if you went hiking on a boat, and the nearest town was 90 miles away. you had your family with you and one lighter to make a fire. the boat collapsed, everybody is fine, but y'all have no food , and are not expected back till 1 week later. you've been there for 2 days.
if the father left his family behind to get help to the nearest town. but the family he leaves behind, and there are grizzlies and black bears and wolves and snakes and other dangerous animals in the forest. there might have even been rumours that a couple of murderers were living in that forest.
but anyways, the father went to look for that Twin on his own leaving the family behind.
in his path, there is a raging river he needs to cross, but he knows he won't make it, cause he's already starving, weak, and out of energy, and the currents are too fast.
he stays by the river for day 3, and rest. he then sees that airplanes be traveling up this way along the river. there are a lot of trees, and he has no open land to make a fire. if he makes a fire, and half the forest got burned down, would he still be punished, or what? would protesters still protest?
I'm sure that there would be controversy about it, but it would still definitely be illegal. If he was going to start a fire, it had to be one he could control. And I agree with the person who answered first, couldn't he have climbed a tree or something?
it would be illegal cuz they could have just cut down a tree or climbed up and gotten firewood for a smaller but still good fire.
I don't agree with boofy150. If the planes were flying by, it would take a longer time to go up a tree and get wood and then make a fire.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment