🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:44:22 -0700, wrcowan1@hal-pc.org
wrote:

>
>
>Obwon wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:20:22 -0700, wrcowan1@hal-pc.org
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>
>>>Obwon wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 23:53:41 -0700, wrcowan1@hal-pc.org
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>And your insistance to wait until everything is perfect before doing
>>>>>>anything is proof that you haven't got a clue. There are always problems in
>>>>>>a relief effort, you solve them as they come up while still providing some
>>>>>>kind of help, you don't wait on the sidelines hoping to get all your ducks
>>>>>>in a row...it will never happen and you are just wasting time and lives
>>>>>>while trying. Don't be so stupid all of your life...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No, I do not say wait until everything is perfect but you can not allow 
>>>>>just every joe into the area to help.  
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  WHY NOT?  After all, if they can get in and your
>>>>agency can't,  why should people have to die waiting
>>>>for help?  
>>>
>>>Simple, Would you allow a bunch of girl scouts in to help (providing 
>>>they got in) and they had their own boat?  
>> 
>> 
>>   Yes,  most definitely,  if they got in and out in
>> their own boat,  and there are people in there in need
>> of supplies,  why would you want to wait until some of
>> those people possibly expired?  What in heavens name
>> have "qualifications", to do with saving lives in this
>> order of things?   Aren't you aware that children often
>> perform heroically under such situations?  That they
>> can and do save lives?  
>
>And what would be said of the adults that let a group of children go in 
>and that group perished because they were not qualified?
>That adult 
>would be arrested for child endangerment at the very least.  Even with 
>qualification, someone could die but at least the risk is hopefully 
>reduced.

  Where the risk is that inaction will more likely
cause death,  the results of a bad decision,  made by
an unqualified person under emergency situations cannot
be faulted.  Of course, you'd expect a reasonable adult
to be able to make a credible/sane decision about which
direction would be the most effective,  clearly,  the
situation may not be such that effective
command/control can be maintained.  Remember it's a
disaster-emergency area.

  If there are people who can be expected not to
survive without immediate help,  you'd have to be a
really cruel or dumbass to not act first to save that
life first.  After all,  that man floating on a door in
midstream in a fast current,  can't wait for qualified
people to help him.  Just like a swimmer,  just a few
yards away from you and drowning,  can't wait for a
qualified lifeguard to make his way out.  You take your
unqualified ass over there and attempt to make the
rescue.   Anything else is just cowardice and/or
depraved indifference for the life of others.

Obwon

>Sure children have performed well but that was from being on the spot 
>and having to take action.  Not from from going out and seeking risky 
>conditions.  But all too often, children do perfom heroically but die in 
>the process unable to rescue the one they were trying to help.  As a 
>matter of fact, it happens that way more often then not.

  Of course it does!  I've read in the news reports
about children drowning after jumping in to save a
friend and not knowing how to swim themselves.
But I've already said "on the spot",  why are you
repeating what I've already said as if it was your own
idea?  Are you not capable of reading and
comprehending...  Or remembering what you have read?
You just read my words and repeated them back to me!
Does that tell you anything about your own approach to
this subject?  It sure tells some of us lots.

  Nor did I say that children were being taken from a
place of safety and injected into dangerous missions!
Why did you create this piece of irrelavent
distraction?  What?!?  Do you think it makes you appear
more rational to work in such a disingenious way?

Com'on...  You should have just conceeded the issue and
moved on.  Apparently you're trying to hold on to
something!  Or did I hit a nerve?  If I did, be very
careful in fashioning arguments with me,  I'm well
aware of how to hit nerves.  It's part of being a good
debater,  not in the "highschool debating" style.  

The fact is, to restate;  any and all lifesaving
resources that were available should have been deployed
by those in or near the area without thought to the
"paperwork" consequences.  Lives lost can't be
reclaimed,  paperwork and regulations etc., can be
argued endlessly!

  Obwon
0[ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]0
  Liars share with those they deceive 
  the desire not to be deceived.
                        --Sissela Bok
0[ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]0