Man Arrested For Paddleboarding In Malibu ALL BY HIMSELF

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: ketsuko

Hope he wins a big $ civil suit. It would probably be wiser to come in when told, but it's absolutely disgusting what's happening right now -- and twofold for how many people are just cheering it on.

Respectfully, I think people are "bearing it" more than "cheering it on"

Could it be, that the beach itself was "closed" ?
Sure he was practicing social distancing, but if
he can go to the beach then why not everyone else ?
I blame m.s.m. for this,
seems m.s.m purposely left out vital facts to this story ?
Once again, m.s.m. is not being transparent,
purposely confusing the public > but why ?

a reply to: Phage

So lifeguards are on duty while beaches remain closed? Seems counter intuitive.

Why have lifeguards if no one is allowed in the water?

If the guy was being attacked by a feeding frenzy of Great Whites, a lifeguard would not be expected to swim out there. This is new territory with the virus concerns, though I don't understand the logic of staffing the lifeguards when the beaches are closed.

My point is the lockdown goes to far. Paddleboarding alone will not hurt anyone else. People are allowed to walk their dogs, go for jogs, but not allowed to surf or swim, activity that is less risky spreading the virus than the ladder.

My home beach in Cocoa Beach still allows surfing and swimming...but the mayor surfs. Keep in mind many golf courses are also still open for business.

a reply to: jrod

Why have lifeguards if no one is allowed in the water?

To prevent people from going in the water, maybe? To save their stupid asses if they do?

That's the way it works here. Giant surf in the country, beaches closed, red flags and everything, lifeguards on duty.

a reply to: Phage

Giant surf is different than a beach closure due to the sequester. People can literally get swept off the beach and into a rip current in giant surf.

This is new for everyone. If someone wants to paddle board alone they should be allowed, at their own risk in case of injury. It is a harmless activity especially compared to grocery shopping.

That said Florida has done a poor job containing this. Closing the beaches does little to control anything. There are widespread beach closures and it is different from city to city. Cocoa Beach you are allowed to surf, fish, walk, jog but sunbathing( staying in the same place is not allowed). Miami closed its beaches about 3 weeks ago, beaches are closed in Key West, but snorkeling, swimming and paddling is still allowed.

Despite being locked down, it is nice for our sanity to do things like paddle board without the law freaking out about it.

Let's say the guy has the virus, how many people could he have potentially infected by being arrested vs. being left alone?

Let's not forgot Trump and his buddies are still playing golf.

yes - he was out in the ocean - all by himself

but that still means he needs rescue - if he gets into difficulty

how do you " social distance " - while rescueing someone ??? - its not a trick question - i now have over 20 email circulars - addressing casualty and rescuer saftey - if we need to respond during this N19COVID episode . the UK emergency services 1st check list - for an incident now asks the question : is the patient showing symptoms or suspected N19COVID positive - or and at risk person .

the people that scream " but mah rights " - still demand rescue when their idiocy catches them

a reply to: jrod
I used to be a lifeguard too.

If we got a call because lets say the coast guard shut down our waters...then you can be jesus christ and what Im doing a sin, you are getting the hell out of my water.

Its mine until I get off duty. Then its someone else's water. Because if YOU drown, and a lifeguard sees you, we both know he is going in to get you...even if the risk is high enough to say its a suicide mission.

And we dont know if the lockdown had anything to do with his request to stop swimming. Maybe all the lifeguards were volunteering or home and so the city couldn't guarantee anyones safety...and didn't want to risk anyones safety having to save someone solo.

Over a swim. Public Beaches have different rules. Go to a pool or to a section of the beach with no lifeguard on duty.

The lifeguard probably had a F off large section of beach to patrol and this idiot kept him in one spot calling cops.

If this idiot needed help then someone would have to risk their safety getting his live or dead body out of the water.

This is retarded. Grown ass people acting like belligerent kids who want to swim at da beach.

Added-
Sorry. NEED to swim or we have an existential crisis over our percieved liberty and freedom. Please. Wait for the crisis to be over. If it doesn't end, start a revolution, I dont effing know. But lets not pretend some douche not being able to paddleboard in Malibu is the end of American democracy. Its too dumb to even laugh about.

Or they could have not made a big deal about it and just let the guy paddle. It's not like he is going to contaminate the entire ocean if he has the virus.

If he gets in trouble....really? Paddleboarding on a SUP, the chances are slim. Maybe a heart attack but that is incredibly unlikely. The guy is much more likely to get hit by a car or attacked by a dog on the way to the beach than having some sort of issue where he needs 'rescueing' from lifeguards. He very well.may be a much more experienced waterman than the lifeguards.

While Hawaii is different because all lifeguards there grow up at the beach and experience heave surf before becoming a lifeguard. I noticed there are two kinds of lifeguards, the surfers who from years of being in the ocean can almost effortlessly get through big surf and rip currents and the jocks who struggle in the heavy stuff, even if they've been swimming laps most their life and swim competively. Often the first time they experience heavy surf is while on duty.

Guess who does not freak out when conditions are heavy?

I have noticed the jock lifeguards are quick to blow their whistles, waive people in, try to be the boss, while the surfer lifeguards let people do their own thing and when they(myself included) whistle at someone it is for a good cause.

I did Ocean Rescue off and on from 2001 to 2012 never had anyone come close to drowning on my watch. The ones who are quick to blow the whistle are also the ones who have difficulty recognizing if someone is in trouble or even identifying rip currents. They also love to document and even exaggerate their rescues numbers(rescues vs assists) where is the guys like me don't care about the numbers as long as no one drowns. I prevented countless potential rescues by simply talking to at risk people about the hazards instead of blowing my whistle after someone(a weak swimmer) is in harm's way. can usually tell if someone needs to be watched closely before they step foot in the water. Surfers make countless more rescues than lifeguards, because of their numbers, experience, and fact they are already out in the 'danger zone.'

In almost all the lifeguard organizations, the jocks are the ones who become captains and chiefs, not because of their ability in the water but because their fellow jock are already superiors and make the promotions plus the fact they will exaggerate everything they do.

It's a big ocean. I for one don't like having a nanny state. This virus is tough to deal with but it is asinine that surfing and paddling is banned while other activities like playing golf is not.

There is a petition in Florida to get surfing declared an 'essential' activity. Attending church mass has been declared 'essential' in Florida and we know that congregating in large groups most certainly spread the virus. Many people consider surfing their religion besides.

www.change.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jrod

So, if the guy had fallen and hit his head, the lifeguard would be expected to watch him sink.

Not on any beach I've been to.

You wouldn't believe what I've seen lifeguards do in the Waimea shorebreak to save idiots who ignored "red flags." I found it hard to believe and I was watching it happen.

"Veteran lifeguard?" Maybe. In name.

Yes. As veteran as they get in Florida.

If you find yourself in trouble out there, you rather have me in the water that the guy who flips out because someone is paddleboarding.

a reply to: HelloboysImbackguy

Why is it that every pool in America has a sign that says "No LIfeguard. Swim at Your Own Risk" but we cannot treat the ocean the same way? This is California we're talking about. Is it illegal for joggers and hikers to go on certain trials now just in case they run into a mountain lion or get bit by a rattlesnake?

I mean they might be infected and then need medical attention and put those first responders at additional risk ... Well, shoot, you don't even need to add in random animal mishaps, just someone out for a pleasant hike on a trail could break a leg or twist an ankle or have a heart attack and do that!

You are so right. Newsome better extend his order and have the police go around welding people into their homes so that nothing like this ever happens again.

They closed all our ski resorts, where people wear gloves, and stay apart from each other, on a mountain, which makes absolutely no sense, so what's the real agenda here?

a reply to: ketsuko

Those are SOME private pools because they can do what they want with their pool and can offer whatever services they like.

Most states require a lifeguard on duty if recreational swimming occurs on public land.

Beaches and lakes, and other non artificial bodies of water have a different myriad of regulations. What rules they get depends on a lot of things we dont even consider. Like: is there a metal fence near the water ? No swimming with lightning or thunder...everyone out...and so on.

Open water /beach lifeguards have a harder job and tend to be the real deal lifeguards. Career lifers.

They do not play. Rules are rules in that world so people dont get hurt.

This is just stupid. Not just this instance, but all the ones similar that have happened and will happen, and will only get worse.

So, in order to stop him from possibly coming into contact with someone, or having to rescue him (possibly coming into contact with him), they order him out of the water and come in contact with him?

Whats the next argument, that they were able to process him without violating the 6 ft rule, thereby not putting them all at risk anyway?

If the authorities are being dumbasses, then YES you should give them a hard time.

Or just COMPLY, COMPLY, COMPLY...

They won't take advantage of a situation right? Right?

Keep an eye on this situation, there's something more going on...don't know what....scared to guess...but something nefarious, other than just a new virii....

Canada has concrete barriers ready to go next to the highways. Looks like they are ready to shut down the highways soon...crown land....no burning....swimming....fishing.....camping....etc....just quit being a f'n Canadian I guess...

Anyways,

Stay Safe, Everyone..

Harmless as doves, wise as serpents...

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: shawmanfromny

He broke this law.

Disobeying a Lifeguard 17.12.115 LACC and Violation of Government Code 8665.

Under what authority was the lifeguard ordering him out? We've established there was no reason under the stay at home rules. He was taking outdoor recreation and practicing social distancing that is allowed per the Governor.

The authority of the State, obviously. Don't tell me you're one of those crazy people who believe the government should be constrained by the Constitution, are you? You're not one of those people who thinks you should just be allowed to assemble or exercise your religion or work to feed your family without government interference, are you? Sounds like you need some reeducation time to remember how generous the State has been in it's dealings with you.

COMPLY.

Don't you know you have to let the "State" do whatever they want to you. Then, you can go to a court, where everything that happened will be used against you. Oh and anything YOU say that could help you is considered "hearsay".

Sounds about right...

a reply to: MykeNukem

Oh no ...

Not only did they chase him down with a coast guard boat, but they perp-walked him on land.



No way they processed him while observing proper social distancing rules.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

By your reasoning, riding bikes should not be done without supervision, 'bike-guards' because someone might fall and hurt themselves.

It is a bogus excuse. The vast majority of people who surf, go paddleboarding in the open ocean know the risk and do not expect the safety net if they get in trouble. I am sure this guy would not expect nor want the lifeguards help.

I have done long open ocean paddles alone when I was younger(prone before SUPs became a thing) never had an issue where I needed help, nor has anyone else I know. Though a buddy and I had a helicopter look for us because a concerned citizen saw people paddling and going further and further offshore and called 911.

Myself and many of my friends have surfed alone at beaches with no lifeguards, knowing that we were on our own. I have spearfished offshore alone knowing that if something happen no one could help me.

Some of us are ok with that risk but not okay living in a nanny state where we are not free to do anything that might need 'rescueing'.

As I wrote earlier and the above poster reiterated, he is trouble because of 'social-distancing' rules but through those rules to arrest him. Now he was in close contact with the guys on the boat, the arresting officers, the officers that will walk him to the jailhouse, the prison guards who will process, and the inmates he will share a cell and pod with.

The state is being stupid here, the guy just wanted to get some excersize and was not putting anyone at risk.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MykeNukem

Oh no ...

Not only did they chase him down with a coast guard boat, but they perp-walked him on land.

No way they processed him while observing proper social distancing rules.

Exactly.

So because he "might" have come into contact with someone (only if he had to be rescued), they thought it was wise to make sure he DID come in contact with at least 2 people, judging by the photo. Even though he wasn't breaking ANY rules.

Wow, just wow.

Even scarier...there's people that agree with this crap. Just comply, you can go to court later where the corrupt system will further put the boot down...

Puhleeeeeze....

a reply to: MykeNukem

Think of the bright side - Look at the fine money the city will get!

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MykeNukem

Think of the bright side - Look at the fine money the city will get!

LMAO yea only cost them about 50k to get 1k, and they only had to jeopardize maybe 10 people to get it.

Sounds like the Government has done it's job again....whew.

I feel safer already

a reply to: jrod

Or they could have not made a big deal about it and just let the guy paddle. It's not like he is going to contaminate the entire ocean if he has the virus.

Maybe the virus could transfer from the water and back into the air???
LA Times

Kim Prather, a leading atmospheric chemist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, told The Times this week that she fears SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, could enter coastal waters and transfer back into the air along the coast.
“I wouldn’t go in the water if you paid me $1 million right now,” she said.

What kinda of frankenvirus did they create?