TexasCHLforum.com

Just for clarity, the rescue was made by CA Air National Guard parachutists who rescued the girl from the sailboat, stabilized her, and next day placed her on board a US Navy ship that was already enroute to San Diego. I don't believe the Coast Guard was involved, other than receiving the distress call, as the rescue was made 900 miles off the coast of Mexico.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/07/pa ... vy-rescue/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

G26ster wrote:Just for clarity, the rescue was made by CA Air National Guard parachutists who rescued the girl from the sailboat, stabilized her, and next day placed her on board a US Navy ship that was already enroute to San Diego. I don't believe the Coast Guard was involved, other than receiving the distress call, as the rescue was made 900 miles off the coast of Mexico.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/07/pa ... vy-rescue/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Okay, let me try this.
I am glad the little girl is safe, I am glad the Coasties received the call, I'm glad that th CA national Guard rescued her and I am glad to support the Navy my tax dollars.

BigGuy wrote:What happened to minding one's own business?

Those of us who believe in it do. Those who don't are busy creating a nanny State.

And that Nanny State comes from both sides. Politicians of all stripes get elected on nanny state agendas.

Dragonfighter wrote:

G26ster wrote:Just for clarity, the rescue was made by CA Air National Guard parachutists who rescued the girl from the sailboat, stabilized her, and next day placed her on board a US Navy ship that was already enroute to San Diego. I don't believe the Coast Guard was involved, other than receiving the distress call, as the rescue was made 900 miles off the coast of Mexico.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/07/pa ... vy-rescue/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Okay, let me try this.
I am glad the little girl is safe, I am glad the Coasties received the call, I'm glad that th CA national Guard rescued her and I am glad to support the Navy my tax dollars.

Dragonfighter has the way of it.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

BigGuy wrote:What happened to minding one's own business?

Those of us who believe in it do. Those who don't are busy creating a nanny State.

And that Nanny State comes from both sides. Politicians of all stripes get elected on nanny state agendas.

The nanny state is the product of the Democrat Party. It began with Johnson's Great Society garbage and it has grown primarily through the support of Democrats. Yes, some Republicans have helped, but largely because the voters in their districts have become so addicted to government handout and regulation that at least some support was necessary to get elected. The vast majority of Republicans do not support the nanny state concept. There's a big difference between supporting bigger government (which I oppose) and supporting liberal/Democrat nanny state laws and policies.

Chas.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:

G26ster wrote:Just for clarity, the rescue was made by CA Air National Guard parachutists who rescued the girl from the sailboat, stabilized her, and next day placed her on board a US Navy ship that was already enroute to San Diego. I don't believe the Coast Guard was involved, other than receiving the distress call, as the rescue was made 900 miles off the coast of Mexico.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/07/pa ... vy-rescue/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Okay, let me try this.
I am glad the little girl is safe, I am glad the Coasties received the call, I'm glad that th CA national Guard rescued her and I am glad to support the Navy my tax dollars.

Dragonfighter has the way of it.

I wasn't weighing in on the legality or morality of who should pay. The purpose of my post was to give credit where credit was due for the rescue.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

BigGuy wrote:What happened to minding one's own business?

Those of us who believe in it do. Those who don't are busy creating a nanny State.

And that Nanny State comes from both sides. Politicians of all stripes get elected on nanny state agendas.

The nanny state is the product of the Democrat Party. It began with Johnson's Great Society garbage and it has grown primarily through the support of Democrats. Yes, some Republicans have helped, but largely because the voters in their districts have become so addicted to government handout and regulation that at least some support was necessary to get elected. The vast majority of Republicans do not support the nanny state concept. There's a big difference between supporting bigger government (which I oppose) and supporting liberal/Democrat nanny state laws and policies.

Chas.

Drug laws (we'll get tough on crime) and other laws about personal behavior - pornography, etc.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

BigGuy wrote:What happened to minding one's own business?

Those of us who believe in it do. Those who don't are busy creating a nanny State.

And that Nanny State comes from both sides. Politicians of all stripes get elected on nanny state agendas.

The nanny state is the product of the Democrat Party. It began with Johnson's Great Society garbage and it has grown primarily through the support of Democrats. Yes, some Republicans have helped, but largely because the voters in their districts have become so addicted to government handout and regulation that at least some support was necessary to get elected. The vast majority of Republicans do not support the nanny state concept. There's a big difference between supporting bigger government (which I oppose) and supporting liberal/Democrat nanny state laws and policies.

Chas.

Drug laws (we'll get tough on crime) and other laws about personal behavior - pornography, etc.

Apparently our definition of "nanny state" is vastly different.

Chas.

G26ster wrote: I wasn't weighing in on the legality or morality of who should pay. The purpose of my post was to give credit where credit was due for the rescue.

I know, I was just being a smart alec. It really was good information but too little sleep and too much coffee...

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

BigGuy wrote:What happened to minding one's own business?

Those of us who believe in it do. Those who don't are busy creating a nanny State.

And that Nanny State comes from both sides. Politicians of all stripes get elected on nanny state agendas.

The nanny state is the product of the Democrat Party. It began with Johnson's Great Society garbage and it has grown primarily through the support of Democrats. Yes, some Republicans have helped, but largely because the voters in their districts have become so addicted to government handout and regulation that at least some support was necessary to get elected. The vast majority of Republicans do not support the nanny state concept. There's a big difference between supporting bigger government (which I oppose) and supporting liberal/Democrat nanny state laws and policies.

Chas.

Drug laws (we'll get tough on crime) and other laws about personal behavior - pornography, etc.

Apparently our definition of "nanny state" is vastly different.

Chas.

And thats allright. The older I get (read more crotchety) the more hostile to any government intrusion I get.

It seems to be a mixed bag when it comes to counties requiring reimbursement of rescue costs. Where I go in the Rockies, reimbursement is required, and I am for the practice. Skiers go into off-limits avalanche areas and require rescue. Seems to me they should pay. As for the ocean, how can it be determined that those rescued were foolhardy? If a good system for doing so can be devised, I would be for it. Tradition isn’t always the correct path.

rdcrags wrote:It seems to be a mixed bag when it comes to counties requiring reimbursement of rescue costs. Where I go in the Rockies, reimbursement is required, and I am for the practice. Skiers go into off-limits avalanche areas and require rescue. Seems to me they should pay. As for the ocean, how can it be determined that those rescued were foolhardy? If a good system for doing so can be devised, I would be for it. Tradition isn’t always the correct path.

I don't get involved with political issues unrelated to the Second Amendment and use of force because doing so would lessen my effectiveness. However, if I could, I would lobby for a few other causes and issues and one would be to pass a law prohibiting any "user fees" for any service provided by an entity with taxing authority. In my opinion, the fees for ambulance, fire protection, police protection, building permits, city inspectors, municipal bus/train service, and everything else a taxing authority does are prepaid via by taxes. (There should be no toll roads after the cost of construction is recouped.)

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

rdcrags wrote:It seems to be a mixed bag when it comes to counties requiring reimbursement of rescue costs. Where I go in the Rockies, reimbursement is required, and I am for the practice. Skiers go into off-limits avalanche areas and require rescue. Seems to me they should pay. As for the ocean, how can it be determined that those rescued were foolhardy? If a good system for doing so can be devised, I would be for it. Tradition isn’t always the correct path.

I don't get involved with political issues unrelated to the Second Amendment and use of force because doing so would lessen my effectiveness. However, if I could, I would lobby for a few other causes and issues and one would be to pass a law prohibiting any "user fees" for any service provided by an entity with taxing authority. In my opinion, the fees for ambulance, fire protection, police protection, building permits, city inspectors, municipal bus/train service, and everything else a taxing authority does are prepaid via by taxes. (There should be no toll roads after the cost of construction is recouped.)

Chas.

The question becomes "why keep flying the aircraft for 6 more hours when the ocean underneath him was perfectly good for crashing into?" Was this just a case of a pilot that wanted to commit suicide or was this a more elaborate terrorist plot involving gps spoofing, an aviation transceiver, and someone pretending to be ATC? If the black boxes show nothing, I suspect that there might be a push for longer recordings for them.

Redneck_Buddha wrote:

VMI77 wrote:It's the progressive way. A million little busy bodies are a million little spies. After all, you can't spell progressive without the "SS."

Ooooohhhh I'm gonna have to borrow that!

Unfortunately so true...