• South Korea ferry survivor 'haunted' by memory of trapped students
    26 replies, posted
[QUOTE] A survivor of South Korea's ferry disaster has described taking the agonising decision to save himself as the ship capsized and water washed away students he was trying to rescue. Lorry driver Eun-su Choi told the BBC: "We were trying to pull them up... but it was very difficult. We then decided to climb up, but I now regret it." The confirmed death toll has reached 113, as divers recovered more bodies from the sunken hull of the Sewol. More than 190 people are still missing. [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27120853[/url] I don't think I could live with myself after doing something like that.
If you were in the situation where you could potentially sacrifice your own life to save others, or abandon them and save yourself, what would you really do? It's a tough question I hope I never have to answer.
[QUOTE=kaine123;44620220]If you were in the situation where you could potentially sacrifice your own life to save others, or abandon them and save yourself, what would you really do? It's a tough question I hope I never have to answer.[/QUOTE] I already know, save myself. And I'm sure the majority would do the same. I hope they can learn to live with themselves, saving one's self is a basic instinct and you can't blame anyone for going with that instinct.
It's human instinct to save yourself
snip
The Captain should always be the last one to abandon ship, the fact he bailed as soon as it happens is sickening
If he really wanted to help or change things he should be doing services to the families of those lost or helping back
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44620429]The Captain should always be the last one to abandon ship, the fact he bailed as soon as it happens is sickening[/QUOTE] Yes how dare this guy not let himself die on the ship.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44620429]The Captain should always be the last one to abandon ship, the fact he bailed as soon as it happens is sickening[/QUOTE] It's very easy to say that.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44620429]The Captain should always be the last one to abandon ship, the fact he bailed as soon as it happens is sickening[/QUOTE] While this is true. You have to understand that being a captain of a ship doesn't grant one a sudden immunity to fear of death. He's still just a person. A person who is on a sinking ship who could die if he doesn't leave. While what he did wasn't right, it wasn't wrong either. If he had stayed there is a good chance he'd just be an extra casualty.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44620429]The Captain should always be the last one to abandon ship, the fact he bailed as soon as it happens is sickening[/QUOTE] It's a very hard decision with no wrong answers. He did what came naturally to him, it's not his fault and he shouldn't be blamed for it or chastised for it.
[QUOTE=mchapra;44620556]It's a very hard decision with no wrong answers. He did what came naturally to him, it's not his fault and he shouldn't be blamed for it or chastised for it.[/QUOTE] but it is a wrong answer, it's known that what fruxodaily said is how it is. He should not have chosen to be captain if he can't do what's necessary in a crisis to save his passengers. It's like saying that an army guy is innocent after he turns tail and runs when combat starts and some of his fellow soldiers die because he didn't do what he was supposed to. Being captain is a big responsibility, much more than just turning the wheel and watching the dials. You are responsible for your passengers until they are all off.
[QUOTE=mchapra;44620556]It's a very hard decision with no wrong answers. He did what came naturally to him, it's not his fault and he shouldn't be blamed for it or chastised for it.[/QUOTE] I'd like to point out that this captain is pure scum not for saving his own skin but dooming the poor souls on board by not calling an abandon ship when he should have and telling the passengers most of which were high schoolers on a trip to stay where they are and not move and when shit started to get serious and it was too late he saved his own ass leaving innocent people, innocent children behind to die for his fuck up.
[QUOTE=kaine123;44620220]If you were in the situation where you could potentially sacrifice your own life to save others, or abandon them and save yourself, what would you really do? It's a tough question I hope I never have to answer.[/QUOTE] It depends on who you'd be saving. You'd be more likely to save people you care about than complete strangers
[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;44620481]Yes how dare this guy not let himself die on the ship.[/QUOTE] The crew and passengers are main priority in these situations, the Captain should of stayed with everyone until it was cleared and then left, he wouldn't die regardless they are trained to make sure that these things are dealt with accordingly
The captain made some very big errors that likely caused several people to die. Also, I would have saved myself as well after TRYING to help other people but if it seemed certain I would die I would also run. Maybe if I was helped by somebody I would try to help more people but I would still want to make sure I would survive. I hope he doesn't blame himself too much.
The captain wasn't even on the bridge. The third mate was running the ship and she shouldn't have been because she admitted to never running that route before. She for some reason did a wild turn that most likely was the cause of the boat running aground. Then, they told everyone to stay where they were on the boat because apparently the waters were too cold and dangerous and they couldn't ascertain the safety of the passengers if they were to leave. Even then, coast guard radio operators told them that boats could be to them in 10 minutes and to evacuate the passengers, but they ignored it. The crew abandoned ship first and didn't even release any of the life boats. They left those people to die and now they are all arrested and are going to pay for it. Bastards. Those kids didn't deserve that. They put their trust in the crew and were left to die.
You all say that he's a piece of shit for not staying with the crew, but I'm sure 99% of facepunchers would do the same thing. It's easy to talk, but another story to actually do something.
[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;44621706]You all say that he's a piece of shit for not staying with the crew, but I'm sure 99% of facepunchers would do the same thing. It's easy to talk, but another story to actually do something.[/QUOTE] A captain stays with their ship not so they can gallantly die with it or something ridiculous like that, they stay with it because they are the ones with the training and authority to properly evacuate a ship and as such are responsible for the safety of all the passengers. The captain and crew in general are entirely responsible for all these deaths.
[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;44621706]You all say that he's a piece of shit for not staying with the crew, but I'm sure 99% of facepunchers would do the same thing. It's easy to talk, but another story to actually do something.[/QUOTE] please refer to frozensodas post it's not about what "99% of facepunchers" would do. its about the captains responsibility. I'm only just reading that it wasn't even the captain but the third mate, but your post is still irrelevant. don't take the responsibility of captain if you're not prepared to carry that responsibility to the end.
[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;44621706]You all say that he's a piece of shit for not staying with the crew, but I'm sure 99% of facepunchers would do the same thing. It's easy to talk, but another story to actually do something.[/QUOTE] I would do my fucking job if I was this man, you think being one of the only people on the ship who knows what to do in these kinds of emargency should use that information to save them self while leaving 100s of others to die, no I don't think I could live with myself anymore if I did that.
This entire situation is a prime example of pure crew incompetence and the people who were at the bridge should all be taken to court if they say, "Stay still, don't go anywhere" right before evacuating. Seriously, what a bunch of dickheads
So why are we still building ships that regularly sink and kill hundreds in the process? Even with the recent phantom plane, it sounds like flying a plane is safer than taking a boat and one would expect that building a safe boat would be easier than building a safe plane.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;44622638]So why are we still building ships that regularly sink and kill hundreds in the process? Even with the recent phantom plane, it sounds like flying a plane is safer than taking a boat and one would expect that building a safe boat would be easier than building a safe plane.[/QUOTE] What can you do when severe weather can topple a ship as sturdy as a huge ferry?
[QUOTE=Viper202;44622670]What can you do when severe weather can topple a ship as sturdy as a huge ferry?[/QUOTE] Well, for starters it would be cool if tilting the ship didn't immediately turn it into inescapable death trap plus it can't be that hard to disperse a lot of smaller inflatable vesrts since even planes have these? Also if I understand right this thing ran onto a rock because the inexperienced officer couldn't handle the storm. Where's the sonar powered computer to go "wow wow wow, slow down bro, we gotta go this way". And if the boat ended up in a place it physically couldn't survive in then where was the system which would keep that in check? Seriously, I have read up on the standard these ships are held to and it's ridiculous. It seems like a today medium range limousine has more intelligent safety systems than these ships.
They think it made a unusually sharp turn that resulted in cargo getting dislodged which weighed the ship down on one side causing it to capsize.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.