http://www.mprnews...plorers-for-rescue

Thoughts on the proposed ordinance? I'd honestly be fine with it. If I'm knowingly risking my life illegally exploring a place least I can do is pay a fine for having others risk their lives for my decisions.

"It took 35 firefighters more than three hours to safely evacuate him."

Really? 35 firefighters, more than 3 hours? Is it just me or does this sound like an excessive, mismanaged rescue effort? I'm sure the SAR nerds are going to start a flame war over this comment, but seriously, 35 people to rescue one?

"The fire department already bills motorists for the cost of extricating them from their vehicles following a car accident."

Sounds rough living in Minneapolis. What's next, bill you for the time it takes the cops to pull you over, on top of the ticket cost?

35 seems like crazy overkill. My Dad was a Philadelphia Firefighter for 30 years and it never took that many firemen to even squelch the flames of a skyscraper completely engulfed in an inferno. Only 1000 bucks too? It'll cost you damn near that just to get an emergency ride in the ambulance here in the city.

haha, believe it or not there are many departments that hire private "billing companies" to charge your insurance for accident clean up for example if two guys are working on you and one is sweeping glass out of the intersection 8 or 9 more just standing around you (your insurance co) gets a bill for a dozen city employees, plus the tow trucks plus any oil or antifreeze that spilled on the concrete has to have haz-mat remediation costs added, petrosorb at $50 a bag (kitty litter) plus anything else they can stack onto your bill

you end up paying though we all do..

I'm more surprised at them charging to extricate you after an accident.

But yeah, I'd not be happy about footing the bill, but if I get myself in that situation, it's my responsibility for my safety and god-forbid, my rescue.

Someone has to pay. May as well be the ones who caused the issue.

we used to pay taxes for these services, at least until the mid 1990s or thereabouts, well I guess our taxes will go way down or go away altogether now

That seems reasonable to me, it is your own risk. It might be a slightly different story if they also pursue criminal charges.

$1000 is drastically cheaper than I would have imagined for such a rescue though.

There's a silo near my house with an uncovered hatch inside a room at the top that creeps me out. If I fell in there it would be a long dark death, or a short one. Rescuers would have to get thru the fence and transport equipment to the top of the silo, or penetrate the sidewall if the top were judged too dangerous.

I guess $1,000 is what they judged they could get from a victim without his taking it to court, rather than an accurate cost. Especially if it's a round number. I'd be grateful enough to pay it without question. However, the fee has a punitive flavor. I think people are rescued from the consequences of their own choices all the time. Smokers in bed, for example.

I could see this leading to people being very reluctant to call for emergency services and winding up in a much worse situation if they know they wouldn't be able to pay the bill. Also, how do you define urban explorer? Would this also apply to others who need to be rescued while committing a crime? What about mountain climbers or skiers who need to be rescued of mountains and such? Are they charged for their rescue since they put themselves in a dangerous situation (serious question, I honestly don't know)?

I was about to agree to the thousand bucks until I read this. What DO they do about people who ski or get caught in caves etc.? Are they going to bill the homeless if they get in trouble? What are taxes for? Its just the man tryin to keep people down! Or I could just pay and go on with life...

If you don't pay up they'll send the bill collector goons to harass you, if you still don't pay they'll drag your ass back out to the hole you fell through and shove you back in it.

Posted by 2Xplorations If you don't pay up they'll send the bill collector goons to harass you, if you still don't pay they'll drag your ass back out to the hole you fell through and shove you back in it.

My new dream career.

As I'm sure many (if not everyone) in the Minnesota have heard, the Minneapolis city council is considering billing first responder expenses in the event of a rescue: http://www.kare11....ue-costs/31354743/

What are people's thoughts on this? I'm not necessarily for or against it, but given that the article points out that you already get billed to have them pull you out of a mangled car wreck, it's only fair.

I'm thinking the price tag may serve as additional incentive for people to be more cautious when exploring (Don't go drunk, use actual lights instead of your fucking cell phone, don't explore tunnels when it's raining, etc.)

Thoughts?

Its currently being discussed here
http://www.uer.ca/...rrpage=1&pp#post12

Perhaps if I read through the entirety of UER before posting I would notice that this topic is already being addressed on the main forums. Given this new knowledge, I welcome mods to delete this post at their leisure.

After spending trillions in Iraq, they probably don't have any tax dollars left for more legitimate purposes.

It's just another nail in the coffin of administrative fees and charges everywhere you look. In 20 years, there won't be any Americans left without some form of heavy debt.

I posted in the Great Lakes forums first without noticing this one, so I'll reiterate:

I'm neither for or against it, really. While I feel it's kind of BS to individually charge people for a public service (especially given the potential above-mentioned "other" circumstances), it may dissuade drunken college kids (who may or may not make the majority of the accidents/rescues here - are there statistics on this kind of thing?) from getting involved in something riskier than their level of experience, and serve as an incentive for the rest of us who are willing to take that risk to explore more safely.

I'd say it's a fair enough measure and it'll probably go through anyway because it really seems to have overwhelming public support, so...meh? Watch your step and explore sober, I guess.

There's a difference between needing a legit rescue from a public place, i.e. a lake while boating, a fire at a building etc, then from a place you are wilfully trespassing at. You want to play, screw up and you'll have to pay.

The idea of making anyone pay for ANY function that is already supposedly coming out of the taxation system is double taxation at it's worst.
If we really want to see people "pay" for their own rescues as well as other previously considered public expenses (i.e., inmates in Wayne County, MI. are sometimes "billed" for their own incarceration, or so I'm told...), we need to privatize the fire department and police. Would you like to see a bunch of rent a cops running around arresting people at will ? How about a fire chief who had the power to say, "Nope, don't send any trucks to (your name) house. I don't care much for him/her anyway!"
None of us go into those buildings 'planning' to get trapped. "But yes", someone might argue, "But you still knew the risks!" Fine and good. Any time we drive a car, get on an airplane, perform routine electrical work or operate heavy machinery we know the risks as well.
Sorry to sound bitter but, quite frankly, hearing about someone costing a thousand (or even SEVERAL thousand!) dollars and how they need to PAYYYYYYYYYYY!!!" from people who are likely also middle-working class folks pisses me off when you have non-productive Wall Street parasites at the top AND barely literate derelicts at the bottom draining the life's blood out of us every day.
Rant done! Good night, all....