5/19 Chaser Convergence

[Chris C Sanner]

It is interesting you mentioned that Chris because I received a phone call from a State Legislature last evening asking to speak to me specifically about the incidents and what I knew about them. I believe the 'tone' you speak of is there and the legislation now is starting.

The ball is definitely rolling on something. I haven't got many specifics mainly because I haven't been up that way since this active period began two weeks ago, but I have various friends who work around or in the House and I know they are preparing to tackle the issue in some way. I'm betting it's just giving LEOs more power to quarantine the areas around storms to prevent hordes of chasers from continuing on. The whole 'they're too busy with other things' mantra was kind of ruined when OHP decided to set up a roadblock on a storm that was producing tornadoes. LEOs aren't stupid and are capable of multitasking -- and give them the power of a few lines of legislation (and perhaps a new traffic violation or two that would hurt chasers) and you have a situation where chasing in Oklahoma will become a bigger headache than it already is. You don't need to outlaw chasing to make it almost impossible to chase, why a lot of people are having a hard time grasping that I don't know, but the solution from the LEOs standpoint is quite simple and is easily implemented and enforced.

EDIT: If anyone is interested, I just posted a brief 5 minute or so read on why we aren't all that important in Oklahoma and how the blowback is coming sooner than most think here: http://www.supercellhunting.com/?p=605

 

[James Hilger]

Wow. And I was complaining over a helicopter, lol. I hit a roadblock at Hennessey after everyone took off but they waved me through. It was nice having the road all to myself for about 15 minutes.

 

[Warren Faidley]

The big problem with blocking traffic is two fold.

1: You have to allow certain people permission to enter an area. This includes spotters, media and others as I mentioned before. I seriously doubt the people of OK will put up with lower quality severe coverage in serious situations because news crews cannot track storms. How the LEO's determine who is legitimate in a crowded road block situation would be a nightmare.

2: Blocking a road and / or rerouting traffic is filled with peril. Although many LEO's know basic spotting, most are not qualified to determine what alternate routes are safe. For example, delaying, turning people around or rerouting them might place them in the path of a second storm and into an even more dangerous situation. As we all know, figuring out safe chase / escape routes vs. multiple storms is complex enough without being forced to alter the route. I see the potential here for disaster.

The solution to this problem is complex but it has to start within the chasing and related communities. Getting sources like TWC to stop accepting (enticing) amateur footage and images will help. I've lost count of the number of locals who tell me they are shooting "for TWC." With VORTEX out of the mix next year, things might calm down. However, I don't see any way to stop the majority of trouble makers -- namely locals.

W.

 

[Aaron Estman]

Am I the only one that thinks 70% of those cars out on Wednesday were not chasers, and that the Vortex II armada rolled through some (Kinda) big towns on an already covered storm on TV, and people came out an followed the V2 Armada? In my opinion once V2 gets off of the road we really wont have this problem anymore. The reason we haven't seen it in years past is because we've only seen 1 DOW out and 1 TIV (and 1 dominator). Now you have like 10 DOWS and over 9000 sticknets and mesonets etc.... people are drawn to that...

 

[Mikey Gribble]

He's just an immature kid that knows no better! I really think he was serious with that post. I really hope not, but if he was, it sure is unfortunate.

LOL dude I'm 29 years old. "Immature kid"??? Seriously lol. Because I point out the fact, and it is a FACT, that the only thing Sean is guilty of is passing in a no passing zone I'm immature now and don't know any better. Yeah it is pretty unfortunate that I recognize something for what it was and not for what it could have been if the worst case scenario came to fruition. Personally I like to deal in reality. You should come back to it and give it a try.

Get this. I took my dog out around the apartments without a leash the other day. Realists would recongize this as a minor infraction, but other people that enjoy drama and dealing in the hypothetical could easily point out how some little girl playing dress up could have come running around the corner, scared my dog and he could have gnawed her face off. So was me taking the dog out without a leash a tragedy???
NO, BECUASE IT DIDN"T ACTUALLY HAPPEN! Sean didn't kill a bus load of nuns when he passed in a no passing zone, so quit acting like he did and GET OVER IT.

 

[Shane Marshall]

So I havent hardly posted here, or been a member long, but have read for a long time. Dont know if that makes my opinion matter much, but here goes anyways. Yes they were wrong and alot COULD have happened by taking the TIV over the hill in the oncoming lane. Im not gonna preach about the "coulda, woulda shoulda's". I havent seen any of the reports that TWC is running about the wrecklessness, but its kinda funny they are comdeming the exact same things that their crews are doing. The big problem I have is all the Vortex fans out there on other websites telling people to get out of their way and pull over for them if they see them in their mirror. Ive been in firefighting/ems for about 10 years, and I can understand how it is difficult to do your work with tons of onlookers being around to get in your way, bothering you, etc. But from my understanding they have no more pull than your average weekend chaser who does this on their off time from work. The big difference being they are getting paid for it and have tons more toys. Yes they are gathering data to help predict things better, but honestly they have no more rights than any other person out on the road.

Mikey I can see your point, but also look at it from another persepctive. Say I go out and fire a gun into a crowd of people. I dont hit anyone luckily, but I could have. does that make it any less of an offense because I didnt hit anyone? No it doesnt. Not trying to start a big argument here, just trying to show a different perspective.

 

[Mikey Gribble]

Here we go with the chaser legislation again. The funny thing is that there were threads exactly like this several years ago stating then that we are on the cusp of legislation outlawing chasing. Weird it didn't happen then. Even though this same topic pops up several times a year I'm sure this time its actually going to happen and none of us will be allowed to chase any more because its getting too crowded out there. Thats the whole reason behind the chaser legislation. It restricts the movement of the people that actually need to be there so they can't do their job.
Okay, so if that's really a problem then how come the coverage of tornadic storms has steadily gotten better and better over the last ten years while at the same time the number of people on the storms has steadily increased? Why is it that the very best coverage of tornadic storms is in Oklahoma, which also happens to be the same place where you get the biggest crowds on storms??? Seriously, Wednesday was a prime example of why some people say we need chaser legislation. It was a zoo on that warm front storm. Yet I personally listened to OKC channel 4's coverage of the storm on the radio while I was chasing and it was the best coverage I have ever heard in my life. Those guys were right on top of every rotating wall cloud and funnel. So where was the problem? The coverage continues to get better and better, warnings continue to get more and more accrate.
So is the problem that some law enforcement officers and spotters couldn't get in position quick enough? That isn't a problem in and of itself. A problem results when them not being able to get into position results in a lack of coverage on the storm that endangers people. Afterall that is their whole reason for having the right of way isn't it. Because they contribute more to public safety than the other chasers that are out there. Is that fundamental belief even true??? Ask normal everyday people about how they get their severe weather information. Ask the people that get hit by tornadoes who was first on the scene to help them. 90% of the time chasers are the ones that relay information and chasers are the first ones on the scene assisting victims. I'm going to get pelted for this one, but I think its almost laughable that some people think a spotter or law enforcement officer that sat through a severe weather slideshow is more capable of relaying accurate information to the public than a storm chaser who studies meteorology and has seen hundreds of tornadic storms before. lol why do they call them sheriffnadoes? Because those guys have very little experience with tornadic storms and they frequently report tornadoes that aren't actually tornadoes. I studied meteorlogy and tornadic storms extensively and have been doing this for 9 years and I still find it difficult to figure out exactly where a tornado would form on a storm some times. How much more difficult do you think that is for a guy that has never seen a tornadic storm before (and the extent of his education is a thirty minute presentation by the NWS). The vast majority of tornadic supercells don't fit a clean textbook model where there is a well organized and defined structure. Look at Wednesday for example. It was an HP storm and the occlusion was farther forward on the storm than it normally would be. You had to be directly east to northeast of the tornado to be able to see it. If you weren't in that clear notch north of the wrap around precip then you would have no clue there was even a tornado. Do you think spotters or cops understand storm scale meteorology well enough to know that? Hell no they don't. Do chasers know enough about storm structure to know that? I'd bet close to 50% of them do. So who is going to be a bigger asset reporting on that storm. The answer is obvious IMO, but thats just me.

Chasers are the ones streaming live video. Chasers are the ones updating with live information and storm reports on the internet. Chasers are the ones going on air and giving live reports about the storm to the public. So who is providing the service that informs the public. Spotters and law enforcement certainly do their part, but in the plains where tornadoes are a constant threat every spring, chasers play the bigger role in keeping the public safe. Because of that I think this idea that spotters and law enforcement serve some higher purpose is misguided. Chasers do just as much if not more than anybody else to inform the public.
BTW if you think chaser legislation should be adopted then why are you out there chasing and contributing to the problem? Shouldn't you be staying out of the way. Talk is cheap.

 

[Aaron Estman]

^ Best way I could describe what I saw not only on Wednesday, but also Tuesday.

I think that was the only time I damn near had a heart attack while chasing...

 

[Mikey Gribble]

So I havent hardly posted here, or been a member long, but have read for a long time. Dont know if that makes my opinion matter much, but here goes anyways. Yes they were wrong and alot COULD have happened by taking the TIV over the hill in the oncoming lane. Im not gonna preach about the "coulda, woulda shoulda's". I havent seen any of the reports that TWC is running about the wrecklessness, but its kinda funny they are comdeming the exact same things that their crews are doing. The big problem I have is all the Vortex fans out there on other websites telling people to get out of their way and pull over for them if they see them in their mirror. Ive been in firefighting/ems for about 10 years, and I can understand how it is difficult to do your work with tons of onlookers being around to get in your way, bothering you, etc. But from my understanding they have no more pull than your average weekend chaser who does this on their off time from work. The big difference being they are getting paid for it and have tons more toys. Yes they are gathering data to help predict things better, but honestly they have no more rights than any other person out on the road.

Mikey I can see your point, but also look at it from another persepctive. Say I go out and fire a gun into a crowd of people. I dont hit anyone luckily, but I could have. does that make it any less of an offense because I didnt hit anyone? No it doesnt. Not trying to start a big argument here, just trying to show a different perspective.

I understand your point Shane. I started to post a similiar analogy before, but stopped short of doing it. The analogy you made isn't accurate IMO though. How many people commit a minor traffic infraction without somebody getting hurt? Maybe one out of a million minor traffic infractions results in a death or injury. Now how many times do loaded guns get fired in crowded areas without somebody getting hurt. I have no idea, but it isn't one in a million. You are taking something much more serious that has a much higher chance of causing harm than a minor traffic infraction and playing it off as comparable. The analogy isn't valid IMO.
When you are judging the seriousness of anything like this that is what you have to consider. How frequently will the action commited result in a serious negative outcome? The higher the frequency of a negative outcome and the seriousness of that outcome is what matters. I don't care what people twist this into, the FACT of the matter is that they passed in a no passing zone, which happens thousands of times every single day and RARELY results in anything serious. So a reasonable person would look at that and say, okay it was wrong, but its not that big of a deal. Other people might adopt the holier than thow attitude and scream and bitch about how big of a deal it could have been because apparently they haven't done anything wrong in their own life that they need to worry about.

 

[Jay McCoy]

Get this. I took my dog out around the apartments without a leash the other day. Realists would recongize this as a minor infraction, but other people that enjoy drama and dealing in the hypothetical could easily point out how some little girl playing dress up could have come running around the corner, scared my dog and he could have gnawed her face off. So was me taking the dog out without a leash a tragedy???
NO, BECUASE IT DIDN"T ACTUALLY HAPPEN! Sean didn't kill a bus load of nuns when he passed in a no passing zone, so quit acting like he did and GET OVER IT.

Thats true it didnt. But you took the risk that it could have. What would you have done IF it did happen just because you felt like breaking the law? Not to mention the ramifications to not only you but the innocent girl. The laws are there for a reason and you do not have the right to arbitrarily choose which ones to obey and which ons to ignore. To do so is dangerous and arrogant. You should ride with me just a few days while I am on duty with my Emergecy services and you will see the result of people ignoring traffic laws. yes people ignore the laws thousand of times a day and lots of people are killed every day. Those red lights and no passing lanes are there for a specific reason. And I have rarely ever seen anybody ignore no passing lanes. Most people arent that stupid. All it takes is that 1 time out of a thousand for tragedy not to mention the fact again its agaisnt the law..period..Does that not mean anything to you??

Hey I am guessing somebody somewhere drove home drunk last night but didnt kill anybody so I guess its ok for him to do so right?? Until that one time he slams into a car filed with a family and kills them. Your logic is stupid and yes inmature. So your 29.. doesnt mean you have grown up to be responsible.

Nope Sean didnt kill a bus of nuns but if a bus of nuns had come over that hill he would have. Sean took a gambled risk he had no right to take and won this time.. This time.. What happens when the house collects and he doesnt make it over that hill in that 10,000lb tank?? And how will it look to the general public and LEO's. You think the outcry against chasing is bad now?? If somebody is killed it will explode like you couldnt imagine. And that effects all of us so yes we have EVERY right to call him out on that as we do anybody else acting in a manner that puts us in danger or effects chasing ni general. I am sure this is falling on deaf ears. if you didnt see anything wrong with it the 1st time you never will. That comes down to morals, maturity, and respect for the law.

As for legislating or restricting chasing. One easy way is laws that already exists in texas and other areas but usually are only in certain locations and that iare signs posted along the road saying no stopping along a highway except for emergencies (flat tires, mechanical probs etc..). I have seen them in spots. Hard to chase and video of you cant stop. And a road block set up for 15-20 minutes can easily end a chase for most since it could put us well out of position on the storm. I never really though we would get to the day where we might actually have to have a certified sticker on our vehicle to be allowed to chase in certain areas. Ofcourse hopefully the threat alone would deter most OKC locals and yahoos from coming out which would solve about 60% of the problem. Mikey I agree chasers for the most part are not the issue. With all the great coverage near OKC its the locals listening to those tv chasers that decide to go see for themselves and drag along the family. They dont know what they are doing and jam the roads. If there is a way to keep "joe public" out of the mix then the spotters/chasers wouldnt have an issue. This is mostly an issue near metro areas. Especially OKC. It isnt near a prob in the rural plains. yes we have big convergences but nothing like we had on the 19th.

I for one dont think I will ever chase within a 100 miles of OKC again in May..would rather miss the show than get into that chaso again. If i see that again I will just break off and head to one of the casinos for some poker..lol

 

[Shane Marshall]

Valid point and I understand where you are coming from. To touch on it, a couple weeks ago here in SD a truck was driving down the oncoming traffic lane just south of Sioux Falls and hit another head on. Resulted in both trucks catching fire and both drivers dying. Yes its a rare circumstance, but it can happen. I agree that your statement about minor traffic occurences rarely resulting in a sever outcome, but is it really worth the chance. If they DID (far reach, but just trying to make a point) hit someone head on and someone died, how would that look. they are out trying to avoid deaths by improving on early warning systems, but taking the risks they are to get that information. On a side note (and not to keep sounding like a stuck cd since the TIv has been talked about so much in this thread) Im suprised there hasnt been more fallout about the tour groups that did the same thing. Not only are the buzzing along way over the speed limit, but they have a van full of people with them while they cut off cars, fly down the oncimong traffic lane, ETC.

 

[Steve Bottkol]

I'll try to not beat this horse anymore, but here's the thing that just blows me away completely about this whole subject, I posted on the TIV facebook page just as many others have in that what they did was illegal and put peoples lives at risk, yet Sean, his wife I assume, and other TIV crew members completely defend what they did was ok even in light of the videos that have popped up on you tube. Huh? You got to be kidding me.

I work for the local media in OKC and I do storm spot, and If I did what they did, I'd be looking for anther job right now, plain and simple, I would have been fired on the spot!!! Nobody is above the law no matter if they think it's safe or not, the laws were made for a reason.

The whole thing just sets a bad example to others that if your rich or famous you can do as you please. I personally have called and wrote to the discovery channel expressing what I feel is unacceptable behavior by the TIV and Discover channel crew members.

My biggest fear is, as others have said, someone is going to get killed because they are taking liberties that are not theirs to take. I can only hope that now this has come to light, that spotters are more careful with their driving because the cameras will be rolling and I think you will start to see more law enforcement, enforcing the rules of the road.

As the old saying goes, it just takes 1 to spoil it for the rest. I hope this doesn't happen.

 

[Jay McCoy]

On a side note (and not to keep sounding like a stuck cd since the TIv has been talked about so much in this thread) Im suprised there hasnt been more fallout about the tour groups that did the same thing. Not only are the buzzing along way over the speed limit, but they have a van full of people with them while they cut off cars, fly down the oncimong traffic lane, ETC.

The more I looked at that video I dont think that white van was a tour group. If you look closely it has a driver but otherwise appears mostly emoty and they were always in the same area as the Discovery crew. I think this was like a support van that carries extra equipment but i could be totally off base. Except for a couple of people too close to the roads edge I actually didnt witness any tour groups acting too bad. Ofcourse I can only be in 1 spot and didnt see them all.

And i feel arguing with Mikey is a waste.. He has zero reguard for the law. he feels he has the right to choose which laws are important and which ones he can ignore so he and Sean arent delayed in gettting that all important video shot. No matter how many people it risks. Sean isnt there to futher science or warn the public he is there for a $$ shot. No more..no less. A very valid reason to break the law.

 

[Chris Campbell]

I wonder how they're going to force that... There is no law against storm chasing... they cannot just pull you over because they feel like it...


So what qualifies someone as an 'official storm chaser'? They have to chase for a television network? That they have the NWS Spotter Training? Or do we need to make new decals that say "OMG OFFICIAL STORM CHASER LOL".... I mean seriously....

1. It's easy. If you are out doing this stuff and you're breaking the (existing) law -- which many are, they come down on you -- HARD. There are already enough laws on the books that they could do this. One post from an apparent LEO in this thread seems to indicate that a LEO in Oklahoma may, at his discretion, arrest someone for a traffic offense. If you don't think that's possible, I will tell you that it IS the law in Iowa, and although it is rarely done, they do have that power under the law. If you think they can't do that, I would say you may be in for a surprise.

2. There are no 'official storm chasers'. However, there ARE REGISTERED storm spotters. I HAVE a NWS spotter ID number, which I got after going through training. They have my phone numbers and they can call me if they need me to spot. I've been through regular and advanced training -- the latter is done by the NWS at Iowa State University.

 

[Joey Ketcham]

Interestingly, it seems as though Sean Casey closed his facebook account. Anyone else notice that?

Ah, nevermind... apparently he blocked me because he didn't like me calling out their reckless behavior.