this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2024
671 points (99.1% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

5826 readers
188 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kaiyoto 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Love the bit where taxpayers are footing the bill to save him.

[–] dual_sport_dork -5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

No one is "saving" him. The Coast Guard has repeatedly and unilaterally decided to hassle this guy every time he puts to sea over red tape and other trivial shit. The word you're searching for is actually "harassing." He did not ask to be rescued and never indicated he was in distress.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

He knew they would harass him and he couldn’t find a guy to tail him in a boat?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Until the moment when they find some dead dude in a giant bubble and now the coast guard is liable for his death.

[–] TheTetrapod 24 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Why would they be? If he wants to wash up dead in a bubble, that's his business.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Tbf, I have no idea whether coast guard would actually be liable. However, one of the coast guards’ responsibilities is rescue, so I would think if they willingly and intentionally ignored someone in obvious danger (this is very obviously dangerous), they would need to take some responsibility for anything going wrong? And I can’t blame them for not wanting to take the risk?

Even if the man sent a clear “no distress” signal, they have no idea if the man is having a mental crisis, or what other circumstances are. Even if they did know all the background information and know for 100% this dude is not in distress (again, he is in danger…I think we can all agree on that?), would you want to be the guy that made the call not to rescue him, then find out he died because of that?

I say rescue him so he doesn’t die of idiocy, and then fine him for the rescue efforts to deter future behavior?

[–] SchmidtGenetics 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Let’s fine everyone who goes skydiving, who are to decide what’s safe or not?

[–] NeoNachtwaechter 2 points 6 months ago

would you want to be the guy that

Don't you think that they have rules and procedures for that?

People who work such jobs simply don't want to think such thoughts while working.

[–] ThePantser -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Suicide is illegal in the USA, this could be interpreted as suicide if they wanted to press charges.

[–] nevemsenki 13 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If being reckless and/or very stupid was akin to suicide, a lot of things like base jumping would be illegal.

[–] ThePantser -5 points 6 months ago

It's the fact the guy has tried it 4 times, he keeps trying to do something stupid.

[–] JJROKCZ 17 points 6 months ago

People die at sea all the time, no one is liable for their deaths