Jump to content
Flames completely engulf small truck in Craig January 18, 2017
My sincere condolences.
Big shoutout to the men and women that put their own lives on hold to save ours.
This scenario is exactly how it should happen, and we are very fortunate to have skilled medics working together for the common good.
And to have something like Classic air in the valley!!!
All I have to say is HALLELUJAH, and that it's about time. Our remoteness seriously needed this boost in ones "golden hour" of survival. I feel a whole lot better now having them close by, that 45 minute wait got very tense at times.
Lastly, a huge shout to the first responders, AKA Good Samaritans. These ordinary folk stopped and utilized a taught skill to save a strangers life, and it looks like they were successful. A save is a save, the aftermath is when it gets tough, but it's a save nonetheless.
If I have an opinion about anything (and I am very opinionated), I feel that basic CPR and first aid should be a REQUIREMENT to graduate high school. The more people in the know, the better off everyone is. I cannot see how it could be that hard to teach, nor that expensive, to educate kids I'd even do it for a low rate.
Bravo everyone, bravo, a hearty round of applause from my side of the screen........
.......Alarming......no! I'm surprised, yet impressed it is not much higher.
When I graduated in 1985, I'm willing to bet that number WAS much higher, I'd say 1/4 of my class of almost 500 itself were smoking, that's huge, and that's just one class. In the 90's, it seemed like every single kid in town was smoking. With the 2000's coming in I feel we have seen a dramatic decrease in kids who smoke, I just do not see it as much as I used to, and I'm around town a lot.
Which is why I am not too worried about this report, and, which is why I thought the idea of an outright ban was a bit unfair to everyone else who are old enough and who have a right to smoke. These reports come out every now and then just to boost the cause, which is a good one no doubt, but once you run the numbers and get accurate figures, it turns out that it really is not that big of a problem.
My solution is the same it has always been, education and experience. I'm not going into my methods, but so far, so good with my kid. She knows the dangers, she knows the risks, I have laid it all out in black and white AND have even given her real world, first hand experience in what smoking can do to your body. I feel proud of that one accomplishment checked off the list and am even prouder of her for listening.
That's MY solution.
Is it THE solution?
I don't know.
Kids are going to do what the adults do because even though they are not ready for them, they seek and desire the same freedoms adults have. Given that, I guess the solution would be to be a good role model, don't smoke, don't promote smoking and don't allow smoking in your family.
Bottom line I guess is that parents need to be invested in the health and future of their children, problem is there are too many parents who depend on the world to do it for them.
Therein lies the problem that needs the solution.
The article makes some interesting points that I think are making this look worse than it actually is:
-"It is entirely possible that while fewer kids are lighting up today, those that have already begun on the path of addiction are smoking more and more instead of trying to decrease use,” said Maggie Rainwater, tri-county tobacco coordinator for Grand Futures Prevention Coalition. “It’s hard to say if this increase is a trend or just a random blip on the data landscape.”
Which to me means that there are not many NEW smokers, but current ones just smoking more. Besides, they are not even sure if this data is showing a true problem or not.
-"Several hundred students from the four-county region, including students at all Routt and Moffat county high schools, were invited to take the survey that was administered by the state departments of health and environment, education and human services, the University of Colorado and a community advisory committee, in fall 2015".
Ok, "several hundred students from the four county region". Lets just say 500 for discussion sake in Rio Blanco (Meeker/Rangely), and Jackson (Walden), 500 is pretty generous between the two. Plus around 500 at MCHS and around 1000 at Routt (Steamboat, Hayden, SoRoCo), gives us about 2000 or so students who took this test (figures compliments of US News and World Report on High Schools).
Of them, only 5% reported smoking.......or about 100 students. Divide that by four (remember, surveyed a four county region) and that leaves you with 25 kids attending MCHS that smoke, or 5% of the entire school.
Yes, 25 to many, but that is far from an alarming number. But how many of them are NEW smokers, and how many are just continuing their habit? If you say 1/2, then your number is now 12.5.
-"In 2013, only 1.6 percent of students in the Northwest Colorado region reported smoking"
So in 2 years, given the amount of students has not fluctuated from the 2000, that's still only about 30 kids who are new smokers overall, 7-8 at Moffat in the year 2013.
If my math is all correct (and math was never my strong point) and given that half of those who said they smoke are long term smokers, not new ones, that gives us five, five brand new smokers at MCHS in the last two years.
As a former CRT, I dealt with, and witnessed, many, MANY residents and neighbors succumb to the affects of smoking. Not once did I ever think that banning it in the county would solve the problem.
Ever sit next to someone coughing so bad they stop breathing? How about catching their black phlegm in your bare hand so it does not get on them? Maybe you have put someone head down and beat them on their back until they cannot stand it anymore, just to get the mucous flowing.
Ever have a friend ask for a smoke, as a dying request? Why not, they're dying, give them their last right.
Just last year I held my dying mothers hand and watched her slowly slip away, because of smoking. We had only known each other one year.
Not once did it ever cross my mind to BAN tobacco. Why?
Because it is unrealistic and will never happen, which I accept.
I've BEEN there, been back, went again and did it for 10 YEARS, everyday, 24/7/365!!
Making statements to me starting with "next time" are as pointless as your unrealistic solution.
Again, for the sake of some action on this forum and to create constructive dialogue, what is your real solution?
Allen. Seriously. This post is in no way to poke at you but c'mon.
Ban all tobacco products in Moffat County?
Um, no, that is unrealistic....and I do not smoke.
C'mon Allen, let's be real. What is your realistic solution?
I am on board Mark, besides, this is coming from the man who does not believe in seatbelt use telling you that the need to use a phone in a moving vehicle is a poor excuse for saving lives.
You don't own a cell phone Allen and what you don't understand is a cell phones usefulness above 4mph (or any usefulness for that matter, which in your own mind there isn't any usefulness for a cell phone) and the fact that every single company on the planet is NOT out to screw you over (again, in YOUR own mind).
What you're looking for Allen is an App for the phone itself, a secret one you can covertly install on your kid's phone that shuts off everything but the "dial a number" function. I did it with an app called Life360, an App for families so they can find each other in say a theme park. Put it on my kids phone and I knew her exact location, by GPS, and a history of where she had been. Even for a tech, phone savvy teenager, she had to have me uninstall it because she could not find the app.
I do not support texting and driving, it's dangerous.
Just like not wearing a seatbelt, or a helmet.
Personal choices are the killers.
Which proves my point, buckle up or don't. Thankfully, these people did. Really, it's the choice between life or death.
Boarder? Try "border".
While I completely agree with you on the part that if it were you or I we would be paying dearly, I want to point out a couple things that I think are being missed as far as whomever causes the damage has to pay for it all. Again, I agree that if you damage something, you are responsible, but consider the following commentary pulled from the CDP links above regarding the bridge and why it is still not at least repaired:
September 17, 2014:
"“We’re working good with T. Wright and his insurance to get it all fixed up,” Mathers said. Dickinson’s insurance will pay to repair the part of the bridge that Dickinson’s tractor broke, and the county will fund the rest of the project."
June 6, 2015:
"Tipton said if Moffat County is going to invest in a project to repair one section of the bridge, they might as well take advantage of the opportunity to perform extensive maintenance and essentially rebuild the bridge"
November 17, 2015:
"In total, the cost of the bridge rehabilitation is approximated at $1.52 million but will go beyond just repairing the damage caused by the tractor accident."
It sounds to me like the person who caused the damage HAS paid for the damage they caused, or at least their insurance has. It is apparent that the damage caused by the tractor did not ruin the integrity of the bridge, all they had to do was repair the hole and we could once again drive across. But instead, they want to make the weight load higher and replace all the decking, cables, and supporting structure, another quote from the paper:
September 22, 2014
“No matter what we do, there's a misperception in the public about what that bridge will hold,” Tipton said. “You’ll never be able to get more than a pickup truck across it if it’s used right.”
Why should the person who caused, and has paid for the damage, fund an entire project that has been in the works before the tractor ever went through?
And it's that very mentality getting people killed.
Last login: Monday, January 9, 2017
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2017 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.