BettyRubble, it's funny you should mention the "idiot savant". I'm not sure where this case was located, but several years ago, when I lived in Arizona, I was a volunteer with a local sheriff's department search and rescue team. We basically did it all, including high angle rescues and recoveries, ground searches, etc. We in fact had one adult male, who in my 2 years with the organization, was rescued three times. All three instances were due to lack of planning and being properly equipped or trained for the situations in which he placed himself. In addition to the stupid motorist law previously mentioned, Arizona did in fact pass a law allowing fines to be levied for rescues conducted due to gross negligence. In all of my time with the organization, and averaging one rescue per month, I had never seen this used, although there were several occasions in which I thought it should have been. It is one thing to legitimately have an accident, even in an extreme sport, such as climbing or hang gliding, and require assistance. In those instances, I don't feel it is appropriate to charge for assistance. Accidents happen. It is entirely another, to do something illegal, or so stupid, such as climbing over a fence atop an 800 foot waterfall and plunge to your death, thus requiring others to put their lives at risk to recover your corpse.
Where to draw the line? I don't know. Perhaps these issues should be handled in civil court, where a judge may determine the level of negligence and fiscal responsibility. I would think in most instances, unless a diver was found to be partaking in activities far outside their training level, or was in gross violation of established safety standards, the thought of charging for rescue should not apply. Accidents and anomalies will happen. I also tend to agree that as divers, we can insure against our own stupidity, as it was cleverly put, through organizations such as DAN, which any frequent diver would be wise to do.
