8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!

[Anonymous]

Guides don’t get paid (or tipped, a big part of their comp) if the trip is cancelled or ended early. The incentives are not aligned with safety. Guides want the trips to go and clients want the trips to go. No one is thinking about safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

You're disgusting.

It's ultimately up to the guide to gauge the safety.

+1 The guides should have erred on the side of safety and delayed the return trip. They could have stayed in the huts another night.

The skiers should have erred on the side of safety and stayed home. Instead, risk takers find someone else to blame for their decisions; and there are always salivating attorneys looking to sue someone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

When the families sue, they'd better settle because the jury will likely find the guides negligent.

Yes. Blame others and sue.

Ultimately it sounds like the guides made the decision to leave the hut and didn't open it for discussion or inform the party of the risks of leaving.

Suing is not just for money and to put a place out of business it is also to evoke change, set an example and force others in the industry to think differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

When the families sue, they'd better settle because the jury will likely find the guides negligent.

Yes. Blame others and sue.

In this case, completely justified.

For sure. Those poor women lacked the experience and ability to ski in the back country. They had no idea that they might encounter an avalanche. They weren't able to understand the significance of severe weather predictions that had been made and were in many news and media sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

You're disgusting.

It's ultimately up to the guide to gauge the safety.

+1 The guides should have erred on the side of safety and delayed the return trip. They could have stayed in the huts another night.

The skiers should have erred on the side of safety and stayed home. Instead, risk takers find someone else to blame for their decisions; and there are always salivating attorneys looking to sue someone.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

When the families sue, they'd better settle because the jury will likely find the guides negligent.

Yes. Blame others and sue.

Ultimately it sounds like the guides made the decision to leave the hut and didn't open it for discussion or inform the party of the risks of leaving.

Suing is not just for money and to put a place out of business it is also to evoke change, set an example and force others in the industry to think differently.

Hopefully, the lawsuits will force risk-takers to change their tendency to not heed posted warnings before they travel to dangerous places to seek adventurous fun times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

When the families sue, they'd better settle because the jury will likely find the guides negligent.

Yes. Blame others and sue.

Ultimately it sounds like the guides made the decision to leave the hut and didn't open it for discussion or inform the party of the risks of leaving.

Suing is not just for money and to put a place out of business it is also to evoke change, set an example and force others in the industry to think differently.

Hopefully, the lawsuits will force risk-takers to change their tendency to not heed posted warnings before they travel to dangerous places to seek adventurous fun times.

It will be interesting to see if there was any discussion before they even left. Even with reading warnings, most people will still default to relying on the guides/outfitter who know the area better than they do.

From the article it sounds like they may have thought they were far enough away from or may not have even realized there was a very steep are above them where the avalanche started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

When the families sue, they'd better settle because the jury will likely find the guides negligent.

Yes. Blame others and sue.

Ultimately it sounds like the guides made the decision to leave the hut and didn't open it for discussion or inform the party of the risks of leaving.

Suing is not just for money and to put a place out of business it is also to evoke change, set an example and force others in the industry to think differently.

Hopefully, the lawsuits will force risk-takers to change their tendency to not heed posted warnings before they travel to dangerous places to seek adventurous fun times.

It will be interesting to see if there was any discussion before they even left. Even with reading warnings, most people will still default to relying on the guides/outfitter who know the area better than they do.

From the article it sounds like they may have thought they were far enough away from or may not have even realized there was a very steep are above them where the avalanche started.

PP here. +1 Possibly so.

[Anonymous]

Reports are that I-80 was closed that whole day so even if they made it to their cars they wouldn’t have been able to go home.

They should have stayed in the huts (or not gone altogether.) Very bad decision-making all around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reports are that I-80 was closed that whole day so even if they made it to their cars they wouldn’t have been able to go home.

They should have stayed in the huts (or not gone altogether.) Very bad decision-making all around.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

You're disgusting.

It's ultimately up to the guide to gauge the safety.

+1 The guides should have erred on the side of safety and delayed the return trip. They could have stayed in the huts another night.

The skiers should have erred on the side of safety and stayed home. Instead, risk takers find someone else to blame for their decisions; and there are always salivating attorneys looking to sue someone.

You could say that about a lot of things, including taking car trips.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reports are that I-80 was closed that whole day so even if they made it to their cars they wouldn’t have been able to go home.

They should have stayed in the huts (or not gone altogether.) Very bad decision-making all around.

I'll bet if that option had been presented to the group along with any information given to the guides, they would have voted to stay another night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

You're disgusting.

It's ultimately up to the guide to gauge the safety.

+1 The guides should have erred on the side of safety and delayed the return trip. They could have stayed in the huts another night.

The skiers should have erred on the side of safety and stayed home. Instead, risk takers find someone else to blame for their decisions; and there are always salivating attorneys looking to sue someone.

You could say that about a lot of things, including taking car trips.

The analogy would be driving your car into the eye of a hurricane, or towards a tornado. Also a bad idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

You're disgusting.

It's ultimately up to the guide to gauge the safety.

+1 The guides should have erred on the side of safety and delayed the return trip. They could have stayed in the huts another night.

The skiers should have erred on the side of safety and stayed home. Instead, risk takers find someone else to blame for their decisions; and there are always salivating attorneys looking to sue someone.

You could say that about a lot of things, including taking car trips.

The analogy would be driving your car into the eye of a hurricane, or towards a tornado. Also a bad idea.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the survivors in the NYT article said that he didn’t think to question the guides because he felt they were the experts and everyone just went along with the plan. Stop trying to blame the victims.

The guides were not with them when they left their homes to go on their planned trip. Supposedly, they were experienced skiers who could read and understand weather forecasts of heavy snow and the potential for avalances. Stop trying to blame the guides for the consequences of the women's decision to embark on such a trip.

You're disgusting.

It's ultimately up to the guide to gauge the safety.

+1 The guides should have erred on the side of safety and delayed the return trip. They could have stayed in the huts another night.

The skiers should have erred on the side of safety and stayed home. Instead, risk takers find someone else to blame for their decisions; and there are always salivating attorneys looking to sue someone.

You could say that about a lot of things, including taking car trips.

Keep telling yourself that as you pursue "exciting" activities.