In reply to Only a hill:
> (In reply to drmarten)
> [...]
>
> I can't see rights etc. being affected, but a less sympathetic public can't be a good thing however you look at things. Will there be practical implications? Who knows--but I would prefer to be part of a community/subculture that is embraced by the public, not routinely criticised in the press.
I understand that.. I'm just not sure such idiotic arguments should even be given credibility through a response.. let alone official responses from the BMC etc.
A number of times I've logged into such sites thinking of responding then backed off as I worry responding with reasoned argument makes there argument also of a reasonable nature.. but I do understand why people want to respond.. I'm just not sure its worth it.
When its alarmist, impractical, poorly thought through and from a position of total or near total ignorance.
There are people who almost rub their hands with glee with such incidents and rush to the comments boards to have their say. You see it with runners, occassionally a runner does die of hypothermia and you get the 'I told you.. poorly dressed runner..'.. and you get it with climbers on steep snow covered slopes..
I just think those people just miss the whole point of enjoying mountain sports/activities, with the associated risk and its challenges being such an integral part of that activity, that the chance of changing their minds is minimal.