Huezee
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2020
Agreed, no 4th Amendment violation. I wonder what the DA's original offer was?
Alpine Touring Thread
- Thread starter NYSnowflake
- Start date
I'm a pretty law and order kinda guy, but we have a problem of conflicting incentives here. The avy forecasters want people to be incentivized to do the right thing, in order to protect life and property. The DA wants to punish people for doing wrong. Both are societal goods, but in this case, I feel that it is more important to preserve the ability of the avalanche forecasters to gather data. I can tell you that in the unlikely event I was anywhere near a Colorado avalanche, I would not agree to an interview with CAIC.
Agreed, I think the District Attorney is overstepping with the charge, and I don’t like the precedent it sets. If it leads to less people reporting incidents that’s obviously a bad thing. Incidents need to be reported not only so that anyone caught in an avalanche can be rescued (or recovered), but reporting provides valuable info to keep others safe. Heck, the DA can’t even prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the snowboarders even caused the avalanche, or that they were negligent in not taking prudent measures given the avy risk.
I do disagree in one respect, in that I think you have to report. Don’t know about you, but if I was near or involved with an avalanche and didn’t report it.....and someone ended up buried and dead....I wouldn’t be able to live with myself.
While anything that limits access to public lands is a bad thing, a better solution to an incident like this might be backcountry users avoiding zones that can actually bury roads. Sometimes a line just isn’t worth the risk it presents, to yourself or others. There’s enough other terrain out there that you don’t need to create such a risk.
I do disagree in one respect, in that I think you have to report. Don’t know about you, but if I was near or involved with an avalanche and didn’t report it.....and someone ended up buried and dead....I wouldn’t be able to live with myself.
While anything that limits access to public lands is a bad thing, a better solution to an incident like this might be backcountry users avoiding zones that can actually bury roads. Sometimes a line just isn’t worth the risk it presents, to yourself or others. There’s enough other terrain out there that you don’t need to create such a risk.
Ripitz
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2020
I think after you cleaned the shit out of your pants you would want to warn others of making the same mistake. Avalanche Pass in the ADKs has a slide zone that is off limits because of the risk it poses to others. My understanding is that there is legal consequences if it is skied. Search and Rescue teams in the Mt. Washington area are starting to charge people for rescues if it is proven that they are negligent. The professionals that work in these environments often rely on cooperation of the individuals involved but can make investigative conclusions without them.
Of course they can. It doesn't mean you should incriminate yourself. My union, and every law enforcement union I am aware of discourages officers from submitting to interviews from other agencies. There is rarely an upside.
There are differing levels of cooperation. The DA is encouraging from no to minimal cooperation. I think society is better served by encouraging maximal cooperation.
100% agree
Harvey
Administrator
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2020
Whose Woods Are These? – VT SKI + RIDE
If you don’t know whose backcountry you’re skiing in, you may be trespassing. On the third weekend of January, somewhere
vtskiandride.com
Brownski
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
Am I the only one who thinks that firing “a few warning shots“ is outrageous? Trespassing is wrong and all but that seems like reckless Endangerment to me. That dude should not own firearms. He may not deserve jail but he needs a felony conviction on his record.
