Forum menu
The injury to the Mountain Rescue chap whilst unfortunate has nothing to do with lockdowns or covid or otherwise.
MRT wouldn't have been called out if these 2 muppets hadn't been on the hill - they are inextricably linked.
Insert clapping .gif here
Would folk have preferred he just quietly snuffed it on the hillside? As that could’ve been the alternative to calling for help. Yes, I understand that the answer is probably “ they shouldn’t have been there” but they were, so what would you have done?
I do not think anyone is questioning that they did the right thing by calling the mountain rescue, or that things went wrong and they needed to call them.
The fact is that they should not even have been there in the first place, it was a completely avoidable situation
a remote part of the UK
I am not sure the Lakes is 'remote'.
No rescue team would ever show prejudice to anyone in need of help or rescue.
A bad judgement would be maybe to a lamb bhuna when you really should have ordered a chicken biryani.
Now we have reached a new low on this thread.
Choosing a lamb bhuna over chicken biryani would never be bad judgement, it is the only sensible decision when faced with such a choice. Are you seriously suggesting otherwise? Pervert.
The fact is that they should not even have been there in the first place, it was a completely avoidable situation
I agree 100%
but they were there, so what are you going to do?
As Nobeer (and maybe others) has said, the issue is that the penalty for breaking lockdown restrictions, at least as spectacularly as this, is too soft. The penalty should be proportionate to the possible outcomes, not the likely most common outcome. In the same way that speeding is an offence because of the possible outcomes, and you can be prosecuted for speeding or careless/dangerous driving regardless of whether you just get caught and pulled, or mow down a family.
(I realise this isn't a great analogy, since causing death by careless/dangerous driving is a separate offence, but generally that's not the way the law works, and says more about attitudes to driving offences, which is an entirely different thread(s).)
Its winter
Theres a nasty storm moving in
We will be at altitude
In an exposed location
At night
Theres a pandemic and all hospitals are fill to bursting
There is a nationwide lockdown restricting movement and activities
Go and tent in your garden if you feel the need to test your new carrymat or whatever before your trip to the outer extremes of Birkenhead >
As Nobeer (and maybe others) has said, the issue is that the penalty for breaking lockdown restrictions, at least as spectacularly as this, is too soft.
See my link above for the other extreme. I'm surprised that there isn't an equivalent in English law.
Its winter
Theres a nasty storm moving in
We will be at altitude
In an exposed location
At nightGo and tent in your garden if you feel the need to test your new carrymat or whatever before your trip to the outer extremes of Birkenhead
And this is where I have a problem. That argument (without the pandemic bit) is exactly the same as put forward by those who think such activities should be permanently banned / should have insurance cover. We see it time and time again in comments posts on the BBC etc. and in various newspapers. Go down that route and you'll have the same issue with bikers injuring themselves and so on.
yes these particular guys made a bad judgement, but they didn’t do it thinking that they’d have to call out the MRT
Well nobody ever does do they. I don't see how that's an argument for what you are suggesting.
That argument (without the pandemic bit) is exactly the same as put forward by those who think such activities should be permanently banned / should have insurance cover.
Does anyone call for mountaineering etc to be permanently banned? Really? I mean the insurance thing - I'm not keen but it's the way it works in a lot of countries and the sky doesn't seem to have fallen in.
the responses of various MRT teams who invariably call for calm, and are often totally ignored by folk who would otherwise claim to be their supporters.
MRTs call for calm and tend not to publicly rip idiots a new one because they really want people to call them out when required, regardless of muppetry level. Calling early, rather than being ashamed and waiting until things are worse, can mean the difference between someone being walked, stretchered or bagged off a hill, and the difference between a quick rescue and being out for hours in pisspoor conditions.
They just want to save lives, but it doesn't mean they won't be privately a bit miffed about their team being placed in harms way in the middle of a pandemic.
Would MR have been needed in the same way if we weren't in lockdown? If we weren't in lockdown then there would probably have been many more people on the mountain who could have assisted before MR were needed.
No rescue team would ever show prejudice to anyone in need of help or rescue.
This.....& brave, generous men & women they are. I applaud them.
Just before you do step out the door into an environment where you might need their kindness quickly check in with Rule 1. Something the gents in question didn't do & they found themselves in need of the generosity of volunteers to get them out of a situation they should not have got themselves into.
Rule 1 in this case being: "Is it a dick move go wild camping 100 miles away during a pandemic when I've been told to not to make unessential journeys?"
By all means wild camp, shred the gnar etc outside of the current restrictions.
I can assure you in private MR members are a lot more scathing than in their public statements!
Does anyone call for mountaineering etc to be permanently banned? Really?
Yes.
And this is where I have a problem. That argument (without the pandemic bit) is exactly the same as put forward by those who think such activities should be permanently banned / should have insurance cover. We see it time and time again in comments posts on the BBC etc. and in various newspapers. Go down that route and you’ll have the same issue with bikers injuring themselves and so on.
Exactly, I've no issue with someone undertaking the said activity at any other year in human history. Thin end of the wedge otherwise that eventually ruins everything worth living for because some paranoid moaner thinks that the only way to live your life is the way they live theirs.
For me it's in the same category as anybody doing something stupid that requires them to be rescued e.g. incorrect clothing on a cold day. Granted it's at the extreme end of being stupid!
Shall we draw a line where low to medium stupidity you get rescued but above that you get left to die? Who draws the line?
A very generous contribution from both of them to the MRT should be forthcoming.
They just want to save lives, but it doesn’t mean they won’t be privately a bit miffed about their team being placed in harms way in the middle of a pandemic.
I’m working at a vaccine centre this weekend. I will placing myself and my colleagues (whom I’ve added to the rota) directly in harms way during a pandemic. Some people I’ll help vaccinate probably don’t want the vaccine, lots of others will cough or sneeze on me, some want to shake my hand...
im am not (and never will be) privately miffed about it. Edit: ans I’m a volunteer, just like the MRT
The injury to the Mountain Rescue chap whilst unfortunate has nothing to do with lockdowns or covid or otherwise.
Sorry that's utter cobblers. Are you familiar with the concept of cause and effect...?
<edit> I have no issue with people calling International Rescue once they're in the shit but there was absolutely no need to be in that situation, in fact being there is specifically prohibited ATM. Disregarding the pandemic bit set in motion a chain of events that resulted in a rescue and an uneccesary injury to some poor inoccent sod.
Is a day waddling around the Lakes that inportant just now? I've cancelled my planned trips (not hurrah for me, it just seemed the sensible thing to do...).
im am not (and never will be) privately miffed about it.
Would you be happy with just a medal as a parade would be tricky under current circumstances.
I will placing myself and my colleagues (whom I’ve added to the rota) directly in harms way during a pandemic. Some people I’ll help vaccinate probably don’t want the vaccine, lots of others will cough or sneeze on me, some want to shake my hand…
Why would you moan about someone being worried about getting a vaccine, a couple of involuntary acts, or a normal human reflex of thanks? Not sure I see the legal or moral equivalence here.
I don’t see how that’s an argument for what you are suggesting.
because sometimes (regardless of how prepared you are) you may have to call for help, like yknow chest pains, for example.
I haven’t seen any one posting on here that hasn’t agreed that these two were idiots for doing what they did, but 1. Hindsight is a marvellous thing, and 2. Idiots are entitled to be rescued from themselves as much as the next man.
Rescuing them - a good thing
Them being there - ****s
They. Shouldn't. Haven't. Been. There.
I have no issue with people calling International Rescue once they’re in the shit
Would have been a bit simpler with Thunderbird 2, I suspect 🙂
I do not think anyone is questioning that they did the right thing by calling the mountain rescue, or that things went wrong and they needed to call them.
The fact is that they should not even have been there in the first place, it was a completely avoidable situation
Absolutely this.
Their irresponsible behaviour lead to someone rescuing them being injured, they should have never been in the area. You can’t claim the two aren’t linked.
because sometimes (regardless of how prepared you are) you may have to call for help, like yknow chest pains, for example.
In a house in Liverpool or Leicester, with ambulance parking outside? Or up a mountain in freezing conditions in the dark. needing the MRT to attend to lift them off?
Which one's likely to create more hazard for the rescuers? Which one is specifically against regs right now, at this time? Which one has led to life-changing injuries to one of the volunteers rescuers after they fell 150ft?
It's far too easy to jump to conclusions about people who have to be rescued. I was involved in Mountain Rescue for around 10 years in Cumbria (including 7 years in Patterdale MRT). I find it difficult to recollect more than a handle of incidents where I couldn't understand the chain of events leading to a call out, and conclude that the casualty/ies were being idiots.
So, unless people REALLY know the full story, don't be sick to pass judgement. I also feel quite strongly, that it is not the pace of MRT'S to pinking pass judgement. The last thing we need is people in trouble in the hills to be reluctant to call for help because if a dear of the public reaction.
because sometimes (regardless of how prepared you are) you may have to call for help, like yknow chest pains, for example.
In a house in Liverpool or Leicester, with ambulance parking outside? Or up a mountain in freezing conditions in the dark. needing the MRT to attend to lift them off?
But this is the case outwith pandemics too. You are conflating two issues.
Aye, and this thread is disappearing down the usual rabbit hole, be as well closing it now tbh.
The law says they shouldnt have been there.
Is this the attitude MRTs and first responders should take for MTBers riding cheeky trails or even falling from legit trails into an area without access rights?
It's very simple - THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE
Well I hope none of you ever do any mountain based sports. Because doing them at any time exposes Mountain Rescue members to risks. If you didn't go mountain biking or climbing, nothing would ever happen to them. Think about it before you head out ever again.
@Joe - that's not the point. We all know that.
The issue here is the situation that led to the call out.
It's not. You risk mountain rescue members every single time you head to the hills. STOP IT! You are selfish people!
This is a mountain bike forum. Sometimes things go wrong and we hurt ourselves. Others would say we should not have been there in the first place particularly if its cheeky footpath or little ramp someone has built in the woods. So those people should not be helped?
I paddle a canoe and kayak, I go out in challenging conditions. Others would say I should not be there in the first place. So I should not be helped?
Yes the chaps were idiots for breaking the rules and have bee fined accordingly and perhaps the fine should have been bigger.
But honestly where are you drawing the line? I'm interested to know what risks are acceptable to people and what isn't? Is it just a question of legality? If you are doing something illegal you don't deserve help (or should pay for it)? So riding on a footpath and falling off you pay for the Ambulance but its a bridleway you don't.
This thread confirms my long held view that philosophy and particularly logic should be taught as part of the GCSE curriculum.
It’s very simple – THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE
True. But I would argue that they shouldn't have been there regardless of covid restrictions.
shouldn't even begin advanced concepts like that though until they've got Rule 1 covered.This thread confirms my long held view that philosophy and particularly logic should be taught as part of the GCSE curriculum.
STOP IT! You are selfish people!
Is following the covid restrictions being selfish now?
True. But I would argue that they shouldn’t have been there regardless of covid restrictions.
Harsh but people from Liverpool are humans too!
I never fail to be impressed by the level of vitriol aimed at folk who have to call out the MRT who fail to meet with some “standard of preparedness”deemed acceptable by the internet.
Yep, especially as MRT absolutely love their job. If no one got in trouble they'd be quite dissapointed. For the older ones, it's probably their entire social life.
I was spending a winter in Glen Coe years ago and a friend, who was a local guide, was asked to join Lochaber MRT, he was over the moon - it's the outdoor equivalent of getting a knighthood.
shouldn’t even begin advanced concepts like that though until they’ve got Rule 1 covered.
Google Kant's categorical imperative.
I reckon it's close enough.