It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: JAGStorm
This is becoming a broken record, officials plead, beg, insist that people evacuate before storms.
Without fail, people are stubborn and say oh' i've been through this before so i'll be ok.
There was someone on FB asking for rescue as water was in their house, they were right by the coast.
It is one thing if something totally unexpected hits like a tornado, or even to some degree wildfires.
Hurricanes not so much. We've had a week of warnings. Everyone on the east coast knows they were at risk.
At what point do we say, NO?
Do we start charging for people that fail to heed the warnings?
Do we let people just sit there and die instead of risking the lives of responders?
Please do not say that people can't leave because they don't have money, there are shelters and transportation that was offered for free.
There were facilities for pets too. That is a sad excuse anyways, how do you think your pets will fare when water is up to your neck?
People have seemed to have lost their sense of responsibility and common sense these days.
Just a story for example:
I'm not even kidding when I say I read about a lady that wanted to get on her roof and cut some tree limbs that she had put off but now thinks the storm will push them to hit her house (the eye was just outside of her area). She was going to have her 10yr old and 14yr old help with ropes and she was going to climb on her roof, with hurricane force winds and try to use a chainsaw. The tree was gigantic too! Part of me feels really sorry for those kids but part of me think that's a good way to clear out the dumb gene pool.
originally posted by: KansasGirl
I thought about this myself yesterday when I read a quote from a sheriff in one of the towns in the bullseye. He said "We are not going to put our personell in harm's way for people who didn't get out when they had the chance."
Which brought up conflicting states of mind for me. One the one hand, yeah, why should some little girl possibly not see her daddy that night, because he was sent in to rescue someone who didn't evacuate, and he perished trying to help them?
On the other hand, well what are taxpayers paying them for, then, if not emergencies? And did those people not choose their profession, knowing the risks?
What about house fires that start because someone falls asleep with a lit cigarette? Do we not send in firefighters because obviously that person ignored the warnings not to smoke in bed?
a reply to: JAGStorm
Please do not say that people just don't have the money
Just a story for example:
a lady that wanted to get on her roof and cut some tree limbs that she had put off. She was going to have her 10yr old and 14yr old help with ropes and she was going to climb on her roof
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: DBCowboy
Rescuing innocent people is the compassionate thing to do. We are America.
originally posted by: KansasGirl
I thought about this myself yesterday when I read a quote from a sheriff in one of the towns in the bullseye. He said "We are not going to put our personell in harm's way for people who didn't get out when they had the chance."
Which brought up conflicting states of mind for me. One the one hand, yeah, why should some little girl possibly not see her daddy that night, because he was sent in to rescue someone who didn't evacuate, and he perished trying to help them?
On the other hand, well what are taxpayers paying them for, then, if not emergencies? And did those people not choose their profession, knowing the risks?
What about house fires that start because someone falls asleep with a lit cigarette? Do we not send in firefighters because obviously that person ignored the warnings not to smoke in bed?