Ed Pawlowski wrote:


Never said I did not approve. I don't care what they do, but like the
rest of us, they should take responsibility for their actions and pay
the consequences. If you want to slide down the side of a
mountain, go for it, but I don't see that others should risk their
lives and spend my money to haul your body out.

They are not spending your money. That money has already been allocated to
support their mission. It's not up to you and I to attempt to define what
that mission should be. They are chartered with search and rescue and they
don't have the limits within their charter that you are proposing. You've
already paid - but now you're suggesting that the service should not be
rendered.




Cheaper than the middle of the Indian Ocean

What is the cost to you and I for her rescue?





Much of that cost is borne by the aircraft owner. They are also using
normal flight procedures, not doing experimental work.

Depends. Experimental work is not denied search and rescue simply because
it is out of the norm.





Never said you could not. If, however, you are pushing the sensible
limits in an unfamiliar place, don't ask me for help. To clarify, I
should add, "just for your personal fun and excitement" as opposed to
real research or exploration such as Columbus or NASA.


You were not asked for help. The help came from organizations that were
already chartered for that sort of thing, and from others who were willing
to help. Why is that a problem?




I want some say in the matter, not to pay for every bozo that says,
"Hey Bubba, watch this"

I do agree with this, but I think the discussion has progressed well beyond
this point.


--

-Mike-
.