Since for some mysterious reason I read the whole thread and links :
According to a comment made about one of the linked article (I believe by someone stating he was working for the county and living nearby, but I could be mixing things up), the family actually saved most of their pets (11, which would mean they had about 15), along with part of their furnitures.
The pets who perished, frightened, would have sought refuge in the shed that soon burned, long before the arrival of the firefighters.
So, the family did save the pets they could save (and I guess that bringing to safety 15 frightened pets while trying at the same time to fight a fire might be a challenge).
No, this one was a home with 3 dogs and a cat that died while the fire department fiddled outside and watched. The home burned to the ground killing all the animals.
I wrote above that according to comments made elsewhere, the family had in fact much more pets, and that only some of them died in the fire, and that before the fire department came to “fiddle and watch”. I’m not mistaken about the house we’re talking about, although I obviously can’t vouch for the accuracy of an anonymous statement on the web.
The animals, if they ever existed, died long before the fire department arrived at the neighbour’s house. If the animals existed, they died while Cranick as his grandchild stood outside watching. A fire the grandchild started, then ignored to take a “shower” in the middle of the afternoon, that lasted long enough for the fire to spread from a barrel, to a shed, across some grass, and then to the corner of the house.
Even if Cranick has paid the $75 subscription fee, the animals (if they existed) still might have died before the fire department got there.
And they surely would have died if the fire department was responding to fires outside of their jurisdiction, to residents that don’t pay.
19 pages and you still don’t get it. You’re either completely retarded or a troll looking for attention. If only I didn’t have all this food to give.
Several years ago there was a huge brush fire near wherei live in So. Cal. Called the Sylmar fire. It destroyed a trailer park of several hundred mobile homes.
Why do I mention this? Well there was this TV news crew just outside of the fence showing a whole row of mobile homes going up one after the other live on TV. The sequence went like this:
Smoke starts to be generated on the upwind (fire) side of trailer.
1-2 minutes later flames are leaping out of the windows.
Another 2 minutes and the unit is totally engulfed.
Lather, rinse, repeat down the line as trailer after trailer went up exactly the same way.
The point here is by the time smoke starts to come off the trailer it is too late to do anything. Trailers have all the fire resistance of a cardboard box soaked in gasoline.
Look Gonzo I have a dog. I have had cats. I love animals. But the deal here is by the time the FD got there it was too late to save them.
Anyway you slice it it is not the FD fault
Who did not pay the $75? Cranick
Who had a previous fire and still didn’t pay the $75? Cranick
Who did not teach fire safety to their grandchild? Cranick
Who did not supervise their grand child? Cranick
Who didn’t get the pets out when there was still time? Cranick
And yet you keep insisting the blame is with the fire Dept.
Thanks for the link, but as I mentionned, I read the whole thread and most of the links provided.
And as I mentionned too, I found this information in a discussion that involved a local resident (although I can’t remember with certainty if it was him who mentionned the numerous pets, and again can’t vouch for the accuracy of a statement made by an anonymous poster).
In any case, since it appears that it took a long time between the moment the fire began and the moment the firefighters actually came to the scene (2 hours, apparently), it would explain why the family didn’t save their pets themselves, a question asked numerous times in this thread. In fact, they would have saved most of them, except the four that sought refuge in the shed that was the first to burn. And they would have saved part of their furnitures too (no clue about the fate of the bibles, sorry).
And that (the 11 pets saved and the 4 pets killed) would have happened before the arrival on the scene of the FD (who anyway wouldn’t have had a duty to risk life and limb to rescue animals).
Again, I wasn’t there and can’t tell if it’s indeed how it happenned. But it definitely makes more sense than the family members roaming around without thinking for an instant that maybe they should get their pets out of the burning/soon to be burnt house.
So, the cited article actually notes “…the two hours it took for the flames to spread from his yard to his house…” and from this you concoct the above as an explanation and excuse?!!?!?!? The animals ran into the soon-to-be-burning shed and, over the course of two hours, nobody could get them out? Like the Cranick clan, this thread gets stupider and stupider the more it’s examined.
And while it is only a minor semantic flourish, let us correct that “fire began” statement. The fire did not begin; the fire was set. In a barrel of trash. In a yard full of trash and weeds. Nearby a shed full of more trash and weeds. BY A CRANICK. Who left it unattended until the fire had spread from the barrel, across the yard, onto the shed, from which it attacked the tinderbox that is a mobile home dwelling. (Thanks for the verbal image, Rick.) It didn’t “just happen”.
Also to note, despite clairobscur’s wishful remembrances, nobody, that’s nobody has come back with a cite for the presence of any actual animals.
After 19 pages, gonzo has wayyyyyyy too much invested in “being right” to ever begin to acknowledge that anyone else might have a point, much less even consider that he may have been wrong all along.
He’s riding this one down in flames, like an Iron Maiden album cover, with a mad gleam in his eyes and a sick grin plastered on his face like a death’s head
“Poor animals of a poorer man died while heartless fire department watches!”
“They probably taunted him!”
“And kicked the burning animals back into the fire!”
“And laughed while they did it!”
“Just like all you assholes are!”
I heard the Cranicks were nursing an endangered Emperor Penguin back to health, but the firemen physically restrained them from carrying it out of the flames even though it was right by the door.
This isn’t the first incident of animal cruelty from these firefighters, either. Two of them were cited by the SPCA for trying to punt a cat through goalposts.
Oh no I would never suggest that professional fire fighters at the scene of a fire have any blame for not putting out the fire. Lots of other firefighters and fire fighters organizations believe that. But me? No, standing around and watching the home burn was just peachy.
Cranick did not pay 75 bucks. I know that. And his house and pets were certainly not as important to the community as 75 big ones. I am sure the people of the community enjoyed the horror that befell Cranick as much as you guys do.
Yep he made a mistake and paid dearly. Paid way too much for his terrible 75 dollar crime. Sorry, I just can not get on board with the fun of watching anothers misery. For whatever reason, it was terrible and I just can not squeeze out any "it serves him right"out . I don’t feel it.
I don’t feel that way. Sorry . .
It took me 915 posts but I finally have come around to gonzomax’s way of thinking. The firefighters should have put Cranick’s house out, charged him the $75, and everything would have been fine. There’s no downside to that. What’s $75 among friends?
Actually Cranickwas involved in a ground breaking experiment trying to make a cat sound like a dog.
When the shed was fully involved Cranick doused his cat in gasoline and threw it into the fire.
The cat went WOOF!
The experiment was a success.
