Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear Islander
How about we simply enforce the laws we have now (where have I heard that before?) and charge idiots for their own rescue.
|
Amen. Legislation is never going to cure stupidity or create common sense. I believe we need more of the latter rather than piling on with yet more fees, regulations, rules or laws that can't effectively be enforced.
But when looking at "rescue cost", is it really some additional incremental cost directly attributed to the rescue? For example, was the Air Guard not going to use the fuel if they didn't burn it during the rescue? And isn't their participation part of very reason why the capability exists? Sure, they may not have been flying that night in that location, but they surely would have been flying and getting the experience somewhere.
I believe in personal responsibility and the golden rule. If there's a risk and cost incurred and you feel compelled to send me a bill for saving my hide, then that's a debt I should pay. But I'm also skeptical when we start tallying up estimated or actual rescue costs for efforts performed by volunteers or people we would have been paying to be at work anyway -- that's not real "cost". And can you imagine if we actually regressed to the place where Air Guard or Coast Guard rescues are managed like health care, where the first question in response to your mayday is a check of credit status and available balance on your visa card? "Do you have insurance? No? OK, you get to freeze to death."
Sometimes I wonder if there's a different agenda involved -- agency heads angling for more budget dollars, or special interest groups looking to make a point? Maybe. But even then it probably doesn't matter. People will be idiots, and other folks will get into honest trouble through no fault of their own. And most of us will continue to offer assistance where we can - law or no law, uncompensated or not. That's the way decent people should be.