[net.politics] The free market and scuba diving

fagin@ucbvax.ARPA (Barry Steven Fagin) (08/24/85)

I just got back from a vacation in Hawaii, and had an interesting
experience worthy of a net.politics posting.

My wife and I decided to go scuba diving; she's experienced, while I
had never been before.  When we went to get equipment, the dive
shop wouldn't rent anything to me because I wasn't certified; my
wife had to get gear at two different dive shops in her name.  I
spoke at great length with a dive shop owner about this.  Apparently,
there are no laws in Hawaii that forbid renting to non-certified divers.
Instead, the companies that insure the dive shops require that their
customers be certified.  My gut reaction was "What a crock", since in
diving I endanger only myself and perhaps my wife, and we're both
consenting adults, but since the regulations were strictly
noncoercive I couldn't get too riled up.  An interesting example of
how the free market keeps a sport safe, even though it may piss
off libertarians.

--Barry
-- 
Barry Fagin @ University of California, Berkeley

ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig) (08/24/85)

Barry Fagin's note on scuba equipment rentals is interesting,
and completely correct except for two minor details.

He says: "An interesting example of how the free market keeps
a sport safe, even though it may piss off libertarians."

Well, it doesn't piss off THIS libertarian.  That is how the
free market SHOULD work.

What DOES piss me off -- and is NOT the way the free market
should work -- is that I cannot say to the rental agency:
"Please rent me your equipment even though I am not certified:
I will agree, in writing, not to hold you responsible for anything
that happens to me as a result of my ignorance."  The trouble
is that the chances are too great that it will be possible to
convince a jury that because I am not certified, I could NOT have
made an informed decision to accept my own risks, and therefore
that the rental agency is liable ANYWAY!

eklhad@ihnet.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke) (08/25/85)

> --Barry
> When we went to get equipment, the dive
> shop wouldn't rent anything to me because I wasn't certified; my
> wife had to get gear at two different dive shops in her name.  I
> spoke at great length with a dive shop owner about this.  Apparently,
> there are no laws in Hawaii that forbid renting to non-certified divers.
> Instead, the companies that insure the dive shops require that their
> customers be certified.  My gut reaction was "What a crock", since in
> diving I endanger only myself and perhaps my wife, and we're both
> consenting adults, but since the regulations were strictly
> noncoercive I couldn't get too riled up.  An interesting example of
> how the free market keeps a sport safe, even though it may piss
> off libertarians.

	It *should* piss off libertarians, it pisses me off!!!
These restrictions *are* instances of coercion, albeit indirect.
Our absurd (and getting worse each year) legal system allows 
anyone to take anyone to court for any reason, and probably win.
If your relative drowns, get a good lawyer, you can get money out of:
the store that sold him the scuba equipment, the spectators on the beach,
the airline that flew him to said vacation spot,  anyone!!!
Even if you haven't got a valid case, the store will settle out of court,
to avoid the inevitable lawyer bills that the innocent
party *always* has to pay.
That's right, no risks in life, anything goes wrong, you get money back.
Just remember to cry a lot in the courtroom.
You might consider breaking something on purpose!

I apologize for the exaggerative flammatory nature of the above paragraph,
but it is a serious problem, and it is growing worse.
Absurd cash awards for absurd reasons represents a coercive force,
distorting the free market, and ruining a few lives along the way.
If sufficiently provoked, I can expound on this topic at length,
providing some thoughts on how we can improve the situation.
Fortunately, now that we are on the edge of a disaster,
a few legal higher-ups are *finally* seriously studying the problem.
-- 
	This .signature file intentionally left blank.
		Karl Dahlke    ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad

bob@pedsgd.UUCP (Robert A. Weiler) (08/25/85)

Organization : Perkin-Elmer DSG, Tinton Falls NJ
Keywords: 

In article <4205@alice.UUCP> ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig) writes:
>Barry Fagin's note on scuba equipment rentals is interesting,
>and completely correct except for two minor details.
>
>He says: "An interesting example of how the free market keeps
>a sport safe, even though it may piss off libertarians."
>
>Well, it doesn't piss off THIS libertarian.  That is how the
>free market SHOULD work.
>
>What DOES piss me off -- and is NOT the way the free market
>should work -- is that I cannot say to the rental agency:
>"Please rent me your equipment even though I am not certified:
>I will agree, in writing, not to hold you responsible for anything
>that happens to me as a result of my ignorance."  The trouble
>is that the chances are too great that it will be possible to
>convince a jury that because I am not certified, I could NOT have
>made an informed decision to accept my own risks, and therefore
>that the rental agency is liable ANYWAY!

Mr Fagin and Mr Koenig are indeed correct about how the scuba
industry works. Mr Fagin suggests these is a glowing triumph
for Libertaria. However, there is a key point to be made; scuba diving
is a purely pleasure oriented activity. Mr Fagin may have been pissed
off, but he got over it fairly quickly. If the service was instead
food, or water, or shelter, or heat, or medical service, the outcome
would be very different. I am grateful that the government has
left scuba diving pretty much alone, but cant we also pick this
as a triumph FOR republican democracy? Given the chance, they
have not (yet) intervened.

As I understand it, Mr Koenig is wrong that in a Free Market would
allow him to voluntarily take the risk. It may still be that
the dive industry would prefer not to take the risk of being
sued. They might insist that he pay as much as the cost of a
certification course as insurance against this risk.And they
DO make money certifying people.

Just trying to cause trouble.

Bob Weiler.
PS. I have redirected followups to net.politics.theory to spare
everyone else.

mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (08/26/85)

In article <10169@ucbvax.ARPA> fagin@ucbvax.UUCP (Barry Steven Fagin) writes:
> My wife and I decided to go scuba diving; she's experienced, while I
> had never been before.  When we went to get equipment, the dive
> shop wouldn't rent anything to me because I wasn't certified; my
> wife had to get gear at two different dive shops in her name.  I
> spoke at great length with a dive shop owner about this.  Apparently,
> there are no laws in Hawaii that forbid renting to non-certified divers.
> Instead, the companies that insure the dive shops require that their
> customers be certified.  My gut reaction was "What a crock", since in
> diving I endanger only myself and perhaps my wife, and we're both
> consenting adults, but since the regulations were strictly
> noncoercive I couldn't get too riled up.  An interesting example of
> how the free market keeps a sport safe, even though it may piss
> off libertarians.

So what we have here is examples of how the free market is ineffective
at protecting you from "unsafe" practices, and of your wife violating a
contract (implied, perhaps.)  Funny how neither of those examples
inspires me to embrace libertarianism.
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh

pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) (08/28/85)

Scuba diving is a more dangerous sport than many people realize.
Getting certified makes a person aware of those dangers and helps
her instill the second-nature practices that one needs to do it safely.

I suppose those who forgo the certification are endangering only
themselves and possibly one of their companions.  The deeper you
plan to dive, the more foolish you are being for not getting certified.

I think that some have suggested that the dive shop be cleared of
any responsibility for renting equipment to and uncertified diver.
How about the coast gaurd?  Could they be relieved of having to
search for you if you don't return from your trip?  Some certification
level ought to be required.  If not, rescue workers like the coast
gaurd are going to be spending a lot more time saving fools from
their folly.
-- 

Paul Dubuc 	cbscc!pmd