Carry more in your pack or break laws for survival?

[stumblinhorse]

If it is an item of safety equipment, Then why wouldn’t I carry it? I probably won’t need it. But I’m never ever ever ever going to say to myself “ Phew! I really wish I hadn’t brought that lighter with me…. I almost used it back there”.

If just having an item in one’s possession makes them automatically feel compelled to use it, then I’d say they have some serious self control issues. Heaven forbid they ever find some junkie’s stash of drugs.

Simply because it is against the law to use it.

 

[fwafwow]

The law wasn't friendly to this guy

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/23-2218/23-2218-2025-02-24.html

He was found to have not acted reasonably, which is required by the necessity defense.

The case was first heard by a magistrate judge in a bench trial. Powers admitted to setting the fires but claimed he did so out of necessity, as he was out of food and water, had no cell phone service, and believed his life was in danger. The magistrate judge rejected the necessity defense, finding that Powers was not facing imminent harm when he set the Taylor Fire and that his actions in setting and abandoning the fires were objectively unreasonable.

Or for God's sake why don't all you people that will just willing break the law, fight for some language in the restrictions that allows for fires in life and death situations?

imho it’s not necessary.

 

[philos]

There is a fairly serious flaw in your reasoning -in my opinion. Burn bans are applied and lifted as conditions warrant. If you are out and inclement weather hits and the burn ban is lifted, but you have nothing to build a fire with you have no one to blame but yourself.

Another problem I have with this kind of logic is that some inexperienced outdoorsman may follow suit -influenced by you- and not be prepared if and when the burn banner is lifted, and the fire is needed or if the fire is needed to survive.

There are certain essentials that people should always have for survival and fire capability is one. As has been said many times fire capability does not mean creating a fire is inevitable unless you are a pyromaniac. I do not mean that in jest.

If your intent is to state that you are law abiding, and others should be then I 100% agree and applaud your mindset on compliance. I just believe you’re taking the spirit of the law a little too far and unnecessarily handicapping yourself in the event of a life or death situation.

 

[stumblinhorse]

The dumpster fire ignited on the first post. Congrats.

Lordy Lordy are you all a bunch of nannies? I wonder how bad it would be if someone really criticized something. A dumpster fire? Geez.

 

[sndmn11]

Or for God's sake why don't all you people that will just willing break the law, fight for some language in the restrictions that allows for fires in life and death situations?

Because it is already within Colorado law, I pasted it verbatim previously, as well as the link for you do research yourself.

The same concept applies to pulling through the stop bar at a red light to provide passage for an emergent police/fire/EMS.
The same concept applies to jumping a residential fence to help a drowning person.
The same concept applies to grabbing a child from stepping into a road.

There's a lot of way a person can break the law, without any negative consequence(s) and for a greater good/lesser evil. Many of those circumstances wouldn't get a sniff of suspicion from LE because they are the right thing to do.

 

[CorbLand]

There is a fairly serious flaw in your reasoning -in my opinion. Burn bans are applied and lifted as conditions warrant. If you are out and inclement weather hits and the burn ban is lifted, but you have nothing to build a fire with you have no one to blame but yourself.

Another problem I have with this kind of logic is that some inexperienced outdoorsman may follow suit -influenced by you- and not be prepared if and when the burn banner is lifted, and the fire is needed or if the fire is needed to survive.

There are certain essentials that people should always have for survival and fire capability is one. As has been said many times fire capability does not mean creating a fire is inevitable unless you are a pyromaniac. I do not mean that in jest.

If your intent is to state that you are law abiding, and others should be then I 100% agree and applaud your mindset on compliance. I just believe you’re taking the spirit of the law a little too far and unnecessarily handicapping yourself in the event of a life or death situation.

He is not taking the spirt of the law too far because he is not even taking it into account. He is talking the letter of the law.

The letter of the law says there is a fire ban. The spirit of the law is that people that are going camping, backpacking, etc don’t need to be starting fires for leisure not that one shouldn’t start a fire to save themselves if needed.

Intent and being reasonable in your actions goes a long ways when it comes to dealing with legal things. It’s one thing that many don’t seem to understand.

 

[stumblinhorse]

There is a fairly serious flaw in your reasoning -in my opinion. Burn bans are applied and lifted as conditions warrant. If you are out and inclement weather hits and the burn ban is lifted, but you have nothing to build a fire with you have no one to blame but yourself.

Another problem I have with this kind of logic is that some inexperienced outdoorsman may follow suit -influenced by you- and not be prepared if and when the burn banner is lifted, and the fire is needed or if the fire is needed to survive.

There are certain essentials that people should always have for survival and fire capability is one. As has been said many times fire capability does not mean creating a fire is inevitable unless you are a pyromaniac. I do not mean that in jest.

If your intent is to state that you are law abiding, and others should be then I 100% agree and applaud your mindset on compliance. I just believe you’re taking the spirit of the law a little too far and unnecessarily handicapping yourself in the event of a life or death situation.

I agree with most of that, but the bans are not on off that quick. Usually the county commission has to remove the ban and they announce the date. I also don’t want anyone following my lead on anything.

 

[BRTreedogs]

Simply because it is against the law to use it.

So you are saying, in all seriousness. You would loose you life to support not starting a fire?

As you lay in the woods, alone, freezing to death, knowing your family may never even have the closure of finding your corpse.

As you draw your last breath you will take solace in knowing you at least upheld the law?

 

[7RemMag]

Simply because it is against the law to use it.

History has demonstrated at various times that legality doesn’t necessarily equate to morality. The same can be said of the opposite.

So you are saying, in all seriousness. You would loose you life to support not starting a fire?

As you lay in the woods, alone, freezing to death, knowing your family may never even have the closure of finding your corpse.

As you draw your last breath you will take solace in knowing you at least upheld the law?

Well, hey… At least he took the *legal* high ground.

 

[philos]

I agree with most of that, but the bans are not on off that quick. Usually the county commission has to remove the ban and they announce the date. I also don’t want anyone following my lead on anything.

As stated burn bans are not immediately lifted, but they could be in the process of being lifted, and you won’t know. I have been in the woods and the bans have been lifted while I was there, and I had no knowledge of any impending reasoning for that to happen.

 

[AZ8]

Gotta say, this is one of the weirdest threads on Rokslide.

 

[np307]

I installed a GPS governor to prevent my car from ever breaking the speed limit. If its not legal I'm not going to be capable of it. I also dont own a mattress so that I cant rip the tag off one.

 

[stumblinhorse]

He is not taking the spirt of the law too far because he is not even taking it into account. He is talking the letter of the law.

The letter of the law says there is a fire ban. The spirit of the law is that people that are going camping, backpacking, etc don’t need to be starting fires for leisure not that one shouldn’t start a fire to save themselves if needed.

Intent and being reasonable in your actions goes a long ways when it comes to dealing with legal things. It’s one thing that many don’t seem to understand.

Ok, I will make some calls, but right now I read that a burn ban is a burn ban. And I see others charged with a crime for this. I could not afford to fight it, so if I got a ticket or worse I am not able to put up any fight.

 

[MuleDeerMike]

Gotta say, this is one of the weirdest threads on Rokslide.

Definitely the most worthless.

 

[MuleDeerMike]

He is not taking the spirt of the law too far because he is not even taking it into account. He is talking the letter of the law.

The letter of the law says there is a fire ban. The spirit of the law is that people that are going camping, backpacking, etc don’t need to be starting fires for leisure not that one shouldn’t start a fire to save themselves if needed.

Intent and being reasonable in your actions goes a long ways when it comes to dealing with legal things. It’s one thing that many don’t seem to understand.

People with common sense seem to be less common by the day.

 

[philos]

How about we let this thread rest and get back to episode 138 of the Robby and Ryan show—Modern Manscaping for Muleys

 

[CorbLand]

Ok, I will do make some calls, but right now I read that a burn ban is a burn ban. And I see others charged with a crime for this. I could not afford to fight it, so if I got a ticket or worse I am not able to put up any fight.

You’re sitting on the side of the mountain freezing to death and your telling me that the last thing going through your head as you die is “well at least I didn’t get a ticket for starting a fire. Couldn’t afford one anyways?”

Like someone said… something’s aren’t so much an insult as they are observation.


Edit to add. **** me, I got sucked into another troll job. Gotta be better Corb, gotta be better.

 

[sndmn11]

Robby and Ryan show—Modern Manscaping for Muleys

Solo techniques or team style?

 

[average]

Dude's holding himself accountable and the reaction is to pile on and call him an idiot? Very strange thread

 

[MuleDeerMike]

This thread should be locked and thrown into the illegal camp fire that the OP would definitely not ever make to save his own life if needed.