Posted on 12/17/2006 3:43:18 PM PST by ConservativeMan55
One climber found dead on Mt. Hood
I agree with you said generally, but Kili can be trekked.
The only acceptable answer to the thread is: God help this poor man's family.
The debate whether we should pay for a rescue or not, is crass, anti-christian, and inhuman.
"unless everyone understands, including the climbers, that no rescue attempt will be made. "
Are you truly not understanding what I said?
Mountain rescue teams are 100 percent private non-profit organizations, many formed decades ago and long before any state, local, or federal agency was even remotely involved in mountain rescue and SAR.
They will continue to aid fellow climbers regardless of public agency involvement, just as they've always done, with or without the "coordination" functions of Oregon county sheriffs, with or without Chinooks.
What you're not understanding, I think, is that mountain rescue teams don't rely on public funds. So you can't really "defund" them. They'll continue to be funded by private donations and volunteer efforts, and they will continue to aid fellow climbers in distress. Just as they always have done.
Your assuption of equal costs is invalid. The top 1% of taxpayers pay 38% of the taxes the top 10% pay 68% of the taxes. SO if you're assuming 100,000,000 taxpayers then the top 1% pay $.28 cents, not $.0075 All of which is irrelevant anyway -
What is relevant is that people should be charged for the taxpayer provided services and by all means charge the hikers too. Mountain climbing is inherently risky, and if you want to do it, then accept the consequences including paying for an SAR efforts. You don't get free stamps at the post office, why get free government sponsored SAR activites (and if volunteers want to do this then more power to them).
"Kili can be trekked."
If you're saying it's a less technical climb, I agree, from everything I've heard and read.
But it's still one of the 7 Summits, and people do fail on it.
My friend did it and he is not a technical climber. But regardless of the technicality it is a very demanding climb, a couple people in his group couldn't make it to the peak.
"the top 1% pay $.28 cents, not $.0075 All of which is irrelevant anyway -"
OK, whatever.
I say completely remove climbing SAR efforts from the public domain.
Mountain rescue will still do what it's always done.
And then we won't hear the keening and moaning over 28 cents.
Amen. (And my second favorite comment to the insensitives.)
"he is not a technical climber. But regardless of the technicality it is a very demanding climb"
I think we're both agreeing here.
I comprehend it, I just don't believe it. I find it impossible to believe that evey resource used in looking for these guys was at no cost to the taxpayers. I saw footage of helos searching, and I know that these are not privately owned and flown by volunteers who purchased them for SAR activities.
"The debate whether we should pay for a rescue or not, is crass, anti-christian, and inhuman."
Continue reading if you can stomach it.
The ghouls are out in force here.
Ya know? I don't give a rat's rear if it's 1 millionth of a penny. It belongs to me and I don't wish to spend it supporting stupid behavior.
Just one more of the thousands of pet programs forced upon us by progressives that couldn't afford to do their idiotic BS without OUR MONEY!!!
I agree - what the heck are we arguing about then?
"I understand that part of conservative values is self-responsibility (which is what has attracted me to this group), but this just takes it too far!"
These people are not really conservatives.
They're heartless and sterile ghouls.
I believe that was the viewpoint I was espousing. It was angkor who thought that it wasn't a problem.
Winter is the dry season in Florida also. Monsoon begins mid-june and lasts through August - typically.
Shame on all of those people.
Where did I say anything about defunding anyone? I didn't.
Where did I say anything about trying to prevent rescue attempts? I didn't.
My comment was entirely directed at what expectations climbers should have. We're not on opposite sides on this question, but you continue to insist that we are.
I would switch to crayon font if I knew how. My point was nothing more than a statement that IF we (whomever WE is) decide not to attempt rescues, and the climbers know that no rescues will be attempted, then that's one path we could take, but everyone should understand that up front.
Otherwise, there is an expectation that rescue attempts will occur.
If you don't understand what I was saying, just forget it. I think the rest of the folks did.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.