Health & Safety gone MAD! A national disgrace.

[roughcaster]

What about the two part time coppers who stood and whatched the youngster drown in the local pond??

Management supported them (if i recall correctly) again, citing health and safety reasons for not trying to help.

Damned if they help, damned if they don't.

Health and Safety didn't prevent Paul Waugh and the other 2 Coastguards from doing their job. They prevented themselves, by leaving their vehicle with all their rescue equipment in behind locked gates, and going to the scene with no equipment to carry out the rescue with. Paul Waugh then ignored safety guidelines and put himself into a perilous situation by climbing down the cliff, un-attatched, to the casualty. Luckily all ended well,and as I said before well done to him. But now, through his actions, Paul Waugh is to blame for the situation he now finds himself in, and the other 2 members must share that blame. The blame does NOT lie with the Coastguard. Safety is paramount in precarious situations,and whether somebody in London or Lapland draws up the safety guidelines, they are their to save lives,and you ignore them at your peril.

Roughcaster.

 

[joe-90]

None of us were there and none of us know what happened.

If the guy had found the girl and gone back to get the right gear and she'd fallen off - would you still be saying what you are saying? Not if it were your daughter you wouldn't.

 

[oompah]

http://www.tiscali.co.uk/news/newsw...l&template=/news/feeds/pa_story_template.html
They are brave men all of them and should be congratulated and not castigated,remember most are volunteers and do it because they want to.
The second from last paragraph says it all.

 

[roughcaster]

I'm not talking to you about this Joe. These are my opinions on this and they wont change. The equipment should have been with them, even if it meant carrying it.There has been enough detail on this on TV and in the press. This is the second time this girl has been in difficulty,once is bad enough, twice is irresponsible. Where is the advice from the adults in her life.

Roughcaster.

 

[joe-90]

I know someone who broke their leg twice. The hospital should have turned her away the second time.

 

[johnny_t]

None of us were there and none of us know what happened.

If the guy had found the girl and gone back to get the right gear and she'd fallen off - would you still be saying what you are saying? Not if it were your daughter you wouldn't.

True, none of us were there, but I think most of us have enough experience of the 'boy who cried wolf' nature of most papers to be able to pick through what is and isn't said and work out what may really have gone on.

However, if she had fallen off whilst he was getting some climbing equipment ready, I doubt that anyone would be viewing it as anything other than a tragic accident, and I don't think any blaming of anyone would be going on.

No-one is saying that his saving the girl is anything other than a great thing - It is just his subsequent flouncing out that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. He doesn't appear to have been disciplined or anything....

 

[roughcaster]

[

quote="joe-90";p="798501"]I know someone who broke their leg twice. The hospital should have turned her away the second time.[/

quote]

That is a ridiculous comparison,and is NO comparison to a life or death situation involving a rescue from a cliff face, or an incoming tide.

Roughcaster.

 

[joe-90]

How about an alcoholic that keeps getting paralytic? Maybe they should ignore him second time around?

 

[roughcaster]

How about an alcoholic that keeps getting paralytic? Maybe they should ignore him second time around?[/

quote]

Learn the lessons.Education,same as the girl needs.

Roughcaster.

 

[joe-90]

So you are suggesting that the emergency services consult their database before attending to see if the victim has learned their lesson or not??

 

[tim west]

I cant see the difference between this case and people being taught to never put themselves in danger when seeing someone being electrocuted, they tell you to find a non conducting object like a piece of wood to remove the person from the source of electricity, by the time you find a suitable object the person could be dead,

Might be a good idea to use something non-conductive

Exactly thats why i stated so

 

[WDIK]

I cant see the difference between this case and people being taught to never put themselves in danger when seeing someone being electrocuted, they tell you to find a non conducting object like a piece of wood to remove the person from the source of electricity, by the time you find a suitable object the person could be dead,

Might be a good idea to use something non-conductive

Exactly thats why i stated so

yes its the first basic rule, dont make yourself another victim.
this guy was lucky, he let his heart rule his head.
an act of bravery? sorry this was an act of bravado.

I admire his sentiment, but his long sight judement was blurred

 

[Balenza]

whatdoiknow wrote

yes its the first basic rule, dont make yourself another victim.
this guy was lucky, he let his heart rule his head.
an act of bravery? sorry this was an act of bravado.

I admire his sentiment, but his long sight judement was blurred

I suspect you would have let the girl die.
Sadly this stance is all too common in society nowadays.
People seeking excuses to stand back before they help each other.
Their was a time when we didnt need legislation to make a decision whether or not to save someones life.

 

[AtoZ]

very difficult without being there.
i suspect that if the girl had held on for so long and there was space for matey to spend an extra half hour hanging on to the gir,l that the actual danger level was quite low.

like i said very difficult to judge but i think of the second coastguard, what does he do when his m8 has gone down without equipment.

always two sides to a story. when i was a fireman they used to issue us with rubbish builders goggles, we had to use these things when we had to 'cut out' at accidents RTA's
these things steamed up as soon as you put them on and were so scratched that you couldnt see, were were using tools close to a trapped driver but you had to wear these goggles because of H/S. catch 22. we used air powered hacksaws or air chisels
later, when we got new helmets with visors, we were still expected to wear the goggles till our orders/paperwork was updated to allow for the change in our kit.

when i first joined we were issued with rubber coated builders gloves, i put them on, like i was trained too, at my first fire. i got bo--llocked by my station officer for wearing them. the were issue but they would melt into your skin at a lower temperature than a man could stand.

i dont know if that coastguard was brave or a fool but i do know that H/S in big organisations is an absolute nightmare.
empires are being created by H/S.

 

[WDIK]

whatdoiknow wrote

yes its the first basic rule, dont make yourself another victim.
this guy was lucky, he let his heart rule his head.
an act of bravery? sorry this was an act of bravado.

I admire his sentiment, but his long sight judement was blurred

I suspect you would have let the girl die.
Sadly this stance is all too common in society nowadays.
People seeking excuses to stand back before they help each other.
Their was a time when we didnt need legislation to make a decision whether or not to save someones life.

how would it benefit anyone to be burying two bodies, and before anyone starts I was in DCRO in the eighties.

the adage fools blunder in where angels fear to tread.

dont suggest I would have let the girl die, but i wont play the hero.

I gave up playing when I became an adult.