Hacker News Reader

Comment by rendall | Hacker News Reader

Hmm. Was the farmer compensated?

No idea. I'm not sure he should have been, but he very probably was - but my Dad was risking his life to protect the farmer, so Dad would not have paid for it. And as far as I know people were compensated for RAF crashes on their property - they certainly are now today, though RAF pilots do everything they can (up to their own deaths) to avoid militraliry accidents.

> I'm not sure he should have been, but he very probably was - but my Dad was risking his life to protect the farmer

Why not? It's not your father who should compensate the farmer but the government. And if government property causes damages to a citizen's livelihood, then the government should compensate them. At least, in a civilized democracy.

And that's happens in the UK. Of course, the farmer has to put in a claim, and I mean't that I do not know if he did so.

Hence:

> but he very probably was

I think you're missing a comma:

> I'm not sure he should have been

> I'm not sure, he should have been

Otherwise it reads like you think he shouldn't have been compensated.

> my Dad was risking his life to protect the farmer

The farmer is an equal citizen with equal rights, regardless - that is what the pilot was protecting.

How was he risking his life to protect the farmer?

This is supposedly where the idiom "bought the farm" comes from.

I don't think so. It came from the life insurance paying off the family farm (if I understand correctly).

Closer to "not in my backyard", until and unless it absolutely and directly benefits ME

Reply on news.ycombinator.com