Prosecution for calling a lifeboat?

ProDave said:
This is a political point.

There is no distance law in Scotland at the moment. There IS guidance of 5 miles. The FM has talked of introducing a legal distance limit.

This is a shot across the bows to get people to stay local. If they don't and they continue to travel larger distances in larger numbers then there may well be a legal distance introduced in law.

What seems to have angered the FM is people flocking to "beauty spots" in large numbers. This one was just an easy target to make the political point that if you travel further you put people at risk. But it fails on that point because if the person had lived witin 5 miles of this "mountain" they still would have needed help but there would have been no prosecution.

Just all be careful. IF you choose to travel don't go somewhere crowded, or if you get there and it is expectantly crowded, go somewhere else.

If we are all sensible, don't go further than we have to, and don't gather in crowds we might get away without a legal distance limit.
Click to expand...

I think this is her mistake. When she announced the 5 mile recommendation she qualified it as being aimed at preventing crowds at beauty spots. She should have just have banned visiting those beauty spots. The 5 mile thing just doesn't work. Everything is further than that, even if you live in a city. So of course it gets ignored. It is also grossly unfair on a large number of people. I don't blame them for wanting to pile onto a train to go to Largs on the hottest weekend of a generation.
 
JumbleDuck said:
It now looks as if this case is a police attempt to find a way of prosecuting peolel for travelling 60 miles, given that it isn't actually illegal to do so. I wonder if the PF will wear it? The MRT doesn't seem too happy.

'No judgement' over lockdown mountain rescues
Click to expand...
It sounds a bit like the application of the Don't be a Pillock rule: If you're not being a pillock, even if it's illegal, we can look the other way; if it's legal, but you're being a pillock, we'll find something.
 
Stemar said:
It sounds a bit like the application of the Don't be a Pillock rule: If you're not being a pillock, even if it's illegal, we can look the other way; if it's legal, but you're being a pillock, we'll find something.
Click to expand...
What a joyous basis for a society purportedly governed by the rule of law. Problem is, this philosophy falls flat on its face when the self appointed adjudicators of pillockness are pillocks themselves.
 
bikedaft said:
Before the slight relaxation in lockdown on Friday there, the Police could charge you with breaking lockdown, as you were not supposed to travel.

This is my pic as we set off up the hill about 10 days ago:

Lost hillwalkers 'met by police' after Argyll rescue

(Arrochar MRT) the Police were most keen that we bring the lost folk off the hill, they were charged (they had driven from Motherwell). Uninjured, just lost in cloud with no map nor compass.

However as the 5 mile limit currently in force is not a legal one (i believe), that is probably why the Killin MRT rescuees were charged with Culpable and Reckless? They were uninjured, but seemed unable to get themselves off a hill with good vis. I have no more info than what was in the media, however.

Some MRT's criticise publicly the less prepared, most do not. We've all done daft stuff, we don't want to stop folk from phoning if they are stuck/injured/lost etc.

Yes, i think there is a chance that if a lifeboat becomes involved at the moment, then you may get charged with something. Yes, i think that that may deter some folk from calling them. Best stick to gov't advice for now?

Yes MRT members are aware of the extra risk of rescuing people, although it is not as high as the media would have you believe. But in addition to that, now, is the Covid risk. If i go on a shout and the casualty or their friend, or one of our team members turns out to have Covid, we are all out of the game, potentially for up to two weeks, depending on how quickly we can get tested/results. This has an obvious knock on effect for the next few days in that another MRT callout may not be feasible, and also for the day jobs that we do - I'm a GP so it can have a significant effect on that, until i get tested etc. It is impossible to do e.g. a stretcher carry without going a lot closer than 2m.
Click to expand...
Did you know Tam McCauley?
 
Stemar said:
It sounds a bit like the application of the Don't be a Pillock rule: If you're not being a pillock, even if it's illegal, we can look the other way; if it's legal, but you're being a pillock, we'll find something.
Click to expand...
Unfortunate the Police Force has a disproportionately high number of pillocks, so where does that leave us?
 
elton said:
No one ventures out with the intention of needing rescue. Everyone makes mistakes, with hindsight. So I don't believe anyone should be prosecuted for requiring recue. Also, a rescue that makes the news, is often a lesson for many others, and it's practical exercise for the rescue services.
Click to expand...


You overlook the fact that they were 60 miles from home and suppose to be under lock down and deserve this.

I understand that in some places the police have attended incidents involving the coastguard and lifeboat where the casualties are not sailors but people stranded by tides and the police have issued fixed penalty fines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top