This up close stuff is getting out of hand

[joel ewing]

Drew, it can get VERY lively in here. You must be fairly new to S.T. In fact, within the past couple of years, the owner had to completely crack down and spring a whole new bunch of rules at us....as many were really attacking each other...lots of times over stupid stuff. All in all, a great bunch of folks in here, but we be passionate.
'Taint for the timid, laddy.

 

[Adam Lucio]

If he thinks this thread is bad I cant wait for the next thread that someone posts of a dust whirl tornado. Then well see some real bickering.

 

[Michael Towers]

Getting close is a personal decision, as long as a chaser isn’t putting someone else (involuntarily or unknown to them) in danger I don’t care. Chasing is inherently dangerous to begin with, just getting under a meso exposes a chaser to increased risk and I bet the vast majority of people here have been under one with their head on a swivel. We all have our own motivations when chasing, we all are responsible for our own choices. Last I checked this is still a free country where individuals have the right to exercise their freedom to pursue their interests within the law and I doubt the confines of the law will change in regard to our interest. If a chaser is motivated for whatever reason (money, curiosity, passion, etc.) to get as close as possible it’s their choice and ultimately their risk/reward. If you want to taste debris then go for it, just don’t bring someone unknowingly or unwillingly to dinner with you and don’t endanger others on the way.

Regarding “Camaro Dude†Michael Ambrosia, the only problem I have with his encounter was his reckless approach. Aside from that it was obvious he was overwhelmed by the environment and got in way over his head. It was clear through his actions he was inexperienced and indecisive, and now that has become apparent through his own words. He’s posted an almost full version of his encounter minus the reckless approach and seems humbled by the experience. Whether it’s genuine or contrived is debatable but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and hope he truly did learn a lesson. His new version is entitled “My Tornado Encounter 13MAY09, lessons to learn†and his comments reflect his inexperience and acknowledgement of how lucky he was to survive unscathed, let alone survive.

“This video is a lesson for myself and all who see it. Don't do what other people are doing around tornadoes. Both times I stopped because other people stopped and it gave me false confidence that it was ok, but it wasn't. I like to have a copilot to help me look out for making mistakes like that, but this particular time I didn't have time to pick one up. Anyway, I'm still here by the mercy of God.â€

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKYtVdmgHIQ&feature=channel_page

Dude, if you’re reading this, until you get more experience and understanding of storm environments forget about getting a co-pilot and find yourself a pilot that knows how to fly. And when you graduate to pilot fly safely and have regard for the safety of those around you!

 

[Dan Robinson]

The irony of all of this is that the driver (and those on the road with him) were more at risk from him going 110 mph than he ever was from the tornado. He shouldn't be so much thanking God for surviving the tornado as he should be thankful he didn't lose control of the car at such a high speed (very easy thing to happen).

Once again, tornado dangers getting more hype than they deserve and detracting from what the real risks of the situation were.

 

[GlennMartin]

I tend to think many of these "in the tornado" chasers are not experienced. Completely different from the category of those who like to get close in a measured way. What leads me to say this is from personal observation of those driving into hp mesos with strong g2g shear as if they expect to "see" it in time to make an escape and the many chasers I witness right "underneath" strong mesos on my gr3. I once thought they must be able to see well enough to be there even though it looked likely to be obscured in rain but after seeing the many videos from Kirksville and a couple from last year I know this is not the case. With the explosion of technology really almost anyone with limited experience could head into x marks the spot situations with in vehicle radar now so this is not surprising. The only reason these chasers live to see another sunrise is that particular tornado was not strong enough or that piece of debris flying by just missed them. Will the next one be as forgiving? I think of Plainfield, ILL 1990 still no photo of the actual tornado exists to my knowledge? This F5 was wrapped in rain. Other F5's have had no condensation funnel Depauw, IN 1974 comes to mind among others. Other more recent EF4's have been obscured in rain through part or all of their life cycles. Doswell's Pampa, TX video 1995 shows what a violent tornado can do to a vehicle among others. If you survive the trip up and the countless missiles you will not survive the ground impact. I have personally witnessed a van rolled into a little ball of metal. These things leave lasting impressions on me.
The media are pushing for more and more extreme videos and there will always be daredevils willing to provide the shot. They don't care about you or your safety they just want extreme footage and they are just as likely once a couple of these daredevil chasers get killed to call for limits to be put on storm chasing. That is how the media works they push for a story and then instantly turn on you for giving them their story. Its perverse but that is the reality. Having said all this I defend anyone's right to get as close as possible or even drive into a tornado if they so desire just know the possible consequences to yourself, your loved ones and the hobby. Tell your survivors if the unthinkable happens not to blame the hobby for your demise as people in mourning sometimes thrash out in irrational ways. For those of you who say there is no way storm chasing could ever be regulated, perhaps not but many regs and laws have been passed over the decades regarding stunt flying for example when many deaths resulted from daredevils in that hobby. Happy chasing!

 

[scott r currens]

I see the "Camaro Kid" Michael Ambrosia is selling his car.

http://kansascity.craigslist.org/cto/1185032750.html

 

[D. Hayes]

Sorry but I'm just catching up on this long thread. But I was wondering if anyone pointed his local law enforcement agency to this video? It's plainly obvious he's putting people in reckless danger and they can press charges against this idiot for doing this based on his own video evidence on break.com. He gives his name and location so it's pretty cut and dry.

 

[Jesse Risley]

Sorry but I'm just catching up on this long thread. But I was wondering if anyone pointed his local law enforcement agency to this video? It's plainly obvious he's putting people in reckless danger and they can press charges against this idiot for doing this based on his own video evidence on break.com. He gives his name and location so it's pretty cut and dry.

They probably could press charges, but that gets into territory that many DA's probably don't wish to deal with. If he doesn't live near the area where the violation occurred, it becomes even more problematic, at least from a fiscal standpoint. I'm certainly no jurist, but I can imagine there are lots of legal technicalities involved with trying to prosecute a case based on a video recording.

I would imagine it's easier for an attorney to mount some sort of reasonable doubt defense based on a defendant's own video being used against them, as opposed to being caught "red-handed" by the police.

 

[Jason Foster]

Are we really talking about being "in' the tornado...or just close....I mean as someone who had to experience a tornado from the inside the tornado inside a house......I don't see where many of these videos and accounts are really "inside"....more of just close anyway.....I love that some are like "We just when though a tornado" yet they drive away in their car. I think it shows how the idea is a one-upmanship and being better than someone else, or proving themselves to someone is the goal more than just enjoying the phenomena.

I also don't think this has to do with level of experience or skill level....it's more a characteristic. It use to be that only a certain type of person chased, but now there are so many. Personally, I'm not as open as I use to be because I've seen that certain personalities and characteristics just don't make for good chasers that I want to be around.

 

[Jason Foster]

They probably could press charges, but that gets into territory that many DA's probably don't wish to deal with. If he doesn't live near the area where the violation occurred, it becomes even more problematic, at least from a fiscal standpoint. I'm certainly no jurist, but I can imagine there are lots of legal technicalities involved with trying to prosecute a case based on a video recording.

I would imagine it's easier for an attorney to mount some sort of reasonable doubt defense based on a defendant's own video being used against them, as opposed to being caught "red-handed" by the police.

It's a matter of proof, video alone cannot convict and it would take eye witnesses and the right of the accused to face their accuser. Bottom line, you need police on the scene in this kind of scenario.

 

[Rob Wadsworth]

Do you think this Camaro dude had learned his lesson that day?
Or - do you think he is dumb enough to do it again?
I think he learned his lesson. After all, he was fortunate that it was weak and he really wasn't close enough to the circulation to pick up his vehicle and get thrown about. One would hope and think that he knows better now.
We will see...

 

[Adam Lucio]

It's a matter of proof, video alone cannot convict and it would take eye witnesses and the right of the accused to face their accuser. Bottom line, you need police on the scene in this kind of scenario.

I know Im no law student but how could they not convict him? He cleary video taped himself doing it and even pointed the camera at himself. If video alone isnt enough then what is the point of having security cameras?

Theres stories all the time about dumbass kids who beat each other up and then get charged after posting the video, I really dont see how this is any different, unless it simply boils down to people being lazy and not wanting to do the work involved to get the deserved result, which in this case is a hefty number of tickets or a suspended license....IMO it would be worth a days worth of paperwork and coordinating with different jurisdictions....but thats based on my lack of knowledge.

 

[Jesse Risley]

I know Im no law student but how could they not convict him? He cleary video taped himself doing it and even pointed the camera at himself. If video alone isnt enough then what is the point of having security cameras?

I think this type of a video is harder to use than an official security camera. As a general rule, a traffic violation is written for a specific location where and when the violation actually occurred. Could that be gathered as evidence directly from the video?

The video would need to show exactly where and when he committed any traffic violations to likely net a conviction. Additionally, an attorney could present the argument that the video could have been edited by this guy for entertainment value or as a joke.

Video makes a nice addition as evidence for any case, but you rarely hear of video being used as the sole evidence for prosecuting a case with no eyewitnesses and for which no other tangible evidence exists. I'm certainly not defending this moronic driving behavior, but if I were a DA I would probably be a little hesistant to jump on handing out a summons given the circumstances.

 

[Adam Lucio]

Interesting, well in this case we know where the tornado crossed and Im sure it can be found what road he was on. I dont remember if the video itself is a continuous video or if it jumps around during the timeline a bit...I could see if he drove the 120...stopped recording and then started recording again 10 minutes later how it may add some confusion or uncertainty...and hell, some jerk lawyer could even argue there was someone else driving while he was talking or something stupid.

I guess its a flaw in the legal system. Oh well.

 

[Jay McCoy]

Not sure if anybody else saw the video today on CNN of somebody getting up close toa large tornado yesterday but it was hilarious how the CNN wx guy was commenting on it. He was blasting the "chaser" for being so close. Talking about how debris could easily hit him and he said "a NOAA radio and a camera does not make you a chaser but you got it on CNN so thats something I guess" being extremely sarcastic.

Usually I could care less how close somebody gets if they feel thats what they need to do BUT...the guy in ther video is screaming the whole time about how big it is and how its doing damage and that he "way too close". He is sooo loud and non stop that its beyond annoying. Its much better video when its muted (hint hint). Have no clue who shot it and dont care really just thought it was hilarious how even the media folks who go overboard on everything even said this was overdoing it. Next time just film it and dont say a word and it will be much better quality. Yelling about OMG its huge and Im too close just makes it annoying..