In message <[email hidden]>
(Tim Jones) said:Peter Clinch said:Tim Jones said:I do climb. In this instance I gather the climbers were asked to
leave, pretended to do so then carried on clmbing.
So that makes it Perfectly Justifiable to assault one person and
endanger the life of another?
No, but given that they weren't the sort of reasoning individuals that
follow a polite request to leave why is there so much certainty that
they didn't offer further provocation?
You started by saying that we shouldn't jump to conclusions, but quite
frankly I find your extrapolations to be wildly speculative. You say
that you are a climber. Perhaps you'd like to indicate how a climber up
a rock face and his second belaying from the bottom can offer such
serious provocation that it can reasonably justify the cutting of the
ropes?
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:We all know access at Vixen Tor is subject to negotiation right
now, so I personally wouldn't have been selfish enough to
jeopardise those negotiations by trying to climb there and
certainly wouldn't have carried on climbing after being asked to
leave. I can't help but feel that these two climbers obviously
weren't masters of subtlety and could very easily have done a lot
to provoke the incident.
It's difficult to provoke someone to do something that could easily
cause *death* when you're either climbing a route or attached to someone
who is. You're pretty much limited to verbal communication, and if you
can provoke someone to cut a safety rope with that then you really score
-10 for Gift of the Gab when the normal minimum is 0.
I'm sure we've all met the loud foul mouthed types who would score a
10plus though, its equally true to say that most people wouldn't just
cut a rope with no provocation.
I'd hope that most people wouldn't even cut a rope with provocation.
Quoted message said:The widespread assumption that the climbers weren't in some way guilty
of causing this confrontation seems absolutely astounding to me.
What I find astounding is that you think that assault and putting
someones life in danger is a reasonable response to a charge of civil
trespass?
Provocation or no provocation. Putting someone's life in danger is
inexcusable. It is as Pete Clinch has indicated an action as inexcusable
as someone who deliberately runs someone else over in their car because
they got in an argument with someone.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:If you knowingly climb at a venue with serious access issues you a
re surely inviting confrontation and must accept that your actions
are provocative, especially if you ignore a request to leave?
Thobut confrontation at the level of cutting a safety rope? Think of
the ramifications of that! It's like deliberately running someone over
at speed because they spat on your car's paintwork!
And most of us have the good common snese not to spit on someones car!
Most of us would have the sense to leave when asked, something tells
me these climbers weren't the brightest or politest specimens are
sport has to offer!
What we also have to remember is that many of the rights we now take for
granted, for example rights of way, open access, and a right to a vote
not dependent on gender or ownership of land, have come about as a
result of civil (and sometimes criminal) disobedience and protest.
Cheers,
Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"
