Aftermath of Chinese Lantern Fire

[Astroscot2]

Yup, stick my name down on the petition too, dont forget fireworks, Christmas lights, BBQs, Bonfires, chip pans, all fire hazards in my book..

[steve_bham]

I do fire investigations and any fire that causes damage or distress is too much especially if it can be reduced or removed from happening. This isnt the first or most damaging case of a fire caused by lanterns.

Would we still think they are pretty and ok to use if it killed a sleeping family by landing on their property?

But the fire aspect is only a small part of the damage they cause, the metal rim can and has killed cattle.

I for one think they should be banned or at the very least the purchaser made to take out insurance incase the worst does happen.

[Psychobilly]

I for one think they should be banned or at the very least the purchaser made to take out insurance incase the worst does happen.

I dont expect anyone would come forward if one they launched caused a more serious incident...

Peter...

[astromerlin]

You want to ban something because one cow died? Do you ever eat beef? If so how many cows have died for you? More than one I would say. And as for the government when did they ever know what was best for us.

Plently of cows I'd say, but humanely slaughtered not left to died in agony in a field. Have you considered the impact on wildlife or does it not matter much?

Nanny state? I'd say not but my belief is to "Do as you will but harm none". This includes all animals and wildlife and unfortunatly people too.

[Psychobilly]

Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints....

[Wurzil]

refractors are much better than dobs

[Chris H]

No way, dobs rule over all other scopes :D:D

[astromerlin]

refractors are much better than dobs

That's optical fighting talk there.. where's my collimation tool.

[beamish]

Plently of cows I'd say, but humanely slaughtered not left to died in agony in a field. Have you considered the impact on wildlife or does it not matter much?

Nanny state? I'd say not but my belief is to "Do as you will but harm none". This includes all animals and wildlife and unfortunatly people too.

Precisely

"

A growing trend of releasing Chinese lanterns at outdoor events is putting livestock, crops and farm buildings at risk, according to farmers.

Producers across the country have complained the lanterns, which are made of paper, bamboo and wire and can float for several miles before falling to the ground, were causing serious problems on farms.

Chester beef farmer Hugh Rowlands said one of his pedigree Red Poll cattle had been killed after it ate a lantern that landed on his farm.

"I found the remains of a Chinese lantern within a few yards of where the cow had been lying... and it had been well-chewed," he told the BBC.

"Consulting the vet, his opinion was she had actually eaten part of the lantern and the fine wire inside it had punctured her oesophagus.

"So she'd in effect spent a long, painful 48 hours suffocating on her own feed."

"

Pedigree beef farmer Pat Stanley of Coalville, Liecestershire, said the lanterns were "incredibly dangerous" and called for them to be banned.

"If we make silage in any of these fields this is all going to be chopped to pieces if we don't see it and find it," she said.

"That's going to go into my silage clamp and next year I'm going to have dead cows."

Other farmers who contacted Farmers Weekly said lit lanterns could also set fire to crops, straw or barns.

The NFU said it had written to the government over its concerns about the increased use of lanterns, which are traditionally released in Asia in a bid to bring good luck.

A union spokesman said farmers who have problems with lanterns on their land should write to venues releasing them and point out the possible dangers of them."

Harmless ?????

[pbyrne]

Fireworks and chip pans are banned in the Irish Republic, though thousands of illegal fireworks are bought every year. Chinese lanterns are just a fad IMNO and if they are banned they will go away, I can't see them being smuggled into the country as they don't have the same dramatic effect as a firework.

We take far greater risks every time we get into a car. Should we ban them too?

There are safety features built into cars, seat belts, air bags, etc. There are no little fire extinguishers attached to to these things.

As a matter of interest, how much fuel goes into one of them?

[brianb]

if they are banned they will go away

Somehow I doubt that. Banning things actually makes them more likely to be used by the more irresponsible members of society ... hence addiction to illegal drugs.

BTW the damn things don't have to be bought, it's child's play to "roll your own" from raw materials which would be impossible to ban.

[Mr Spock]

I'm going out armed with my collimation laser...

[Stryda]

kris 77!!!! im definitely with you on this one!! i'll definitely join your group . to me this just seems like a mirrored effect of do-gooders (oo cant sing bah bah black sheep because its racist). Honestly, if I lit one of these and it did cause a fire i'd be extremely sorry and regretful, however, it's the exact same risk and principle to people throwing a cigarette on the floor or in a bin....which pretty much every smoker has done. The risk of causing a fire is small, but theirs stil that 1 in a billion chance that it could happen, and that risk applies to absolutely everything in life!! maybe we all shouldnt drive our cars to work anymore....because theirs a million to 1 greater chance of you killing someone doing that than using a chinese lantern.....I don't see any of you anti-chinese lanternists doing that .

[brianb]

maybe we all shouldnt drive our cars to work anymore

I don't (retired).

The difference here is that driving is generally done for a purpose - to get you from A to B so that you can work / buy food / observe stars / whatever. There is no economic benefit I can see in these lanterns but there is a risk.

I do not believe in "banning" but behaviours which can and do endanger other people or their property are usually restricted in some way. I agree absolutely that tossing lit cigarette ends around is despicable and certainly can cause damage, but the heat output from a cigarette is very small compared with these lanterns .... and I do not enjoy having the night sky polluted with the things, or answering the "UFO sighting" reports which they generate in huge quantities.

[themos]

3000 people killed in road accidents every year in the UK, approximately zero killed by lanterns.

Do you really want a single policeman to waste time policing the lantern-ban law instead of catching dangerous drivers?

I don't. Also, we have far too many laws, most people don't even know they're there, how do we expect them to be obeyed?

[brianb]

Do you really want a single policeman to waste time policing the lantern-ban law instead of catching dangerous drivers?

It's a LONG time since I saw a policeman catching a dangerous driver. They do catch a lot of people who are driving perfectly safely but happen to be exceeding the speed limit.

And - like it or not - the offence of arson (unlimited jail sentence) is a great deal more serious than the offence of speeding (£60 fine).

[themos]

Well, if arson already covers it, then we're done.

[Wurzil]

No way, dobs rule over all other scopes :D:D

just trying to change the subject.

This thread has got tedious, but has made two very good points:

1 - chinese lanterns are a bit pointless and rarely cause fires and they choke cows.

2 - banning things W1lly nilly is stupid.

both very good points that are seemingly at loggerheads with each other.

Maybe the two sides should just form a coallition, forget about chinese lanterns and then just pass some rules to make sure we stay in control of stargazers lounge for five years???

W

[Wurzil]

cant believe the word W1lly gets moderated and censored.

even w1llies are banned?? whatever next.

[Mr Spock]

Um, yeah, and we should ban planes because of 911...

Dumb arguments have nothing to do with the real issue; people setting fire to something and willfully setting it adrift without recognition of the consequence.

[brianb]

we should ban planes because of 911...

No, we should ban planes because of contrails.

Impact with buildings can be avoided by placing the buildings underground. This will have a desirable secondary effect by reducing light pollution from inadequately screened windows.

[Psychobilly]

No, we should ban planes because of contrails.

Impact with buildings can be avoided by placing the buildings underground. This will have a desirable secondary effect by reducing light pollution from inadequately screened windows.

Whilst at the same time removing obstructions from the local ...

But can we wait until the chinese lanterns have burnt down all the trees before banning them

Billy...

[themos]

people setting fire to something and willfully setting it adrift without recognition of the consequence.

It should be possible to persuade the police to prosecute users of lanterns if current law is being violated, then.

If not, then it is obviously not considered arson.

Which reminds me of a greek sub-title in some movie: One person says to another "I think it was arson". The subtitle: "I think Arson did it".

[Psychobilly]

I would have thought the problem is "proving" who launched the thing in the first place... and who is responsible - sorry perhaps that should be irresponsible

Peter...

[themos]

I don't think proving who did it will be a problem for a test case as lantern events seem to be advertised openly.