Unbelievable

[Roy]

Billy Bob you are to be commended. It's guys like you that help keep the rest of us safe. Thank you.

 

Times TWO!

[scuro2]

International Association of Fire Fighters General President Harold Schaitberger today issued the following statement on the September 29 fire in Obion County, Tennessee:

 

“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.”

 

 

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/10/05/2279115/fire-fighters-condemn-south-fultons.html#ixzz11ofai4nf

 

I guess some people see fire fighters as an essential service whose duty is to protect people and property against fire. Fire fighting is not a business like dry cleaning. If you can't pay for your suit the house doesn't burn down. If you can't pay for your shirt three pups belonging to your grandchildren don't die. This fire fighting is a "business" is total thinking of the first order.

Edited October 9, 2010 by scuro2

[scuro2]

Fire-fighting personnel across East Tennessee seem almost universally outraged by the actions of a small-town fire company on the other end of the state that responded to a house afire but was ordered to let the structure burn because the owner had not paid a $75 subscription fee. "We don't particularly care who's paid his dues," said Steve Wheeler, chief of the Vonore, Tenn., Fire Department. "If somebody needs help, we help and worry about everything else later. Truly, a firefighter cannot stand by and watch something burn," said Doug McClanahan, chief of the Blount County Fire Department. "He can't stand by and not try to react to a fire or rescue. They are trained to take care of people."

 

Not all fire-fighting agencies in East Tennessee sell subscriptions for their services, but some that do are adamant that they would never let a structure burn depending on whether the fee had been paid or not. Among such agencies is Rural/Metro, which handles fire-fighting duties for Knox County under the direction of Chief Jerry Harnish. The chief said the South Fulton case is a "major topic of discussion" among those in his profession, and he finds it "kind of hard to relate to. People don't join fire departments to not respond to emergencies." Wheeler's five paid and 15 volunteer firefighters, he said, are driven by the same sense of wanting to help people that causes most to get involved in such potentially dangerous work. "It's in your blood," he said. "You love it. It's about helping people." Wheeler said he does not know how the South Fulton team even knew Cranick was not a subscriber. "We don't ask," he said, adding that he believes the firefighters who responded were probably anxious to attack the flames despite their orders. He said his unit would not "let policies and stuff get in the way".

 

Blount County residents who fail to subscribe to fire services for $110 will be presented with a hefty bill after firefighters finish their duties at a house fire. McClanahan said it amounts to $2,200 for the initial call and $1,100 for every hour past the first two that firefighters are on the scene. Wheeler said his department has no set fee but does ask the homeowner to assign to the fire department any insurance money designated for compensating the fire department. If no subscription is paid, he said, the standard rate is $1,200 per hour for each unit dispatched to the scene. "And we never send a single engine to a fire," he said. "We send four engines and a ladder truck," meaning the homeowner is charged the hourly fee for each truck. Knowing that, he said, most people realize it is "more reasonable" to pay the subscription fee.

 

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2010/oct/08/fire-chiefs-we-wont-watch-a-home-burn/

Edited October 9, 2010 by scuro2

[Guest Johnny Bass]

Johnny Ole Boy you got that one right......maybe we can bond yet....

 

PEACE,

Bob

 

LOL. Whatever my beef is with the American system shouldn't be taken personally by you. I've been raised in a different environment and have some differences of opinion. I am very opinionated and can ruffle feathers but mean no offense to anyone.

 

Yes PEACE is the objective.

[John Bacon]

No because then everyone wouldn't pay until their house got burned down.

 

That depends on whether you are charging them the $75 after the fact or the actual cost of putting out the fire. I am not sure what the actual cost of responding to the fire is but I believe that someone did mention $3,000. If people knew they would be hit with a $3,000 bill or may more after the fact, then I think they may be inclined to pay the $75 annual fee.

 

I still think they should add $75 to the property taxes and just do their best to put out all fires.

[Grimace]

International Association of Fire Fighters General President Harold Schaitberger today issued the following statement on the September 29 fire in Obion County, Tennessee:

 

“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.”

 

 

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/10/05/2279115/fire-fighters-condemn-south-fultons.html#ixzz11ofai4nf

 

I guess some people see fire fighters as an essential service whose duty is to protect people and property against fire. Fire fighting is not a business like dry cleaning. If you can't pay for your suit the house doesn't burn down. If you can't pay for your shirt three pups belonging to your grandchildren don't die. This fire fighting is a "business" is total thinking of the first order.

My sentiments exactly.

[scuro2]

My sentiments exactly.

Perhaps the case made for helping people when your job description is all about helping people was best made by a fellow Tennessee fire chiefs: "We don't particularly care who's paid his dues. It's in your blood," he said. "You love it. It's about helping people." said Steve Wheeler, chief of the Vonore, Tenn., Fire Department. "If somebody needs help, we help and worry about everything else later. Truly, a firefighter cannot stand by and watch something burn," said Doug McClanahan, chief of the Blount County Fire Department. "He can't stand by and not try to react to a fire or rescue. They are trained to take care of people." Edited October 9, 2010 by scuro2

[fish-miester]

saw this.. was pretty shocked

[Billy Bob]

LOL. Whatever my beef is with the American system shouldn't be taken personally by you. I've been raised in a different environment and have some differences of opinion. I am very opinionated and can ruffle feathers but mean no offense to anyone.

 

Yes PEACE is the objective.

 

I concur as I am the same way.....hell I even let you buy the cold Canadian beer while we argue non-sense we have no control over....

 

Bob

[I'mHooked]

Fire-fighting personnel across East Tennessee seem almost universally outraged by the actions of a small-town fire company on the other end of the state that responded to a house afire but was ordered to let the structure burn because the owner had not paid a $75 subscription fee. "We don't particularly care who's paid his dues," said Steve Wheeler, chief of the Vonore, Tenn., Fire Department. "If somebody needs help, we help and worry about everything else later. Truly, a firefighter cannot stand by and watch something burn," said Doug McClanahan, chief of the Blount County Fire Department. "He can't stand by and not try to react to a fire or rescue. They are trained to take care of people."

 

Not all fire-fighting agencies in East Tennessee sell subscriptions for their services, but some that do are adamant that they would never let a structure burn depending on whether the fee had been paid or not. Among such agencies is Rural/Metro, which handles fire-fighting duties for Knox County under the direction of Chief Jerry Harnish. The chief said the South Fulton case is a "major topic of discussion" among those in his profession, and he finds it "kind of hard to relate to. People don't join fire departments to not respond to emergencies." Wheeler's five paid and 15 volunteer firefighters, he said, are driven by the same sense of wanting to help people that causes most to get involved in such potentially dangerous work. "It's in your blood," he said. "You love it. It's about helping people." Wheeler said he does not know how the South Fulton team even knew Cranick was not a subscriber. "We don't ask," he said, adding that he believes the firefighters who responded were probably anxious to attack the flames despite their orders. He said his unit would not "let policies and stuff get in the way".

 

Blount County residents who fail to subscribe to fire services for $110 will be presented with a hefty bill after firefighters finish their duties at a house fire. McClanahan said it amounts to $2,200 for the initial call and $1,100 for every hour past the first two that firefighters are on the scene. Wheeler said his department has no set fee but does ask the homeowner to assign to the fire department any insurance money designated for compensating the fire department. If no subscription is paid, he said, the standard rate is $1,200 per hour for each unit dispatched to the scene. "And we never send a single engine to a fire," he said. "We send four engines and a ladder truck," meaning the homeowner is charged the hourly fee for each truck. Knowing that, he said, most people realize it is "more reasonable" to pay the subscription fee.

 

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2010/oct/08/fire-chiefs-we-wont-watch-a-home-burn/

 

Sounds familiar. Couldn't have said it better myself...well maybe close!

 

I netted a couple 4-5 lb Steelies this morning for a guy.

Didn't catch any myself. ...other than some 10" smolts.

[Guest Johnny Bass]

That depends on whether you are charging them the $75 after the fact or the actual cost of putting out the fire. I am not sure what the actual cost of responding to the fire is but I believe that someone did mention $3,000. If people knew they would be hit with a $3,000 bill or may more after the fact, then I think they may be inclined to pay the $75 annual fee.

 

I still think they should add $75 to the property taxes and just do their best to put out all fires.

 

I would assume that the people from the city were paying a heck of a lot less then $75(seems a bit steep to me). I think the guys in rural areas were getting dinged more because they were probably paying as individuals and weren't getting the group rate.

 

The cost they said was $2,000 + just for responding, and $1,000+ for each truck they dispatch for each hour and they usually dispatch about 4, so you do the math. $6,000-$9000 is a bit steep for a trailer. Maybe if it was a large building I could understand....

 

The guy offered to pay the fire department what ever it takes to save the house and his pets. I know how some owners feel about their pets and it is difficult to put a price on that, since they can't be easily replaced(he lost 3 cats and a dog). I think even a $1,000 bill to put out a trailer fire is MORE than sufficient for an hours work.

 

I know many people that gamble and cut corners to make ends meet. Fire protection is not something you gamble with and should be provided by the government to ALL. Take it out of the tax dollars or whatever.

Edited October 9, 2010 by Johnny Bass

[Billy Bob]

I would assume that the people from the city were paying a heck of a lot less then $75(seems a bit steep to me). I think the guys in rural areas were getting dinged more because they were probably paying as individuals and weren't getting the group rate.

 

The cost they said was $2,000 + just for responding, and $1,000+ for each truck they dispatch for each hour and they usually dispatch about 4, so you do the math. $6,000-$9000 is a bit steep for a trailer. Maybe if it was a large building I could understand....

 

The guy offered to pay the fire department what ever it takes to save the house and his pets. I know how some owners feel about their pets and it is difficult to put a price on that, since they can't be easily replaced(he lost 3 cats and a dog). I think even a $1,000 bill to put out a trailer fire is MORE than sufficient for an hours work.

 

I know many people that gamble and cut corners to make ends meet. Fire protection is not something you gamble with and should be provided by the government to ALL. Take it out of the tax dollars or whatever.

 

In a working house fire you are way off on how long a fire truck would spend from "out" to "in" service time...that means from the time the truck left the fire hall until it's back in service in the hall ready for another fire call.

 

Even a routine garage fire would take 2-3 hours for out to in service time.....a big working house fire where you might knock it down and save, let's say half the structure, you could be there 4 hours or more easily......don't forget, even after the fire is out their is a lot of hose and equipment to be put away. Then the rest of the structure has to be check with the thermal imaging camera to make sure there are no hidden hot spots between the existing walls that could restart the fire once we leave. And don't forget, it has to be investigated for possible arson. In order to do so at least one truck with one line (hose) will remain in the house so the fire department hasn't relinquishment control of the building back over to the owner. This is a legal move because once the fire department leaves the scene it will take a court order to return and investigate if arson is suspected. You don't want a bunch of arsonist running around your neighborhood do you ?

 

Yep, just keep beating up on the volunteers and someday (and it's coming) nobody will want to volunteer anymore. We are at about 55% strength because of all the time it takes to VOLUNTEER....

 

 

 

Bob

Edited October 9, 2010 by Billy Bob

[Guest Johnny Bass]

In a working house fire you are way off on how long a fire truck would spend from "out" to "in" service time...that means from the time the truck left the fire hall until it's back in service in the hall ready for another fire call.

 

Even a routine garage fire would take 2-3 hours for out to in service time.....a big working house fire where you might knock it down and save, let's say half the structure, you could be there 4 hours or more easily......don't forget, even after the fire is out their is a lot of hose and equipment to be put away. Then the rest of the structure has to be check with the thermal imaging camera to make sure there are no hidden hot spots between the existing walls that could restart the fire once we leave. And don't forget, it has to be investigated for possible arson. In order to do so at least one truck with one line (hose) will remain in the house so the fire department hasn't relinquishment control of the building back over to the owner. This is a legal move because once the fire department leaves the scene it will take a court order to return and investigate if arson is suspected. You don't want a bunch of arsonist running around your neighborhood do you ?

 

Yep, just keep beating up on the volunteers and someday (and it's coming) nobody will want to volunteer anymore. We are at about 55% strength because of all the time it takes to VOLUNTEER....

 

 

 

Bob

 

Now I get it!!! That explains the $6000-$9000 dollar price tag for putting out a trailer or garage fire!

 

All that shouldn't cost more than a $1000 bucks for a trailer.

 

Who is beating up on the volunteers? Even the firefighters association president said that was the wrong thing to do.

 

And over 80% of Americans polled (with the 20% probably coming from the south) agree. Your in the minority Bob.

 

They were there in time and they just watched it burn when they could have put it out in less than 15 minutes give or take. Its a trailer!

Edited October 9, 2010 by Johnny Bass

[Billy Bob]

Now I get it!!! That explains the $6000-$9000 dollar price tag for putting out a trailer or garage fire!

 

All that shouldn't cost more than a $1000 bucks for a trailer.

 

Who is beating up on the volunteers? Even the firefighters association president said that was the wrong thing to do.

 

And over 80% of Americans polled (with the 20% probably coming from the south) agree. Your in the minority Bob.

 

They were there in time and they just watched it burn when they could have put it out in less than 15 minutes give or take. Its a trailer!

 

Boy Johnny, you know a LOT about EVERYTHING......how long it takes to put out a trailer fire that you were NOT at... Do you have any firefighting experience ? ? ?

 

You know the percentage of Americans who agree that the fire should of been put out.......tell me, WHO did the polling, YOU....

 

You know how fast they arrived and how bad the fire was without even being there....

 

And the most important fact....you know the ratifications of the volunteer fire department involved when it comes to fighting fires when they are NOT legally contracted to do so in case someone was injured or worse while doing so.....YOU are one smart man when it comes to fighting fires. Have you ever thought about becoming a fire chief ? ? ? It usually only takes about 15-20 years of experience as a firefighter and assistance chief but with all your firefighting knowledge you might be ready now....

Edited October 10, 2010 by Billy Bob

[Guest Johnny Bass]

Boy Johnny, you know a LOT about EVERYTHING......how long it takes to put out a trailer fire that you were NOT at... Do you have any firefighting experience ? ? ?

 

You know the percentage of Americans who agree that the fire should of been put out.......tell me, WHO did the polling, YOU....

 

You know how fast they arrived and how bad the fire was without even being there....

 

And the most important fact....you know the ratifications of the volunteer fire department involved when it comes to fighting fires when they are NOT legally contracted to do so in case someone was injured or worse while doing so.....YOU are one smart man when it comes to fighting fires. Have you ever thought about becoming a fire chief ? ? ? It usually only takes about 15-20 years of experience as a firefighter and assistance chief but with all your firefighting knowledge you might be ready now....

 

Yes, I consider myself an intelligent person. Oh and I guess you have more knowledge than the President of the firefighters association! Maybe you should apply for the job!

 

I go by what the news said and they arrived in time to at least ATTEMPT to try to salvage something. Why don't you enlighten us and tell us how long it would take a firefighter with firetruck to stop a trailer from burning! And what expenses that would involve!

 

Did you know one of the kids assaulted the fire chief for refusing to put out the fire? You think he did that because the house was already burnt down? Its clear I know more of the incident than you do and I and everyone in the know has stated that the firefighters were incredibly irresponsible.

 

As far as who made the poll? Here it is and try reading some of the more intelligent comments.

 

http://msnbc.polls.newsvine.com/_question/2010/10/05/5232681-should-firefighters-have-put-out-the-blaze-at-gene-cranicks-home-even-though-he-hadnt-paid-the-fire-fee

 

Tell me? If your neighbor didn't pay his fire protection and you were a trained firefighter and in a position to extinguish it and he had all his belongings, his 3 cats and his dog inside. Would you put out the fire and do you think it should be put out?

 

Bottom line? They shouldn't have watched the trailer/home burn down and fire protection should be provided by the state for all its citizens. Not pay and play.

Edited October 10, 2010 by Johnny Bass

[scuro2]

...when a fellow firefighter is under the gun, the rest of us naturally come to their defense.

I think nearly everyone of us has respect for those who serve the general public. Sometimes even... such people like a police officer or a nurse will get crapped on when they actually did the right thing. That is inexcusable. But it is Bull to circle the wagons when the wrong thing was done. Some of those firemen were crying afterwards. They instinctively knew it is wrong. It is not the firemen's fault that the house burnt down. Fault would rest with the fire chief or county. I'm not even sure if anyone is legally at fault but morally an inexcusable wrong was done. I can't see how you can defend the fire chief standing by why all the possessions of the owner, his wife, and his children were destroyed. Only the owner is to blame for not paying the fee. You say no lesson was taught here but those kids have certainly learned a lesson and it goes against everything that we are taught in church. I can't see how you can defend the fire chief standing by when pets are dying in front of the family. How are the animals at fault here?

 

Best just to say the firemen did as they were ordered and the wife said exactly that. She did not blame the firemen. There is no shame here for the firemen.

Edited October 10, 2010 by scuro2

[bigfish1965]

One of the biggest reasons this is a shock to Canadians is the difference in culture. We expect some universal standards more than our neighbours do. We expect that some things will be taken care of and then we can worry about money after that. Fire, police, paramedics and hospitals are primary as well as education.

To Canadians we know that no matter where we travel in Canada, those things are always there.

I remember when the local fire department here said they wanted to charge out of town people a fee for response. It was quickly struck down when someone told them that everyone from that town could then expect to pay in other municipalities should they need help. So it is a wash.

 

It is a different mindset here. It is something we will never grasp. The idea that only those who can afford fire and police protection will receive it is shocking to us, but is the way some places are.

I could not have stood by myself and watched the house burn with pets in it. I hope the people had insurance and I hope the insurance company takes the town to task over it.

 

Rather than have 100 people pay $75 a year for advance protection (which absolutely smells of a racket to Canadians) they would be better off charging $500 for each response afterwards. More flies with honey...

[Billy Bob]

 

 

Rather than have 100 people pay $75 a year for advance protection (which absolutely smells of a racket to Canadians) they would be better off charging $500 for each response afterwards. More flies with honey...

 

OK, let's do the math....100 x $75 is only $7,500.00 per year...with this amount you will not get much for your dollars.....I am not saying that firefighters should stand by but SOMEONE has to foot the bill BEFORE the fire starts....the cost are enormous when it comes to supplying the firefighters with the proper equipment and training not to mention the amount it takes to MAINTAIN the equipment....OSHA has MANY different demands that we as a fire department must maintain...just recently we have to furnish BAILOUT equipment to all interior firefighters at a cost of $30,000.00 for our small department. Each truck cost $250,000 or MORE....turn out gear, helmets, new boots, radios, batteries, thermal image camera's, ropes, ladders, hazmat response equipment, ladders, fuel, tires, ropes, life of jaws, first aid equipment, safety cones...the list goes on and on....not to mention even if this equipment has NEVER been used it expires because of the date on it....and this is all mandated by the federal or state government.....we haven't even covered the cost of the buildings or insurance or utilities....Scott Packs, refills.....for those that have been involved in fire departments, then they realize what I am referring to.

 

This is the last time I will post here and here is WHY the fire department was not able to respond........they were not under contract to protect that building.....if they HAD and someone got hurt or worse the CHIEF would had been in BIG TROUBLE as he violated his agreement with the city/town/village he worked under....would YOU risk everything you owned including the well being of your family AGAINST orders ?!?!?!?

Edited October 10, 2010 by Billy Bob

[HTHM]

AS original poster, I would suggest that this debate be closed, both Rick and Billy Bob have expressed the differing views quite eloquently and there is no further need for discussion.

This was a great debate that illustrated the differences between us northerners, and our neighbours to the south.

Edited October 10, 2010 by HTHM

[Woodsman]

Let's just except that the debate boils down to different political views on how public(?) services should be provided.

We in Canada generally expect that most services should be provided though our taxes where in the US it is more common to expect to pay for services through insurance or voluntary fees.( fire coverage, health care ect.)

Saying that I'm sure there are some if not many on both sides of the border who believe that the other countries model is best.