This goes for anyone else that willingly engages in a high-risk activity. Should they have to bear the costs of the risk? Even partly? Obviously we don't want them to die, but does subsidizing risky behavior encourage it?
2007-02-23 07:02:15 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Let me clarify a bit. Driving is inherently risky, thus drivers must carry a certain amount of liability insurance. Driving is a voluntary activity.
Mountain-climbing is a voluntary activity, yet any putz can go attempt to scale a mountain, regardless of skill level or preparation, and when he gets stranded, he puts the RESCUE people in jeopardy. Shouldn't there be a monetary cost for engaging in this voluntary risky activity?
2007-02-23 07:12:26 · update #1
Definitely. If you take part in a hazardous activity, you must accept the cost of the risks involved. It's like me playing football and getting serious brain damage. I should pay for my medical help.
2007-02-23 07:11:38 · answer #1 · answered by Politicspassion 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, all the people who willingly engage in dangerous things, hang gliding, mountain climbing, river rafting, parachuting, and dumb @ss things like that and then screw up and get hurt or stranded, should be made to pay the bill for all resources in saving their butts. Vehicle accidents happen and many other things happen like fires and stuff, but if you "purposely" but yourself in a position where you could be hurt , then pay up and this also includes race car and motorcycles drivers/ racing. Yes they might be public servants and they are there to help, but if you put yourself in a position where the chances of being hurt are high, then pay up.
2007-02-23 07:21:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes,most are basically cowards who depend on others to risk thier lives to save theirs,if you decide to climb a mountain don't risk other peoples lives to get you out of trouble.
2007-02-23 09:12:02 · answer #3 · answered by dcam47 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. That's what rescue parties are for...to save people. That's what they are paid for. That's like a cop charging me to stop the theif who stole my purse.
2007-02-23 07:07:30 · answer #4 · answered by Groovy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
of course initially they have to bear little but the relevent departments in the govt.,encrasing such idol people,in any country
THEPRINCE
2007-02-23 07:11:36 · answer #5 · answered by theprince 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If people say 'yes', they should realize that they would also be saying 'yes' to sports players, airplane pilots, boxers, wrestlers, construction workers, boaters, drivers, divers, and our troops!
2007-02-23 07:07:54 · answer #6 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
many places charge for dispatching rescue squads
2007-02-23 07:06:05 · answer #7 · answered by Jim G 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Best idea I've heard yet. Bravo.
2007-02-23 07:07:37 · answer #8 · answered by Quasimodo 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
YES YES YES
2007-02-23 07:44:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋