dreunc1542
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2005
- Messages
- 7,437
I remember similar outrage here when this story came out in The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/20/sports/20climber.html. Oh, wait, that's right, there wasn't any.
Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I don't recall a thread being started on many things. Doesn't mean sj members either condone or condemn them.dreunc1542 said:I remember similar outrage here when this story came out in The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/20/sports/20climber.html. Oh, wait, that's right, there wasn't any.
I think the difference lies within the reason/risk ratio. A farm kid working on a farm is likely doing so because that's how the family earns its living, and the percentage of accidents — I would think, tho I don't have the stats to back it up — are miniscule. Our sailor was doing it for nothing other than vanity, either hers or shipbuilding dad's, and sailing into seas that regularly claim lives. Major risk, no reason.Small Town Guy said:I certainly wouldn't let my kid sail around the world. My theoretical kid. But at the same time, having grown up in a farming community, and having known kids who died while operating tractors or got caught in grain bins, I don't think you can just say the parents are being reckless and ridiculous. Farm accidents happen all the time. Parents know this. Yet they have their kids out there working on the farm, basically sending them into a situation where there's a chance they could die. Does that mean they should be arrested for endangerment? Obviously not.
Again, I think these types of events are fairly dumb - these kids aren't exactly Charles Lindbergh - but I don't think it's black and white.
Killick said:I don't recall a thread being started on many things. Doesn't mean sj members either condone or condemn them.dreunc1542 said:I remember similar outrage here when this story came out in The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/20/sports/20climber.html. Oh, wait, that's right, there wasn't any.
Next.
Killick said:I think the difference lies within the reason/risk ratio. A farm kid working on a farm is likely doing so because that's how the family earns its living, and the percentage of accidents — I would think, tho I don't have the stats to back it up — are miniscule. Our sailor was doing it for nothing other than vanity, either hers or shipbuilding dad's, and sailing into seas that regularly claim lives. Major risk, no reason.
poindexter said:I am ecstatic she's alive. She's a gorgeous young woman with balls the size of Mexico.
If she has this thrillseeker DNA that BTE suggests (personally, I think its more like the dad has the Balloon Boy DNA), then maybe she should try the Baker to Vegas 120 mile race in the Mojave desert. If she gets lost there, she'll be easier to find.
YGBFKM said:Devil, what are the odds of Phil Mickelson dying near the end of an attempted circumnavigation of the globe. (Sorry, couldn't resist)
And you can't win your argument with BTE. Talk of young people and death doesn't faze him.