Look the legal debate is getting us nowhere, and is in fact completely irrelevant to the argument. I am not sure I would trust someone flying who concentrates on obscure legal discussion to the detriment of a debate about safety! Personally I go for safety first, the law second, but call me old fashioned.
Do you, Chilli and IO540 not agree that using a Garmin 296 for avoiding obstructions is rather more dangerous than not having one at all? It is not an EGPWS. It is not even a fitted unit, and is certainly not suitable for that purpose. Surely this is the most imoportant point, yet people attacked Mariner for mentioning it, and then ignored the point when I made it.