These men are trained to save lives ... where's the bravery ... no conscience .. pissed me off reading something like this. ‘Handcuffed by policy,’ fire and police crews watch man drown By Zachary Roth An apparently suicidal man waded into San Francisco Bay on Monday, stood up to his neck, and waited. As the man drowned, police, fire crews, and others watched idly from the shore. Why? Officials blamed a departmental policy, stemming from budget cuts, that prevented them from jumping in to save him. Fifty-year-old Raymond Zack spent nearly an hour in the water before drowning. A crowd of about 75 people, in addition to first responders, watched from the beach in Alameda across the bay from San Francisco as Zack inched farther and farther away, sometimes glancing back, a witness told the San Jose Mercury News. "The next thing he was floating face down." A volunteer eventually pulled Zack's lifeless body from the Bay. Mike D'Orazi of the Alameda Fire Department said that, due to 2009 budget cuts, his crews lacked the training and gear to enter the water. And a Coast Guard boat couldn't access the area because the water was too shallow. "The incident yesterday was deeply regrettable," D'Orazi said Tuesday. "But I can also see it from our firefighters' perspective. They're standing there wanting to do something, but they are handcuffed by policy at that point." Alameda Police Lt. Sean Lynch also suggested his men did the right thing. "He was engaged in a deliberate act of taking his own life," Lynch told the Mercury News. "We did not know whether he was violent, whether drugs were involved. It's not a situation of a typical rescue." But at a City Council hearing Tuesday night, some locals expressed outrage that Zack was left to die. "This just strikes me as not just a problem with funding, but a problem with the culture of what's going on in our city, that no one would take the time and help this drowning man," said one resident, Adam Gillitt. The city said it would spend up to $40,000 to certify 16 firefighters in land-based water rescues. One witness to the event told a local news station that Zack was looking at people on the shore. "We expected to see at some point that there would be a concern for him," said another. (Paul Sakuma/AP) http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelo...d-police-crews-watch-man-drown?bouchon=807,ca
doesn't surprise me that they didn't do anything but at the same time, not even any locals did anything... people have changed these days
I emailed my friend this article and he was just as pissed about the incident. He said that all these high technologies out these days are affecting people's mind .. desensitized us humans .. to be able to stand there and watch a human being drowned yet still think it's the right thing to do.
^ yeah that surprise me. Even if the budget wasn't enough to fully train those workers they should at least do something rather than standing there like a statue. Don't they get that feeling to rescue someone...
Not sure if you read about incidences in Florida and Tennessee where police and firemen stood and watched a man's home burned to the ground because why? The guy didn't pay his annual $75 police and fire dept tax.
wait so how did this 'volunteer' pull the guys body out the water? there was 75 people watching yet not one jumped in?
Haven't read about that. Just because they are sticking to the so-called 'law' it doesn't mean they have to obey the law cos I'm sure they would feel shameful, as a policeman (or whichever force they are working as) anyway.
I don't think they feel shameful at all .. if you didn't respond to the call, then it's shameful but you stood there and watched the whole ordeal when you could have done something about .. just wrong .. these people don't care as long as they get their paychecks .. they should be FIRED. There's NO law that held them back .. they just didn't do anything. If a volunteer swam out to get the lifeless body, then I am sure water is not that bad that someone could have swam out to help the poor man. You expect these firemen and policemen to be BRAVE and to protect us citizens .. that's why they're being PAID with high salary and excellent RETIREMENT for very little education requirement .. dangerous jobs .. yet with this incident, I really wonder whether people can count on these services anymore.
I think that people here won't be satisfied unless they have their pound of flesh; ie. that they would have been morally assuaged only if they perhaps had read that 16 firemen and police officers drowned trying to save one idiot from his asinine suicidal act. Most people in general know absolutely nothing about water rescues and how quickly it can turn well intentions into wider disaster. A rip current could have just as easily pulled all of them to their deaths. Moreover, everyone thinks that cops and firemen are somehow required to go "above and beyond," to give their lives in excess of the call of duty. Bullshit, not any more than you would expect a secretary or waiter to do so. Without the proper training and tools, a fireman or cop is just another helpless bystander. The real culprit here is the fiscal reality that faces municipalities throughout the nation and the resource choices that need to be made. The ropes systems, floatation platforms, breathing apparatus, and having enough trained personnel at the ready around the clock, would entail easily millions of dollars annually. Combine that with a low statistical chance of the need for a water rescue, one can see why such training and equipment became a likely target of the money saving ax. So to ensure that this can never happen again, I propose that the city in which this occurred institute an "emergency water response public surcharge" and take it from the pockets of concerned citizens throughout the Bay area. I would bet anything that the public hue and cry would become even louder, drowning out the voices that profess indignation at this tragedy. Bottom line, you have a sick fool who wanted to put on a self serving "cry for help" show, as most attempted "suicides" do, giving others plenty of chance to save him or "pull him back from the brink of death" so to speak. But unfortunately for him, he didn't stop to think that in this present fiscal climate, the safety net that he was counting on (to pull him back) had been budget cut out of existence. His psychiatric disease and arrogant lack of forethought is what killed him. While we expect firemen and police officers to be brave, that doesn't mean they're stupid. Going into the water without training or equipment would have been stupid. The above comment implies that all 75 bystanders happened to be powerful swimmers who can jump in at any time to effect drowning rescues. That is simply wishful thinking. However, not to cast a negative light on this heroic act, I would suggest that the city hire this grandstanding hero as their first water rescue crew member, and then pay his salary with all new taxes. Oh, and BTW, one has to wonder if this hero was such a powerful swimmer, then why didn't he act sooner? And the comment "I am sure the water is not so bad..." I would ask you Neg, would you have jumped in? I know for a fact that I wouldn't have, as just because one person can swim in that water doesn't mean that another cannot drown in it.
Yes, I have seen too many deaths in my life growing up (you read) and that was when I couldn't do anything. Now, I'll do it in a heart beat because to know that I could've done something and I didn't, that guilt will live within me forever and I don't want that. I do understand what you said about the fiscal crisis but honestly, whether these people are police, firemen, or whatever, I really expect "us" human to step up and help out the poor man. What if this wasn't a suicide but a child whom got swept out by the water? People should not use budget cut or whatever as an excuse. Just like a good samaritan, they step out to help someone despite the danger and they're not obligated to or whatever .. but from the heart. To step back and think about budget and craps .. smart .. yeah but cruel and one day, the same thing can happen to them or their family member and someone just stand there and watch .. I wonder how they gonna feel .. in fact, I wonder if they can really convince deep down in their heart that they really did the right thing by not doing anything and enjoy the show.
I would understand it if you were angry about the lack of cost that would supply the authorities with the proper equipment and training to perform a rescue, however what you state you are angry with absolutely makes no sense. You're angry because the authorities did not have any "bravery", "conscience" and "are trained to save lives"? First of all, they didn't have the money to train for this particular scenario. So that refutes your claim that they "are trained to save lives" in this man's case. Second, there's a difference between "bravery" and intelligent decision making. You're pretty much analogizing this scenario with, for example, a Navy Coast Guard Search and Rescue team trying to save someone who's in the middle of a damned jungle. They aren't trained for that scenario, and if they were to be "brave" and attempt a rescue in a tropical forrest, they would perish themselves. Third, what are you talking about, "conscience"? You really think rescue organization members would really just not give a shit that a person is dying, when there's nothing they could do? Don't tell me you really think they could have done something, because if they could, they would have. At the time, they did not have the equipment, nor experience, nor knowledge as to how to save the man. And as for the volunteer who jumped in to save, perhaps he was a diver or swimmer, and knew the proper protocols. edit: Furthermore, you make it seem like they're supermen, not doing their jobs. How is it ANY different than a rookie at work, who freezes because he/she does not know what to do do? Moreover, you seem to talk like you yourself would have made the rescue by jumping in to save the man. Tell me, would you do it if that scenario comes? I'm sorry, but a lot of your comments are very closed-minded and biased, not just in this thread, but other ones as well.
enjoy the show? i think not.... these people know they should be saving this guy but who is going to bail them out when the person they save turns around and sues them for bodily damages caused by the rescue? who wins that one? given previous cases..... the guy who wanted to die in the first place. these people are professionals and therefore bound to the rules and stipulations of their professions, which include all safety related work regulations. I don't like it either but this is just how the world works.
If they helped they probably would have got fired (if not sued) with a family to feed and no money and this thread wouldn't be here and everybody would be happy. IMO the guy tried to commit suicide and maybe he was banking on people risking their lives to save the one he was throwing away but it didn't work out that way. End of the day he killed himself, the red tape is stupid but i dont really blame the police, firemen or paramedics. If the public wanted to jump in, nobody was stopping them but maybe when it comes to the crunch rather then sitting on the computer saying what youll do in scenarios you have never been in, you do things you thought you wouldn't, like become frightened, not want to get involved, not want to risk your own life, especially if you have a family of your own.
One of the things that I think is missing from a lot of the criticism here is the tacit acknowledgment that this would have been a man needing to be rescued against his will. In other words, he walked out there on his own, in an attempt to die, and very likely he would have drowned anyone (by willful purpose or accident) that would have come close to try to pull him back. Hence, he likely would have needed to be struggled with and subdued. Given the fact that those rescuers not only didn't have the training to do so, they had no safety equipment to prevent themselves from drowning, so one can readily see why they didn't go into the surf.
