To quote Bill Engvall, what he said to his daughter's boyfriend:

"I don't have a problem with going back to prison."



:arrgh!:


[EDIT]

Here Jim, from the horse's mouth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Myd9TO_ZN4o

LOL :DL

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/f...-1225879181591

Family cannot afford to pay for rescue.

This, IMNSHO is BS. They should have to pay, even if it destroys them. Sell the house, whatever (they live in CA, they can sell even a cheap house and raise 300k, then move to Iowa or someplace cheap).

I'm actually fine with letting the kids do this, but the parents need to face enough financial problems in case of rescue that they at least take out some sort of insurance for this contingency or face financial ruin.

Yeah. Somehow they were able to afford to outfit a ship so their son could sail around the world last year -another one for their daughter this year, and now they're planning on sending her out again in the near future.

3 ships fitting out with supplies, planning, and support teams, for their children to sail around the world, but when it comes time to pay the bill for rescuing one of their children they play the "we're poor" card and expect the Australian government to foot the bill. What a crock.

I wish I was that kind of "poor"

I share your sentiment :up:

Meanwhile, some poor SOB out west this summer will have to pay the USFS and all other responders for their efforts to put out a tractor fire that spread into a wildfire. I don't mean to jump to conclusions, but those parents had the money to send their kids on solo missions around the globe and somehow they can't cough up the dough for a rescue mission that saved their daughter? Horse biscuits. They'll have to work out the details in court.

I do not know what the regulations say about privately paying for rescue services, wether it is with regard to mountain climbing, or sailing. But I think the same rules should apply in case of this girl than would apply in case of 45 year old man, since that she was running into that storm that took her mast could have happened to everybody and has nothing to do with her age, nor did she sail into a rock in the middle of the ocean for being too incompetent to avoid it.

However, I also think that if a mountain climber gets into a distress situation because he embarked on a climb in the middle of a blizzard, than he also is responsible for the stupid situation he brought himself into, and his decision was irresponisble and idiotic. If then others have to get up to resuce him, he should pay for it. Correspondingly I think the decision to launch this voyage at a time of the year when the seas in the Indian ocean are known to be in "winter" conditions and thus seeing gales more often, must be taken into account. To what degree that decision can be defended or not, sailors and experts must decide, I do not know the matter.

with the girl trying that voyage, in principle I have no problem. I think that some teens of that age can have the ripeness and skill indeed to try something like this, and that it can be a gain for their life experience. Not to that spectacular ammounts, I took some security risks too during my travellings, and for being even more unexperienced - I now see stupid decisions I made that could have brought me into trouble, but did not see them back then. However, I survived. :)Being successful although doing soemthign risky, is possible. that's somethign many oh so caring oh so wellmeaning oh so guarding know-it-alls do not like to understand, they want legal rules to simply forbid such things - and European states seem to be full of such brilliant minds.

However, no gain without risks. In Europe, the general trend in opinion seems to be that such things should be forbidden. but that is europe, and "being european" hardly is a compliment anymore these days, but a synonym for social-intellectual impotence and cowardice. I personally think that people are free to take risks - as long as they accept to bear the consequences in good and in bad, and with regard to parent's responsibility I do not have the impression that the parents pushed or forced their offsprings to become young sailors or that they kick-started them onto the their trips although knowing they were not fit for it.

the only thing that must be exmained here is the decision-making that lead to the timing for starting the voyage in regional winter.

Or let's simplify that.

They were willing to let their daughter risk her life. But they were not prepared to risk a measly $300,000? Give me a break. They could have lost her if not for the search. SOME of the search (like a whole flippin' A330 chartered) might have been a bit overkill, but all in all there is absolutely no reason Aussie or US taxpayers have to be responsible for the family's private risk. And if their insurance didn't cover it, tough. While arguably the whole 300k might be overkill, they should pay substantially for the rescue. It's only fair to everyone else who doesn't send their kids across the world in a boat, but still works and pays taxes.

Well, how is the normal practice then? It's fair qeather when I start to climb onto that 5000m peak, halfway down the weather changes and I get locked down ojn place in kind of a threatening emergency situation that I cannot just sit out. Or I am on high seas and get surprised by a storm, or I am a fisherboat getting caught by a gale. Or I get buried by an avalanche. SAR services that are maintained by the states and national NGO rescue services get up and start looking for me.

To what degree would I normally need to attribute to the costs the operation causes? I really do not know how it is handled normally, or if the normal handling is changed when the victim has behaved irresponsibly and by that has increased the risk of running into an emergency.

What about insurance? I realize it can be really expensive for things like that, but shouldn't that be something that anyone in that - or any - situation should be really careful about? I mean, I buy travel insurance even when I go on routine trips to the USA - on the understanding that if I don't, or if my insurance doesn't cover something, I'll have to foot the bill from my own pocket, on the fares charged by their system.

Otherwise if you're willing to risk an arm and a leg, or drowning for that matter, you should face the risk of having to pay to pull you out.

Anyway, if they don't want to pay out of pocket, they should dispute the scale of the bill, which might be reasonable. Some of it should certainly be discounted on the fact that it's the rescuers' job to do this and services should be in part maintained for everyone's benefit. But I don't think that means that it gives everyone a free pass to risk their life in the middle of the ocean for free.

Even more reasonable - raise funds. The girl has plenty of sympathy around the world, and rightly so. Let her fans and the people she inspired help her pay - and hopefully that can solve the problem fairly.

Insurance, okay, fine, I had that too, for being returned to Germany if I should get involved and injured in an incident in another nation.

but that does not answer my question that I ask of lacking knowledge. What is it about the costs for rescuing a fish trawler off the coast who ran into a strom, the mountain climber getting surprised by a blizzard, or breaking a leg in an accident? SAR services at sea usually are operated by national military. Are their operations covered by regular budgets, or do the people or their insurances need to pay for these operations if the people get rescued?

I still think that in case of that sailing teen these financial factors around the rescue operation should be handled not any different than in case of any other person getting into an emergency situation at sea. A raised share of financial contribution I only see necessary where there was any negligence shown on side of the parents or the girl. And the time of the year to start that voyage may be such a careless negligence. But that must be decided by sailing experts.

It was gear failure wasn't it, as long as that was not due to negligence she shouldn't have to pay for the rescue.

Well then hopefully they dispute it. I still think that fundamentally, people who take undue risks on their own should be prepared to be financially responsible for them.

I like the girl and the family, too. I think she's done great, and whatever the outcome I hope that the public exposure she got from this gives her the opportunity to raise funds - whether for herself or for good causes.

I think people should have to take insurance out for this kind of thing (or pay out of pocket).

Idiots here in town (usually, but not always tourists) manage to get lost in our mountains (which boggles the mind, simply look west and see a sea of houses—head THAT WAY, MORON). I see the helos flying over, etc. All because they took the tram to the crest wearing loafers, then decided to bushwhack their way down a 4000ft pretty shear west face. Bad choices lead directly to situations like this, the person making the choice should be ultimately responsible.

In this particular case, having rescue insurance would be a tiny price to pay. It would likely have cost a small fraction of 300k. Well within the means of people capable of affording to fit out an ocean-going yacht. A few thousand bucks, I bet.

Again, we're not talking about a fishing vessel—fishermen in waters where a given country would do a rescue pay taxes and fees to fish, that's part of the deal.

This is recreational, it's fluff.

As such, I think it's the least they can do to be required to carry some insurance. Remember, not only does rescue cost money, it actually risks the lives of other people. If the boat had been found floundering in a storm, you can bet that a rescue guy on the helo would have taken a swim to try and save her, and potentially been killed. If fishermen, etc in some poor country don't have insurance, then their governments could pay back any rescues they lack the capability to do themselves.

I have to agree generally in broad terms that if you endevor in a risky practice you should be prepared to handle any consiquences.

To send your teenage daughter on a dangerous trip then be supprised when things go wrong is just ridiculous.