BOP Eruption?
-
@Virgil said in BOP Eruption?:
If they had no idea it was going to erupt on Monday how can they be sure it will erupt again now.
It’s an active volcano, I’d imagine no one at GNS wants to be the person to say yep your all good to go over now.
Not wanting to open arguments from earlier this morning, but kind of illustrates my earlier point about not allowing access.
-
@booboo said in BOP Eruption?:
@Virgil said in BOP Eruption?:
If they had no idea it was going to erupt on Monday how can they be sure it will erupt again now.
It’s an active volcano, I’d imagine no one at GNS wants to be the person to say yep your all good to go over now.
Not wanting to open arguments from earlier this morning, but kind of illustrates my earlier point about not allowing access.
If the pilots want to go, if they are saying they are fine with the risk and confident they can get in and out then let them go
It was even admitted by the police that they could have gone on Tuesday but they failed to make the call. -
@booboo said in BOP Eruption?:
@Virgil said in BOP Eruption?:
@booboo said in BOP Eruption?:
@Virgil said in BOP Eruption?:
Yep can you imagine if Dunkirk took place now, it would be endless press conferences and risk assessments.. experts telling us they will only go in if they can manage the risks..
Back to White Island.. how the fuck can they manage the risk?... wait till it’s no longer an active volcano..
It must be very tempting for those chopper pilots to go rogue and head out to the island anyway
They're dead, they're not rescuing anyone.
Tell that to the families of the missing.. sorry they are dead it’s not important to get them back
Also I my point was from the very beginning, from what the pilots who landed on the island straight after the explosion said, no rescue services were going to actually rescue anyone. One pilot had to leave his co pilot behind so he could carry more injured, he was then told not to go back to get him.
I would, as the authorities are, not perhaps as harshly.
I think you're conflating two issues. Whilst there are people alive I'm on board with the sentiment. There's not now.
To only recover bodies at the risk of losing more lives is not a risk worth taking. Recovering the bodies will not bring them back. And the risk is certainly not worth it for some minor emotional benefit.
Not worth the risk? That's obviously an individual choice.
Govt are becoming more and more authoritarian as time goes on, liberties are only eroded and not built. It is concerning. -
So, let's say that one of these pilots decides - and is not prevented - from flying to the island for a deceased recovery operation.
They crash due to conditions, but are still alive and radio for help.
Is the government then obliged to send more live bodies in to rescue the living bodies that went after the dead bodies?
Or do they say "You exercised your individual choice to fly there. We are exercising our right to leave you to that choice"?
-
@NTA said in BOP Eruption?:
So, let's say that one of these pilots decides - and is not prevented - from flying to the island for a deceased recovery operation.
They crash due to conditions, but are still alive and radio for help.
Is the government then obliged to send more live bodies in to rescue the living bodies that went after the dead bodies?
Or do they say "You exercised your individual choice to fly there. We are exercising our right to leave you to that choice"?
I’d assume one of his chopper pilot mates would go in, or a boatie from Whakatane.
I doubt there would be a lack of volunteers -
@NTA most of these rescue chopper types would do it in a heart beat, and I expect if there were people alive they would, but there aren't so that may have tempered any cavalier approach to recovery.
This has similarities to Pike River, but everything is more visible.
-
@taniwharugby said in BOP Eruption?:
@NTA most of these rescue chopper types would do it in a heart beat, and I expect if there were people alive they would, but there aren't so that may have tempered any cavalier approach to recovery.
I'm not particularly religious or anything, so I'm of the belief that if there is no possibility of recovering a living human, there is no hurry.
-
Well after the passing of the euthanasia law maybe it wont be an issue, just get the pilot to say he wants euthanasia ... death by volcano.
Then if he does make it back he can change his mind. -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in BOP Eruption?:
Well after the passing of the euthanasia law maybe it wont be an issue, just get the pilot to say he wants euthanasia ... death by volcano.
Then if he does make it back he can change his mind.Terrible bloody movie
-
@NTA said in BOP Eruption?:
So, let's say that one of these pilots decides - and is not prevented - from flying to the island for a deceased recovery operation.
They crash due to conditions, but are still alive and radio for help.
Is the government then obliged to send more live bodies in to rescue the living bodies that went after the dead bodies?
Or do they say "You exercised your individual choice to fly there. We are exercising our right to leave you to that choice"?
All of the above mate. Your scenario makes little allowance for the acumen and capabilities of a person whose summed up the situation and wants to act. Being stranded must certainly have crossed his/her mind.
The trouble with over regulation is that it relies on the perception that everyone's a village idiot
Caveat emptor for the rescuer
-
-
-
@jegga said in BOP Eruption?:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in BOP Eruption?:
Well after the passing of the euthanasia law maybe it wont be an issue, just get the pilot to say he wants euthanasia ... death by volcano.
Then if he does make it back he can change his mind.Terrible bloody movie
What is this word "versus" ... ?
Joe verses the Volcano
-
@Siam said in BOP Eruption?:
@NTA said in BOP Eruption?:
So, let's say that one of these pilots decides - and is not prevented - from flying to the island for a deceased recovery operation.
They crash due to conditions, but are still alive and radio for help.
Is the government then obliged to send more live bodies in to rescue the living bodies that went after the dead bodies?
Or do they say "You exercised your individual choice to fly there. We are exercising our right to leave you to that choice"?
All of the above mate. Your scenario makes little allowance for the acumen and capabilities of a person whose summed up the situation and wants to act. Being stranded must certainly have crossed his/her mind.
The trouble with over regulation is that it relies on the perception that everyone's a village idiot
Caveat emptor for the rescuer
Who are they "rescuing"?
-
@booboo said in BOP Eruption?:
@Siam said in BOP Eruption?:
@NTA said in BOP Eruption?:
So, let's say that one of these pilots decides - and is not prevented - from flying to the island for a deceased recovery operation.
They crash due to conditions, but are still alive and radio for help.
Is the government then obliged to send more live bodies in to rescue the living bodies that went after the dead bodies?
Or do they say "You exercised your individual choice to fly there. We are exercising our right to leave you to that choice"?
All of the above mate. Your scenario makes little allowance for the acumen and capabilities of a person whose summed up the situation and wants to act. Being stranded must certainly have crossed his/her mind.
The trouble with over regulation is that it relies on the perception that everyone's a village idiot
Caveat emptor for the rescuer
Who are they "rescuing"?
Obviously not your loved ones
-
I think we can all agree there should be different levels of regulation for a rescue than for a body retrieval. For the former, I have zero issue with 99% of decisions sitting with individuals. The 1% reservation is for the potential for support crew being pressured into accompanying a gung-ho rescue pilot or similar. But for the most part, government should stay out of it.
For body retrieval, I can understand safety first for all involved. But then I have never been in n the situation of having a loved ones body lying dead on a beach. Hard to know how you'd feel.
-
@voodoo said in BOP Eruption?:
I think we can all agree there should be different levels of regulation for a rescue than for a body retrieval. For the former, I have zero issue with 99% of decisions sitting with individuals. The 1% reservation is for the potential for support crew being pressured into accompanying a gung-ho rescue pilot or similar. But for the most part, government should stay out of it.
For body retrieval, I can understand safety first for all involved. But then I have never been in n the situation of having a loved ones body lying dead on a beach. Hard to know how you'd feel.
Exactly!
Fluffybunnies making decisions from miles away, full of self importance, and ignoring those at the coalface.
-
@voodoo said in BOP Eruption?:
But then I have never been in n the situation of having a loved ones body lying dead on a beach. Hard to know how you'd feel.
A very individual thing.
But its hardly nanny-state to say there is nothing to be gained by risking more lives.
The stupidest thing would be to have someone die or get seriously injured in the pursuit of a corpse.
-
@Siam said in BOP Eruption?:
@booboo said in BOP Eruption?:
@Siam said in BOP Eruption?:
@NTA said in BOP Eruption?:
So, let's say that one of these pilots decides - and is not prevented - from flying to the island for a deceased recovery operation.
They crash due to conditions, but are still alive and radio for help.
Is the government then obliged to send more live bodies in to rescue the living bodies that went after the dead bodies?
Or do they say "You exercised your individual choice to fly there. We are exercising our right to leave you to that choice"?
All of the above mate. Your scenario makes little allowance for the acumen and capabilities of a person whose summed up the situation and wants to act. Being stranded must certainly have crossed his/her mind.
The trouble with over regulation is that it relies on the perception that everyone's a village idiot
Caveat emptor for the rescuer
Who are they "rescuing"?
Obviously not your loved ones
How to answer that without sounding callous?
But I don't see why anyone has the right to risk someone else's life when the end goal is purely some minimal emotional gain.
I can't say how I would react in the same situation, but I hope I would not expect someone to retrieve a body by putting themselves at risk, and more importantly potentially others at risk.
To what end? Who benefits? People are sad and shocked and think it will help them.
How would you feel if those people go over and die? Or the people who have to save them die in turn.
I just don't see the logic.
