Who deserves to get rescued?

American has more than enough dumb and stupid. It's what's pulling it into the gutter.

I say let nature do some culling

originally posted by: Edumakated

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?

Put it this way... lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine. The issue with things like hurricanes is that people are given prior warning. In addition, it is a huge burden to public services to try to rescue folks during/after a hurricane when an entire town is screwed up.

House fires aren't really an apples to apples comparison. Rescuing someone, even if it is their own fault, isn't a huge burden when there is nothing else really going on. On the other hand, if a town has been devastated, rescuing someone who really shouldn't have needed rescuing in the first place is a burden.

I disagree- the house fire is very much an apples to apples situation, and how is it less of a burden for a firefighter to run into a house that may collapse because an idiot ignored the warnings to not smoke in bed? How is that NOT a burden?

Because it's his job, you might say? He signed up for those risks. Same as the rescuers in this hurricane scenario.

The sheriff isn't talking about sending Joe Schmoe in to rescue non-evacuators. If he were to send me in to rescue that woman on the roof, yeah, that would be a burden since I'm not trained nor did I apply for that job. But his rescue personell, the public servants who volunteered for the paying job that they trained for and are getting paid for- how is that a burden and how is it different than the idiot bed smoker?

Where do you draw the line?

The line is drawn by level of risk.
Some one on a public servants wage should not be risk their life for some idiot who ignored all evacuation warnings.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: DBCowboy

Rescuing innocent people is the compassionate thing to do. We are America.

put this one in a scrapbook b/c i agree with you

i guess 'you made your bed now lie in it and die' makes sense to sociopaths....

a reply to: fiverx313

I think there's a lot of swapping between ally/foe going on in here. It's refreshing.

TheRedneck

I'm just glad that here in Charlotte it's been a minor inconvenience, whereas where my mom lives (the new NC record holder for most rainfall) they did mandatory evacs. She left and went to a friend's place, she went back today with the only damage being a missing gate on her fence. Could she have stayed and been safe? In hindsight sure. That being said, why chance it? The worst she's had out of this is a minor few day inconvenience, a new gate, and a roof inspection, it could have been a hell of a lot worse.

If you can get out, do it. If you can't, call for help before the storm and you'll receive it. While I generally agree stupidity shouldn't be helped or rewarded, if rescuers can safely help and they're willing, I'm all for it.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

You missed the point I replied about.

And of course people need to help each other in times of trouble when possible.