Man falls down Cornwall mineshaft· Page 3

Mine exploration, photographs and mining history for mine explorers, industrial archaeologists, researchers and historians

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

Morlock
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#41

I suspect any council would consider the worst case scenario, i.e. a child getting injured?

droid
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#42

The reply to which is: it's your child, look after them properly.

Morlock
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#43

"droid" wrote:
The reply to which is: it's your child, look after them properly.

I'm pretty sure no one on the H&S bandwagon would publicly utter those words.

Edit: Agree with your comment though.:)

Chalcocite
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#44

Cornwall is world famous for mining and the Pendeen area particularly well known amongst most or nearly all mining enthusiasts. How stupid could that tourist be to not know it's a mining entry. Even if there was a barrier the idiot would probably have still entered the mine. Why should the countryside be covered with mine signs just to cater for every idiot that decides they want to poke around in places they have no business in entering. People like this bloke will only encourage our dopey council to cover the countryside with signs and padlocked gated entrances.

Roy Morton
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#45

As for 'accidental entry', this goon had accidentally wandered into the mine to the tune of 30 metres. Hardly accidental if you ask me, and then they have the audacity to complain when they come to grief.
'Wasn't my fault guv, I only wandered well away from the footpath, scrambled down through the bracken and went in with a torch'
Accidental my rosy pink a*se!

"You Chinese think of everything!"
"But I''m not Chinese!"
"Then you must have forgotten something!"

crickleymal
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#46

"droid" wrote:
The reply to which is: it's your child, look after them properly.

Yes up to a point. Having lost our youngest once I can tell you it's not quite as simple as that though.

Malc.
Rusted and ropey, Dog eared old copy
Vintage and classic or just plain Jurassic
All words to describe me.

sinker
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#47

"crickleymal" wrote:

"droid" wrote:
The reply to which is: it's your child, look after them properly.

Yes up to a point. Having lost our youngest once I can tell you it's not quite as simple as that though.

@ mal: Totally agree.

@droid and morlock: What a stupid and heartless thing to say FFS :(

Children are EVERYONE'S responsibility whether they are yours or not. The state steps in and protects children from all sorts of nastiness when the parents are either too stupid or too lazy to do it. And that includes mine shafts and stopes.

Yma O Hyd....

Peter Burgess
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#48

A hypothetical example of how a young child might come to harm through no real fault of its parents. Family goes for a picnic on some open ground. Parents decide to take a break and let young child play for a bit, exploring the immediate area. Child gets into problems through simple innocent curiosity. It is impossible to keep active youngsters in sight or on a lead all the time.

JohnnearCfon
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#49

"sinker" wrote:

Children are EVERYONE'S responsibility whether they are yours or not. The state steps in and protects children from all sorts of nastiness when the parents are either too stupid or too lazy to do it. And that includes mine shafts and stopes.

I fail to see how I am responsible for other people's children!

Peter Burgess
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#50

No, you are not. But perhaps we should be responsible for our own actions with regard to how they might affect others (including young children) - a subtle difference. Like taking care to watch for kids running out into the road in built-up areas. It's simple common sense really. It's unrealistic to expect all pavements to be cordoned off to prevent children going into the road, so the most practical way to keep children as safe as possible is to be aware that they might dash out, and drive accordingly.

sinker
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#51

"JohnnearCfon" wrote:

"sinker" wrote:

Children are EVERYONE'S responsibility whether they are yours or not. The state steps in and protects children from all sorts of nastiness when the parents are either too stupid or too lazy to do it. And that includes mine shafts and stopes.

I fail to see how I am responsible for other people's children!

You are responsible in the absence of anyone else. We are all "responsible" for each other in the same way. Or we should be. You wouldn't turn your back on a young child walking towards a mineshaft or a busy road would you? That's what I meant.

Yma O Hyd....

crickleymal
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#52

"Peter Burgess" wrote:
A hypothetical example of how a young child might come to harm through no real fault of its parents. Family goes for a picnic on some open ground. Parents decide to take a break and let young child play for a bit, exploring the immediate area. Child gets into problems through simple innocent curiosity. It is impossible to keep active youngsters in sight or on a lead all the time.

That's exactly what happened to me. He was behind me whilst I was talking to some friends at a picnic, next minute gone. Turns out he was looking for fossils in a exposed bit of limestone just round the corner but it took us half an hour to find him. He didn't hear us calling because he was so absorbed in what he was doing.

Malc.
Rusted and ropey, Dog eared old copy
Vintage and classic or just plain Jurassic
All words to describe me.

gNick
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#53

The owner does have responsibilities which I have looked at regarding Brewery Shaft at Nenthead but I can't find my copy of the regulations just at the moment. From what I remember there is a certain emphasis placed on protection of unattended children.

Don't look so embarrassed, it's a family trait...

ttxela
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#54

"sinker" wrote:

"JohnnearCfon" wrote:

"sinker" wrote:

Children are EVERYONE'S responsibility whether they are yours or not. The state steps in and protects children from all sorts of nastiness when the parents are either too stupid or too lazy to do it. And that includes mine shafts and stopes.

I fail to see how I am responsible for other people's children!

You are responsible in the absence of anyone else. We are all "responsible" for each other in the same way. Or we should be. You wouldn't turn your back on a young child walking towards a mineshaft or a busy road would you? That's what I meant.

I have a dim recollection from the days when I studied a bit of law that there is a fundamental difference in the UK compared to many other countries in terms of whether doing nothing in this sort of circumstance is lawful or not, can't quite remember which way around it is.

http://journalarchive.cilex.org.uk/journal_home/issue_content/november_2014/nov_14-crimebrief_pg_40-41.aspx

ttxela
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#55

"crickleymal" wrote:

"Peter Burgess" wrote:
A hypothetical example of how a young child might come to harm through no real fault of its parents. Family goes for a picnic on some open ground. Parents decide to take a break and let young child play for a bit, exploring the immediate area. Child gets into problems through simple innocent curiosity. It is impossible to keep active youngsters in sight or on a lead all the time.

That's exactly what happened to me. He was behind me whilst I was talking to some friends at a picnic, next minute gone. Turns out he was looking for fossils in a exposed bit of limestone just round the corner but it took us half an hour to find him. He didn't hear us calling because he was so absorbed in what he was doing.

True, many of us I suspect will have had our first experience of exploring underground by poking our heads into beach adits and caves when told to 'go off and play' as youngsters.

not that that's a bad thing at all in my opinion......

JohnnearCfon
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#56

"sinker" wrote:

You are responsible in the absence of anyone else. We are all "responsible" for each other in the same way. Or we should be. You wouldn't turn your back on a young child walking towards a mineshaft or a busy road would you? That's what I meant.

In today's climate I would do nothing more than shout a warning. Anything more would doubtless be misconstrued in 10 years time!

crickleymal
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#57

Never underestimate children's lack of common sense.

"The Westbury Brook Mine shaft was left only with a rather insecure stone wall surrounding it for many years, which was eventually securely capped by Forest Enterprise in the late 1980’s. A couple of visitors to the Forest were looking at the shaft area and to their horror they saw some young boys playing at the shaft top. One of the boys was balancing himself over the gaping shaft by standing on an insecure branch of an elderberry bush growing out over the shaft." (From the RFDCC Newsletter)

Malc.
Rusted and ropey, Dog eared old copy
Vintage and classic or just plain Jurassic
All words to describe me.

sinker
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#58

"JohnnearCfon" wrote:

"sinker" wrote:

You are responsible in the absence of anyone else. We are all "responsible" for each other in the same way. Or we should be. You wouldn't turn your back on a young child walking towards a mineshaft or a busy road would you? That's what I meant.

In today's climate I would do nothing more than shout a warning. Anything more would doubtless be misconstrued in 10 years time!

Well as long as you can live with your conscience that's ok then. I'm sure The Daily Mail said that we are over-run with children so a few more down mine shafts or under buses can only help.

Yma O Hyd....

droid
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#59

in loco parentis is the guiding principle here.

Peter Burgess
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

7 years ago

#60

In almost every walk of life there seems to be this wide spectrum of attitude from "let natural selection takes its course" to "have to protect everyone from everything no matter how impractical". As ever, the most effective solution is half way along the spectrum.