Who will pay to rescue these idiots?

[Rick R]

Reality TV stars crossing Northwest Passage on jet skis forced to cancel Arctic trek after costly rescue | National Post

As a Canadian taxpayer, I resent having to pay for rescuing these fools. Perhaps it is time for the Govt to require a bond to be posted before a permit is issued, and no jet skis or row boats allowed.

[ScuzzMonkey]

It's interesting, I just happened to go to a presentation by the alternate captain of the Laurier down here in Port Townsend (coincidentally, the presentation was about their search for the remains of the Franklin expedition).

He made the interesting point that everything we've been hearing in the media lately has been about the Northwest Passage clearing up, when in fact the ice this year has been pretty bad. And, he says, the fact that it is sometimes clearing up can make it more dangerous, not less... when the ice is thick, the packs tend to stay static, whereas when it is less thick, it becomes more mobile and less predictable.

I'm curious by what you said about permits, though; is that already a requirement for Arctic passages? Or just something you're suggesting?

[skipmac]

Agree. This kind of thing has annoyed me for years. Rescuing a hiker or camper who gets lost or stranded is one thing but to bail out some daredevil who intentionally (and possibly foolishly) puts himself/herself in danger especially for money is another.

I think anyone attempting something like this should be required to carry an insurance policy to cover the cost of rescue.

I watched the video clip on the link you posted. It twice referred to the "brave men". I think foolish might be more accurate.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Rick R

Reality TV stars crossing Northwest Passage on jet skis forced to cancel Arctic trek after costly rescue | National Post

As a Canadian taxpayer, I resent having to pay for rescuing these fools. Perhaps it is time for the Govt to require a bond to be posted before a permit is issued, and no jet skis or row boats allowed.

Be happy we allow the idiots to exist . Keep paying the taxes

[rognvald]

This is just another reminder of the Barnum and Bailey mentality of mindless people (viewers) who need to experience life vicariously through other equally mindless people(actors/reality stars). These are not explorers but reality TV buffoons providing "bread and circuses" for the Sheeple. How sad our Civilization has become and how low will it sink as we are suffocated with this pathetic nonsense. But wait . . . I think they're building a Colliseum that will trump all others in the past . . . bring on the lions!

[Dennis.G]

They vow to return!!

[senormechanico]

If they want to try stupid stuff like that, either post a bond for rescue or let 'em become polar bear food !

[Rick R]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

If they want to try stupid stuff like that, either post a bond for rescue or let 'em become polar bear food !

But we wouldn't want to poison the bears would we?

[robert sailor]

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

[David M]

If people are doing foolish things for a reality TV show or to get themselves media publicity then let the producers of the TV show or the advertisers pay for the insurance plan or the bond to cover the rescue costs.

If a foolish thing is being done for money or media attention, effectively making it a commercial venture, then pay up for the rescue costs.

Commercial ventures should be paying all of the costs and potential costs.

A good definition of commercial is if there is a professional film crew involved at any point or if they are trying to get media attention. This would keep regular cruisers off the hook for rescue costs. It would also discourage foolish stunts for the purpose of making money or achieving fame, which ultimately earns one money.

Using "foolish stunt" is too nebulous to define who picks up the tab for the rescue. A commercial venture is much easier to define.

[Mike OReilly]

In principal, I agree that "idiots" should not be rescued at tax payers expense, but then who defines what is "idiotic"? By most people's standards, sailing out of sight of land in a small sailboat is crazy. Who decides what is acceptable and what is not?

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.

[rebel heart]

A frequent argument in the states is about people not wanting to wear motorcycle helmets. Many of these people don't have medical insurance either. So in an effort to demonstrate their desire to not have the government tell them what to do, they have the government take tax money and spend it on them for acting like selfish children.

(I'm sitting at ~80k motorcycle miles by the age of 35)

It's aggravating watching tax money spent on stupid things, it's even more aggravating when it's spent on people who claim to want "less government". Similar to that couple that got rescued and flown home to Arizona when they left the US because of "too much government".

If you get your ass chased down by a skiff full of RPG-7 armed pirates with a 50 cal deck gun, feel free to broadcast on the radio that you want "less government" and as such don't want any coalition war ships to burn excess fuel trying to get to you quickly.

I don't have a problem paying taxes because I use and enjoy government services of many flavors. If you want to experience less government, move to Mogadishu. Oh what's that, you want basic security, emergency medical services, a fire department, decent reciprocal visa statuses, embassies to help you when you get mugged and beaten in any country? Open your wallet and pay your taxes.

[Stevens 47]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

In principal, I agree that "idiots" should not be rescued at tax payers expense, but then who defines what is "idiotic"? By most people's standards, sailing out of sight of land in a small sailboat is crazy. Who decides what is acceptable and what is not?

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.

1+

[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.

[Tony B]

Our human history is full of idiots. Columbus, Lewis and Clark, The Wright Brothers, Lindburgh, the astronauts, etc. I will grant you that the above people didn't have any real rescue service available to them that cost the public any money. But just think that if those that died along the way had been rescued how much better off the world would be.

The biggest morons are the sailors that leave sight of land and some even cross oceans. There are even people that sail in 15 kt. winds and 2 -3 ft seas. Imagine that.

I think we should start a group and decide on who gets rescued and who don't. We could go a step further and euthanize those that have more guts and adventure in them.

Or.... we could just quit complaining about what others do and move to Samalia where you wont have to pay for this stuff. .