MSNBC: No pay, no spray: Firefighters let home burn

[pjfootballer]

Personally I think this is pretty horrible. It's their job to put out fires and they did nothing to help this family save their home.

Fine or no fine, I don't see how they could just let it burn down, especially with those animals inside.

If they could have put out the fire they should have.

That said...why were these morons burning trash in the first place?

They didn't pay their sanitation fee!

[AsburySkinsFan]

Why would you leave a fire unsupervised in close proximity to a shed? Seems really dumb. Especially when you have past issues with out of control fires, that have been documented by the fire dept.

If only we could outlaw stupid.

I don't really like the idea of having to pay an annual fee for the fire dept, but if it's not already taken from taxes, i guess it makes sense. Is this normal for rural areas? Despite that fact that I think the homeowner is somewhat stupid for leaving a fire unsupervised, the firefighters probably should have put the fire out, and then have the home owners pay the fee + some sort of penalty (kind of like how car insurance companies do it).

This is not normal is rural areas most fire departments are paid for through property taxes or county/city taxes as well as state/federal grants.

Personally I just hope the police don't catch on to this idea of requiring payment of a fee for protection.

"Hey...I hearz youtz iz needin' sum protection....we can offer youtz dat...hey I hear bad stuff happenz in dis neihborhood all da time."

[twa]

We have a national fire service; http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/

Or do you favor a plan that has each local fire department be responsible for forest fires?

Funny how that works ain't it?....and I'm sure they would respond eventually to address a threat to the forests.

Now ya want to talk about local fire depts ?

I do agree it is a Christian duty...civic?...apparently not.

Added

With your police example you could simply stop paying them and use the funds to hire new officers

That don't work too well if ya ain't paying them though

[AsburySkinsFan]

That said...why were these morons burning trash in the first place?

People in rural areas burn their trash all the time. Lots of times it's because they don't have garbage pick up. And yes, there are still areas in the US without regular garbage pick up.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Funny how that works ain't it?....and I'm sure they would respond eventually to address a threat to the forests.

Now ya want to talk about local fire depts ?

Oh so now you agree that there is a need for a federal fire service, as such a need for a broader government fire services, the debate now is to what extent should they cover.

I do agree it is a Christian duty...civic?...apparently not.

Well apparently the firefighters themselves understood that it was their civic duty since they've called and apologized to the homeowners.

[rictus58]

the firefighters probably should have put the fire out, and then have the home owners pay the fee + some sort of penalty (kind of like how car insurance companies do it).

Let me know an insurance company which will cover you for an accident, BEFORE you are under their policy.

At what point will people be held responsible for the choices they made?

While it may be cold hearted what they (firemen) did, the owners of the property took a risk. A risk they lost out on.

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

Man, that ****** up. Would they put out a person bursting in flames.

Wait a minute... spontaneous combustion so that wouldn't be a probable cause.

[sacase]

Last night this was reported on the local news, and there were eyewitnesses who said that there were people at the scene of the fire with checkbooks and cash out to pay the $75 and the department refused it. It also appears that the firefighters have been calling the family to apologize that they were following the orders of their chief. At least someone knew it was wrong to let their house burn.

As for the dogs inside, it said that the man at the house started a fire in a barrel then took a shower and when he got out of the shower it had spread to the shed, he went to put the fire out with a hose but it got to the house, he then tried to call the fire department and they declined to come out because the fee wasn't paid. Sometimes people need to come before policy, what's more is that if they had responded to the initial call then they wouldn't have had to respond the subsequent house fires that it started. Classic bureaucracy getting in the way of helping people.

What's the point of having a policy if all you are going to do is make exceptions. Try getting into an accidnet without insurance and calling the insurance company offering to pay. No Human died, so there is no issue there. Not sure what the problem is with this. People need to be more responsible for their actions. Instead of putting this on the country or on the firemen, why not put the blame squarely where it belongs. The homeowner. If the homeowner would have payed the fee then none of this would have happened. The homeowner was aware of this fee when he bought his home in the county and understood the risks. He decided to roll the dice and it came up snake eyes. If you don't like the way the county does stuff then move to another county or into the city.

Also, there is seperation of church and state so we need to take out what the "christian" thing to do was.

[twa]

Oh so now you agree that there is a need for a federal fire service, as such a need for a broader government fire services, the debate now is to what extent should they cover.

Well apparently the firefighters themselves understood that it was their civic duty since they've called and apologized to the homeowners.

Have a need?...we have programs in place for grants and training for rural areas

If the homeowners want to wait for the federal response,more power to them:ols:(funny you ain't blamed them yet)

If the lazy ****ers want to risk burning or are too cheap to pay someone else to do their job ...LET THEM

It's in God's plan ain't it? :evilg:

I'm sure the firefighters feel bad about it since they are volunteers that take responsibility...unlike those that can't be bothered with it:beatdeadhorse:

[Baculus]

Let me know an insurance company which will cover you for an accident, BEFORE you are under their policy.

At what point will people be held responsible for the choices they made?

While it may be cold hearted what they (firemen) did, the owners of the property took a risk. A risk they lost out on.

That's not a very good analogy. A better analogy would be between homeowner's and car insurance.

[Baculus]

Have a need?...we have programs in place for grants and training for rural areas

If the homeowners want to wait for the federal response,more power to them:ols:(funny you ain't blamed them yet)

If the lazy ****ers want to risk burning or are too cheap to pay someone else to do their job ...LET THEM

It's in God's plan ain't it? :evilg:

I'm sure the firefighters feel bad about it since they are volunteers that take responsibility...unlike those that can't be bothered with it:beatdeadhorse:

The Federal government doesn't have to fulfill that need -- the state could provide rural grants if couldn't provide fire protection for its citizens. Of course, if the state doesn't deem this a necessity or cost effective, then I don't see why you would have a problem with the Washington, D.C., providing such assistance.

As far as the Federal government is concerned, they did spend millions in rural electrification programs such as the TVA (AKA the Tennessee Valley Authority, which is still run by the Federal government).

[Baculus]

i love all the people that say that if i have no sympathy for the guy i must be some "Right wing/Republican/Conservative".

How about the fact that this guy didn't pay the fee, under-insured his home, and still made the dumb decision to have an open burn on his property??? how do i feel sorry for that???

i'm gonna feel sorry for people who's homes burn down that didn't do stupid things like this, not idiots who bring it on themselves.

and how dare you guys for bashing the fire department. they have orders and jurisdictions, just like the police and military and i guarantee you they would've been fired if they disobeyed regulations. if you wanna be pissed off, get mad at the governing body, not the actual men. it's easy to say you would have put out that idiots fire, because your family doesn't depend on your hypothetical firefighting income.

if you were in their shoes, would you sacrifice your job EVERYTIME a resident called and didn't pay the fee for you to put out the fire??? if you have a wife and kids at home, i bet your job comes before some idiot's house. i do feel bad for the pets though. they deserved a much better fate.

How dare us? We have every right to bash the fire department as they stood by and did nothing to help this family. Apparently, though, the bashing from the community at large achieve something since the township is going to modify their policy.

And yes. you DO sound like a right-winger as you parrot their talking points.

[Bang]

the insurance analogy.. this is saying the insurance company won't pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to replace a house if you don't have a policy.

That is reasonable.

In this case, all the guy wanted them to do was spray some water from the trucks they brought with them on his house.

They can refill it in the river if need be, and I doubt the night's work will cost anywhere near as much as the insurance company would be asked to pay.

the county can settle up with him later. They could even give him 30 days in jail. But damn, to just stand there and let his whole life go up in flames, that's just a **** move no matter how much anyone wants to say it's right.

It may be legal.. but it sure as hell isn't right.

~Bang

[Baculus]

the insurance analogy.. this is saying the insurance company won't pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to replace a house if you don't have a policy.

That is reasonable.

In this case, all the guy wanted them to do was spray some water from the trucks they brought with them on his house.

They can refill it in the river if need be, and I doubt the night's work will cost anywhere near as much as the insurance company would be asked to pay.

the county can settle up with him later. They could even give him 30 days in jail. But damn, to just stand there and let his whole life go up in flames, that's just a **** move no matter how much anyone wants to say it's right.

It may be legal.. but it sure as hell isn't right.

~Bang

I agree, Bang. That has been part of my issue with the entire situation.

[pjfootballer]

Man, that ****** up. Would they put out a person bursting in flames.

Wait a minute... spontaneous combustion so that wouldn't be a probable cause.

Only if they paid the $75 fee ahead of time.

[pjfootballer]

How is this any different than hospitals turning the uninsured away?

It's illegal for hospitals to turn patients away (It's called IMTALA) once they've entered the doors. Hospitals are supposed to provide basic care no matter the situation. Most hospitals will triage a patient to determine if it's an emergency situation. If they deem the situation is not an emergency, they can refer them to ugent care centers or treat them on an outpatient basis.

[Baculus]

Above and beyond this argument, to whether or not the fire department should have acted upon the family's burning house, I noticed that the defenders of the fire department don't see to have any problems with (1) Glenn Beck using his show to bash this family (and kicking them while they are down, and (2) other conservatives calling them "dead beats." It isn't enough to defend the fire department, but they have to pile onto this poor family that lost their house.

It is classless, tasteless, and mean.

I have seen no reason to change my view that compassionate conservatism has died a slow death, and that this incident points to a wider philosophy of conservatism, which further makes me question the sort of civil and social structure these people want. Even worse, they are hypocrites, because they also use taxpayer's paid resources, such as public roads, to which they haven't contributed.

[Baculus]

It's illegal for hospitals to turn patients away (It's called IMTALA) once they've entered the doors. Hospitals are supposed to provide basic care no matter the situation. Most hospitals will triage a patient to determine if it's an emergency situation. If they deem the situation is not an emergency, they can refer them to ugent care centers or treat them on an outpatient basis.

It is supposed to be illegal, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. Remember the person (in Texas, I believe) that died on the floor of a hospital waiting room?

[rictus58]

And yes. you DO sound like a right-winger as you parrot their talking points.

what talking points exactly? That people should be held responsible for their own decisions?

[Baculus]

what talking points exactly? That people should be held responsible for their own decisions?

The talking points that have been purveyed by conservative media such as the National Review and personalities such as Glenn Beck.

And the phrase "personal responsibility" HAS become a talking point unto itself -- more of a mantra then anything.

[rictus58]

The talking points that have been purveyed by conservative media such as the National Review and personalities such as Glenn Beck.

And the phrase "personal responsibility" HAS become a talking point unto itself -- more of a mantra then anything.

Actually, I agree in some regards it's a talking point. It's certainly not reality since most people seem to not understand the concept of it.

Look, I already said what the FD did was heartless...but the only people who seem to point out it was the homeowners own doing are the heartless "conservatives".

FWIW, I don't watch Beck, don't listen to Rush, and don't care for Palin.

I have a problem with people who took a calculated risk, lost on their bet, and shift blame to others.

Just like people who choose to smoke, who in turn blame Phillip Morris for putting out an addictive product and "giving" them Lung cancer.

[twa]

Glen Beck?...ya gonna have to post a clip or start another thread

My point on the feds earlier is they already have that nationwide program in place for just this sort of area...and have for ages.

They enable people to help themselves...IF they will.

added

http://www.federalgrantswire.com/national-fire-plan--rural-fire-assistance.html

http://www.firegrantsupport.com/

ya can't help those that won't help themselves for long.

[Pwyl]

what talking points exactly? That people should be held responsible for their own decisions?

I agree with this

BUT

There were many decisions made in this story, and all of them were bad:

The city decided to have a poorly thought out fire department policy.

The people of the county decided not to have a county fire department.

The guy with the burned house decided to not pay his fee. (says he forgot but still... you don't forget to pay house insurance and expect to get a claim paid, etc), and he clearly knew the policy.

The fire department decision maker decided not to respond to the guy's fire. (fire chief, mayor, whoever)

The firefighters at the scene decided not to spray the guy's house at all once they were already there. (I've seen this opined on alot, but with no confirmation that by the time they were there to respond to the neighbor's call that it would have done any good, but still).

What do I take from all that? People need to make better ****ing decisions and take better care of themselves and their communities. Pay your damn fire department fees to comply with the policy. If you don't like the policy, work with your community to get a better one. People have become too complacent about taking care of themselves and working within their communities to make things better. And continually pushing those responsibilities up the governmental ladder makes the problem worse, not better.

[Baculus]

Actually, I agree in some regards it's a talking point. It's certainly not reality since most people seem to not understand the concept of it.

Look, I already said what the FD did was heartless...but the only people who seem to point out it was the homeowners own doing are the heartless "conservatives".

FWIW, I don't watch Beck, don't listen to Rush, and don't care for Palin.

I have a problem with people who took a calculated risk, lost on their bet, and shift blame to others.

Just like people who choose to smoke, who in turn blame Phillip Morris for putting out an addictive product and "giving" them Lung cancer.

I don't see this family "shifting" the blame onto the fire department. I think they just wanted their house saved. That's it. And I believe it was a bad decision to allow the extent of property damage, plus the death of animals, over $75. To me, especially since the fire department was already on-site, it isn't rational.

Obviously this family DID try to exercise some personal responsibility, in that they attempted to put out the fire on their own. (They apparently tried to use garden hoses.) That didn't work. When faced in that sort of situation, many of us will ask for help from others, especially to save one's home.

Yes, obviously the homeowner shares some responsibility. The fire didn't start by itself. He didn't pay the fee. Obviously he has to share blame for his losses. But the United States wouldn't even exist as a country if we didn't have some sense of community and helping our neighbors in time of trouble. I understand if the community may not be well off and can't afford comprehensive coverage for everyone -- if this is the case, then a structure needs to be created for that area (town, county, etc.) to provide cross-county assistance for emergencies, or perhaps grants from the state to do so (if this isn't already in place).

[Bang]

I wonder how much that family will now sponge off the state since they've lost everything?

I bet it's a hell of a lot more than $75.

Boy, that'll teach 'em to be responsible.

~Bang