• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

SAR Response Under the Gun Again

ballz

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
422
Points
910
I'm pretty sure snowmobiles don't fit the definition of an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle)... under legislation, they are referred to as "Motorized Snow Vehicles."

http://assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/Regulations/rc961163.htm#8_
"Age of operators
        8. (1) For the purpose of paragraph 21(1)(l) of the Act
            (a)  a person under the age of 13 years shall not drive a motorized snow vehicle; and
            (b)  no one shall cause or permit a person under the age of 13 years to drive a motorized snow vehicle,
unless the person is accompanied by another person who is 19 years of age or older.

            (2)  A person under the age of 16 years shall not operate an all-terrain vehicle in the province.

            (3)  Subsection (2) shall not apply to a person who has attained the age of 14 years and is operating an all-terrain vehicle having an engine size of 90cc or less.
            (4)  A person who operates an all-terrain vehicle under subsection (3) shall not operate that vehicle unless he or she is accompanied and supervised by a person who is 19 years of age or older.
            (5)  For the purposes of this section an operator of a vehicle is accompanied and supervised when the other person has visual and voice communication with the operator."
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
1,270
Points
1,160
The life blood of the media is controversy - man bites dog and if it bleeds, it leads - and if there is insufficient controversy they, the (most?) journalists, will manufacture it. The CBC is not above twisting the facts to make a 'better', more controversial story and what could be better than the big, bad, cold hearted CF versus a small boy from a poor, first nations family?

There's no news here - the CBC is filling up the dead air between the advertisements with fictional drama. It's called 'infotainment' and Canadians lap it up.
 
 

Jimmy_D

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
ballz said:
I'm pretty sure snowmobiles don't fit the definition of an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle)... under legislation, they are referred to as "Motorized Snow Vehicles."

http://assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/Regulations/rc961163.htm#8_
"Age of operators
        8. (1) For the purpose of paragraph 21(1)(l) of the Act
            (a)  a person under the age of 13 years shall not drive a motorized snow vehicle; and
            (b)  no one shall cause or permit a person under the age of 13 years to drive a motorized snow vehicle,
unless the person is accompanied by another person who is 19 years of age or older.

            (2)  A person under the age of 16 years shall not operate an all-terrain vehicle in the province.

            (3)  Subsection (2) shall not apply to a person who has attained the age of 14 years and is operating an all-terrain vehicle having an engine size of 90cc or less.
            (4)  A person who operates an all-terrain vehicle under subsection (3) shall not operate that vehicle unless he or she is accompanied and supervised by a person who is 19 years of age or older.
            (5)  For the purposes of this section an operator of a vehicle is accompanied and supervised when the other person has visual and voice communication with the operator."

Edit: Removed Defination of term Act
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
4,366
Points
1,110
E.R. Campbell said:
The life blood of the media is controversy - man bites dog and if it bleeds, it leads - and if there is insufficient controversy they, the (most?) journalists, will manufacture it. The CBC is not above twisting the facts to make a 'better', more controversial story and what could be better than the big, bad, cold hearted CF versus a small boy from a poor, first nations family?

There's no news here - the CBC is filling up the dead air between the advertisements with fictional drama. It's called 'infotainment' and Canadians lap it up.

I recall a piece that the Fifth Mistake estate did on The Canadian Airborne Regiment in Cyprus. They attempted to paint the CF contribution there as a paid holiday with numerous disciplinary problems. They interviewed the RSM - who stated that disicplinary issues were minimal. The interviewer (can't remember who it was) refused to beleive him.

 

ballz

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
422
Points
910
Jimmy_D said:
2. In these regulations

            (a)  "Act" means the Motorized Snow Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles Act ;

So there for same law applies that until the age of 16 the operator may not operate a machine with an engine size larger than 90cc and must have an Adult of age 19y/o or older to supervise.

No. All it is saying in the part you quoted is that for the rest of the bill, it's not going to say "the Motorized Snow Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles Act," instead it's just going to say "the Act."

The "Motorized Snow Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles Act" clearly makes a black and white distinction between Motorized Snow Vehicles and All-Terrain Vehicles, and it makes it pretty clear when it outlines two distinct ages for the two different types of vehicles. I've made it even easier for you, I made it a bolded yellow and red distinction. You can continue to believe whatever you want because I'm not going to entertain this sideshow, I am sure the rest of Army.ca has figured it out by now.
 

CountDC

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
28
Points
580
Spectrum said:
The military should trade it's tanks for snow plows. We can train tens of thousands of SAR Techs that can stand on every corner in case something happens. The Navy can then crash it's last few ships into the docks and carry on drinking. Who's with me?

ME!!! ;D
 
F

fraserdw

Guest
Just watched the 5th Estate, I felt the program was very well done.  The young man had dropped his cousin off at his Grandparents and was returning on a known trail when he became lost due to possibly due to visibility.  He left the trail about 5km from town where the trail makes a u turn and heads toward town, He continued straight toward open ocean.  Interestingly, ground search found where he went wrong but were not able to follow due to darkness and thin ice section they could not see at night.  By the time his machine got stuck, he was 10km from home and then walked another 19km before death all in the wrong direction.  It took 3 men to pull the machine out so self rescue was not possible.  I do not think he was irresponsible nor were his parents as has been suggested, he was doing something he did almost everyday.  On this day he was unlucky.  As for survival equipment, consider how often the average Canadian carries survival equipment when they go 5km on a known road.  There are indeed questions to be answered but that is up to our government to decide.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,979
Points
1,060
This goes to support my last post;  real dangers appear to become routine, people become complacent, and then bad things happen.

I can't agree that his parents aren't responsible, sorry, I just can't do it.  He was a minor.  Part of a parents job is to ensure the safety and well-being of their kids.  If a kid was killed on a city street who was 14, became lost and ended up in the wrong part of town and was gunned down by some druggie or crackhead, I'd feel the exact same.  Parents are responsible for the kids safety until they aren't kids anymore.

I'd never let a 14 year old of mine go off alone on a ski-do, without having basic kit to make it thru a 1 night scenario and FIRM direction to "stay put if something happens and we wil find you". 

Real dangers were ignored and unfortunately ended in the result of the loss of life.  I feel for the parents, but they have a part in this tragedy too.

:2c:
 

Pat in Halifax

Sr. Member
Donor
Reaction score
0
Points
260
Spectrum said:
The military should trade it's tanks for snow plows. We can train tens of thousands of SAR Techs that can stand on every corner in case something happens. The Navy can then crash it's last few ships into the docks and carry on drinking.

Who's with me?
[/quote

Read what we have said

We've done our share. My wife may want to chime in here as I haven't been home for an aniversary yet!
 

Strike

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Okay.  I just watched the episode and it was so completely one-sided.  I understand that it would have been difficult to find a CF person to comment on SAR protocols wrt weather and call-outs, but you can't tell me they couldn't find one former CF member to comment?  HELLO!  Half the pilots working the oil rigs are either former SAR or Sea King!

Where we're the questions regarding safety equipment?  How about the basic rescue caveat taught to all CF, including Rangers, to stay with your vehicle? Why wasn't that explored?  And the comment from the so-called expert that CF aircraft can fly in worse weather than other aircraft?  Not the last time I checked.  Our rules are the same as everyone else and put in place by the Government.  By the way, said expert is a Coast Guard employee (former?) who was working out of the RCC (?) St Johns.  We all know what's going on there.

There is no reflection from anyone in the town (at least that CBC showed) about what THEY can do to ensure this does not happen again.  Would that not be more constructive than sitting there complaining about an entity that they have no direct or immediate control over?

This whole episode just pisses me off and makes me realize why I hate CBC so much.  A member of my family was been personally attacked by this show several years ago and I see the haven't changed their methods at all.
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
255
Points
880
Don't feel bad, Strike. It's not like our tax dollars are funding the CBC...

Oh wait...  :facepalm:

The following should be CF SOP's WRT the CBC:

1) Avoid the CBC at all costs

2) When option 1 fails, for the love of god - don't read the comments.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,979
Points
1,060
Strike said:
Where we're the questions regarding safety equipment?  How about the basic rescue caveat taught to all CF, including Rangers, to stay with your vehicle? Why wasn't that explored? 

You are thinking the same way I am.  This was a series of errors that ended up with the death of the boy, and sadly to say, even include his own actions.  He wandered for 19km's.  He and his family didn't prepare for the real dangers.  Did he have a FRS/radio of any sorts? Compass?  Flare gun?? 

There is no reflection from anyone in the town (at least that CBC showed) about what THEY can do to ensure this does not happen again.  Would that not be more constructive than sitting there complaining about an entity that they have no direct or immediate control over?

Or the family, for that matter.  I was a kid once, and at the cottage in the summer, sure I could go out in the canoe alone.  I HAD to wear my PFD and I HAD to say in sight of the cottage.  If my father couldn't see me, he'd be in the speed boat finding me, and that would end my days on the water.  That was summertime in PEI....

 

RubberTree

Member
Reaction score
5
Points
180
Strike said:
Okay.  I just watched the episode and it was so completely one-sided.  I understand that it would have been difficult to find a CF person to comment on SAR protocols wrt weather and call-outs, but you can't tell me they couldn't find one former CF member to comment?

I would suspect the CBC interviewed a number of CF members...both current and retired. Of course if what they had to say doesn't coincide with the message the CBC wanted to portray, it gets left on the cutting room floor.
I too am getting pretty sick of the CBC and their constant anti-CF message. Just once I would appreciate hearing about something positive we do. Even a quick "the SAR teams were responsible for saving X number of lives last year" instead of the 5th estate's closing message about the number of "failed" rescues off the NL coast.
 

Strike

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
RubberTree said:
... Even a quick "the SAR teams were responsible for saving X number of lives last year" instead of the 5th estate's closing message about the number of "failed" rescues off the NL coast.

Exactly!  A stat is only good when the total story is given.  8 lives lost in 3 yrs I think?  But how many calls did they have to answer?  I suspect thousands are investigated each year.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,979
Points
1,060
Perhaps the CBC and Canadian public are forgetting the sacrifices made by CF SAR units and members.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/10/28/north-soldier-igloolik-death.html
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,332
Points
1,260
RubberTree said:
I would suspect the CBC interviewed a number of CF members...both current and retired. Of course if what they had to say doesn't coincide with the message the CBC wanted to portray, it gets left on the cutting room floor.
Possible, indeed - I'm going to guess that the only ones we would have heard a lot from in such a piece would be anyone who may have told them, "yeah, the rules should have changed long ago."
 

Celticgirl

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Strike said:
Exactly!  A stat is only good when the total story is given.  8 lives lost in 3 yrs I think?  But how many calls did they have to answer?  I suspect thousands are investigated each year.

Judging by the number of MTECs that come to the SORs with incident numbers attached, I am sure that you are not too far off!  8)
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
1,270
Points
1,160
I need to repeat: The Fifth Estate is not a 'news' or 'public affairs' programme. It is infotainment; The Fifth Estate is to 'news' as Tennyson's Idylls of the King are to history. The CBC is selling air time to sponsors ~ that's the business they are in and that is, exclusively, The Fifth Estate's business. The truth is boring and sponsors don't pay to put boredom on the air so The Fifth Estate provides something other than the truth, something that stirs up controversy. It's rubbish but this is Canada in 2012 and rubbish sells "ears and eyeballs" to sponsors.
 

Celticgirl

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
E.R. Campbell said:
I need to repeat: The Fifth Estate is not a 'news' or 'public affairs' programme. It is infotainment; The Fifth Estate is to 'news' as Tennyson's Idylls of the King are to history. The CBC is selling air time to sponsors ~ that's the business they are in and that is, exclusively, The Fifth Estate's business. The truth is boring and sponsors don't pay to put boredom on the air so The Fifth Estate provides something other than the truth, something that stirs up controversy. It's rubbish but this is Canada in 2012 and rubbish sells "ears and eyeballs" to sponsors.

I'm really disappointed with the CBC...they are always looking for 'bad news' and putting a negative spin on what is otherwise positive.  Earlier this week, one of our SAR techs had a mishap with his parachute on a dive trg ex - both the regular chute and the back-up chute apparently launched at the same time and he had to cut one of them to get himself out of a dangerous spin.  However, the STL was p.o.'d because someone had witnessed the chute in freefall and the person called CBC to report that a SAR tech had DIED.  So the STL was forced to meet with CBC and do damage control because you know those camerapersons were out there in a New York minute ready to get the story of the dead SAR tech for the 5 o'clock news!

On the flip side, do they ever do a news piece on how hard the SAR techs train, how much time they spend away from home to do their jobs, how often they are injured (sometimes seriously), and the number people who are helped/saved by their courage and skill each year?  ::)

Sorry for the rant, but I've gotten to know a lot of these guys personally through my job, and I think they are first class heroes.  I wish the CBC would bark up a different tree. 
 
Top