Who will pay to rescue these idiots?

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by Tony B

Oh really?
By who's definition?
I think reality shows are stupid and I don't watch any of them. Whether some of their stunts require sheer stupidity or very large balls is depending on your attitude towards it.
Hard to imagine that our forefathers were a bunch of sniffling little wimps, cowering in a corner, discussing the idea of a revolution.
While some stunts are crazy, others are highly productive. These are folks with adventure in their blood. Some day some of them will be over achievers while some of us will still be living hum-drum lives finding fault with everything we can't do.
These guys and gals don't go out with the idea of being rescued any more than a cruising sailor or an around the world racer.

Oh, and BTW, states like La. allow no helmets but you have to prove a minimum amount of medical insurance so that the others people wont have to subsidize their head injuries.

Tony,
For you to compare our Founding Fathers, who were the best and brightest of our country's citizens, with corn-brained reality TV "stars" who are being paid for their stunts to satiate the needs of a society of brain dead mushroom heads is patently absurd. It is called a non sequitur in philosophy. To call these goons people with "adventure in their blood" is to call a beaten and abused circus dancing bear a marvel of nature. Good luck, good sailing and if you're looking for heros . . . you won't find them on TV.

[bbowers2004]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Interesting. Can you provide any further info?

Insurance company and program name (web link)?

Any geographic limits?

It is through spot.

http://findmespot.com

[SkiprJohn]

Interesting post! Back in the olden days when I was a kid, you counted on no one to come rescue you and if you broke your back, neck or head you weren't miracuously put back togther. I learned caution and safety. Now is a totally different story. Now you'd be considered a hero for surviving and a fund would be started to help you and your family with your medical bills and counseling.

I know I'm exaggerating a bit but somewhere in there I think I made a point. Most folks are too dependent on others to take care of them.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by jeremiason

OK where do you stop...

Should the governments charge cruise ships, container ships, off shore oil rigs or even sanctioned off-shore sailboat races for rescues since they are commercial ventures making tons of money?

Although it does piss me off... I am afraid that if governments took the position of fining or charging people for rescues, then the first person to get a bill would be the guy who owns a 35 foot sailboat.

Good point, good question and not an easy answer. On one hand when the government starts limiting what I can and cannot do, where does it stop, the old slippery slope. On the other hand there are limits on freedoms when they impinge on the rights of others, as in the classic freedom of speech example, an individual's freedom of speech does not extend to yelling fire in a crowded theater or to paraphrase a common aphorism, your freedom ends where my nose begins.

Unfortunately in our society lines must be drawn to protect us from the idiots, criminals, sociopaths and such. When and where to draw the line is I think the most important responsibility we all face to protect ourselves while also protecting our freedom.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by bbowers2004

It is through spot.

SPOT SATELLITE MESSENGER :: HOME PAGE

interesting.

Note sure if they would cover say a NWP passage or not. The terms and conditions exclude "(a) Expeditions, time trials and/or record attempts;
(b) professional sports or riding or driving in any kind of race;
(c) skydiving, skysurfing, hang gliding, paragliding or aerobatics"

Also, this bit is a bit worrying. "In such cases where a Member activates their emergency (911/SOS) signal for an emergency and it later transpires that the additional rescue service was not required or covered by the terms and conditions of the Search and Rescue Benefit cover, the member will be liable for the whole cost." You might end up stuck with a bigger bill than if you did not use the spot service.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"No, I'm with Dave. Keep paying those taxes and be thankful we are rich enough to cover for the few idiots. Otherwise we'll all be defined as idiots, and all have to carry more insurance than we already do." Mike O'Reilly

Mike, this concept might work for you Canadians, but it is the reason we Americans have a nearly 18 trillion dollar deficit and and are on the path to bankruptcy/collapse. Without "reason" and "standards" in government, the system cannot survive. These reality goons should pay for their pathetic fiasco and not burden the Canadian taxpayer. This theater of the absurd is very different from a sailor being rescued offshore. Good luck and good sailing.

I'm not sure I follow the debt connection rognvald, but I do agree these idiots should be paying for their own rescue. The problem is where do you draw the line, and more importantly, who gets to draw them? I do have a real problem with people doing stupid things with the expectation that the collective will save their butts. But my definition of stupid actions is probably not yours. Do you really want me deciding for you what is acceptable risk and what is not?

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by skipmac

I think David M put it perfectly. If a commercial venture then why should tax payers (Canadian or US) have to pay for their problems. And I think his way of defining commercial is as good as any I could conjure up.

Aren't ships commercial ventures?

edit: I read further and found this has already been asked.

[Teknav]

For those who do not wear helmets while riding their motorcycles...You have told the world that your brain neither worth much nor worth saving. If there are no rescues to be made, the Weather Channel would be in trouble. Much of their programs are about rescues and weather-related calamities.

Here in Central Texas, the weather forecast is as boring as it gets...during the summer months...everyday high is in the upper 90's, lows in the upper 70's...hardly any rain...always sunshine; repeat the same forecast for weeks on end. No rescues or calamities...might as well pack it up and go out of business!

Mauritz
Knows and sees all...

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Hey Dave I don't recall you being a Canadian Taxpayer!!

We get enough idiots here too that we rescue each year. I keep paying my taxes.

Dave

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by skipmac

I think David M put it perfectly. If a commercial venture then why should tax payers (Canadian or US) have to pay for their problems. And I think his way of defining commercial is as good as any I could conjure up.

You mean if the commercial venture hasn't the cash you leave them die. A sort of nautical wallet biopsy !!!! Ayn rand would be proud of you

Dave

[goboatingnow]

Hey of you want thrifty government why not start with a military budget that's 4 times larger then it needs be.

People belly aching cause we rescue a few idiots , seriously folks , its not about money.

As for nutters who drive motorbikes without helmets , leave then bleed out on the side of the road. !!!!


Please mr law makers I'd like to drive down an empty motorway at 4am at 150 mph , what I can't , it's my personal decision , hang on why are you holding handcuffs


Dave

[thinwater]

What is the value, to all those Water Mittys out there, of being able to watch folks do stuff they would never do, could never do, and don't even understand? A great many people enjoy knowing that others sail in the southern ocean, climb Mt. Everest, or swim with sharks.

I'm not saying I know what the value is, but it's material. It's enough to pay for a few idiots.


ME? The humiliation of having to call for rescue due to my own hubris keeps me away from the most extreme adventures.

[Bashleys]

And the government does charge people for rescues. I don't know what the criteria is, but my former brother in law overloaded his powerboat in Lake Tahoe (18' boat w/11 on board). The Tahoe Queen chugged past and the wake pooped the boat. All 11 in the lake! Coasties responded and in the end it cost him $40,000. Expensive lesson!

[SkiprJohn]

Originally Posted by Bashleys

And the government does charge people for rescues. I don't know what the criteria is, but my former brother in law overloaded his powerboat in Lake Tahoe (18' boat w/11 on board). The Tahoe Queen chugged past and the wake pooped the boat. All 11 in the lake! Coasties responded and in the end it cost him $40,000. Expensive lesson!

Coasties are on Tahoe too? They do get around!

[Boatguy30]

Originally Posted by sec906

I wonder how they calculated that? Don't you wonder why they never report how much money was spent as a result of this rescue above and beyond what would have been spent anyway?

I'd guess this figure is the total cost of all the personnel and equipment with any involvement in the rescue. But what is the incremental cost between this operation versus having all the personnel and equipment sitting idle? What is the incremental cost of this rescue over doing a training exercise SAR?

What is the "real" cost?

Why does marine salvage cost so much? a guy has to maintain that salvage boat 365 for those couple of jobs a year. Therefore the per job cost is very high, same deal here. sure they may have only used a few tank fulls of gas or whatever but the REAL cost was associated overhead costs attributed to this one rescue. Training, retirements, pensions, replacement equipment, etc, etc. if they didn't feel obliged by treaty or national pride to conduct rescues the cost would be very low.