Do you support the Fire Department's decision to allow Gene Cranick's house and pets to burn?

[ZombieHorde]

In case you have been away from DU for a while... http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/firefighters-let-it-burn-over-75-fee/question-1264753/

The third option is actually "Other."

[DURHAM D]

1. The fire department did not decide.

The city government did.

And the county government (and county citizens) is also responsible for a failure to protect themselves.

[leftstreet]

2. Yes. It's not like it was a big important mansion or something

Of course, if it had been we wouldn't even be having this conversation

[Hannah Bell]

23. no, it was the house of a guy who gets farm subsidies in two states & has had the same thing

happen before.

a guy who ignored two contacts from the city, one by letter & one by phone, offering fire service at $6.25 a month -- affordable even to the lowest income tier, the price of one fast-food burger a month.

a guy who had a previous fire & knew the consequences & went ahead & let his grandson burn trash on his property.

a guy who has a homeowners policy that he says will pay to rebuild the house.

a guy who lives in a county of 32K people that has no fire service, & that twice shot down proposals to set up a county volunteer fire department.

a county that preferred to get pay-per-fire service from a city of 2500 people -- but under that previous policy, fewer than half of county residents who called the fire department paid. and the city had no authority to make them pay, because they weren't city residents.

this, while out of city calls were 75% of all fire calls to the city.

a county that, after years of dispute over the issue between the county & the cities it was leeching off, decided to let individual residents decide whether to contract with the cities, as individuals -- or not -- because they didn't want to "force" their residents to pay for fire protection.

this isn't a case of the evil city.

it's a case of a small town trying not to be bankrupted by a bunch of libertarians. who, incidentally, have a higher median income than the 2500 residents of the city.

the county's policy is insane.

[Mimosa]

34. Hannah said it though I voted for the fire to be put out

The homeowner made the decision which led to the deaths of the family pets.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

37. "twice shot down proposals to set up a county volunteer fire department"

Any community with 35k population that can't manage to muster a volunteer fire company is pretty pathetic. They don't care enough about each other to bother, why should anyone else?

[Xithras]

41. +100. The libertarian got exactly what he was asking (and voting) for.

By the way, were you aware that the town fire service still drives 1960's era trucks, because they can't afford newer equipment? The more you look into this story, the less sympathy you can have for the homeowner.

The guy was a teabagger libertarian, living his teabagger libertarian lifestyle, and is now unhappy because he had to deal with the consequences of his own political fantasy.

Maybe this will wake a few of these idiots up, and make them realize that NOT ALL taxes are bad!1

[leftstreet]

44. Wow. Thanks for that info

I hadn't seen any of that!

You are a DU research treasure

[uncommon]

91. Get out of here with your logic and well-informed posts.

Jerk.

[Statistical]

122. +1 Hannah. Good summary.

The guy got exactly what he wanted.

He didn't want the "ebil socialist gubbermint" telling him how to live.... so his house burned down.

The town has no obligation to provide free fire protection to NON RESIDENTS anymore than citizens in VA have an expectation of free Police service from New York Police Dept.

[Green_Lantern]

155. I'd say the central role of government is to provide defense..

Local govt. with police and fire protection.

Should police not protect people who don't pay taxes in their community?

[Statistical]

165. The local govt (via the local population) has decided they DON'T WANT FIRE PROTECTION.

You may say that is stupid (and I would agree) but that is what they decided.

The analogy would be if VA decided to defund the Police dept and then demand that NY Police Dept investigate crimes in VA at no cost (and at expense to citizens of NY). Now you would laugh at that but this is the exact scenario in play here.

The town has decided they don't want to pay for a fire dept. The resident decided he didn't want to pay the nearby town for protection.
Despite both those decisions he still expects the fire dept to protection him.

Democracy represents the will of the people. If the people don't want to pay for a fire dept, or Police dept, or roads, or schools, or anything then why would it by my right or your right to force them? Not very Democratic is it.

Now hopefully this incident has caused the people of the county to rethink the "no fire protection" policy and maybe next time it comes up for vote it will pass. Maybe not but we can hope.

[JTFrog]

136. "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." n/t

[JVS]

3. Yes. It was neither their fault nor their business.

[Orrex]

4. I think that they should preemptively burn down the homes of people who don't pay up

In a civilized society, nothing less will do.

[JVS]

15. That would be wrong.

[awoke_in_2003]

60. the sarcasm tag...

isn't always necessary.

[npk]

53. LOL..

:rofl:

[northernlights]

5. I haven't seen pets mentioned in a single article about this

only rumored without source on this board.

Link please?

[DURHAM D]

7. In the interview old geezer said two or three dogs and one cat died in the fire.

I am not sure I believe the part about the dogs because of the way he said it as if he did not know the exact number of dogs. I can easily believe the cat died but the dog thing - not sure. Also he said something about the dogs belonging to his grandson. The same grandson who set the house on fire.

[Renew Deal]

8. delete

Our other colloquy got nuked. I didn't mean to pull you into so much rule breaking. ;)

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Renew Deal]

13. I am you

:evilgrin:

[DURHAM D]

27. The last person I heard say that was Linda Tripp.

[seabeyond]

33. he lied about forgetting, he lied about dead animals. what does that say.

fire way out so he could have easily saved the animals. easily. if they died HE is beyond scum.

[ZombieHorde]

51. A fair request, here you go...

Obion County, TN, United States (AHN) - Firefighters and officials in rural Tennessee let a house burn to the ground along with the owners' belongings and pets - all because the owner forgot to pay a service fee. Gene and Paulette Cranick, residents of Obion County lost everything they owned along with their three cats and a dog last week in an incident that has sparked the ire of many who learned of the local community’s fire policy.

Read more: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7020119673?Firefighters%20Allow%20Home,%20Pets%20to%20Burn%20Because%20of%20Unpaid%20Service%20Fee#ixzz11XjEcscX

[Politicalboi]

57. This story says he "forgot" to pay

He was never paying. How can you forget something you don't even do? I feel for the animals that could have been saved in the 2 hours they had. Like I said in an earlier post, you can't get insurance after the accident. That's why the call it insurance.

[ZombieHorde]

59. He said he paid each year, except for the current year. Is there evidence otherwise? nt

[Statistical]

124. How do you forget when the town sends you a letter and phone call.

advising you HAVE NOT PAID. The letters and phone calls aren't sent until AFTER the deadline passed as a warning that you have no coverage. You are unprotected and in any fire the fire dept WILL NOT RESPOND. He didn't have to remember. A clerk from the town called him and specifically TOLD HIM YOU ARE NOT COVERED.

So why didn't he pay. My guess:
His Son house caught fire 2 years ago and the fire dept responded (Son never paid anything). He likely did have fire protection in the past. Probably figured why pay it. Hell his son didn't pay it and STILL govt coverage.

Something for nothing that is what libretarians are always looking for.
They want fire protection but they don't want to pay for it.
They want good roads but they don't want to pay for it.
They want strong banks but they don't want to pay for it.
They want their social security but they don't want to pay for it.

[Green_Lantern]

157. that's not entirely true...who said this guy opposes paying for

Fire protection? I wouldn't want to pay for fire protection out of pocket on top of the local taxes I pay.

As for Social Security for retirees, it's not free money, it is their money they put into it.

[Green_Lantern]

156. where does it say he was never paying the fee?

Not being argumentative, just curios where you got that.

[SOS]

160. "Cranick says he's paid the fee in years past"

http://www.truecrimereport.com/2010/10/gene_cranicks_house_burns_down.php

Should be easy enough to verify.

[northernlights]

62. craps.

:cry: how could they effing stand by...

[cynatnite]

120. Here you go...

http://townhall.com/columnists/AshleyHerzog/2010/10/07/when_uncle_sams_in_charge,_no_one_claims_responsibility

http://www.examiner.com/us-headlines-in-national/firefighters-let-gene-cranick-s-house-burn-pets-die-over-75-00-video

[GrantDem]

148. Link...

http://blackpoliticalthought.blogspot.com/2010/10/gene-cranick-loses-home-three-dogs-cat.html

[Ozymanithrax]

6. That fire department and Glen Beck...

approved of letting that house burn down.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=511933&mesg_id=511933

I don't think firefighters should act like Wall Stree Bankers in a Red Truck, and I don't agree with Glen Beck.

[Hannah Bell]

24. bullshit. the glenn beckers live in the county.

[Ozymanithrax]

47. Are you saying it was OK to let the house burn down?

Otherwise, I don't understand you disagreement with me.

I maintain it was wrong to let tht house burn down. They just killed a cat and some dogs this time. Maybe next time they can kill some babies or sleeping children.

[yella_dawg]

9. Absolutely.

Though it was a terrible price for a family to pay, this is a perfect example of the unavoidable outcome of Objectivist Libertarian philosophy. They're too stupid to follow an idea to its inevitable outcome, but they do understand pictures. Some lessons are costly, but important nonetheless.

[Green_Lantern]

158. this has nothing to do with libertarianism...

Libertarians don't support privatized police so I doubt they'd support private fire protection. This seems to be more about a city and rural dispute about how to handle a govt. funded fire dept. who is given jurisdiction over an area outside town limits.

[county worker]

11. I didn't vote but I am dumbfounded by how much attention this is getting

[ZombieHorde]

40. I am not surprised. This is really big deal nt

[county worker]

55. The fact that this board is shooting itself in the foot is the big deal.

I could not take the Obama vs Hillary thing and lately the pro vs against Obama thing now this. We are fighting against each other way to much.

[DearAbby]

12. I live in a city

Our city taxes pays for fire protection, I wouldn't resent having our department loaned out to the county to fight a house fire thus preventing a wild fire, especially when conditions are extreme.

How many fire dept. sent their crews and trucks to respond during national disasters. Did these counties pay for that? Did anyone complain? Were those who responded paid to do so?

Sometimes doing the right thing, is just the right thing to do. Above ALL COST.

[Parker CA]

21. Exactly. The right thing seems obvious to me, but I understand we all see things differently. nt

[Hannah Bell]

25. would you resent it when 75% of your calls came from outside your service area,

& more than half of the callers refused to pay the cost after the fire was out?

would you resent it when the median income in the county was higher than that of the city, & the county had 13 times more people than the city?

would you resent it if your firefighters were injured or killed fighting fires for people who didn't want to pay anything to support the service?

not *couldn't,* not didn't have the means -- just plain didn't want to.

[Politicalboi]

58. I think maybe the only way some would resent it is

If the firemen went to put out a fire of someone who didn't pay the $75.00, and they did, and their house burned down. I think for some it's the animals dying that make them mad about this. I does me if the story is true and they had 2 hours to save them but for some reason didn't. I think if the animals didn't die, this would be a laugh fest about the Libertarian who got what he deserved.

[SOS]

159. Fact check

South Fulton FD calls (2006):

30 in-town
23 rural

That is 43% rural, not 75%.
Half of 23 is 11 unpaid calls or a grand total of $825 in uncollected fees.
South Fulton FD is 17 volunteers.

Total Obion county calls 2006:

1369 in-town
245 rural

15% rural, not 75%

Obion County 2000 census:

18,000 in town - 59% of total
14,000 rural - 41% of total

The rural population is not 13 times the in-town population, it is less than half the in-town population.

South Fulton median household income: $27,462
Obion County median household income: $32,764

Hardly a rich vs. poor situation.

[Green_Lantern]

161. not really it's no different than fire fighters risking their life to save

People from fires who started it by falling asleep smoking. It's not a business, it's a public service.




Also the fire department in question is mostly volunteer anyway so this really isn't about not being paid for individual fire fighters(http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/applications/census/display.cfm?cc=&dn=south+fulton&sb=0&ad=&ct=&sc=&zc=&oc=">USFA)


Not that many fire fighters are killed fighting fires. Last year only 90 died while on duty compared to over 3000 civilians dying.(http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/statistics/quickstats/index.shtm">USFA)

[SidDithers]

67. +1...nt

Sid

[Statistical]

128. The county has 32,000 residents. The town has 2,500. How about YOU pay the $75 then.

The county is 10x the size of the town. Less than half the county (32,000 residents) paid fire protection service. The fire dept responded to hundreds of unpaid calls outside the town which drains the town's budget. Nobody minds a few "goodwill calls" but when tens of thousands of people are just "forgetting" to pay for coverage and expecting it anyways you got to draw the line.

It isn't like the town is some massive city and they have a few rural neighbors. The county (the one with no fire dept) is 10X the size of the town. Think about that for a second. The town of only 2,500 people can manage to raise taxes and fund a fire dept but the rural county of 32,000 can't? Not only don't they have a fire dept but over HALF don't pay for fire protection (like the guy who's home burned down) yet they still expect the fire dept to respond and quickly when they need them. Something for nothing. The town said enough is enough.

If you don't think that is fair then ... put your money where your mouth is.
You said you don't mind your money being used to pay for those who are too lazy/stupid/cheap to protect themselves. So do it. You can cover one unprotected home for just $75 a year?. How many residents are you going to protect. 1? 5? 10? How many years will you commit to providing subsidized coverage?

Please don't tell me it is just words. Fire protection is more important than money right. So how many homes are you going to write a check for today? How many years are you going to keep covering them with your money?

[SOS]

163. South Fulton is not the only town in Obion County

Subscription service exists only in South Fulton and Union City.

20,000 of the 32,000 residents of Obion County are covered by fire service without subscription.

South Fulton's 17 volunteers cover only South Fulton, not all of Obion County.

[stray cat]

14. Will you pay the taxes others refuse to pay to keep it from happening?

[JackRiddler]

16. A situation where this question can even be asked is wrong.

They should have taxed all people of the towns fairly to finance the fire department.

Notwithstanding, the spectacle of the fire department already at the scene watching the house burn (and the pets die) is sick beyond measure, as are the sentiments of those who approve. Being a libertarian idiot should not be punishable by this, and no one should take pleasure in it.

They should have put out the fire and sent a bill for services rendered. (There are plenty of penalties in place to enforce bill paying and punish those who don't.)

[KittyWampus]

20. strange to say "punish" when it's actually "consequence". And "should have" is irrelevant

to the reality faced by all parties.

it's as if a large number of DU'ers live in bubbles or ivory towers.

I don't "approve" of what happened. I "accept" it and hope it wakes up the county where this happened so they change their system.

[Hannah Bell]

26. the non-payers didn't live in "towns". they lived in unincorporated areas.

the city already tried charging them after the fire was out. that was the previous practice.

more than half never paid. and because they weren't city residents, the city had no authority to collect the charge, or fine them.

they just ate it.

this is a town of 2500 people we're talking about.

75% of their calls came from outside the city.

how long do you think they could go before bankrupting themselves?

[DevonRex]

30. Money is more important than public safety and the lives of those pets? Fuck that. nt

[Hannah Bell]

38. it is if the cost = bankrupting the city of 2500 to serve 32,000 freeloaders.

apparently you think the lives of freeloaders pets are more important than the lives of firemen.

who's going to fund their health care when they get injured rescuing those pets?

as far as i'm concerned, not the city's problem.

and the city comes out when human life is endangered -- even for libertarian freeloaders.

[SidDithers]

72. The South Fulton Fire Department isn't responsible for the entire Obion County...

unincorporated area. There are Fire Departments from 8 cities that serve the unincorporated areas of the county. The population of the cities in the county is ~18,000.

To say that the Fire Department, paid for from the taxes of 2500, are serving 32,000 is inaccurate and disingenious.

Sid

Edit: spelling

[hayu_lol]

87. Sid, there are other fire departments in the county...

one is in Union City just a few miles away. That being said however, of the fee for service departments(3)and the two that are tax supported in other cities(along with S Fulton), the city departments that are tax supported do not, repeat, do not go out into rural areas. S Fulton is the only tax supported(by the city of S Fulton)fire department that has been willing to service a rural area.

In short, two tax supported FDs from cities WILL NOT SERVE RURAL AREAS...PERIOD. They service fires only WITHIN the boundries of their city, township.

That explanation is from the head commissioner of Obion County.

[SidDithers]

99. Understood...

but the poster was suggesting that a fire department funded by the 2500 city residents of South Fulton was serving all 32,000 residents of Obion county. Of the 32,000 residents of the county, ~18,000 live in cities and towns served by their own fire departments.

The numbers posted by the poster are just wrong.

Sid

[Recursion]

81. People forget that part

and the city comes out when human life is endangered -- even for libertarian freeloaders.

Exactly. They come out and make sure nobody's in danger -- and the city eats those costs as it is.

[PavePusher]

88. How do you propose to run a fire dept. without money?

This should be good....

[lumberjack_jeff]

48. The situation in which that question can be asked is exactly the context of the poll.

Voters in the county chose this system, 19-1.

It's all a matter of degrees. Should the one conscientious voter provide fire service to the other 19? More to the point, if he says no, are the 19 freeloaders victims of an their neighbor's inhumanity?

Lots of blame to go around, starting with the city. If the situation doesn't permit them to do an adequate job of fire service in the county, they shouldn't provide the service - at all.

[Statistical]

132. The town does have a fire dept. The town of 2,500 is being crushed by 32,000 freeloaders.

think about that.

Town: population 2,500 - has a fire dept
County: population 32,000 - has no fire dept.

The county for 20 years has refused to fund a fire dept.

To be a nice neighbor the town offers (can't force) people in the county coverage for $75 per year. Less than half of them pay for coverage yet all the uncovered expect the fire dept to respond when there is a fire.

[Doremus]

141. Even though the people have voted AGAINST a fire dept. & the taxes to pay for it?

Once again: The people voted AGAINST having a fire department because they specifically didn't want to pay for it. The city that responded has no jurisdiction to bill anyone outside city limits. Now, where is this magical fairy that pays for everything that people don't want to pay for but still demand to have?

If you find her/him/it, please send them my way as I have a list I would like filled. Thanks!

[ZombieHorde]

42. Of course. Why wouldn't I? nt

[The Straight Story]

154. plenty of people don't pay taxes, they don't work/etc and I pay for their fire service (nt)

[KittyWampus]

17. Do you support the Fire Department personnel getting paid and equipped properly?

[Mimosa]

35. YES!

Mr. Crainik didn't

[Hannah Bell]

39. yes. and also getting their medical care paid for, since firefighting is a dangerous job.

i don't agree that saving pets is more important than funding public services properly, & should be undertaken as a humanitarian mission for freeloaders who are well-able to pay $6/mo.

[ZombieHorde]

43. Yes, through taxes. nt

[Agony]

61. the S. Fulton FD received $56k of Mr. Cranik's federal tax dollars in 2006

to buy turnout gear. There is a good chance that they were wearing that gear the day his house burned. The state of Tennessee reimburses firefighters for training costs, and I am sure that they were not (sarcasm) using that training that his tax dollars paid for that very tragic day.

There is simply no way to know beforehand if human life is at risk or not before you put out the fire. As a volunteer firefighter of 16 years I have been through the gut wrenching experience where someone died in a fire that no one knew was in the house.

So, yes i support paying and equipping FF's but I do not under any circumstances support the decision to let a house burn regardless of who made that decision. I doubt that the FF's made this one. Sacrificing peoples lives and property while waiting for sanity to prevail is wrong. This was a lose-lose scenario and the FF's took the brunt of it beyond Mr Cranick.

[Doremus]

142. Wow, Cranik paid $56K of federal taxes? How much does he make & WTF doesn't he BUY the fire dept?!!

[Orangepeel]

18. I don't support the system that caused it

Fire departments should be supported by tax dollars collected using a progressive structure. This particular situation aside, people can't live outside of a city, not pay taxes to the city, and expect to receive city services. The county government shouldn't have let it happen.

[lumberjack_jeff]

49. +1 n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

19. 68-12. Wow.

Didnt expect that from reading other threads.
Thanks for the poll, which momentarily renews
my wavering connection with DU.

[DURHAM D]

28. Most people are not voting because the "Fire Department" didn't make the decision.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

31. 99-16.

:*

[TexasObserver]

22. These polls reveal how a few posters can skew perceptions here.

An event like this occurs. Suddenly, there is a flurry of threads, with a strong group of very active posters who take up the cause that so many of us find repulsive to our beliefs as progressives. The perception is that DU is evenly split on the topic, but a poll demonstrates that is not true. A poll shows we are remarkably consistent, except for the small handful whose objectives are not always apparent.

[emilyg]

29. No. Hell no.

[seabeyond]

32. i have issue with lie FD allowed pets to burn. fire way out in yard. took lots of time to hit house

yet the OWNER of those pets did not get them out of the house. why? why did this man allowed his pets to die

otherwise... i am neither in agreement or disagreement with FD so i cant vote

[Rex]

36. Good to see common sense still rules DU.

Thank goodness it is a tiny minority of people here on DU that believe in evil.

[Green_Lantern]

66. yeah next they'll say kids whose parents vote GOP on Medicaid

Shouldn't be seen by doctors.

[Recursion]

78. Are you aware how Medicaid works?

If you live in Mississippi (which drastically underfunds Medicaid) you can't go to Arkansas and get Medicaid-funded treatments.

[Canuckistanian]

45. Where's the "Fuck, No" option?

I guess I'll have to vote "do not support"

[Odin2005]

46. No, any anyone who votes yes should be TSed.

[ZombieHorde]

50. I voted no, I don't think those who voted yes should be TSed. nt

[Recursion]

63. Why?

What's wrong about refusing to provide services to people who consistently refuse to do any thing to pay for them?

The longer we coddle libertarians the longer their fantasies will screw up our country.

[Green_Lantern]

65. libertarians or not no one deserves to have their house burn and

Pets burn to death. Once the fire fighters were there they should've put out the fire then dealt with the fees.

[Recursion]

70. The last time they went to *his house* they did that

And he never paid them. Why do you want people who live in the city to burn to death because their fire department used its resources helping people who refuse to pay?

[PVnRT]

89. Yeah, you would think that.

Anyone who votes different from you on a push poll should be banned.

[PavePusher]

90. How very authoritarian of you. n/t

[TwilightGardener]

52. No.

[backscatter712]

54. 146 Democrats, 23 disruptors...

[Recursion]

74. Whatever

What do you want the city to do? How are they going to keep paying for the county's fire service if the county residents refuse to pay? They tried to get the county to take over the fire department. No dice. They tried a fee-for-service model: people didn't pay including this very guy.

What do you want the city to do?

[PavePusher]

92. 146 pairs of reality-blinders. n/t

[donheld]

56. As I said before there is NO excuse NONE

[Recursion]

77. OK, you tell the city what to do

What should the city do? How can it keep putting out the county's fires, for free, without going bankrupt?

[donheld]

150. Put the fire out and bill the home owner.

[Green_Lantern]

64. no way...firefighters should fight fires and not randomly decide

Who should or shouldn't deserve to have their house left to burn.

The lack of compassion by so-called "liberals" is shocking.

[Recursion]

76. This wasn't the firefighters' decision

Maybe you should read the news stories.

[Green_Lantern]

86. of course it was their decision...they were there with their equipment..

They could've said "these people may not have a subscription but I became a fire fighter to fight fires."

This is like if a fire fighter was off-duty and came upon a fire...if he was the only one there....and sat back saying "I'm off the clock."

They chose to let it burn and now trying to wash their hands of it.

[Recursion]

95. No, they were specifically told by the city not to

They were sent out to go make sure nobody was in danger, but were told by their bosses in the city that they can't stop fires simply to protect property out there.

[Green_Lantern]

102. ohyeah....the old "I was just following orders" excuse

I really doubt the city's government has that much of a say over fire fighters to order them to stand down. That'd be the Fire Chief's job.

[Scout]

109. wasn't at all RANDOM and it wasn't the firefighter's decision....

the HOMEOWNER decided he didn't want fire protection when he didn't pay his fair share of the cost.

[Green_Lantern]

110. so if a person was stuck in the fire the fire dept. could've watched

Them burn? No a truly decent human being would've said screw the rules and put out the fire.

They could've worried about his "subscription" later.

No one "decides" to let their house burn down any more than they decide not to have health care.

If someone came to a hospital with a concussion a doctor shouldn't be saying "can't treat you, you don't have insurance."

[Scout]

112. you obviously don't really know what the situation was....

as it has been clearly stated repeatedly that when lives are in danger the fire department responds regardless of payment status.

do you want me to repeat that again, slowly and in a larger point size?

[Green_Lantern]

113. oh are you talking about psychic fire department who can..

Predict that a fire won't get out of control and threaten lives.

When it's bad enough to kill pets and spread to neighbors' then it's not far off to see this threatening people's lives.

[Scout]

114. yes, and these homeowners had time to call for the fire department SEVERAL times....

before the fire ever got near to the house.

this asshole brought this situation entirely on himself. he didn't bother to pay for the fire service. he didn't bother to monitor the trash being burned outside during high fire danger, he didn't bother to go into the house and rescue his pets ... they called the fire department, and even though they knew they were not coming, he sat on his ass outside and let his OWN pets die.

jesus h christ on a fucking pogo stick :eyes:

[Green_Lantern]

121. oh please....fire fighters can't expect people to provide fire protection

To their own homes when they don't have access to fire fighting equipment.

Running into a burning fire and smoke filled house often ends in people being dead themselves.

All I know is that if I call 911 and the fire dept. comes it is safe to assume they'll fight the fire.

You also don't question how a fire started to determine if it's worthy to fight the fire.

You don't know "he just sat on his ass and watched it burn" as if people are required to try their best to put out a fire before calling the fire dept.

[Scout]

134. he wasn't expected to provide fire fighting equipment ... he was expected

to pay the required fee, and then the professionals would come and put out the fire.

and i DO know he sat on his ass, because i've read the stories. the house was not in fire when he called the fire department, the fire was still in the yard.

this idiot brought this situation on himself by refusing to pay the required fee.

[Green_Lantern]

138. and as I said before that's like a doctor refusing to help someone

Because they don't have insurance. I place the blame on a system that balances who to help based on if you can pay or not. You'd say they were idiots for not buying insurance.

Fire fighters shouldn't be refusing to put out fires for lack of payment.

I guess you also oppose laws saying police and fire man can't walk off the job and strike.

Public services is more than just a business deal.

[Scout]

143. more blah blah blah from you

this person and his neighbors WANTED the system they have, based on PREPAYMENT of the required, minimal amount of $6 per month. yes, they are idiots for not paying for the plan they wanted. he was selfish and shortsighted, and thought he deserved service he hasn't paid for.

you can "guess" all you want about what i oppose or not, but you really just make yourself appear stupid by doing so.

[Green_Lantern]

151. but the fire fighters still sat and watched it burn....

So I guess if some "idiot" left a space heater on and started a house fire the fire fighters should let it burn.

Sorry but in an emergency situation fire fighters, doctors, etc. shouldn't first be worried about payment, which can be worked out afterward.

[Scout]

153. yes, if that idiot left a space heater on and started a fire, and had not paid

for the service under the plan they agreed to, then the fire department is not obligated to put out the fire.

as people have REPEATEDLY posted, billing after the fact DID NOT WORK, the department had already tried it in other instances.

i'm done with your stupid posts.

[Little Star]

131. I think there have actually been some people

who decided to let their house burn down. I remember hearing about house insurance fraud being perpetrated quite a bit. Some actually set the fire themselves.

[Green_Lantern]

133. I'm sure this case wasn't insurance fraud...

I'm sure most people don't want their house to burn thinking they'll hit it big. Insurance doesn't pay out that good.

[Little Star]

137. what ever....................

[Green_Lantern]

139. statistics suggest this wasn't arson for insrance...

In 2005 only 29% of arsons were at mobile homes..http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/property_crime/arson.html
In 2009 that decreased to 28.4% http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/property_crime/arson.html

[Little Star]

149. Who the heck ever said this was arson? Good Night.

[Green_Lantern]

152. I said I doubt this case was arson and you said...."Whatever"

nt

[LynneSin]

68. They should have put the fire out and then send the homeowner the bill for the cost

If my car was in an accident and I didn't have car insurance I would have to pay for the full cost of repairs but I could get my car repaired.

If I ended up in the emergency room and had no insurance I would get treated and be sent the bill.

So the solution here was real easy - put out the fire and then send the idiot who didn't pay the $75 bill the full total of what it cost him to have the fire put out. If the homeowner STILL refused to pay that bill then stick the collectors on him.

Problem solved!

[gulliver]

71. I thought that might work too, but have changed my mind.

If the FD put out the fire and just billed the guy, then 1) Other people would stop paying the $75 en masse and 2) The guy would likely not pay.

[Recursion]

75. We don't need to speculate. They already did it *FOR THIS GUY* and he stiffed them

It's not the city's responsibility, and there's only so much free fire service the city can provide the county without going bankrupt itself.

[LynneSin]

79. I don't mean bill the guy for $75. I mean bill the guy for the total cost

Trust me, when I see my neighbor get stuck with a bill for a couple thousand dollars it'll encourage me to get my $75 check in the mail almost immediately.

[Recursion]

80. Except they can't collect

The city cannot tax him, and they can't put a lien on his trailer (if it were more than a smoldering ash heap at this point). Again, what should the city do?

[LynneSin]

82. Send it to the bill collectors and let them hound him to death

nuff said.

[Recursion]

83. That doesn't get them their money

Debt collectors typically buy debt for pennies or even fractions of pennies on the dollar.

[LynneSin]

85. So I'm guessing as long as it's pets & property that was destroyed you're ok with this

I thought we were suppose to be compassionate. What if there was a person in there? A child? What value do you put on loved ones?


I've had bad credit and I've been hounded by debtors. Hell I still get calls on debts that were paid off ages ago for reasons I can't figure. But I got my credit score up to a point that I can get any credit card that I want (but I don't) and was able to buy a house with a great rate. So the concept for me to pay that bill has value. For others perhaps they don't give a shit about their credit rating.


Personally I hope the homeowner sues the bejesus out of the fire company. Perhaps you're a callous soul that doesn't give a shit if someone's life ownings and PETS burn to the ground but the rest of us here do.

[Recursion]

97. The fire department *WAS SENT THERE* in case people were in danger

They saw nobody was in danger. Once it just became a question of property, they didn't risk their lives and their equipment to protect the property of someone who refuses to pay for that property to be protected.

[SidDithers]

105. The fire department was sent there when the fire threatened a neighbour's field...

a neighbour that had paid their subscription fee. They arrived at the scene something like 2 hours after the the fire was first reported.

Sid

[Pithlet]

129. Yes. The whole idea that they went there to watch it burn is wrong.

This story has just been spun into oblivion.

[dionysus]

108. it happened to the guy before and he didnt pay. the question really isnt letting one guy's house

burn, the real issue is that a large county is hogging the FD of a town and they're not paying for it.

[PVnRT]

94. Sigh.....that's what they used to do

And half the people did not pay. And the city had no legal authority to go after them for non-payment.

[gulliver]

69. Yes. Otherwise more lives and property would be lost.

If the FD isn't funded, then others would lose their lives (human and animal) and property. If they saved this guy's house, no one would pay the $75 fee. The FD would lose the funds it needs to protect everyone. Others would suffer.

For example, maybe the FD would not be able to purchase a special rescue ladder assembly. They might respond to a blazing two-story home and find Grandma and Grandpa could not be rescued from the second floor--all because of the "kind act" of saving Gene Cranick's house and pets.

Secondary effects always have to be taken into account for true ethical decisions. Democracy elected the Obion County representatives. The representatives voted for the system that cost Gene Cranick his home and pets. It's a regrettable occurrence, but far worse occurrences are happening everywhere, often--if not mostly--due to the secondary effects of short-sighted decisions.

The people at the tip of the tooth have to pay for the consequences of democracy. I feel sorry for the FD personnel as much as for Cranick. I feel sorry for the euthanized unwanted cats, dogs, and other animals at animal shelters and the people who have to carry out the process. But the fault lies in the process. Maybe the Obion County representatives will change the "rules of engagement" for rural fires; maybe they won't.

[ecstatic]

73. No, and now that we see how few DUers agree with their decision

hopefully we can move on to more important topics.

[Egnever]

84. Hell yes!

I do not support allowing teabaggers to have their cake and eat it too. By all indications this guy was milking the system.

Tea baggers and their ilk need to understand what their limited government gets them and it isnt a compassionate fire department that puts itself out of business to help people who refuse to pitch in their fair share to the commie government.

If this was a new thing I might feel differently but this cities fire department has been putting up with this crap for 20 years doing it the way so many here want them to do and they have been denied payment time and again for their efforts. At some point the shit has to hit the fan. Better it starts hitting the people that refuse to chip in than it hits the people who did their part in chipping in for the betterment of others.

Apparently the large majority on this poll believe otherwise...I have no problem whatsoever not being a part of that compassionate but also misguided herd.

[TwilightGardener]

96. "Milking the system"...where have I heard that before, in reference

to declaring some people unworthy and denying them assistance...I know I've heard that before...

[Egnever]

103. Horse shit

this guy had the means and refused to participate.. thats a far cry from someone who couldnt afford help and was denied it. This guy had this happen before to another property and still refused to pay likely because the last time it happened to him the fire departement helped him anyway. He stiffed them then and would have more than likely had stiffed em again had they helped him this time.

He gambled and lost. Its not a case of him being unfortunate its a case of him taking a risk and losing the bet.

If he couldn't afford the insurance I would feel differently but every indication I have seen doesn't point to that being the case at all.

[TwilightGardener]

107. They could work, why don't they get jobs instead of sitting around

having babies or collecting disability or unemployment? Why don't they have health insurance like I do, instead of relying on the ER to treat them for free? Same judgmental shit, same demonization, different side of the coin. If you didn't know his backstory, then how would you know whether or not he was worthy to be saved, right? Hope no one passes judgment on you in a time of dire need.

[Scout]

117. more bull shit

no one is saying what you just spewed.

this person COULD afford the payment, he never said he could not afford it ... he didn't pay it when he had the money to do so.

[PavePusher]

98. Just for the record...

freeloading does not come tied to a single political philosophy. I've seen an unfortunate number of so-called progressives who fit the term, and many "libertarians" and "teabaggers" who are highly socially responsible.

Just say NO to stereotypes.

[Egnever]

101. This is not a stereo type

This guy had a fire before and hadnt paid his fee on another property and when the fire department helped him anyway he still refused to pay them.

I find it hilarious that he had the balls to tell the fire department he would pay them this time.

This guy carries only the minimal insurance, he ignored repeated warnings that he hadnt paid for fire protection and he stiffed the very same fire company once already. This guy is a typical personal responsibility asshat that had that personal responsibility come home to roost I feel no sympathy for him at all.

He let his dogs burn because he didnt want to risk going into the house to save them but had no problem whatsoever sending other people that he couldnt be bother to support risk their lives for him.

Sorry fuck that these folks need to get a heaping dose of what they are asking for so we can put this personal responsibility crap to rest once and for all. If its all about the individual then we are not a nation and we cant be a nation if people dont participate. This guy didnt want to participate and his past actions make that abundantly clear. He wanted this outcome he asked for this outcome and i dont feel the least bit bad that he got what he asked for.

If someone in the town that actually pays for this service had died because they department was saving this guy who cant chip in $75 then i would be outraged.. The fact that this guy got what he paid for doesnt bother me in the least.

[PavePusher]

106. I agree with the terms...

for this individual.

But don't broad-brush every person who didn't pay as a "libertarian" or "teabagger". Many are people politically similar to yourself.

[JVS]

125. +1000

[snooper2]

93. I've used dictionary.com for YEARS

Website is greatness and a good tool for students...

Over 10 million words searched today alone--here's my search for today

fire   /faɪər/ Show Spelled
Show IPA
noun, verb, fired, fir·ing.
–noun
1. a state, process, or instance of combustion in which fuel or other material is ignited and combined with oxygen, giving off light, heat, and flame.
2. a burning mass of material, as on a hearth or in a furnace.
3. the destructive burning of a building, town, forest, etc.; conflagration.
4. heat used for cooking, esp. the lighted burner of a stove: Put the kettle on the fire.
5. Greek fire.
6. flashing light; luminous appearance.
7. brilliance, as of a gem.
8. burning passion; excitement or enthusiasm; ardor.
9. liveliness of imagination.
10. fever or inflammation.
11. severe trial or trouble; ordeal.
12. exposure to fire as a means of torture or ordeal.
13. strength, as of an alcoholic beverage.
14. a spark or sparks.
15. the discharge of firearms: enemy fire.
16. the effect of firing military weapons: to pour fire upon the enemy.
17. British . a gas or electric heater used for heating a room.
18. Literary . a luminous object, as a star: heavenly fires.
–verb (used with object)
19. to set on fire.
20. to supply with fuel; attend to the fire of: They fired the boiler.
21. to expose to the action of fire; subject to heat.
22. to apply heat to in a kiln for baking or glazing; burn.
23. to heat very slowly for the purpose of drying, as tea.
24. to inflame, as with passion; fill with ardor.
25. to inspire.
26. to light or cause to glow as if on fire.
27. to discharge (a gun).
28. to project (a bullet or the like) by or as if by discharging from a gun.
29. to subject to explosion or explosive force, as a mine.
30. to hurl; throw: to fire a stone through a window.
31. to dismiss from a job.
32. Veterinary Medicine . to apply a heated iron to (the skin) in order to create a local inflammation of the superficial structures, with the intention of favorably affecting deeper inflammatory processes.
33. to drive out or away by or as by fire.
–verb (used without object)
34. to take fire; be kindled.
35. to glow as if on fire.
36. to become inflamed with passion; become excited.
37. to shoot, as a gun.
38. to discharge a gun: to fire at a fleeing enemy.
39. to hurl a projectile.
40. Music . to ring the bells of a chime all at once.
41. (of plant leaves) to turn yellow or brown before the plant matures.
42. (of an internal-combustion engine) to cause ignition of the air-fuel mixture in a cylinder or cylinders.
43. (of a nerve cell) to discharge an electric impulse.
—Verb phrases
44. fire away, Informal . to begin to talk and continue without slackening, as to ask a series of questions: The reporters fired away at the president.
45. fire off,
a. to discharge (as weapons, ammunition, etc.): Police fired off canisters of tear gas.
b. to write and send hurriedly: She fired off an angry letter to her congressman.
—Idioms
46. between two fires, under physical or verbal attack from two or more sides simultaneously: The senator is between two fires because of his stand on the bill.
47. build a fire under, Informal . to cause or urge to take action, make a decision quickly, or work faster: If somebody doesn't build a fire under that committee, it will never reach a decision.
48. catch fire,
a. Also, catch on fire. to become ignited; burn: The sofa caught fire from a lighted cigarette.
b. to create enthusiasm: His new book did not catch fire among his followers.
49. fight fire with fire, to use the same tactics as one's opponent; return like for like.
50. go through fire and water, to brave any danger or endure any trial: He said he would go through fire and water to win her hand.
51. hang fire,
a. to be delayed in exploding, or fail to explode.
b. to be undecided, postponed, or delayed: The new housing project is hanging fire because of concerted opposition.
52. miss fire,
a. to fail to explode or discharge, as a firearm.
b. to fail to produce the desired effect; be unsuccessful: He repeated the joke, but it missed fire the second time.
53. on fire,
a. ignited; burning; afire.
b. eager; ardent; zealous: They were on fire to prove themselves in competition.
54. play with fire, to trifle with a serious or dangerous matter: He didn't realize that insulting the border guards was playing with fire.
55. set fire to,
a. to cause to burn; ignite.
b. to excite; arouse; inflame: The painting set fire to the composer's imagination.
Also, set on fire.
56. take fire,
a. to become ignited; burn.
b. to become inspired with enthusiasm or zeal: Everyone who heard him speak immediately took fire.
57. under fire,
a. under attack, esp. by military forces.
b. under censure or criticism: The school administration is under fire for its policies.
Use fire in a Sentence
See images of fire
Search fire on the Web

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
bef. 900; (n.) ME; OE fȳr; c. ON fūrr, G Feuer, Gk pŷr ( see pyro-); (v.) ME firen to kindle, inflame, deriv. of the n.

—Related forms
firer, noun
coun·ter·fire, noun, verb (used without object), -fired, -fir·ing.
re·fire, verb, -fired, -fir·ing.
un·fired, adjective


—Can be confused:   downsize, fire, lay off, rightsize, terminate.

[itsrobert]

100. He could have saved his pets himself

It's his fault and his fault only.

[Evasporque]

104. Can I get the list of the Yes votes names? I need to add to my ingore list.

Thanks.

[Bluebear]

111. Yes voters: you are disgraceful human beings

"allow pets to burn"...and you can actually vote yes? Shudder.

[TexasObserver]

115. Only 17% voting in this poll support the failure to put the house fire out.

Isn't that about the same percentage of Americans who think president Obama is a Kenyon, Muslim, communist?

I think so.

[Scout]

118. :rofl: n/t

[Taverner]

116. Of course I don't support it, but you're missing the point

My point is this is where our Neo-Randian Culture is headed. Pretty soon everything will be pay to play. And it is not good.

[Common Sense Party]

119. I would support the neighbors pitching in and backing him up, and

telling the fire department, "Hey, Gene's an idiot. He screwed up. Here's $75...in fact, here's $300 that we all pitched in to cover his delinquent fees. We don't want to see one of our neighbors lose his house and pets because he's a moron, and his grandson is dumb as a bag of rocks. Here's the money, he's covered. Now go do the RIGHT thing, go do the AMERICAN thing, and turn on the hoses, and do your job. If not, stand back, because we're going to turn on the hoses ourselves."

We're Americans. We should stand up for each other and help each other out.

[Pithlet]

123. Yep. Or they could have done it before hand and all pitched in

and done that thing called taxes. And then none of it would have happened. But they didn't. And that's why the fire department for the city was near bankrupt and couldn't come to their fires anymore unless someone had paid the fee. They couldn't do it anymore. They couldn't afford it. The only reason they were there was because of the neighbor. This whole "They showed up just to watch it burn" is a fallacy.

[Common Sense Party]

126. Were the people in the city paying their taxes?

If so, the FD shouldn't be bankrupt.

The unincorporated rural areas aren't subject to the same taxes. The city should have worked with the county to make the fee a part of county taxes, and then that revenue would be passed on to the city.

[Pithlet]

127. They were paying enough taxes for a city fire department. Not city/county.

The county is much larger than the city. The city can't impose a tax on the county. They're not even in the same state! Fulton city is in Kentucky. Obion County is in Tennesee. That's right. The county is mooching off a city that's in an entirely different state. The county has to make the decision to raise a tax to pay them. That's the funding they voted against. Repeatedly.

[sohndrsmith]

130. Lives were lost... I'm really surprised that no SPCA/animal rights group

has yet to speak up... the FD knowingly allowed those pets to die a horrific death - as they watched. Aren't there laws against animal cruelty? ....Sigh, right - the FD is probably exempt from responsibility, but in this case I don't think such exemption should apply.

Has anyone been able to find the actual wording of this fee-based policy? Do they make exceptions if people are trapped in a burning home?

Guess rescuing kittens out of trees isn't in the job description anymore either...

If this happened to me and my boy was burned alive - I would be more devastated about him than I would be the material loss... which is covered by insurance.

I just find it horrific and cruel of anyone with the means and equipment to save a life just stands by and does nothing but listen to whines and cries until they died out. Literally.

Ugh.

In the case of humans, they probably do the minimum required to save the individual, and then let the house burn. If only they had at least tried to save the trapped (non-human) lives - but lives just the same...

I'm probably going to get some razzing from some on this post... hope not, but I'll preemptively say:

Have at it.

[Scout]

135. oh for fuck's sake. n/t

[TexasObserver]

140. They will probably do that eventually.

It's the right thing to do.

I hope those who allowed these animals to die a horrible death are very proud of themselves.

[Scout]

144. i'm sure the homeowners are very proud of themselves for letting their pets die. n/t

[TexasObserver]

145. I'm not moved by your mean spirited attitude about the fire.

[Scout]

146. i don't care, why should i? i've had a fire at my house, and the first thing

i did after calling the fire department was rescue my animals.

so i am not moved by their negligence in letting their animals die.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

147. 252! ?@!

Freakin' Bleeding Heart Liberals!

:*

[indypaul]

162. Firefighters have only two duties

1. Protection of life
2. Protection of property

Nowhere is it their obligation to collect taxes or fees.
These firefighters, if they responded to the call, did not
meet their duty and obligation to their community and
should be ashamed of themselves and their superiors
prosecuted.

[TexasObserver]

164. This kind of poll makes me proud of DU's silent majority.

Without a poll, one might think it was close. That's what concentrated noise is intended to create - misperception of reality.

Way to go, DU! Once again, the compassionate left carries the day.