Jenkinsbball wrote:
Where do we draw the line when it comes to helping people who knowingly put themselves into dangerous situations and then expect us to come to the rescue?
Where do you draw the line concerning a dangerous situation?
www.car-accidents.com wrote:
Car Crash Stats: There were nearly 6,420,000 auto accidents in the United States in 2005. The financial cost of these crashes is more than 230 Billion dollars. 2.9 million people were injured and 42,636 people killed. About 115 people die every day in vehicle crashes in the United States -- one death every 13 minutes.
There is a risk when you are driving a car but it will not stop you from driving because the need / use / aim / reason / … of driving the car is larger than the estimated risk of it.
Does this mean that when you are involved in a car accident you are not entitled for any help, because you knew there was a risk involved?
No, because it is generally believed that it is normal to take the risk of driving a car
if you the needed precautions. Precaution could be anything from knowing how to drive, don’t be drunk, keep to the speeding limit, … Even when people are not minding the rules they are entitled emergency rescue and medical care and whatever needed, even if it was there own bloody fault! Why? Because they are human and shouldn't be punished by dead for there mistakes (don’t get me started about the dead penalty here).
But when they caused the accident they will have to pay for it.
But the risk of using a car is by far not comparable with mountaineering.
True, there is a bigger risk in mountaineering, but the resulting pleasure is also not comparable. I can assure you that the experience exceeds the estimated risk by far. Moreover the preparation you need for mountaineering is hardly comparable with any other activity. You need to be on top of a physical, mental and technical level before you could ever endeavour something these guys did. Normally you are preparing and planning a climb like this for months if not years. I don’t have all the details, but my guess is these guys knew very well what they were doing and were probably very prepared for all the possible dangers.
They were caught in storm? Bad luck. But did they forfeited there right of rescue because of bad luck or even bad judgement? Sure as hell no! But they will have to pay for all the interventions. (and I can assure you those rescue crews are costly; did you know they charge you per minute of helicopter flight / person / …) Here in Europe we have an insurance for mountaineering and it is regarded as common sense to take it before you go to the mountains. Especially for occasions like these, because if you would die, your family won’t have to pay the bill.
So where do you draw the line when it comes to helping people in any possible case?
Nowhere! As long as there is reasonable chance you can rescue them without endangering other people beyond an acceptable degree.
Cheers,
R
Ps.: No, I am not a machine so a can’t numerically express reasonable or acceptable.
