Lifeguard fired for trying to save life - Polidicks

here's the question: If a man in the zone was drowning, would it be legally correct to fire IF the man had drifted out of the zone?

[QUOTE=AK'z;36627745]here's the question: If a man in the zone was drowning, would it be legally correct to fire IF the man had drifted out of the zone?[/QUOTE] No, because the victim began drowning in a protected zone. The moment he became a victim, he became the responsibility of the lifeguard that was in charge of the zone he was in.

[QUOTE=ryanmh12;36627265][sp]It's satire[/sp][/QUOTE] What the hell is he satiring? It seems like he was making fun of Republicans, which has no place in a thread about a lifeguard getting fired.

[QUOTE=AK'z;36627403]It's not like he left the fucking country to save a man. He was in the SAME waters. Within eye distance OF his zone. "a risk is a risk", if people didn't take risks nobody would be alive.[/QUOTE] Where he was may have been close enough that he could still see his zone, but it's not the same. You definitely do not have the same view when on the ground as you would in a lifeguard's chair/stand, and while you're paying attention to the man drowning, you wouldn't be able to look at the zone you were covering. Even when there's someone in your zone drowning/in distress, there should be another lifeguard nearby that can watch over the area while you go down to help. You never leave your post/bring your gaze away from your area of coverage for more than a few seconds without having someone else there. Definitely the morally right choice, and I don't blame the guy for doing what he did.

I am a lifeguard but not at a beach so we would never be in a position where we wouldn't have at least 3 other guards on call to take over your zone in under a minute if you went in for something out of your zone which as far as I'm concerned is just fine if the people covering the other zone isn't reacting. But I mean I dunno its a strange situation and I think in the heat of the moment any lifeguard I know including myself would have gone running to save him. Didn't he have a whistle or something to blow to signify he is going in for something? I dunno something is just off about this whole scenario. In my opinion firing him was wrong. Yes there's liability issues but at least where I work our managers are always behind us 100% for making decisions while on the job assuming we don't do something batshit retarted.

Future potential employer of this guy: "So why did you get fired from your lifeguard job?" Guy: "Oh, I saved someone's life"

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36627846]What the hell is he satiring? It seems like he was making fun of Republicans, which has no place in a thread about a lifeguard getting fired.[/QUOTE] oh sorry context: i saw a recording of some fox news republican debate whatever and i was mad.

The CORRECT thing to do would be to praise him and allow him to keep his job, and also inform all of the lifeguards what they SHOULD do next time something like that happens. What did they expect the kid to say to the pedestrian that came begging for help? Say no?

[quote]private aquatic safety contractor[/quote] The wonders of privatization, right here. "We're not paid to protect that part of the beach, you should have left him to die."

[QUOTE=W00tbeer1;36628261]The CORRECT thing to do would be to praise him and allow him to keep his job, and also inform all of the lifeguards what they SHOULD do next time something like that happens. What did they expect the kid to say to the pedestrian that came begging for help? Say no?[/QUOTE] By helping the one man drowning, he put however many other people in danger who were swimming in the area he was watching. In the time it took him to go down the beach 1,500ft, and come back, someone could've went under and drowned. He wouldn't know about it. Even if he did, by the time he'd get to and rescue the person in his zone, there would be probably be some brain damage from lack of oxygen. That's why he was fired. Yes he saved someone's life, yes it was the right thing to do. Could I sit there and know that someone drowned because of my inaction? Hell no. But he did leave his duty to go help, and that's why his higher ups let him go.

That's fucking ridiculous

[QUOTE=Killerelf12;36628321]By helping the one man drowning, he put however many other people in danger who were swimming in the area he was watching. In the time it took him to go down the beach 1,500ft, and come back, someone could've went under and drowned. He wouldn't know about it. Even if he did, by the time he'd get to and rescue the person in his zone, there would be probably be some brain damage from lack of oxygen. That's why he was fired. Yes he saved someone's life, yes it was the right thing to do. Could I sit there and know that someone drowned because of my inaction? Hell no. But he did leave his duty to go help, and that's why his higher ups let him go.[/QUOTE] I would like the see the higher-ups sit in that lifeguard stand and say no to saving the life of another. Sometimes its just as simple as putting yourself in the situation and see how you react. I mean the kid had to be trained and tested for his position, he should not have lost his job.

AMERICA! SOUTH! FLORIDA! Nothing out of the ordinary then...

[QUOTE=Killerelf12;36628321]By helping the one man drowning, he put however many other people in danger who were swimming in the area he was watching. In the time it took him to go down the beach 1,500ft, and come back, someone could've went under and drowned. He wouldn't know about it. Even if he did, by the time he'd get to and rescue the person in his zone, there would be probably be some brain damage from lack of oxygen. That's why he was fired. Yes he saved someone's life, yes it was the right thing to do. Could I sit there and know that someone drowned because of my inaction? Hell no. But he did leave his duty to go help, and that's why his higher ups let him go.[/QUOTE] If he stays there a person dies. If he goes and saves him, another person could eventually die. Why would you let a guy die for the sole reason that it could maybe save someone else? There's not much difference with saving someone in his zone. What if while he's trying to save a guy in his zone another one drowns, still in the same zone? Should he avoid saving anyone because it prevents him from saving someone else at the same time?

[QUOTE=Run&Gun12;36627104][i]"In a world, where trivial and insignificant rules take priority over the lives of people..".[/i][/QUOTE] "Hey look, theres a guy drowning over there!..." [i]"One man is willing to sacrifice his job..."[/i] "Meh leave him be... He's out of our zone and we'll lose our jobs if we don't..." [i]"...for someone else's life!"[/i] "I'm gonna do something! I can't leave him there! Who cares about a job!" "No Tom! Don't go! You'll lose your job!" [i]This summer...[/i] and so on.

[QUOTE=Master Kief-117;36627699]then throw him in the water outside the zone and watch him drown.[/QUOTE] Maybe he can swim.

He's doing an AMA on Reddit: [url]http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/w24m9/iama_hallandale_beach_lifeguards_that_got_fired/[/url]

[QUOTE=Killerelf12;36628321]Yes he saved someone's life,[/QUOTE] No he didn't. [quote]By the time Lopez got to him, he had been pulled to shore by fellow beachgoers.[/quote]