Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
well, because they are in the most dangerous areas obviously.
im just kidding, i see no reason to help them until the area has been deemed safe to enter. i like to kid around sometimes. i think its funny but ive noticed nobody really appreciates it.
well, because they are in the most dangerous areas obviously.
im just kidding, i see no reason to help them until the area has been deemed safe to enter. i like to kid around sometimes. i think its funny but ive noticed nobody really appreciates it.
If you had used a "" after your statement people would have known you were kidding.
well, because they are in the most dangerous areas obviously.
im just kidding, i see no reason to help them until the area has been deemed safe to enter. i like to kid around sometimes. i think its funny but ive noticed nobody really appreciates it.
I do, but I tend to think it's more that you want certain people to think you are serious so that they will argue with you.
There are simply times when the rescuers lives are in such danger that they cannot try and rescue anyone. Then it is triage to determine what to do and who to rescue first. Common sense prevails.
This is really nothing new. People have tried to ride out storms and then called for help even during the storm itself. They have been told no and after the danger to rescuers has passed, the needs are assessed. Does not matter the reason for staying. Some have died and some will continue to die.
I think that -if- they have to rescue anyone who rejected a mandatory evacuation order, then the people who get evacuated should be issued hefty fines to help cover the cost of their rescue, AND that of anyone who needed rescuing outside of an evacuation area.
So, let's say it cost $1000 to rescue Joe Smith in Evacuation Area Central. He should be fined $2000; one for himself, and one for a random stranger in Non-Evacuation Area.
I think that -if- they have to rescue anyone who rejected a mandatory evacuation order, then the people who get evacuated should be issued hefty fines to help cover the cost of their rescue, AND that of anyone who needed rescuing outside of an evacuation area.
So, let's say it cost $1000 to rescue Joe Smith in Evacuation Area Central. He should be fined $2000; one for himself, and one for a random stranger in Non-Evacuation Area.
I agree that they should be fined the entire cost of their rescue. I don't think it is possible to make them pay for someone else's rescue.
I think that -if- they have to rescue anyone who rejected a mandatory evacuation order, then the people who get evacuated should be issued hefty fines to help cover the cost of their rescue, AND that of anyone who needed rescuing outside of an evacuation area.
So, let's say it cost $1000 to rescue Joe Smith in Evacuation Area Central. He should be fined $2000; one for himself, and one for a random stranger in Non-Evacuation Area.
Ha! They could only wish the cost would be $1000. It would be around to $3K, and that's a simple rescue with no swift water and no first aid/medical. If it's after the winds have passed and they use a helicopter, add $10K. If mutual aid is involved, add another $3K. If a paid crew is involved, tack on another $5K.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.