D.Duck wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message
ups.com...
A very lucky man:


==============
"SANTIAGO, Chile (AP) -- A Chilean navy search plane has located an
American solo sailor on his disabled yacht off the southern tip of
South America, and a Chilean navy officer said rescuers will probably
reach him early Friday.

A fishing trawler was sailing to rescue the Southern California
sailor,
Ken Barnes, whose round-the-world solo trip was interrupted a week
ago
when his 44-foot ketch hit a storm that broke both its masts and
soaked
Barnes' supplies and food.

Barnes, 47, lost contact with friends when the battery of his
satellite
telephone ran down on Wednesday, but his girlfriend Cathy Chambers
said
he managed another brief call again Thursday morning, saying he was
surviving on Pop Tarts and granola bars. He has a small cut on his
leg,
she said."
==============

Complete story he
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html


And who is going to pay for the rescue? Not that he should not be
rescued,
but seems as if like the climbers in Oregon, every time someone gets in
trouble while doing a dangerous endevor, the people, via government,
are
asked to pay for the screwup.

I agree. If folks put themselves in harms way intentionally and end up
needing rescue they should pay the bill. But that should not stop the
effort to save a human life.

I don't know about you, but around here we pay taxes just for those
things. You are putting yourself in harms way every time your furnace
turns on, risk of fire, you know. You are putting yourself in harms way
when you go outside and get your mail, you are always at some sort of
risk. So, again in these parts we pay taxes for fire departments,
emergency services and such.

I know around here we pay for an ambulance ride, above and beyond the annual
fire/rescue tax we pay. Not sure about a fire.

Paying taxes for emergency services needed to respond to fires and
accidents is one thing. Having to pay for emergency services to rescue
those who purposely put their lives in danger for the sake of a thrill
is another.

I am with Bill on this one. This thrill seeking sailor should have to
pay back any expenses incurred with his rescue.

"JimH" wrote in message
ps.com...

I am with Bill on this one. This thrill seeking sailor should have to
pay back any expenses incurred with his rescue.


We get a lot of that here. Every nut who decides to sail, row, swim or
balloon to England passes in our coastal waters or air space.
Some years it seems like our Seach & Rescue service is saving someone on a
weekly basis.