Again, won't save a drowning man.

Manic Moran

It comes up from time to time, this latest event was all of about a mile from me here.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43233984/ns/us_news-life/t/handcuffed-policy-fire-crews-watch-man-die/

Fire crews and police could only watch after a man waded into San Francisco Bay, stood up to his neck and waited. They wanted to do something, but a policy tied to earlier budget cuts strictly forbade them from trying to save the 50-year-old, officials said.

Cliff's Notes version:

Man walks to the beach. Stops a passer-by, and says "Do me a favour. Call 911, I'm about to go kill myself." Then strides off into the water. Right off the bat, some people might say this is more of a call for help and attention than an honest suicide attempt. Plenty of more efficient methods around here to kill yourself. We have some very picturesque bridges, for example.

Police show up. Realise he's in the water, and are under instructions not to effect land/water rescues (Even if previously trained in water rescue). Ditto fire service.

Meantime, the chap's just standing there in the water.

They call a Coast Guard station, there's a major one around the corner. Coast guard send a boat out. 25-footer, like this.


The boat can't get to him because the water was too shallow. (Boat draws 1m of water). Call for a helicopter. The helicopter is on another call and will bee the better part of two hours.

An hour later, the individual succumbs (The water here isn't warm), and is observed floating face-down. A bystander gets fed up, walks out to the body and drags it back onto the shore.

City council now taking a fair bit of flak. Exactly why the Coast Guardsman couldn't climb out of his boat is beyond me. I understand not being willing to dive into a raging river or into rough seas, but a policy so strict that emergency services will sit there and watch for an hour as a guy is standing in waves a few inches tall has a serious problem to it. There's a theory that emergency services on an island (and it's not a big island) probably should be allowed to enter water.

NTM

sdanseo

Forgive me for saying it, but I'm not surprised that was in the US. It would never, ever happen here, and I mean that -because if I could swim I'd have been the first one in. Everything is so by-the-book over yonder. It's actually sickening.

starviewadams

I could never see that situation occurring here,even hearing story's of dangerous water rescues that my cousin and has done in the DFB without coastguard/helicopter assistance etc.

I don't know the in's and out's of procedure's in the state's,but how a few teams of capable trained rescuer's could justify standing-by and watching a another human being drown,protocol or no protocol,is beyond me.There's not really much anybody could say to defend such actions in my opinion.

Hooch

sdonn wrote: »

Forgive me for saying it, but I'm not surprised that was in the US. It would never, ever happen here, and I mean that -because if I could swim I'd have been the first one in. Everything is so by-the-book over yonder. It's actually sickening.

Dont be so sure....i'll wait for a fire service head to pop in an answer it but county guidelines in more than a few services do not allow fire service personnel into water above their knee.......even with a lifejacket. AND.....they will suspend those who go that extra mile.

searescue

Something similar happened in the UK before.

There was an RTC on the motorway and the car left the edge of the motorway which was about 15 feet down but had 2 feet of water. Police/Fire/Ambo called as per normal.

Firemen got a ladder and told one of their men to go down the ladder. Then a Fire Officer arrived and told the fireman to get off the ladder as they weren't insured for this type of incident. So a Coast Guard unit from 40 miles away was tasked but took an hour to come. In the meantime the father of the driver had become aware of the accident and landed on the scene where he saw the ES personnel standing by helplessly (not permitted to do what they wanted to do).

When the Coast Guard arrived the man was dead. The post mortem concluded that he died from drowning - not from the crash impact.

As a result the father was looking to sue the council and fire officer - haven't heard anymore since.

Would I be right in saying that our paramedics are forbidden from going anywhere near water?

Theory being that when the paramedics enters water they becomes useless, as when the man is eventually rescued; there'll be no paramedics to treat him?


I think our last big drowning incident was a while ago in Dublin? Someone went in to the Liffey? Garda jumped in after him, if I recall. Both were taken to hospital; the Garda with minor injuries, but the other man died (in the hospital, didn't drown).

tommy.obr

I have witnesed this happen on two separate occasions with our local fire brigade. Apparently they are only allowed up to their knees in water, despite the fact that they are equipped with full dry suits and personal flotation devices. They've had to stand back as they could do notting. I'm sure there has been times where they have ignored these stupid rules but equally i know there have been times where members of the public have had to step in and deal with a situation and in the process put themselves at risk.

Healt and Safety regulations are written by idiots and its slowly ruining this country...

angelfire9

In Ennis (where i live) there have been lots of rescues of people from the river by the fire service over the years
http://www.clareherald.com/features/clare-video/2569-river-fergus-rescue-drama-as-man-tries-to-evade-gardai.html

There is talk of setting up a water rescue unit in the town
Ennis fire service must do a dozen or so rescues from the river every year (that is a guestimate), the town being essentially an island having a river with a strong current going through the town centre and meandering around the town boundaries

Its a pity Ireland doesn't have anything like this:
http://channelnine.ninemsn.com.au/rescuespecialops/

After all, Dublin, Limerick, Galway and Cork are all river based cities!

Leo Demidov

angelfire9 wrote: »

After all, Dublin, Limerick, Galway and Cork are all river based cities!

And Waterford is a _______ based _______? :p

Civil Defence have recently begun training in Water Awareness with Rescue3/Fire service. Many retained services still do not have this training done, but it permits rescue from the river bank using throw lines/floating hoses etc. Probably not too effective where the vic is intent on suicide.

Afaik, the major cities have trained water rescue technicians who may enter the water to effect a rescue. very highly skilled, but risky nonetheless for the rescuer.

Tabnabs

wexfjord wrote: »

Afaik, the major cities have trained water rescue technicians who may enter the water to effect a rescue. very highly skilled, but risky nonetheless for the rescuer.

Swiftwater Rescue Technician

This is a one week course carried out on the Liffey river which teaches firefighters about the dynamics of water, hazards, rope techniques and of course methods of rescue from bank operations to actually getting into the river/ water source in a safe manner and rescuing the casualty. Equipment now used in Dublin includes, drysuits, lifejackets, inflatable walkways, inflatable hose, throwable floating lines, ropework equipment, boat, boat carrier and launcher in HQ.

At this stage (Dec 2008) over 300 firefighters are qualified Swiftwater Rescue Technicians with over all firefighters trained in water awareness.
source

And here's their boat
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52271937@N04/4984212141/

The_Snapper

Manic Moran wrote: »

Police show up. Realise he's in the water, and are under instructions not to effect land/water rescues (Even if previously trained in water rescue). Ditto fire service.

Suicidal male. I wouldn't have gone in either.

He indicated he was going to take his life, and did. Who's to know he didn't have a weapon on him at the time. I agree with their course of action in this case.

dvpower

The_Snapper wrote: »

Suicidal male. I wouldn't have gone in either.

He indicated he was going to take his life, and did. Who's to know he didn't have a weapon on him at the time. I agree with their course of action in this case.

Yep. Could be dangerous. Same when the police are called to a burglary or a violent attack. They should just watch 'till the danger has passed:rolleyes:

The_Snapper

dvpower wrote: »

Same when the police are called to a burglary or a violent attack. They should just watch 'till the danger has passed:rolleyes:

Well, not entirely true. Assess the situation and then act when/if safe to do so. It's called self preservation.

Manic Moran

The_Snapper wrote: »

Suicidal male. I wouldn't have gone in either.

He indicated he was going to take his life, and did. Who's to know he didn't have a weapon on him at the time. I agree with their course of action in this case.

His actions were not those of a man committed to suicide. Unless you plan suicide-by-cop, usually you don't call the police beforehand to let them stop you. This was a last-ditch call for help, which he did not receive.

Note that the position of the administration was that no rescue was effected due to the water policy, not out of concern for the man trying to kill one of the responders.

NTM

The_Snapper

Manic Moran wrote: »

His actions were not those of a man committed to suicide. Unless you plan suicide-by-cop, usually you don't call the police beforehand to let them stop you. This was a last-ditch call for help, which he did not receive.

Note that the position of the administration was that no rescue was effected due to the water policy, not out of concern for the man trying to kill one of the responders.

NTM

I'm not suggesting suicide by cop at all. Suicidal persons are dangerous to themselves and others. I hear what you are saying though and I still wouldn't have gone in under the circumstances, policy in place or not for the reasons outlined in my last post re weapons. The incident was unique. He didn't receive help for a good reason tragic and all, he died and by his own doing.

Taken from the link."He was engaged in a deliberate act of taking his own life," Lynch told the Mercury News. "We did not know whether he was violent, whether drugs were involved. It's not a situation of a typical rescue."

MagicSean

dvpower wrote: »

Yep. Could be dangerous. Same when the police are called to a burglary or a violent attack. They should just watch 'till the danger has passed:rolleyes:

Police are trained to deal with that. They are not trained to rescue a man from a river, especially a man who does not want to be rescued.

Manic Moran

They are not trained to rescue a man from a river, especially a man who does not want to be rescued.

That's just it, though. If he really wanted to kill himself, he (1) wouldn't have asked for someone to call the police before he did the deed and (2) he wouldn't have picked what is probably the most inefficient and slowest manner I can think of.

I think he did want to be rescued.

NTM

CaseyRyback

Manic Moran wrote: »

That's just it, though. If he really wanted to kill himself, he (1) wouldn't have asked for someone to call the police before he did the deed and (2) he wouldn't have picked what is probably the most inefficient and slowest manner I can think of.

I think he did want to be rescued.

NTM

Are you for real? Have you had much experience in dealing with those attempting suicide because based on the level of ignorance displayed in your above post I'm guessing not.

Persons who call emergency services when planning to kill themselves can do so for a multitude of reasons. If you think for one second that the person concerned will not kill themselves or wants 'rescuing' simply because they've dialed 999, you may well be shocked when the exact opposite occurs and have to explain yourself to the powers that be.

As for your second point; he did kill himself, so I'm guessing the method used wasn't so inefficient after-all, was it.

The mindset of a person at the point where taking their own life is an actual choice, is not something anyone can appreciate or predict. It is entirely subjective.

As an aside, a common theme in your posts is 'how I'd have done it better than the police'. Are you a failed/wannabe Garda or something because the sour grapes certainly suggests that?

discus

First of CaseyRyback, Manic_Moran (IMHO) stimulates some great debate on this forum, so take a step back before you jump down his throat.

Secondly, I don't know how modest he is, so I'll give you a brief on his credentials. He's a former Irish Army reservist, now a US National Guardsman. He's an officer, with tours overseas under his belt. On top of that, he seems to be a top guy. He's certainly no "failed guard" or keyboard warrior.

RMD

CaseyRyback wrote: »

Are you for real? Have you had much experience in dealing with those attempting suicide because based on the level of ignorance displayed in your above post I'm guessing not.

Persons who call emergency services when planning to kill themselves can do so for a multitude of reasons. If you think for one second that the person concerned will not kill themselves or wants 'rescuing' simply because they've dialed 999, you may well be shocked when the exact opposite occurs and have to explain yourself to the powers that be.

As for your second point; he did kill himself, so I'm guessing the method used wasn't so inefficient after-all, was it.

The mindset of a person at the point where taking their own life is an actual choice, is not something anyone can appreciate or predict. It is entirely subjective.

As an aside, a common theme in your posts is 'how I'd have done it better than the police'. Are you a failed/wannabe Garda or something because the sour grapes certainly suggests that?

This suicide rings exactly of what has been said. The man wanted help, he asked a by-passer to call the emergency services and he chose an extremely slow and inefficient method whereby there was enough time for the services to show up, see they weren't allowed rescue him and go through all the crap involved of getting other services involved. It was an extremely insufficient method which IMO was screaming for help, if he wanted to do it efficiently without looking for help he would have shot himself, hung himself, jumped from the many bridges available or used suitable pharmaceuticals. Drowning is not an efficient method by any means at all, it's also one of the most painful and psychologically challenging.

And as Discus pointed out, Manic is a hell of a lot more than a failed Garda. He's an Officer with 8 tours under his belt who's had to go through various situations and make decisions which far outweigh anything the average Garda has dealt with.

goldie fish

8 tours?

CaseyRyback

discus wrote: »

First of CaseyRyback, Manic_Moran (IMHO) stimulates some great debate on this forum, so take a step back before you jump down his throat.

Secondly, I don't know how modest he is, so I'll give you a brief on his credentials. He's a former Irish Army reservist, now a US National Guardsman. He's an officer, with tours overseas under his belt. On top of that, he seems to be a top guy. He's certainly no "failed guard" or keyboard warrior.

He has already widely publicised his reservist experience, but thanks for the bio.

I am more interested in his experience in dealing with emergency response to suicides and mental health crisis based on what he has said above.

The tone of his posts towards the Gardai/Police may be something he is entirely unaware of, or may be loser's scorn, i.e sour grapes, hence my question. It is a running theme in his posts on this forum.

Eru

Just so I understand this.

1. A man enters cold water and stands still
2. He asks someone else to make a phonecall to the police.
3. He stands in the water looking at the police who are looking at him.
4. He eventually dies from cold.

This is correct isnt it?

Now, permit me to suggest:

A, He could have rang samaritans or walked into a number of centres including a police station to obtain help.
B, He could have made the call himself like many do.
C, He could have walked out of the water at any time into the hands of the police at any bloody time.

Its a running theme the world over to blame the mythical 'emergency services' beast but when all is said and done, its the person who took the killing action that killed, not the people who didnt stop them.

And for those that would suggest he couldn't do any of this because of his mental state, being depressed is not a form of madness. You do realise your depressed, you do still have all your functions about you and you can still take reasonable and logical steps. He had the foresight to get dressed, travel to the beach, make the plan and then ask someone to make the phonecall so clearly had a plan of action which would result in his rescue. Im loath to call a suicidal person selfish but on this occasion theres no other word.

Eru

RMD wrote: »

And as Discus pointed out, Manic is a hell of a lot more than a failed Garda. He's an Officer with 8 tours under his belt who's had to go through various situations and make decisions which far outweigh anything the average Garda has dealt with.

Well as suggested, 8 tours of what? Disneyland? But moving on and without getting into a fight with manic (as I have nothing against the chap) but being a national guardsman is a soldier in the US and not a police officer, fireman or any other emergency service.

You say he has made decisions and been where no garda would ever face? The National Guards were called up in support of police during 9/11. Maybe we should look at that as a test of Guardsman compared to police? Or another example where they meet is on UN duty and peacekeeping. The National guard are deployed on various UN duties in many of the same countries that An Garda Siochana are such as Kosova and Afghanistan. So your theory that he has made decisions no garda would ever need to make is pretty much what I would expect, an uneducated opinion.

People need to stop the boring army V police because in my experience its only 'civilians' that think like that and by and large both groups work together just fine when needed.

the_syco

Manic Moran wrote: »

Man walks to the beach. Stops a passer-by, and says "Do me a favour. Call 911, I'm about to go kill myself." Then strides off into the water.
<snip>
Police show up. Realise he's in the water, and are under instructions not to effect land/water rescues (Even if previously trained in water rescue). Ditto fire service.
<snip>
They call a Coast Guard station, there's a major one around the corner. Coast guard send a boat out. 25-footer, like this.

<snip>
Call for a helicopter. The helicopter is on another call and will bee the better part of two hours.
<snip>
An hour later, the individual succumbs (The water here isn't warm), and is observed floating face-down.

I think the man knew exactly what he was doing. He planned to commit suicide in a public place where no-one would be able to stop him.

My first query would be if someone he knew well, or was related to him, died due to lack of action by the emergency services (caused by red tape or otherwise)?

Manic Moran

I am more interested in his experience in dealing with emergency response to suicides and mental health crisis based on what he has said above

A fair amount, you may be surprised to discover. One of the biggest problems facing the US military today is that of suicide.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/blog-post/2011/01/suicides_double_in_national_gu.html

On Wednesday, the Pentagon announced that suicides doubled in the Army Reserve and National Guard in 2010. The number of active-duty suicides dropped, but the spike in the National Guard and Reserve has Army leaders attempting to figure out how to address the mental health issues of men and women who often live far away from their assigned units.

Particularly in the year after a return from a combat tour. As a result, we get a substantial amount of training in suicide awareness, the nature of suicides, and what to do with it. And when a soldier in theatre goes and has suicidal ideations, there are no emergency services to call upon. Just us. Often times all you can do (and we did) is simply separate him from his weapons, and give him suitable on-base taskings, but the important thing is to identify the ideation before it has time to fester to a point where it will be carried out.

It gets even worse in the last month before return, when the Dear John letters start arriving, and then when people return home to find their jobs or wives gone (in one case, the wife was still there, but so was another man and the trooper's belongings were in boxes in the garage), or have other issues with returning to normal life. We lost no soldiers on the tour, since our return, we've lost a few by either suicide (eg jumping out of a Vegas Casino window), risky behaviour (eg high speed motorcycle crash while street racing) or in one case, which doesn't really count, he was a Sheriff's deputy killed in a gunfight, but it still affected us. This is unacceptable, and it is incumbent upon us to be able to identify and act on individuals identified as at risk.

If I may give an example, one of my mechanics last February quit his job one day, went around the back, and started cutting on himself. Turned out they were more cat scratches than a serious attempt, but it was certainly a warning sign, so we directed him to some help. He didn't take up on it. Then two months ago, he, again, quits his job, posts on Facebook saying "That's it, this is the end", and is last seen walking out to the hills with a bottle of whiskey and a case of anti-freeze. As you can imagine, we start quite the search party. This is in Nevada, remember, one of the States were most everyone has access to firearms. We find him 36 hours later. He's not very happy, doesn't want to talk to us, but we basically sit on him and drag him to the VA. There he expresses a willingness to harm both himself and members of the Guard, particularly his leadership (i.e. me, amongst others).

Yes, it's a threat to take seriously. As a result, next drill I made sure that some people were carrying concealed firearms. However, we also did not abandon him, and he is now taking a course of medication and psychiatric assistance whlst remaining in the unit. He has a better chance at life now than if we had just said "Oh well, he wants to kill himself" and not gone to the efforts (and expense, flying military helicopters isn't cheap) to help him.

We very much consider that we would bedelinquent in our duty had we not taken the effort and risk in trying to reintegrate this man. With that duty comes the hours of mandatory suicide training that we have to take. Honestly, I'd prefer that we spent that training time training to kill people and break things, but I can't deny that the training is applicable and can save lives. I don't know how much training an average cop gets in such matters, but I would be surprised to discover it's more than the Army has given me, and very surprised to discover many average cops who have actually closely dealt with persons with suicidal ideations.

He's an Officer with 8 tours under his belt

8? Two. I've done two of Disneyland too, actually.

I think the man knew exactly what he was doing. He planned to commit suicide in a public place where no-one would be able to stop him.

I doubt the average person not aware of the policies of first responders could possibly fathom that they couldn't rescue him within a few feet of water and a couple of score yards from the shore. I would never have thought so, and it seems from the public reaction that most are in a similar situation to me.

If I may quote from this government website:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001554.htm

Suicide attempts that do not result in death are much more common than completed suicides. Many of these suicide attempts are carried out in a way that makes rescue possible. These attempts often represent a desperate cry for help.

As for your second point; he did kill himself, so I'm guessing the method used wasn't so inefficient after-all, was it.

It took over an hour. I call that inefficient. Within his line of sight was the Golden Gate Bridge, suicide attempts from there are far more frequent, terminal, faster and harder to stop. As are firearm attempts, which are also not overly uncommon around these parts. It was effective, yes, but hardly an efficient way of doing business.

As an aside, a common theme in your posts is 'how I'd have done it better than the police'

I believe my last debate of any note was actually "This is how Dallas police did it better than the Irish police" (the Cork airport incident). I try to keep definitive personal statements into areas I either have experience or training in. Otherwise, I tend to rely on the precedent of others.

You will note that at no point have I blamed the police, fire service or Coast Guard for the man's death. As has been pointed out, it was his actions that put him there. However, I do have serious issue with policies which prevent actions from being carried out which could save lives. We don't know why the man never called the Samaritans. Maybe he thought he would be taken more seriously if he actually put himself in a dangerous position as opposed to just getting on the 'phone. Regardless, it is known that many people do go the route of getting the police involved, and they are viewed as the last, fall-back, safety net facility to stop a suicide attempt if it can be stopped.

NTM

amacachi

Eru wrote: »

A, He could have rang samaritans or walked into a number of centres including a police station to obtain help.
B, He could have made the call himself like many do.
C, He could have walked out of the water at any time into the hands of the police at any bloody time.

Its a running theme the world over to blame the mythical 'emergency services' beast but when all is said and done, its the person who took the killing action that killed, not the people who didnt stop them.

And for those that would suggest he couldn't do any of this because of his mental state, being depressed is not a form of madness. You do realise your depressed, you do still have all your functions about you and you can still take reasonable and logical steps. He had the foresight to get dressed, travel to the beach, make the plan and then ask someone to make the phonecall so clearly had a plan of action which would result in his rescue. Im loath to call a suicidal person selfish but on this occasion theres no other word.

Wonderful stuff that post.

RMD

Manic Moran wrote: »

8? Two. I've done two of Disneyland too, actually.

You said in the MoH thread over in the military forum you've done 2 in Iraq and 6 in Afghanistan?

Edit: I know see you were talking about Sgt. Petry, my mistake.

Eru wrote: »

Well as suggested, 8 tours of what? Disneyland? But moving on and without getting into a fight with manic (as I have nothing against the chap) but being a national guardsman is a soldier in the US and not a police officer, fireman or any other emergency service.

2 tours of the Middle East, I'm not sure of which specific country. I didn't mention anything about his experience of being an emergency services employee, I was pointing out to Casey he's a lot more than a failed / wannabe Garda.

You say he has made decisions and been where no garda would ever face? The National Guards were called up in support of police during 9/11. Maybe we should look at that as a test of Guardsman compared to police? Or another example where they meet is on UN duty and peacekeeping. The National guard are deployed on various UN duties in many of the same countries that An Garda Siochana are such as Kosova and Afghanistan. So your theory that he has made decisions no garda would ever need to make is pretty much what I would expect, an uneducated opinion.

Quote me on where I said no Garda, I didn't. I said the average Garda which I think is a fair statement, I doubt the average Garda will have to face the challenges of working in a warzone. To make a blanket statement though of "no Garda", well that would be idiotic.

People need to stop the boring army V police because in my experience its only 'civilians' that think like that and by and large both groups work together just fine when needed.

I'm not arguing "the army is so much better than the police!!!!@!!!!" type crap, I made the point that he's a lot more than just a failed / wannabe Garda. I never once said he's better than the average Garda or the army are better than the police, I don't even know where you got that idea from to be honest.

Manic Moran

Can we now move off the topic of what I have or have not done in my life, and return to the two concepts of what, if any, duty the emergency services have to aid a person with suicidal ideations (I believe that it should be part of the job description), and the merits of safety policies which prohibit the emergency services from acting in apparently reasonable cases, whether the guy wants to be saved or not? (I believe that part of the job involves making judgement calls on scene, especially by a person of rank, not having hands tied by administrative decisions in broad terms)

NTM

Eru

RMD wrote: »

2 tours of the Middle East, I'm not sure of which specific country. I didn't mention anything about his experience of being an emergency services employee, I was pointing out to Casey he's a lot more than a failed / wannabe Garda.

Thats it in a nutshell, hes not nor are you an emergency services employee. Fighting a war brings its own decisions, needs and training. Being a soldier in no way means said soldier can comment on what and how a fireman or paramedic deals with a situation.

And while Im not suggesting he is, moving to the US and joining the national guard in no way means someone is not a failed or wannabee Garda. Theres plenty of people that join an alternative service having failed to or while trying to join AGS. Some of these later do join.

Its also fair to say that responding on a military base to a soldiers attempted suicide is not going to be the same as a fireman / paramedic or cop responding to a civilian situation


QUOTE=RMD;72584122]
Quote me on where I said no Garda, I didn't. I said the average Garda which I think is a fair statement, I doubt the average Garda will have to face the challenges of working in a warzone. To make a blanket statement though of "no Garda", well that would be idiotic.[/QUOTE]

Your making a lot of assumptions about a person you have never even met or know. As for challenges. I would consider the daily decisions made by Gardai above the daily decisions made by a soldier. Iraq for a soldier is more dangerous without a doubt but is it less dangerous than being an Iraqi police officer? And what decisions? they are more or less exempt from Iraqi law and can shoot people.

But you know what Im getting sidetracked here, what I deal with, what casey deals with and what manic deals with is still nothing that YOU can talk about.

Manic wnated to return to topic, well the topic is a man that made a decision to enter water and stay there until he died. Freewill and personal responsibility as an adult. No paramedic or cop is to blame, the man is plain and simple.

searescue

As said earlier, if we are paged and find out it's the suicidal person who has called it in - we are even more cautious.

Do they have a weapon? Have they other motives. We wont risk ourselves.

It's sad but true - if they're going to do it and we are concerned for our own safety - let them off. Better one person than two!