8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

Risktakers and thrill seekers don't like their decisions to be questioned. They want to be validated and affirmed for their expertise and determination to defy the odds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More information on the avalanche has dropped: https://www.sierrasun.com/news/avalanche-victims-buried-5-8-feet-in-small-area-near-runout-edge/

Wow, hard to see the pictures. It is such an enclosed area. If they had followed what i understand to be basic rules for skiing in avalanche areas - don't bunch - this would have turned out far differently. If they had left 20 feet or more between them, only 1-2 people might have been caught and there would have been many people available to dig them out. I've read other stories posted here where the guideline is only allow 1 person at a time to cross open terrain.

Many bad decisions made that day.

Clearly they were rushing - but again as others have said they must have known their cars would be buried. But maybe they were rushing because conditions were so bad - near white out, hard to space out too far without losing rack, and I know I read something linked here that said it was hard breaking the trail, so likely several people at the front were very bunched laying down the path. So bad decisions compound bad decisions. Decide to leave, encounter bad conditions, decide you've gone too far to turn back, rush to just get through it, and break common sense guidelines that say DON'T RUSH. It's tragic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More information on the avalanche has dropped: https://www.sierrasun.com/news/avalanche-victims-buried-5-8-feet-in-small-area-near-runout-edge/

Wow, hard to see the pictures. It is such an enclosed area. If they had followed what i understand to be basic rules for skiing in avalanche areas - don't bunch - this would have turned out far differently. If they had left 20 feet or more between them, only 1-2 people might have been caught and there would have been many people available to dig them out. I've read other stories posted here where the guideline is only allow 1 person at a time to cross open terrain.

Many bad decisions made that day.

Clearly they were rushing - but again as others have said they must have known their cars would be buried. But maybe they were rushing because conditions were so bad - near white out, hard to space out too far without losing rack, and I know I read something linked here that said it was hard breaking the trail, so likely several people at the front were very bunched laying down the path. So bad decisions compound bad decisions. Decide to leave, encounter bad conditions, decide you've gone too far to turn back, rush to just get through it, and break common sense guidelines that say DON'T RUSH. It's tragic.

Don't go in the first olace when there have been warnings.

[Anonymous]

It was snowing 4 inches an hour when they left! Who in their right mind says “yeah let’s go”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

I'm sure it will all be sorted out in the wrongful death lawsuits and we can talk about that later as much as it upsets people here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was snowing 4 inches an hour when they left! Who in their right mind says “yeah let’s go”.

Well, the idiots on here, that's who. They will even pay $$$ for someone to make the decisions for them. Because they are experts in smelling snow or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

I'm sure it will all be sorted out in the wrongful death lawsuits and we can talk about that later as much as it upsets people here.

And when the guide company just declares bankruptcy instead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

I'm sure it will all be sorted out in the wrongful death lawsuits and we can talk about that later as much as it upsets people here.

And when the guide company just declares bankruptcy instead?

They won’t be leading anyone to their death. And good luck getting insurance next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

I'm sure it will all be sorted out in the wrongful death lawsuits and we can talk about that later as much as it upsets people here.

And when the guide company just declares bankruptcy instead?

They won’t be leading anyone to their death. And good luck getting insurance next time.

They won’t anyway. Most of them are dead.

[Anonymous]

Do away with guides and let risktakers go it alone in the back country..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

I'm sure it will all be sorted out in the wrongful death lawsuits and we can talk about that later as much as it upsets people here.

And when the guide company just declares bankruptcy instead?

They won’t be leading anyone to their death. And good luck getting insurance next time.

Next time, hire guides to take you water skiing when a hurricane is off shore. Exciting!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although probably some of you pedantic posters would argue that the woman who died during a tornado because a tree fell in her house wasn’t a victim since “she cHoSe to live in a place with tornados” or “she chose to have trees within the vicinity of her house”

It makes them feel safe to figure out why everyone who has a tragedy was somehow responsible.

This exactly.

It us called the Just World Hypothesis (a psychological defense mechanism).

See also, Fundamental Attribution Error.

Or maybe it makes the thrill seekers feel better that nothing is in their control. No free will. It’s all pre determined.

Nope, it’s the other way around, especially on this thread.

You mean the people crying "can you even leave your house!" when people say think a little first? Because clearly there is no gray space between being sane and throwing all caution to the wind.

You can think all you want about each of your activities. You can also come to a different conclusion than someone else. What I think is rude is blaming the people who died when you weren’t in their position, you don’t have all the information, and no one cares about your opinion.

You do. Clearly. You can't stand the fact that people are judging people who disregard warnings. You aren't going to change minds by continually arguing. Bad decisions were made, tragedy ensued in a completely foreseeable situation.

It was obviously not completely forseeable because I don't believe the people who died had a death wish. And multiple disagree with you, by the way. Or at least are trying to tell you you're a jacka$$.

No pretty sure it's just you. The people involve made tragic errors. Not unlike the deaths that occur on Everest. You seem really ignorant about the psychology of events like this. it's obvious why.

DP. Wrong again. Ask Jeff if you don't believe multiple posters disagree with you.

+2

It’s disgusting.

I really don't care because I see multiple people saying this was a stupid move. So much so that it's being investigated for negligence. Chew on that.

https://www.kqed.org/news/12074177/california-authorities-launch-investigation-of-criminal-negligence-in-deadly-tahoe-avalanche

That article is old (from Feb 21 before the bodies were even recovered) and doesn’t really say anything much. It says the investigation is just standard procedure and there is no indication if charges will even be filed.

Weird considering you're saying that it's just rude to even question them.

I’m not that poster and didn’t say it was rude to question them. Just saying your article doesn’t say what you seem to be implying.

I'm sure it will all be sorted out in the wrongful death lawsuits and we can talk about that later as much as it upsets people here.

And when the guide company just declares bankruptcy instead?

They won’t be leading anyone to their death. And good luck getting insurance next time.

They won’t anyway. Most of them are dead.

Au contraire. Sounds like a few people in here would make great guides. It takes little common sense, some 'experience', and lots of bravado. No lessons will be learned.