Originally posted by Stuart Robinson
something does not ring true about that video - perhaps it is just me ...
I think the gov't should fine folks who have to be rescued in this fashion.
They interviewed the driver, who said that the water just looked like the surface of the road.
They interviewed the driver, who said that the water just looked like the surface of the road.
Sure it did :roll:
Did he not notice the fog lines and lane stripes just disappear, or the fact the median wall went from 4 feet high to non-existant? The big clue should have been that overpass 200 feet in front of him was about 6 feet off the "road" surface. That would get my attention.
He was moving at a good clip, and never hit the brakes.
What a clueless SOB.
I wonder if there's an awkward silence when folks fly back in the US Coast Guard helicopters after being rescued on their rooftops in the mandatory evacuation locations... I know there are legitimate reasons why some folks could not leave the area (finances, etc) but there should have been little if any reason not to at least at least go to a shelter.
I think the gov't should fine folks who have to be rescued in this fashion. It probably costs a ton of money to fly helicopters around saving people who should have left in the first place. Why are we paying (tax money) for folks who refused to at least go to a shelter?
There is NOT a MANDATORY EVACUATION in place for SPC High Risks. The probability of getting hit by a tornado, even during tornado outbreaks, is minimal. The probability of facing life-threatening conditions during a high-end hurricane and MANDATORY evacuation is SIGNIFICANT. Such a parallel between a High Risk and a mandatory evacuation (including the incredible anticipation of complete destruction) is non-existant IMO.If people get caught in a thunderstorm and get flooded and need a helicopter rescue should they get fined because they were in an SPC high RISK?
There is NOT a MANDATORY EVACUATION in place for SPC High Risks. The probability of getting hit by a tornado, even during tornado outbreaks, is minimal. The probability of facing life-threatening conditions during a high-end hurricane and MANDATORY evacuation is SIGNIFICANT. Such a parallel between a High Risk and a mandatory evacuation (including the incredible anticipation of complete destruction) is non-existant IMO.If people get caught in a thunderstorm and get flooded and need a helicopter rescue should they get fined because they were in an SPC high RISK?
Scott, I realize that folks folks cannot AFFORD to gas up their vehicle, drive 400 miles, and stay at a hotel for days on end (not to mention food, etc). That is why I explicitly stated that folks should have at least gone to a shelter. If you can't afford the gas, hotel, etc, that's understandable. But at least drive the 10-30 miles to a shelter. Most shelters are designated as such because they have been deemed to be sufficiently-built to withstand the winds/floods expected during a particular event. IMO, there's little excuse to not at least go to a nearby shelter.