Disobeying Safety Warnings - Should it be crime/punishable offence?

AudreyHepburn

Now that Hurricane has passed there is much discussion about the many people who not only put their own lives at risk by disobeying Met Eireann's safety warnings but also the lives of the rescue personnel sent out after them.

I personally see such actions as selfish and idiotic and I firmly believe that anyone who deliberately disobeys safety warnings to go swimming, kite surfing etc and subsequently calls out the emergency services to help them should at the very least be fined.

The Rescue 116 tragedy showed us exactly how dangerous the job our rescue services do at the best of times - the idea that people would have so little disregard for them that they willingly disobey safety warnings boils my blood.

What do my fellow boardsies think?

dudara

Not a criminal offense IMO, that's too nanny state. But neither should they expect any assistance

Hitman3000

If there is a red alert in place, idiots who ignore the warning and place themselves in danger requiring the emergency services should be prosecuted no If's or Buts.

corner of hells

Possibly tattoo the word "idiot" on their forehead as a reminder for them.

Omackeral

Those knobheads that went kite surfing in Co Louth surfing should have to pay the call out charge for the Emergency Services. I know it's not legal right now but legislation should be made going forward that if a Red Alert is put in place and you ignore it, you are responsible for call out charges and maybe even fines.

AudreyHepburn

dudara wrote: »

Not a criminal offense IMO, that's too nanny state. But neither should they expect any assistance

Ok perhaps it shouldn't be a criminal offense but I do still think the Emergency Services should be able to issue a fine or a bill for the call out.

Hitman3000

dudara wrote:

Not a criminal offense IMO, that's too nanny state. But neither should they expect any assistance

I'm a former member of the emergency services no member would willing refuse to come to someone's aid. The issue is putting oneself in a position of danger when specially warned not to thereby endangering the life of rescue service members.

Omackeral

dudara wrote: »

Not a criminal offense IMO, that's too nanny state. But neither should they expect any assistance

You have to try save lives regardless. That's the job of emergency services. That's why we try to save suicidal people.

Hitman3000 wrote: »

If there is a red alert in place, idiots who ignore the warning and place themselves in danger requiring the emergency services should be prosecuted no If's or Buts.

Somewhat agree with this. Prosecuted or fined or made to pay a call out charge. All should be at least debated anyway.

Arsemageddon

It would be almost impossible to prosecute anyone for such an offence.

The lads windsurfing in Dundalk were highly experienced and were out on the water hours before the storm had even reached the south of the country. They were in a far better position to judge what the risks were than some busy body on the beach.

I'm not condoning the people swimming at Salthill or eejits taking selfies on a pier in a storm, just saying we can't regulate everything.

HeidiHeidi

Trouble is, those surfers weren't in trouble. Some people on land thought they were and made the call, and the emergency agencies responded.

The row has developed into should they be entitled to go out surfing (which was within their capabilities in the conditions at the time) even though there was a red alert in place?

The Undecided One

I disagree with bills for emergency call outs but I would support the idea of ‚You ignore a warning, we ignore your plight’ kinda rule.

If sombody wants thrill let them have a go but why should any emergency personel risk their lives for them?

The Backwards Man

We had a local hero got stuck up the Christmas tree in town one year, had to be rescued.

In true heroic style, he sent his wife down the barracks the next day to see if he was in trouble with the law. Sergeant says to her, "ah, tell him he's not in trouble, but tell him he's not fcuking right in the head either."

Not much point making stupidity an offence in fairness. But take every opportunity to tell them what stupid irresponsible selfish bastards they are.

AudreyHepburn

Omackeral wrote: »

You have to try save lives regardless. That's the job of emergency services. That's why we try to save suicidal people.



Somewhat agree with this. Prosecuted or fined or made to pay a call out charge. All should be at least debated anyway.

I'm absolutely not saying these people should be left to die - I'm not that cold.

I just think they need to be held to account for recklessly endangering the lives of their rescuers.

branie2

Very much so!

The Undecided One

Arsemageddon wrote: »

It would be almost impossible to prosecute anyone for such an offence.

The lads windsurfing in Dundalk were highly experienced and were out on the water hours before the storm had even reached the south of the country. They were in a far better position to judge what the risks were than some busy body on the beach.

I'm not condoning the people swimming at Salthill or eejits taking selfies on a pier in a storm, just saying we can't regulate everything.

In this case I would make it mandatory for them to inform rmergency services in advance that they will be staying out on the water and not to respond.

Arsemageddon

The Backwards Man wrote: »

We had a local hero got stuck up the Christmas tree in town one year, had to be rescued.

In true heroic style, he sent his wife down the barracks the next day to see if he was in trouble with the law. Sergeant says to her, "ah, tell him he's not in trouble, but tell him he's not fcuking right in the head either."

Not much point making stupidity an offence in fairness. But take every opportunity to tell them what stupid irresponsible selfish bastards they are.

Why was he up the tree?

The Backwards Man

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Why was he up the tree?

Because somebody in the pub dared him to do it. You know what peer pressure can be like when you're in your mid to late fifties.

Hitman3000

The Backwards Man wrote:

Because somebody in the pub dared him to do it. You know what peer pressure can be like when you're in your mid to late fifties.

Hopefully someone can dare him not to be a bell end.

Arsemageddon

The Undecided One wrote: »

In this case I would make it mandatory for them to inform rmergency services in advance that they will be staying out on the water and not to respond.

That seems like a reasonable enough suggestion.

Mick Costello

Yes absolutely they should be punishable by a fine at least,warnings were in place for a reason,selfishly these people ignored the warnings and could have risked others lives by their actions

Omackeral

Arsemageddon wrote: »

The lads windsurfing in Dundalk were highly experienced and were out on the water hours before the storm had even reached the south of the country. They were in a far better position to judge what the risks were than some busy body on the beach.

The Undecided One wrote: »

In this case I would make it mandatory for them to inform emergency services in advance that they will be staying out on the water and not to respond.

Emergency Services have to respond, civilians don't get a choice in that. As for the surfers being in a better position to judge the conditions than a busy body on the shore, well that's neither here nor there. Meteorologists decided on a Red Alert for the entire country, I'd wager they are in a far better position to judge.

Also, you can call them busy bodies but wasn't one of the crew members from the doomed former Rescue 116 from Blackrock, Co Louth were these guys were surfing, so you can excuse the 'busy bodies' I'd say. Oh yeah and someone died in Louth from the storm too. So the Red Alert was obviously merited.

biko

I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

Discodog

Arsemageddon wrote: »

It would be almost impossible to prosecute anyone for such an offence.

The lads windsurfing in Dundalk were highly experienced and were out on the water hours before the storm had even reached the south of the country. They were in a far better position to judge what the risks were than some busy body on the beach.

I'm not condoning the people swimming at Salthill or eejits taking selfies on a pier in a storm, just saying we can't regulate everything.

I assume you mean North

The busy body probably knew that there was a red warning. Maybe hours before the storm but hours after the warning.

A Galway Guard said that he approached the kids, on the diving board, but could only warn them. The Guards said that they even sounded their sirens to try & stop walkers.

In my opinion, if a red alert is issued for an area, it should be an offence to disregard the warning & the instructions of Gardai.

I am all for civil liberties but no one has the right to actions which will cause worry for the general public during a red alert. I am not against extreme sports.

If the windsurfers had notified the coastguard, before they started, the helicopter & lifeboat would not of been called out.

dudara

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Ok perhaps it shouldn't be a criminal offense but I do still think the Emergency Services should be able to issue a fine or a bill for the call out.

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I'm a former member of the emergency services no member would willing refuse to come to someone's aid. The issue is putting oneself in a position of danger when specially warned not to thereby endangering the life of rescue service members.

I commend you. You have a far greater sense of duty than I do.

AudreyHepburn

I'd just like to point out I'm not suggesting that we take away people's freedom of choice, only that if they make reckless choices that put the lives of others at risk they must be held accountable.

Red Weather Warnings are not issued for no reason.

AudreyHepburn

Discodog wrote: »

I assume you mean North

The busy body probably knew that there was a red warning. Maybe hours before the storm but hours after the warning.

A Galway Guard said that he approached the kids, on the diving board, but could only warn them. The Guards said that they even sounded their sirens to try & stop walkers.

In my opinion, if a red alert is issued for an area, it should be an offence to disregard the warning & the instructions of Gardai.

I am all for civil liberties but no one has the right to actions which will cause worry for the general public during a red alert. I am not against extreme sports.

If the windsurfers had notified the coastguard, before they started, the helicopter & lifeboat would not of been called out.

Agree 100%

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Hitman3000

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

It's not martial law, it's a mechanism whereby you do put the lives of others ( emergency personal) in needless danger when weather conditions dictate that a significant danger exists.

Arsemageddon

Discodog wrote: »

I assume you mean North

The busy body probably knew that there was a red warning.
Maybe hours before the storm but hours after the warning.

.

No, I did mean south. AFAIK the storm hadn't even got going in Cork & Kerry when the windsurfers were out.

My point was the windsurfers are in a far better position to judge the conditions than some random member of the public.

In my opinion, if a red alert is issued for an area, it should be an offence to disregard the warning & the instructions of Gardai.

I am all for civil liberties but no one has the right to actions which will cause
worry for the general public during a red alert.

,

I dunno, 'worry for the public' is a very subjective standard. What might cause me worry might be grand for you and vice versa.

It seems to me that it would be an awful waste of the guards time to be running around having to arrest lads on piers and beaches during a storm.

If the windsurfers had notified the coastguard, before they started, the helicopter & lifeboat would not of been called out.

Might be better if they were required to carry a device that could emit a distress signal.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Arsemageddon

Omackeral wrote: »

Emergency Services have to respond, civilians don't get a choice in that. As for the surfers being in a better position to judge the conditions than a busy body on the shore, well that's neither here nor there. Meteorologists decided on a Red Alert for the entire country, I'd wager they are in a far better position to judge.

Met Eireann only wanted to give a red warning for seven counties and an orange warning everywhere else. It was the national emergency committee that decided to extend it to the whole country

Also, you can call them busy bodies but wasn't one of the crew members from the doomed former Rescue 116 from Blackrock, Co Louth were these guys were surfing

I have no idea why you would think that is of any relevance.

Oh yeah and someone died in Louth from the storm too

That happened inland 5 hours later.

Donal55

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'd just like to point out I'm not suggesting that we take away people's freedom of choice, only that if they make reckless choices that put the lives of others at risk they must be held accountable.

Red Weather Warnings are not issued for no reason.

Could we use your argument to prosecute employers who force their employees to turn in?

'Red Weather Warnings are not issued for no reason.'

AudreyHepburn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's not martial law at all - it's about making people take responsibility for their actions and protecting our emergency service personnel.

AudreyHepburn

Donal55 wrote: »

Could we use your argument to prosecute employers who force their employees to turn in?

'Red Weather Warnings are not issued for no reason.'

Chance would be a fine thing!

AudreyHepburn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm suggesting nothing of the sort and if you'd read my op properly you'd know that.

I was referring to those who take stupid risks like Kite Surfing during a hurricane forcing the emergency services to put their lives at risk to rescue them.

Hitman3000

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

There in lies the issue 'only a tiny handful of them endangered anyone else's life' They have no right to endanger anyone's life during a situation like yesterday.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

andekwarhola

Criminal offence is probably going too far. I sense that's just a populist soundbite from Varadkar.

Also instructing the emergency service to ignore them is equally rash and probably prone to error. For example, somebody swept out to sea rather than swimming.

Also where do you draw the line? For example, insisting in driving to work during a red alert.

That said, I'd love to see deliberate and egregious acts of stupidity like those witnessed yesterday, that waste the time of the emergency services, punished in some way, perhaps in the form of a forced financial or labour contribution to the service.

AudreyHepburn

s

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Let's try this again - I am not talking about taking away people's freedom of choice but if you make the decision to behave recklessly despite numerous warnings and then put other people's lives at risk by doing so you need to be held responsible.

If not a criminal offense then it should at be punishable by a fine or having to the bill for the call out.

It's not that hard to understand really.

Criminal offense might have been the wrong phrase so apologies for any agro caused.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Discodog

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Met Eireann only wanted to give a red warning for seven counties and an orange warning everywhere else. It was the national emergency committee that decided to extend it to the whole country



I have no idea why you would think that is of any relevance.



That happened inland 5 hours later.

Really ? It was obvious that the forecast needed a full country warning. Posters in the excellent weather forum here were calling for it .
The storm was expanding & was obviously going to affect most of the country.

AudreyHepburn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So what do you suggest then? You say you're not endorsing reckless behavior but what else do you call refusal to accept any form of punishment?

Discodog

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No one is suggesting that. The red warning would include what you should & should not do. Some things would be advisory like travelling but obvious dangers like swimming & ignoring the instructions of Gardai would be mandatory.

It's simply bonkers that a Guard can't stop you from walking along a closed road or climbing on a diving board.

railer201

I'm trying to imagine an airborne kite surfer whizzing around inside a hurricane - maybe someone will try it some day and report back !

BrianBoru00

To play devils advocate here and I'm not trying to trivialise the loss of life. But should people who were out on the street walking past / under trees or those driving on roads where trees were located also be prosecuted for putting first responders at risk.

Emergency personnel had to respond and were therefore put into the exact same danger as the fatalities in the two Munster cases.
There's an argument to be made that the water was no more excessively rough than other days with no warnings in place - that people in the sea were actually safer than those walking the prom for example.

The kitesurfers it appears were not in danger and did not require assistance. I think wasting emergency services time should be dealt with a lot more sternly - i.e. a severe fine but as I said - theres a strong argument that walkers out and about were in far more danger due to the huge amount of flying debris from trees in particular

elperello

Considering that this was a rare event and that we probably (though not definitely) have time to make changes before the next one I would advise against any quick fix legislation.
Better to have a period of reflection followed by a public consultation involving all relevant stakeholders and interested parties.

Arsemageddon

Discodog wrote: »

Really ? It was obvious that the forecast needed a full country warning. Posters in the excellent weather forum here were calling for it .
The storm was expanding & was obviously going to affect most of the country.

I'm just going by what Eibhlin Cusack said.

fryup

let them adrenaline junkies drown, most of them are assh@les anyway no loss

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

josip

Are people in this country incapable of reading and disseminating a weather forecast?
For a nation that spends so much time talking about the weather, many of us never escape our own local mindset.
[Phone Call Home]
"What's the weather like with you up there?"
Sunny.
"Really? It's raining down here."
(Home is 200 fcuking kms south of here)

Loads on here saying that the wind surfers in Louth shouldn't have been out there because of the nationwide red alert.
But in that case, nor should the "passerby" who called in the FA.
Some places report that the passerby didn't call it in because they were concerned, but because they "felt it to be irresponsible"

http://www.dundalkdemocrat.ie/news/home/276434/two-kite-surfers-in-difficulty-in-blackrock.html

And they were wind surfers, not kite surfers for those of you who don't know the difference but do seem to know everything else.

Shemale

Let them win Darwin Awards why should the emergency services be put in harms way to rescue morons. Or make them pay the €100,000 call out and give the rescue team a percentage between them.

Its like the simpletons that frequently get into trouble climbing mountains in the snow