer fatalities--but it's a matter of
HOW to go about achieving this very necessary goal.
thanx!! for some stimulating discussion.
kelphead.