Fletch wrote:Im not sure if any of you saw this article in the LA Times. It is absolutely groundbreaking and may have major consequences in the scuba industry which will no doubt spill over into other sports industries (including the climbing and mountaineering industry).
Heres the article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 8808.story
Let me start off by saying that I am a certified Scuba Instructor and Divemaster and have been diving for 20+ years. Most of my days diving were in Southern California and I spent some time working boats as a Divemaster. I've actually been on the boat in question a few times and have dove at the location in question.
What makes this unique is that for the first time in 50+ years of the recreational diving community, a "guide" has been found guilty of neglegence in a court of law. Im not going to go into the details of the case because frankly, the facts aren't important (it's California, right? ). What's important is the ruling will set a precedent in the scuba industry (which was always viewed as impermeable to the legal system). The thought behind this was that if you were dumb enough to strap compressed air to your back and dive in the ocean, no one except yourself could be held responsible. Now that has all changed. This will push up insurance costs for boats, dive shops, and divers, not to mention put blood in the water for lawyers to sue the shit out of folks trying to go diving. They just opened up Pandora's Box and it can't be shut again.
Im wondering if you can see this spilling over into the guided climbing industry. Can you see the headlines now, "Climber's guide didn't tie a figure eight to a man's harness while climbing Everest and he fell to his death. Family awarded $2.1MM..." Insurance and legal costs will skyrocket and the guiding community will no doubt have to pass this cost on to its clients (if they will pay it). I don't want to get into the "well, just don't hire a guide then" argument because sooner or later, climbers will start suing the park service or the plane companies, etc...
But, what are your thoughts?
A. The facts are always important. That you chose to dismiss them belies a lot about your appreciation of the verdict and it's ramifications. Had the facts been different, the outcome might have been different.
B. The man was abandoned by those who brought him out into the water.
C. There were consequences for those actions.
D. You have given no substantive reasons why this will have any effect on climbing guides.