Good Samaritans Face Fine After Rescuing Deer From Icy Water

baltimore.cbslocal.com...

“We had oars and shovels to break the ice, for the deer to get out,” Abusakran said. But in the excited aftermath of the rescue, a natural resources police officer on the scene wrote both men a ticket. “And he didn’t say anything,” Jim Hart said. “We went in and out of the water numerous times. He didn’t stop us at all.” They say they were ticketed for not wearing life vests, although both are over the age for mandatory use of flotation devices.

Just when you think things may have become quieted from a nation of sheer lunacy, one reads a story such as this.

I think the "natural resources police officer" should be tossed into the icy water without a vest and let him make his way out. Should someone accidentally drop an oar on his head on his attempt to get out....whoops, stuff happens.

Truth is stranger than fiction. You just can't make this craziness up!!

Like they say: No good deed goes unpunished. What kind of society do we live in when a park ranger fines people for the saving the life of one of the creatures in his domain?

All seriousness aside, though, it must've been the end of the month and he needed to fill his quota.

this is why i gave up on movies.

life trully provides the best scripts, plot twists, and keeps you on hold till the very last breath.
trully priceless.

even if it happened to myself, who cares about the fine, i'll be 80 and be telling my grandkids about stories like this.

hopefully looking back at this time period as a necessary step in order to trully start a new world.

reply to post by bozzchem


The deer walking out on the ice and falling in is part of natural selection, or survival of the fittest. The deer for what ever reason lacked the instincts to avoid the ice and fell in. These people risked their lives in order to interfere in nature and were more than likely warned not to. Had one of them become incapacitated they would have put other people at risk by making them come and save them. People should not be so ignorant as to walk/wade out in icy water just to save a deer. I think that they should have gotten a worse reprimand.

It seems more and more these days I am hearing stories of people doing good things and getting punished for it....

Like the saying says, No good deed goes unpunished.

reply to post by LeaderOfProgress


You aren't seeing the big picture. The wilderness is a dangerous place, these people should have been fined and imprisoned the moment they set foot in those woods; for their own protection.

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
It seems more and more these days I am hearing stories of people doing good things and getting punished for it....

Like the saying says, No good deed goes unpunished.

What they did was not good. It had a possibility of more negative repprocusions than any good that could have come of this. Real simple, the deer that lacked the instincts to avoid the ice is supposed to die. It will die due to this lack of instincts. These people instead of allowing to happen that which is going to happen anyways, put their lives on the line to rescue an animal that did not need to be rescued. More than likely they were warned not to go rescue it by the officer, but instead using their biology education that match that of the conservation officer made a decision to ignore the officer and put them selves in danger, thus possibly putting that officer in danger and others, had they of need rescuing themselves. They were cited for being ignorant. He could have cited them for more. They should feel luck they aren't in jail for their childish actions.

This is one of the thing s that make me surprise when I first come to the U.S. people helping each other out and got sued for their deeds "What kind of F up sht is this ?!"
Where I come from is kind of a backwater country compare to other Asian countries (No it isn't the DPRK nor China). But when people gotten themsleves in harm ways, others would help out in anyway they could WITHOUT worrying about facing interrogation by the cop or being sued by the ones they helped.

reply to post by LeaderOfProgress


so a concept called natural selection placed the animal there to die, yet a concept named chance placed humans at that spot at the exact same time, yet you say it was a concept called ignorance that drove the humans to save the animal.

well i hope if one day you happen to be threading on some thin ice(litteral or figurative), some concepts happen to be there to ignorantly save you too.

Originally posted by the_0bserver85
This is one of the thing s that make me surprise when I first come to the U.S. people helping each other out and got sued for their deeds "What kind of F up sht is this ?!"

Where I come from is kind of a backwater country compare to other Asian countries (No it isn't the DPRK nor China). But when people gotten themsleves in harm ways, others would help out in anyway they could WITHOUT worrying about facing interrogation by the cop or being sued by the ones they helped.

This had nothing to do with the issue at hand. These people put their lives and others at risk by going against natures own rules. They disobeyed a college educated state law enforcement officer and were penalized because of that. This was not one person helping another but yet two people possibly hurting others.

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
reply to post by bozzchem

 

The deer walking out on the ice and falling in is part of natural selection, or survival of the fittest. The deer for what ever reason lacked the instincts to avoid the ice and fell in. These people risked their lives in order to interfere in nature and were more than likely warned not to. Had one of them become incapacitated they would have put other people at risk by making them come and save them. People should not be so ignorant as to walk/wade out in icy water just to save a deer. I think that they should have gotten a worse reprimand.

I don't disagree with natural selection. However, I do disagree with you or anyone else telling me or another what they can and cannot do. Deer in my yard have far more to worry about than falling through the ice since most end up in my freezer.

A worse reprimand? From whom? Who has the right to tell you that you can or cannot do what you feel is right?

I'm guessing you have an office in DC or are appointed to be an "overseer" of the less intelligent (at least as those of your ilk determine such)?

I could care less about the deer...

They should of let it die then pulled it out and ate it....

Oh and times are tough states need all the money they can get...

Originally posted by AnotherYOU
reply to post by LeaderOfProgress

 

so a concept called natural selection placed the animal there to die, yet a concept named chance placed humans at that spot at the exact same time, yet you say it was a concept called ignorance that drove the humans to save the animal.

well i hope if one day you happen to be threading on some thin ice(litteral or figurative), some concepts happen to be there to ignorantly save you too.

No a lack of certain survival instincs put the deer on the ice. Peoples lack of knowledge about natural things drove them to "save the day" when in fact all they did was give the deer a few more days of survival but yet risked others safety. This was not a person but a deer, nor was it a pet but it was a wild natural deer. Natural selection is needed in nature to ensure that good genetics continue to pass throught a species, they interferred that is all ther is to it.

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
This had nothing to do with the issue at hand. These people put their lives and others at risk by going against natures own rules. They disobeyed a college educated state law enforcement officer and were penalized because of that. This was not one person helping another but yet two people possibly hurting others.

I'm still laughing at such a ridiculous post!! Thank you since laughter is invariably one of the best medicines. I don't remember reading in the article that the "LEO" was college educated nor do I see where that would make a difference. I am constantly surrounded by "college educated" folks who couldn't punch their way out of a wet paper bag if you provided them instructions.

I'm guessing one of your favorite movies is Minority Report? Someone may POSSIBLY be injured so let's send in the SWAT team to save them?

Do you seriously subscribe to that logic or are you just being coy? I hope it's the latter.

Originally posted by bozzchem

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
reply to post by bozzchem

 

The deer walking out on the ice and falling in is part of natural selection, or survival of the fittest. The deer for what ever reason lacked the instincts to avoid the ice and fell in. These people risked their lives in order to interfere in nature and were more than likely warned not to. Had one of them become incapacitated they would have put other people at risk by making them come and save them. People should not be so ignorant as to walk/wade out in icy water just to save a deer. I think that they should have gotten a worse reprimand.

I don't disagree with natural selection. However, I do disagree with you or anyone else telling me or another what they can and cannot do. Deer in my yard have far more to worry about than falling through the ice since most end up in my freezer.

A worse reprimand? From whom? Who has the right to tell you that you can or cannot do what you feel is right?

I'm guessing you have an office in DC or are appointed to be an "overseer" of the less intelligent (at least as those of your ilk determine such)?

edit on 17-12-2010 by bozzchem because: (no reason given)

Nope but i have a very good understaning of nature and it's habbits so to speak. They were more than likely told not to interferre, yet they did. Had they have become endangered or stuck themselves then who would have to save them? The conservation officer and others. That puts those people at risk. When you do something knowingly against what is natural and by your actions run the risk of putting others at risk to save you, then sure you need to be reprimanded. So the officer wrote them the "lightest" ticket he could think of. He should have jailed them for it.

excuse me but you were as much there as the rest of us.

any speculation is allowed.

so, who's to say it wasn't the human presence in the area that disturbed the animal to begin with and out of (legitimate)fear made him step outside his regular boundaries as guided by survival instincts.

was it still natural selection when maybe some ignorant humans tainted the scene, therefore collapsing the "natural" parameters of natural selection.

Originally posted by bozzchem

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
This had nothing to do with the issue at hand. These people put their lives and others at risk by going against natures own rules. They disobeyed a college educated state law enforcement officer and were penalized because of that. This was not one person helping another but yet two people possibly hurting others.

I'm still laughing at such a ridiculous post!! Thank you since laughter is invariably one of the best medicines. I don't remember reading in the article that the "LEO" was college educated nor do I see where that would make a difference. I am constantly surrounded by "college educated" folks who couldn't punch their way out of a wet paper bag if you provided them instructions.

I'm guessing one of your favorite movies is Minority Report? Someone may POSSIBLY be injured so let's send in the SWAT team to save them?

Do you seriously subscribe to that logic or are you just being coy? I hope it's the latter.

All conservation officers in all states are required degrees, look it up. The officer knew what was going on and used his education to make the best possible decision in this case. Those 2 people went against some one hired by the state to conserve wildlife and for that they were reprimanded.

What does the last 2 parts you wrote about have anything to do with the topic at hand?

No a lack of certain survival instincs put the deer on the ice. Peoples lack of knowledge about natural things drove them to "save the day" when in fact all they did was give the deer a few more days of survival but yet risked others safety. This was not a person but a deer, nor was it a pet but it was a wild natural deer. Natural selection is needed in nature to ensure that good genetics continue to pass throught a species, they interferred that is all ther is to it.

Do you seriously believe the tripe you type? It was just some people who cared about the deer...I would have bagged/tagged the damn thing and be eating it Monday...but it was their conscience that drove them to do what they did.

I am awestruck at your comments since it's been some time since I've seen comments that reek of such control over others based on an opinion with little if any fact to base said opinion on.

Better hope you don't fall through the ice, bubba. At least a deer is worth saving.

Wow, some arrogant and ignorant people about- both posting here and in the case of the article. So what about if you had a car accident, for example. The roads were icey, you skidded off the road and hit a tree, as a result you were trapped. Definitely should leave you there by your logic, you should have known to take the corner slower because of the adverse weather. What about if you had/have kids, and your child wondered off. By chance, he/she wondered into the middle of the road and was ran over. A group of strangers did see the entire event, but going by their logic, by attempting to pull him/her out of the way of the on-going car, they were statistically more likely to have died themselves and only created further carnage. After-all, if a parent can't teach their child not to wonder off into the road, and the parent can't keep an eye on their child, this "thing" is not worthy of remaining in the gene-pool, correct?

It's called having some humanity and acting decently. I know about game theory and all that- society would be a much more efficient place if we all acted selfishly- but would it be a more pleasant place to live? I think not.

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
All conservation officers in all states are required degrees, look it up. The officer knew what was going on and used his education to make the best possible decision in this case. Those 2 people went against some one hired by the state to conserve wildlife and for that they were reprimanded.

What does the last 2 parts you wrote about have anything to do with the topic at hand?

Really? Then why didn't Mr. Edumucated keep them from attempting to save the deer? Why did Mr. Edumucated wait until all was said and done and then write a ticket? If he is so edumucated, he should have used "authority" to keep them from risking their lives rather than waiting until all was said and done and doing what most edumucated folks like him do.....write tickets.

Let me guess? He had his edumucated thumb up his edumucated ass and only pulled it out when the coast was clear and he could puff out his edumucated chest to exert his "authority"?