<% ballot="243720" ' Check nothing is broken broken = 0 if ballot = "" then broken = 1 end if set vt = Server.Createobject("mps.Vote") openresult = vt.Open("Vote", "sa", "") ' Created object? if IsObject(vt) = TRUE then ' Opened db? if openresult = True AND broken = 0 then ballotresult = vt.SetBallotName(ballot) ' read the vote votetotal=(vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes")+vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no")) if votetotal <> 0 then ' there are votes in the database numberyes = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes") numberno = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no") percentyes = Int((numberyes/votetotal)*100) percentno = 100 - percentyes ' fix graph so funny graph heights dont appear 'if percentyes = 0 then ' percentyes = 1 'end if 'if percentno = 0 then ' percentno = 1 'end if else ' summut went wrong frig it numberyes = 0 numberno = 0 percentyes = 50 percentno = 50 end if end if end if %> Votes so far:

100% 0%			>		>
			Yes: <% =percentyes %>%		No: <% =percentno %>%

Where do you draw the line? People face untold risks in everyday life.
Michael Reibscheid, UK

If someone can afford to participate in a high risk sport, they should have the right. However, they should understand that part of the costs include possible rescue. If rescue is required, the idiot should billed fully for all costs incurred. This can be tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds, euros, dollars or whatever. As a taxpayer, why should I underwrite some jerk who finds himself in a terrible jam while seeking an adrenaline rush?
Joe Bills, USA

Absolutely not. To ban such sports as ocean racing, mountain climbing or formula one is to kill off the dreamer in all of us that we too could have achieved such feats. We live in enough of a nanny state without further restrictions on our civil liberties.
Tim Masters, UK

I'd just like to know who picks up the tab for all these people who need saving. If some moron in a car knocks me off my bike, and an ambulance is called, I get sent a bill.
Wheatley, UK

Perhaps we should all just stay at home and watch virtual sports on TV!!! (no one would get injured or killed on the sports arena again!, we would only probably die from heart disease or something like that!!) Or perhaps we should just wrap ourselves up in plastic bubble packaging for the rest of our lives?? We would all be safe from falling and injuring ourselves) besides we could all still use our imagination to experience the thrills of life...or would that be to risky as well????
Shane Miller, Australia

Men and Women have always felt the need to take on challenges which put them at the edge of human endurance. This is one of the driving forces of the species and should be allowed to continue, it is necessary for our survival. The thought that we can protect ourselves from any experience is wrong, rather we should be out there positively seeking these experiences, conquering our fears and moving onwards.
James Vincent, England

How can you even define let alone ban a 'dangerous sport'. People are killed every year in such sports as fishing, so at which point do we draw the line.
Compulsory insurance is another area, but with most sporting events the chance of external costs are not great. As a motorcyclist with no great wish to go sailing, I have no problem with the rescue costs a yatchmans sport incurs, in the same way as I have no objection to my taxes subsidising the cost of child birth.
Keith Walker, UK

Every is one is an individual and hence have different levels of adventure thresh-holds. It would kill the spirit a great number of people to be starved of their adventures.
Antony, UK

A ban would not change human nature. People will continue to attempt this type of thing and it would cost just as much, if not more, to rescue people who are not cooperating with the authorities.
Nick Robinson, UK

They shouldn't be banned, but adventure-seekers should be made to put up a bond or take out insurance to provide funds for their rescue, should it be necessary. Too many people, both in high profile adventures (Branson, Bullimore, etc) and day-to-day bushwalkers, swimmers and sailors put little thought into the dangers they are to face. They rely on others to cover their shortcomings, expecting to pay nothing for it.
Geoff Buttsworth, Australia

The sports should be allowed to continue but the participants should be made to put down a sum of money to cover any costs that may occur in their rescue and if not needed, returned at the end of the event. Why should you and I, the non-aggressive sports types, pay for their misfortunes?
Jacqui Baxter, Canada

The mere fact that this question has been asked fills me with panic. Those who believe that these sports should be banned are those who live their lives without imagination or passion. As for rescue provision, insurance seems to be the key, but in then end I would rather see my taxes go on rescuing sportsmen than a great deal of other causes. As a previous writer noted, even this government wouldn't ban this - or would they ?
Michael Smith, UK

Ban them and I'm still going out there alone, what is life without a little risk?
Matthew R Lee, Chile

I lost a leg in a flying accident (my fault). While being treated in hospital together with a paralysed horse-rider and two fellow amputees (motorcyclists) I overheard one of the motorcyclists seeking some reassurance from the medical consultant. He didn't get any. It was a salutary lesson. Those of us who participate in risky activities are right to expect help when we need it because mutual help is a fundamental feature of civilised society. What we don't have is the right to sympathy when we are faced with the consequences of what some may regard as foolish risk-taking.
Rob Mainstone, Norway

No I do not believe high risk sports should be banned. Most people calling for them to be banned are neither involved in the sport or in any subsequent rescue. To claim that they should is an emotive response that completely misses out on the contributions such sports have made to our understanding of the world and of human endurance. It also ignores the fact that in many of these sports the people carrying out rescues are themselves involved in the sport and that most of the rescues are carried out for non-sportsmen.
Allan Pearson, UK

How will you stop them? If somebody wants to do something crazy that nobody can stop them from trying, then they'll try it. Millenia of human nature and experience show us that "Thou Shalt Not" is no way to begin a commandment.
T J Cassidy, USA

Define High risk sports? - swimming, diving, football, running, golf and even sunbathing have caused serious injuries and death. You cannot outlaw dangerous sports, as people will do them where they can (ie base jumping). What you should do, is ensure that in these organised events, insurance is taken out, to pay for the rescues. As much as its in our nature to do these crazy(?) sports, its in our nature to help people in difficulty. So they go hand in hand. More people die from car accidents, or from getting shot in the US, but the car and gun arent banned!
Chris Sandford, Netherlands

People that take part in such sports are the same people that drive humanity forward.
Angus Keith, UK

It is common knowledge to all sportsmen and women that participation in virtually any sport incurs the risk of potential injury. People undertake sporting activities fully aware of the dangers, indeed in some cases it is the danger that adds an extra element of enjoyment to the sport. In a world where we increasingly cocoon ourselves from potential danger and indeed seem persistent on shutting off the real experience of life itself, it is refreshing to see people breaking through the barrier of fear (which is the greatest crippler of humanity) and taking themselves to the edge of their physical and mental abilities. Are we really so pathetic that we have to ban the very things that make peole happy just because we are to afraid even to condone it, let alone do it? BRAVO to the people who take their life in their hands and enjoy it.
Edward Haigh, UK

If these sports were to be banned it would only increase the numbers of people wanting to participate in them. Surely people who take part should be made to pay for any rescue that may be needed.
Chris Jones, Austria

If they wish to pursue these sports then let them do so. Nobody moans about Richard Branson's exploits in the sky - they just wish him all the best. The people who take part are all intelligent and know the risks involved.
Mark Corrigan, UK

Absolutely not. These sports are an important part in these people's lives. What would the Government's reaction be if we told them they couldn't pursue their hobbies?
Nathan Hamer, UK

I do think though that event organisers need to ensure that all competitors have the most advanced and accurate safety equipment what ever the cost and that lives are not risked because no one has the guts to call the event off when there is evidence that danger lies ahead for the competitors. As you say its human nature to push boundries, but it should be done only with safety first in mind.
Hamish Dwight, Canada

The bulk of these guys are rich morons. Anyone attempting such stunts should have to post a massive bond which is more than enough to cover rescue costs. How to enforce this requirement.... The rescuing country should just sue for damages. Any rescuers (family) should sue the adventurer directly
Blake Wilson, Canada

The problem is if the participants have an expectation that others (rescuers) should take risks to turn a high-risk sport into a relatively safe one. To paraphrase Sean Maguire 'Your choice to do it, someone else's choice to rescue you'. How many of the Sydney to Hobart boats took active steps to help those in distress?
Mick Beasley, UK

High risk, high danger - high excitement!! Face it, any bloke can enjoy a stroll through a park or a float down a stream, but the human race demands, of itself, participation in events above the ordinary. Survival depends on it. Space was not and will not be won without blood. Humans may choose two paths, the comfortabe, sedate, or or the adventurous, risky, depending on the person you are. I choose adventure.
Steve, Canada

There is always a need to push and test ourselves to the limits and sadly sometimes beyond. It adds to the excitement.
Ian Smith, UK

Who is to determine which sport to eliminate? Most sports have at least some risk to them. That's what makes them worthwhile. Yacht racing, for instance, is one of the best sports there is.
George C Best, USA

YES they should be banned! This is not a question of freedom, but a question about abuse and disrespect for the other people who do not practice these stupid sports. Why should these high-risk takers put other peoples' lives at risk? Why should the tax payer spend thousands of pounds/dollars in rescue operations. Public money and services should not be put at the disposal of these people. People should be free to take any risks they want, but only if they make their own rescuing arrangements.
R Venturini, UK

Humanity has reached its current position by a willingless to explore the boundaries. In most fields, these boundaries are beyond the reach of individuals for a variety of reasons. High-risk sports provide one source of the stimulus vital to keep humanity from becoming moribund.
Donald Pearce, UK

High risk sport pushes the boundaries of human endurance and endeavour. It does have its risks, and can place rescuers in danger but you only need to walk down your average city centre on a Saturday night to experience what is probably as high-risk an environment as you would face participating in one of these "high risk sports". In reality some are no more dangerous than going for a beer!
Chris Gough, UK

In the last two years I have lost five friends to whitewater kayaking accidents. All of these men where in the top 3or4% of all paddlers. All of them died doing what they love. Everyone is going to die sooner or later but don't sacrifice living just so that you can live. As for the rescuers I have had the oppurtunity to train and work with several SAR teams. Most are in it because it involves a certain amount of risk, and that is why they have that job instead of a more boring job. I'm proud to pay the salaries of these people. Even if most of the time they end up rescuing people that are in trouble because they came up short on common sense.
Joe, USA

Of course high risk sports should not be banned. The decision to take part in such sport is entirely that of the individual competing. No one else has any business to tell him/her what they should or should not do. The question of the risk to rescuers is a separate issue. Rescuers too have the right to make their own decision about whether they should become involved. There is no reason why people involved in high risk sports should be rescued. If organsiations/people/governments are not prepared to undertake rescues; fine. Let them say so and then let the sports(wo)men get on with their pursuits.
Mike Taylor, Nepal/UK

Banning high risk sports would be both pointless and unworkable. It would be pointless because the risk seekers would simply move on to some other activity not yet banned (until all actvities were outlawed). It would be unworkable because many of these activities occur outside the juristidiction of any body that might ban them, for instance in international waters in the case of off-shore racing. A more effective solution might be for the emergency services around the world to present the rescuees with a bill for the costs they incur.
Nicko van Someren, UK

Dangerous sports are the boundaries by which we grow. No way should they be banned. During the 60's and 70's major sporting and technical achievments were made that now look very ordinary. Sports is one area where personal risk are acceptable. And risk to the emergency services tolerated through respect. Only when sportsmen are poorly prepared for the risk that we should question their senses.
Kev Smith, USA

It is only the rich people that can do those things. They sould also come up with the money for the eventual rescue.
S Bruin, USA

It is a matter of personal choice to put one's life at risk. We should not allow the government to limit our choices. If a person is over age 18, it should be a personal choice, not the goverment's! Fight socialism !
Scott Blake, USA

I do not believe they should be banned but participants (especially multi-millionaire participants) should be prepared to bear the cost of rescue.
Ian Fuller, USA

Participants should be required to pay for, at least part of, the cost of their rescue and should be required to insure against that risk.
Malcolm Halls, South Korea

Despite my view that those who participate in such sports are selfish and have little concern for the affect on their families I do not believe that such sports should be banned. Many valuable lessons are learned whilst rescuing these foolhardy adventureres and those who get into peril through no fault of their own benefit from these lessons.
Peter Kidds, UK

People smoke, drink and take drugs. No matter what the risks and what does the rest of society think or feel. Banning the sports is on the border of human rights violation. As we all know all boat crews could assess the situation and decide for themselves if to continue or not. Everyone has to have that right. And do not forget : ''Without struggle, there is no progress". Part time climber, hiker and snowboarder - yours Gita.
Gita Vargova, Czech Republic

How would you police people trying these sports? There's a lot of earth to be dangerous in.
Joe, UK

It's an individuals choice to participate in high risk sports. It is somebody else's choice to rescue them.
Sean Maguire, Australia

What a silly question! Surely even Tony Blair isn't thinking of banning Yachting? Even the EU aren't! Our lives belong to us, and we must have the freedom to decide how to enjoy them, and when/ how much to risk them, or we have no freedom at all.
Alex Stanway, UK

What do you class as a high risk sport? Is it offshore sailing or could it be driving a car prehaps? When there is an problem sailing the rescue action is probably more expensive, but it is far less frequent. The financial cost from vehicle accidents globally must be horrific. Is rescuing a broken down motorist from a busy motorway any less dangerous? The personnel in rescue services are there because they get satisfaction from helping people. Most importantly most 'high-risk' sports are great fun and only taken to extremes by people with a great deal of training and experience. Of course there are people that jump in over their heads, but that happens in all walks of life. What would you do with all those people that enjoy and need the stimulation they get from high-risk sports? Let them loose on the roads or lock them up. Anyone who says 'yes' to your question better cancel their skiing holiday!
Andy Holmes, Kosovo/UK

No, I don't think adventure should be banned. However, if one wants to take the risk, for personal satisfaction or a prize or just attention, then that one should have a cushion to cover all rescue costs. Because a deliberate adventurous risk is just that - a risk. If something untoward occurs, it is not an accident. Taxpayers should not be held liable. There is a saying used a lot.....Do it at your own peril.
Joan Lisa, USA

Sporting events, such as this one, should not be banned for they encourage innovation in sailing tactics and equipment, and allow human beings to push themselves to personal greatness. Unfortunately innovation often takes precedence over safety, which results in increased risk to both rescuers and participants alike. When this happens, the event/adventure becomes a high risk adventure and is unacceptable. The fact of the matter is that (judging from the history of the subject race) sailing from Sidney to Hobart is not inherently risky, provided one is in a proper displacement boat and equipped with proper storm equipment (droges, para anchors etc.) Adventures planned with due regard for safety must be encouraged, but those without, must not.
Kevin Scott, Canada

All people need a degree of challenge and stress. Some people need taking risks, and if high risk sports were not available, they will feel unhappy and seek risky adventures in other areas - business, politics, personal life. We tolerate risk when crossing a street, we inflict sure damage on ourselves when smoking or overeating - it makes no sense to ban ocean yachting.
Yuri, Canada

There is risk in everything, often more risk in everyday things such as driving than in most "dangerous sports". If you remove all risk from life you have essentially removed the essence of life itself.
David Brown, UK

People lives should not be governed by what others feel is safe or unsafe. A persons opinion should stay exactly that. How would you distinguish between one persons sport and anothers recreational passtime. For example how many people who sail for recreation have to be rescued. On this basis should we ban everything that could in some way be classed as dangerous and would result in expense in the event of an accident.
Paul Mitchell, UK

It should be banned only if it endangers the lives and well-being of others. "Dangerous High risk sports" are like attempting suicide which is also banned in many countries, yet I am still all for legalized euthanasia. Every day living involves dangers, for example driving. Yet we have so may rules and regulations to make it safer. A similar legal and monitoring body for monitoring dangerous sports and to educate, restrict and not necessarily ban high risk sports would be a great option. After all if the sports person is willing to jeopardize his life along with others she or he should go though a psychiatric evaluation. People can go on an adrenaline rush which can have very similar affects as alcohol or other drugs. And just because it is naturally produced in our bodies it should not be abused.
Nezam, Iran/USA

Strongly against banning high risk adventure sports. An old common law principle is that of informed consent to activities that are inherently dangerous or potentially harmful, but that a person might find enjoyable. Any effort to impede such activities is another effort by legislators to tell the general public what it best for them without understanding a person's motivation behind undertaking such activities in the first place.
Jay Fisher, USA

High risk adventure sports help build well rounded, outgoing and interesting people. The world would be a much poorer place if we never took any risks.
Andrew Hedger, UK

No, unlike animals who are forced to participate in bloodsports and other sports (such as horse racing) against their will, to my knowledge, humans have freedom of choice about taking part in sports. I do think that those participating should have compulsory insurance though which would be used to re-imburse the cost of medical treatment or the rescue services needed when they get into problems.
Barry Tregear, UK

People should have the freedom to choose exactly what pursuits please them best. However, the impacts of that decision should be limited to the boundaries of the sport itself. Rescue costs and maintenance, Media coverage and sponsorhip and supporters should provide adequate resource for each sport to be self sufficient and meet the bills of its costly existence (in the example of Balloon racing and sailing). Finally, for those who do not wish to have any participation in "Dangeous Sports" and do not wish to see or spectate in them either - then there should be limitations and regulations on the location, timings and management of large Events so that there existence does not adversely affect the lives of non-participants
Matt Smith, UK

They should not be banned as without these high-risk sports, life will be pretty boring....
S Ganesh, Singapore

To me this is a very complex issue. I race yachts and race motorcycles, both are sports to me and some would consider them both high risk but I have trained, practiced and prepared to compete and do so with considerable safety. In my experience there is some risk in every worthwhile endevour or sport. Those who seek to protect people from the dangers of life and especially refer to Polititians, are continuously eroding an individuals ability to determin their own future and take responsibility for their actions and their own life. As a person who has competed in over 35 Ocean races including Sydney to Hobarts and the tougher Melbourne to Hobart, I say that we are better to explore what is possible than to hide in fear of what might happen. The conditions that the fleet encountered were not forcast and each yacht experienced different seas and winds. The yachts where there was loss of life had mostly retired and were headed for the port of Eden. There appears to be no common denominator to the severity of the conditions or the loss of life. You would therefore have to stop all competitive sailing to cover the eventuality of these extreme conditions happening again. That simply does not serve a valuable purpose. The difficulty occurs when other peoples lives are put at risk. No sailor I know would deliberately put a yacht and a crew in the situation where the loss of life will occur.
Peter Martin, Australia

Freedom of the individual should always be maintained. In many cases procedures and techniques can only be improved upon by experiencing real-life rescues such as during the Sydney-Hobart race. Many sports are now organised commercially for corporate gain and I would therefore certainly approve of some contribution to the costs of the rescue services from these companies - especially to voluntary services such as the RNLI.
Ginny, UK

No, as an avid skydiver with more then 2000 jumps, and recovering from a major accident, which was totally my fault, I do not believe that anybody should decide where I can find my thrills. I can not believe that you can even ask this question.
Eric Hertsens, Dominican Republic

Those rescued should have to pay heavily. These fees shall include sufficient compensations to rescue crews. This would encourage adventurers to get proper insurance before attempting a dangerous feat.
Kent Eriksson, Sweden

These glory-seeking half-wits in balloons and boats should be told that if they are going to risk their lives through these pursuits, then they are on their own and no-one should have to risk their lives trying to rescue the idiots. I also think the media should not publicise these events in order to discourage these people, and there is nothing more boring than news reports of some lunatic trying to get round the globe in a biscuit barrel or whatever.
Alan Wright, UK

Who Decides what's a dangerous sport - Nanny? According to statistics, Football is VERY dangerous.
David Moore, UK

The issue isn't so much whether high risk sports should be banned, it's more how much responsibility should be placed on the organisers to ensure that all reasonable safeguards are taken before an event commences, including preparing their own search and rescue facilities should they be needed. Not only does this ensure that third parties are put to less risk in having to overcome potentially life threatening conditions when undertaking rescues, the level of responsibility placed on the organisers of such events should provide an extra level of incentive to make sure that all of the participants are capable of looking after themselves with the assistance of the facilities offered by the organisers. Place the liability for any mishaps more completely on the shoulders of the organisers and the level of self regulation should be increased appropriately.
Julian Page, Australia

These sports usually represent the pinnacle of achievement in the given sport, and as such will always be striven for. Those who participate must accept and acknowledge the risks involved and must ensure that resultant rescue operations must not put the rescuers at unreasonable risk and must not be an unreasonable financial burden. Insurance is unlikely to be available, so some form of bond needs to be involved. In the case of Richard Branson's sadly unsuccessful attempt to circumnavigate the globe in a balloon, I asume he will offer to cover the cost of his rescue. With the Sydney to Hobart tragedy, there are several exceptionally wealthy race participants who might be well advised to at least offer to cover the cost of that operations. We will see.
Peter Donahue, Australia

Danger is relative. Banning "dangerous sports" is the thin end of the wedge, it will be your sport or activity next as the definition of dangerous moves down the list.
William Burt, UK

Even discussing this is a step towards further erosion of civil liberties in this ever increasingly 'Nanny' State.
John, Scotland

It is up to the individual wether they take the risks or not... Banning them would just make them even more 'extreme'
Jason Digby, UK

"Total commitment is paramount to reaching the ultimate in performance." If these sports persons are willing to take the risks why should we stop them. They should have the freedom to decide what they want to do and you also have the freedom to watch them or not. Also who's going to define 'high risk sports' if it came down to it. "Should boring sports be banned?"
Duncan Harkness, Greece

It doesn't make much sense to ban such sports because people want to explore and find out how much they can achieve. Beside are we all not playing risk games? What about the numerous space shuttles and other nerve cracking adventures? Should they be banned too. I don't think so. I think we need to encourage people to do these kind of things because, at the end the end we can learn one or two things. As for the costs and the dangers involved, I think those who are found or interested in those sports have money, why can't they be asked to pay the costs? Beside, insurance companies can be called in to assist.
Dr H Sosovele, Tanzania

Back to top | BBC News Home | BBC Homepage | ©