11-16-2006, 11:30 PM
[size 1]
[#505000][size 2]A search and rescue operation of the magnitude of what they are doing at Strawberry costs 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands of dollars. Are you suggesting if someone drowns in a lake, we say... [/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]"It's their own fault they should have been wearing a PFD. Hope a fisherman, or one of the power squadron calls us if the body turns up." ???[/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]Or do you suggest we send the family the bill? If we send the bill it would easily take all money from life insurance to cover what we can and we can get the rest from the family through lifetime payments which will eventually cover the remaining balance.[/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]The idea is not to limit personal freedom as it is to take some easy steps and make usage mandatory to eliminate having to pick either of the above scenarios. [/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]As long as tax payers foot the bills for these horribly expensive operations. As long as public saftey has to deal with the gruesome outcome of these situations, and as long as families have to deal with the worry and grief of these situations I think it's pretty selfish to sit back and say it is our right not to have to wear PFDs. [/size][/#505000]
[#505000]I think I addressed how everyone gets to foot the bill of a recovery operation. Yes the money is avaliable for these operations to an extent. It is in a budget; however long involved searches like the Strawberry search chew through an entire years budget in no time. If another major search is needed the money has to come from somewhere else. Another program suffers because of it. This money could be better used to educate kids, pay for improvements to our favorite lakes, and god forbid even lower taxes if we aren't spending the money. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]There are a million and one places this money could be better spent. One knuckle head not wearing or having a PFD is potentially taking thousands of dollars away from other programs, including the DWR. How about less fish stocking because we spent all the money searching for "soggy Larry"?[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Let's look at an alternative.... [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Instead of a law making usage of PFD's mandatory, which would "violate someone's right" to make a personal choice let's let the users pay the costs. Instead of tax payer funded search and rescue for those who get in trouble or drown, let's let those people who boat, and swim fund the program. Let's add a $200 per year fee for search and rescue to all annual water craft registrations, and $50 onto fishing and hunting license fees. Let's also add a $20 per head walk in fee for all the lakes in the state. Since that would be hard to collect that fee at each lake, you would need a state swimming license to swim outside of a public or private pool. We also lose a lot of hunters, hikers, and skiiers each year so how about tacking on a hiking/skiing license too if you want to go anywhere off trail. If we go over budget? Well we raise the fee the next year to cover the shortfall. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]That should about cover the costs of these body recovery and search and rescue operations. Seems to me a mandatory PFD law is a lot more reasonable, a lot less restrictive, and impacts the personal choice a lot less than making users pay for recovery operations through fees and tolls. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Let "Soggy Larry", the guy, who think's he's too good a swimmer pay a fine for not wearing his PFD, and let the word get out from him it cost him $75 and you'll see a lot more PFD's and usage go up, and costs associated with people not using their heads, and not using their safety gear go down. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]No offense utfishguy31 but your arguments don't hold any water. Trying to compare this to cellphone driving and eating in a car (both bad ideas) is a smoke and mirror tactic to cover an issue which is apples versus oranges if compared to PFD usage. Your argument is good justification for you not to use your PFD, without taking anyone or anything else into consideration. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]When you look at the big picture a mandatory PFD law makes a whole lot of sense, and will save a lot of lives. Those who are already doing it won't notice a difference, and those who aren't doing it SHOULD BE, we can talk education till we turn blue in the face but I think it's crystal clear education isn't working and even those who know better won't do it unless made to. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]I'm wrong on a lot of issues but I think when you weigh all that is involved with this one, most people can't help but come to the conclusion that far more is involved in a single PFD mishap, than someone's personal choice. I think all of us wish it could be as simple, and easy as you make it out to be with minimal to no impact on anyone but the person who has died, but that simpily isn't reality. The fact is people not wearing PFD's literally cost the government (ultimately tax payers) millions of dollars a year. Wasted money that could be better spent elsewhere. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Man I love a good debate!! [cool][/#505000]
[signature]
Quote:[size 1]Maybe if we had the thinking of "well its there own fault let them deal with it" are taxes would be lower so we wouldn't have to pay for those tax payers funded programs.[/size]
[#505000][size 2]A search and rescue operation of the magnitude of what they are doing at Strawberry costs 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands of dollars. Are you suggesting if someone drowns in a lake, we say... [/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]"It's their own fault they should have been wearing a PFD. Hope a fisherman, or one of the power squadron calls us if the body turns up." ???[/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]Or do you suggest we send the family the bill? If we send the bill it would easily take all money from life insurance to cover what we can and we can get the rest from the family through lifetime payments which will eventually cover the remaining balance.[/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]The idea is not to limit personal freedom as it is to take some easy steps and make usage mandatory to eliminate having to pick either of the above scenarios. [/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2][/size][/#505000]
[#505000][size 2]As long as tax payers foot the bills for these horribly expensive operations. As long as public saftey has to deal with the gruesome outcome of these situations, and as long as families have to deal with the worry and grief of these situations I think it's pretty selfish to sit back and say it is our right not to have to wear PFDs. [/size][/#505000]
Quote: How does EVERYONE who pays taxes pay for my choice??I pay plenty of taxes myself so like everyone else who pays has those services if we need them,what do you think there for???[/size]
[#505000]I think I addressed how everyone gets to foot the bill of a recovery operation. Yes the money is avaliable for these operations to an extent. It is in a budget; however long involved searches like the Strawberry search chew through an entire years budget in no time. If another major search is needed the money has to come from somewhere else. Another program suffers because of it. This money could be better used to educate kids, pay for improvements to our favorite lakes, and god forbid even lower taxes if we aren't spending the money. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]There are a million and one places this money could be better spent. One knuckle head not wearing or having a PFD is potentially taking thousands of dollars away from other programs, including the DWR. How about less fish stocking because we spent all the money searching for "soggy Larry"?[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Let's look at an alternative.... [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Instead of a law making usage of PFD's mandatory, which would "violate someone's right" to make a personal choice let's let the users pay the costs. Instead of tax payer funded search and rescue for those who get in trouble or drown, let's let those people who boat, and swim fund the program. Let's add a $200 per year fee for search and rescue to all annual water craft registrations, and $50 onto fishing and hunting license fees. Let's also add a $20 per head walk in fee for all the lakes in the state. Since that would be hard to collect that fee at each lake, you would need a state swimming license to swim outside of a public or private pool. We also lose a lot of hunters, hikers, and skiiers each year so how about tacking on a hiking/skiing license too if you want to go anywhere off trail. If we go over budget? Well we raise the fee the next year to cover the shortfall. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]That should about cover the costs of these body recovery and search and rescue operations. Seems to me a mandatory PFD law is a lot more reasonable, a lot less restrictive, and impacts the personal choice a lot less than making users pay for recovery operations through fees and tolls. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Let "Soggy Larry", the guy, who think's he's too good a swimmer pay a fine for not wearing his PFD, and let the word get out from him it cost him $75 and you'll see a lot more PFD's and usage go up, and costs associated with people not using their heads, and not using their safety gear go down. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]No offense utfishguy31 but your arguments don't hold any water. Trying to compare this to cellphone driving and eating in a car (both bad ideas) is a smoke and mirror tactic to cover an issue which is apples versus oranges if compared to PFD usage. Your argument is good justification for you not to use your PFD, without taking anyone or anything else into consideration. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]When you look at the big picture a mandatory PFD law makes a whole lot of sense, and will save a lot of lives. Those who are already doing it won't notice a difference, and those who aren't doing it SHOULD BE, we can talk education till we turn blue in the face but I think it's crystal clear education isn't working and even those who know better won't do it unless made to. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]I'm wrong on a lot of issues but I think when you weigh all that is involved with this one, most people can't help but come to the conclusion that far more is involved in a single PFD mishap, than someone's personal choice. I think all of us wish it could be as simple, and easy as you make it out to be with minimal to no impact on anyone but the person who has died, but that simpily isn't reality. The fact is people not wearing PFD's literally cost the government (ultimately tax payers) millions of dollars a year. Wasted money that could be better spent elsewhere. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Man I love a good debate!! [cool][/#505000]
[signature]