UKC

Bamford Edge rock throwing MRT report

New Topic
Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
 Shaw Brown 01 May 2022

Bamford Edge

Description:

Incident 37 - Saturday 30th April 2022 14:15hrs. The team was called to Bamford Edge to reports of a climber with a leg injury below Great Tor. On arrival he had indeed sustained a leg injury, however it was how the injury came about that causes concern. A boulder had been deliberately thrown off the top of the crag towards the climbers by a group of males. Whether they knew there was anyone underneath is not known as they ran off before they could be apprehended. Fortunately the climber was wearing a helmet which took a glancing blow before hitting his leg. Without the helmet or if he had been hit more fully on the head, things could have been a whole lot different and serious. The climbers leg injury was dealt with and he was evacuated down to an ambulance on New Road. This type of behaviour is totally irresponsible and could have had potentially fatal consequences. It has been reported to the police Do not throw rocks over the edge of crags and cliffs.

OP Shaw Brown 01 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

I’ve posted the above as I was also bombarded on Stannage about an hour later. Same group doing the throwing? I posted this on the Edale MRT  FB page reporting the incident.

My partner and I were climbing on Tower Face, Stannage yesterday. Multiple stones started coming down the side of the buttress, brick size. I knew straight away they were being thrown. I started shouting and a climbing party at the bottom ran around and eyeballed a group of lads who where chucking the stones. They claimed they didn’t realise anyone was below 🤷‍♂️. Don’t know who the climbing party were but very glad they were there, there’s enough objective danger on Tower face without additional ones!

 Denning76 01 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

Some people are utterly pathetic. Got to have a really tragic existence to get kicks out of that.

 tmawer 01 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

There must be something in the air, other than the rocks, as I have encountered this twice in the last few weeks. Once at Malham where we saw a lad wearing a rucksack throw something over the top near the left wing. With the climbers and tourists at the base it was very lucky that no-one was hurt. The second one was at Scout Scar starting with rocks and finishing with water bottles, shouting at them made it worse!? 

 cb294 01 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

This is what the large hexes are still good for. Emergency climber's nunchaks...

CB

1
 diffdiff 01 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

Yes, heard about this from a friend who was in the vicinity. Rock glanced the climber's helmet and damaged his leg.

 WhiteSpider88 01 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

Years ago I was with a group on a single pitch crag in Jersey, rocks started flying down at us, I climbed up to find a mother and two boys, I asked them to stop and said there were people below, mother said, my boys can throw rocks if they want to.  We had to stop the session till Karen left with her nasty entitled offspring. 

In reply to Shaw Brown:

The BBC have picked up the story now: BBC News - Peak District climber injured after boulder 'thrown off' crag

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-61291220

Hopefully the police might be able to catch up with the idiots but it must be hard without any CCTV around the parking and so on.

In reply to WhiteSpider88:

> Years ago I was with a group on a single pitch crag in Jersey, rocks started flying down at us, I climbed up to find a mother and two boys, I asked them to stop and said there were people below, mother said, my boys can throw rocks if they want to.  We had to stop the session till Karen left with her nasty entitled offspring. 

I think I would have pointed out that I too was entitled to throw rocks, just over there where her boys were.

In reply to TobyA:

Mr Torr added that their message was "please wear a helmet if you are climbing.”

Well that seems a slightly odd takeaway message.

1
In reply to steveriley:

Yep, agreed! But I guess the poor chap hit was probably quite glad he had his on.

In reply to Michael Hood:

> just over there where her boys were.

I might have aimed them at the Karen.

OP Shaw Brown 02 May 2022
In reply to steveriley: Yes a bit of an odd takeaway. Don’t think a helmet would of been much use for the rocks coming down near us, looks as though it was a lifesaver in the Bamford case. Not sure what the answer is, I now seem to have anecdotes of many climbing friends of the same type of incident but near misses thankfully. Even when they have caught up with the tossers there seems to be little understanding of the danger caused. After a bit of reflection though, I realise that I’ve had far more stones come towards me, with some hits, from other climbers above! Not exactly reassuring but puts the incident into perspective??! 

1
 cb294 02 May 2022
In reply to steveriley:

Not at all, it is a sensible comment!

I was almost flattened by a helmet that some helmet dropped from close to the top while abseiling from Falkenstein in Saxony, some 60m vertical.

The flying helmet missed me by a couple of meters, but I was glad that I already had my own helmet in already while racking the gear and changing into my climbing shoes.

Not that I condone chucking rocks, obviously, but idiots or children are almost an environmental risk that you should take into account when standing at the bottom of any crag with a footpath along the top.

That said, my worst rockfall experiences have all been caused by reckless climbers (e.g. the team leaving a crowded VF on Zugspitze to scramble up a terribly loose colouir as a shortcut and showering everybody below with hundreds of rocks).

1
In reply to steveriley:

I’d liken it to those police reports that manage to subtly blame the cyclist for being driven into by a bell end driver. Anyway, I’ve no desire to turn this into a helmet debate, it definitely helped here, the takeaway for me would be “don’t be a bell end”.

3
In reply to Shaw Brown:

I doubt the other climbers were intentionally dropping rocks on you though? Presumed intention makes all the difference between a tragic accident and murder/manslaughter.

Real talk, I almost dropped a krab on someone's head while I was faffing around setting up an intermediate abseil last year. Luckily it didn't hit them but I was utterly mortified. I don't think that puts me in the same sort of league as these bellends, but maybe that's just making excuses.

In reply to Shaw Brown:

Yep, FWIW I've been climbing pretty regularly for 30 years and don't really remember any incidents of people chucking rocks of the top. Some lads at Auchinstarry threw an iron brew bottle off the top of the Prom but there were enough climbers around to persuade them that this had been a bad move. Some kids had thrown beer bottles of the top of a crag in Helsinki just I was getting there, we ran to the top to "have a word" with them, but they had buggered off sharpish.

Now I live pretty close to the Peak District's finest abandoned limestone quarries, I've knocked bits of rock down - or had bits come down towards me when belaying - more times than I can count. Normally the ones you don't mean to knock off are just pebbles, and the ones that are scary big I've been able to throw away from my belayer. Similar experiences ice climbing.

This story is still terrible, but hopefully it will turn out to be a very rare event that doesn't get repeated.

In reply to Shaw Brown:

I have been expecting an incident exactly like this for the last year or so. For some reason, Bamford has hit the big time on social media circles of people who don't normally go outdoors much. It has become one of the busiest crags on good weekends mainly with people going for a walk (often to get the 'gun rock selfie') rather than people you might call 'walkers'. Mam Tor has become a similar destination.

We were bouldering there a few weeks ago and I had to tell a mother to stop her kids throwing small rocks off. When I said it she could see the problem but had been apparently completely clueless before. What was even odder is that she knew we were below since we had topped-out in front of them a few times. 

These people obviously have just as much right to enjoy the countryside as everyone else. Whilst not throwing stones or lighting fires may seem obvious to the rest of us, I suspect some of the people visiting Bamford in recent years have no experience of outdoors, climbing or the general country code. I can't fathom why you would think that throwing rocks in these places would be okay, but it seems some people do without realising the potential consequences.

I don't know what to do about this problem beyond putting signs by the gate. There are already signs there about fires and litter (which is also an increasing problem). Maybe we should do something graphic about throwing rocks.

Alan 

 spenser 02 May 2022
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Do they really have any right to enjoy the outdoor environment if they are committing a criminal act which endangers other people's lives?

I've spent a lot of time encouraging people to enjoy the outdoors, but they need to do it responsibly.

5
 fred99 02 May 2022
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

 I can't fathom why you would think that throwing rocks in these places would be okay, but it seems some people do without realising the potential consequences.

This sort of thing has been happening, on and off, for years.

I someone was to randomly throw a rock across the street then I'd expect them to be arrested for some version of Assault with a blunt instrument.

If they catch these morons, or for that matter the next moron who is caught, then isn't it about time they were charged with something like "Reckless Endangerment". And if they could be expected to know someone was below, then they should start with "Attempted Murder" and leave the little sh1t crapping themselves in jail until it comes to court.

It's certainly not completely unlikely that this incident was deliberate, after all, there have been enough incidents of large objects being dropped off motorway bridges onto oncoming vehicles.

If the Police are not interested in dealing with such a problem, then sooner or later a potential victim is going to take the law into their own hands, and that could end up with someone falling (or being thrown) off the top of a cliff.

3
In reply to Shaw Brown:

I wonder if these incidents have been sparked by TikTok trends. 'Rock drops' and 'for my male audience' trends involve throwing rocks/stuff from high places. The original 'male audience' video at the end of last year involved trundling rocks off a cliff and got over 12 million views and 2.3 million likes. There is at least one example I found (without delving much deeper into the video feed) from the Peak District of a guy throwing a rock off the top of a quarry with hashtags #malesonly #manthings.

Of course people have done this for years for 'fun', but if it's seemingly a spate of incidences involving young people it's certainly possible that social media is playing some role. 

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/for-my-male-audience

https://twitter.com/natalie_a_berry/status/1521084459898089472

3
 ianstevens 02 May 2022
In reply to steveriley:

> I’d liken it to those police reports that manage to subtly blame the cyclist for being driven into by a bell end driver. Anyway, I’ve no desire to turn this into a helmet debate, it definitely helped here, the takeaway for me would be “don’t be a bell end”.

Or any other victim blaming the police like to partake in. 

5
In reply to WhiteSpider88:

At that point I would be calling the police.

 Sherlock 02 May 2022
In reply to TobyA:

> Yep, FWIW I've been climbing pretty regularly for 30 years and don't really remember any incidents of people chucking rocks of the top. 

Wasn't Lakes legend Jeff Lamb killed by rocks thrown off a crag in Australia? Apologies if I've mis-remembered this.

 Tom Valentine 02 May 2022
In reply to TobyA:

On other threads I've detailed an incident in 1970 when another UKC er and I were pelted by stones from above by a couple of Welsh climbers who were partway up a route on Craig Ddu. We were packing up to go home and both needed to get away or the exchange might have become more protracted.

3
 The Pylon King 02 May 2022
In reply to Natalie Berry - UKC:

I reckon you are probably spot on with this.

1
 The Pylon King 02 May 2022
In reply to Denning76:

> Some people are utterly pathetic. Got to have a really tragic existence to get kicks out of that.

Yes. The boring lives of ordinary people.

7
 SimonCRMC 02 May 2022
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Alan, I think you've summed it up well.  I was climbing at the crag shortly after the incident occurred and the place was swarming with walkers, all of whom were well behaved (though I wonder how long it will be before someone falls off the Gun while posing for a photo?).  Most of them were dressed like casual visitors.  I think your suggestion about putting warning notices on the gates is probably the best we can do.  As Natalie comments, lobbing rocks probably seems like a bit of fun for some people, and they lack the awareness to imagine the consequences.

 fmck 02 May 2022
In reply to tmawer:

I had something similar happen at Malham. We were having a family picnic beside the stream. I looked up and realised we were in the fall line with the central top lip. I said to the wife I'm not happy with where we were sitting. She agreed and before we got to reposition there was a boom right behind us in that spot. Very busy above.

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Just a single, simple sign saying "don't be a dick"?

And on a more serious note. There are often idle threats bandied around by climbers intolerant of drones, jet skis, others enjoying themselves to chuck rocks at them. Hopefully this incident will highlight the risks of doing so. 

Post edited at 17:15
2
 Maggot 02 May 2022
In reply to fred99:

> the Police are not interested in dealing with such a problem,

If they weren't innocently drinking cups of takeaway coffee, I mean having a picnic, Derbyshire Police are going to do sod all.

4
 Baz P 02 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

Didn’t Wymper start all this on the Matterhorn a few years ago?

In reply to Presley Whippet:

In most Peak District crags drones are banned, but the wider problem is the current prevailing national mood in the UK of an overbearing sense of entitlement without a thought for others or any sense of responsibility. Perhaps at the seaside you like piss heads zooming around at high speed on loud and potentially dangerous jet skis, wrecking other peoples enjoyment. Also threats aren’t always idle, a couple of years ago we were climbing at Brevent crag, Chamonix, high in the Aiguilles Rouge, but tellingly near to the telepherique. Two Brits arrived with a boogie box and blasted out loud music. We invited them to turn it off but received a load abuse, so naturally we smashed it and reset the peace and tranquillity. I don’t think they expected this, but perceived an even greater threat, so didn’t push it. Perhaps and hopefully they learned a lesson that day.

6
 HardenClimber 02 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

People regularly chuck stones down caves, even when there are obvious ropes set up.

I've had stone thrown / kicked on me on the top pitch of Bar. I don't think that was accidental.

In July 1936 a woman in Alum Pot was killed by a stone. Inquest concluded it had been deliberately thrown.

In reply to Philb1950:

OK, I concede the outdoors is for climbers only. Re read your post and think about the entitlement you accuse others of.

And good luck with the attempted murder charge from the direct hit on that jet ski. 

16
In reply to Presley Whippet:

I think the attempted murder charge would be the Bamford rockthrowers. I don’t think the outdoors is only for climbers, but certainly responsible users. The groupthink of your anything goes attitude by anyone is exponentially wrecking the outdoor environment. Unfortunately it has to be said Bamford was a lot better off and far less damaged when access was restricted and you had to trespass to visit and that’s before you get onto the barbecue moorland wild fires and trashed roadside.

Misuse of jet skis is a nationally recognised problem and local authorities and the police are implementing bylaws to ban or restrict them. Prime example Windermere.

5
 Mark Bannan 02 May 2022
In reply to cb294:

And 

> This is what the large hexes are still good for. Emergency climber's nunchaks...

...and all the while, I have been using them as "seagull bashers" when climbing on the Aberdeenshire coast!

In reply to Philb1950:

Indeed the privileged title of knobhead/attempted murderer is inclusive of both climbers and non climbers. Both cases are abhorrent, as is your destruction of property.

Windermere is quite flawed, speed restricted but only policed 9 to 5 (from memory). It made for an interesting early morning swim whilst "traffic is quiet". 

Post edited at 18:25
1
 Mark Bannan 02 May 2022
In reply to Natalie Berry - UKC:

I hope the Old Bill find out which twunt started off such a pathetic and dangerous trend!

When I was still a teacher (up to last xmas; I am now in outdoor retail), there was a dreadful TikTok trend encouraging young people to steal stuff from schools! I hope the cops got those responsible on that occasion too. I reckon any young yobbo starting off this sort of crap deserves a couple of years in borstal.

2
 Slackboot 02 May 2022

Slightly off topic but this was a particularly nasty piece of vandalism in 2018. It's lucky no one was under it when it went.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6526325/brimham-rocks-damage-yorkshire-youths-destroy/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwi_noOxqcH3AhVLY8AKHaloCb8QFnoECAQQAg&usg=AOvVaw1JJ4d-9tP00Zw_npeftQnb

sorry it's a link to The Sun but the photo's tell the tale.

Post edited at 18:31
1
 Tom Valentine 02 May 2022
In reply to Philb1950:

> Unfortunately it has to be said Bamford was a lot better off and far less damaged when access was restricted 

I'm pretty sure the game keepers agreed with you, even while you were trying to avoid them and sneak a couple of routes in.

In reply to Presley Whippet:

The Countryside Code asks us all to be respectful to each other. I read that to mean "don't piss everyone else off by blaring your music at the crag". Or just "don't be a dick".

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1052574/Countryside_Code_A5.pdf

In reply to Tom Valentine:

My memory of several visits to Bamford pre CROW was that you phoned up a number (that was in the guidebook), left some details and then went climbing.

And there was soft grass below the routes!!! - lovely

I know the edge was only available for some of the year but during that time you didn't have to be clandestine, just slightly prepared.

CROW definitely made things worse for Bamford.

5
 Tom Valentine 03 May 2022
In reply to Michael Hood:

> CROW definitely made things worse for Bamford.

 I understand what you're saying but it isn't just CROW that is encouraging everybody and his grandma to take to the hills.

In reply to SimonCRMC:

> (though I wonder how long it will be before someone falls off the Gun while posing for a photo?). 

A friend saw a chap fall off the top of Bamford when posing for a photo somewhere near Gargoyle Flake I think it was in 2020. He was badly injured and his girlfriend taking the photo was mess with shock. Joe got the MRT out and stayed with the injured people until the pros arrived. 

In reply to captain paranoia:

When was the last time you saw the countryside code advertised? There should have been a massive campaign over the last couple of years.

 Abu777 03 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

I got hit by a rock whilst driving up the M1 once, thrown off a bridge by a teenager stood with his mates. Seemed to have been doing it for a while as there was debris all over the road from earlier attempts. The 6" diameter rock came straight through my windscreen, bounced off the steering wheel and landed in my lap. My superb driving skills and cool head in a crisis meant I was able to pull over safely on the hard shoulder and no-one was hurt. Police turned up eventually, discarded the rock into the bushes without even dusting it for prints and shrugged their shoulders in longhand.

I guess there are tossers everywhere and you just have to hope your paths don't intertwine at just the wrong moment. Signs at tourist hotspots advising not to throw rocks, as earlier posts, would be a good idea - especially at Bamford, where there is definitely a higher percentage chance of tossers popping up at the minute, as it is Instafamous.

In reply to Natalie Berry - UKC:

The thing I don't understand is if you are an adult/teenager going to chuck bits of rock off a cliff for fun or for a video surely you want to stand near the edge so you can see them hit the ground. In which case you'd usually be able to see if there were folk underneath. If you go ahead and chuck them knowing there's people underneath it's definitely criminal.

Chucking rocks from further back with no way of seeing what's under them is more like something kids under supervision from a parent who won't let them go near the edge would do.

Post edited at 14:19
In reply to Natalie Berry - UKC:

Holy shit…. Probably bang on Nat. 
Jeeez!

 cragtyke 03 May 2022
In reply to Natalie Berry - UKC:

I was at Bamford a couple of weeks ago, having a coffee between routes at Neb Buttress when a grapefruit sized lump of rock landed about 10 feet away so I don't think this was an isolated incident.

Over the last couple of years I've frequently noticed freshly broken rocks at the bottom of many Peak gritstone crags, including some fairly hefty chunks. It seems to be quite a worrying trend. Still not as scary as the upper tier of Goddard's Quarry though!

 toad 03 May 2022
In reply to pancakeandchips:

> When was the last time you saw the countryside code advertised? There should have been a massive campaign over the last couple of years.

Within the limits of budgets, there has been a new campaign in the last few weeks, as they've slightly rejigged some of the wording, but defra don't have the same budget as the latest perfume, so don't get the same exposure!

In reply to mike reed:

I don't know, the trend was 'viral' end of last year (long time in internet terms) but that doesn't mean there aren't people still watching or trying to replicate them. I don't know if many people even consider the risks of rocks hitting people and the damage it can cause. We must be more aware of this than people who don't climb, especially given the interactions people have written about on here (and if young people are involved especially). 

If there are more people flocking to the area for its beauty/height/whatever - and there are lots of videos of 'look-how-close-to-the-edge-I-am!' at Bamford in TikTok - then it's entirely possible that these incidents will occur whether influenced by videos or not and whether the rock throwing/dropping is intentional or accidental.

In reply to pancakeandchips:

> When was the last time you saw the countryside code advertised?

Funnily enough, I think it popped up on my facebook feed not long ago...

As observed above, the budget for 'public information films' of all sorts is non-existent. Austerity, innit?

Post edited at 17:55
 GDes 03 May 2022
In reply to cb294:

> This is what the large hexes are still good for. Emergency climber's nunchaks...

> CB

Don't post this nonsense. 

A) let's be honest, you're not actually going to go and violently attack anyone, and if you are you're as bad as them.

B) you're encouraging moronic responses to moronic behaviour. Nobody wins. 

22
 cb294 04 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

It is of course nonsense.

If I managed to catch someone deliberately throwing rocks at me I would flatten them. No large rocks needed!

CB

1
 Cobra_Head 04 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

> Don't post this nonsense. 

> A) let's be honest, you're not actually going to go and violently attack anyone, and if you are you're as bad as them.

Not really, you might start of politely, but some people don't like to take advice, some people will actively refuse advice, then......

Either that or you say something and they just carry on, what happens then?

 Cobra_Head 04 May 2022
In reply to captain paranoia:

.

> As observed above, the budget for 'public information films' of all sorts is non-existent. Austerity, innit?

I want them all back, "smash the handle of old fridges", "Deep water warning", "stranger Danger", "Clunk-Click"!!!

Well maybe not the last one.

 GDes 04 May 2022
In reply to Cobra_Head:

What? You're seriously suggesting if someone doesnt listen to you, the next stage is to attack them with a weapon? 

7
In reply to GDes:

If someone deliberately tries to kill you (which is exactly what deliberately lobbing rocks at people amounts to), I'd suggest that talking to them before going full mental is incredibly generous.

2
 GDes 04 May 2022
In reply to tehmarks:

Morals of using violence to respond to violence aside, I think the law would have a different view. Self defence would involve moving yourself out of the way (and then calling the police I guess). A pre meditated attack with a weapon, which is what is being suggested here, is just assault, regardless of what's happened before. I'm surprised peolle are so willing to write about those kind of intentions on a public forum. Those kind of throwaway comments have come back to bite people in court. 

6
 mrphilipoldham 04 May 2022
In reply to SimonCRMC:

> (though I wonder how long it will be before someone falls off the Gun while posing for a photo?).

Not at Bamford but there's been a rise in the number of MRT call outs to The Ravenstones area since (I think) the M.E.N decided to run an article on the walk around there from Dovestones Res and how it's one of the best walking routes in the country - failing to inform their readership that it involves some scrambling in the clough.

In reply to tehmarks:

You're not wrong but macho posturing online is a bit boring.

 Tom Valentine 04 May 2022
In reply to mrphilipoldham:

The Trinnacle Trail.

MRT also gives a bit of advice about standing on top of the pillar itself. Or not.

 Jamie Wakeham 04 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

Macho posturing aside, a citizen's arrest is perfectly within the law.  If someone were standing at the top of a cliff, throwing rocks off, and refused to stop when told that there were people below, you'd be acting within the law to use the force you felt reasonable to prevent them from committing an offence of (at least) ABH.

Yes, calling the police is a better option, but if the threat is immediate then this simply isn't going to be quick enough.

 GDes 04 May 2022
In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I still refuse to believe that condoning attacking someone with a makeshift metal weapon is the way to do that, and suspect if you badly injured or worse you'd be on your way to prison. 

7
 Jamie Wakeham 04 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

I didn't say anything about weapons - see the first three words of my post - but essentially the law says that 'reasonable force' is what you deem necessary in the circumstances.

In reply to GDes:

Self defence in law is defined as meeting violence with an appropriate of violence is acceptable. You must not exceed the level perpetrated against you, so bursting someone’s nose after a rock attack would be OK

2
In reply to Philb1950:

> Self defence in law is defined as meeting violence with an appropriate of violence is acceptable. You must not exceed the level perpetrated against you, so bursting someone’s nose after a rock attack would be OK

Not so sure about the word "after" in that last sentence. I'm no legal expert but I strongly suspect that using violence against someone who refused to stop throwing rocks would be viewed very differently from attacking them after some rocks had been thrown.

 Marek 04 May 2022
In reply to Philb1950:

> Self defence in law is defined as meeting violence with an appropriate of violence is acceptable. You must not exceed the level perpetrated against you, so bursting someone’s nose after a rock attack would be OK

No. 'Violence' doesn't come into it. You are allowed to use 'reasonable force' to (a) prevent them committing an offense and (b) to apprehend them (if they have committed an offence) until such time as the police arrive. And 'reasonable' is as defined by the courts, not you, and certainly doesn't include any level of retribution. The clue is in the name: citizen's 'arrest' as in 'to stop'. Anything beyond that leaves you at risk of committing an offense yourself.

 Jamie Wakeham 04 May 2022
In reply to Luke90:

Indeed.  The provision is to allow you to prevent someone from committing an offence, or to detain them once they have committed an offence.  So it's appropriate to use reasonable force if they are about to throw rocks, and also to prevent them from leaving the scene if they have already hit someone with rocks (although I'd probably be more concerned with first aid at that point). 

It's not there to allow you to smack them with a hex because they have just done something you disagree with.

 fred99 05 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

> I still refuse to believe that condoning attacking someone with a makeshift metal weapon is the way to do that, and suspect if you badly injured or worse you'd be on your way to prison. 

If I believe that person A is about to MURDER person B - whether or not person B is myself, someone dear to me, or a complete stranger - it is incumbent upon me to prevent said MURDER.

If that involves violence, then so be it.

Presumably if you saw someone kicking some poor unfortunate in the head one Saturday night you'd either walk on by or maybe phone PC Plod - even though you would know for certain that by the time they got there the poor unfortunate would either be dead or a vegetable. The last thing you would do is try to stop it.

It's about time we DID stop scum being violent to others, and it's people like you who are encouraging them with your attitude.

7
 fred99 05 May 2022
In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

> It's not there to allow you to smack them with a hex because they have just done something you disagree with.

But if they insist on continuing to chuck rocks, then surely the largest hexes available might need to be brought into play in order to "dissuade" them.

I did this once, used them swinging around my head like a bolas, threatening to loose them at him - didn't actually have to release them and hit the scumbag, but scared him sufficiently so that he rode off on his (illegal) motorbike (shouting abuse). He never came back, and my climbing partner and I continued with our climbing in a peaceful manner.

1
In reply to Philb1950:

> Self defence in law is defined as meeting violence with an appropriate of violence is acceptable. You must not exceed the level perpetrated against you, so bursting someone’s nose after a rock attack would be OK

Sorry, but that's incorrect. You are allowed to use 'Reasonable force' to defend yourself. There is no expectation that someone being attacked would be able to determine the 'appropriate level of violence' required to respond to that attack.

If someone physically attacks you, you are allowed to hit them with anything and everything to hand as hard as you can until they stop. If you continue beyond that point you're in trouble. (Obviously if you just so happen to have a samurai sword or baseball bat with nails through it to hand then you're going to be prosecuted).

In your example "bursting someone’s nose after a rock attack" wouldn't be OK, as that's retribution not self defence. (Although morally I don't have an issue with it).

 Tom Valentine 05 May 2022
In reply to Ridge:

Does the notion of " self defence" extend to others? 

If the assailant had agreed to stop throwing rocks at you but continued to drop them down a nearby route which had climbers on it, you are not at risk. Simply remonstrating with him might not do the trick.

1
In reply to fred99:

> If I believe that person A is about to MURDER person B - whether or not person B is myself, someone dear to me, or a complete stranger - it is incumbent upon me to prevent said MURDER.

Belief isn't enough. People believe all sorts of stupid stuff. You could be completely wrong. 

> Presumably if you saw someone kicking some poor unfortunate in the head one Saturday night you'd either walk on by or maybe phone PC Plod - even though you would know...

Again you can't know that. This is just like all the ticking timebomb justifications for torture that the US government came so fond of under Bush. All it led to was people who, at worst, were innocent getting tortured; and, at best, torturing people who had done something wrong but had no actionable intelligence to reveal. 

> It's about time we DID stop scum being violent to others, and it's people like you who are encouraging them with your attitude.

You seem to be one encouraging vigilante violence here. 

4
 mcawle 05 May 2022
In reply to Ridge:

"If someone physically attacks you, you are allowed to hit them with anything and everything to hand as hard as you can until they stop."

I don't have direct experience of the legalities around this, but I don't think what you wrote here is quite right, although you do make a good point about the distinction between self defence and retribution.

"A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large."

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/self-defence-and-prevention-crime

Such force as reasonable - where reasonable is decided initially by the police (in determining whether or not to charge) and then by the court if it comes to that.

As you say in your message, if your response is disproportionate to the situation (baseball bat with nails, samurai sword) then you could be prosecuted even if you weren't the aggressor.

But it depends - if I accidentally bump someone's beer in the pub, then they respond with insults and shove me, then I respond with lethal force (let's say I hit them, they go down, then I stomp them until they stop moving, or I hit them hard in the head with a heavy wine bottle and they hit their head again falling down), then on the face of it that would probably be a disproportionate response and I may well end up being prosecuted, because a shove alone does not warrant a lethal response.

But if there are mitigating factors - if they are a lot bigger or stronger than me, or if their friends are also looking like getting involved against me, or if I have reason to believe they were armed (e.g. they shoved me then reached into their pocket), then my response may well have been justified.

So it's very situational - the point I am trying to make is that I don't necessarily have carte blanche to respond with everything I've got purely because I was attacked, even if the original attack was completely unprovoked. It depends on the level of the threat and being able to articulate that to the police and possibly the courts.

Post edited at 14:32
1
In reply to mcawle:

Good points. The actual guidance is:

Reasonable Force

A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of (in the alternative): -

self-defence;

defence of another;

defence of property;

prevention of crime;

lawful arrest.

In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions:

was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all?; and

was the force used reasonable in the circumstances?

The courts have indicated that both questions are to be answered on the basis of the facts as the accused honestly believed them to be

In your example of beating someone to death for a push is obviously grossly disproportionate, so you're in trouble.

In the rock thrower at the top of the crag scenario "I yelled at him to stop, he didn't, and I honestly believed he intended to kill the person below so I hit him with my seagull swatter that I had in my hand" would be looked on more favourably by the CPS than "He chucked a rock at me and 10 minutes later I topped out and bust his nose".

I can't remember the actual statement, but IIRC a judge ruled something along the lines of "A member of the public cannot be reasonably expected to weigh to a nicety the exact level of force that is necessary to defend themselves or others"

In reply to TobyA:

You selectively seem to have overlooked Putins latest escapade, whereby the invasion of Georgia, Chechnya, annexation of Crimea and finally the full on invasion of a sovereign nation, with massive associated war crimes, is exactly what happens when liberals wring their hands and stamp their feet at illegal war mongering and do nothing, whilst at the same time giving Russia billions of euros per week in fuel sales. (Corbyn s statements over NATO?) This inaction and the EU dependence on Russian oil and gas is exactly what emboldened Putin. The rehearsals went to plan so crack on. In WW2 Fairfax advocated appeasing Hitler, but Churchill stood firm stopping us from currently speaking German. This is not xenophobic ranting, but historical fact. I accept this is somewhat scaled up from the rock throwing incident, (just a bit!), but the principle and same retaliatory responses are what are required to protect oneself, or in this case Europe.

17
 mcawle 05 May 2022
In reply to Ridge:

Yes you’re right, that’s a good point and an important detail - if I honestly believe the shove comprises e.g. a lethal threat then that is a key factor. I’m not sure to what extent my belief has to be justified/justifiable - if I claim I believed the attacker had a hidden weapon then I believe I may be called upon to provide some basis for the belief, but this is getting a bit beyond my ken.

 Tony Buckley 05 May 2022
In reply to Philb1950:

> . . . but Churchill stood firm stopping us from currently speaking German. This is not xenophobic ranting, but historical fact. 

Point of order; no it isn't, it's conjecture.

T.

1
In reply to Philb1950:

What are you are on about Phil? One moment you're talking about punching someone (or hitting them with a hex) for attacking someone, and the legal basis, or not, of that. Then you're going on about Russia invading Ukraine?! 

English criminal law and international law aren't the same thing! 😆 But good luck using the "it's what NATO should have done to Russia" defence, when up in front of a judge for assault!

2
 Cobra_Head 06 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

Really, is that what I said?

Or is that what you wanted me to say so you could try and prove a point?

WTF?

My point, in case you need a bit more explanation, is a lot of people don't care for advice, or even an explanation of why doing something might be dangerous.

What do you do when they tell you to "f*ck off and mind you own business" and then proceed to carry on chucking rock off the top, maybe on your family?

You try and prevent it, and when they try and stop you preventing them? Then what? My post was the imagined progression of this scenario. (As well you know, but there we go, at least I've spelt it out for you now.)

 Offwidth 06 May 2022
In reply to TobyA:

On the internet no one can see the liberal wringing his hands whilst saying sensible things

...still trying to work out who Fairfax was. Mistaken for Halifax maybe?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilty_Men

Phil is never boring though....he does a quality rant.... and knows his climbing onions.

In reply to Offwidth:

Yes Halifax, confused mid rant, which I only post to wind people up. Never fails though. After over 50 + years climbing, some of it at a high level and with the greats I have acquired considerable climbing knowledge and would only comment when absolutely sure of the facts. In my opinion!

3
 GDes 06 May 2022
In reply to Cobra_Head:

The one thing you have reminded me is why I don't usually bother getting involved in these discussions. Have a pleasant day. 

 Sean Kelly 06 May 2022
In reply to cb294:

> It is of course nonsense.

> If I managed to catch someone deliberately throwing rocks at me I would flatten them. No large rocks needed!

In reality, it is not always what it appears. When climbing on Low Man at Haytor, a 1ltr bottle full of water, caught my partner a glancing blow on the back. It was dropped/thrown from the top fully over 100ft. When I immediately climbed to the top and confronted the guy that owned the bottle (he was a 17st. giant, about twice my size), he was totally unconcerned that his actions had nearly killed somebody and said it was an accident and the bottle had somehow slipped out of his pocket, which took some believing. Impossible to prove either intent or stupidity.

 cb294 06 May 2022
In reply to Sean Kelly:

There are situations when being a 100kg former international level judo competitor does help getting my point across... No climber's nunchaks needed, that was clearly a joke.

The example of the dropped helmet I posted recently was clearly an accident, and the guy obviously apologized when he finished his abseil. Lesson for both sides, wear a helmet when gearing up, and clip your helmet safely to your harness (or even better wear it!) on a multi pitch abseil.

CB

1
 DerwentDiluted 07 May 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> On the internet no one can see the liberal wringing his hands whilst saying sensible things

> ...still trying to work out who Fairfax was. 

I think he was one of the hidden British Pilots in 'Allo 'Allo.  The other being Carstairs if memory serves.  I don't think that series ever purported to be completely historically accurate.

 Cobra_Head 07 May 2022
In reply to GDes:

> The one thing you have reminded me is why I don't usually bother getting involved in these discussions. Have a pleasant day. 

Oh! dear, thought you might have been able to give us a few suggestions.

Good day to you too.

 wercat 07 May 2022
In reply to Philb1950:

> Self defence in law is defined as meeting violence with an appropriate of violence is acceptable. You must not exceed the level perpetrated against you, so bursting someone’s nose after a rock attack would be OK

that is not true at all.  You should not exceed what is reasonable in the circumstances.  This is part objective and part subjective.  A nervous older person would be excused using the most force they could muster if faced by someone hostile and of unknown but probable great strength and of unknown bad intent.  There is no need to keep to what is done against you - the limit is what it is reasonable to do to prevent what might be going to happen to you.

 George Frisby 08 May 2022
In reply to Shaw Brown:

At Millstone yesterday (Sat evening, about 7.30pm) bunch of kids chucked a bottle of pop and then rocks down below into the embankments area, 3 people at the base. I shouted up to them (was belaying at embank 4 so just nr the top) after the plastic bottle so they knew what they were doing when the knocked the big rocks off. Everyone at the base had time to run away but was really scary. They basically just didn't care. Last wknd at Millstone rocks also knocked down from the top too, but in the middle of the day. 


New Topic
Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Loading Notifications...