I do not think Spanish is the only non-English language they have to deal with there. My understanding is a lot of the rural backwater places are still predominantly Cajun, and that in those places, literacy isn’t high, so newspapers would not be much help.
As to the current discussion, I have no problem with trying to enforce a manditory evacuation in some situations, but in those instances you need #1 To make sure there is somewhere for all those people to go and #2 a way for them to get there. We can talk all we want about the odd individual who had other options, but in a city with 30% poverty rate, my guess is that those people were exceptions.
I can’t speak for Mr. Moto’s vision of how the law would work, but in post #13 of this thread, I specifically addressed humanitarian reasons for staying, and said they would be exempt under the law.
So I’m a little confused as to why you’d bring them up now. Has Mr. Moto said something to indicate he doesn’t agree with the framework proposed in post #13?
If I haven’t made it clear, I am in full agreement with that construction. Obviously, there are people who will need to be in the excluded zone, and those folks won’t be prosecuted.
Just like cops who chase down speeders aren’t cited for speeding themselves.
The law makes distinctions like this all of the time, and I see no reason why this wouldn’t be another case of such.
As for the rest of the thread, and Mr. Moto’s strange foray into military rule–I don’t see it working one bit. I DO envision remaining people exchanging gunfire with “rescuers” who are there to either cite, arrest or kill them.
NO’s horror is due to many factors–geography being a big one. I don’t agree that those who stayed behind “chose” to do so. A minority of them, sure–saw what was coming, reckoned their odds and stayed put. Many more went into denial and thought, “it can’t be that bad–I rode out the last few” etc. Early on, it seemed that they might be correct. Tragically, they were not.
I just don’t see fines/arrests/jail time being an effective way of solving this problem. If I am poor-so poor I do not have access to a car–and am told to leave a place, I will need transport. If no transport is made available (I heard a story of $200 cab fare to Baton Rouge!), I suppose I can walk–but I cannot outwalk a hurricane. And where am I to go? I have no money; I have relatives/kids who depend on me; what little I DO have, I treasure. The natural inclination is to stay put and hold on to what little I have. And if “justice prevails”? What then? The court is gonna charge me money I don’t have, garnishee a wage I don’t make, take my home in which I have no equity, repossess a car I don’t have? WTF?
I hafta agree with Cervaise and the mad hermit --don’t hide behind some falsely reassuring “law and order” bullshit. Say it–be honest: we want the poor and all their problems to go away for good. Here’s hoping there are no survivors of the next big one. You all got what you deserved, you parasites on our land.
It seems a thinly veiled attempt to judicially condemen people for being poor.
Mr. Moto --surely you understand that your experiences in the military do not equate with the average citizen’s experience with a hurricane? You had orders, had somewhere to go, had supplies, had a shared sense of mission with a peer group. There was no survival of the fittest for you in your anecdotes. Hey, I give you credit for doing the work, but it’s the difference between being the nurse and being the patient. Not even close to equivalent positions.
Excuse me. But I have to ask if I wrote posts #5 and #13 in invisible ink? In post #5, I clearly said that the question was addressed to people with the means to leave. Mr. Moto has indicated he agrees with that framework.
So why are you bringing up people with no money as a reason not to proceed with this plan? As everyone in this thread agrees, having no resources to evacuate exempts you from the fine.
I rode out Hurricane Isabel as an average citizen. Just me and my wife and kids in our basement together.
I’ve been on the other side of it as well.
Those Greek merchantmen who died when their ship sank ignored weather warnings and sailed right into the teeth of the worst storm the Med had seen in decades. Their ship broke apart off the coast of Sicily and sank. We got the call to assist in a search.
I was working at the Tactical Support Center in Sigonella at the time. We supported Navy P-3 aircraft, as well as allied maritime air.
I helped, over several days, to brief and debrief aircrews, plot search areas, man communications nets and data links with the aircraft. It was a significant expenditure of resources on our part, undertaken to help people who shouldn’t have been in the area in the first place.
Sound familiar?
And in the end, all that was found was debris. Nine Greek sailors died.
So no, I haven’t been the nurse. But I’ve been something a bit closer to a rescuer than anyone else posting here. And while that doesn’t give my arguments any greater weight, it should at least dispel any notions that I’m proposing these for any reason other than the belief that they will be helpful in saving lives.
Bricker/Moto you guys are funny the way you can ignore how people actually think and behave.
Here’s my case, I’ve lived in town X for 20 years. Numerous times, I 've been given the mandatory leave order, obeyed and left only to be told that the hurricane just missed or the damage isn’t really that bad and to return home.
The previous evacuations have cost me X dollars, cost me work, and a one case allowed my home to be looted.
Once again, I receive the warning and decide this time, based on my prior experience with the weather, the government and my neighbours; I stay home. How bad can it be, right? I board up my stained glass windows, secure my Bentley, grab my 21 year blonde girlfriend with the big boobs and tiny waist, fire up the oven, start the Baked Alaska and laugh at all the suckers leaving town…“they’ll be back”, I think to myself.
Then the levees break. By the time I realize I was wrong, it’s too late…and now need to be evacuted. My home is gone or close enough to being gone. My girlfriend is sick, from contained water and I just shake my head and wish this time I did go, like I did all the previous times.
OMFG, how dense ARE you? The nurse/patient analogy was a METAPHOR. In the guise of a rescuer, YOU were indeed the nurse.
Kudos to you for “riding out hurricane Isobel in the basement with your wife and kids.” You now owe Uncle Sam some moola (according to your own propsition–or didn’t you have means to leave?)
OK, Bricker --guilty as charged. I was not answering your posts directly, I was addressing the whole nasty ass feel of the thread. I completely agree with the upthread post of "No Person Down Left Unkicked .
How many, how many had the means and chose to stay? I read about a guy in The New Yorker yesterday who stayed to guard his effing wine cellar. Now, there’s a priority.
But here’s the thing: I think that IF he were to fall victim to West Nile or similiar–we should still get him out. And not fine him. Isn’t that what personal freedom is all about? The GOP continually shoves that down our throats–here it is in action. What if wine guy is now permanently disabled from WNV and has lost all his assets? How ya gonna get money from a turnip? What is the POINT? Human behavior isn’t going to change, and as Katrina fades into history–it will be repeated (but I hope not on this scale).
I am fully aware that people will behave that way, which is why I think there should be sanctions should they not behave in a way helpful to the situation.
Again, all I’m hearing from most people here is why this won’t work. Does anyone have any suggestions on what might?
No, you didn’t. The main problem I have with this is in sorting people out. I just think it would get awfully sticky for the courts to try to decide it all. Yes, that’s what courts do, but this is potentially a buttload of cases, with reasons for staying that the courts may not have anticipated.
And you get to judge what dicatates helpful behaviour? The reasons why you’re getting negative responses is because your sanctions are ridiculous and will do nothing to deter people who do not believe they are in danger.
You would have a point if the we knew the exact time and date and place the hurricane struck, knocked on the guy’s door, showed him the data and told him he HAD to leave or he was on his own. He then signed a piece of paper to that effect, with a promise to pay for any rescue attempts, including the lost of life and illness of the people to come to help him. Then YES fine the sucker.
Then you could have your sanctions, but to penalize people for behaving in what may be due to prior experiences a perfectly rational and reasonable decision, because that decision went wrong, is ridiculous and petty and not a little bit on the classist side, as if people with means should know better and must be held to a higher standard, than just plain folks.
Nothing will work, except to impress upon people the seriousness of the situation and hope that they make the right choice, somethings the right choice is staying home, others it’s leaving; but I fail to see the purpose in fining people because they don’t have the ability to see into the future…sometimes the bull gets YOU.
I think that people should be responsible for the effects of the choices they make, and that, for those people who voluntarily (i.e. have the option, means, ability, to leave) choose to remain after a mandatory evacuation order is given, a fine is not unreasonable. I would agree with this because it is appropriate to help defray the costs involved in rescuing and providing other services to people who needn’t have been in the circumstances of requiring these services. It is in keeping with my beliefs about the mutual obligations that exist between an individual and society, upon which my agreement with the principles of the Democratic party lies.
I feel the same way about it that I do about mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. (I hope Mr. Moto agrees with mandatory helmet laws because otherwise he is being a bit hypocritical). However, I don’t think it is possible to have most people pay some amount that is equal to the costs of saving their ass, so the amount would have to be more symbolic than proportional.
However, given that my motivations are to have people be accountable for the increased cost to society for their actions, the process of administering fines (and the associated time taken in the courts) would probably end up costing more than would be brought in from the fines. Additionally, I could see someone making a claim, not entirely without merit, that they should be reimbursed for the costs involved to them if they are given an order for mandatory evacuation that ends up having been unnecessary.
Just to give us some meat to shew on here, instead of a picked clean bone, I checked out our own Virginia Code.
Lo and behold, it states that the governor has the power to compel evacuation in an emergency, and that that order has the force of law. Failure to comply with it is a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Class 1 misdemeanors are punishable by confinement in jail for not more than twelve months and a fine of not more than $2,500, either or both. Prosecutorial and judicial discretion apply as always.