Idiots on the River Chapter CXLVT

X

xyzabc

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
RO Number
14301
Messages
89
Female swimmer injured when hit by boat propeller
By Eric Stern - Bee Staff Writer
Published 10:10 am PDT Thursday, July 5, 2007
Print | E-Mail | | Digg it | del.icio.us
An 18-year-old woman was struck by the propeller of a moving boat around 6:30 p.m. while swimming in the American River during Fourth of July celebrations.
The woman, who remained conscious, was treated for injuries to her leg by the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary before being taken to a hospital.
"She was feeling no pain," said Ed Sweeney, an auxiliary crew member. "She was extremely intoxicated."
Dozens of boats created a parking lot in the river, with the majority of people on board "drinking and partying," according to a news release.
"The scene was pure chaos," said Steve Allen, an auxiliary crew member. "People were screaming, and it was difficult to ascertain what was going on or what the real problem was."
No further information was available on the vessel that struck the woman.
The auxiliary, which is composed of uniformed volunteers who assist the Coast Guard, issued a warning to boaters and swimmers about the danger of "prop strikes" and the need to be vigilant.
 
The idiots who were not allowed to drink and raft in the Rancho Cordova area moved down stream I guess. Still idiots; still drunk.

They say the new law does not include this coming weekend and many of the drink & raft crowd plan to be on the river at Rancho Cordova again. Pretty soon the ban will be from Memorial Day Weekend through Labor Day Weekend, I bet.
 
I say get the government out of our private lives. If people want to drink and act irresponsibly, let them. Let them also be responsible for the costs of rescue, treatment and rehabilitation. We don't need more laws limiting our actions becuase of the actions of a few idiots. Too bad about the woman's leg, but don't take away my rights because of it.
 
Uh, boozed up on public roads or in public waters ain't about PRIVATE lives. And if they're too dumb to act responsibly it's fair to say they're not going to be effectively insured to pay for said damages. I'm all for avoiding government intrusion in our lives but, please, get real.
 
I prefer to take a narrower view of this issue and confine my attention only to the stretch of river where the ban on alcohol applies. When I first read about the plan to impose the alcohol ban, I wondered about the authprity of the Sacto Board of Supervisors to act. I am 97% sure I read that the specific area is part of a county park and that for several years a bunch or inebriates there would ruin the ho;iday outing for families on shore across the way. In that context, the county's action would not appear to be directed at boaters in general and their partying or other rights. However, I am in "Abso;oot" agreement with Dave"s declaration that he doesn't want government poling into his private pastime. --- Warren
 
The state's ban on the river specifies "vessels without motors" so it is very narrowly defined.

I haven't heard of any problems this last weekend after the ban had been lifted, so maybe the law worked as planned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top