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

[Baculus]

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.

I posted the Glenn Beck bit in another post where his show mocked the family.

Those are BLM grants for governments at various levels -- individuals can't take advantage of it. But here you are, again, blaming the family for something that the local government should have taken advantage of. Your links don't support your position at all, because it shows the failure of those people that should have been able to offer the Craniks some assistance.

Here is what the first grant says as an objective:

"To implement the National Fire Plan by increasing firefighter safety and enhancing the knowledge and fire protection capability of rural fire departments by providing assistance in education and training, protective clothing and equipment purchase, and support to public education efforts on a cost share basis."

The second program is a DHS program for, again, fire departments; a family can't help itself when it isn't a fire department.

[pjfootballer]

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?

I didn't see the story on that. But he was in the waiting room, and the hosptial determines who is more of an emergency. Like I said, they only have to triage them to determine what course of action they will take on the patient.

[twa]

Bac they have grants and programs to START local fire depts....but ya need people willing to do so rather than depend on other areas volunteers and money.

You expect me to cast blame on someone already volunteering for their community for not doing more?...not in this lifetime.

[rictus58]

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).

I agree with a lot that you say. I highlighted the bolded part for a reason....helping our neighbors. It's one thing if his neighbors and friends want to help him/them. It's another entirely if that family willing chooses to go without what amounts to a fire insurance policy on their house, and expect others to act neighborly. That was their choice. The KNEW they wouldn't get the assitance the fire department. Maybe they had hoped if there was a fire, they would get assistance. Sadly, it didn't work out that way for them. If the FD waited until people had a fire THEN collected $75, how long would they last?

I guess that's why I don't have much of a problem with what the FD did. People seem to expect to be bailed out from their own poor choices. Pick up too much debt on a C/C? Just file bankruptcy. Upside down on your mortgage? Just bail on the house, and blame the bank for predatory lending? Teacher fails your child? Blame the school system.

I'm cynical...and likely more coldhearted than I should be, but it's gotten to be too much.

[Baculus]

I agree with a lot that you say. I highlighted the bolded part for a reason....helping our neighbors. It's one thing if his neighbors and friends want to help him/them. It's another entirely if that family willing chooses to go without what amounts to a fire insurance policy on their house, and expect others to act neighborly. That was their choice. The KNEW they wouldn't get the assitance the fire department. Maybe they had hoped if there was a fire, they would get assistance. Sadly, it didn't work out that way for them. If the FD waited until people had a fire THEN collected $75, how long would they last?

I guess that's why I don't have much of a problem with what the FD did. People seem to expect to be bailed out from their own poor choices. Pick up too much debt on a C/C? Just file bankruptcy. Upside down on your mortgage? Just bail on the house, and blame the bank for predatory lending? Teacher fails your child? Blame the school system.

I'm cynical...and likely more coldhearted than I should be, but it's gotten to be too much.

An honest post, which I appreciate, but that still doesn't address the sheer irrationality of allowing the amount of damage allowed over $75. Should the family have paid the $75? Probably, if that is the local policy, but it is bad policy when there's no way to allow a penalty and assistance to those who didn't pay but still could receive fire department help. Where I used to live in Maryland, a house fire would have the response from several of the surrounding areas (including those men and women who decide to volunteer their lives to do that), so to hear of this particular's town piss-poor response, is, frankly, befuddling. I have friends who are volunteer firemen, and I expect they would probably be just as puzzled to hear of this story.

I agree that personal responsibility is important, but there is plenty of blame to go around for all of the above issues that you mentioned. There are bad mortgages. There are predatory lenders. There are failing school systems that are underfunded or a part of a bad educational structure. Many of our problems are a mixture of Americans doing not-very-smart things, and a system that may need to be reformed or reinvested.

But what we don't need is a coldhearted, cynical America, because that isn't the country that I want.

[rictus58]

An honest post, which I appreciate, but that still doesn't address the sheer irrationality of allowing the amount of damage allowed over $75. Should the family have paid the $75? Probably, if that is the local policy, but it is bad policy when there's no way to allow a penalty and assistance to those who didn't pay but still could receive fire department help. Where I used to live in Maryland, a house fire would have the response from several of the surrounding areas (including those men and women who decide to volunteer their lives to do that), so to hear of this particular's town piss-poor response, is, frankly, befuddling. I have friends who are volunteer firemen, and I expect they would probably be just as puzzled to hear of this story.

I agree that personal responsibility is important, but there is plenty of blame to go around for all of the above issues that you mentioned. There are bad mortgages. There are predatory lenders. There are failing school systems that are underfunded or a part of a bad educational structure. Many of our problems are a mixture of Americans doing not-very-smart things, and a system that may need to be reformed or reinvested.

But what we don't need is a coldhearted, cynical America, because that isn't the country that I want.

I don't want that either. But I also don't want people taking the "easy" way out when it comes to protecting themselves and their property, and letting that responibility rest on others.

If I were a firefighter there, I would have had to do something. It would have weighed to heavy on me not to. But NOT if it put my life or job at risk.

[Baculus]

Bac they have grants and programs to START local fire depts....but ya need people willing to do so rather than depend on other areas volunteers and money.

You expect me to cast blame on someone already volunteering for their community for not doing more?...not in this lifetime.

First of all, I am not going out of my way to bash the firemen, themselves, since the policy itself is the main problem (and since I don't know the personal views of each firefighter). Also, it is ridiculous to expect some family to start a fire company by themselves. Is that what you are really suggesting? Because that suggestion doesn't strengthen your position at all. As a note, I believe the South Fulton firemen are professionals, not volunteers, which negates your last sentence.

I thought conservatives were all about community, but obviously money trumps everything else.

By the way, here is what the President of a fire fighter's organization had to say on this:

“The decision by the South Fulton Fire Department to allow a family’s home to burn to the ground was

incredibly irresponsible. This tragic loss of property was completely avoidable. Because of South

Fulton’s pay-to-play policy, fire fighters were ordered to stand and watch a family lose its home.

“Everyone deserves fire protection because providing public safety is among a municipality’s highest

priorities.

“Instead, South Fulton wants to charge citizens outside the city for fire protection. We condemn South

Fulton’s ill-advised, unsafe policy. Professional, career fire fighters shouldn’t be forced to check a list

before running out the door to see which homeowners have paid up. They get in their trucks and go.”

http://www.iaff.org/Comm/PDFs/SouthFulton.pdf

Obviously, to these men, ideology and money does not trump civic safety.

[Baculus]

I don't want that either. But I also don't want people taking the "easy" way out when it comes to protecting themselves and their property, and letting that responibility rest on others.

If I were a firefighter there, I would have had to do something. It would have weighed to heavy on me not to. But NOT if it put my life or job at risk.

I understand -- thanks for outlying your position with me. I think the policy that is at the root of this entire affair should probably be changed in some manner, IMO. Maybe some good will come of this, in that the issue of rural fire departments -- and their concerns -- will receive more attention.

[rictus58]

I understand -- thanks for outlying your position with me. I think the policy that is at the root of this entire affair should probably be changed in some manner, IMO. Maybe some good will come of this, in that the issue of rural fire departments -- and their concerns -- will receive more attention.

Yes. The policy sucks. Who knows how long this "arrangement" has been in place. Maybe the two juristictions can come to an agreement to get this rectified.

[AsburySkinsFan]

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.

You do realize of course that had the fire department showed up to the initial fire then they wouldn't have had to show up to the subsequent fires right? BTW, crap policy is crap policy and it should be done away with, especially when you have people willing to write the $75 check on the spot. The policy is broken and I hope it gets fixed. BTW, how does the fire department know if no one is in the house? What if they did let someone die, would that change your opinion?

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

Ahh, but see most Christians understand that the commands of God supersede the state, as such a Christian cannot rightly respond to God, "But, there was a policy against showing compassion to my neighbor in need."

[Baculus]

Yes. The policy sucks. Who knows how long this "arrangement" has been in place. Maybe the two juristictions can come to an agreement to get this rectified.

I completely agree with you on this.

[PokerPacker]

the posts in this thread have become redundant. Positions are entrenched; no point in further discussion.

[Baculus]

the posts in this thread have become redundant. Positions are entrenched; no point in further discussion.

Maybe you should read the thread. Rictus58 and I didn't have the exact same position, but we agreed that some problems obviously need to be addressed. You don't have to be in total agreement to come to some sort of solutions.

[sacase]

I understand -- thanks for outlying your position with me. I think the policy that is at the root of this entire affair should probably be changed in some manner, IMO. Maybe some good will come of this, in that the issue of rural fire departments -- and their concerns -- will receive more attention.

Why should the city change its policy? They are not the ones at fault. The Cities responsiblity is to the city residents. The city residents are the ones who pay the taxes for the fire department to exist and to provide service to the city. The County is the one who failed in this, not the city. The city can just say screw it and only provide service to the city. Fact of the matter is that someone has to pay for a fire department. If the city allows people to pay $75 when the fire department shows up. You can bet that every other county resident is going to say gee, I won't pay my $75 until I have to! Depending on how many people live in the county, that could be a significant sum of money that the city would lose by providing a service to people who haven't paid their fair share. How is that fair to city residents? What it comes down to is personal responsibility. At the most the county could have had a better fire plan, but even that is stretching it.

I am from a small town in Kansas. The city fire department takes care of any issues that arise in the city. There is a volunteer rual fire department which takes care of fire issues in the County. System works great and has for many years.

[Baculus]

Why should the city change its policy? They are not the ones at fault. The Cities responsiblity is to the city residents. The city residents are the ones who pay the taxes for the fire department to exist and to provide service to the city. The County is the one who failed in this, not the city. The city can just say screw it and only provide service to the city. Fact of the matter is that someone has to pay for a fire department. If the city allows people to pay $75 when the fire department shows up. You can bet that every other county resident is going to say gee, I won't pay my $75 until I have to! Depending on how many people live in the county, that could be a significant sum of money that the city would lose by providing a service to people who haven't paid their fair share. How is that fair to city residents? What it comes down to is personal responsibility. At the most the county could have had a better fire plan, but even that is stretching it.

Why would it be "stretching" for the county to have a better plan? That is a really curious remark to make.

Maybe you should read the letter from the President of the firefighters' organization to better understand my POV.

I am from a small town in Kansas. The city fire department takes care of any issues that arise in the city. There is a volunteer rual fire department which takes care of fire issues in the County. System works great and has for many years.

Wonderful. So you get the coverage you need, but in the case of Obion County, where South Fulton is located, it's "stretching it" for them to provide better coverage for rural citizens?

This doesn't provide a solution at all. Even worse, you're trumpeting your region's fire services while acting as if the citizens in Obion county don't deserve the same sort of service.

[twa]

http://www.iaff.org/Comm/PDFs/SouthFulton.pdf

Obviously, to these men, ideology and money does not trump civic safety.

I'm almost certain South Fulton is a volunteer fire fighting force

You link to a full time paid career fire fighters association is apples to oranges...of course they get paid no matter where the fire is.

(when they ain't out on strike of course) ...why would they not?

The stats I have seen show 80+% of the calls the S Fulton fire dept gets is from out of city limits....is that sustainable?

[Baculus]

I'm almost certain South Fulton is a volunteer fire fighting force

You link to a full time paid career fire fighters association is apples to oranges...of course they get paid no matter where the fire is.

(when they ain't out on strike of course) ...why would they not?

It would be even worse if the South Fulton firemen were volunteers, because, if that were they case, they didn't put out a fire based on money. I don't recall any of my volunteer firefighting friends ever questioning, "Hey, did this house pay their subscription? They go to fires and they put them out.

The stats I have seen show 80+% of the calls the S Fulton fire dept gets is from out of city limits....is that sustainable?

Without knowing their budget, I can't say. But you gave me two links to programs that can assist a fire department departments if it isn't sustainable; did you take that into consideration, especially since you provided me with these links? Or are you too determined to persist in making sure the Craniks are entirely at fault?

[twa]

It would be even worse if the South Fulton firemen were volunteers, because, if that were they case, they didn't put out a fire based on money. I don't recall any of my volunteer firefighting friends ever questioning, "Hey, did this house pay their subscription? They go to fires and they put them out.

Without knowing their budget, I can't say. But you gave me two links to programs that can assist a fire department departments if it isn't sustainable; did you take that into consideration, especially since you provided me with these links? Or are you too determined to persist in making sure the Craniks are entirely at fault?

You wouldn't happen to want to venture a guess why a city would have this policy would ya?

(And it is the city that owns and controls the equipment)

The links I gave you require locals participation and some matching funding....where do you draw the line at using limited resources to help those that don't care enough to pay or volunteer?

You can bet your ass they would have responded if he was one

added

We've created a generation of people who are capitalists with their income and socialists with their obligations. ..Trust

[NavyDave]

To every poster who thought this was the right action:

You are what is wrong with the world. And let me guess, you are probably republican/right wing.

I will never understand this way of thinking. How the **** can people like this live with themselves.

I thought this was supposed to be a "christian" nation built on "christian"principles, (totally bull**** btw.)

This is the same exact thing that is happening in health care. They couldn't give a **** if you are dying, its all about the bottomline.

**** you people, for real.

So I guess that means you are going to volunteer for public service such as a volunteer firefighter or the military instead of just sitting on your azz sniveling.

The exact same thing is happening to healthcare? Where? Oh woe is us, how did people survive prior to Obama healthcare?

[Baculus]

You wouldn't happen to want to venture a guess why a city would have this policy would ya?

(And it is the city that owns and controls the equipment)

I am sure it has something to do with costs and policy, but as another poster indicated (in a detail that really doesn't support neither his nor your view), other rural townships and counties are able to provide broader coverage without instituting a direct fee that can result in this sort of "no pay, no spray" situation.

The links I gave you require locals participation and some matching funding....where do you draw the line at using limited resources to help those that don't care enough to pay or volunteer?

You can bet your ass they would have responded if he was one

The entire arose when they responded to his neighbor's house and did nothing to help the non-paying customer. By the way, your point is still contrary to how other firefighters feel about this issue.

added

We've created a generation of people who are capitalists with their income and socialists with their obligations. ..Trust

That's an irrelevant point. Are against public firefighting departments that cover even those who don't pay? Did you just throw out this slogan for the heck of it and so you can introduce "socialism" into the argument?

Do you pay for all of the roads that you use when you drive? Really? Well, that is being rather socialist with your obligations, isn't it?

[Baculus]

So I guess that means you are going to volunteer for public service such as a volunteer firefighter or the military instead of just sitting on your azz sniveling.

What does the military have to do with this?

The exact same thing is happening to healthcare? Where? Oh woe is us, how did people survive prior to Obama healthcare?

A lot of people didn't survive prior to "ObamaCare." That is the point: Americans who aren't covered and who suffer from a lack of health insurance. It isn't an eye-rolling problem, either -- it's quite serious in nature. As it is, a lot of Americans still won't be covered because reform didn't go far enough.

[NavyDave]

Decency? Human kindness?

$75 please.

~Bang

That little???

I've been told money can't buy happiness so its no wonder libs and progressives are always b1tchin.....

[Engine754]

That was " BS" ....i don't care what a law says, when you call 911, someone needs to come and help you. You know how many Ambulance runs we get that people dont have insurance ...are we supposed to show up and then leave when your having a heart attack, etc.

Yes, im a Volunteer Firefighter in Calvert County/PG and i help anyone and everyone that has an Emergency. I run over a 1,000 calls a year and its all for free....you know how many times im going down the road and come up on an accident, etc. With that being said....im also a Paid Firefighter with the Walter Reed FD in DC.

Point is....its what i eat and sleep, it doesnt matter who needs me, when or where....this is something ive been doing for 17 years now. That is a dam shame and gives the Fire Service a bad name / image!!!

I dont care what anyone says, nobody should ever have any doubt that when u call 911 someone is not going to show up and help you.

[Thiebear]

If 80+% of the call are out of town we have a question:

1. Is the fire department in the wrong location..

2. Should a fire department be built where 80% of the fires are reported?

[Baculus]

That was " BS" ....i don't care what a law says, when you call 911, someone needs to come and help you. You know how many Ambulance runs we get that people dont have insurance ...are we supposed to show up and then leave when your having a heart attack, etc.

Yes, im a Volunteer Firefighter in Calvert County/PG and i help anyone and everyone that has an Emergency. I run over a 1,000 calls a year and its all for free....you know how many times im going down the road and come up on an accident, etc. With that being said....im also a Paid Firefighter with the Walter Reed FD in DC.

Point is....its what i eat and sleep, it doesnt matter who needs me, when or where....this is something ive been doing for 17 years now. That is a dam shame and gives the Fire Service a bad name / image!!!

I dont care what anyone says, nobody should ever have any doubt that when u call 911 someone is not going to show up and help you.

Thank you for both your service to the community and to our fellow citizens, and for your valued opinion as well. You brought some excellent points to the debate, especially with your experience.