Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Far too many unknowns involved to start judging the firefighters.How far along was the fire,was there anything to save?What threat to life for the firefighters was involved?Hazardous materials,propane etc???Were they fully equiped at that time to fight that fire?Easy for many to sit back and judge without being in their shoes.I am sure each and every one of them would of reacted differently if life were involved. I can tell you that if you disobey a lawful order from your superior and do the complete opposite you better have a VERY good reason.If you get injured or injure or kill someone else in the process then forget your reasoning its too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercman Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Far too many unknowns involved to start judging the firefighters.How far along was the fire,was there anything to save?What threat to life for the firefighters was involved?Hazardous materials,propane etc???Were they fully equiped at that time to fight that fire?Easy for many to sit back and judge without being in their shoes.I am sure each and every one of them would of reacted differently if life were involved. I can tell you that if you disobey a lawful order from your superior and do the complete opposite you better have a VERY good reason.If you get injured or injure or kill someone else in the process then forget your reasoning its too late. absolutely right. fire fighters are like soldiers. they work as a tight team, taking orders from superiors who have the experience and the knowledge to direct his men. I,m sure any of us would have tried to help, but when it comes to risking your comrades lives, we would think twice and look for direction from someone able to make the decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Johnny Bass Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Far too many unknowns involved to start judging the firefighters.How far along was the fire,was there anything to save?What threat to life for the firefighters was involved?Hazardous materials,propane etc???Were they fully equiped at that time to fight that fire?Easy for many to sit back and judge without being in their shoes.I am sure each and every one of them would of reacted differently if life were involved. I can tell you that if you disobey a lawful order from your superior and do the complete opposite you better have a VERY good reason.If you get injured or injure or kill someone else in the process then forget your reasoning its too late. No one is judging the fire fighters. Just the fire department and politicians. To believe that people can just stand by and watch a person's house burn down without helping makes my stomach turn. For $70 they made a house burn down! Then for someone that cant pay the premium, they are pretty much screwed! It should be included in the property tax. GOD KNOWS we pay enough of it!And the more people that are covered the less people will have to pay. Capitalism at its worst. Profits before people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Bob Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 No one is judging the fire fighters. Just the fire department and politicians. To believe that people can just stand by and watch a person's house burn down without helping makes my stomach turn. For $70 they made a house burn down! Then for someone that cant pay the premium, they are pretty much screwed! It should be included in the property tax. GOD KNOWS we pay enough of it!And the more people that are covered the less people will have to pay. Capitalism at its worst. Profits before people. Oh no....not your commie Bull again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbuck Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Protection racket!!Pay your insurance or there will be a fire......... Jeez, Mario Puzo could not have wrote this one better. That folks, is what the gov't is, it's legalized Mafia. Look at protection, ie. police and fire dept's. Look at gambling, ie. OLG and slots. Look at prostitution, soon to be taxed when they can figure out how to do it......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 To believe that people can just stand by and watch a person's house burn down without helping makes my stomach turn. For $70 they made a house burn down! Hmmm...I would say that statement is fairly judgemental AND directed towards the firefighters in attendance.They MADE their house burn down, c'mon now. How do you know they could not pay,perhaps they defiantly decided not to pay,you dont know.Once again you cannot judge a situation without all the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Johnny Bass Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Protection racket!!Pay your insurance or there will be a fire......... Jeez, Mario Puzo could not have wrote this one better. That folks, is what the gov't is, it's legalized Mafia. Look at protection, ie. police and fire dept's. Look at gambling, ie. OLG and slots. Look at prostitution, soon to be taxed when they can figure out how to do it......... That's what it is! A money grab! Canadians should recognize it right away since it is common practice in Canada!! Pretty soon the Americans will be charging a cop tax. Didn't pay your cop tax? We'll we will just watch as your being assaulted, your house broken into, and your property vandalized. Sorry! Should have paid your cop tax! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Headhunter Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Chance, when have facts actually had anything to do with a discussion around here! HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Johnny Bass Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 (edited) Hmmm...I would say that statement is fairly judgemental AND directed towards the firefighters in attendance.They MADE their house burn down, c'mon now. How do you know they could not pay,perhaps they defiantly decided not to pay,you dont know.Once again you cannot judge a situation without all the facts. They were following orders. I'm just stating for people that cannot pay(in general) they are screwed. The facts are the house was burning down, the firefighters were in a position to stop it and they didn't because the home owner didn't pay the money grab. Edited October 7, 2010 by Johnny Bass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Chance, when have facts actually had anything to do with a discussion around here! HH Good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC1OZ Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 (edited) They were following orders. I'm just stating for people that cannot pay(in general) they are screwed. The facts are the house was burning down, the firefighters were in a position to stop it and they didn't because the home owner didn't pay the money grab. I usually like your posts Johnny... But its not a money grab... everything in this monetary system has a cost associated with it. And we all know money has real world value right? HAHAHAHAHAHA So you can't argue logic in a monetary system, because its not a part of the system. And compassion... that's just plain absurd. Edited October 7, 2010 by TC1OZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tybo Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 If you can't pay a $75 fire fighters fee. IT'S TIME TO BUT DOWN THE BEER!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC1OZ Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 If you can't pay a $75 fire fighters fee. IT'S TIME TO BUT DOWN THE BEER!!! LOOOOOOOL I'm sure there were a few in the fridge that got fried.... Any story can be told from any perspective... I bet if it were a grow house burning down that didn't pay their fee's people wouldn't be as heart felt for the family... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'mHooked Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 You're missing the point on many issues here.....THEY DID BILL the property owner and the bill was NOT paid....no one was in the building so it wasn't a life threating fire but could have had the firefighters fought the fire and one of them got hurt or worse....since they were not under contract to fight the fire then if a firefighter would have gotten hurt maybe their liability insurance would not cover the medical expensive's. It would be like have another fire department from another county respond when they are NOT contracted to do so. Even our mutual aid has to be contracted out to protect the firefighter involved AND all the EXPENSIVE fire fighting equipment. As Ohiofisherman pointed out......wouldn't it be nice only to buy a fishing license after you were caught fishing without one. When that's OK with you let me know. Bob I didn't miss any point. Yes they were billed the $75 ahead of time, and if they paid it they MAYBE wouldn't have lost everything. My point was about still fighting the fire and THEN billing them the total cost of doing so AFTERWARDS. Just like if they didn't have fire insurance on the unit, they will have to PAY for the services to get rebuilt or what ever. So what'd the responding truck do, call & check on the surrounding exposures to see if they were paid up before deciding to protect them or not?...Ooops Mr. Neighbour, you're not paid up either, so if your house catches fire as a result of your neighbour, we're going to sit and watch it burn as well. You're telling me that you'd stand & watch the initial fire spread to other houses and not REACT if it was known they hadn't paid the $75? I'd be more concerned about the ramifications of NOT acting. If someone from 'out of town' gets in a car accident, they will get a bill for the response. We don't check for valid car insurance 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smally21 Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 most likely rural we would agree? if a structure fire has progressed enough to threaten/ignite adjacent properties its toast. especially with 3 ff's working off a 30 year old firetruck.( in a town whose 2500 residents, lets say own 500 homes, each contributing 75$ = 37500 not enough to cover one ffs wage for the year by the way not to mention half million dollar appparauts). almost ALL rural properties will be destroyed by fire in a rural situation, even in wealthy areas with serious volunteer or composite firefighters. 400 in taxes wont get you fire protection even with a 75 levy. as to this happening in ontario? youd have to give me a good ezample, and not soemting you heard from uncle burt. ontario has great funding for small communties and mutual aid agreements exist between communities as well. the fireprotection act allows for ff's to enter and act on lands adjacent to their districts so there is no 'its not in our district'. as an example hamilton responds regularlyy with burlington on the QEw, and with grimsby, and with brantford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 most likely rural we would agree? if a structure fire has progressed enough to threaten/ignite adjacent properties its toast. especially with 3 ff's working off a 30 year old firetruck.( in a town whose 2500 residents, lets say own 500 homes, each contributing 75$ = 37500 not enough to cover one ffs wage for the year by the way not to mention half million dollar appparauts). almost ALL rural properties will be destroyed by fire in a rural situation, even in wealthy areas with serious volunteer or composite firefighters. 400 in taxes wont get you fire protection even with a 75 levy. as to this happening in ontario? youd have to give me a good ezample, and not soemting you heard from uncle burt. ontario has great funding for small communties and mutual aid agreements exist between communities as well. the fireprotection act allows for ff's to enter and act on lands adjacent to their districts so there is no 'its not in our district'. as an example hamilton responds regularlyy with burlington on the QEw, and with grimsby, and with brantford. Couldn't have said it better myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smally21 Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Couldn't have said it better myself Chance, i now think you are the smartest guy on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Couldn't have said it better myself Chance, i now think you are the smartest guy on the board. Dont worry that won't last On another note your boat looks familiar,I am sure we have run into each other somwhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smally21 Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 its a stratos excursion series. it haunts fishless bodies of water surrounding the hammer. you could have seen it on lake erie from dover to lngpoint, at the bay, on simcoe, etc. or parked at a bar between here and there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 its a stratos excursion series. it haunts fishless bodies of water surrounding the hammer. you could have seen it on lake erie from dover to lngpoint, at the bay, on simcoe, etc. or parked at a bar between here and there. Wouldnt have a IAFF sticker on it by chance would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbosh1980 Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Thats a pretty different system down there... It actually sounds like how fire brigades used to be. A city would have several brigades run by different insurance companies. They would only protect buildings that had their companies fire mark (like a little plaque) on the outside which showed they had paid for fire protection. Obviously cities eventually took over the responsibility to make sure everyone got equal protection. I'm not sure what the deal is down there, but I'm sure its much more complex than the article conveys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeGuy Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 I'm guessing the mobile home was totaled even before it caught fire. Metal structures warp beyond repair and that baby had to be pretty hot from being next to the burning shed. I checked the property on the property tax rolls and it didn't seem to be much of a prize. Gene Cranick built a roaring trash fire near the shed, the shed caught fire when ol' Gene went inside to shower and then the mobile home ignited. Burning mobile homes need to be located pretty close to the fire station if we expect firemen to save the structure. Might have been better to have it burn competely than to tear down and haul off the remains. Removal can be time consuming and costly. Who would pay for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chance Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Trucks only carry so much water and without a tanker present or a pond near by when its done its done.If the trailer was a right off then the thought process then turns to saving the exposures or trailers that are not yet involved fully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC1OZ Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 Those who wanted to go put this trailer out wouldn't last a month in today's business market..... Sad but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smally21 Posted October 7, 2010 Report Share Posted October 7, 2010 thanks for fillin in the blanks tenessee guy. the truth will likely spoil the mix..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts