If hosing down the house that’s not on fire is what you consider fighting the fire, then I hope that conception with your S.O. isn’t high on your list of life goals.
actually it is. There is alot of indirect mehods for containing a fire. Rather than dousing your flaming strawman, standing by to protect the neighbors is a perfectly legitimate tactic. Especially since they paid and cranick did not. SFFD only had enough water to manage a full blown firefight for a matter of minutes. Using reel lines and such to contain grass fires they can probably sustain for 45 min at which point the burned area dies out and your chance of spreading dies off.
If they Went balls out, they could have easily dropped every gallon of water they had and cranicks house might still be burning.
Nice response. Very well phrased. But what you quoted was simply snark for the fun of it.
No, just one that shows that if the Canick’s fire was left to burn they couldn’t contain it before it did significant damage to a neighbor’s house.
Sorry, but my point isn’t confined to this one particular case. A policy of not responding to some fires based on who’s paid and who hasn’t is a dangerous one and is apt to get some people killed.
Just a ferinstance–what if Cranick’s neighbor had been on vacation or at work or whatever and hadn’t called? He may have come home to smoldering ruins of his own.
I don’t think anyone is claiming that letting people opt in/out of fire coverage is a good system.
The problem is, this is a democracy, and if the majority of the voters wanted it, that’s what they get. And experience has show that once you have a ‘voluntary’ fire protection system, the only way it works financially is to be hard-assed about ‘you don’t pay up front, you don’t get.’
this is why 911 dispatchers ask questions, like is anyone in the house? If cranick had a family member trapped inside, they would have rolled and attempted a rescue. Most neighbors would call it in if they saw a neighbors house on fire. The reality of rural areas however means some fires will burn unchecked for a while. Low population density is to blame there, not matters of policy.
People can blather “what if?” scenarios all day long. Firefighting was not invented yesterday and whatever worst case scenario you want to concoct already has a name in the world of emergency services. It’s called “Tuesday”. Operational policy on a fire scene is not the random blatherings of a handful of rednecks. Methodologies and priorities have been refined alot more than folks outside the biz realize. Second guessing these methods has been time tested to result in dead firefighters. Dead firefighters are a violation of ems rule #1 " go home safe to your family after work"
Not a democracy, but a republic. We vote for people who make decisions for us. Sometimes their decisions are wrong.
Fire was the scourge of early America. We rallied around people who had fires with a true sense of community. But back then, they were people who deserved help. Now we have people who deserve to have their homes burn down and animals to die in an inferno. Some ,who are just not solid enough citizens deserve nothing but contempt. and ridicule. Some people make bad decisions. They are not like us. For some reason, if you want to know the reason, read the thread. Many people will tell you exactly what he was thinking and why he did not pay. They know these things. They will tell you what a low life guy he was and why we all would have been better if he did not get out. We can not empathize with people like that. He is not enough like us to care about. Real solid citizens can get enjoyment when a bad guy pays for his sins. Gets you all warm and fuzzy.
Can we put to rest the idea that the county has a fire protection system? It doesn’t. What is in place, on the other hand, is a municipality with a fire department that has gone out of its way to provide protection to out of area individuals who have specifically asked for such a service, said service also being fee-based.
Here’s a what if: What if the municipal government had not authorized the service to be extended beyond the city limits?
My dear gonzomax, thanks for the civics lesson but if you actually voted, you’d know that things like tax levies and statewide referendums are, indeed, democratic votes: One voter, one vote. Simple majority passes; otherwise it fails.
So their elected officials had nothing to do with it. It was the very populace whose homes were directly affected that voted the fire protection levy down.
It was nothing next to disease.
Thank god, you finally started to blame the right people. Cranick choose to live in a shitty community. One in which no one gives a shit about anyone elses house. We know this because this is now the 4th house (plus a barn) to burn.
Where was his community when the fire broke out? Where was his community when the optino was put to vote?
His community had the power and ability to ensure fire services, to enact legistlation forcing Cranick to pay. They choose not to, because they don’t give a shit about Cranick or his house.
Trying to pass blame off onto the firefighters is sad and pathetic. Both Cranick and his community had plenty of time and plenty of options to prevent his house from burning.
Dousing the house next door would be a crappy way to fight a fire at Cranick’s. However, their goal was *not *to fight a fire at Cranick’s, because he was in no way entitled to that service. (You may have noticed a thread full of whiny people who think that those who deliberately opt out of a service are still somehow entitled to get it, which they wouldn’t have been doing if the FD had been fighting Cranick’s fire.) Their goal was to prevent his neighbor, who had paid for the service, from having damage to *his *property as a result of Cranick’s carelessness. Clearly, their strategy worked, as the neighbor’s property seems to be just fine.
By your analogy, I should be knocking on all my neighbors’ doors to make sure *they’re *wearing condoms, have IUDs, or are taking contraceptives before *I *have sex.
Where was Superman through all this?
Shouldn’t he have flown in with a big sheet of ice, put out the fire,and save the animals?
If you ask me, he’s to blame in all this.
Where was Superman when the Westfold fell?
Again, you miss my point–dousing the fire at Cranick’s would not have been on Cranick’s behalf, it would have been a service to the subscribers, to protect their property from his fire getting out of control. Fires have a nasty habit of doing that.
As I understand it (and I could be wrong), the fire department would not have even rolled if the neighbor hadn’t called. Sure, that strategy worked this time. It may not next time.
If Cranick had stated that there was a person trapped in the building they would have rolled. There was not, so they no longer obligated to deal with it.
Please note, a rescue entry would not need to put out the house, just to clear a path to the victim.
Yes, and firefighters have a nasty habit of knowing more than you, when it comes to controlling fires. Controlled burns are not that uncommon. By the time they got there, the house was engulfed. Spraying water on it would have done nothing.
With that said, there was plenty Cranick and his grandkid could have done, like let the animals out, or paid for garbage removal, or paid attention to a fire that did get out of control.
Sounds like Cranick and his neighbours need to get their shit together before the next time.
And you’re right, the fire department would not have rolled out, because they are not responsible for that area. They are not responsible for the area because the community doesn’t want them.
I have no doubt that if they’d have received an “oh shit, somebody’s trapped in my burning house” call, they’d have made a bee-line for Cranick’s place. I don’t think they’re heartless bastards or anything, I just think this particular policy is wrong-headed.