Saddened By The Loss Of The Mount Hood Climbers, But:

[Stinkfinger]

Regardless of the climbers' skills....... it still makes me wonder about the judgment of the climbers that put their lives at risk by making these dangerous climbs.

I'm very sad that one member of the team has been found dead and its looking even more grim for the remaining two climbers being found alive. But who's responsibility is it for these climbers, all climbers and other risk takers that get themselves in trouble?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming them for wanting to seek adventure, but shouldn't they consider that by putting their lives at risk, that they might very well put other lives at risk by their foolish adventures? Many brave folks have been killed attempting to rescue risk takers.

What if there was a rule that anyone taking the risk would be on their own during times of bad weather. Perilous rescues would not take place if the adventure seekers got into trouble. Wouldn't this cause the climbers, hikers, kayakers, etc, etc, think about their actions first?

Perhaps they would delay their climb until weather conditions improved and then if they got into trouble, rescue could take place with a decreased risk to the rescuers.

[Glowgood Jigster]

Watching Mt. climbers kill themselves every year is getting to be too much to bear. They should be required to have ONE LOCATOR BEACON DEVICE, EACH, or no cllimbing. They should also be required to post $10,000 bond to be put towards rescue efforts, if needed. If they disregard these safeguards it should be the policy of the state involved to offer NO rescue effort. Let their family and friends go hunt for them, on their dollar and at their own risk.
I had initally written alot more, but went back and read the posting rules, and decided that they meant I shouldn't call the mt. climbers idiots, so I deleted all of it. I also deleted the part where I called the guy who just froze to death over by Agness, OR an idiot. I'm sorry they died doing what they wanted to, or felt they had to do. I just belive it shouldn't have any effect through taxes or freedoms, on those citizens who are not morons.

[Shellback]

On Everest, it's not unusual for a group to leave a who's member having trouble behind to die, while the rest go on to summit. Can't imagine leaving someone behind just to say you reached the summit.

[Bridges]

I think the rescuers do it for the same reason as the climbers.

For the thrill of it.

I agree with Glowgood Jigster that a bond should be posted an ever effort to reduce the taxpayers part in helping with the recovery of these lost climbers.

[crappiequeennc]

When I read this post it really saddened me...I think we all put our lives at risk everyday...Maybe not as much as others, but still we could be hurt or killed at anytime...Everytime we get into our cars we are taking a chance...I don't want to have to start paying a (bond) to be able to drive...Or to even go out on our boat...We love to fish...They love to mountain climb...
But what bothered me the most about this post was the comment about James Kim...The husband, and father, who froze to death, trying to find help for his family...He was not an idiot by any means...In my eyes, and alot of others, he is a hero..He was trying to save his family...If that made him an idiot, then we need more idiots in this world...
My prayers go out to the climbers and their families...May God bring them peace at this time of tragedy

[FishCrazy]

Well I guess buying insurance to drive a car is sort of like buying a bond isnt it. So really we do have to have insurance to drive a car or a boat so why not have insurance to do these other inherantly dangerous activities. It sounds reasonable to me. Why should everyone have to pay through taxes for the mistakes of a few who freely CHOSE to engage in an exceedingly dangerous sport. James Kim didnt choose to climb a mountain but rather took a wrong turn and got lost. I have been lost before myself and he did make a heroic effort to save his family. Probably should have stayed with them though. But that situation is not the same as the climbers. I will not agree that they are igits but do think that they should carry some insurance to cover US for their own risk taking. Not unreasonable at all. They should have the free choice to engauge in whatever activity they have the financial means to support.

[crappiequeennc]

I'm sure that these guys has all kinds of insurance...I could see them taking out a rescue policy...The insurance companies would have a field day...Some don't want to pay out any money as it is...What do you think would happen here? For now, I think we should just keep these families in our prayers...And debate the money part later...

[FishCrazy]

I assure you that my thoughts and prayers are with the men and their family as well. But I disagree about the wait till later to discuss this. Later we will be talking about the next rescue attempt. So I dont think this discussion is inappropriate at all. It is their act that has spured me as well as others to have these thoughts. I am truely sorry for their situation and if I could do anything for them I certainly would. But I cant. Maybe if these requirements were in place then some would be forced to see the danger in their undertaking and think better in making their preparations or even decide not to undertake such an activity. And therefore the regulation could save a life or two or more. And maybe some would carry on as planned except that they would have a LOCATOR BEACON DEVICE and some insurance to pay for the rescue.

[deathb4disco]

On Everest, it's not unusual for a group to leave a who's member having trouble behind to die, while the rest go on to summit. Can't imagine leaving someone behind just to say you reached the summit.

Everest fascinates me. The whole 1996 disaster got me hooked on it, and Jon Krakauer's book cemented my interest. I have NO desires to climb it, though.

The current series on Discovery is great, too.

[crappiequeennc]

I copied this off of a news site... I think if you can't change the minds of these towns that have the ski slopes, and the mountain climbers..Things will most likely stay the same...They make too much money to risk losing any of it...

"We're a nonprofit organization," said Sgt. Steve Stokes of the Summit County Sheriff's Department in Park City, Utah. "There's a huge controversy over whether we should charge for our services, and so far, we've elected not to do so." Summit County is home to several ski resorts and stays busy searching for and rescuing lost skiers, snowmobilers, mountain climbers and hikers every year. Last year the department had 52 "activations" of its 10-man search-and-rescue team.


"The problem with charging is, where do you draw the line?" said Stokes. "Who decides what was a legitimate accident versus someone who foolishly puts himself in harm's way?" Summit County, which depends on outdoor recreation and tourism, has elected to absorb the costs, which means taxpayers ultimately foot the bill.