Upscale wrote:
: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 08:15:39 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
: I do not want to denigrate the girl's accomplishments, but who is
: paying for the rescue efforts now?
:
:Hopefully, the services which have already been funded by taxes will simply
:exercise their tax funded capabilities. No point in having them, paying for
:them, if they can't be used.

: Don't agree. If everybody decided to knowingly go on such a dangerous
: trip, (and many experienced sailors advised of the danger beforehand)
: then tax services would be stretched much more than they are now. If
: her parents had the money to fund such a trip, then they should be
: obligated to provide surety for rescue expenses up front as well.

I agree.

Here in flash flood country, we have very prominnt road signs saying
"Warning: Do Not Enter When Flooding". These are often dips in the road
under a bridge, or through natural washes that route the rainfall. Every
year some idiots think they can ignore the signs, get stuck, and then have
to be rescue (which is both expensive and dangerous for the rescue
personnel). A few years ago the city started billing the rescuees, which I
think is only fair. It's one thing to gt protcted from danger by tax-funde
services, which I heartily support; it's another to willingly put yourself
(or, in the girl's case, your child) in danger. That's stupid, and those
doing it should pay the price of rescue.

-- Andy Barss