The sign says....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-03-2014, 02:32 PM
The sign says....
I remember some time ago a skier or a snowboarder decided to pass over the danger zone on a hill. This guy knew the dangers as he and all people were warned but went anyway and got lost or injured or something. So then the people had to look for him. Cops were called in and all that jazz. Cost a bit of money I'd imagine. This guy didn't have to pay anything back though because somehow he isn't responsible for his actions. And it's not like this was some kid. He was a grown man.
If you are aware of the dangers and cross the line anyway then fuck ya. You are too stupid to live. Cold I know but that how I feel!
Any thoughts on this?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 02:40 PM
RE: The sign says....
That kind of rescues are a form of social help, a safety net for bad events. So it is paid by all of us, even for the stupid ones.

It's not supposed to be efficient or fair.

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 02:43 PM
RE: The sign says....
I am a firm subscriber of Radical Darwinism.

[Image: im-not-saying-lets-kill-all-the-stupid-people.png]

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like itsnotmeitsyou's post
05-03-2014, 03:09 PM
RE: The sign says....
(05-03-2014 02:32 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  I remember some time ago a skier or a snowboarder decided to pass over the danger zone on a hill. This guy knew the dangers as he and all people were warned but went anyway and got lost or injured or something. So then the people had to look for him. Cops were called in and all that jazz. Cost a bit of money I'd imagine. This guy didn't have to pay anything back though because somehow he isn't responsible for his actions. And it's not like this was some kid. He was a grown man.
If you are aware of the dangers and cross the line anyway then fuck ya. You are too stupid to live. Cold I know but that how I feel!
Any thoughts on this?


well, by that logic, one could say that almost *all* mistakes are the result of someone ignoring certain risks.

Roll your car into a ditch? well, you know the dangers of driving, yet you did it anyway. Going for a hike and get lost? A massive search and rescue operation must be conducted because one asshole decided that buying a new pair of hiking boots was all the orienteering he needed to do.

However, the darwin awards is my favorite bathroom material to read. :-)

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Cathym112's post
05-03-2014, 03:18 PM
RE: The sign says....
(05-03-2014 03:09 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 02:32 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  I remember some time ago a skier or a snowboarder decided to pass over the danger zone on a hill. This guy knew the dangers as he and all people were warned but went anyway and got lost or injured or something. So then the people had to look for him. Cops were called in and all that jazz. Cost a bit of money I'd imagine. This guy didn't have to pay anything back though because somehow he isn't responsible for his actions. And it's not like this was some kid. He was a grown man.
If you are aware of the dangers and cross the line anyway then fuck ya. You are too stupid to live. Cold I know but that how I feel!
Any thoughts on this?


well, by that logic, one could say that almost *all* mistakes are the result of someone ignoring certain risks.

Roll your car into a ditch? well, you know the dangers of driving, yet you did it anyway. Going for a hike and get lost? A massive search and rescue operation must be conducted because one asshole decided that buying a new pair of hiking boots was all the orienteering he needed to do.

However, the darwin awards is my favorite bathroom material to read. :-)

Your analogies do not follow the original logic. The OP wasn't about risks that are undertaken during a normal course of action. It was about ignoring blatant warning signs about increased risk. More appropriate analogies would be "If a guy decides to take his vehicle off roading and flips it" and "If someone decides to hike in an area marked as being full of quicksand"

Dangerous areas are marked that way for a reason. It's not just to ruin someone's fun, it's because they are more dangerous than is generally acceptable. If you CHOOSE to ignore blatant warnings and accept the increased risk, then you are also choosing to go it alone.

Now, I don't think that we should simply leave them to die, but they should at least be financially responsible for the rescue op.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like itsnotmeitsyou's post
05-03-2014, 11:52 PM
RE: The sign says....
No. Your words are still too warm to have asked viewers' opinion on your remarks, a sign of the merit of self-reflection.

The confident line of "let the problem sort itself out" is kinda more like it.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2014, 01:24 AM
RE: The sign says....
"signs, signs, everywhere there's signs
Blocking up the scenery, breaking my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?"

"If you want a happy ending, that depends, of course, on where you stop your story." Orson Welles
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2014, 03:19 AM
RE: The sign says....
My favourite sign said:

"DO NOT THROW STONES AT THIS SIGN"

It had lots of dents in it.

The emergency services have no way of ascertaining intent.

Nor should they.

In a way, it's no different from the test drills they do for practice.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
06-03-2014, 08:42 AM
RE: The sign says....
(05-03-2014 03:18 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 03:09 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  well, by that logic, one could say that almost *all* mistakes are the result of someone ignoring certain risks.

Roll your car into a ditch? well, you know the dangers of driving, yet you did it anyway. Going for a hike and get lost? A massive search and rescue operation must be conducted because one asshole decided that buying a new pair of hiking boots was all the orienteering he needed to do.

However, the darwin awards is my favorite bathroom material to read. :-)

Your analogies do not follow the original logic. The OP wasn't about risks that are undertaken during a normal course of action. It was about ignoring blatant warning signs about increased risk. More appropriate analogies would be "If a guy decides to take his vehicle off roading and flips it" and "If someone decides to hike in an area marked as being full of quicksand"

Dangerous areas are marked that way for a reason. It's not just to ruin someone's fun, it's because they are more dangerous than is generally acceptable. If you CHOOSE to ignore blatant warnings and accept the increased risk, then you are also choosing to go it alone.

Now, I don't think that we should simply leave them to die, but they should at least be financially responsible for the rescue op.


no, my logic follows. I guess you never saw those "caution, possible ice conditions" sign while driving too, eh? Or those signs of "danger: falling rocks" sign when driving by a cliff. yet you continue to drive the way you were going, knowing full well that you have an increased risk of harm.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-03-2014, 09:00 AM
RE: The sign says....
(06-03-2014 08:42 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 03:18 PM)itsnotmeitsyou Wrote:  Your analogies do not follow the original logic. The OP wasn't about risks that are undertaken during a normal course of action. It was about ignoring blatant warning signs about increased risk. More appropriate analogies would be "If a guy decides to take his vehicle off roading and flips it" and "If someone decides to hike in an area marked as being full of quicksand"

Dangerous areas are marked that way for a reason. It's not just to ruin someone's fun, it's because they are more dangerous than is generally acceptable. If you CHOOSE to ignore blatant warnings and accept the increased risk, then you are also choosing to go it alone.

Now, I don't think that we should simply leave them to die, but they should at least be financially responsible for the rescue op.


no, my logic follows. I guess you never saw those "caution, possible ice conditions" sign while driving too, eh? Or those signs of "danger: falling rocks" sign when driving by a cliff. yet you continue to drive the way you were going, knowing full well that you have an increased risk of harm.

Facepalm

No, it doesn't. A "caution, ice possible" or "danger: falling rocks" sign is STILL a warning sign that follows along a normal course of action. I.E. you're driving a road vehicle on a road. It does not follow the logic in the OP that talks about going outside the normal boundaries for the activity.

If the OP had been about ignoring the risks of going down a double black diamond, your analogies would be logically consistent. But it doesn't. The OP specifically called out people who decide to carry out the activity in an area that is expressly excluded from the normal trails.

It's like the difference between taking a risk by swimming on a marked safe beach and a marked unsafe beach. On the safe beach, there are still risks. Drowning, sharks, jellies, etc. These are generally considered low risks and are therefore generally acceptable. On the unsafe beach, there is a reason it is marked that way. Riptides, dangerous rocks, etc. These are high risk areas that are generally not considered acceptable risks.

When I lived in Carmel, Ca, most of the beaches were marked as having strong currents and riptides and visitors were expressly warned about the dangers of going in the water. People ignored the signs and drowned all the time. Those people brought it on themselves.

The beaches not too far away were marked as safe for swimming, there were very few deaths on those beaches, hence, they were marked as safe. When someone did get injured or died on one of those beaches, it was more likely to be a freak accident and those people were victims of chance.

Not even close to the same thing.

Excuse me, I'm making perfect sense. You're just not keeping up.

"Let me give you some advice, bastard: never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armor, and it can never be used to hurt you." - Tyrion Lannister
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: