Um..........


If Parents left a girl that young home alone for a week or 2 even if they were left with a number to call in an emergency and plenty of food and money child protective services would be investigating, how the hell can it be legal for a girl of only 14 or 13 to be alone in a boat for 2 years???? I am sorry but I just do NOT agree with this. Nobody under age 18 should be allowed to do this alone. I am fine if there is at least one other person over age 18 on the boat. Am I being a prude?

reply

that's what I was thinking. also what about the expense? if a 14 year old said he/she wanted to drive around the world in a ferari should you just pay for it and let them go do it ? I mean just giving this kid a huge boat and money isn't teaching her anything. not to mention its dangerous as all heck. they had a stunt like that about 10 years ago a 7 year old kid wanted to fly across america (with the parents promoting it of course) and the kid crashed killing herself her dad and another pilot in the plane. that's the way jackass stunts like this usually end.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Dubroff




"After the crash, there were claims that the media frenzy around the "bogus" record attempt contributed to the accident by helping promote the flight and pressuring its schedule.[2] This was supported by the NTSB, which determined that the pressure induced by the intense media attention was a "contributing factor" in the accident.[1] ABC's Ted Koppel reflected on the media's role in the tragedy on Nightline: "We need to begin by acknowledging our own contribution...We feed one another: those of you looking for publicity and those of us looking for stories." Koppel ended by asking "whether we in the media...by our ravenous attention contribute to this phenomenon," and answered: "We did"

reply

they had a stunt like that about 10 years ago a 7 year old kid wanted to fly across america (with the parents promoting it of course) and the kid crashed killing herself her dad and another pilot in the plane. that's the way jackass stunts like this usually end.
That's a bit misleading. The kid wasn't the one who crashed the plane. Joe Reid, her flight instructor and the person piloting the plane during take off, was the one who crashed the plane. Maybe if Jessica was the one piloting during take off she would have been too scared to take off during a heavy storm. So as you can see, being older doesn't make one a safer pilot.

"The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board investigated the crash and concluded it was caused by the flight instructor's improper decision to take off in poor weather conditions, his overloading the aircraft, and his failure to maintain airspeed, which resulted in a stall."

Robin wishes he was me

reply

Her dad told her she had yo figure it all out herself, so she got sponsors to pay for everything. Also, her dad is a ship-builder.

reply

The Dutch courts tried to stop her you know. And yes, you are being a prude if you think that sexuality enters into it--what's she going to do alone on a boat, screw a seagull?

reply

rofl

reply

TS, what is is magical about the number 18? You do understand that we are human beings, developing at different speeds? We are no robots that function the same, no matter which one you unwrap. Some 14 year olds act more mature than others who are 22.

This was no whim from a young girl that thought overnight: 'hey, I want to go sailing around the world next week..... Daddy! Gimme a boat!' They spent years planning, saving, preparing and fighting to get permission.

reply

This was no whim from a young girl that thought overnight: 'hey, I want to go sailing around the world next week..... Daddy! Gimme a boat!' They spent years planning, saving, preparing and fighting to get permission.


Contrast her with Tania Aebi, who pretty much did do that at 18 with no experience or training at all.

reply

Interestingly, Aebi seems to be a bit of a hero of Laura's. She compares heself to Aebi in her book by pointing out how much better equiped she is than Aebi, and that Aebi writes a lot better than her.

She doesn't say anything about being a more skillful sailor than Aebi, although she earlier claims that she was banned from youth sailing events because she won too often, and had to compete against the adults. Not that I know anything about sailing, but that seems pretty impressive for a ten-year-old.

reply

Finally a calm intelligent response. Willing to bet all the whining "she is too young" and "how dare she be allowed to do this", comes from Americans. We claim we are the land of discovery and free thinkers, when really, Americans have turned into the biggest nanny state this side of Mars. She is a true adventurer doing things we all wish could but we are too damn afraid to to try. Good for her!

reply

She had to fight the DUTCH court system, Council for Child Care, Child Welfare Office, etc.. for almost a year before being allowed to go. It was a huge controversy with legitimate opinions coming from many sides, genius.

One person "whining" on an IMDB board represents 315 million Americans to you? Pure knee-jerk buffoonery.

All countries have laws regarding children, whether you agree with them or not. Some are less restrictive, and many are much more restrictive that the US.

reply

All the arguments that she should not have been allowed to go because of her age/experience are moot simply because she accomplished her goal. Therefore, she was obviously prepared and capable. Bravo Laura.

reply

So when someone survives driving home drunk, all "arguments are moot" against drunk driving. Nice logic, genius.

reply

ok. first,i never said that what she did was completely without risk, i just meant that since she handled everything so well, she was obviously prepared and capable. second,she wasn't drunk driving, and comparing her to a drunk driver is simply stupid. also, if drunk drivers only endangered themselves, i would have no problem with that either.

reply

So when a 3 yr old makes it across the street, it proves they are "prepared and capable", therefore "ALL arguments are moot". Brilliant logic, genius.

reply

i forgot all about the comments i made on here. allow me to reply now. You just compared the preparation and achievement of the girl in the film to a toddler wandering into the street. Noe THAT is some sound logic.

reply

No, I am exposing your flawed logic. I never compared the skill levels of the two, genius.

reply

you don't even understand what you said. lol

reply

Can I guess? Libertarian. Your smugness comes across like a typical d-bag who thinks we should not pay taxes but sure wants his pot holes filled in on his street.

reply

In your sick world:
truth = smugness = Libertarian

And btw, I can fill pot holes. But to someone like you this is obviously rocket science.

reply

Agreed. The parents are irresponsible. I even think an 18 year old wouldn't be mature enough.

reply

I even think an 18 year old wouldn't be mature enough.


So how "mature" does one need to be to sail a boat?

reply

of all the ways that parents are irresponsible nowadays this is one of the least concerning.

reply

Yes, she was obviously too young. There's no way somebody that young could possibly do such a thing.

Oh wait......


I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler.
- Jon Stewart

reply

The girl grew up on the sea. It's not like she doesn't know what she's doing. They probably had to prove in court that she was competent enough to go.

reply

The girl grew up on the sea. It's not like she doesn't know what she's doing. They probably had to prove in court that she was competent enough to go.

If I remember correctly her skill was not in doubt, but it was because the law here says all kids under 16 must go to school.

reply

I am fine if there is at least one other person over age 18 on the boat. Am I being a prude?

Just what part of "an attempt at solo circumnavigation of the world by the youngest person" don't you understand? I don't know if you're a prude, but I question your functional literacy.

reply

You nay-sayers are a bunch of loons. I grew up on the sea since age six. As we loved on an island and school was on another island, my siblings and I went to school by Boston Whaler. I was commercial fishing in Alaska by age 14 and joined the USCG at 17. You ground pounders know nothing of life on the waves and the passion that comes with it. I followed Dekker's voyage and commend her for her accomplishment.

reply

That is understandable and clearly in the community you were in that would be considered normal, but you live within the rules of the country you are living in.

They were living in a country where leaving a 14 year old to take care of themselves is considered child endangerment, even in an environment where its not that dangerous. By making an exception they send the wrong message, that the law only applies when you don't have enough money and media to throw at it. Granted that may actually be true, but its dangerous to make it so obvious as this.

Would the same argument have worked if she had instead been arguing that she was old enough to have sex? Something that would actually have been safer than what she ended up doing.

I wonder if the parents would have ended up in prison had she died on the attempt? Would the media have spun it as a tragic accident? The point is, there is a fine line between letting your kids do something slightly dangerous to learn and grow, and allowing them to do something extremely dangerous. The law is "supposed" to be there to ensure you make the right choice, and I don't see how any sane person can think this was okay. The fact she made it is not relevant, it was far more danger than a rational person would put their child in.

http://csdprojects.co.uk http://maewhitman.com http://halleehirsh.co.uk

reply

I completely agree with everything Alex said here.

The fact that a record for "the youngest solo circumnavigation of the world" even exists and is given media coverage is completely ludicrous. When will it become child endangerment? When parents try to send a toddler out onto open sea?

I followed this case when it was being contested in court, and I completely agreed with child protective services. Not only is it insane to let a child that age fend for herself out on the open sea, she's also supposed to be in school until she turns 18, so I still don't understand that a judge permitted her to go.

And yes, like someone wrote earlier, people do grow up at different rates, so perhaps she was more responsible at 14 than a lot of other people are at 18. But that's not the point. The point is that according to the law here in The Netherlands, children are obliged to go to school (not just get an education, home schooling is illegal as well in most cases) until they reach the age of 18. The law needs to be based on facts like this, not on arbitrary statements like "she might be too young according to the law, but it's okay because she's so responsible". If I'd been the judge I would have taken away custody from her parents for even considering letting her go on this journey.

reply

Not only is it insane to let a child that age fend for herself out on the open sea, she's also supposed to be in school until she turns 18, so I still don't understand that a judge permitted her to go.


Because he realized that a solo circumnavigation would be a better education than anything that can be learned in schools?

The point is that according to the law here in The Netherlands, children are obliged to go to school (not just get an education, home schooling is illegal as well in most cases) until they reach the age of 18.


No wonder she wanted to get out of Holland.

If I'd been the judge I would have taken away custody from her parents for even considering letting her go on this journey.


Yep, never bend any rule in even the slightest particular. Let us know when that one comes back to bite you in the butt.

reply

Because he realized that a solo circumnavigation would be a better education than anything that can be learned in schools?


Sure, staring out into nothing for most of the day and doing a bit of math every now and then to correct your course is better than the broad academic, social and physical education a child gets in school. You really are retarded if you truly believe that.

No wonder she wanted to get out of Holland.


Yes, just like most CHILDREN want to get out of school. But is that really what's best for them? Do you truly believe that the world would be a better place if we simply abolished schools? Education is essential if you want to be able to make sense of the world around you. Without education not only will you severely limit yourself in the type of success you might be able to achieve later in life (only sports, arts and crafts and manual labor come to mind), also nobody with any intelligence will ever take your opinions seriously, because you don't have the knowledge to back up your opinions, and chances are you are simply spouting nonsense without being aware of it. I can't even count the times I've had to hide a chuckle (or an exasperated sigh) because some uneducated person was talking like he or she was actually knowledgeable on a certain subject, while in fact they were only repeating what they'd heard some other uneducated person say and which they had simply accepted as fact because they don't have the education to know any better. I've heard people claim that we are all made out of clay, that women can get pregnant from oral sex, that evolution is nonsense because we are clearly not monkeys, that if oil is running short they should just make more of it and all sorts of nonsense over the years, all because of lack of education.
I was probably wrong earlier. You're not a retard, you're just a young child who wants out of school yourself!

Yep, never bend any rule in even the slightest particular. Let us know when that one comes back to bite you in the butt.


There are plenty of rules that can be bent under the right circumstances. There are some that can't. An adult having sex with a child is always bad. Killing someone for fun is always bad. Child endangerment is always bad. Allowing a child to cut short his/her education to pursue a hobby is always bad.
I'd say let us know when your uneducated, carefree lifestyle comes back to bite you in the ass, but you'll probably not realize the error of your ways until you're old and look back upon your life only to realize that you've accomplished absolutely nothing.

reply

Mon dieu!! Get over it!

reply

Yes I know that in reality people develop at different rates, but just see what will happen if an underage person (under 21 here in USA) walks into a bar and tries to convince the bartender that yes I am not yet 21 years old but I am very mature and responsible so I should be allowed to have a beer, good luck with that.


Or what would happen to me if I had sex with a 17 or 16 year old girl and the court argued that the girl was the aggressor (that can happen) and was mature for her age and had had sex before, I would still be convicted of statutory rape and after getting out of jail I would be a registered sex offender the rest of my life.

I do not always agree with it but in our society age limits are set for many things and I think that one should have to be at least 18 (a poster here said that was not even old enough but 18 is legally adult and old enough for military so you kind of have to allow it) for a solo sailing trip AROUND THE FRIGGING WORLD. I am fine with a teen taking a sailboat out into the bay for a few hours or on a lake though but come on.

Sailing around the world alone is so dangerous that I suspect I could even find other teens to agree with me on this one.

In my country minors under age 17 need an adult to accompany them into an R rated movie (which I admit is ridiculous but its the law) so I hardly think requiring one adult over age 18 on the boat is unreasonable.

And to the poster who made his comment about setting a record for youngest solo trip, are you aware that the Guinness world record department has started to refuse to recognize certain records for fear of people hurting or killing themselves trying to set them? Youngest pilot (a seven year old girl crashed her plane and died) and sword swallowing records are no longer accepted. I think youngest person to sail alone around the world should be added to that list.

reply

Yes I know that in reality people develop at different rates, but just see what will happen if an underage person (under 21 here in USA) walks into a bar and tries to convince the bartender that yes I am not yet 21 years old but I am very mature and responsible so I should be allowed to have a beer, good luck with that.


So you're saying that it's a violation of the law for a 14 year old to sail a boat? Maybe wherever you are it is, but in most of the world it isn't.

Or what would happen to me if I had sex with a 17 or 16 year old girl and the court argued that the girl was the aggressor (that can happen) and was mature for her age and had had sex before, I would still be convicted of statutory rape and after getting out of jail I would be a registered sex offender the rest of my life.


What Hell do you inhabit? In most of the US a girl who is 16 can have sex with anybody she wants to without any legal issues.

Sailing around the world alone is so dangerous that I suspect I could even find other teens to agree with me on this one.


So tell us, what percentage of people who have set out to sail around the world since, say, 1990, have died in the endeavor? Do you have a basis for asserting that it is "so dangerous" or are you just afraid of water and projecting that fear?

As for "other teens" agreeing with you on this, I'm sure you can. You can find "other teens" willing to ban water if you present it in the right manner. When you can present "other teens" with extensive offshore sailing experience who agree with you, get back to us. The opinions of "other teens" who have never seen the ocean don't count.

In my country minors under age 17 need an adult to accompany them into an R rated movie (which I admit is ridiculous but its the law) so I hardly think requiring one adult over age 18 on the boat is unreasonable.


Fine, get every country in the world to pass such a law.

reply

So you're saying that it's a violation of the law for a 14 year old to sail a boat? Maybe wherever you are it is, but in most of the world it isn't.


Holy ****, you're stupid!
Of course it's not illegal for a 14-year-old to sail a boat. For an hour. For an afternoon. For a day. But for months at a time? All alone? Out on the open ocean? That's child endangerment, and that IS illegal in most civilized countries.
Also, dropping out of school at age 14 is illegal. In all civilized countries, that is.
There are probably few countries (if at all) that have specifically banned allowing a child to sail the open oceans for months or years at a time without adult supervision, simply because it's common sense and nobody in their right mind would let their child do such a thing, which is why it's so rarely an issue. Reminds me of a court case against a company producing microwaves because they didn't mention in the instructions that you can't use it to dry your pet. Now they are legally required to.
Thankfully this obviously falls under child endangerment, so it isn't necessary to concoct a new piece of legislature that describes these specific cases.

What Hell do you inhabit? In most of the US a girl who is 16 can have sex with anybody she wants to without any legal issues.


Here your lack of education clearly shines through. I'm not even from your country and I know your laws better than you do!
Once anybody has notified the police of any possible sexual relations between an adult and a minor (which constitutes anybody under the age of 18 in the entire US), they are required to investigate and, if possible, prosecute the adult in question for statutory rape. There are many known cases where parents simply didn't like the guy their 17-year-old daughter was seeing and thus proceeded to get her 18-year-old boyfriend put away on account of statutory rape. And because prisons need to be nice and full to be able to make money (which is what happens when you privatize prisons in a capitalist system) this is only considered to be a good thing.

So tell us, what percentage of people who have set out to sail around the world since, say, 1990, have died in the endeavor? Do you have a basis for asserting that it is "so dangerous" or are you just afraid of water and projecting that fear?


How many have tried to? If 10 people try something and they all return safely, does that automatically mean that it is safer than another activity that cost a thousand lives out of the million who tried it? I can only assume that you'd say yes, but logically and scientifically speaking the answer would be a definite and resounding NO.
Further more I know that there have been cases of people who just disappeared (perhaps they are living an anonymous life somewhere, seems unlikely, but who knows?) out on the open seas, of people adrift for months (we only know about those in the unlikely case they happen to survive) and of people getting kidnapped by Somali pirates for ransom. In a quick search I haven't been able to find any statistics though, so I can just as easily ask you to produce statistics to prove going out on the open ocean in a small craft is NOT dangerous. That would be equally impossible. Also, logic is on the side of those who are "afraid of water", as you so eloquently put it, when said body of water is the size of an ocean and you're trying to cross it in a small sailing vessel.

As for "other teens" agreeing with you on this, I'm sure you can. You can find "other teens" willing to ban water if you present it in the right manner. When you can present "other teens" with extensive offshore sailing experience who agree with you, get back to us. The opinions of "other teens" who have never seen the ocean don't count.


Another completely asinine statement.
So you'd let the opinions of people who are completely in love with a certain activity be the only opinions that count? That would mean that all drugs are awesome and should be readily available for everyone, even children, because that's certainly what a lot of experienced drug abusers think.
Their opinions actually don't matter in the slightest, because they can never be objective. For legislation purposes, one should only look at cold, hard facts, like the possible dangers involved and the statistics of them happening. And in the case of a minor, who is by law not yet considered to be mature enough to make his/her own decisions, if risk factors are avoidable, the parents should be required to make sure they are avoided. Period!

Fine, get every country in the world to pass such a law.


Again, every civilized country in the world has similar laws, only the exact age limits differ.

reply

Jay you don't know near as much as you think. Each U.S. state (and the District of Columbia) has its own age of consent. Currently state laws set the age of consent at 16, 17, or 18. The most common age is 16.[50]

age of consent 16 (31): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia
age of consent 17 (8): Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Wyoming
age of consent 18 (12): Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin[51]
These state laws are discussed in detail below. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#State_laws. There are only 12 states where A.O.C is 18 and all of them but maybe fl and ca have a 4 age rule. Example being a 16 yo can have sex with up to a 20 year old. Most states a 90 y.o can have sex with a 16 y.o. Also you are crazy if you think that girl would learn more in a classroom than sailing and seeing the world. This comes down to ideology. You are clearly a type A personality. You probably think everyone should go to college, get married, buy a house and procreate. That is exactly the status qoe this girl specifically is against. She wants to sail. That's it. People like you don't seem to understand risk taking either. I have ridden motorcycles for 20 years with out a helmet. I hate them.the whole point of getting on a bike is for the freedom of having the wind blow threw my hair. I do a lot of dangerous things and am ready to meet my maker with a smile on my face. Those squirrel suit guys die a lot. They are pioneers that died doing what they love. More power to them. IMO it's not how long you live but how you do it. That girl has already accomplished more than the vast majority of people ever do in life. I agree her young age is a concern. However she was as mature as any 18 y.o I've ever met. 14 is not 7.

reply

I do not always agree with it but in our society age limits are set for many things and I think that one should have to be at least 18 (a poster here said that was not even old enough but 18 is legally adult and old enough for military so you kind of have to allow it) for a solo sailing trip AROUND THE FRIGGING WORLD. I am fine with a teen taking a sailboat out into the bay for a few hours or on a lake though but come on.
If someone as young as Laura Dekker can do it then maybe it's not as difficult or dangerous as you think it is? We still allow 16 year olds to drive cars even though motor vehicle accidents are one of the leading causes of death among young people. Maybe driving a car is more dangerous than sailing around the world by yourself?

Robin wishes he was me

reply

Yes, because on an immense body of water like an ocean there are never unforeseen circumstances. There are never storms that can severely damage, set adrift or even sink a small sailing vessel. No sailing vessel ever shipwrecked on a rocky shore. Nobody ever gets thrown overboard due to an unexpected wave, or a simple slip up on deck. Nobody ever makes a mistake because they're fatigued, resulting in some part of the rigging hitting them in the back of the head. Nobody ever gets entered and abducted by (Somali) pirates or (more likely perhaps in the case of a 14-year-old girl) human traffickers. No experienced seafarers have have been on the news these past several years because they had to survive at sea, cast adrift, under horrible circumstances, for months at a time (and those were only the lucky few who survived such an experience). And certainly nobody has ever disappeared out on the open sea, never to be heard from again. Such things just don't happen! (For those on the autistic spectrum: this entire paragraph was intended to be sarcastic.)

And your logic is inherently flawed. Let me illustrate.
If someone like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MPV1Gu1uFk can successfully do a wingsuit flight, then maybe it's not as dangerous or difficult as you think it is. Only, the same guy died doing exactly that a mere six months later... Common sense usually dictates how dangerous something is.
As for comparing a sailing trip around the world to 16-year-olds driving... How many teens attempt to sail solo around the world every year? A handful? And how many teens are driving around the US? Several million? The discrepancy in sampling size makes it impossible to compare the statistics of these two. Perhaps if you'd send a couple hundred thousand teens out on the open sea for several months at a time we'd be able to make a scientifically sound comparison.
Also, if you get into a traffic accident, there's a good chance you'll survive because you usually don't have to wait long for medical attention. If something happens out on the open sea though... This makes it only logical that the mortality rate in case of an accident will be many times higher out on the open sea.
Furthermore, unless you become a recluse, it's impossible to avoid traffic. You can just as easily get into an accident riding a bike, train or bus. Avoiding going out on the open ocean in a small vessel is relatively easy though. I've been doing that for over 30 years and barring any unforeseen circumstances will probably continue doing that for the rest of my life!

reply

Yes, because on an immense body of water like an ocean there are never unforeseen circumstances. There are never storms that can severely damage, set adrift or even sink a small sailing vessel. No sailing vessel ever shipwrecked on a rocky shore. Nobody ever gets thrown overboard due to an unexpected wave, or a simple slip up on deck. Nobody ever makes a mistake because they're fatigued, resulting in some part of the rigging hitting them in the back of the head. Nobody ever gets entered and abducted by (Somali) pirates or (more likely perhaps in the case of a 14-year-old girl) human traffickers. No experienced seafarers have have been on the news these past several years because they had to survive at sea, cast adrift, under horrible circumstances, for months at a time (and those were only the lucky few who survived such an experience). And certainly nobody has ever disappeared out on the open sea, never to be heard from again. Such things just don't happen! (For those on the autistic spectrum: this entire paragraph was intended to be sarcastic.)
You can make all of those same arguments for driving. There can be a horrible storm while you are driving making the roads more dangerous. You can fall asleep while driving and crash. You can get carjacked, etc. But the point is, that a smart person can prepare for such circumstances. For example, she didn't go anywhere near Somalia. Do you know why? Because she's not an idiot! She could have saved herself months by going through the Suez canal instead of going around Africa, but she decided to play it safe.
If someone like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MPV1Gu1uFk can successfully do a wingsuit flight, then maybe it's not as dangerous or difficult as you think it is. Only, the same guy died doing exactly that a mere six months later... Common sense usually dictates how dangerous something is.
Again, you can make the same argument with driving. A person can die in a car accident after driving safely for decades. Does that mean we should stop letting people drive?
As for comparing a sailing trip around the world to 16-year-olds driving... How many teens attempt to sail solo around the world every year? A handful? And how many teens are driving around the US? Several million? The discrepancy in sampling size makes it impossible to compare the statistics of these two.
Nonsense. You can easily compare the statistics by looking at the percentages. Also, your perception of the dangers are likely to be skewed due to the representations in the media. Take for example the fact that there are many more people who are scared to get into a plane than there are people who are afraid to get into a car. Is this because flying is more dangerous than driving? NO! It's because everytime there is a plane crash it makes national headlines and is on the news for weeks. But every time there is a car crash it MIGHT get about 20 seconds of coverage on the local news. Why? Because car crashes are so much more common than plane crashes. Yes, I know that there are more cars than planes but percentage-wise flying is still much more safer than driving. Same is true for sailing
Perhaps if you'd send a couple hundred thousand teens out on the open sea for several months at a time we'd be able to make a scientifically sound comparison.
Would they all have to be as skilled Laura Dekker? If not then what would be the point?
Robin wishes he was me

reply

Your flawed logic is extremely tiresome. But here we go again.

You can make all of those same arguments for driving. There can be a horrible storm while you are driving making the roads more dangerous. You can fall asleep while driving and crash. You can get carjacked, etc. But the point is, that a smart person can prepare for such circumstances. For example, she didn't go anywhere near Somalia. Do you know why? Because she's not an idiot! She could have saved herself months by going through the Suez canal instead of going around Africa, but she decided to play it safe.


First of all, here in Holland we have a little more common sense than you do in America and children are not allowed to drive (only 18 and up), thus this makes this entire paragraph an exercise in futility on your part (seeing as Laura Dekker is Dutch and thus has to obey Dutch laws). Further more if there's a sudden heavy storm or your eye lids are getting heavy while you're driving you can pull over at a parking lot, gas station, or even the side of the road if you have to. Also, if disaster does strike and something happens to you, you can be found rather easily and help is usually nearby. When you're a small dot in a gigantic ocean, that is not the case, or do you think otherwise?
And no matter how much you prepare, there are always unforeseen circumstances. I advise you to look up that word, "unforeseen", because apparently you didn't understand it when I previously used it.

Again, you can make the same argument with driving. A person can die in a car accident after driving safely for decades. Does that mean we should stop letting people drive?


In a perfect world, YES! That's probably exactly what will happen in a couple of decades time. There are already tests being conducted with cars that can drive themselves, and seeing as computers are capable of always making the best decision in a fraction of the time it would take a human and can even communicate with all the other cars around them in real time, this would finally make traffic truly SAFE. Once this technology is advanced enough and has been implemented people will probably only be allowed to drive for themselves on race tracks solely intended for that purpose.

Nonsense. You can easily compare the statistics by looking at the percentages. Also, your perception of the dangers are likely to be skewed due to the representations in the media. Take for example the fact that there are many more people who are scared to get into a plane than there are people who are afraid to get into a car. Is this because flying is more dangerous than driving? NO! It's because everytime there is a plane crash it makes national headlines and is on the news for weeks. But every time there is a car crash it MIGHT get about 20 seconds of coverage on the local news. Why? Because car crashes are so much more common than plane crashes. Yes, I know that there are more cars than planes but percentage-wise flying is still much more safer than driving. Same is true for sailing []


This clearly demonstrates your lack of education, seeing as everybody with at least some high school education should be able to understand this VERY simple concept. Percentages are ONLY comparable if the difference in sample size is not too significant. If you toss a coin 3 times and it comes up heads all three times, does that mean the chance of getting heads is 100%? Because if what you state here is true, then that would be its logical consequence. So please, get an education and stop talking out of your ass.
I agree with you on flying, as long as you're taking a large plane, from a respectable company which is approved by the organization that enforces local safety regulations and is flown by an experienced pilot. Small and/or poorly maintained planes are much more dangerous, as are helicopters for instance. And sailing a small vessel across an ocean is DEFINITELY not safer than driving. If you think that you are simply insane. When conditions are getting dangerous in your car, you can pull over and/or get out/phone for help whenever you want. The same is not true for a small sailing vessel. In a heavy storm, the best you can do is lock everything down and hope you don't sink to the bottom of the ocean or smash into a reef, coastline or other (larger) ship. And if you happen to survive a shipwreck, the chances of you being found out at open sea, especially in a storm, are slim to none. And hypothermia and dehydration (and if you're really unlucky, sharks) make sure that rescue workers will only have a very limited window to actually retrieve you alive. For such a small country we have a rather long coast line here in Holland, and we are renowned for our seafaring abilities all over the world. Yet it still often happens that someone is cast overboard only a couple of miles from shore simply to never be seen (alive) again, especially in bad weather conditions and/or when it's dark. Do you really think a person's chances of survival increase out on the open ocean?

Now, I've had enough of refuting all your nonsense. You are either uneducated or a child, so your opinion is irrelevant to anyone with at least a sliver of intelligence. Of course, the handle you chose for yourself is enough by itself to disqualify your opinions to most people.

reply

Or what would happen to me if I had sex with a 17 or 16 year old girl

In most of the world, including most of the US, you would not be breaking the law. A sixteen-year-old can consent to sex in most American states and in most nations.

In my country minors under age 17 need an adult to accompany them into an R rated movie (which I admit is ridiculous but its the law) so I hardly think requiring one adult over age 18 on the boat is unreasonable.

In my country a sixteen-year-old can get a driver's license. She can then drive from sea to shining sea, alone if she likes. Legal as the day is long... in July. I'm not sure that what Laura did is any more dangerous than that.


I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler.
- Jon Stewart

reply