Fisherman charged after saving his friends

[smitty55]

I think you need to look up the word "assume" my post is the opposite of an assumption, there are literally zero assumptions in it.

Really? Ok lets see...

1." It's hard to use the word lucky in this situation. However, everyone is lucky that this drunk guy on a snowmachine didn't kill someone else while driving to safety. Would you be defending him if he ran over a child while drunkenly driving that snowmachine?"

Hmmm. You seem to know how drunk he was, or are you just assuming? He was certainly sober enough to save the lives of his buddies without falling in himself. He was the one who managed to calm his buddies in the water as they were becoming hysterical. Doesn't sound drunk to me. I guess you are also assuming how lucky everyone everyone else was as this drunk madman was racing around on the ice as you are assuming how bad his driving was.

2."had a few drinks"? what does that mean? 3, probably not, it never does."

Well if that isn't assuming you know how much he drank, what else can you call it? You also assume everyone lies about it.

3."So given that A) We can't believe his story until we talk to everyone and investigate, and B) He risked public safety to save himself."

So again, you are assuming he was lying when you really don't know do you? You are also still assuming he was a public risk when you don't even know how many people were out there on the ice. It was late in the day, remember.

4."And as a follow-up, everyone that believes his story, can i ask why you're giving him the benefit of the doubt,"

Why wouldn't folks give him the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming like you that he's guilty? The guy risked his life to save some buddies.

5."MANY mistakes were made here... He's lucky he didn't kill someone driving back drunk to top the day off."

Again you are assuming you know how drunk he was. Do you? This guy saved two buds and then went to get help to save the third guy and you call that a mistake. The mistake would have been if he didn't try and go for help.


The word drunk is a very relative term. Just because someone may blow .08 doesn't mean they are stumbling drunk by any means. I/we all probably know plenty of folk who have had three or four beer and we wouldn't consider them drunk at all or even could tell if they had been drinking if we didn't know. There are guys out there that could put back a dozen pints and you wouldn't call them hammered by any stretch. Specially real big guys.

So now after all this the police have dropped the charges, so I will make an assumption that he wasn't drunk after all like you assume he was. In the end I guess all your assumptions were wrong.

Maybe you're the one who should consult a dictionary and stick to tying flies instead of jumping all over a hero. You know what they say about assuming things.

[greatwhite]

Well charges were dropped.

[Camp Red Maple]

Really? Ok lets see...

1." It's hard to use the word lucky in this situation. However, everyone is lucky that this drunk guy on a snowmachine didn't kill someone else while driving to safety. Would you be defending him if he ran over a child while drunkenly driving that snowmachine?"

Hmmm. You seem to know how drunk he was, or are you just assuming? He was certainly sober enough to save the lives of his buddies without falling in himself. He was the one who managed to calm his buddies in the water as they were becoming hysterical. Doesn't sound drunk to me. I guess you are also assuming how lucky everyone everyone else was as this drunk madman was racing around on the ice as you are assuming how bad his driving was.

2."had a few drinks"? what does that mean? 3, probably not, it never does."

Well if that isn't assuming you know how much he drank, what else can you call it? You also assume everyone lies about it.

3."So given that A) We can't believe his story until we talk to everyone and investigate, and B) He risked public safety to save himself."

So again, you are assuming he was lying when you really don't know do you? You are also still assuming he was a public risk when you don't even know how many people were out there on the ice. It was late in the day, remember.

4."And as a follow-up, everyone that believes his story, can i ask why you're giving him the benefit of the doubt,"

Why wouldn't folks give him the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming like you that he's guilty? The guy risked his life to save some buddies.

5."MANY mistakes were made here... He's lucky he didn't kill someone driving back drunk to top the day off."

Again you are assuming you know how drunk he was. Do you? This guy saved two buds and then went to get help to save the third guy and you call that a mistake. The mistake would have been if he didn't try and go for help.


The word drunk is a very relative term. Just because someone may blow .08 doesn't mean they are stumbling drunk by any means. I/we all probably know plenty of folk who have had three or four beer and we wouldn't consider them drunk at all or even could tell if they had been drinking if we didn't know. There are guys out there that could put back a dozen pints and you wouldn't call them hammered by any stretch. Specially real big guys.

So now after all this the police have dropped the charges, so I will make an assumption that he wasn't drunk after all like you assume he was. In the end I guess all your assumptions were wrong.

Maybe you're the one who should consult a dictionary and stick to tying flies instead of jumping all over a hero. You know what they say about assuming things.

Lets not hang our coat on this one but jeez let's make do our best to make sure everyone comes home and at the end of the day these guy did.

[Camp Red Maple]

It was a unfortunate incident and I hope those guys are okay.