Reckless people who put themselves in danger need to be rescued, but not handed a bill

There are 5 comments on the Jun 22, 2013, MLive.com story titled Reckless people who put themselves in danger need to be rescued, but not handed a bill. In it, MLive.com reports that:

Firefighters, like these from Jackson, Spring Arbor, and Summit, train to rescue people in all kinds of conditions.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at MLive.com.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#1 Jun 22, 2013
Adventurers, Mountain climbers and many other death-defyers.....should likely pay for the effort's of taxpayers rescue personnel and equipment.....People in bad car crashes have to pay bigtime, when the Air Ambulance is summoned.....

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#2 Jun 22, 2013
Go Blue Forever wrote:
Adventurers, Mountain climbers and many other death-defyers.....should likely pay for the effort's of taxpayers rescue personnel and equipment.....People in bad car crashes have to pay bigtime, when the Air Ambulance is summoned.....
In looking at the comments it seems that folks missed the key part that said "if you do something reckless during an emergency – like a major flood – and need to be rescued, you’ll pick up the tab."

The bill has nothing to do with everyday emergencies, regardless if the person needing help was doing something stupid or just had an accident. There has to be a declared state of emergency.

I don't mind the bill because I'm not going to go kaiaking during a flood but I would be upset if I got stuck in a flood but the emergency services couldn't help me because they were rescuing some stupid daredevil.
Jules

Grand Rapids, MI

#3 Jun 22, 2013
If you put yourself in a dangerous position needlessly then yes you should be required to pay back the taxpayers for your decisions. They usually end up putting others in danger. When I lived in Colorado there were these idiots who would heli-ski in the back country and either get caught in an avalanche or smack into a tree miles from any road or civilization. Usually, helicopters were used in the search and rescue or used to transport rescuers at the cost of tens of thousands per hour paid for by taxpayers. You play? You pay!
Oneal

Grand Rapids, MI

#4 Jun 23, 2013
Jules wrote:
If you put yourself in a dangerous position needlessly then yes you should be required to pay back the taxpayers for your decisions. They usually end up putting others in danger. When I lived in Colorado there were these idiots who would heli-ski in the back country and either get caught in an avalanche or smack into a tree miles from any road or civilization. Usually, helicopters were used in the search and rescue or used to transport rescuers at the cost of tens of thousands per hour paid for by taxpayers. You play? You pay!
So, let me ask you this; Should the same theory go for people who risk their lives and properties? If you decide to build a home in an area of the country that annually is renowned for tornado activity, or floods, or hurricanes - should you receive federal aid on top of the insurance you buy, should the probable natural disaster occur?

It's the same theory, yet annually the government spends billions on aid for natural disasters in areas of the country that we already know are risky.

We'd be hard-pressed to let people just sit their after a tornado swept their homes and lives away. In fact, it was either Ron or Rand Paul who suggested we not offer the Arkansas tornado victims government aid for the very reason you would deny risk-takers. He was absolutely demonized for that comment.

So, if we offer government aid to home risk-takers, why would we not offer emergency aid to personal risk-takers?

Just a thought.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#5 Jun 23, 2013
Jules wrote:
If you put yourself in a dangerous position needlessly then yes you should be required to pay back the taxpayers for your decisions. They usually end up putting others in danger. When I lived in Colorado there were these idiots who would heli-ski in the back country and either get caught in an avalanche or smack into a tree miles from any road or civilization. Usually, helicopters were used in the search and rescue or used to transport rescuers at the cost of tens of thousands per hour paid for by taxpayers. You play? You pay!
I alway's thought places like California and Colorado have this adventuresom nature and their overboard political correctness, clogged their common sense.....Like San Francisco is very friendly with the homeless....so much so, that at Fisherman's Wharf, a major tourist attraction....the homeless are allowed to roust you, for spare change......lol.....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Grand Rapids Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Local News Women (Apr '09) 3 hr Juanito 2,363
News College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) 8 hr tom wingo 1,880
Poll Are you tired of the gays and their various pro... (Feb '13) Sat Sharon 8
News Dangerous trains rolling through West Michigan. Sat Who 1
WLLA channel 64 - off the air? (Feb '12) Apr 22 queenT 14
News Woman Gets 3-7-Years For Shooting Over Bacon-le... Apr 22 Porky 3
News Shop owner will deny - openly gay' customers Apr 22 Brian_G 65
More from around the web

Grand Rapids People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]