Should You Pay To Be Rescued?

[moderator]

NH will likely lower the threshold of negligence by which hikers have to repay the state for being rescued. Should you have to pay to be rescued? And what do you think qualifies as negligence?

[wildone]

Absofuckinglutely!! If some stupid shit doesn't know that he can die in the mountains, why the fuck should people risk their lives to save him and spend a shitload of money getting him? Make him pay or let him freeze!!!

[ILuvGnats]

No. If you force people to pay to be rescued they may decide not to call for help, or they may push themselves to keep going when what they should do is stay put and call for help. This is a bad idea. You are going to have more people dying on those mountains.

Ben

[dmath]

People are putting their lives on the line in extremely terrible conditions to rescue these people. It seems there should be some accountability. If the threat of having to pay to be rescued makes someone think more before heading out, questioning whether they are even prepared more, and thinking twice before making that call to make sure they are really in danger rather than scared for a moment, then maybe that is a good thing.

[marchowes]

Yes, depending on the circumstances.

A discounted rate for NH residents.
A tripled rate for Massachusetts residents.
And a regular rate for other states/countries etc.

If you are prevented from calling in due to fear of prohibitive costs then you probably aren't in a big enough jam to need a rescue anyways. Is this rule going to stop people completely from getting in trouble? Absolutely not, in fact I suspect forced payment will have no impact at all. Besides, you have to pay if you were judged "reckless" now anyways... not that that sort of rule is terribly sensical simply because the term reckless is not defined.

If you are out on the wilderness trail and break your leg on a rail tie and you have to be carried out you shouldn't be charged... You arent putting the rescuers at any imminent danger and that could happen to anyone. Rescues should be reimbursed if it requires some sort of heroism on the part of the resuers and (not OR) it is deemed something logically preventable.

People shouldn't go out hiking with the impression that there is a government safety shield floating around their bodys. Personal responsibility and self reliance needs to be emphasized and understood.

[nug919]

haha..triple rate for mass residents. seriously though..i dont think that people should have to pay to be rescued..the rescuers are allready being paid..right?if they wanna make people pay..eliminate the state jobs and people would have to pay some private rescue company!