From another ng

Page 5 of 7  

Morris Dovey wrote: ...

Well, it also means it takes resources away from those who need it and are appreciative of the efforts--raw "courage" is hardly a replacement for common sense. It won't help a thing for a rescuer to be lost just to show he has "courage".

Don't believe there's more than the proverbial 1 in a million who actually think that. There are some who (like I) think that those who make providing help a risk to the helper aren't worth nearly the effort that those who don't are...

Well, get on your horse and get down there then...I'm sure there are plenty of local churches, etc., in the locality that have many demands that volunteers could help.

Not necessarily, but is it really worth the risk when there are a lot of others who aren't shooting to help? I frankly don't think so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Duane Bozarth (in snipped-for-privacy@swko.dot.net) said:
| Morris Dovey wrote: | ... || Danger simply means that more courage is needed to do the job. | | Well, it also means it takes resources away from those who need it | and are appreciative of the efforts--raw "courage" is hardly a | replacement for common sense. It won't help a thing for a rescuer | to be lost just to show he has "courage".
I think you're partially right. I don't think you're correct in making the assumption that the effort will necessarily (or has a high probablility) of producing a worst-case result. It's not about showing courage - it's about using it to save lives that are already beeing lost.
|| If you don't think those people are worth the effort, I disagree. | | Don't believe there's more than the proverbial 1 in a million who | actually think that. There are some who (like I) think that those | who make providing help a risk to the helper aren't worth nearly | the effort that those who don't are...
We're in complete argreement here. I'm just not willing to let the less worthy prevent saving the more worthy - and if I had my druthers, I'd still prefer that even the less worthy survived.
|| you think the danger is too great, then make it possible for /me/ || to go help get the job done - not that I wouldn't be scared || spitless; but because I'd rather accept the danger than have those || people die. | | Well, get on your horse and get down there then...I'm sure there are | plenty of local churches, etc., in the locality that have many | demands that volunteers could help.
I've already sent what those people said they wanted from me.
| || FWIW, being shot *at* doesn't mean becoming a casualty. | | Not necessarily, but is it really worth the risk when there are a | lot of others who aren't shooting to help? I frankly don't think | so.
It sounds like you're saying that it isn't worth the risk to save the shooters. I don't have a problem with that. My point is that I think it's worth some amount of risk to save the non-shooters - who aren't being saved because somebody, or a number of somebodies, think lives should only be saved in a risk-free (or extremely low-risk) environment.
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Morris Dovey wrote:

...
Sure, I'd prefer both, but I'm not going to lose much sleep over the guilty.
...

That's all one can do...sometimes things <are> out of our individual "hands-on" hands...

I don't think anybody's really saying that--and if that's what you intended, I apologize for the snitty tone previously as I didn't get that.
I do think that it makes sense to go places that are less risky first as it takes more resources to do the other safely. I don't think it's reasonable to expect rescuers to have to risk life and limb beyond the risks they're already taking w/o supporting protection.
That some innocent thus suffer is unfortunate, but the sad truth is that most victims of thugs are the innocent.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Duane Bozarth (in snipped-for-privacy@swko.dot.net) said:
| Morris Dovey wrote:
|| I've already sent what those people said they wanted from me. | | That's all one can do...sometimes things <are> out of our individual | "hands-on" hands...
Yes, I know - but I don't have to like it that way...
|| It sounds like you're saying that it isn't worth the risk to save || the shooters. I don't have a problem with that. My point is that I || think it's worth some amount of risk to save the non-shooters - || who aren't being saved because somebody, or a number of || somebodies, think lives should only be saved in a risk-free (or || extremely low-risk) environment. | | I don't think anybody's really saying that--and if that's what you | intended, I apologize for the snitty tone previously as I didn't get | that.
No apology needed. I realized after sending that I might have sounded self-righteous. That wasn't the spirit in which I wrote. I do believe that it's wrong to ask someone else to do something I'd be unwilling to do myself. If it came down to me or nobody, it'd have to be me.
| I do think that it makes sense to go places that are less risky | first as it takes more resources to do the other safely. I don't | think it's reasonable to expect rescuers to have to risk life and | limb beyond the risks they're already taking w/o supporting | protection.
This makes me _really_ uncomfortable - it's too close to leaving wounded on the battlefield - still more uncomfortable when I see small children on those rooftops. I can't imagine that it's any more comfortable for the rescue personnel on scene.
| That some innocent thus suffer is unfortunate, but the sad truth is | that most victims of thugs are the innocent.
I know. I don't care much for that either...
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Morris Dovey wrote:

...
I'm sure it's not. But, there are small children on those other rooftops, too...

That's being human (and humane)...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
/semper paratus/ - always prepared
I'm remiss in not having sung the praise of the "Coasties" before now.
In a place and time where so much has gone so badly and been so badly handled, the Coast Guard seems to have its act together - and appears to be doing a magnificent, heroic job.
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

As the very proud father of a Coastie, thank you. It's amazing the things they do.
In my twenty years in the Navy I said many disparaging things about them, as well as the Marines, Army, Air Force, National Guard, and especially about Reserves, but it was always in jest. They are all to be remembered and appreciated.
jmac
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 07:35:34 -0700, jmac wrote:

"You have to go out. You don't have to come back."
It is nice that _someone_ was on the ball in that charlie foxtrot.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:06:44 -0500, Australopithecus scobis

The CG is the best. Sad that they get so little credit for what they do. I know they're not looking for publicity, but they deserve more than they get.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant. Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography
Web Site: www.destarr.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're right. It doesn't.
So what?
--
Life. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 23:55:53 -0600, Dave Balderstone

Predicting that a disaster *will* hit does not help in identifying *when* it will hit. Yes, Katrina was a large storm that gave some warning (days), but as far as the infrastructure changes to the levees, the fact that a cat 4 hurricane would hit the last week of August, 2005 was neither known nor knowable.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[...]

Of course, but irrelevant. The time to start reinforcing levees is when you find they are not good enough to prevent disaster hen it strikes, and that point had (as far as I gather from assorted readings) been reached years ago.
But shomehow areas the are likely to be flooded seem to be very attractive building grounds and protection seems always feeble, in Bavaria for example some levees had ben raised after the 1999 floods to be safe up to that level, but the 2005 floods were higher still... So flood protection blunders are common all over the world.
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
mailto: snipped-for-privacy@physik.uni-bonn.de Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Juergen Hannappel wrote:

...
...
Building levees in fact is, in general, a prime if not the contributing factor. Channeling raises level by definition.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 20:38:41 +0200, Juergen Hannappel

In a fantasy world where you build for every exigency regardless of cost, your analysis may have some relevance. I watched a briefing by Lt. Gen. Stroud(?), the commander of the Corps of Engineers. His information was illuminating. The levees had been built to withstand a Category 3 hurricane.
While you may say, "well, that's dumb, what about a Category 5 or at the very least a Category 4, which is what hit there?" the fact of the matter according to the statistics he cited was that Category 3 met 99.5% of the probability of an event.
Now the big question is, particularly for those who are constantly complaining about where their tax dollars are going, what is the cost to build the levees to even .1% higher a level of capacity or even more, to take it from Category 3 to Category 4 capability?
And then, of course, if they were built to Category 4 standards (at tremendous expense) what kind of caterwauling would we hear when (not if) a Category 5 hurricane hit?
Planning is done considering a cutoff of 100 year or 500 year events. That means that a statistically huge percent of the structure will survive, but that a cost/benefit analysis dictates that it is not feasible to build beyond a 100 year event capacity (not necessarily the exact terms, but the principle is correct).
Now, take emergency preparedness planning and plug it into the same model. Do you prepare for the 500 year event? Do you prepare for the 100 year event? Can you predict consequences of either? Even the planning costs money, the physical preparedness (stockpiling of medical supplies, foodstuffs, fuel, etc.) costs money. How much is the taxpayer willing to spend?
It sure is easy to second guess and run the show from the sidelines with no accountability and no possibility of error, but real world civil engineering and civic management is an entirely different prospect. Shoot, in civic management, you aren't even guaranteed you'll be able to work on the project past the next election.
But calling responsible planning and construction to a standard that is a tolerable balance in comparison to cost a blunder is the worst kind of Monday morning negative thinking.
--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

LRod,
I've read that sentence about 12 times and I can't make head nor tail of it...
Could you rephrase?
Tnx.
djb
--
Life. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Balderstone wrote:

It's almost Steinbeckien in construction, but he's saying that the level of design that was used covered a high proportion of the expected events at a cost that was considered justifiable. To then say that not having built to the 99.99% level after the fact is Monday morning quarterbacking.
That get close, LRod?
(I tend to write such stuff, too...) :) (or maybe :(, I don't know)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's a good enough filter that I can read the sentence and have it make sense now. Thanks.
djb
--
Life. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Balderstone wrote:

Took some careful parsing, granted... :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sorry, guys. Yes, Duane had it pretty much right. Let me add some punctuation and artificial pauses for emphasis.
Naming as a blunder, however, responsible planning, and construction to a standard, which yields a tolerable balance-in-comparison-to-cost, is the worst kind of Monday morning negative thinking.
Better?
Sorry, it was plain as day to me when I was pecking it out, but I can see that it was a tester.
--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
LRod wrote:

Over what time frame?
--

FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.