Idiots that persist on walking on frozen lakes despite warnings.

RonMexico

Was reading through this thread in the Limerick City Forum and I just couldn't believe the attitude of some of the posters.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055794472

What do you guys make of it from a professional point of view?

There are even people using quad bikes and motorbikes out on the ice:eek:

boardsbandit200

What do you guys make of it from a "professional" point of view?

is there professional ice walkers?

RonMexico

boardsbandit200 wrote: »

What do you guys make of it from a "professional" point of view?

is there professional ice walkers?

Haha very funny. I meant what do Emergency Services Personnel think of these people walking on frozen lakes at the moment.

Trojan911

Well, I was listening to the local radio here in Cork a couple of days ago and the broadcaster was announcing reiterating a message from the Gardai to stay off the Lough (near the city centre). It was frozen over.

Thirty minutes later, as I was riding along in my automobile, a reporter from the same radio station came on air to say a person had fallen through the ice into the water..... on the Lough....

Seems we have idiots here in Cork as well as Limerick. And it's idiots like these that could tie up the emergency services because of their ignorance & stupidity and a response to a genuine case may be delayed because of this.

There now, I said all that without swearing.....

Sisu200

Good Question,

I watched a guy driving a Toyota Corrolla around the shores of a frozen lake yesterday in the midlands, also 2 quad bikes, and a group of 6 young children with their parents standing in the middle of a frozen lake and about 20 people standing on the shores watching them, could not believe my eyes,

Can the Gardai do anything to stop this, is there rules governing this dangerous stupid act or can they be only advised not to walk onto the lake?

I would imagine anybody going through the ice would certainly die from exposure due to the fact that the roads were so bad Emergency Services would find it difficult to get to the scene quickly

Watched another fool last night on BBC Northern Ireland news sitting down with a hatchet in his hand beating the ice to find out how thick it was, with a group of people around him looking to see the results,

Is there a emergency plan to deal with a catastrophe of a number of people falling through the ice at the one time?

deadwood

Sisu200 wrote: »

Is there a emergency plan to deal with a catastrophe of a number of people falling through the ice at the one time?

Throw in some gin, a few slices of lemon and enjoy the show.

utick

Sisu200 wrote: »

Good Question,

I watched a guy driving a Toyota Corrolla around the shores of a frozen lake yesterday in the midlands, also 2 quad bikes, and a group of 6 young children with their parents standing in the middle of a frozen lake and about 20 people standing on the shores watching them, could not believe my eyes,

?

was the car actually on the lake?

Sisu200

utick wrote: »

was the car actually on the lake?

The car was on the lake out about 20 feet, I know that there is a video of it on a phone will try and get my hands on it, I actually stopped to see it I could not believe it

Irish_polizei

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev-ziAeTGZU

Paulzx

Trojan911 wrote: »

a response to a genuine case may be delayed because of this.

)

Someone trapped in a freezing cold lake is a genuine case. How they got there during the rescue itself is irrelevant.



It doesnt matter how many warnings are given. It's just not possible to save all stupid people from their own stupidity.

Bosco boy

Paulzx wrote: »

Someone trapped in a freezing cold lake is a genuine case. How they got there during the rescue itself is irrelevant.



It doesnt matter how many warnings are given. It's just not possible to save all stupid people from their own stupidity.

I'd have a little less smpathy for someone who has been continously warned of the situation they might get in and who ignores advice and common sence and finds themselves in the predicted trouble than someone in a life threatening situation not of their own making. Having said all that obviously you'd try and help them but isnt it an added shame that people may have to risk their lives to save an asshole and fool who should know better.

c4cat

Don't worry about it, Its just Natural selection cleaning the gene pool of the ones we do not need.

h3000

utick wrote: »

was the car actually on the lake?

Sisu200 wrote: »

The car was on the lake out about 20 feet, I know that there is a video of it on a phone will try and get my hands on it, I actually stopped to see it I could not believe it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVtyzr-rSIU

Paulzx

Bosco boy wrote: »

I'd have a little less smpathy for someone who has been continously warned of the situation they might get in and who ignores advice and common sence and finds themselves in the predicted trouble than someone in a life threatening situation not of their own making. Having said all that obviously you'd try and help them but isnt it an added shame that people may have to risk their lives to save an asshole and fool who should know better.

Sympathy is an emotion that doesn't come into play during any sort of rescue situation. You do your job and worry about the how's and why's afterwards. The person in trouble is a casualty. Nothing more or nothing less. You do your best for them irrespective of how they came to be in trouble. Its called being professional


After the incident you can call them every name under the sun if deserved

Sisu200

h3000 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVtyzr-rSIU

Very good, now the lake is been polluted and somebody will have to risk themselves to get that piece of crap out of the water, I thought these idiots only lived around me:eek:

civdef

For people on this forum, behaviour like that is called job security

exsitingisinit

:rolleyes: why should the public pay the rescue these idiots...

Trojan911

Paulzx wrote: »

How they got there during the rescue itself is irrelevant.

Have to disagree there. The ignorance/stupidity shows a blatant disregard to ones own safety & the safety of others including the Emer Services.

People like that, in my opinion, should be either prosecuted and/or charged a fee * for the intervention of the Emer Services rescue. That goes for all types of rescues where blatant stupidity is found to be the cause of a rescue.

Because of this person stupidity another person who wasn't stupid who needs the Emer Services may have to wait to be dealt with.

*Full medical card holders.

Corcioch

Kerry Mountain Rescue it was reported in the Examiner, encountered people walking on the frozen surface of the Devils Punchbowl atop Mangerton Mountain.

Any of ye that know this place/ mountain/ lake will appreciate how deadly that is . . .


Walking on the Lough in Cork is one thing . . . .walking on the surface of an extremely deep Glacial Lake miles and miles away from the nearest population center is beyond stupidity.

Trojan911

Trojan911 wrote: »

Have to disagree there.

Suppose thats the difference between members of the public and members of the Fire and Rescue Services.

Bosco boy

Trojan911 wrote: »

Have to disagree there. The ignorance/stupidity shows a blatant disregard to ones own safety & the safety of others including the Emer Services.

People like that, in my opinion, should be either prosecuted and/or charged a fee * for the intervention of the Emer Services rescue. That goes for all types of rescues where blatant stupidity is found to be the cause of a rescue.

Because of this person stupidity another person who wasn't stupid who needs the Emer Services may have to wait to be dealt with.

*Full medical card holders.

I fully agree with you, its only when people get hit in the pocket that they start to learn, these people often walk away without grasping what efforts have made by emergency services for them and the risks they may have taken because of their stupidity, no sympathy here, paulx will be appaulled:D

Bosco boy

foreign wrote: »

Suppose thats the difference between members of the public and members of the Fire and Rescue Services.

I think there are a fair few members of the public out there who have saved the lives of people in difficulty and they were not in the emergency services. I think your statement is more than a little unfair and I certainly would not support it.

emtrgnmb

While a rescue operation is in progress it is no ones responsibility to stand back and judge the individual and their present circumstances and how/why they got there. Apart perhaps to consider the mechanism of injury or history. While the person may be the inventor of their crisis the minds of rescuers will be focused on the job at hand, executed with unconditional positive regard. If a rescue is conducted in a manner which reflects that those involved are not interested for the reasons described above, then why bother at all? And what does it say about the rescuers?

The scene of a rescue does not lend itself to the blame game. The time for accountability comes after the incident. When everything is done and dusted.

Paulzx

Bosco boy wrote: »

I think there are a fair few members of the public out there who have saved the lives of people in difficulty and they were not in the emergency services.

Correct. They also werent interested in moralising about how the person came to be in trouble in the first place.


As i have said already, any firefighter that arrives on a scene is not interested in how or why the situation occured except to gain the info needed to do his job. He does not effect a rescue on the basis of whether a person deserves a rescue or not. He does not work off the basis of sympathy.

He is there to do a job he is paid to do and to do it to the best of his ability. If it is not possible to help or rescue someone so be it. You walk away knowing you did everything you possibly could.


What one person classes as stupidity or recklesness is another person normality. Someone climbing a sheer rockface for fun even fully equipped is a lunatic to 99% of the population. The 1% of the population who do this as a pastime will beg to differ. Receational diving is hazardous and something people don't need to do yet they choose to do it. Should the coastguard tell every diver to fu*k off when they call them on the basis that they were stupid to do it in the first place?

If i arrive at a house fire and find it was started by irresponsible use of chip pan do i refuse to extingush it. Not on your nelly!! I will however speak afterwards to the person responsible and let them know they were idiots to let it go on fire in the first place.


People do stupid things mainly because there are a lot of stupid people out there. Whats next? Start up a database of thicks that we'll refuse to help.

There is no excuse for people disregarding notices telling them not to walk on frozen ponds or to keep out of the mountains whilst the weather is bad. However, i'll bet you won't get one ES worker on here who'll say they deserve no help and to be left on their own when they get into trouble

maglite

Paulzx wrote: »

I will however speak afterwards to the person responsible and let them know they were idiots to let it go on fire in the first place.

I think that is the point.

Do the job get it done, then go "they were a bit of a plank",

concussion

Two escape as car falls through ice



Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Wire

Two men escaped uninjured when the car they were driving along a frozen canal in Scotland plunged through the ice, it was revealed today.

Police said the men, aged 22 and 24, were driving on the Union Canal near Winchburgh, West Lothian, yesterday afternoon when the ice gave way beneath them.

They managed to escape from the Peugeot, which was discovered shortly afterwards by the emergency services.

Lothian and Borders Police said the men were later arrested and charged with reckless conduct. They will appear at Livingston Sheriff Court at a later date.

A police spokesman said the men had a lucky escape.

“While it goes without saying that the vast majority of people have the good sense not to take their vehicles on to frozen waterways, this incident serves as an example of the type of stupidity that the emergency services occasionally have to deal with,” he said.

“There is no doubt that these two individuals had a lucky escape, and had the canal been deeper there could very well have been a different outcome.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0112/breaking79.htm

Charging them with reckless conduct -seems like a step in the right direction.

Trojan911

foreign wrote: »

Suppose thats the difference between members of the public and members of the Fire and Rescue Services.

A typically narrow minded post there, are you suggesting members of the public are not capable at all? Many members of the public step in to assist a person in trouble and that would include myself.

The situation would need to be assessed and if I deemed it safe to act (using my previous experience from being in the Emer Services) I would act until one of the Emer Services arrived on scene. My main focus would be to see how this person could be rescued/saved, just like any other rational thinking person.

If I deemed it unsafe to act I would make it look like I tried my best without causing harm to myself until the Emer Services arrived. They would then have control of the situation and would act accordingly.

Just because a person is no longer a part of the Emer Services does not nesessarily mean they do not retain their skills/experience or knowledge.

And just because a person is a member of the public it also does not mean they have less skills than some of the Emer Services.

There are private courses out there which some public pay to do.

Whitewater-AGS

Missing the point there trojan what the lads are saying is that as es we couldn't give two ****s as to how someone found themselves in danger just that they are there and how we can get them out of said danger which in this case is a frozen lake, in fairness paulx made that point fairly clear.

Trojan911

Whitewater-AGS wrote: »

Missing the point there trojan what the lads are saying is that as es we couldn't give two ****s as to how someone found themselves in danger just that they are there and how we can get them out of said danger which in this case is a frozen lake, in fairness paulx made that point fairly clear.

Not at all, I get the point. Paulzx made some good points. What I disagreed with, as stated:

wrote:

"How they got there during the rescue itself is irrelevant"

It is relevant in my opinion as the facts need to established as to how the person got into difficulty in the first place. It would need to be established why this person had fallen throught the ice i.e. Was this person attempting to rescue another person, his pet dog or was he out fooling around?

Now that in itself whether stupidity induced or not, would be irrelevant as the Emer Services will still conduct the rescue as per their training.

The reasons would be fed back to the relevant section of the Emer Services for consideration to prosecute or offer words of advice.

And as I also said:

wrote:

"People like that, in my opinion, should be either prosecuted and/or charged a fee * for the intervention of the Emer Services rescue. That goes for all types of rescues where blatant stupidity is found to be the cause of a rescue.

Because of this person stupidity another person who wasn't stupid who needs the Emer Services may have to wait to be dealt with.

*Full medical card holders.

I would support a prosecution if it was found to be recklessness.

Paulzx

Trojan911 wrote: »

The reasons would be fed back to the relevant section of the Emer Services for consideration to prosecute

I don't really understand what you plan to prosecute them with. I don't think laws regarding stupidity are on the statute books. Maybe some legal boffins will correct me


I'd be much keener on more effort being put into prosecuting those who assault and obstruct members of the ES rather than criminalising those who require our assistance

faigs

On Lough Sillan in Cavan the other day, a group of people lit a fire on the iced over lake and were all standing around it, there seemed to be a couple of kids with them too. Sorry if this is irrelevent I just had to contribute to the stupidity stories!

Trojan911

Paulzx wrote: »

I don't think laws regarding stupidity are on the statute books.

No, however, recklessness should cover it or the Public Order Act should cover it somewhere.... or trespass (if applicable).

What was that plank charged with that was dancing on the fountain in Corks Grand Parade recently? He apparently got three months inside and a hefty fine.....

Trojan911

Trojan911 wrote: »

No, however, recklessness should cover it or the Public Order Act should cover it somewhere.... or trespass (if applicable).

What was that plank charged with that was dancing on the fountain in Corks Grand Parade recently? He apparently got three months inside and a hefty fine.....

Non Fatal won't cover it as they are not risking others in their actions. Which part of Public Order? Section 8, Failure to comply with a direction. You would need a garda at every bit of frozen water then. Tresspass? Would you arrest them for swimming in the summer?

Bosco boy

Paulzx wrote: »

I don't really understand what you plan to prosecute them with. I don't think laws regarding stupidity are on the statute books. Maybe some legal boffins will correct me


I'd be much keener on more effort being put into prosecuting those who assault and obstruct members of the ES rather than criminalising those who require our assistance

Are you suggesting the gardai dont make an effort?

opti76

Trojan911 wrote: »

No, however, recklessness should cover it or the Public Order Act should cover it somewhere.... or trespass (if applicable).

What was that plank charged with that was dancing on the fountain in Corks Grand Parade recently? He apparently got three months inside and a hefty fine.....

indecent exposure.. he spent 40 minutes flashing his bits at the good people of the republic

Paulzx

Bosco boy wrote: »

Are you suggesting the gardai dont make an effort?

Ehhhh. Where did i say that?

Bosco boy

Paulzx wrote: »

Ehhhh. Where did i say that?

read your own posts

Trojan911

Paulzx wrote: »

I'd be much keener on more effort being put into prosecuting those who assault and obstruct members of the ES rather than criminalising those who require our assistance

For info: There is a specific offence for this here

wrote:

Section 185 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 makes it an offence to assault or threaten to assault fire brigade personnel during the execution of their duties. The penalty for this offence is a fine of 5,000 euro and 7 years in prison (or both). It is also an offence to obstruct or impede fire brigade personnel from carrying out their duties. This offence carries a fine of 2,500 euro.

You are Fire Services?

Paulzx

Bosco boy wrote: »

read your own posts

I can read them but you obviously can't. Please refrain from attributing comments to me that i have plainly not made.



Trojan,
I am well aware of the law as regards obstructing Fire Services personnel. Thanks for the refresher.


I will try and make things clearer for Bosco and others who wish to levy the stupid.

Your suggestion is basically to examine all ES callouts and have a decision made as to whether the call is to be classisied as "stupid" . These calls would then attract a bill commensurate with the cost of the rescue operation e.g cost of fire personnel, ambulance, gardai, coastguard, mountain rescue etc. Maybe we could call it a "stupidity levy" or if you have a more suitable suggestion please post it.

"Non stupid" calls would not attract any charge.


So we'll just try and scale this down to one agency. DFB will set up an office with an officer plus whatever personnel are required and are experts in stupidity ( we have plenty qualified for this in house ). Their job will be to invent a scale of stupidity. They will reveiw all turnouts we attend and then decide and allocate stupidity. They will then send the heavies ( plenty of heavy fireman around ) around to the stupid persons house and extract payment. If it was a multi agency turnout i'm sure like good honest "stupidity" investigators they will hand over a portion of the cash to that agency.

Jesus. I think we're onto a plan here.



Now to help Bosco in his interpretation of my comments. I would much prefer if the personnel in the stupidity office concentrated their efforts on co ordinating the info from all attacks on our personnel etc. and assisted the gardai in contacting personnel etc. This to me would be a much more valid use of resources than setting up a "Stupidity Inquisition!

Now if you could show me where i said gardai don't bother their arse i would be obliged.

wreckless

Paulzx wrote: »

Jesus. I think we're onto a plan here.

:D, thats some funny stuff Paul

but dont be giving the white shirts any more ideas, the PDA`s are cut enough at the moment.

Paulzx

wreckless wrote: »

, the PDA`s are cut enough at the moment.

Believe it or not ours have actually increased for certain turnouts. I know its a different situation for the Retained brigades

Bosco boy

Paulzx wrote: »

I can read them but you obviously can't. Please refrain from attributing comments to me that i have plainly not made.



Trojan,
I am well aware of the law as regards obstructing Fire Services personnel. Thanks for the refresher.


I will try and make things clearer for Bosco and others who wish to levy the stupid.

Your suggestion is basically to examine all ES callouts and have a decision made as to whether the call is to be classisied as "stupid" . These calls would then attract a bill commensurate with the cost of the rescue operation e.g cost of fire personnel, ambulance, gardai, coastguard, mountain rescue etc. Maybe we could call it a "stupidity levy" or if you have a more suitable suggestion please post it.

"Non stupid" calls would not attract any charge.


So we'll just try and scale this down to one agency. DFB will set up an office with an officer plus whatever personnel are required and are experts in stupidity ( we have plenty qualified for this in house ). Their job will be to invent a scale of stupidity. They will reveiw all turnouts we attend and then decide and allocate stupidity. They will then send the heavies ( plenty of heavy fireman around ) around to the stupid persons house and extract payment. If it was a multi agency turnout i'm sure like good honest "stupidity" investigators they will hand over a portion of the cash to that agency.

Jesus. I think we're onto a plan here.



Now to help Bosco in his interpretation of my comments. I would much prefer if the personnel in the stupidity office concentrated their efforts on co ordinating the info from all attacks on our personnel etc. and assisted the gardai in contacting personnel etc. This to me would be a much more valid use of resources than setting up a "Stupidity Inquisition!

Now if you could show me where i said gardai don't bother their arse i would be obliged.

please explain "stupidity office" and "Stupidity inquisition" I'm not great at riddles

Paulzx

Bosco boy wrote: »

please explain "stupidity office" and "Stupidity inquisition" I'm not great at riddles

Please tell me you are joking.

It's not my job to hold your hand and teach you the english language. Sign up for a night course.

Hooch

Relax fellas.....I only warn once;)

Thanks

Bosco boy

Paulzx wrote: »

Please tell me you are joking.

It's not my job to hold your hand and teach you the english language. Sign up for a night course.

The night course sounds better than holding hands, its just the riddles I can't figure out

Paulzx

Bosco boy wrote: »

The night course sounds better than holding hands, its just the riddles I can't figure out

The night course might explain what a riddle actually is 'cause i don't see any in this thread.

Shield

Jaysus lads will yiz ever knock it off?

Paulzx

psni wrote: »

Jaysus lads will yiz ever knock it off?

Fair enough. Keyboard locked on this one