🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <19905@fritz.filenet.com> asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) 
writes:

>As to the subject of "ecofacists" and killing:

>Folks from or associated with Earth First! and other groups have posted
>here and in talk.environment about the various ways of spiking a tree.
>There's been plenty of controversy surrounding this practice, including
>media talk-shows featuring these radical environmentalists.  Logging
>companies claim this can kill an unwary logger.

Hm.  There was an article in the EF! Journal about a year ago, the author
of which I have forgotten, in which the author and cohorts went to *two*
major chainsaw manucaturers and asked about safety precautions on their 
products.  The chain saw people flat out stated that the chains & guards
were designed in such a way that if the chain were to break, there is no
way it would kill the person using it, or one standing nearby for that
matter.  They did also state, however, that the chain saw would be ruined
and would need to be replaced.

Admittedly, the article was biased, but then again I am not so sure I would 
trust the unsupported word of companies whose business obviously suffers when 
trees are spiked.  The only way they will ever get public support against 
tree-spikers is to claim that the spikes kill people.

>The spikers have since countered that they always warn the companies of
>which grove has been spiked, but without telling which particular tree.
>Their claim is, and I _have_ heard this on the radio, that it's then the
>logging companies fault if someone is killed.

I would more blame the chain saw manufacturer, who guaranteed that this would 
not happen.  How do I know this? - you might ask.  Well, I don't.  BUT if
*I* were a logger I sure wouldn't buy any kind of chain saw that could *kill*
me if the chain snapped!  Spikes aren't the only things that snap the chains!

No matter, really; all of this blame is meaningless, as no-one has yet been
killed from a spiked tree.  I personally don't think it will ever happen;
unless it's a setup or a freak accident, a defective chain saw.

>That's like sprinkling tacks on a mountain highway and posting a warning
>sign.  If someone blows out a tire and goes over the edge, they can be
>killed.  Claiming its the victim's fault for ignoring the sign is a
>rationalization of *_enormous_* proportions.

Not quite; usually there are people there on site at whatever grove.  If you
sprinkled tacks on the highway, posted a warning sign, and then had a bunch of
people (illegally, probably :)  ) blocking the roadway, carrying their own
signs, and then someone drives through these people, and past the sign, in all
weather tires, then your analogy might hold a little better.

>I call that being willing to kill.

>-- 
>The Chipmunk.
>Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
>Everybody wants improvement, but nobody wants change.

--
  Shari L Brooks                   |   slb%suned1.nswses.navy.mil@nosc.mil
  NAVSOC code NSOC323D             |   shari@caspar.nosc.mil
  NAWS Pt Mugu, CA 93042-5013      |   
--> All statements/opinions above are mine and mine only, not the US Navy's.