i saw nothing wrong with marvins pictures and can say that as a father and grandfather that nothing makes you take less risks than being in charge of a little one and introducing them to the wonders of the ocean and the wind that drives us all.
his words may have displayed a little to much bravado and a buoyancy vest may have helped.
Yes, this guy a case for eugenics.
> "but isn't it the sole parent/s responsibility to decide what is best for their child; not the general public"
NO it is not - up to a point only. Many parents don't have that capacity, either intellectual or they put their own little image first and foremost. Gonads work, not the brain.
Parents going to the pub with the kids in the car are an example of the former, and this idiot is a perfect example of the latter. I mean, look at his face in the picture - perfect "look at me I'm cool" idiot.
And don't want to hear that there is worse elsewhere - let's discuss other such cases separately. You guys can't use the "there is worse elsewhere" to justify this.
I think the issue has a lot to do with perceived risk, rather than actual risk. And I seem to remember the same discussion came out when Steve Irwin took his baby into the croc enclosure.
This is quite a difficult subject and as MikeyS pointed out the perceived versus actual risk is the core problem.
I can't wait to teach my 2y.o & 5 y.o. twins (birthday today actually) to sailboard, but will only do it when they are competent at swimming at least the length of a 50m pool and are comfortable with the process and wearing a PFD. I have had them standing on the board without the rig many times to get them used to balancing but don't feel introducing a rig at this stage is prudent. Nor would I feel it safe to let them ride shotgun - I shudder to think what damage could be done to a leg, arm head etc if pinned between the board and mast or hit with the rig - no matter how careful or experienced I am.
Now for the piggybacking kiter. It looks like one of those "Baby Bjorn" child holders and my experience with these is they are very fiddly to get a child out of on dry land even when in the forward position. I wouldn't even know how you would be able to release it quickly when strapped to your back. This is where the actual risk appears to be very onerous for the passenger in this situation. No matter how safe the conditions or experienced the kiter is, I personally believe that this particular action is potentially endangering the child's life. This enormous risk would only be slightly reduced if the child was a competent swimmer and was wearing a PFD and was not strapped into (what appears to be) a makeshift harness
To try and justify this action is irresponsible - You don't see people riding bicycles, motorbikes, skateboards, etc with children strapped to their backs. It's like saying my passion is mountainbiking, and I wan't to give my child the experience of what I love so much, so I strap her/him to my back and off we go. Off course my child won't need a helmet (read PFD in kiter's situation) because I'm so experienced that I'm not going to fall off or go over the handlebars and land on my back.
Sh1t happens, and when it does, just hope you don't have the most precious thing strapped to your back.
i reckon the concept is great
but some sort of quick release that both the kids and kiter can hit in an emergency, and pfd, would make it much more kosher
but some sort of quick release that both the kids and kiter can hit in an emergency, and pfd, would make it much more kosher
[}:)]
If you swapped the child for a dog getting piggybacked and showed the pictures to the RSPCA along with the kiter's contact details, do you think a RSPCA inspector would want to have a chat to the kiter?
