General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"I wish we had listened. I wish we had left."
I just heard that said by an interviewee who survived Sandy in New York's Breezy Point neighborhood, which was completely devastated by storm, surge, and fire. Over 100 homes gone; burned to cinders is a hurricane's deluge. The man who said that lived through the horror with his wife and child as they watched a nearby house get lifted off its foundation and float toward them. It slammed into their house, opening up some of it to the storm. To survive, they left their house and headed into the storm and the night and the howling gale and made their way to the neighborhood church where they waited it out, scared to their very cores.
I am sure many of us can relate to that. As self reliant people, we tend to want to stay and protect ourselves and our own. Against anything.
And sometimes that is a terrible decision.
But how does one *make* that decision? To flee or to stay? To trust in others to keep you and yours safe.
Hindsight is always 20/20. The "right" decision is always clear when it no longer needs to be made. I don't know what I would have actually decided . . . . . but my tendency, my first instinct, would be to stay. What I can never do is condemn the decisions of others. I'm sure some can find the decisions foolhardy. All I can find is compassion.
Many of us can relate to Harry Truman, Spirit Lake Lodge proprietor, and Mt. St. Helens' most famous victim. His decision to stay was wrong only in hindsight. Or not. That run down lodge was his very life.
To flee or not? I don't know, but I hope, now that decisions were made we can all come together to help.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Speck Tater
(10,618 posts)
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,615 posts)I hope we can all come together to help, too...
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And at times doing body recovery after telling people, look, you need help later, we won't be able to help you.
If I am told to leave, it is leave. Property can be replaced, lives can't. that includes the lives of first responders.
That said, help we will, that's the way people are after a disaster.
Jennicut
(25,415 posts)the national guards in NY, NJ and CT. Scary stuff. I think Christie, Cuomo and Malloy made it clear to evacuate so there were less people in danger. Malloy spoke about that tonight at his press conference for the media in CT. Glad most people listened.
teddy51
(3,491 posts)Last edited Tue Oct 30, 2012, 11:37 PM - Edit history (1)
have lost everything. Reality is, if you survived that's the first part of the battle. Please stay safe all those out there that still are facing risks.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)What a shame.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)who really don't have the means to leave, stay in a hotel, or don't want to stay in a shelter, and I get that--but I'm not going to die guarding my house and my stuff.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)is that it assumes the "self-reliant" person knows more than the experts who are saying Get Out. And golly, gee, what an unforeseen turn of events when they needed help getting to safety, after ignoring evacuation orders.
I honestly think that there should be a time to evacuate, and a time to live or die with the decision to stay. If you choose to ignore the MANDATORY evacuation, you not only need a vocabulary lesson, but do not deserve to be rescued later on.
What in the world did these people think they could actually do to stop 80 mph winds and 10 foot flood waters? Simply command the winds and the waves to stop?
I do not relate to dumb decisions, especially dumb decisions to stay when told to leave.
It's this very deification of "self-reliance" that leads people to think everyone should never depend on anyone else. And then, those very people are grateful for help. Gosh, any chance their original reasoning was just the tiniest bit faulty?
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)is that when those self-reliant people get in over their heads they have to be rescued at great expense to the rest of us not to mention great personal risk to first responders.
Emergency crews suffer casualties all the time rescuing these idiots.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)The same people who tell them "When the shit comes down, we will not be able to help you" and get indifference and arrogance in reply almost always give in and go back for them.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And told them that when the waters came, none would come.
We followed through, we didn't have the gear and I was not going to order my people into a suicide mission.
We did body recovery two days later.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)in an area of the country vulnerable to hurricanes? More often than not it IS safe to stay. And not everyone has the means to replace their meager possessions after the storm so they try to protect the little they have.
What a sad place DU has become!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sometimes a rescue is impossible. I faced that during major floods. My choice would have been to order a rescue where first responders would have most certainly died.
Once people are warned of this, yes sometimes (more often than you care to think) there is no rescue possible.
I guess I am a horrible person, but serious, one reason to evacuate is to prevent that Faustian choice from even happening. I don't allow a rescue to protect crews, people may, and sometimes do, die. If I do, rescue workers and those who remained behind might die.
That is the real world. You know what? It sucks, but again, that is the real world.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)the first responders I know and other ordinary people, understand that sometimes there are people who live alone, they are old, they are disabled, they often do not even hear the orders to get out and those first responders don't hesitate to help them rather than judge them. Thankfully their attitude is not to simply walk away because someone dared to not 'follow orders'. A lot of people are alive because they did the job they signed up for.
I wonder why we always tend to go to the worst case scenario in order to justify our proclamations. The post I responded to was simply angry that anyone would dare to not to 'follow orders' and therefore should receive no help. Sorry, that is not the world I live in or want to, thankfully.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)We physically went down to the zone to try to get people, the old, the elderly, you the drill, out before the waters got there. We knew the storm was comming and this s a well known flood zone.
Most residents of that canyon listened and got on trucks, ambulances and city busses. One family, they simply refused. We toyed with arresting them for their own protection. I mean we had a back and forth with the police and the army. We recovered all bodies two days later.
You know, it's nice to be judged by people who have never had to make those choices.
I gave the order against rescue. Waters were, as predicted, running at over 20 knots, and we had no swift water rescue gear, let alone trained people. So yes, even attempting it woud have meant almost certain death for crews.
If I am told to Evac, I will NOT be selfish and put another commander in that terrible spot. In my mind people who refuse should sign release of liability papers on the spot. Period.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)the severity of a coming storm and think they know better than those who are telling them it's going to be bad, then they are not entitled to rescue if it puts others at risk. It's not as though the storm was unanticipated.
Go ahead, choose to stay. But understand very clearly that if you do, you are on your own.
And how exactly do you protect your meager possession s when your house is falling down around you?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)most first responders. They will assess situations regardless of WHY someone is trapped and act accordingly. I love the appeal to emotions here that if someone doesn't 'follow orders' they are putting other lives in danger. Thanks Christie, you got your nasty message across even to the 'left'.
There are many reasons why people do not leave. Believe it or not, which I know people sitting at home surrounded by family and friends cannot imagine, there are many, many Americans who live alone, who are elderly, disabled, mentally ill. That is WHY we are often asked to check on those who are alone during these kinds of catastrophes. But in our society today there are often people living alone that no one checks on.
I do not want to live in this world being created here where if you 'don't follow orders', that's it, you deserve no attempt to try to save your life.
And I am happy to say this is not the sentiment of most first responders.
The use of the 'ticking time bomb' scenario in this thread is disturbing to say the least. That rarely happens, and first responders are more than capable of assessing the danger of every situation they encounter. You need not worry about them. They know what they are doing, and I am very, very thankful that their attitude is to simply save whatever lives they can, WITHOUT the moral judgement.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)Why can't you understand that??
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I'm looking for proof that any First Responders lost their lives as a result of people's decisions to stay. So far, I have found nothing to back up that claim.
First Responders do not take unnecessary risks regardless of the reasons why people are stranded. That claim is simply false.
Christie and Bloomberg, both Republicans, (regardless of Bloomberg's constant changing of parties he is a Republican) made this claim. I have found zero evidence to support it. First Responders always asses the danger to themselves regardless of why someone needs rescuing. To cheer on this false claim is not something I am willing to participate in and hope that everyone, regardless of their decisions, survives.
I personally do not condemn people to death even if they make foolish decisions.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Already told you why, and for some reason it is not possible to grasp this for you. If conditions are deemed too dangerous a rescue will not be attempted, therefore rescuers will not be at risk, therefore they will not make it into that list...hence that list will not need to be compiled.
Why this is so hard to comprehend I really have no idea.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)....the one who stayed, and the first responder who went back when they knew they shouldn't as opposed to the just the one who didn't heed the good advice given?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)can rescue someone. That decision thankfully among all the first responders I know, is not generally based on 'let them die, they refused to follow orders'. I have never, ever heard a single first responder and I know many due to my husband being one, worry about why a person is still trapped in a dangerous situation.
There are many reasons why people do not leave. Sometimes they are too old, alone, disabled and/or have a precious animal they are afraid might not be allowed to go with them. Some people are mentally ill, panicked, frightened and too traumatized to understand everything that is going on.
Thankfully first responders generally do not try to figure out whether they 'didn't follow orders' or not, they simply do their job and will go in and rescue everyone it is possible to rescue.
I hope I never live in a world where that changes.
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)....because the authorities were not willing to put their rescue personnel in conditions that could result in their injury or death.
Additionally, they put themselves and a child at risk because they foolishly decided to ride out the storm. That, in my opinion, is irresponsible and ignorant beyond belief. Nothing, not even the possibility of losing meager possessions, is worth risking your life. It is NEVER safe to stay when threatened by the imminent landfall of a hurricane. NEVER.
And don't give me any of that stuff about living in coastal areas subject to the threats of hurricanes...been there, done that. That's why I currently live about 425 miles north of the Gulf Coast.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Knowing as many First Responders in NY and NYC as I do, I am confident that the last thing they are thinking of right now as they assess situations they are faced with, is 'hmm, there was a MANDATORY order for these people to leave so let's move on'. They will simply save as many lives as they can without endangering themselves, which is always a first consideration regardless of mandatory orders or simply cases of people who could not get out which is why I fail to see the point of claiming that First Responders EVER unnecessarily place themselves in danger.
I fail to see the point of these admonishments other than it feels good to find someone to admonish. Thankfully I do not know a single first responder who will be worrying about who to admonish or who not to admonish. Much like doctors who are often faced with saving the lives of criminals, they will simply assess each situation and try to save as many lives as possible while not endangering their own and without judging the decisions made by those whose lives are in danger.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Other than that, I'm inclined to agree with you.
While the instinct is to stay and protect your home, when all common sense and direct instructions are to evacuate, then pack your children, your critters, important papers and treasured keepsakes.... and evacuate.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)In Fukushima, I will never, ever take chances with water. I'll get out even if the threat is slight.
The thing about water is that one minute, the street is dry--then five minutes later, there is six feet of water over the street. A water threat can come up so suddenly that you can't outrun it.
Just get out. A storm isn't an adventure. It's a dangerous situation.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)I've seen flash flooding before, but nothing like this. We live on a waterway and watching the water rise was a feeling I never want to have again -- not because we might have to leave, but because we may have missed our chance because no one knew it would rise so fast.
nolabear
(41,963 posts)When the boss says go, you go.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
aquart
(69,014 posts)Unfortunately, our power was on lower ground than we are and an explosion blacked us out. I left last Friday. My 90-something neighbor and her daughter and dog stayed. I spoke to her today. Our building has landlines but no other power. She is cold and anxious.
She said they have friends in the West 90s BUT THEY CAN'T GET THERE. Said Manhattan traffic is so bad it takes three hours to get uptown.Can't get a car service.
I have no idea what to tell her.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)I remain mystified by the supposed conflict here.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Some folks simply "know better."
You can't cure that, and it's international.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)enough to be able bodied with transportation. I can get out without assistance.
EC
(12,287 posts)where I had so little money to go to a motel somewhere out of danger, that I would have wondered just where would I go? I haven't heard if shelters further inland were set up or not. But I've never seen it listed in evacuation plans my city used to have in case the power plant started melting down. Just which highway out to use. So where would everyone be expected to go?
Ilsa
(61,695 posts)Order to evacuate Galveston Island was given. they were told that if they stayed, the first responders probably couldn't reach them if they tried, and that they didn't want to send first responders out because it endangers them.
I don't remember the final death count. They simply couldn't rescue the ones who decided to stay.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)I mean, honestly, there's nothing you can do to "protect" anything (or anyone, for that matter) if giant winds and waves and rain come and wash away your house. I think you don't really mean that you want to protect yourself against anything, because that's not possible. You can't keep your basement from flooding or your roof from being blown off or your house from being washed away. Staying there just means staying with it, whatever happens. If that's your choice, so be it.
The self-reliance part should be on the front end, before you evacuate: board up windows, get anything valuable out of the basement, turn off the electricity, pack the family jewels and/or pictures. And pack your own: your kids, your pets. That's the instinct to protect.
It's also the responsible thing to do when ordered by the government to evacuate. I've done it before. Not my own house , but one we'd paid a pretty penny to rent for a week on a barrier island (and not a mandatory, but a highly suggested evacuation, requested by the governor). We chose to leave, given that we had kids and an elderly mother with us.
And staying there isn't self-reliant if you end up risking other people's lives if you have to be rescued. It's selfish.
Warpy
(111,256 posts)I'm on reasonably high ground. Otherwise, it's get the hell out of Dodge before it hits or you're going to find yourself trying to do it during the storm.
I'm glad you made it through. Once you wring everything out, you should be OK now.
yardwork
(61,608 posts)That is the opposite of self-reliant.
1monster
(11,012 posts)expected to follow the coast up to the Carolinas and then hit land. But there was always a chance it could come in closer than expected.
So, when friends offered us the use of a house on the west coast of Florida, we packed up and headed down I-95 to I-4 to I-75.
We crusied down I-95. There wasn't much traffic most of the time. But the closer to I-4, the heavier the traffic. The traffic on I-4 was unbelievably heavy -- in both directions. It took us seven hours to go from one end to the other end of I-4. I-4 is only 130 miles long.
While we were on I-4, Floyd brushed past on its way to the Carolinas. Had Floyd moved in and hit Florida while we were stuck on I-4, thousands upon thousands of people, including us, would have been at risk. In Florida, there are far too many people and far to few evacuation routes.
To go or to stay. The next time there's a hurricane that we feel is a danger to us, we will seek safer ground as close to our homes as possible.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)I have no clue why anybody thinks mass evacuation is safe.
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)that died on that bus because they were stuck in hours long traffic on I-10. No reason for that to happen.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)So many willing to condemn people without knowing why they make the decisions they make.
Let's hope some of the sentiments expressed in this thread are not reflected by the rescuers. My SO being a first responder, never judged people who were in trouble, he was there to save lives, period. Something very ugly is going on in this country and it's not just on the Right. I lost my First Responder to a tragic accident. We never blamed the person responsible, what good would that have done? Other than ruin yet another life.
Yes, let's hope that is the reaction of those who took on the job of saving lives. From what I know from the many first responders I know, they will not be asking why people made the decisions they made, they will be putting every effort into saving lives.
Stinky The Clown
(67,799 posts)You got my point.
You're right about something ugly going on in this country, and it covers the spectrum.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)There's the gold, right there.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)I've moved dozens of times in my life and I rent. I've never owned a home. My home is wherever my husband and kids are. I heard the majority of deaths has come from trees falling on people some while they thought they were safe in their home. No, even if I did own my own home no house is worth my precious family.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I can't really condemn their decisions, either. My compassion is just tinged with irritation at knowing that they aren't just risking their own lives. Firefighters, cops, and EMTs die every storm trying to save people that chose to ride it out.
I'm not in a position to be a first responder on this one, so I'm going to go volunteer on cleanup if I get a chance.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Order rescue personnel to shelter and NOT engage in a rescue since it's too dangerous.
Go ahead and tell e this is not true, because I have issued those orders.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)Not enough infrastructure to get them all out. So, was it better to evacuate and be stuck on the road, or stay in place?
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)And there's no excuse for a country as wealthy as this one to not have the infrastructure to evacuate population centers.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And staggered.
I am sure the after review explored that
I know, you know better
LisaL
(44,973 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The orders are given using information at the momemt, at the momemt Houston was on the path.
Play along now, they don't and as expected when they issued the order, it stays in that path. It hits Houston, killls oh let's low ball it, ten people... Then you would be telling me, why didn't they issue that order?
Emergency Command Centers work with the info available at the momemt, not five hours into the future. I wish the NWS had wizards capable of looking into the future, woud make the job that much easier, alas they have scientist that have to forecast based on scientific information...sorry, no magical thinking or indeed magic involved in that business.
You know the NWS issues red flag warnings regularly for the back country and rarely do we have major fires...I am thankful when they are "wrong". This attitude is really baffling to me.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)It isn't. People died during evacuation of Houston for Rita (which turned out not even be necessary). Evacuations aren't risk free.
"State Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, whose wife spent more than 12 hours in a U.S. 290 traffic jam, called for a careful review of the evacuation. "People are downplaying the fact that people died in the evacuation and that is not right," he said. "Is the chance of dying greater in the movement than in the storm? That's the question we need to consider.""
http://www.chron.com/news/hurricanes/article/Exodus-weighs-heavily-in-death-toll-107-1502590.php
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Who told you they were?
It is a balance of keeping you in a potential disaster zone or risking you getting killed during the evacuation.
When EOC centers issue the Evac order, pretty much the decision has been made that the risk of shelter in place is greater than moving populations.
Houston has become an example of what can go wrong, but sorry, they issued it when the risk of keeping you in place outweighed the risk of moving you. I am betting four hours later they would not have issued, but when they dd, given the information they had, they took the decision they took.
Houston also raised another issue, won't happen...but to reduce the risk busses should be used in evacuations, not POV.
Trust me, I live in a town that if it needs to be evacuated...kiss your ass pretty much... Maybe trains, busses and military vehicles. Good luck with that one! You will not pry vehicles off the hands of San Diegas.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)When they gave the order it was a decision made on data at that momemt. If they were able to see into the future, even four hours, they would not have issued those orders.
Is this that hard to comprehend? I 's'pose.
So again, you'd be howling if they decided against it and people drowned in their homes. Rita turned at the last momemt.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)It is a disingenuous argument therefore to try to put forward the notion that first responders simply rush into every situation without considering their own safety also.
This appeal to the emotions of the public to get support for their need to point fingers, to lecture, to admonish, even in the middle of a huge tragedy, using First Responders to do so, is reprehensible.
Iow, no one giving orders in these situations is going to send First Responders into situations where there is the likelihood that they themselves may die regardless of the reasons why the people needing help are there.
I would like to see a list of the names of First Responders who died trying to help people who chose to stay rather than leave during national disasters. So far I have not been able to find such a list.
I have found names of courageous first responders, such as the Fire Fighters and Cops who died on 9/11 trying to get to those trapped in the towers, who lost their lives while trying to save others. They are all tragic deaths and heroic. But not one of them died because of people who 'refused to leave'.
Therefore the argument using First Responders is disingenuous. If such an argument is to be made, it should be made our of concern for all lives and based on actual facts.
Sgent
(5,857 posts)they cannot go out in 50 Kt winds while a storm is going on.
They will try to be there as soon as possible, but Sandy was lucky in the fact that the winds were less than 6 hours. Isaac this year sat on top of New Orleans for over 36 hours.
If the levee's had broke during Katrina -- rather than afterwards, 1000's more would have died than did. You cannot fly helicopters, use boats, or use vehicles in that type of weather.
Even after the storm passes, it can take a long time to get vehicles through. In Katrina, 4 of 5 routes into the city had been destroyed, or still had standing water preventing their use for over a week. The only supplies had to come in by boat, or by one highway.
During Katrina itself, the Parish President of Jefferson (Metairie) even ordered the pump operators out of their bunkers and to leave.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And unexpected, to a storm that we know is comming? Serious?
For the record, once again, I have been in the exact situation you say does not hapen, both as a line responder and in command authority. You know why you can't find those lists? Because in a storm situation after a certain threshold is reached responders are ordered to shelter by responsible commanders. Yup, they hate it, they argue over the radio at times, but I do not want to bury them as well. This is ALWAYS after warnings are given to residents that no rescue is forthcoming and that they are on their own.
By the way, here is a huge freaking clue, fire and police personnel were in the process of effecting, or attempting, actual evacuations and rescues when the towers came down. But you knew that. 911 was not an expected storm that we knew was coming for a week or so.
You might call this appeal to emotion, I call it reality.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)First Responders who, as being claimed in these emotional appeals for condemnation of people who chose to stay for whatever reasons, died as a result of their choice.
If you have such a list, it would save me any more time searching.
I made zero comparison between 9/11 and any natural disaster so have no clue where you got that from my comment.
Still searching for proof of the claim and still finding nothing.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Died just last month after mandatory orders were given in a wild fire situation.
You might want to look for boulevard fire, and elderly man dead.
His neighbor, who also staid behind, pretty much said he was an idiot to local media.
The dog was bright and ran away, and was adopted by a neighbor.
They happen, but I guess you do know better than every EOC staff, FEMA, fire and rescue official across the country.
Serious...and you go ahead and stay, just sign a release of liability please.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Apparently no First Responder was placed at risk by the decision made by that 80 year old. And that is my point. It is sad that he died. It's also sad that at least 69 people have died across the Caribbean and so far, 39 have died in the US. Each and every death is a tragedy, and I am not interested in judging any of them right now.
Again, if you have some proof that Christie's and Bloomberg's statements are true regarding the risk to First Responders, I'll be happy to check it out.
I have stayed during hurricanes and have left also. I doubt you know more than any other First Responder frankly. I know many, many of them right now in NY and most of them are in NYC. They will assess each situation as they always do, they will not unnecessarily endanger their own lives, but will not leave anyone who can be rescued safely, simply because they made a foolish decision.
I am grateful to all those I know who are now working round the clock to save lives and I have every confidence in their decisions.
I still have not been able to contact members of my own family. I am sure that is because they have no power.
And I hope you are able to contact your family members soon.
Most likely, it is a power outage.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)power outages but by today I was getting a little anxious since I could not reach anyone, but just a few minutes ago I did get through on my nephew's cell phone and he confirmed that at least my sister's family are fine, just without power.
My heart goes out to those whose lives have been lost, and to those who are now without homes. Watching the footage on CNN as one man said, 'it makes you want to cry'.
Anyhow, thanks for the good wishes.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Had family and friends stranded without power after Katrina.
Within days, the stress caused some of the most vicious arguments ever.
Some are still not talking to each other!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)We do not put responders at more risk than needed, why you can't find those list for the most part.
Look, I am talking from the real world...you apparently still believe rescuers are some sort of supermen.
I think we are done.
And you used tricky phrase, they will not leave people behind if they can...but they do if they feel they can't, corollary to what you said.
They will assess.... Jesus that is what I have been telling you...
You know responders, I have done this shit...there is a difference. Rescuers have a higher threshold for danger, partly training and equipment, but we have a limit.
And if you do not believe me that rescuers are at times ORDERED TO SHELTER as the scads of rescuers you know, preferably a Captain or Batallion Chief or above.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Contrary to the false claims being made here, most people know that First Responders will assess each situation and that the claim that people's foolish decisions will place their lives at any more risk than normal, is FALSE. I don't know why you have had such a difficult time understanding this.
Comments were made in this thread that anyone who made a foolish decision should not receive any assistance. I know of NO First Responder, thankfully, who subscribes to that opinion.
I am not interested in discussing what experiences you or anyone else has had as they are not relevant to this discussion.
What IS relevant is very simple. NO ONE should be condemned to death because they made a foolish decision as was advocated for here by some people. I disagreed with that. That is all this is about.
Your experience, mine, is totally irrelevant to this discussion.
No human being should be left to die because they made a foolish decision.
It doesn't take any expertise to reach that conclusion.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Can you get that in? It DOES HAPPEN.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Of course, by "discussion", I mean your usual condescension and nastiness.
Can you get that in?
hoboken123
(251 posts)Their posts in Sandy threads always devolve into these tangents...
deutsey
(20,166 posts)We have never had mandatory evacuation orders, though.
Last year, I was even outside during Hurricane Irene most of the night keeping debris off a drain so my yard/street/house wouldn't flood.
It was different this year with Sandy, however. When I heard reports indicating the storm was intensifying beyond the original forecast, I took my family to a friend's house that's elevated and we rode it out there. It was a very tough choice for me, but based on the reports, I felt I had to go the "better safe than sorry" route this time around.
As it turned out, with Sandy unexpectedly moving through up north much faster than expected, we probably could've ridden it out at home. We had some water accumulation in the basement but that was it. However, if the original forecast for a prolonged event had come true (and if the storm suddenly lurched more southward), we would've had catastrophic flooding, imo.
The idea of me and my family huddled on our rooftop waiting for rescue was all the motivation I needed to get the hell out of Dodge.
ananda
(28,860 posts)But I have a very healthy respect for hurricanes.
mac56
(17,567 posts)
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)you get the hell out -- that isn't hard to figure out. Even easier to decide with a child involved.
To each his own but if it was me, I'd at least go to another location nearby and anything less than at least 10 feet above sea level would be a deal-breaker -- that's if I was feeling risky that day. Probably a higher elevation than that would be the goal.
I really think that some people (moreso these days than before) have very poor practical judgment skills.
JI7
(89,249 posts)and they can say they wasted time in leaving when they would have been perfectly ok staying there.
the worst in case of not leaving is worse .
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)We were hit but not as bad as states to the North of us. Had Sandy shifted a bit further to the south that would have been us. IT's better to do too much and be prepared than not enough and be sorry.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)However, this particular storm was predicted to be a clusterf*ck.
Quite honestly and perhaps my priorities aren't in order but my first thought is always of the critters and I pray the folks fleeing take their pets with them. I could never walk out of my home under these conditions without mine.
GumboYaYa
(5,942 posts)After living through 145 mph sustained winds with gusts up to 180 mph in Andrew, I have never been near a hurricane making landfall and I never will be.
Initech
(100,075 posts)aquart
(69,014 posts)They cherished their beautifully-kept home in Long Beach so they stayed. Until they had to beg for evacuation. They've lost their cars. The house? They don't know yet.
