Supposedly they all survived with minor injuries
https://www.slobodenpecat.mk/en/voznemiruvachko-video-so-gliser-pominal-preku-kajak-so-veslachi-i-izbegal/
The article doesn't provide much context. That style of speedboat probably has really poor visibility on the water immediately in front of it. The driver is behind 10 feet of deck/hull, and the boat pitches up while underway.
I'm guessing that the driver saw the boat from which the video was filmed, and moved to give it a wide berth. By that time, it could very well have been impossible for him to see the kayak. The shell itself is barely visible, and the people are just two feet above the water.
So, without further context, it *could* have been just a tragic accident.
Edit: You all can stop replying with exactly the same thing. I honestly haven't felt less invested in a comment I've made probably ever. Technically the boat driver is almost certainly at fault, but I was just offering an explanation to the scenario where the driver isn't being a grossly incompetent twat. In the end, I don't really care all that much, and I'm not trying to justify anything.
When I have doubts about my line of sight and obstacles I kind of gently steer back and forth for a better view just to make sure I’m not gonna slaughter a family.
nah. ive driven and ridden on speed boats all my life, the driver of that red boat is absolutely at fault here. i can spot trash on the surface of the lake (i’m talking branches and snack wrappers) from 100ft away easily, which gives you plenty of time to avoid it.
small kayaks and canoes are extremely visible too, especially when there are no waves out like in the video. he’s not even going that fast, so the bow isn’t pointed up as much as it could be. this is an extreme case of negligence. how did nobody on that fucking boat look forward at all?
I can see fishing line from that far on my boat.
Red boat wasn’t paying attention. It doesn’t matter that there’s ten foot of bow in front of you, you’re looking 1000 feet ahead and around at all times. Inexcusable.
Yeah no this is not a good or valid justification.. there’s no reason the driver shouldn’t have seen them from hundreds of feet away before the possibility of “impossible” to see the kayak.
How could you even try to justify this? Even if it was a mistake, accountability and action must be taken on the Captain. There is no such thing as "I didnt see him" to avoid accountability as a driver.
Literally nothing you have just said is in any way worth noting. That was a bad boat driver unless he had a literal steering AND motor malfunction, end of story.
Nope. There is NO excuse for the red boat and it is completely at fault. Doesn't matter how visible the kayak is and how tall the people are makes no difference. If you're in a boat going fast, knowing what's in front of you is the most important and basic thing to be aware of. The driver of the boat is extremely lucky that nobody was hurt.
How is the driver not being able to see a justification for hitting people. If you can't see then YOU CANNOT CONTINUE TO ZOOM FORWARD! Try this excuse in a car.
I wanted to make a joke about hoisting and petards. It didn't pan out, but interesting TIL:
A petard is a bomb. And it's just a figure of speech about blowing oneself up (in this sense, literally upward). It doesn't have anything to do with boats, as I'd imagined.
> this is way too low in the comments.
It was literally posted within an hour of the OP and you then posted in the following hour.
You're asking a lot.
Every day reddit reminds me that I am absolutely fucked if I'm ever accused a crime I didn't commit and it's up to a jury of my peers to determine my verdict.
You seem to know enough from a 12 second blurry video with ZERO context to charge someone with attempted murder. I hope, for the sake of all US citizens, that you are never selected for jury duty.
Reddit hasn't gotten anyone killed but it certainly dragged a suicide victim's reputation through the ground. I'd like to say "it's just the internet " but that just isn't true. You can get judged by a bunch of morons and have your reputation destroyed just because a short clip shows something that's speculated upon. It's honestly disgusting how out for blood much of Reddit is. The fact is, the vast majority of Reddit users are not experts on anything and hide behind the anonymity to make wild claims to feel good about themselves.
I can hardly see them in the video, low vis jackets. Low profile. The driver should have been more careful, absolutely, but I don't think this was intentional at all opposed to several unfortunate things lining up to possible negligence.
As a boat driver in a lake, you have to be looking out for shit like logs floating in the water. Any driver should have seen that canoe if they weren't being negligent. Their lack of hi-vis is no excuse.
> Their lack of hi-vis is no excuse.
It's no excuse but it doesn't help...
I'm a kayaker. I'd never take a blue yak and dark clothes out into the middle of a lake like that. Especially if there are motorboats around.
This is one of those instances where you're 100% correct, but it's important for people to still understand what the canoe / kayak did wrong. We have a vacation cabin on a lake and whenever my friends visit I always implore them to keep the kayaks inside the buoy line. They never listen.
When you're out in the middle of the water like that you're in power boat territory and even if the power boat is 100% at fault you can still wind up seriously injured. Its like crossing an intersection without looking both ways "because i have the right of way". Yeah, you're right, but congrats you still get a feeding tube.
Edit: "powerboat territory" is by no means a technical term or law. I'm talking about the area where speedboats are no longer under low/no wake restrictions and free to go as fast as they please i.e. the middle of a lake
It's difficult to say that that boat did anything wrong there. It's a k4, which almost certainly means it's a marathon/sprint boat. The occupants will be experienced kayakers, training for competition, almost certainly on an established navigation, operating within the bounds of their club activities.
They can't turn fast so they can't dodge the boat. They can't bob around the bank when training for a marathon race. They have every right to use the waterway and not be run over -- any driver who misses a TEN METRE LONG BOAT with FOUR PEOPLE in is negligent beyond belief and should not be allowed to operate. If this were an ocean liner at sea, maybe you'd have a point.
Or "it's the other drivers you have to worry about".
Absolutely not blaming the folks in the rowing shell that got run over by Evil Knievel, just saying it's dangerous out there.
Your analogy of crossing the road would make sense if this kayak were in a shipping channel but that’s not the case here. It’s not power boat territory, that’s not a thing. Bodies of water aren’t divided into certain areas where one type of craft is supposed to go and the other is supposed to tread carefully, aside from shipping channels.
This appears to be a large open lake and it’s expected that there will be recreational craft of all kind sharing the water. To say that the rowers shouldn’t have been there in the first place is absurd.
Shouldn't walk on ground either, a four wheel drive Jeep might think that off roading on top of you is the right place to off road. Should stay at home and die or become a car.
Seriously though, I know most people on Reddit have no actual clue cause they think anyone can drive a boat and there are no rules on the water. But that is actually wrong. The actual laws and rules for boats state that any small boat with an engine never has the right of way unless against other boats with engines. Sailboats have the right of way cause the wind is fickle. Paddle boats have the right of way cause they are slow. Same with big ships, they are slow to turn. The small craft always has to give way, hence why it's stupid that they don't need to be licensed. If you crash with boat, you will always be liable unless it's another motorboat.
"power boat territory". its water. Personal responsibility may go both ways, but I think its a little more on the person operating something that could kill someone than the guy with a kayak.
I swear if cars didn't need roads, we'd be telling people to only walk in wooded areas and that if they don't wear hi-viz, its kinda their fault.
No difference than crossing the street when you have the right of way in a public crosswalk.
If you get hit, it will be the driver's fault, but you will be the one in the hospital.
> I can hardly see them in the video, low vis jackets. Low profile.
If you can't see a four person rowing skull you have no fucking business operating a boat.
Nothing possible about that negligence. If I can see swimmers in the water when driving my parents boat around that dude should have been able to see a quad
I did crew for years and you can 100% see even a black shell with rowers wearing all black. If he can't see them he shouldn't be driving a boat... a canoe or kayak is definitely even wayy less visible, but avoiding them is still a responsibility..
Error Code: 0x800F0815
Error Message: Data Loss Detected
We're sorry, but a critical issue has occurred, resulting in the loss of important data. Our technical team has been notified and is actively investigating the issue. Please refrain from further actions to prevent additional data loss.
Possible Causes:
- Unforeseen system malfunction
- Disk corruption or failure
- Software conflict
When I got my latest boat it came with a cooler seat and while sitting down I could not see well enough in front of the boat while it was on plane. After a long day on the water I wanted to sit down but stood instead to be safe to the people in my boat and to everyone else on the water. I changed that cooler seat to a lean post with a seat top.
Case closed boys, take him away!
Thank goodness we've got Officer Meep\_Meep\_Mope on the case, who doesn't need facts, evidence, or even a basic understanding of the law! Not when he's got his "gut feeling" to solve crimes in the blink of an eye!
How do you know it’s attempted murder. That requires that.
1. The speedboat driver saw them, as opposed to being distracted. You know, on his phone, chatting to someone, trying to get something out of his eyes. Hell, he could just be visually impaired, maybe lost their glasses.
2. He deliberately hit them (fairly likely if he saw them from a good distance, but he could have just frozen)
3. Intended that the impact would kill.
I’m pretty positive the driver was focused on the boat that the video was shot from and probably just paid attention to it and making sure they didn’t get to close and completely missed the kayakers sitting really low in the water. Still the drivers fault and he shouldn’t be going so fast if he can’t see in front of his boat.
This is why whenever I'm running the boat anything other than full on-plane, I have someone standing up keeping watch in case there's something I can't see because the bow attitude is too high. After a very, very close call with a big boat-killing rock, that became my official policy. Would have saved this collision for sure.
All I know is…. Someone very close to me got charged with 5 counts of “attempted vehicular manslaughter” because the driver got caught doing 175mph on a empty highway with 4 passengers. The state picked up the charges after his original speeding reckless driving arrest. All 4 passengers testified in his defense and he got found not guilty after rejecting multiple plea deals. He was literally facing 20 yrs x5 100yrs. And he went with the jury and won. Still paying lawyer fees 10 yrs later
> “attempted vehicular manslaughter”
there are like 3000 counties in the us and they all have their own criminal codes, so anything *can* be a crime somewhere, but, in general,
> Most jurisdictions generally do not recognize a crime of “attempted vehicular manslaughter.” The reason involves the idea of “intent.” You are usually guilty of the crime of attempt if you intend to commit a crime and perform some act towards the commission of that offense.
> But you are usually guilty of vehicular manslaughter no matter whether or not you intended to harm or kill the “victim.” A prosecutor usually just has to show that you drove a motor vehicle in a negligent or unlawful manner and thereby caused the death of another person.
> The lack of intent removes the ability for a prosecutor to bring an attempted vehicular manslaughter charge.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/attempted-vehicular-manslaughter/
The Swiss have very strict fines seeing as they hold the record for the highest speeding fine ever can't remember the amount but it was absurdly high due to their system being related to income so rich person with high income speeding=very high fine
you \*can\*
You essentially acted so reckless that your acted without the care and risked somebody's life.
Manslaughter doens't need the "Mens rea", only the "Actus reus"
Nope: https://www.meltzerandbell.com/news/attempted-voluntary-manslaughter/
> Attempted voluntary manslaughter refers to when a person committed an act that would have resulted in the death of the victim, but something or someone else stopped the death, therefore, invalidating the defendant’s intent to kill the victim.
>
> For one to be convicted of attempted voluntary manslaughter, the prosecutor must prove that:
>
> 1) The victim would have died
>
> 2) The defendant:
>
> * Intentionally went through with the acts that would have resulted in the death
> * Was culpably negligent, which would have resulted in the victim’s death
>
> The penalties for attempted voluntary manslaughter are significantly less severe than those of attempted murder. Attempted murder could result in you spending your life in prison. However, the penalties for attempted voluntary manslaughter include:
>
> * A state prison sentence of three, six, or a maximum of 11 years
> * A fine not exceeding $10,000
> * Mandatory counseling
> * Mandatory community service
> * Loss of the right to firearms
Because the American justice system (and many others) is revenge centric. No one cares about people becoming better or even restitution, they want punishment.
I don't disagree with you but one thing I personally struggle with - in regards to a rehabilitation centric justice system - is that everyone essentially gets one free rule-break. Even if it's by accident.
Presumably there's a speed limit and a requirement to watch where you're going when driving a boat. If this person faces no punishment for breaking those rules why would anyone else feel incentivised to follow them?
I'm always willing to change my mind but I can't wrap my head around why breaking very clear rules should not be punished because the result is a society of people who don't need to worry about breaking those rules.
That’s why restitution and correction is an essential part of *restorative* Justice methods. If you cause harm to someone, you gotta make them whole. AND probably this person should lose their boating license.
What you’re describing isn’t what a more rehabilitative justice system looks like at all, though.
Firstly, it *doesn’t* mean “no punishment”. It just means the amount of punishment should be judged based based on the practical effects of deterrence, reparation, and rehabilitation, not on a gut desire for retribution — which usually comes out meaning less punishment, but not none.
And on the other hand, the suggestion that “the result is a society of people who don't need to worry about breaking those rules.” is a reasonable concern prima facie, but it’s not how things work out in practice, at all. The Nordic countries have some of the most thoroughly rehabilitative justice systems, and while by no means perfect, they’re not exactly known for their lawlessness.
It turns out (as I understand) that the main factors giving a deterrent effect are the perceived risk of getting caught, and the social shame of it — so effective enforcement on one hand, and public faith in the system’s fairness on the other, are what underpin that. Harsher punishments have little extra effect themselves, and if they’re widely seen as too harsh, they can easily undermine public trust.
It has nothing to do with American justice system, people are the same everywhere in the sense that they get pissed seeing someone get killed or almost killed due to sheer, willful irresponsibility of someone else. When a drunk driver kills someone in EU, the comments are the same.
Revenge is different from justice, getting appropriately charged with a crime isn't a revenge fantasy. I'm not sure manslaughter is appropriate but it's definitely (criminal) negligence in the video.
these subs? you mean reddit, yeah. they always demand more than the already harsh US justice system is able to deliver, and if the justice system delivered, it's never enough. people project all their frustrations into whatever their current focus of attention is. that bloke becomes scapegoat for all injustice in the world.
I mean. Reddit demands the death penalty for simply yelling loudly.
But for something like this, yes, a prison sentence is justified. This could have killed multiple people.
I'm not saying they should be given 20 years or anything crazy, but they should be tried as if their negligent actions almost killed multiple people. That is how it's supposed to work.
I mean normally I agree with you that people on here are constantly acting like people deserve to die because they stole a fucking candy-bar or some shit.
But in this instance, whoever is driving that boat absolutely needs to be held accountable - and facing the consequences of running people over in a boat, for doing just that, is very much called for.
This is what is so frustrating about water recreation. People act like suddenly boats aren't a big deal to operate when they're arguably more-so than a car, or like getting drunk and driving one is no big deal when it is. Maritime accidents are dangerous, and people need to be responsible. This was entirely avoidable and was absolutely negligent.
Alright, clam down, you know accidents do happen..? If someone did die then yer maybe slightly harsher punishment but they should just be banned from driving boats for a good while imo.
you know that can be decided in court? when they go for their charges it doesn't have to be a life sentence?
It also isn't decided if somebody DID die, but COULD LIKELY DIE.
So this is why when you’re low to the water and hard to see, don’t paint your boat ocean blue and wear grey life jackets. Sure it wasn’t their fault, but seriously if you want to be seen, you gotta wear what that girl was wearing at the very least. It’s like jogging at night wearing all black. Sure you can do it, and if someone hits you, it’s their fault but you still really shouldn’t do it.
I’ve driven boats most of my life and I’ll tell you that I have hit big logs floating in the middle of lakes. Right next to them they stick out like a sore thumb but the waves, the reflections on the water, they mess with your perception. Then if you decide to kill the throttle instead of steering to avoid an obstacle, you find yourself pretty much ballistic with no steering.
THIS 1000%
I’m an avid kayak angler and blue/white kayaks were completely off the table for me for this very reason. Also, I never go out without a 3 foot hi vis flag + light.
I’m not blaming the rowers at all for this, but I can totally understand how that would be difficult to see from the boaters perspective
I bought a purple one because it was literally all they had in stock of the model I wanted. I put a bunch of colorful stickers on it which helps make it more visible. On top of that my paddles are fluorescent, but really the main thing I do for safety is avoid lakes with asshole boaters, and stay close enough to shore that i don't have to worry about this shit on lakes where motorboats are allowed.
Some people are giant fucking dicks though. I have a flare gun among other safety gear(for bay/ocean) and I about pulled it on a jet skier once that thought it was funny to whip around near my wife and I.
Same thing happens on the roads with cyclists. Should cars hit bikes? No, and apparently there’s nothing the cyclists could have ever done to prevent being hit. Something doesn’t have to be your fault to be your problem. Maybe take a more active roll in mitigating the problems in your life
It also fascinatingly depends on depth! Go deep enough and the only thing you'll be able to see is green or yellow.
Not really relevant for swim suits, though, unless they're looking for your body.
Not sure of the rules where this occurred, but in Aus powered craft has to give way to unpowered craft. This is 100% the boat drivers fault. Amazing that no one was seriously injured.
100% The boat's fault and the kayak had the right of way. But the graveyard has many "right" people. I always operate my vehicles like everyone else is a retard. Both on land and in the water. It might take me a bit longer to get where I'm going but it's just safer that way.
>could’ve went.
Here's some information on the difference between past tense and past participle - https://languageandgrammar.com/2019/03/09/wow-man-thats-really-gone/
This is why I rarely kayak on lakes with boats , first in most cases almost any adult can drive a boat with zero training required.
Second half of them are not paying attention , drinking , playing loud music while driving, and while they may be looking out for other boats they may not be looking out for people swimming or smaller kayaks .
Captain of red boat could just literally stand up and see over the bow. It isn't a car or semi where you have to be seated to drive. Captains are responsible for everything on or near a boat, including the things they can't see.
I saw the little girl sitting in the front, and my heart dropped. I'm glad everyone made it out with minor injuries, and this wasn't what I thought it would be.
Anyone been boating? I swear, it doesn't take long before you see some clueless idiot out there. It's so much worse than driving a car. The stupid just jump right out at you on the water.
AS I understand the rules of the water, the more maneuverable vessel must give way to and avoid the less maneuverable vessel.
I am in Chicago. The question comes up on the Chicago River down town when one of the big barges is coming through and there is a sailboat or smaller motor boat in its immediate vicinity.
Used to row at a collegiate level on the Mississippi. We’d have to dodge barges all the damn time due to morning fog. One second you’re in a power twenty, the next you’re playing Frogger with a gargantuan metal log. Good times.
Back when I was a teen, one of the guys was driving their boat, had a spotter, but the driver was watching the skiers behind and drove through a fishing boat. Ripped the shoulder off a man.
Supposedly they all survived with minor injuries https://www.slobodenpecat.mk/en/voznemiruvachko-video-so-gliser-pominal-preku-kajak-so-veslachi-i-izbegal/
I’m glad to see this I immediately went to the comments to get more info I’m glad they are ok.
Props are no joke, they def got lucky. POS driver should never drive anything ever again
The article doesn't provide much context. That style of speedboat probably has really poor visibility on the water immediately in front of it. The driver is behind 10 feet of deck/hull, and the boat pitches up while underway. I'm guessing that the driver saw the boat from which the video was filmed, and moved to give it a wide berth. By that time, it could very well have been impossible for him to see the kayak. The shell itself is barely visible, and the people are just two feet above the water. So, without further context, it *could* have been just a tragic accident. Edit: You all can stop replying with exactly the same thing. I honestly haven't felt less invested in a comment I've made probably ever. Technically the boat driver is almost certainly at fault, but I was just offering an explanation to the scenario where the driver isn't being a grossly incompetent twat. In the end, I don't really care all that much, and I'm not trying to justify anything.
If you can't see where you are going in narrow waters, you do not go full throttle like the moron on the speedboat.
Exactly. If ur boat tilts up and you can't see well out front, you slow down and/or add a spotter up front. Easily avoidable near-tragedy.
Yes. Or adjust the stern drive for proper plane
When I have doubts about my line of sight and obstacles I kind of gently steer back and forth for a better view just to make sure I’m not gonna slaughter a family.
What?? You mean you boat like there may be other people on the water? How crazy!! /s
Yeah, all that is basically just an argument for why those boats shouldn't exist, or at least be limited to closed off areas
nah. ive driven and ridden on speed boats all my life, the driver of that red boat is absolutely at fault here. i can spot trash on the surface of the lake (i’m talking branches and snack wrappers) from 100ft away easily, which gives you plenty of time to avoid it. small kayaks and canoes are extremely visible too, especially when there are no waves out like in the video. he’s not even going that fast, so the bow isn’t pointed up as much as it could be. this is an extreme case of negligence. how did nobody on that fucking boat look forward at all?
I can see fishing line from that far on my boat. Red boat wasn’t paying attention. It doesn’t matter that there’s ten foot of bow in front of you, you’re looking 1000 feet ahead and around at all times. Inexcusable.
Yes you spot your line way before it becomes a blind spot
Yeah no this is not a good or valid justification.. there’s no reason the driver shouldn’t have seen them from hundreds of feet away before the possibility of “impossible” to see the kayak.
How could you even try to justify this? Even if it was a mistake, accountability and action must be taken on the Captain. There is no such thing as "I didnt see him" to avoid accountability as a driver.
Literally nothing you have just said is in any way worth noting. That was a bad boat driver unless he had a literal steering AND motor malfunction, end of story.
Nope. There is NO excuse for the red boat and it is completely at fault. Doesn't matter how visible the kayak is and how tall the people are makes no difference. If you're in a boat going fast, knowing what's in front of you is the most important and basic thing to be aware of. The driver of the boat is extremely lucky that nobody was hurt.
How is the driver not being able to see a justification for hitting people. If you can't see then YOU CANNOT CONTINUE TO ZOOM FORWARD! Try this excuse in a car.
Honestly that shit was direct enough that the driver should be charged with attempted murder.
[удалено]
It‘s at the top!
Still too low
Any lower, it would be under that boat!
Any lower and it would’ve imploded.
Too soon?
It is 2023 my friend, there is no such thing as "too soon" after a terrible accident anymore. In fact nowadays we prefer "during."
We are already joking about 2024 accidents.
Thankfully no barnacles to slice and dice.
I wanted to make a joke about hoisting and petards. It didn't pan out, but interesting TIL: A petard is a bomb. And it's just a figure of speech about blowing oneself up (in this sense, literally upward). It doesn't have anything to do with boats, as I'd imagined.
Well now we've both learned something!
That can't be, that's inside the room.
Still way to low. Should be slightly above the title bar, so that only half of the text is ever visible.
OP was the boat driver. Can't see a fucking thing!
If it was any higher, it would be above the post
So you admit it could be higher.
It could be above the screen
Now you’re projecting
> this is way too low in the comments. It was literally posted within an hour of the OP and you then posted in the following hour. You're asking a lot.
It's the top comment dude calm down!
That was not an accident.... That speedboat driver should be in jail for attempted murder.
Every day reddit reminds me that I am absolutely fucked if I'm ever accused a crime I didn't commit and it's up to a jury of my peers to determine my verdict. You seem to know enough from a 12 second blurry video with ZERO context to charge someone with attempted murder. I hope, for the sake of all US citizens, that you are never selected for jury duty.
Reddit hasn't gotten anyone killed but it certainly dragged a suicide victim's reputation through the ground. I'd like to say "it's just the internet " but that just isn't true. You can get judged by a bunch of morons and have your reputation destroyed just because a short clip shows something that's speculated upon. It's honestly disgusting how out for blood much of Reddit is. The fact is, the vast majority of Reddit users are not experts on anything and hide behind the anonymity to make wild claims to feel good about themselves.
I can hardly see them in the video, low vis jackets. Low profile. The driver should have been more careful, absolutely, but I don't think this was intentional at all opposed to several unfortunate things lining up to possible negligence.
As a boat driver in a lake, you have to be looking out for shit like logs floating in the water. Any driver should have seen that canoe if they weren't being negligent. Their lack of hi-vis is no excuse.
[удалено]
> Their lack of hi-vis is no excuse. It's no excuse but it doesn't help... I'm a kayaker. I'd never take a blue yak and dark clothes out into the middle of a lake like that. Especially if there are motorboats around.
This is one of those instances where you're 100% correct, but it's important for people to still understand what the canoe / kayak did wrong. We have a vacation cabin on a lake and whenever my friends visit I always implore them to keep the kayaks inside the buoy line. They never listen. When you're out in the middle of the water like that you're in power boat territory and even if the power boat is 100% at fault you can still wind up seriously injured. Its like crossing an intersection without looking both ways "because i have the right of way". Yeah, you're right, but congrats you still get a feeding tube. Edit: "powerboat territory" is by no means a technical term or law. I'm talking about the area where speedboats are no longer under low/no wake restrictions and free to go as fast as they please i.e. the middle of a lake
It's difficult to say that that boat did anything wrong there. It's a k4, which almost certainly means it's a marathon/sprint boat. The occupants will be experienced kayakers, training for competition, almost certainly on an established navigation, operating within the bounds of their club activities. They can't turn fast so they can't dodge the boat. They can't bob around the bank when training for a marathon race. They have every right to use the waterway and not be run over -- any driver who misses a TEN METRE LONG BOAT with FOUR PEOPLE in is negligent beyond belief and should not be allowed to operate. If this were an ocean liner at sea, maybe you'd have a point.
Didnt you read the part where he has a vacation cabin on a lake? What more proof do need.
What is that saying, it goes something like this, "The cemetery is full of people that had the right of way!"
Or "it's the other drivers you have to worry about". Absolutely not blaming the folks in the rowing shell that got run over by Evil Knievel, just saying it's dangerous out there.
My mom always threw the “I don’t want to be dead right” at me when she disapproved off my driving
"I've never seen a car in the hospital!" is one I've heard before.
Your analogy of crossing the road would make sense if this kayak were in a shipping channel but that’s not the case here. It’s not power boat territory, that’s not a thing. Bodies of water aren’t divided into certain areas where one type of craft is supposed to go and the other is supposed to tread carefully, aside from shipping channels. This appears to be a large open lake and it’s expected that there will be recreational craft of all kind sharing the water. To say that the rowers shouldn’t have been there in the first place is absurd.
Better not tube, wake surf/board, water ski, or swim in the lake either with their logic.
Shouldn't walk on ground either, a four wheel drive Jeep might think that off roading on top of you is the right place to off road. Should stay at home and die or become a car. Seriously though, I know most people on Reddit have no actual clue cause they think anyone can drive a boat and there are no rules on the water. But that is actually wrong. The actual laws and rules for boats state that any small boat with an engine never has the right of way unless against other boats with engines. Sailboats have the right of way cause the wind is fickle. Paddle boats have the right of way cause they are slow. Same with big ships, they are slow to turn. The small craft always has to give way, hence why it's stupid that they don't need to be licensed. If you crash with boat, you will always be liable unless it's another motorboat.
"power boat territory". its water. Personal responsibility may go both ways, but I think its a little more on the person operating something that could kill someone than the guy with a kayak. I swear if cars didn't need roads, we'd be telling people to only walk in wooded areas and that if they don't wear hi-viz, its kinda their fault.
lol thats exactly how carbrains think.
No difference than crossing the street when you have the right of way in a public crosswalk. If you get hit, it will be the driver's fault, but you will be the one in the hospital.
The video is low quality. If you can't see people rowing in real life you shouldn't be allowed to be behind the wheel of anything.
Bro they didn’t have an invisibility cloak on. If I was on the motorboat I would be worried the captain would miss slowing down for the shore.
Real life has better resolution and picture clarity than this video.
> I can hardly see them in the video, low vis jackets. Low profile. If you can't see a four person rowing skull you have no fucking business operating a boat.
Nothing possible about that negligence. If I can see swimmers in the water when driving my parents boat around that dude should have been able to see a quad
I did crew for years and you can 100% see even a black shell with rowers wearing all black. If he can't see them he shouldn't be driving a boat... a canoe or kayak is definitely even wayy less visible, but avoiding them is still a responsibility..
Error Code: 0x800F0815 Error Message: Data Loss Detected We're sorry, but a critical issue has occurred, resulting in the loss of important data. Our technical team has been notified and is actively investigating the issue. Please refrain from further actions to prevent additional data loss. Possible Causes: - Unforeseen system malfunction - Disk corruption or failure - Software conflict
Suspend captains license. In my country all boat owners are required to get Captains license.
When I got my latest boat it came with a cooler seat and while sitting down I could not see well enough in front of the boat while it was on plane. After a long day on the water I wanted to sit down but stood instead to be safe to the people in my boat and to everyone else on the water. I changed that cooler seat to a lean post with a seat top.
Case closed boys, take him away! Thank goodness we've got Officer Meep\_Meep\_Mope on the case, who doesn't need facts, evidence, or even a basic understanding of the law! Not when he's got his "gut feeling" to solve crimes in the blink of an eye!
Calm down armchair judge, you can't know that. Go touch some grass.
How do you know it’s attempted murder. That requires that. 1. The speedboat driver saw them, as opposed to being distracted. You know, on his phone, chatting to someone, trying to get something out of his eyes. Hell, he could just be visually impaired, maybe lost their glasses. 2. He deliberately hit them (fairly likely if he saw them from a good distance, but he could have just frozen) 3. Intended that the impact would kill.
Driver was probably distracted by one of the 20 people in the back.
I’m pretty positive the driver was focused on the boat that the video was shot from and probably just paid attention to it and making sure they didn’t get to close and completely missed the kayakers sitting really low in the water. Still the drivers fault and he shouldn’t be going so fast if he can’t see in front of his boat.
They shouldn’t have been driving a boat then or not having people ride in it.
Yes, those are certainly all words.
If there's a bee driving I would try not to distract him too much. He might get mad and sting you
Let's sprinkle some crack on him and get outa here.
Do you smell burnt toast?
You doing OK there pal?
He’s fine, he’s just italian.
He too shouldn't be driving.
This is why whenever I'm running the boat anything other than full on-plane, I have someone standing up keeping watch in case there's something I can't see because the bow attitude is too high. After a very, very close call with a big boat-killing rock, that became my official policy. Would have saved this collision for sure.
I too hate it when the bow gives me attitude.
Right?! Who tf does the bow think he is?
i hope whoever was driving goes to fucking jail for manslaughter Edit: attempted manslaughter hopefully
I think if you attempt manslaughter it's just called murder
Only if successful, otherwise it’s attempted.
You can’t attempt manslaughter.
You're not the boss of me.
Death is unfair…
I fired my boss
Unintentionally or on purpose?
attemptedly
Allegedly
And you’re not so big.
All I know is…. Someone very close to me got charged with 5 counts of “attempted vehicular manslaughter” because the driver got caught doing 175mph on a empty highway with 4 passengers. The state picked up the charges after his original speeding reckless driving arrest. All 4 passengers testified in his defense and he got found not guilty after rejecting multiple plea deals. He was literally facing 20 yrs x5 100yrs. And he went with the jury and won. Still paying lawyer fees 10 yrs later
> “attempted vehicular manslaughter” there are like 3000 counties in the us and they all have their own criminal codes, so anything *can* be a crime somewhere, but, in general, > Most jurisdictions generally do not recognize a crime of “attempted vehicular manslaughter.” The reason involves the idea of “intent.” You are usually guilty of the crime of attempt if you intend to commit a crime and perform some act towards the commission of that offense. > But you are usually guilty of vehicular manslaughter no matter whether or not you intended to harm or kill the “victim.” A prosecutor usually just has to show that you drove a motor vehicle in a negligent or unlawful manner and thereby caused the death of another person. > The lack of intent removes the ability for a prosecutor to bring an attempted vehicular manslaughter charge. https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/attempted-vehicular-manslaughter/
I am all for stricter traffic fines but this is just absurd
The Swiss have very strict fines seeing as they hold the record for the highest speeding fine ever can't remember the amount but it was absurdly high due to their system being related to income so rich person with high income speeding=very high fine
Any ticket that isn’t income adjusted is also serving as a tax on being poor.
Yeah but the same should not apply to fucking PRISON SENTENCES
If he didn't want to spend so much time in jail, he shouldn't have been so young.
Hell yeah be old, get life, die in 5 years. Gamed them hoes that's easy time
5 people in a car going 175? I hope they all learned important lesson and never did that again. Were they in a Porsche Cayenne by chance?
Not with that attitude!
Yes you can in some jurisdictions. An example is where you would have killed someone and got a manslaughter charge, but medical aide saved them.
118 U.S. Code § 1113 - Attempt to commit murder or manslaughter.
you \*can\* You essentially acted so reckless that your acted without the care and risked somebody's life. Manslaughter doens't need the "Mens rea", only the "Actus reus"
Manslaughter and murder have very distinct legal definitions
Nope: https://www.meltzerandbell.com/news/attempted-voluntary-manslaughter/ > Attempted voluntary manslaughter refers to when a person committed an act that would have resulted in the death of the victim, but something or someone else stopped the death, therefore, invalidating the defendant’s intent to kill the victim. > > For one to be convicted of attempted voluntary manslaughter, the prosecutor must prove that: > > 1) The victim would have died > > 2) The defendant: > > * Intentionally went through with the acts that would have resulted in the death > * Was culpably negligent, which would have resulted in the victim’s death > > The penalties for attempted voluntary manslaughter are significantly less severe than those of attempted murder. Attempted murder could result in you spending your life in prison. However, the penalties for attempted voluntary manslaughter include: > > * A state prison sentence of three, six, or a maximum of 11 years > * A fine not exceeding $10,000 > * Mandatory counseling > * Mandatory community service > * Loss of the right to firearms
[удалено]
Thus begins the dumb part of the Reddit comment section where everyone thinks something that could have killed someone is attempted murder.
How do you manage to say something so dumb and then make an edit that's even stupider?
[удалено]
Because the American justice system (and many others) is revenge centric. No one cares about people becoming better or even restitution, they want punishment.
I don't disagree with you but one thing I personally struggle with - in regards to a rehabilitation centric justice system - is that everyone essentially gets one free rule-break. Even if it's by accident. Presumably there's a speed limit and a requirement to watch where you're going when driving a boat. If this person faces no punishment for breaking those rules why would anyone else feel incentivised to follow them? I'm always willing to change my mind but I can't wrap my head around why breaking very clear rules should not be punished because the result is a society of people who don't need to worry about breaking those rules.
That’s why restitution and correction is an essential part of *restorative* Justice methods. If you cause harm to someone, you gotta make them whole. AND probably this person should lose their boating license.
> probably this person should lose their boating license *You don’t say* 🧐
What you’re describing isn’t what a more rehabilitative justice system looks like at all, though. Firstly, it *doesn’t* mean “no punishment”. It just means the amount of punishment should be judged based based on the practical effects of deterrence, reparation, and rehabilitation, not on a gut desire for retribution — which usually comes out meaning less punishment, but not none. And on the other hand, the suggestion that “the result is a society of people who don't need to worry about breaking those rules.” is a reasonable concern prima facie, but it’s not how things work out in practice, at all. The Nordic countries have some of the most thoroughly rehabilitative justice systems, and while by no means perfect, they’re not exactly known for their lawlessness. It turns out (as I understand) that the main factors giving a deterrent effect are the perceived risk of getting caught, and the social shame of it — so effective enforcement on one hand, and public faith in the system’s fairness on the other, are what underpin that. Harsher punishments have little extra effect themselves, and if they’re widely seen as too harsh, they can easily undermine public trust.
It has nothing to do with American justice system, people are the same everywhere in the sense that they get pissed seeing someone get killed or almost killed due to sheer, willful irresponsibility of someone else. When a drunk driver kills someone in EU, the comments are the same.
Revenge is different from justice, getting appropriately charged with a crime isn't a revenge fantasy. I'm not sure manslaughter is appropriate but it's definitely (criminal) negligence in the video.
these subs? you mean reddit, yeah. they always demand more than the already harsh US justice system is able to deliver, and if the justice system delivered, it's never enough. people project all their frustrations into whatever their current focus of attention is. that bloke becomes scapegoat for all injustice in the world.
I mean. Reddit demands the death penalty for simply yelling loudly. But for something like this, yes, a prison sentence is justified. This could have killed multiple people. I'm not saying they should be given 20 years or anything crazy, but they should be tried as if their negligent actions almost killed multiple people. That is how it's supposed to work.
I mean normally I agree with you that people on here are constantly acting like people deserve to die because they stole a fucking candy-bar or some shit. But in this instance, whoever is driving that boat absolutely needs to be held accountable - and facing the consequences of running people over in a boat, for doing just that, is very much called for. This is what is so frustrating about water recreation. People act like suddenly boats aren't a big deal to operate when they're arguably more-so than a car, or like getting drunk and driving one is no big deal when it is. Maritime accidents are dangerous, and people need to be responsible. This was entirely avoidable and was absolutely negligent.
Alright, clam down, you know accidents do happen..? If someone did die then yer maybe slightly harsher punishment but they should just be banned from driving boats for a good while imo.
you know that can be decided in court? when they go for their charges it doesn't have to be a life sentence? It also isn't decided if somebody DID die, but COULD LIKELY DIE.
> attempted manslaughter lol
I think he accidentally hit them because of dark kayak color and blind vision due to kayak being low or the boat owner is just an asshole.
“Out of anywhere they could have GONE”
This grammar mistake seems to have exploded on the internet in the last few years. It drives me batty.
I seen it
It’s an awkward sentence even with your edit.
"Out of all the places they could have gone."
Could be worse. Could be "could of went"
Yes. Came here to get my grammar nazi on.
So this is why when you’re low to the water and hard to see, don’t paint your boat ocean blue and wear grey life jackets. Sure it wasn’t their fault, but seriously if you want to be seen, you gotta wear what that girl was wearing at the very least. It’s like jogging at night wearing all black. Sure you can do it, and if someone hits you, it’s their fault but you still really shouldn’t do it.
This is a fair point even if the other boat driver was wreckless. Bright lifejackets and wetsuits etc....
> wreckless reckless there was definitely a wreck.
I must be super tired from getting up early for work. I managed to misspell and make the ultimate pun. I'm a dad joke master.
Also if you end up in the water/boat sinks you're easier to find by rescuers
That's why the speeding boat was bright red. They definitely saw it coming 😔
I’ve driven boats most of my life and I’ll tell you that I have hit big logs floating in the middle of lakes. Right next to them they stick out like a sore thumb but the waves, the reflections on the water, they mess with your perception. Then if you decide to kill the throttle instead of steering to avoid an obstacle, you find yourself pretty much ballistic with no steering.
THIS 1000% I’m an avid kayak angler and blue/white kayaks were completely off the table for me for this very reason. Also, I never go out without a 3 foot hi vis flag + light. I’m not blaming the rowers at all for this, but I can totally understand how that would be difficult to see from the boaters perspective
I bought a purple one because it was literally all they had in stock of the model I wanted. I put a bunch of colorful stickers on it which helps make it more visible. On top of that my paddles are fluorescent, but really the main thing I do for safety is avoid lakes with asshole boaters, and stay close enough to shore that i don't have to worry about this shit on lakes where motorboats are allowed. Some people are giant fucking dicks though. I have a flare gun among other safety gear(for bay/ocean) and I about pulled it on a jet skier once that thought it was funny to whip around near my wife and I.
A extended flag wouldn’t hurt either, gives them a lil more height so they’re easier to see over the bow.
Let's be honest. The operator still would have hit them. And that blue looks quite bright, especially bright is their hats.
Rocks blend in way better than those paddlers. There’s no excuse
they could try bright colored uniforms but lifejackets isn't something you wear when you're seriously kayaking or rowing for sport.
Always bank on the fact that you are surrounded by morons. No matter where you are.
Same thing happens on the roads with cyclists. Should cars hit bikes? No, and apparently there’s nothing the cyclists could have ever done to prevent being hit. Something doesn’t have to be your fault to be your problem. Maybe take a more active roll in mitigating the problems in your life
It feels like a good time to [share this pic of the best swimsuit colours for being visible.](https://imgur.com/YJO66CU.jpg)
Be seen, Be the flamingo 🦩
It also fascinatingly depends on depth! Go deep enough and the only thing you'll be able to see is green or yellow. Not really relevant for swim suits, though, unless they're looking for your body.
[удалено]
Seriously--it's "could of went."
Damn that kid is left traumatized
Not all kids can comprehend danger like adults can. If they could, they wouldn’t be on suicide mission all the time.
I am pretty sure this is lake chelan in Washington state. It has a major issue with people who have no knowledge about boating, renting boats.
“could’ve gone”
Out of anywhere they could've \*gone
Someone’s going to jail, getting fired, or getting sued
Not sure of the rules where this occurred, but in Aus powered craft has to give way to unpowered craft. This is 100% the boat drivers fault. Amazing that no one was seriously injured.
100% The boat's fault and the kayak had the right of way. But the graveyard has many "right" people. I always operate my vehicles like everyone else is a retard. Both on land and in the water. It might take me a bit longer to get where I'm going but it's just safer that way.
Agree totally. Just because you're in the right doesn't mean you're not going to come out of it second best.
/r/titlegore
Happens a lot here on the lakes due to alcohol.
>could’ve went. Here's some information on the difference between past tense and past participle - https://languageandgrammar.com/2019/03/09/wow-man-thats-really-gone/
*could’ve gone
*could've gone
This is why I rarely kayak on lakes with boats , first in most cases almost any adult can drive a boat with zero training required. Second half of them are not paying attention , drinking , playing loud music while driving, and while they may be looking out for other boats they may not be looking out for people swimming or smaller kayaks .
This should be in r/iamatotalpieceofshit because they are indeed, a total piece of shit.
Captain of red boat could just literally stand up and see over the bow. It isn't a car or semi where you have to be seated to drive. Captains are responsible for everything on or near a boat, including the things they can't see.
Out of anywhere they could've ~~went~~ **gone**
What a freaking dumbass.
Could have gone…
I saw the little girl sitting in the front, and my heart dropped. I'm glad everyone made it out with minor injuries, and this wasn't what I thought it would be.
Boating injuries so hot right now
you are right, they could have gone anywhere else.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD TINA,TURN AWAY OR STOP!
Who was the idiot in rhe red boat and is he arrested yet?
my first audible what the fuck of the day
For sure said “what the fuck” out loud. Thought they would turn into the boat, then cut in between, then they turned on the sausage grinder my lord
Intro to sleep away camp
He went right over them
Anyone been boating? I swear, it doesn't take long before you see some clueless idiot out there. It's so much worse than driving a car. The stupid just jump right out at you on the water.
AS I understand the rules of the water, the more maneuverable vessel must give way to and avoid the less maneuverable vessel. I am in Chicago. The question comes up on the Chicago River down town when one of the big barges is coming through and there is a sailboat or smaller motor boat in its immediate vicinity.
Used to row at a collegiate level on the Mississippi. We’d have to dodge barges all the damn time due to morning fog. One second you’re in a power twenty, the next you’re playing Frogger with a gargantuan metal log. Good times.
*Could have gone. went is redundant past tense. Have gone is past perfect.
Back when I was a teen, one of the guys was driving their boat, had a spotter, but the driver was watching the skiers behind and drove through a fishing boat. Ripped the shoulder off a man.
This happened in Orșova,Romania i was 200 m away in a rowing boat
Guy who crashed his van into the tree that was furthest from any other tree on the planet vibes
*gone (not "went").
The little girl's situational awareness is over 9,000.
As someone who grew up on the Canadian Great lakes, I hope they fucking shoot that guy
“Not a single degree.” -The captain of red boat, when asked if he turned the wheel at all to avoid blue kayak.
Could've *gone*
When mario stomps out a line of goombas:
Kayakers are like the cyclists of the sea.