Our post about the rescue of Canadian teen Samuel Frappier from Long's Peak, which he attempted to climb without the proper experience, gear or clothing, prompted strong reactions from our readers -- particularly when it came to the question of whether he should have to pay for the crews that saved him. But this commenter argues that a certain percentage of incidents like this one can't be prevented.
Andres DeMorin writes:
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
Um, if you are truly aware of how basic human nature and curiosity work, then you'd realize that people will continue to resort to seemingly insane or just plain dumb behavior, regardless of any sign posted or the existence of any emergency rescue service within the vicinity. Some asshole will still feed the bears despite the signs explicitly prohibiting it; people still drive through flooded roadways despite numerous pleas by meteorologists and public officials to avoid unnecessary travel during inclement weather; lastly, some KID will try to prove his/her bravado amongst his/her peers by attempting to climb a dangerous peak despite a glaring lack of experience. The existence of rescue teams is because they expect a rather small segment of the population to willfully ignore warnings and engage in dangerous behavior without adequate experience.
Send your story tips to the author, Michael Roberts.
For more memorable takes, visit our Comment of the Day archive.