Bimini Babe 0 Posted September 17, 2013 Share Posted September 17, 2013 ...this is why. http://dangerousminds.net/comments/oh_god_christian_goofballs_lost_at_sea_for_91_days_want_to_sail Link to post Share on other sites
Steve_C 0 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Ugh, this is likely to cost some poor tax payers some serious search and rescue money, if there were more idiots like this out there, we would need to buy more Orion's Link to post Share on other sites
Fish 0 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 There is absolutely no relationship between religious fundamentalist nut bar American's, and our CAT 1 requirements. Even that nut bar on Boat Alexandra demonstrated that. The only applicable CAT 1 requirement we haev that relates to this story is a competent and sane skipper. End Of. And SteveC, no one was looking for them, so no SAR money, and that chestnut, cost of searches, has been done to death, most recently under the boat Alexandra thread. Air force need to do minimum flight hours anyway... Link to post Share on other sites
Steve_C 0 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Aerial SAR funding for off shore work comes from RCCNZ budget, not the airforces, so you betcha they worry about costs. And just because we didn't end up looking for them the first time, if they come into our area and go missing the boys will be up there looking for them...... Link to post Share on other sites
Fish 0 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 That's great Steve C, but you haven't said what regilious fundamentallists in Arizona have to do with our CAT 1 regulations? And I still can't see why you'd be worried about the same Arizona based nut bars might cost us money? All the other crazy American's we let in, yes (Nina, Alexandra), the ones still in America? No. Link to post Share on other sites
Steve_C 0 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 You' re right, I have no idea why they are anything to do with our Cat 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Bimini Babe 0 Posted September 18, 2013 Author Share Posted September 18, 2013 Oh my gawd, serious, much?! Lighten up and see the funny side. If you hadn't noticed, the article was faaaaaairly tongue-in-cheek. Link to post Share on other sites
banaari 27 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Arrrrrrgh. Point being made is that WERE this particular set of nut-job fundamentalist Americans subject to something approximating our Cat 1 regulations, they wouldn't be able (quite so easily, although doubtless they'd find a way*) to endanger their kids. *Suspect simply being raised by them would do it... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.