If his wife particularly *needed* to leave him for longer than the battery would last, she would undoubtedly arrange for a more robust backup system. If such events were rare, that backup could consist of merely asking a reliable neighbour to check on him every hour or so. If it was a frequent requirement, then I am sure that a backup system could have been fitted that would not require manual intervention.
I can assure you it is far from a dream. The only life support machines that are not designed with such a backup are those that are meant to be used exclusively in an environment where immediate human backup is available at all times.
I would not even risk important *data* to the possibility of a mains power failure, but arrange for a UPS and other failsafe measures. I can assure you that if any of my family or friends' lives depended on the operation of an electric machine, I would ensure that their lives would not be ended as a result of a power cut. YMMV
It is *especially* true in the case of life support machines designed to be used at home. Hospitals will always have staff on hand to manually operate a ventilator etc. should the power fail, but the designer of a life-support machine meant for home use cannot rely on the fact that someone with the necessary knowlege will be on hand within minutes in the event of a power cut, and so the design of backup systems and fail-safe failure modes is even more important.
Any domestic life support machine that is designed so that it would kill the patient in the event of a mains power outage would not be fit for purpose.
Prison works as a deterrent to the sort of people who are least likely to go to prison. Eg nice law-abiding middle-class people obey the law because they do not want to got to prison. It dosn't deter habitual criminals for whom gotting to prison is just part of the lifestyle.
Such imaginary scenarios are as easy to dream up as the imaginary scenarios in this thread of a cable thief causing deaths.
A children's home is on fire. 136 children are trapped on the top floor. The fire engine is delayed by 4.27 minutes due to a car being double-parked on the access road. The delay results in 22 children dying who would otherwise have been rescued.
You really want me to invent another few imaginary scenarios?
Heck, I could come up with a situation in which opening a window caused the death of 100 people.
That is true, but the general approach in this country is that all that is needed is protection for long enough to call for an ambulance. The same applies to 'first-aid' courses, which don't even contemplate the possibility that you might be more than a minute away from a telephone, let alone from a road.
It would not surprise me if the backup had a design time of only a couple of hours. That isn't enough for any non-trivial trip, including getting to the nearest shops in many cases.
Regards, Nick Maclaren.
Those cigs are genersally even worse the the ones that have labels saying they can kill. The baccy is 3rd rate and they add chemicals, well even more than the major companies do.
Not significantly, no. In the first place, the average person who has never been in trouble with the law is unlikely to have any idea what the sentence is likely to be should he break a particular law. In the second place, for anyone who is willing in principle to break a particular (non-trivial) law, the decision whether or not to do so will almost completely depend on how likely that person believes it is that they will be caught.
Quite. And someone lives on the streets, a spell in prison may not be as much of a deterrent. Also those in desperate need of a fix simply don't think of the future.
But I would hope the majority 'obey the law' because they feel it to be the correct thing to do in a civilised society, rather than just to avoid being punished. Although reading some of the posts here, I'm not so sure. ;-)
So would you express exactly the same attitude if the photograph showed two incinerated children who died because they trespassed on a railway line?
So long as it included an automatic and reliable call for human assistance, it would not result in a fatality. There are plenty of ways for providing such a call that are sufficiently reliable in the fact of a power cut - at the very basic level it could simply be a battery-operated siren to alert neighbours (who have been informed of the situation).
People on home life-support will always have a carer, and the carer will need to take account of any time limitations.
Did you miss the pictures at the start of this thread?
It's seems to be all you're good for, so go ahead if that's what turns you on.
I'm sure you could, but the fact remains that being an apologist for criminals in action by claiming that "worse things happen at sea" shows how out of touch with reality you are. They DID put life and limb at risk, but luckily it did not go beyond their own.
That would indicate that vandals had broken the security fences, etc. and that police action was required to find them.
Straw man strikes again. Grow up for heaven's sake.
No - the scenarios I refer to are those involving the thieves causing deaths other than their own.
It was yourself who asked me to do so.
I don't see anyone acting as apologists, simply people who see no reason to gloat over their deaths or believe that it is *good* that they were killed.
This thread is about whether it is a "good thing" if criminals are killed as a result of their criminal action, therefore whether or not the driver's act was or was not criminal is indeed relevant to this thread - and that in turn depends on the speed limit in force.
How do you know it was not the children who did it?
If you cannot see the connection, it's you who needs to grow up.
Again I ask. Do you have experience of behind bars and the prison regime?
Please don't top post.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required