Hacker News Reader

Comment by irishcoffee | Hacker News Reader

I would like to point out that any flotation device in a pool besides a life jacket is just asking for problems.

I life-guarded for almost 10 years, the only way I would ever let anything that supported a human floating __besides__ an approved life jacket was if the pool was almost empty (such that the one person got my undivided attention) and if I knew the child to already be a strong swimmer.

I highly encourage everyone reading this to not swim at pools that allow floats of any kind besides a life jacket, even something as simple as water wings. [0] It encourages kids to go deeper than they should, and if they fall off they're in big trouble. It creates the possibility for a child to get trapped under someone else, and a life guard has almost no chance in that scenario.

95% of guarding is preventive.

Neat site though.

[0] Water wings can create the situation where a child has their head underwater and their arms up above water, but they can't pull themselves up.

View on HN

When I was a young child, my local pool allowed kids to play on large floating foam rafts (like this, but half the length: http://goo.gl/7Y4HbU). One day I decided to show off my underwater swimming skills to a girl I fancied. After a long swim underwater, I exhausted my breath and came to resurface for air, only to get caught under a stacked pile of 5 of these rafts, with kids standing on top like in that photo! I panicked and didn't know what was going on. I don't remember what happened next, but I am told my father was watching me closely and jumped into the pool, pushed the mats off of me (thus throwing like 4 kids off the rafts into the water) and saved me.

Parents were angry at him for throwing their kids into the water. None of them even realized I had almost died. Not that I blame them though, it would probably look pretty funny to see a grown man knock 4 kids off some mats into the pool haha.

I once got "trapped" under one of those big diving rafts they put in lakes[1]. I swam down after one of those colored diving rings, and the wind blew the raft over me while I was under.

I was a pretty strong swimmer at that point, and more than a little lucky as well. I was able to collect my thoughts and get out.

I'm told I was only under there for about ten seconds, but my memory of it feels like about 2-3 minutes. It was easily the scariest thing that ever happened to me personally as a child.

[1]-Like this, but without the gap in the middle: http://www.aquacycleusa.com/aqua-cycle-swim-raft

Once we did rafting and our monitor guy told us: when you fall into the water and find yourself under the boat, just don't panic. Don't try to move your head up but rather chose whatever direction and swim until you reach the either side. We thought it would never happen, but we ended up few times in the water just like just like that. And even though it's just a few seconds you are quite disoriented and at first time don't know what to do.

Sounds like an easy thing to practice? Go to a pool with a boat, dive under the boat, and practice getting out.

Like people who do kayaking practice how to get out when the kayak turns upside down.

I came to realize that a lot of things in life are easy when you practice beforehand. It's a good idea to identify things you don't expect how to handle and then go and learn to handle them. It's especially important to learn how to use the tools you may need in emergency so that they won't surprise you when you need to use them quickly. Otherwise having those tools only gives you false sense of confidence, which may be dangerous.

So for instance, I bought a fire extinguisher and used it up in some deserted bushes. It was a small expense, but now I'm fully aware how this particular type of extinguishers behave. Or when a friend wanted to buy mace (she was coming home late at night), we bought two and used up one for doing target practice, so that she's aware how the fluid stream behaves and how to aim it.

The biggest problem with this approach that I find is that there are so many things you could prepare yourself. Even if it usually would just take a few minutes and little to no expense, you can't train for things you don't realize exist as concepts or situations. For instance, thanks to this subthread it is the first time it occured to me that a situation like obstructed surface when diving in a pool can occur. I'm adding it to my mental list of things to prepare for when I get the opportunity.

Having done whitewater kayaking for a long time I cannot stress this enough. You need to practice being under water with being denied surfacing even if you strongly want to.

Once you are calm, you can orient yourself by observing air bubbles for example, even in turbulent water.

Yeah, I remember the same thing happening to me as well when I was young. Luckily in my case I had enough air to use my hands to pull myself along the underside to the edge. But you instantly thought "That was far too close". I wonder if they still have those in schools with pools nowadays.

Your humorous view on an otherwise harrowing story brought a smile to my face. Glad you made it. My dad was a life-guard though I never asked him for any stories, I should do that.

So, how'd that go over with the girl?

As I guy with a young child, who ditched floaties and makes him always swim with a life jacket, thank you.

And thanks for watching other people's kids. Wage or not, that job can become real rewarding, especially once you are the humiliated and terrified parent.

I do not even let my kid walk around our community pool without it on!

A thankless job too, I remember hating life guards growing up because they would blow their whistle at all sorts of things. They aren't trying to be jerks of course, but that was my perception when I was very young and just loved swimming. Being older I see how tough that job would be.

I lifeguarded throughout high school and college, and it always surprised me that most of the difficulties I had were with parents/adults. For the most part, kids would give a sullen look and then listen. My only memorable troubles were the occasional adults who would just flat-out ignore or contradict rules, no matter how many times you told them (I always assumed because they thought they knew better than a ~15 year old). At that point, you have a young lifeguard who has to choose between causing a minor scene (ie: whistling a manager over to "tattle" on them) or having other children see rules not being consistently enforced, which they perceive as license to do whatever they want.

I made one rescue after a little girl faceplanted from the high dive and came up crying and clearly struggling - the whole time I was helping her to the wall, I had her mom yelling at me from the pool deck that "she's fine, you're just scaring her!" I came away from that second-guessing myself - that maybe I SHOULDN'T have gone in after her, and that I should've just let it play out a little more - which is a really scary thing to second-guess.

I would imagine that the go-to for situations like this is "Ma'am, just following my training."

I (obviously) wasn't there but it sounds like you did the right thing.

At the end of the day you were the one sitting in the chair and had to make a judgement call based on your training and observations.

Think of this way - if you hadn't reacted as you did and the girl ended up injured or dead, how much worse would you feel today?

hey, look at it this way. the girl was fine. by definition, you did your job well. that's the best desired outcome of all cases, whether or not you made the wrong call.

To be fair, some life guards are really boring martinets with no sense of fun.

Other life guards dive into the deep end from the exhaust hatch in the ceiling after the pool is closed to the public.

I'm thankful for both types but I slightly favor the latter.

If you get to know the lifeguards, most of them prefer the latter. I distinctly remember taking 2 umbrellas, one in each hand, and after climbing up onto the guardshack, taking a running leap into the pool.

Needless to say I had to buy 2 umbrellas least my boss found out.

I always likes horsing around with the kids, when we developed a relationship such that they listened to the rules, which really wasn't asking a lot. Don't run, don't dunk people, get out when I ask you do (adult swim, thunder/lighting) and stay out of the deep end if you haven't passed the swim test.

There are boring guards, just like there are boring people. I have found that men and women (mostly teenagers at that point) who elect to hang out in their bathing suits (read: basically underwear) 40 hours a week are usually a lot of fun to be around. There is a specific sense of self-confidence that I never really thought about until replying to your comment.

I was around four-five years old when I was first allowed into the deep pool with some float equipment. I was like a fish and liked diving. Couldn't swim though.

When I jumped into the deep pool my floating equipment was pushed off. I panicked and struggled for my life until I somehow got to the side and then managed to get up by myself. And no-one noticed.

I stayed away from deep water until I could swim properly.

When I was 11, I had just discovered I could kind-of swim and somehow decided to try swimming across a rather large lake. By the time I realized that was a dumb idea, I was halfway across. I collapsed from exhaustion and threw up several times after I (somehow) got across.

When I was a teenager I was in Boy Scouts. Every year we went to a summer camp that was on the edge of a large pond [1]. And one of the strictest rules there was that you were not allowed in the water until you'd passed the swimming competency test (and you had to pass it again every single year), and the main swimming test was that you had to swim laps in their roped-off section of the lake without pausing until you'd swum for at least half of the distance across the lake (thus ensuring that if you were to be dropped smack dab into the middle of the lake, you could swim out). We had to do this even though most scouts never even had a reason to go outside the small roped-off section and thus would never be required to actually swim to shore.

I also remember one year doing a lifeguarding merit badge where we did various things like tread water for an excessively long period of time, practice towing other people to shore, and even a bit where we had to jump into the water fully clothed in jeans and a long-sleeved shirt and learn how to float regardless (basically by inflating our shirt with air). That stuff was hard. Also one bit where we started on shore, fully-clothed including jeans, socks, laced-up boots, etc, and had to ditch as much clothing as possible and run into the water within an extremely short period of time (the idea being if we saw someone drowning, we had to be able to get in the water to effect a rescue as fast as possible).

[1] New England has a habit of calling large bodies of water "ponds" even though most other places would call them lakes

Man, BSA lifeguard was rigorous as hell. It was the only legitimately serious course that the camp offered, and it was not for beginners. I failed it the first year, and it taught me a lot about the difference between "can swim" and "competent swimmer."

They later changed it to a gimme course because of "hazing" complaints, which I thought was awful.

I didn't even consider trying the lifeguarding merit badge for the first couple of years. I doubt I could have done it back then.

> They later changed it to a gimme course

That sucks. I'm also kind of surprised to hear that, because BSA does not usually skimp on safety, and anyone with the lifeguarding merit badge should be capable of actually saving someone's life.

That was by far my proudest merit badge. I felt like such a badass when I passed.

Ah, I got to do some military training involving jumping into a pool with weapons, armor, and helmet. Swimming in boots is hard.

Yeah I bet. Jeans are pretty fun. They get amazingly heavy and restrictive.

Took my young son to a cub scout camp this summer. The swim test was just as grueling. My son didn't pass at all even though he has had swim lessons and can swim. He was just too nervous at the testing aspect of it.

I swam two out of two and a half laps, but I didn't pace myself well enough, and I ended up having to stop. Partially, I was out of breath, partially, my shoulder was bothering me due to a healed fracture from a car accident last fall. First time I had done any significant amount of swimming since then and didn't realize how far from 100% I was. Was a bit embarrassing getting the "beginner" swim label, but I had to be a good role model and take my lumps.

Curious: what camp in New England?

Honestly, it's been so long, I forget. I actually did a bit of searching when I wrote that to see if I could find the camp, but I had no luck. It looks like the Boy Scout Council my troop was a member of has changed what summer camp they use in the many years since I was last there, and I can't actually find any reference to what the name of the old camp was.

What do you think of this style of lifejacket/water wings? http://www.amazon.com/Stearns-Puddle-Jumper-Deluxe-Jacket/dp...

That's what we use with our two year old son, though he's also only in pools with one-on-one attention. I'd prefer to just take him to shallower pools, but his feet just don't touch in any of our local pools, and puddle jumper seemed like a good option for him to have a little independent exploration in the water.

After looking it up, it is a coast guard approved flotation device, so I would have allowed it at my pools. That was my rule, and it was always nice having that when parents questioned my rule. Things like rafts, boogie boards, round tubes, noodles, those were the big no-no's.

We use those too and they are totally safe. The difference between those and the classic floaties is these can't come off, which I remember happening all the time with the old style.

My 2 year old can actually get these off. We had to switch to a normal life vest that has a strap that goes underneath, by his crotch.

If the kid is determined enough, they can indeed come off.

they're great, have several for my kid. One at grandparents houses, and one at home. Class 3 Coast Guard approved, really happy with them.

Nitpick but it's Type 3 (III), not a class ("Class" gives me the impression it's a higher or lower rating of device).

Thanks, I saw the original comment and thought, oh no I just bought some new water wings for my son, and now I can't use them. Luckily I bought the ones you linked and now I know they are coast guard approved. Thank goodness for a wife who is detail oriented.

When I was a kid I put water wings on my ankles so I could walk on the water like Jesus. I fell over within 0.5 seconds of entering the pool and they held me upside down with my feet sticking out. I remember thinking I was going to die right up until my Mom jumped in and saved me.

I was very close to drown when diving, and someone planted a 6 cm high, and 2*1 meter wide foam block[0] on top of where I had planned to surface, and I was caught underneath without much air.

[0] http://shopdolphin.dk/139h/images/35111.jpg

I've never been close to drowning from something like that, but I've definitely felt that panic set in when you start swimming for the surface and then bump into a big float that wasn't there when you went down

I don't mean any disrespect, and I do agree with the point about "encourages them to go deeper...", but I think "any flotation device" "besides a life jacket" is a little bit hardcore. We can't make everything 100% fool proof and 100% safe in every way without removing all activities. Parents need to pay attention to their kids' swimming abilities and govern their activities accordingly. If a kid can't swim really well, the wave pool (or at least the deep end of one) is not a safe place to be at all.

Less than 1000 deaths by drowning is a really small number in a country with tens of millions of children swimming every year.

So I'll admit, I didn't set the rules, I enforced them. I agreed with them, but I was not the rule-setter.

I'll also say that I could find ~1000 families who are probably devastated every year, most likely any marriage that existed was challenged, and possibly broken up. Lives changed forever. Why? So some kid who can't swim could float in 6 feet of water for a few minutes.

Yes it is on parents as well. I am a parent. Fortunately I can swim well. I am not the parent that takes their child to the kiddie pool, and while I'm in the middle of a sneeze, my child takes off and jumps feet-first into the "big" pool, and I can't do anything to save them because I can't swim.

I'll agree 100% that the parents that showed up at my pool and took a 2 hour nap, those were bad parents. I woke them up when their child was misbehaving, and sometimes just because I was severely annoyed.. My guards were guards, not baby-sitters.

Perhaps my child is hanging out with friends, and one of the friends parents takes them all to the community pool. I'm not there. Is is still on me as a parent?

I understand and appreciate your comment. Life just isn't that simple sometimes.

The issue is with the parents, who just want to let the kid in the pool so they can go back to their phone.

I do volunteer work with my local surf live saving club, looking after the kids in the under 7 program. It is exhausting work standing in the surf watching 30-40 kids at once. Most parents see it as a child-minding surface and are content to sit way up on the beach with a coffee and a phone.

The point is the parents - in many if not the majority of cases - don't pay attention to their kids swimming abilities.

I would think it should be common sense to not go to the deep end without a life saving device if I don't know how to swim.

Sometimes I get cramps(? Not sure if right word?) In my legs that hamper my ability to swim. It scares me to think what I'd do if I had to swim in anything other than a small pond. I'm not a good swimmer to begin with.

When I was a kid I was using these life belt, one day I flipped upside down, my feet were up in the air, my head bellow water. I couldn't flip again, I almost died if it wasn't for my dad who jumped in the water to rescue me after a while.

water wings are also terrible at teaching kids to swim: they can't properly use their arms wearing wings.

I had both my kids (currently 3 and 5) learn to swim by having them wear inflatable vests. When they started they had fully inflated vests. every week or so I would deflate it bit by bit, until they are wearing a fully deflated vest. At that point the vest is just for emotional support, and they can pretty much handle the water without drowning (though still need proper lessons of course)

The funny thing is that I remember as a kid using a borrowed set of water wings (I'm assuming those are the inflatable things that go on the upper arms?). I was like 9 years old, and could barely swim by doing a back stroke (floating on my back, and somewhat making my way across the water). But when I put those water wings on, it gave me just enough support that I learned that afternoon how to do a breast stroke and side stroke, and ended up being a fairly strong swimmer after that (only used them that one time though).

interesting! I'll try mixing that in when they get to learning backstroke!

That makes me think. Could one make a remote inflatable vest? Basically, one of those vests they equip aircraft with, but with a remote control attached as well. While deflated, it wouldn't have a significant effect on buoyancy or encumbrance, so the child could learn to swim naturally. If one notices one's child in distress one could inflate it with the push of a button.

and listening to the child's various physiological indicators, so can auto-deploy itself. (and/or notify you of a potential issue)

And when it fails, and a toddler dies, the lawsuit would be enough to totally bankrupt the startup. Simply not worth the risk. I like the idea of using reactive technology to improve the cruft of aversion-type devices though.

I feel like this is why Hovding says it's "not intended for people under the age of 15". It's not that it wouldn't work most of the time, if not "all but a single time" and are simply protecting themselves from a possible lawsuit.

What's to prevent a condom-like "99% success rate" as legal backing for "haha can't sue us if it fails because we didn't promise 100% success rate"? Even though, effectively and when used properly, they have a 100% success rate... it's just there for legal reasons to prevent lawsuits.

[0] http://www.hovding.com/

When we put both my young kids through swim lessons, they were taught with "bubbles", little foam blocks that are strapped to the middle of the back, and the number of bubbles are reduced as their proficiency increases. That left their arms and chest free to work on actual swimming form. When working on kicks, they held on to little floating dumbell bars.

I just commented on this on Twitter..

My first comment was asking why most of the people were in those rubber things. If most of them can't swim, it is really dangerous for it calls for a high level of alertness on the life-guard part when the people shouldn't be there in the first place. And no, that's not really the job of the life-guard to watch over all of those.

That's like putting someone to watch over a large number of drunk people moving around and having fun in a porcelain shop and make sure none of them breaks anything.

A person unable to swim simply doesn't belong in a swimming pool deep enough that she can drown. She should be the exception rather than the norm.

I may seem dramatic, but this is really a bad thing waiting to happen. And it's already happening. If you couldn't spot the kids in that cluster-mess, that's bad news.

In my opinion, those who don't know yet how to swim should be in a pool of an appropriate depth. This is why you have different pools for swimmers and non-swimmers, or one pool with a gradient of depths.

Also the people responsible for the kid.. if the kid will be in the water unattended, the top priority is to make sure he's comfortable in the water (how to float, how to relax, etc).

Nobody should drown in a darn swimming pool! It's a darn swimming pool!

As a kid I always hated water wings. Luckily my parents gave up on them pretty quick too. They made it hard to move your arms properly and didn't provide good floatation anyway.

The biggest danger seems to be parents who let their children swim before they know how.

Having guarded for several years at a popular club (and having had one of only two requires saves at the club in my tenure) I can tell you this isn't true. I will allow that their parents should pay closer attention (or attention at all).

Fatigue sets in quickly (and sometimes almost instantly). In my case it was a young girl who was a fine swimmer (on the swim team) and had been playing in the pool all day on a hot and crowded July day. She got a little far away from the wall in an area between 5-6 feet, very much like the video, and suddenly found herself struggling to break the surface of the water.

It happens fast, and can happen to kids you would never suspect would find themselves in trouble.

> "very much like the video, and suddenly found herself struggling to break the surface of the water."

I am unable to view OP's site at the moment so I'm not sure if you mean there was something on top of her.

Anyway, in open water "being able to swim" should include a "rescue/recovery float" ability. AKA, the ability to float indefinitely with little or no expended effort (ideally no effort at all, but some people have body builds which make light sculling necessary). If they can't do that, they aren't ready to swim in deep water.

That is the standard we used when I was a lifeguard and swim instructor (well, instructor assistant).

> I am unable to view OP's site at the moment so I'm not sure if you mean there was something on top of her.

No, there was no flotation device blocking the surface in any of the videos.

Only if unsupervised. It's very easy to underestimate how quickly things can change.

On a slightly more positive note, this is a clip from BBCs Fantastic The Human Body. It talks about and shows the natural abilities of babies to swim at a very early age. If you're politically correct/sensitive, you may want to skip it. It does show genitals. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fbSCSHzXkrI

Yes.

They conflate 'can swim across shallow pool' with 'johnny can swim now, so I can relax'.

I have already heard two kids claim they can swim, when later it turned out they can only swim with water wings.

This video is one I recognize from the series of pool rescues that was on HN a few days back. Having watched a number of videos from that wave pool, I can confirm that "kid flips tube after climbing on it and is dumped face down" is probably the #1 thing that leads to a rescue.

That said, if you're watching for them, I just sort of defocus to watch the whole pool at once and look for the particular splashes of the drowning person's "swim" that become distinctive after you've seen it enough times.

Cheers to a fellow lifeguard! It was a great summer job in high school and my first year of college.

My 20 month old has one of these Shark Fins: http://www.amazon.co.uk/SwimFin-3PK-Angelfish-Pink/dp/B001JR...

I assume that they are good as he uses them in his swimming classes and with it he can swim a few metres to the side of the pool.

If I'm being honest, this is the kind of thing I would not have allowed. As you describe, your child can make it a few meters away from the side of the pool. Then what?

If your child gets tired, this will not help. This looks like it forced the child into a face-down position, and a tired child forced to be face-down in water doesn't seem like a great idea.

As a fellow parent of a 1.5 year old, I'm sure you've heard of latent drowning. [0] This device seems like it could promote the chances of that happening as well.

[0] https://www.parentmap.com/article/how-a-child-can-drown-5-ho...

Does not appear to be Coast Guard Approved (nearly every PFD that is approved mentions that it is Coast Guard Approved if it is).

On Amazon you can shop for flotation devices that are "Coast Guard Approved" specifically. I would highly recommend getting one that is.

Looks reasonable as a support when your child is being taught how to swim (and is thus closely monitored). Looks absolutely horrible as a means of preventing your kid from drowning though.

disclaimer: I'm not in any way a professional when it comes to water safety, so this is just a remark; not advice.

Yea, it looks like a useful tool to provide support while following the warnings:

Warning: Not suitable for children under 36 months Warning: Only to be used in water in which the child is within its depth and under adult supervision Warning: To be used under the direct supervision of an adult

I don't think it's a mistake that "under adult supervision" is said twice.

I'd definitely not let him out of my reach, he's far too young.

When I was younger (say, 7 or 8 years old), I considered myself a good swimmer and as part of my swimming lessons we were told to do length-ways with the aid of a swimming board [0] at arms' length.

Approaching the 3/4 mark of the length, I felt it slipping out of my hands and in my panic, I went down. I woke up after being resuscitated after a lifeguard noticed I was in trouble under the water. He had jumped from the top step of his high chair straight in apparently and literally threw me out of the water to a waiting colleague.

Not sure if I'd trust my own children with that type of flotation aid again, but as you said, it encouraged me to swim outside of my comfort zone and I panicked so perhaps more control is needed of when and where it is used.

[0] http://runforthethrills.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/kick-...

As far as I see it, there are two use cases for a pool, swimming and fun. I'd agree with you if you were talking about a pool with swimming lanes. The point of the pool in the video on the website is to have fun. If you make it safe, you kill the fun.

    > If you make it safe, you kill the fun.

It puts a damper on things when someone drowns too.

You are right, of course, but that's why things shouldn't be black and white. There is a difference between banning everything except "approved" life jackets and banning large inflatable pads which children could get stuck under. If you look at the website, the majority of people in the pool are hanging on the blue inflatable tubes. They would not be in the pool at all if they had to actually swim.

It would be nice to know from you which PFD you would recommend from say this list at amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/s/ref=is_pn_1?fst=as%3Aoff&rh=i%...

There are tons of all kinds of floaties in every pool I've seen in BC, Canada. The life guards seems pretty strict there, but maybe not for banning floaties.

I have no lifeguarding experience nor education, but what you are saying seems important. Any known research or training practices for lifeguards that would support your claim? I could start a dialogue with our local pool with something like that.

Thanks

I don't know anything about your old profession but I know that every adventure bath place I've been to in Sweden with a wave maker have always asked everyone to take all toys out of the water before the wave maker starts.

At family pool parties I had a cousin who thought it was a fun game to try to trap me underneath a raft to prevent me from surfacing for air. He was 12, I was 8. Fun times. Learned how to hold my breath, that's for sure.

You're lucky you never drowned.

That would make for a pretty fucking boring pool, honestly. No flotation devices would mean that all I could do as a kid would be to stand around on my tiptoes.

I was tempted to go on a diatribe about your comment, but I'll leave it at this: my job was to guard lives, not provide entertainment.

Nobody died, which gave every person I guarded the opportunity to pursue an anti-boring life in whatever way they see fit.

I'm not saying you drew the line in the wrong place, as I know nothing about the subject, but surely you could also close the pool so nobody can use it for the same reason of "saving lives, not providing entertainment"

Well no, I couldn't. I was paid to run the pool, not close it.

There are a lot of ways to have fun at a pool without flotation devices that endanger lives. I can provide a list if you'd like.

You could run the pool by saying any child under 16 needs to be accompanied into the pool by an adult and can never be more than 2m away from that adult, one adult per child. Hell why only children, everyone in the pool needs one designated person they won't go more than 2m away from so they can watch each other.

You could introduce a rule that nobody can speak or make any noises that aren't a direct result of swimming, so that when someone is in trouble it's easier to hear them and/or someone else alerting to the problem.

Both of those would still be running the pool, both of them would make it easier to keep people from drowning, and it wouldn't be impossible to have fun. It would be much less fun, but not impossible.

But you've drawn a line that those rules would be going too far, whereas banning flotation devices isn't too far. You've balanced in your mind safety vs. entertainment to see what's worth doing and what isn't. I'm not arguing with your decisions, I know nothing about keeping swimmers safe, I'm just saying in response to "my job was to guard lives, not provide entertainment" that if you really didn't care about anything other than saving their lives you could be much stricter and make the pool much less fun, but a tiny bit more safe.

Well hopefully it would be an impetus to learn to swim instead of instigating dangerous situations that floatation devices put non-swimmers in.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com