[at-l] Homemade Snowshoes - Break-in person.

[stephensadams@hotmail.com (Steve Adams)]

Clifford,

Reference your post, dated October 1, 2001, advising:

(1)  "(Lots) of folks were upset because some guy got lost without a compass 
and map, they sent out search parties ... I'll bet you ... the lost guy cost 
a lot less than this snow storm did for rescues."

(2)  "This person that broke into the shed and fabricated snowshoes isn't 
someone to admire in my book. He (simply) demonstrated his selfishness when 
he broke into the shed in order to survive his own ignorance in being 
unprepared in the first place."

(3)  "But (worst) of (all) he demonstrated his lack of respect and lack of 
honesty in not reporting his break in."

(4)  "In the country breaking into a camp by a person in trouble is 
acceptable by one who was prepared for the situation they put themselves in, 
but not when the person foolishly went out unprepared and selfishly depended 
on breaking into someone else's camp or shed to bail themselves out."

(5)  "Not only did this person bring shame on himself, but to some extent 
the entire hiking community."

Responding to:

(1)  I, as apparently do you, remain surprised at the lack of forgiveness 
some hikers extend to others.  After all, who among us is incapable of 
making a mistake?  The snowshoe fabricating hiker did not cause a search 
party to be sent out.  The U.S. Park Service responded, realizing the high 
likelihood of people becoming stranded by the unexpectedly quick 
accumulation and depth of the snow.

(2)  I'm not sure the hiker wouldn't have survived without the break-in -- 
but my observation is in hindsight, not in the midst of a very unusual 
blizzard.  In the same sentence you use the terms "selfishness" and "to 
survive" to describe the same act, "(Breaking) into the shed and 
(fabricating) snowshoes."  Once we accept the possibility that a person's 
very survival depends upon some act, we usually forgive some fairly horrific 
acts to accomplish that survival.

(3)  As I mentioned in a previous post, the Statute of Limitations may not 
have run, and the desire of some people to prosecute may be greater than 
their appreciation for the hikers' adaptability.  Some may feel free to turn 
themselves in for every indiscretion, this hiker apparently does not.

(4)  This hiker qualified both as being "in the country" and also as being 
"in trouble."  The remainder is a non sequitur; if someone is "prepared for 
the situation they put themselves in ..." they would, by definition, not 
need to take the extraordinary measure of "breaking into someone else's camp 
or shed to bail themselves out."  To break into someplace seems to make less 
sense if you were, in fact, "prepared for the situation."

(5)  I must have a higher shame threshold, the actions of this hiker do not 
make me feel ashamed.

Happy hiking.  Steve


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp