Look, I didn't make you act like a child and insert words into my mouth kid, all I did was point out what you did, that is not crying, but it is giving you fair warning that if you want to be taken seriously, you have to stay on topic and stop trying to play childish games.
The firefighters didn't refuse to fight it, they were never dispatched. Something you seem to dodge to keep thinking the firefighters are bad people.
There you go again kid, where did I ever say the firefighters were "bad people"? You spend most of your replies commenting on things I never said so why do you bother to post?
Yes they were dispatched, to the next door neighbors house to prevent the fire from spreading. They were there and they watched the home burn down. Not because they were evil people but because the powerd that be decided they felt their firefighters needed to be more concerned about a name on a list than helping people.
They didn't tell the firefighters anything. That's the point. And he didn't pay for the service, the firefighters had no right to put the fire out in the first place. He didn't put anybody else in danger, because the other people had paid their fee.
Again you continue to miss the point, I am talking about how things can change for the future, this home is already gone and nothing can change that but we can learn from this example and try to improve things for the future.
Making firefighters watch homes burn down simply seems wrong to me, so I am trying to offer how things can change while you seem to not care about trying to improve things and you are more closed off to new ideas than most people I know.
Get him to sign a contract stating that, in such an event, he's willing to pay an extra amount for services rendered, and that's a good idea. He couldn't get out of it because it's a legally binding contract.
But there is nothing they can do otherwise.
You just can't seem to get past the wrong assertion hugo has offered kid.
Do people sign a contract before lifeflight takes them to the hospital? There is no requirement for emergency services to have that kind of contract and do you know why? Well do you kid? Because under emergency situations it is assumed by the law that any reasonable person would want themselves flown to the hospital to save their live and any reasonable person would want ther home fire put out. The reasonable person standard has always been honored in the courts.
Well, for one, they aren't in California. CA law doesn't apply to them.
All states have similar laws kid, stop acting stupid, I showed you the CA law because I know you live there and if that liberal utopia is charging people to fight fires, you can bet everyone is.
They can't charge him for "as needed" emergency services because they didn't HAVE to put it out. And they didn't. They'd already been paid for what they did, so they had no need for more money, and had no need to put out half a forest worth of fire. They couldn't charge him a thing. Basically, he didn't light PUBLIC property on fire, so they had no reason to charge him a dime. He destroyed his own property.
Now what are you ranting about kid? The property being private or owned by a government has nothing to do with this, you seem to waste a lot of time typing about things that have nothing to do with this conversation.
I do see you again talked about money though, first you say people should not get services for free, then you say the fire department did not need more money, make up your mind kid.
My point is firefighters should always be allowed to fight fires, so how do we get to that point that they don't have to be seen as the bad guys for watching a family home burn down? If you don't like my ideas, offer some of your own, or are you happy to see situations like this?
CA law still doesn't apply to TN. Also, see above.
And as I said above all States have these laws, and this discussion is not restricted to any one state, this could happen in any state so the point is can we let firefighters stay firefighters or are they just another money making venture by the Government?
And true....
And I support PROPERLY FUNDED "socialist programs". I don't support our current SS system. I don't support all of the welfare **** we have.
Properly funded? Where do you get that word play from? SS is completely funded, for a few more years, and the Government can certainly increase taxes to increase the funding for SS and keep it funded forever, just keep taking more money from the workers to pay to the non-workers, if funding is your only concern then what is the difference between giving someone foodstamps or giving someone firefighting services? The firefighting will cost about a thousand times less than the foodstamps.
So they should put all of the fires out, whether people pay? Then why would anybody pay? They would lose a fair chunk of money when people realize they don't have to pay a thing for their fires to be put out.
There you go again getting all worked up and upset over something I did not say.
Why do you constantly put words into my mouth then you use those false words to go on a rant complaining about what I did not say? You need to grow up.
How many times do I have to say I don't want people to get free firefighting services before you will have the ability to understand this fact? Everything I have been taling about is how there can be two seperate fees, one for insurance "just in case" and the other much higher fee for "as needed services"? Is this concept really that difficult for you to understand?
Let a double-wide trailer burn for 2 hours. There will be pretty much nothing of it left. Why waste time putting it out? They don't have hydrants out where he lives. They have the water they have in the truck. That's it. It's more efficient to just wet down the area around it.
Go to your mother and ask her if her home burned down what kinds of things she would hate to lose the most.
You might not understand how bad a home fire is but talk to a few people who have had to go through it and you will understand that some of the more profound losses are not things like a television, it is family photos, a couple keepsakes your child gave you when they were 7 years old, a pressed flower you keep in a book or an number of of things that can't be replaced.
Being efficient is not why we have firefighters, is is about helping people at a time they are the most vulnerable and need someone to help them save what they can save from a horrible situation.
It's not their fault they know how to do their job better than an 11 year old.
You completely missed that point.
Don;t you understand the concept of heros? Did you grow up that jaded in life you can't see the value of heros in a society?
Yes. They are evil, evil people. They would never ask if there was anybody in the building when they got the call. I bet the would tell Cranick to go blow a duck if he said his grandson was in there, because they're Hitler.
There you go again, you have no decent reply to my question so you go on a crazy rant trying to put words in my mouth I never said. Hitler? Really? You had to invoke the name of Hitler in your childish rant? People like you actually diminish the reality of the evil of Hitler by trying to compare his level of evil to minor and insignificant things like this Joker. This is not in that arena, stop over reacting and compose yourself.
But I will say that putting money first in every possible way can be evil sometimes. People should always pay their way, in the old days people did not have much money but they felt compelled to pay their way so the barter system was used most of the time. Maybe they have a chicken or maybe you need help fixing your roof, there was always a way to let people help each other and to settle their debts in different ways.
Today all we care about is money, does that mean we have evoved for the better or the worse?
Irrelevant. Apples and oranges. I'm not dodging this, Times, I'm simply calling it out for what it is: a load of bull.
If you live out in the middle of nowhere, and you get told "Hey, if you want police to respond to your calls, give us $50 to pay for gas, etc, etc. If you don't want it, you don't have to pay. It's up to you", and you don't pay, then they don't respond. Simple as that. Now, if they said "You can pay us $50 now, or $500 later when you get robbed or need something", then they should respond no matter what. But if you don't pay for the service, or agree you'll pay if needed, then why should you get it? You can talk about how much you pay in taxes all you want, but if you didn't pay such things in taxes, you wouldn't get certain services because they wouldn't be properly funded, Mr. Property Tax. If nobody paid property taxes, there would be no funding. And because the people where Cranick live don't pay into the fire service via property tax, this is what's been decided they need to do.
Not irrelivant, it is very much the same thing. You see property taxes used to pay for all emergency services, irresponsible spending by our elected officials have made them look for new ways to get more and more taxes from each of us because they can't learn how to control their spending. So things like garbage, fire, schools, etc have been given their own fees while still getting the same base taxes from property.
And still it is not enough. These Government officials can never get enough tax funds to pay the bills, no matter how much they increase taxes, they always find a way to spend it all and fall short each and every year. I understand things cost money kid, my bigger point is in my belief, people are paying enough taxes to receive "basic emergency services" through their basic home taxes, in this case the county is taking that tax money and not providing any emergency services at all, to me that is just sad. If you own property and you pay your taxes the least the Governing body should provide is basis emergency services.
IMHO.
