Capsized ship - who gets the lifeboats/life jackets?

[mulhuzz]

If somebody is young and stupid I'm not sure they should get priority over old and intelligent. Perhaps it would be a good idea for everybody to submit a CV and take a brief numeracy test before they embark so accurate life potential can be assessed by the ship's crew. A middle-aged teacher who produces brilliant students year on year shouldn't be bumped for a young lad who spends his time drinking mad dog 20 20 in bus shelters.

Can you actually measure the value of a life by what it produces or contributes to society?

I'm guessing the 'locked-in' paraplegic is the very first to go?

Nah, first to go would be people unable to grasp the notion of wit.

I tried very hard not to laugh, but eventually I relented.

In Mantis' defence, it was pretty funny, I nearly wet myself too, Tony.

I just initially scanned your post Mantis, apologies, I thought you were just continuing the sentiments of those in the posts before you. I see now that it was in fact a subtle but ironic attack on their position. Note to self: read all posts of Mantis word-for-word in future to avoid embarrassment.

Np np what a gracious post.

In all seriousness I'm a passionate campaigner for equality and that's why I think the 'locked-in' paraplegic should be made to swim for it like the rest of us.

yeah, that'd be equal. jesus.

[MANTIS01]

If somebody is young and stupid I'm not sure they should get priority over old and intelligent. Perhaps it would be a good idea for everybody to submit a CV and take a brief numeracy test before they embark so accurate life potential can be assessed by the ship's crew. A middle-aged teacher who produces brilliant students year on year shouldn't be bumped for a young lad who spends his time drinking mad dog 20 20 in bus shelters.

Can you actually measure the value of a life by what it produces or contributes to society?

I'm guessing the 'locked-in' paraplegic is the very first to go?

Nah, first to go would be people unable to grasp the notion of wit.

I tried very hard not to laugh, but eventually I relented.

In Mantis' defence, it was pretty funny, I nearly wet myself too, Tony.

I just initially scanned your post Mantis, apologies, I thought you were just continuing the sentiments of those in the posts before you. I see now that it was in fact a subtle but ironic attack on their position. Note to self: read all posts of Mantis word-for-word in future to avoid embarrassment.

Np np what a gracious post.

In all seriousness I'm a passionate campaigner for equality and that's why I think the 'locked-in' paraplegic should be made to swim for it like the rest of us.

yeah, that'd be equal. jesus.

I often think I should make use of the smiley icons but then again I think fuck it I'm not putting stabilizers on my posts for people who can't ride big bikes. I think it's a great analogy to support why women go first in times of crisis even though they are equals in society which is one of the main arguments in this thread. Happy to carry on spoon feeding you the baby food thou.

[mulhuzz]

probably the complete lack of humour that confused me. easy mistake, in future i'll just avoid taking you seriously, especially when you say 'in all seriousness'

[tikay]

Weather here is lovely today.

[EvilPie]

Weather here is lovely today.

Bit chilly but there's a very 'clean' feel in the air.

[MANTIS01]

probably the complete lack of humour that confused me. easy mistake, in future i'll just avoid taking you seriously, especially when you say 'in all seriousness'

Yes good idea. In all seriousness paraplegics can't use their arms so they can't swim. Sorry you were confused when I suggested they should swim for it. 

[AndrewT]

I think I'd throw 4 women, 6 children and Stephen Hawking in the sea just so that Mantis would have some space in the lifeboat to stretch his feet out.

[Geo the Sarge]

'Kids and their Mums first' IMO, any other women are treated the same as men. A fair, undiscriminating society.

I would say old dudes next, but doesn't that mean everyone on a ships cruise?? You'd spend more time squabbling about who's oldest...

The priority should be those with longest to live first and those who have lived most of their lives and have least left to go should be last, with the rest in between.

"Can all those with terminal illnesses, regardless of age, please make their way to the back of the queue for the lifeboats please"

 

Geo

Absolutely. If places are limited, people with terminal diseases should not be taking places from those who will benefit most and potentially contribute most to the world. Are you saying that someone who will live for six months should get one of the limited places before someone who is likely to live for 50 years?

TBH John I personally find it beyond belief that anyone can think this.

Geo

Put it the other way round George. If places are limited, are you saying that someone who has not yet lived much of their life; not yet had children; not made their contribution to the world; should be sacrificed to save someone who has already experienced all those things and is going to die in a short time anyway?

What I'm saying is I'd like to think I'd be orderly, I believe I would be one of those putting myself before others, that's not a billy big balls claim either. I'd be trying where possible to put women and children first because that is the recognised way but it wouldn't neccessarily be possible and circumstances may dictate that we need to evecuate as many people as we can in a short period of time without having the time to make choices.

Even with time I certainly wouldn't be cherrypicking who I thought more needy based on time spent on earth or terminal illness.

Geo

[ScottMGee]

Even with time I certainly wouldn't be cherrypicking who I thought more needy based on time spent on earth or terminal illness.

Surely it depends on the available resources.

For example, ship sinking fast, one place left on the only lifeboat and you as Captain have four passagers remaining.

a - An 80 year old
b - A child killer
c - A 10 year old child
d - A person with a terminal illness

All four have equal right to the seat? All four other the same potential contribution to society?

[Woodsey]

Even with time I certainly wouldn't be cherrypicking who I thought more needy based on time spent on earth or terminal illness.

Surely it depends on the available resources.

For example, ship sinking fast, one place left on the only lifeboat and you as Captain have four passagers remaining.

a - An 80 year old
b - A child killer
c - A 10 year old child
d - A person with a terminal illness

All four have equal right to the seat? All four other the same potential contribution to society?

Fuck the passengers, I'd be having that seat!

[Geo the Sarge]

Even with time I certainly wouldn't be cherrypicking who I thought more needy based on time spent on earth or terminal illness.

Surely it depends on the available resources.

For example, ship sinking fast, one place left on the only lifeboat and you as Captain have four passagers remaining.

a - An 80 year old
b - A child killer
c - A 10 year old child
d - A person with a terminal illness

All four have equal right to the seat? All four other the same potential contribution to society?

Just getting silly now.

I'll stay off this thread safe in the knowledge that if I'm ever in this situ I'll do the best I can in the circumstances.

Geo

[MintTrav]

'Kids and their Mums first' IMO, any other women are treated the same as men. A fair, undiscriminating society.

I would say old dudes next, but doesn't that mean everyone on a ships cruise?? You'd spend more time squabbling about who's oldest...

The priority should be those with longest to live first and those who have lived most of their lives and have least left to go should be last, with the rest in between.

"Can all those with terminal illnesses, regardless of age, please make their way to the back of the queue for the lifeboats please"

 

Geo

Absolutely. If places are limited, people with terminal diseases should not be taking places from those who will benefit most and potentially contribute most to the world. Are you saying that someone who will live for six months should get one of the limited places before someone who is likely to live for 50 years?

TBH John I personally find it beyond belief that anyone can think this.

Geo

Put it the other way round George. If places are limited, are you saying that someone who has not yet lived much of their life; not yet had children; not made their contribution to the world; should be sacrificed to save someone who has already experienced all those things and is going to die in a short time anyway?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082640/How-year-old-Adolf-Hitler-saved-certain-death--drowning-icy-river-rescued.html

Looks a loada baloney tbh, but u get the point...

Please put it into words............

[MANTIS01]

Even with time I certainly wouldn't be cherrypicking who I thought more needy based on time spent on earth or terminal illness.

Surely it depends on the available resources.

For example, ship sinking fast, one place left on the only lifeboat and you as Captain have four passagers remaining.

a - An 80 year old
b - A child killer
c - A 10 year old child
d - A person with a terminal illness

All four have equal right to the seat? All four other the same potential contribution to society?

As captain I'm sure oldie and sickie would understand if I look to split up the child killer and the 10 year-old.

[MintTrav]

Even with time I certainly wouldn't be cherrypicking who I thought more needy based on time spent on earth or terminal illness.

Surely it depends on the available resources.

For example, ship sinking fast, one place left on the only lifeboat and you as Captain have four passagers remaining.

a - An 80 year old
b - A child killer
c - A 10 year old child
d - A person with a terminal illness

All four have equal right to the seat? All four other the same potential contribution to society?

As captain I'm sure oldie and sickie would understand if I look to split up the child killer and the 10 year-old.

It's a fox, goose & corn thing. Take the child; come back empty; take the killer; bring back the child, etc.

[chatban]

I would personally question why I was on a cruise ship when I am under 90 years of age, then I would be happy that most old people are going to be weaker than me and easier to tip off of a dingy.