Just look what happened to Amity Island when the government didn't issue an appropriate warning and shut things down!

At least in this area, NOAA operates on the Chicken Little rule. They issue warnings for winter weather advisories when they call for an inch or two of snow in the winter. We used to get six inches plus several times a winter.

I've seen too many episodes of weather forecast says snow. Temps over the last week say IF it snows it won't lay (ground is too warm). Eventually you get to where you look at their map, apply 47 years of local experience, and forecast it yourself.

Could it be that some who choose not to evacuate could be concerned that their "stuff" would be stolen. Stuff over life - weird.

That judgement on your part would only if be valid their lives were really in danger.

Individuals are still allowed to apply their own knowledge and experience in making the decision if their life is really in danger. Just because the government says it's so, does not necessarily make it so. You have to use your own brain to draw a final conclusion. Occasionally you might be wrong, and end up dead because of it, but most of the time you'll be right trusting your own judgement.

You should definitely take government warnings into account when making your final decision. But I feel sorry for those who can't make any decision for themselves and instead require the government to do it for them and totally control every aspect of their lives, without question or personal consideration. Not the way I'd want to live.

haertig, you are right about using personal judgement in conjunction with what the officials are saying/recommending. I do think that many people do not leave because they really do not want their homes looted. Their reasoning could be clouded by such concerns. I know that I am not sure how I would react in such times of distress. I am fortunate that I do not live in an area where I have to make those considerations due to weather events. I am in the middle of, and in close proximity (<1 mile), to major interstates/toll roads and a rail line, though. I would have considerably less time to react if a really nasty chemical event happened. I would leave.

The issue at hand is people who think for themselves and refuse to follow evacuation orders. They sometimes get themselves in trouble, risk the lives of rescuer, and the money of taxpayers. Is there a problem with people who follow evacuation orders "too closely"? Since this is ETS, emergency situations are our context. Are there situations where the authorities issued a really bad order in an emergency, and people followed the order even and perished as a result? (Note that this is not quite what haertig is talking about. I'm seriously having a hard time imagining an emergency evac situation this applies to.)

I'm not aware of people who can't make decision for themselves and want the government to make it for them. I do know people who don't think others make good decisions, and they get the government to set rules for everybody. As a consequence, you cannot marry your sister or buy soda above a certain size, unlike the good old days. How crazy is that?

Ethical question...Your neighbor's house is well stocked. Your house is not. Your neighbor evacuates. You don't, but you could have. Is it OK to raid your neighbor's house to get what you need to survive? Is it OK to raid your neighbor's house in prep of possibly being in life danger in the near future?

The only person who can risk the life of a rescuer is the rescuer themselves. I used to be one, I guess you'd call it - a paramedic on an ambulance. Never once did I put my life in danger to save someone. And I never knew anybody else who did either. Not paramedic, not firefighter, not police. We might risk non-fatal injury at times, but not death. Sure, there are heroes out there who will put their lives at risk for a stranger. They have big hearts, if not big brains. Realize though, that most of these heroes are granted their hero status posthumously. There's a reason for that.

My comments here do not apply to the military. That's a totally different situation. Our soldiers deserve the greatest respect and honor for how they sacrifice for each other and for all of us.

I'm talking about the situations like where Mr. Idiot Druggie decides to overdose and pass out while his pet cobra is sitting in his lap. Not a whole lot of rescuers are going to jump in there to save him without taking precautions to protect themselves first. Idiots who drive their cars into flooded rivers and get stranded (you see them on TV all the time!) are kind of like that druggie/cobra guy. If a rescuers life ends up being in danger, it's because the rescuer decided that's what they wanted to do. Good for them. But it's their choice. The stranded idiot didn't force them to do anything.

What precisely is "risk"? I was, in my younger days, a member of a mountain rescue unit and we frequently did technical, high angle stuff which appeared to be "risky," but if you had your act together, was fairly safe. None of us felt we were at risk - we were trained and we adopted procedures which protected us and the victim(s).

Oddly enough, one of our members did perish prematurely- from Valley fever, most likely contracted while driving many miles over dusty dirt roads in southern Arizona during a particularly intricate practice session.

After all, life is risky.

I agree that people should evacuate in order that first responders can concentrate on combating the hazard rather than assisting people who should not have been there. That is an easy determination after the fact but difficult to predict in advance. I suppose there is a "macho" factor is standing one's ground, but it can be better to take an impromptu vacation with a friend or relative.

How are these examples of people not being able to decide for themselves and wanting the government to decide everything for me? I continue to be unable to figure this one out. It really seems like these are examples of people making decisions against common sense or maybe even warnings from the authorities.