The title of this post comes from this article from the Insurance News. It's about a case I happened to have blogged not long ago: an unsuccessful rescue case in which the two rescuer were also encountered a freaque wave and injured. This new article seems to assign fault to the rescuers because the rescue operation could have "postponed".
I find that kind of mentality extremely unwise and irresponsible. The fact that this is being discussed as an insurance news item clearly stem from some one who's not willing to pay for the damage incurred. It is understandably the human nature, of course.
But for heaven's sake, this is search and rescue, some human life could be on the line -- and that can be "postponed"?
I think the two rescuing officers should be commended for willing to go out during bad weather doing the rescue and got themselves injured, now some one is questioning their judgement by splitting hair on some regulations.
Human nature as it is, this dollar and sense hair splitting stuff is certainly not surprising, only sad and pitiful! Does anyone really think that it is justified for a rescuing officer to consulting regulating book first to decide the rescue should be postponed because the waves out there were 6 feet not 8 feet as regulation specified? What if the people waiting to be rescued could be one of your love ones -- are you still expect the officer should make a regulation-correct judgement?
No comments:
Post a Comment