So, a fire department let three dogs and a cat burn to death...

[cynatnite]

because a homeowner forgot to pay $75. They let a family lose everything they own because of $75. They couldn't have billed him after saving his house and his pets?

Don't we have a moral obligation to help others who are in obvious need?

Since when do we stop being human over fucking money?

[MidwestTransplant]

1. Privatize it all...

[1620rock]

2. ASSHOLE FD. They should be in prison!

[Tesha]

315. Does it matter if, in another fire three years ago, they *DID* save his bacon...

...and he stiffed them the cost of the saving?

Honestly, at some point, people have to be responsible
for their actions.

Tesha

[nolabear]

346. Reference?

[kirby]

349. You must support denying care at the ER for the uninsured then n/t

[hyphenate]

3. That law is as close to protection pay

As it can get. I think that shit has to go. I would sue those bastards, and get the state to run them out, or at least dissolve that kind of protection racket as quickly as possible. Bastards. The governor needs to be threatened by the proper federal agency as soon as possible, and that law should be removed from the state legislature immediately.

[cynatnite]

6. It sure is. n/t

[TorchTheWitch]

35. damn right!

It's 19th century libertarian failed philosophy and it's revolting to see the outcome defended here of all places. Absolutely revolting.

It's circumstances like this that was the reason community fire service paid through taxes and provided to everyone whether they could afford to pay or not were established to begin with.

[Hannah Bell]

152. the libertarian policy belongs to the county, & it's humorous to see that fact spun 180.

[EFerrari]

4. Since now? And people are DEFENDING this.

:puke:

[Posteritatis]

5. Hell, cheering it.

Lots of "lawl he must be a Republican so this is good!" going around.

[Mz Pip]

13. His dogs and cat

had no party affilation. Fuck anyone who thinks this guy, whatever is political affilation, deserved this.

[Posteritatis]

16. Yep. (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

127. so firemen should risk their own lives to save the pets of people who are outside

their service area and have refused to pay for fire service?

i don't see it myself.

[reggie the dog]

158. how can you have a photo of marx as your avatar????

TAXES should pay for fire service, giving people the option of opting out of paying for fire service is the aberration

[Hannah Bell]

167. yes, giving people the option not to pay is the aberration, & that's what the county voted for, 19-1

and that's what this guy chose to do, despite two notifications of the service, one written & one by phone, and apparently despite having had a fire in the past.

the city has 2500 residents. not a big tax base. its median household income is lower than the county's.

the county has 32K residents. rather than tax its residents to provide universal fire protection, it voted to allow them to contract as individuals with cities -- or not -- their free choice.

their free choice, a good libertarian policy, which presumably represents the wishes of the constituents.

forcing cities to pay for this insanity is a good way to bankrupt them & usher in the fee for service libertarian nightmare.

[reggie the dog]

185. the county should force all people to pay for fire service

the town should not pay for it, EVERYONE SHOULD PAY FOR IT!

[Hannah Bell]

193. & how do you suggest "the county" "force" "the county" to pay when "the county" DOESN'T WANT TO?

the county would rather paint the city as the bad guy when the results of their own idiotic "choice" comes to fruition.

[reggie the dog]

268. how???

by voting through a state law requiring all areas to have property tax levied fire departments, that is one way how, and it would force big agro biz to pay way more than a little family farmer as property taxes are based on property value as opposed to the current system of 75 dollars for all which favorizes the rich by enabling them to ride the coattails of the poor who pay the same fee as them.....

[Hannah Bell]

279. well why do you think it is that hasn't happened, eh? since this dispute has been going on for

years, if not decades?

[reggie the dog]

293. politicians working for monied interests

instead of the interests of the people, it has been going on a long time, some guy wrote a book about it in german back in the 1800's

[Hannah Bell]

309. that may be. however, the same interests are served when a small-town PUBLICLY_FUNDED fire dept is

painted as the villain.

[davidinalameda]

344. they should force them?

hold a gun to their heads and have them write checks

throw people in jail if they don't pay?

[truebrit71]

198. Hmm..so let's see if we can apply the same to the cops...then when they try and bust...

...someone, the perp can tell them to fuck off because he didn't pay for them..

Firemen are like Doctors, their JOB is to SAVE people. Not watch them suffer.

[Hannah Bell]

204. they won't be saving anyone if the city of 2500 residents goes bankrupt to pay for county (32K

residents) free-riders, more than half of whom never paid the bill when the city had the policy of charging them at cost after the fire was out.

considering that 75% of the city's fire calls came from outside its funding area, that's what you're asking them to do -- bankrupt themselves.

but bankrupting public services is a clever way to create space for private, for-profit fire services.

which i'm beginning to think is why this story is getting so much play.

[TheEuclideanOne]

325. So, half of them never paid the bill, so charge a higher penalty. Problem solved.

I heard that argument on another discussion thread and it sounds weak to me. If half the people who are paying and the other half refused, why don't they simply charge a higher penalty for fires that they half to put out for the people who don't pay their fee? If the fee is $500, double it to $1000 to make up for the free-riders. If they factor in that buffer, the fire department doesn't lose money and risk going bankrupt. Seems pretty simple to me.

[elehhhhna]

232. good points. unfortunate but factual. wonder what would happen

had there been children in the building. The firefighters I know wouldl go in if possible in that case, fee be dammned. Hell, they'd even do it while - gassp - off-duty(!)

Hannah, you infuriate me sometimes - not a bad thing, btw - but your courage in injecting facts & logic to DU is laudable. Thank you.

[Hannah Bell]

238. The fire department already stated they respond to calls where lives are at stake,

even if the residents haven't paid.

No lives were at stake, & sorry about the pets, but I wouldn't put firefighter's lives at risk to save pets as a freebie -- not for people who've refused to pay. If a fireman is injured on the job, these SOB's ain't going to be donating for the medical bills.

I appreciate the props. This case infuriates me -- i see the publicity surrounding it, which paints the homeowner as a victim of the evil city -- as another attack on public services, when the truth appears to be 180 from that.

It would be easy to bankrupt a small fire dept funded by 2500 residents by forcing it to answer calls from a county of 32K residents, more than half of whom are freeloaders.

Nice opening for for-profit fire contractors.

[elehhhhna]

251. Again with the facts. Geez! BTW,

did you know that AIG's homeowners insurance arm in CA has its own private fire dept.? They hose down their insured's homes when threatened by wildfires. Sounds elitist but it makes good business sense.

[Hannah Bell]

276. and the homeowners pay for it. & likely more than they'd pay for public fire protection,

while the firefighters doing the work get paid less.

[elehhhhna]

301. It's part of their ins. premium, yes, but

it's cheaper for the insurer to prevent a fire than pay for the aftermath. Feels creepy. Makes sense.

Makes me wonder why property ins. co's don't help sponsor fire departments, come to think of it.

[RoccoR5955]

245. Screw that, EVERYONE should pay...

It's called the COMMON GOOD. That's what taxes are supposed to be for.

[Hannah Bell]

259. BUT THEY DON'T. AND NO ONE CAN MAKE THEM. That's the reality of the situation.

[Stonepounder]

340. They can handle it very easily

If there is a fire at a home that has not paid their fee, go
fight the fire.  Then send the homeowner a bill for services,
which would probably be several thousand dollars.  If the
homeowner doesn't pay the bill, slap a lien on his home and
take him to court.  Once you win your fight in court, you can
garnish wages and seize property to satisfy the judgement.

[reggie the dog]

294. you must have misunderstood me

re read what i wrote and you will find that you and i are saying the same thing with different words

[tavalon]

298. We have a fellow here in Washington whose name is Tim Eyman

He keeps putting libertarian Props up to try to hamstring the government. Before we were on to him, he actually fucked up a good bit of our government. This is libertarian claptrap that probably ought not to see the light of day, much less the voting booth.

[JDPriestly]

366. Fires are not just a hazard to the property that is burning, they

pose a danger to the surrounding properties as well. Everyone should be taxed and pay for fire department services. And everyone should be protected by fire department services. I do not want my neighbor's house to burn. But then I have great neighbors. In fact I just happen to live in a great neighborhood. We are all friends. We all care about each other, and we don't want each other's houses to burn.

You must be antisocial, Hannah Bell. Wouldn't you be willing to pay a little extra so that your neighbor's house will not burn to the ground? We have very little, but we are quite willing to pay.

[freebrew]

249. Maybe taxes SHOULD pay for fire service.

But the reality is that they don't always do so.

[Hissyspit]

208. delete nt

[MsPithy]

313. Isn't animal cruelty a crime?

Firefighters are professionals, they can't endanger their lives even to save humans if the situation is too dangerous. That being said, to not even try to save animals because of 75 FUCKING DOLLARS, they need to be charged with a crime! And, anyone who supervises this cruel and unchristian policy needs to go to jail with them.

The policy itself is straight out of the 3rd world! What kind of fucking country do we want to be? If property taxes no longer cover the cost of the fire department, we raise the god damn taxes! Clearly the homeowners in this community can afford to pay $75. more! Sheesh! How long will it be until the super rich buy their own fire fighters who work to save their property to the detriment of their poor neighbors?

[Cetacea]

351. Good point.

Obviously some here (who are now on my first ever ignore list) do not understand the bonds between humans and smaller animals. Nor do they value them as felling beings.

[jtuck004]

321. I would've gone after the dogs, then the cat. Free, and I don't care who for.

If they could do it without risking human life, and it wasn't totally engulfed, it would have been the humane thing to do.

That trumps taxes and fees ;) Humane treatment of pets trumps most crap like that.

Fire coverage should be paid for with property taxes, because it benefits all. What if someone's kid was visiting a home who had not paid? Is there a list?

This is a stupid system that deserves to get updated or subsumed under another group that knows what they are doing, 'cause this could get people killed, because of an ego.

[liquid diamond]

367. I've avoided this topic since yesterday. Have progressives

here really been defending this? WTF?

[Lorien]

377. Not ""Progressives" ; just the usual party faithful

who hate anything that doesn't stand under their flag with them 24/7 and toe the line. They honestly think the family deserved to lose their home, their four pets, and all their worldly possessions over $75.00 because A). "They should have been responsible and paid the $75.00!" (apparently none of them ever forgot to make a payment to anyone) and B). they suspect that the parents are repugs.

[Lorien]

375. His KIDS pets no less! They think that the beloved pets of small children

deserve to die, breaking those children's hearts, because of fucking POLITICS??? Insane AND heartless. This isn't the Democratic party I once knew.

[Scout]

397. it's not the democratic party you knew, because NO ONE thinks

the pets DESERVED to die.

:eyes:

get a fucking grip and a clue

[FirstTimeVoterAt37]

33. For their families' sakes, I hope their houses never catch on fire

And if someone comes in here having lost everything, I'll be sympathetic.

[reggie the dog]

157. i dont give a damn if the guy votes libertarian

he did not come off as the brightest person in the interview but come off as an average person, he probably worked damn hard for most of his life. if he is part of the duped working class who vote on the right then so be it . I am a progressive/liberal/socialist because i think that society has to work together, a tax funded fire department should be in place and i dont give a damn if this guy didnt pay his 75 dollars it is immoral not to help another person in need if we are trained how to help them. we should also look out for those less fortunate (and less intelligent than us), that's what it means to me to be a liberal, this guy doesnt look like he had all the fancy schooling up to an MA like i have had so it may be easier to pull one over on him and convince him to vote republican against his own interests but as a liberal i can never say "you got what you deserved" because in my opinion we all deserve quality fire service.

dont even get me started on letting the grand kids pets die......

[Hannah Bell]

178. he gets farm subsidies from usda in two states, for corn, wheat and tobacco.

he can afford $6.25/mo.

but nice try at playing the "working man" phony populist card.

[reggie the dog]

184. because small farmers are not members of the working class?

they often work 7 days a week and even with subsudies often dont do well financially, plus a drought can ruin them. how is he not a working man????

[Hannah Bell]

195. properties in two states suggest he's not a "small" farmer. that's your spin.

and being in his 70s, doubt he's working his land by himself.

[reggie the dog]

291. he has kids and grandkids

plus having land in 2 states is not rare when the nearest town itself is cut in two by THE STATE LINE!

[Hansel]

330. Sounds like something a Tea Bagger would say.

You think this guy's punishment for not paying a $75 fee is the loss of his home, his pets and all of his belongings? Seriously? Because you don't like it that he's getting tax payer money?

Pathetic.

[whathehell]

288. Exactly....Anyone who would "approve" an unfought house fire

should, in my opinion, go to Freepville if not to Hell.

[Lorien]

379. Amen reggie, well said!

:yourock:

[Chulanowa]

43. I'm no longer surprised by what I see here, EFerrari

Dismayed, but not surprised.

[DeSwiss]

7. K&R

Yeah I saw that story earlier today......

Firefighters Watch As Home Burns To The Ground

Local 6 | WPSD - Paducah KY
Reporter - Jason Hibbs
Photojournalist - Mark Owen
Updated: Sep 30, 2010 at 12:31 AM CDT

OBION COUNTY, Tenn. - Imagine your home catches fire but the local fire department won't respond, then watches it burn. That's exactly what happened to a local family tonight. A local neighborhood is furious after firefighters watched as an Obion County, Tennessee, home burned to the ground. The homeowner, Gene Cranick, said he offered to pay whatever it would take for firefighters to put out the flames, but was told it was too late. They wouldn't do anything to stop his house from burning.

Each year, Obion County residents must pay $75 if they want fire protection from the city of South Fulton. But the Cranicks did not pay. The mayor said if homeowners don't pay, they're out of luck. This fire went on for hours because garden hoses just wouldn't put it out. It wasn't until that fire spread to a neighbor's property, that anyone would respond. Turns out, the neighbor had paid the fee. "I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick. Because of that, not much is left of Cranick's house.

They called 911 several times, and initially the South Fulton Fire Department would not come. The Cranicks told 9-1-1 they would pay firefighters, whatever the cost, to stop the fire before it spread to their house. "When I called I told them that. My grandson had already called there and he thought that when I got here I could get something done, I couldn't," Paulette Cranick.

It was only when a neighbor's field caught fire, a neighbor who had paid the county fire service fee, that the department responded. Gene Cranick asked the fire chief to make an exception and save his home, the chief wouldn't. We asked him why. He wouldn't talk to us and called police to have us escorted off the property. Police never came but firefighters quickly left the scene. Meanwhile, the Cranick home continued to burn.

http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-the-ground-104052668.html">MORE

[doc03]

18. I assume they had insurance I think the insurance company

would be justified in suing the FD for the loss. When a house catches fire around here the fire department charges a fire service fee to the insurance company.

[Hannah Bell]

116. why doesn't the insurance policy require fire protection? the city fire department

has no obligation to provide service to county residents.

[doc03]

153. This whole thing is weird to me, where I live all our fire

departments help each other. I live in a rural area and when we have a fire or accident our neighboring fire departments also respond usually at least two show up. If there is a large fire in the city it's not unusual for a half dozen or more departments to be on the scene. I guess I am old fashioned I figure a fireman, EMT or a Doctor have and obligation to help anybody first then worry about money second. Doesn't the fire department charge the insurance companies for their services our fire department bills health insurance carriers $400 or $500 for an EMT call I imagine they also bill homeowners policies for fire service. In the city of Wheeling, WV businesses have to pay a fire service fee but there is no way the fire department would ever sit and watch a building burn down

[Hannah Bell]

159. according to the records i've seen, city population = 2500, county = 32K. county has never

had its own fire service & has relied on the fire services of five incorporated areas within its boundaries to fight fires in its unincorporated areas -- which they apparently did until the free rider problem -- more than 50% never paid the charges -- became a problem.

the county twice shot down proposals to establish & fund its own volunteer fire dept.

now three of the five cities have a fee system & two are still trying to collect from county residents after the fact.

south fulton, the city in this case, has a population of about 2,500 people. if you divide the 32K in the county over 5 fire depts, that's 6400 people per department. so 2500 people were being taxed to provide fire service to 4000 people who didn't pay taxes, more than half of whom never paid for their fire calls, either.

and 75% of calls came from outside the city, meaning the residents would have had to pay more than double to fund the libertarians in the county.

the county voted 19-1 to have residents contract individually with the city.

this guy chose not to pay the minimal fee of $6.25/mo despite two notices, one by phone.

he gets agricultural subsidies in two states.

it's apparently not the first time a property of his has burned.

[doc03]

170. That is one strange situation, beyond my comprehension

We pay a township fire levy and the township has two fire departments for maybe 1500 people. All I know is that area must be totally populated with people of the Teabagger mentality, the something for nothing crowd. I would think they would at least have a volunteer fire department if only to keep their fire insurance rates down. I know around here if you are not within a thousand feet of a fire hydrant your rates are much higher. It's the south I don't claim to understand their way of thinking never have probably never will.

[Hannah Bell]

173. "totally populated with people of the Teabagger mentality"

that would be my guess, as the county's policy is insane.

[theHandpuppet]

203. I'm hearing ya

The fact that so few others are really isn't surprising to me anymore.

[reggie the dog]

162. the fact that they dont is the problem

the county should levy property taxes to get this service from the town

[lukasahero]

150. Yeah - I'm sure that's cold comfort in the loss of their pets

WTF is wrong with people?

[Hannah Bell]

115. so the firemen didn't "stand around & watch it burn".

[pnwmom]

148. Yes they did. They waited until the fire spread to the next property

and they saved that one. But they ignored the ongoing fire and the dying animals at this house.

[Hannah Bell]

181. no. they didn't respond to the first homeowner's call at all.

The fire started when the Cranicks' grandson was burning trash near the family home. As it grew out of control, the Cranicks called 911, but the fire department from the nearby city of South Fulton would not respond.

"We wasn't on their list," he said the operators told him.

Firefighters did eventually show up, but only to fight the fire on the neighboring property, whose owner had paid the fee.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/

[ingac70]

8. ?

The news report I watched on TV said it took two hours for the fire to move from the barrels the guy started the fire in to the house, and they left their critters inside?

I'm sorry the guy lost his house, I myself would never follow such an order if I were a firefighter, but they just watched the fire creep across the yard and left their animals in there? :wow:

[cynatnite]

12. Our neighbor's house caught on fire a few years ago...

The two dogs were in the kennel behind the garage. They would not allow anyone to go near the house to rescue the dogs. It didn't matter that the animals could have been reached and saved. At least that's what we all believed. The fire department and the police forbade anyone from going near the place. Everyone was kept away. The dogs died.

Watching it on TV and being there are two different things.

[ingac70]

19. Cops weren't on the scene there....

and the fire dept. took its sweet time getting there, then did nothing once they arrived.

[EFerrari]

36. They would have to shoot me before I let anyone keep me from those dogs.

It wouldn't happen. There's no way I'm going to let my dogs burn to death for the FD's insurance premium.

[Hannah Bell]

145. the fire dept didn't respond to the call until the neighbor's place caught fire, so the

residents had plenty of time to save their pets in the two hours it took for the fire to reach the house.

i think it's interesting that the guy was burning without fire protection, & has a policy to ensure his place without having fire service in place. i wonder how you get a policy like that?

i've read some stuff that suggested he or someone in his family had a similar incident in the past.

[pnwmom]

151. You don't know that the owners had the ability to save their animals.

They don't have the equipment that the firefighters have.

[Hannah Bell]

154. i know that if the fire took two hours to reach the house, they did, if they could walk.

& since they were able to start the fire in the first place, presumably someone could walk.

the city has 2500 residents who pay for fire protection.

the county has 32K residents.

[Name removed]

165. Deleted message

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

[Hannah Bell]

174. i see you have no response to the facts & must resort to personal attack & redbaiting.

the man is not "working class".

he receives usda agricultural subsidies in two states.

and he's apparently had the same fire problem before.

[reggie the dog]

187. how is he not working class?

do you know how many days a week most farmers work??? they dont have a 40 hour week that is for sure. plus the simple fact that you get subsudies means you grow stuff that would not make a profit against foreign goods were it not for the subsudies. I get benefits from the goverment in the form of aid and I work i just have a very low wage. the fact that he has a fields in two states does not make him the owner of anything more than a family farm passed down through the generations.

[Hannah Bell]

201. "working class" = wage workers. he works for himself as an owner = petit-bourg.

it's your unwarranted spin that he's some impoverished hard-working farmer who can't afford $6.25/month to buy fire protection.

median income in the county (32K residents) is higher than in this city of 2500 residents.

[reggie the dog]

258. i never said he could not afford 75 dollars a year

and nice try, a family farm puts you in the income level of a member of the working class, you work your ass off and are generally poor, petit bourgeois implies that YOU LIVE IN TOWN bourgeois means "town folk" seeing as they dont own a factory they are not petit bourg, running a small business where you and your family work and you dont hire other people does not make you a bourgeois, also being bourgeois means having a certain level of income, a certain standard of living, which it did not appear to me this guy had. family farmers are not the bourgeois of farming, large agro biz corporations are, do you not see the fight of family farmers against agro biz corporations as strikingly similar to urban workers fighting against big corporations???? this dude looks more like a peasant than the landed gentry to me

[mommalegga]

353. Yah just another "Kulak" who should be liquidated...

We all know how greedy, rich, and lazy farmers are...:sarcasm:

The FD should put out the fire, send the bill, and slap a lien of not paid...End of issue...

[mommalegga]

355. Double post

[Boudica the Lyoness]

376. Well you just discredited yourself

as far as I'm concerned. So you think you know all about people who receive farm subsides? My husband and I receive farm subsides, so in your book what are we? Come on, tell me all about me!

[mitchtv]

186. the county has no fire service

the city which does have the service cannot tax unincorporated rural properties, which is the case here.The city should have fought the fire then billed the nonsubscriber list price.

[reggie the dog]

188. so we agree

1. the fire should be put out
2. the guy should pay something (the damn county should levy taxes)

[pnwmom]

324. You know nothing about the details of where the fire started

relative to where the three animals were. You know nothing about cats if you think they'd be easy to find in a fire.

[Mz Pip]

9. This makes me sick.

How could anyone of good conscious stand by and just watch this man's house and pets burn? All for $75? Is that what what have become?

This is truly disturbing.

[Scout]

156. how could anyone WITH a "conscious" NOT pay for fire protection

for their home, family and pets? that's what's disturbing.

when i had a fire at my house, the first thing i did after calling fire department was GET MY PETS OUT OF THE HOUSE. i carried the 5 feet tall by 3 feet wide by 1.5 feet deep bird cage and stand out of the house and a safe distance away, after i brought my dog out and put her in the car for safekeeping.

[Hansel]

331. So this is an appropriate punishment for not paying a $75 fee?

Forgetting to pay a fee, which is what he claims, is morally equivalent to allowing a home filled with pets to the ground in your opinion?

Sick.

[Scout]

362. it's not a punishment, it's a consequence of his own negligence n/t

[kurtzapril4]

352. I had a fire in my building

That destroyed my apartment at 1959 W. Chicago Ave., and you better damn believe that after I crawled to the window, then opened it, the firemen were up a ladder to me. And all I said was "HELP." I was on the 3rd floor. I'm afraid of heights. I had to turn around on the window sill and go out the window ass first, wrapped in a bed sheet. They were screaming "hurry hurry hurry" at me the whole time. I was concerned about my cats, and they said "Fuck the cats...you're coming out now. We'll drag you out. Your choice." The cats all survived.

I think it is absolutely amoral that those firemen, and the county, let that house burn. And for the person who intimated that it was a big deal that the dogs burned to death, but not the cat.....FU.

[WeekendWarrior]

10. I think what they did is criminal. nt

[jannyk]

11. k&r!

[proteus_lives]

14. K/R!

[Canuckistanian]

15. K&R

For pure, unadulterated SANITY.

[pacalo]

17. "Moral obligation" says it all.

[Pithlet]

20. Did the fire department in the article let any pets die?

Did they say they would let animals die? I must have missed that.

The reason they can't go ahead and save property and bill afterwords is because then no one would pay the 75 fee would they? What would be the motivation? Oh, they'll just show up anyway, whether I pay it or not, la dee da! After all, these are the geniuses that voted not to pay to fund them in the first place.

Since when did we stop being human over fucking money? This is why I have the stance I do. We let the freeloaders suck them dry? No one gets a fire department. They do cost money. The fire department in this particular story was already stretched thin as it was trying to accommodate the county as well as the city. They had to do something. It isn't fair to the city to let the county pull from their resources without paying, is it? It's living in a dreamworld to say that it isn't about money. We have to pay our taxes. It's the price of living in a civilized society. They don't get to bitch about paying taxes and vote them down, and then insist on a free ride. It doesn't work that way. Moral obligation? Where is the moral obligation of the county citizens to pay their taxes? They have one too.

[Swede]

23. When someone purposely evades taxes,everyone else has to make it up.

That is what everyone is saying. Of course I have sympathy for this guy,but he was warned multiple times.

http://www.nwtntoday.com/news.php?viewStory=46801

[cynatnite]

25. They still could have billed him after the fact.

If they were so worried about money, they could have sued him. He didn't have to lose his house. He didn't deserve it. His family didn't deserve it.

[Swede]

27. Life doesn't work like that. Pay for coverage after you need it?

What should be happening is that county should have levied a tax to pay the city for FD coverage.

[EFerrari]

30. Life works that way all the time. It's called good will and what distinguishes

human beings from snakes.

[Patchuli]

34. Exactly.

:thumbsup:

[malaise]

67. Ding Ding

I don't recognize this America

[Hannah Bell]

125. and when that policy was in place before the fee system, more than half of the county residents

who called the city's fire dept never paid a cent.

that's the result of the "good will" system, & that's why the city went to the fee system.

btw, median household income in the county is higher than in the city.

[Lorien]

380. Amen! Enough of the de-evolving that comes with the sick

"every person for themselves" Reaganite mentality. No other CIVILIZED Nation would be so unkind to their own citizens!

[sabrina 1]

384. You are absolutely right.

Where I come from it works that way ~

[Posteritatis]

62. That's precisely how ambulance service works where I live.

Life often does work like that.

[BzaDem]

63. They wouldn't just bill 75. They would bill the cost of the putting out the fire, just like if you

got in a car accident and had no insurance, you would have to pay the cost of the repair.

[Hannah Bell]

126. that was the previous policy. more than half the county residents who made fire calls

never paid a dime.

and the city had no authority to collect from them.

which is why they went to the contract/fee system.

[pipoman]

70. This isn't insurance

it is a public service...huge difference. What should be happening is that the fucking fire chief and mayor should be charged with failure to perform. People who fail to pay up front should be charged for the service at a higher rate after the fact. This is real estate we are talking about. It is attachable. It would be simple for the fire dept to file the equivalent of a mechanics lien on the property after the fact. After reading a few of the responses in this thread, I find it impossible to believe I an on a liberal/progressive board.

[pecwae]

163. Thank you.

[Hannah Bell]

190. it's a city (pop 2500) fire dept, not a county (pop 32K) fire dept. it has no obligation to fight

the county's fires, particularly when the county is unwilling to tax its residents to pay for the service.

under the previous system when they went out on county calls (which incidentally, were 75% of their calls), they charged the cost of fighting the fire after the fact, as you suggest --

and more than half the people didn't pay the bill.

That's about 38% of those served paying nothing for the service.

Do you really think a city of 2500 can sustain that level of "charity" without bankrupting itself?

Your suggestion that they attach liens to 38% of their "customers'" properties sounds unworkable & expensive to me -- & wouldn't result in any immediate money coming in to fund service anyway.

[pipoman]

265. Attaching liens is simple

and often results in immediate payment or payment arrangements. They are getting immediate money in the people who pay the $75. Those who don't and need the service could be billed a $500 minimum.

The bottom line is there are alternatives to having fire fighters watching someone's house burn down..again if I didn't know better I would think I was listening to a bunch of freepers justifying firemen watching a house burn over $75.

Shame on his dumb ass for not paying. How is this different from denying medical to smokers or fat people? Denying assistance to accident victims who were no wearing their seat belts? Refusing to respond to domestic violence when the abused spouse has previously called? Serves'em all right...fuck'em!

[happyslug]

356. You can ONLY put a lien if someone lets you

Mechanic liens are put on homes all the time BUT THE HOME OWNER HAS TO AGREE FIRST, it is generally inside the contract, but no written contract no mechanic lien,

Then we have the problem of Contract law? What was the offer? The home owner says he would pay "anything". The legal interpretation of that means "I will pay NOTHING".

Remember this is a Contract for Services NOT a Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Contract for goods. When the UCC was adopted, starting in the 1950s, it was decided to get away from the Common Law Rule as to Contracts that to have a valid Contract you must have a Complete meeting of the minds. No meeting of the minds, no Contract. That was and is the Common Law Rule as to Contracts. The UCC, which only applies to the sale of goods, changed that to what did both sides agree to? No meeting of the mind is needed in a contract for the sale of goods, just look at what was actually agreed to.

The problem is the UCC only applies to the Sale of Goods, NOT Real Estate OR Services. When it comes to Real Estate and Services, you retain the Common Law Concept of the Meeting of the mind, no complete meeting of the minds, no contract.

In this case, the City made an offer, he refused to agree to those terms. When the fire hit his home, he made an offer, but by then the original offer had been withdrawn and the city did NOT accept his offer. In cases where the City did accept such offers, since there was NO meeting of the minds as to the terms (i.e. how much was he to pay etc) you still would have no legally enforceable contract.

Now, an exception exists for emergency situations, as when you are rush to the Hospital by an ambulance. The law assumes you would have agreed, even if you later say you would NOT have. But that exception is quite narrow, only when a human life is endanger AND that person can NOT agree or refuse help. In this case, and in most cases in similar situations, you can NOT fit the work of the Fire Department was an Emergency for only property was at risk. Thus as far as the law is concerned anything the city did was a gift, for which the home owner owns no obligations to pay. This is the problem the City has been running across and why it decided to go to the fee system for anyone outside the city limits. If you want to live without fire protection, you can do so, but once a fire hits the city fire department has no duty to protect your property AND if it did there is no way for the Fire Department even to pay for the diesel to drive the pumpers to the fire, let alone pay for the pumpers themselves.

Just pointing out WHY the City did what it did, the law leaves it no choice IF IT WANTS PAID.

[Lorien]

381. Some of the responses make it feel more like "Brownshirts Underground"

The heartless, soulless, unthinking and illogical arguments being made against any form of Public Service here is the kind of hate that really does belong in Freeperville. How low will some people go and still dare to call themselves "Democrats"?

[jayfish]

103. Mike? Is that you?

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2010/09/17/huckabee-says-no-to-insurance-for-people-with-pre-existing-conditions/

It sounds so good, and it’s such a warm message to say we’re not gonna deny anyone from a preexisting condition. Look, I think that sounds terrific, but I want to ask you something from a common sense perspective. Suppose we applied that principle our property insurance. And you can call your insurance agent and say, “I’d like to buy some insurance for my house.” He’d say, “Tell me about your house.” “Well sir, it burned down yesterday, but I’d like to insure it today.” And he’ll say “I’m sorry, but we can’t insure it after it’s already burned.” Well, no preexisting conditions.”

[Swede]

143. Why do you jump to this? I think the US should have universal health care.

This is different. He choose to ignore two reminders to spend $75 to protect his house. The city decided it cannot afford to go to houses that did not pay the tax. Who pays if a firefighter gets permanently injured if they ignore city council?

[sabrina 1]

386. Should people who have no coverage be treated in the ER?

After all, by not having coverage, they are costing the rest of us more! Should they be allowed to die to teach everyone else a lesson that they better find a way to get coverage, or 'too bad'?

This is what you're saying. You can argue 'pragmatically' and make a good case for not treating them, for not putting out fires if someone hasn't paid. IF you want to live in a Republican Utopia!

Or you could treat people and put out their fires, make sure everyone is safe, THEN send them the bill, IF they can afford it. That is a Progressive Society, and one I prefer to live in.

[reggie the dog]

192. life does too work that way

go to the hospital in france, they ask for your insurance card then bill you NOTHING, if you are foreign they treat you then ask you to pay a nominal fee of 22 euros. they dont ask foreigners to pay for the health system before they come here on vacation but they sure as shit do treat the people and let them benefit from the system paid for by others. as for health insurance, EVERYONE HAS IT, you pay in when you work and get a free ride whilst unemployed.

[Gore1FL]

220. In the end, that is the best solution.

If the fire protection is available it needs to be mandatory.

That concept has to fall somewhere in general welfare or common defense.

[Hansel]

328. You're talking about insurance. This is a fee (tax) not insurance.

and the city could have collected it from him on the spot as he offered to pay.

The penalty for not paying your taxes of $75 should not be the loss of all of your belonging and your pets.

[Hansel]

332. A fee is a tax. Seriously. It wasn't an insurance policy. nt

[Pithlet]

28. What sense would billing after the fact make?

The county drove them to a very extreme position in flat out refusing to help. If they imposed this fee service, but then still show up when people don't pay, then they don't get funded, because people won't be compelled to pay if they know the fire department will show up anyway. They still have to have the extra equipment and resources to include the county, even though the county voted against funding them. But they'll have to chase after payment every time they put out a fire in the county, and hope they get payment after the fact? That is hardly fair.

Yes, it's drastic for them to show up and watch it burn if no one's lives are at stake. But the county, with their drastic vote not to fund, drove them to it. Cities and other municipalities simply cannot afford to let other neighboring communities sponge off them like that, especially not in these lean times.

[Hannah Bell]

139. billing after the fact was the previous policy. more than half of the county residents

who made fire calls never paid, & the city had no authority to collect. 75% of municipal fire calls come from outside the municipality. they'd be in court a lot under your fix.

the county reps voted 19-1 to have individual homeowners contract with the city rather than assess taxes to contract county-wide or set up a volunteer dept. presumably that vote represented the wishes of their constituency.

the city sent notices & called each homeowner to offer their services. this homeowner didn't opt in.

[thelordofhell]

199. They did 3 years ago when they set another fire at another of their homes

And they didn't pay. This is a whole family of scofflaws trying to use the media to look sympathetic. But now research is actually happening and the full true story is coming to light.

[Hannah Bell]

217. i keep hearing they'd already had a previous fire. do you have a link for that?

because that makes me wonder about insurance fraud as well as libertarian idiocy.

[thelordofhell]

304. Here ya go

http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=13266558

"It doesn't make sense," she said. "Two or three years ago this house up here caught fire. My son lives there but they waived the fee." Cranick said South Fulton firefighters had also previously helped people but sternly reminded them to pay the fee the next day.

The same son who started the current fire. This family just keeps getting sketchier and sketchier.

[dionysus]

409. they tried billing afterthe fact, and hardly anyone paid. thats why the $75 fee came about.

too many people are missing the whole point of the deal.

a county of 15000+ people with no FD of their own, by choice, are expecting free service from a neighboring "city" of 2500 people. that they refuse to pay for.

it doesnt mean the guy's house should burn, but can't you see the problem here?

[Hannah Bell]

247. and in this case, 2,500 city residents supporting 32K county residents,

more than half of whom never paid when the city used to charge the cost of putting out the fire after it was out.

and when 75% of fire calls came from unincorporated areas.

the county's policy is madness. seeing DU-ers who refuse to recognize how absolutely mad, proposing things that were already tried, and failed, refusing to recognize the county's culpability for this result - is infuriating.

[JuniperLea]

329. Looks like Glenn Beck agrees with you! Aren't you proud?!"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9261426&mesg_id=9261426

[cynatnite]

24. It's not civilized to stand by while someone loses everything over $75...

As I said, they could have billed him after the fact. They could sue if him they'd like. It's unconscionable to stand by and watch someone's home burn to the ground like that. He's a human being for shit's sake.

When people are in trouble, you help them. Period.

You sound like Sharon Angle. :puke:

[Pithlet]

32. No. What would be unconscionable

Is letting our services be bled dry because we let those who don't believe in taxes insist those of us who do share those services we pay for with them. Do you think I want MY house covered with fire services that I paid for with MY tax dollars to burn down because some idiot yahoo teabagger voted no in his area and stretched our fire department too thin? It was too underfunded because they didn't want to pay their taxes? You think that's fair? That's conscionable? Why do you defend that? Why shouldn't that fire department insist that the county pay their way? Why is that so :puke: worthy? I'm not getting it. At all. Yes, it's drastic. But the county was the one that chose the drastic measure of voting not to pay in the first place! They did that.

Yes, this individual suffered a harsh consequence. But if he didn't, the fire department doesn't get funded adequately. I'll repeat that because it's important. The fire department doesn't get funded adequately. What happens when fire departments don't get funded adequately? Why should the city suffer for the county's actions?

[pipoman]

71. Such drama

and bullshit. The fucking county can condemn, levy, encroach, ease, excise, and lien..they would get their fucking money which could be levied at a much higher rate. What you are advocating is really unbelievable on a progressive/liberal board...it is the equivalent of refusing to piss on someone who is on fire..wreaks of conservatism

edit. Does one cent from the county's property tax base, sales tax, general fund, or any other revenue stream pay any portion of the fire dept? I would bet it does. In that case the guy has already paid something toward the service.

[Pithlet]

105. No, it doesn't. They're not even in the same state.

Such drama? Yes, the county can do those things. Guess what? They voted not to! Is anyone even reading any of the stories involved in this? They don't want to pay for the fire department. They voted against it. That's what led to this mess. The city is the one doing this because they feel they shouldn't have to do it for free. And it's you guys who are all up in arms saying they're so evil. I don't get it! It's the frigging assholes in the county who don't want to pay their fair share and think they're entitled to free fire department from a city. That isn't even in the same state. A county that is richer than the city, I might add. I'll also add that the city tried putting out the fires anyway and then billing afterwords. It didn't work. They still weren't getting paid.

[Hannah Bell]

130. i agree. the poster tries to paint the city as enacting libertarian policies when it's the county

who forced the issue by refusing to tax itself as a community for fire service.

[Pithlet]

216. Exactly. They're lucky fire department simply didn't tell them to go pound sand in the first place.

The fire department aren't the bad guys in this. The idiot county voters and their government they voted into place are.

[freebrew]

286. They counld have thrown matches at it...

n/t

[jeff47]

300. You'd lose that bet.

"Does one cent from the county's property tax base, sales tax, general fund, or any other revenue stream pay any portion of the fire dept? I would bet it does."

You'd be wrong.

[Fokker Trip]

21. Disgusting..

Isn't this what Libertarians are hoping for?

They don't want the government to force you to have your house fire put out..

Unbelievable.

[Swamp Rat]

22. On Countdown, the same FD, according to the homeowner, allowed a barn with horses to burn

He did not say (or have a chance to say), whether or not the horses were burned alive and/or died.

[Fumesucker]

26. And yet 86% of DUers who voted in this poll blamed the owner or his county government ..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9254774

[ingac70]

29. ....

http://farm.ewg.org/persondetail.php?custnumber=007236505

[sabrina 1]

66. What has happened to DU?

They just voted for Republicans. The Republican Mayor who was interviewed about this, made the same arguments I have seen made here by several DUers.

I feel sick also tonight. Maybe I don't belong here. I knew for sure I never belonged on FR, but now I'm seriously wondering about this place.

[w4rma]

134. DLCers, Republican trolls and paid propagandists are very good at getting on threads quickly to try

to tilt opinions towards Wall Street laissez faire BS.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

278. That's pretty funny you say that since one of the people defending this action

right here in this thread is a proud socialist and promoter of sites like WSWS and certainly is no right winger.

[sabrina 1]

334. I'm not seeing the connection? This is MY opinion. Why is it

funny that someone who is a Socialist is defending it? I disagree with anyone who is defending it regardless of their political ideology, not sure what your point it.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

347. I didnt reply to you, I replied to the person who said RWers were the ones defending this

I pointed out that no, it isn't just RWers...for example there a progressive in this very thread defending it.

[sabrina 1]

363. Okay, sorry, my mistake then. And btw

I agree, sad to say some progressives are defending it.

[meeshrox]

264. What I don't understand is why the FD even CHECKED if he was on a list or not before they left!

I was in that spot a couple of days ago...hang onto DU...you know this place contentious just before elections.

[reggie the dog]

196. 57% blame the county for its shit policy

only 22 % blame the dude

[glinda]

31. That makes me seriously want to vomit.

[Quantess]

37. People need to return to the agreement that sometimes taxes are necessary.

[EFerrari]

38. People need to return to the agreement that sometimes humanity is necessary.

[Pithlet]

39. The fire department can't work for free. It just can't.

This county voted and decided it wanted to pay with fees and not taxes. As much as we think that's ridiculous, that's what this county wanted to do. So, why should the city, completely different from the county, fight the fires anyway? They basically have to do it for free if the fee isn't paid. And that's what would happen if they put out fires anyway. No one would ever pay the fee. Then this county would get free fire service. The city in no way could afford that. Not to mention it would stretched thinner and everyone would end up waiting longer, thus lives are endangered. They would very likely lose their fire service altogether. Then no one would have fire service. Where is the humanity in that?

[EFerrari]

41. False premise. They could have saved the house and billed.

But only 100 people have already told you that.

[Pithlet]

42. Then why have this stupid arrangement in the first place?

This county waned a fee based arrangment? Then that's what they should get. It makes no sense for this fire department to show up anyway and fight the fires. Why would people pay the fee? They know their house will be saved. They have no incentive to pay it. If the fire department is going to show up anyway? Then fund the damn fire depeartment. The fire departement is just calling them on their bluff, and rightfully so, because they need to get paid. If the fire department has to show up for the fires in county too, then they have to be eqiuped more. They should be funded. THey should be paid.

[EFerrari]

44. You're not an emergency worker, are you?

There's a reason why emergency workers are emergency workers and bureaucrats are bureaucrats and it usually involves saving lives and property.

[Pithlet]

45. You don't live near a community of teabagger type right wing whackadoodles do you?

You might not have be endangered and wait longer because they're sponging off of your community.

[EFerrari]

46. I live in a rural area surrounded by all kinds of people.

I waited this summer with a hose in my hand to see if a grass fire would jump a dry creek and I watched out for my neighbors for hours.

There was no question of who was paying that afternoon.

So you would be wrong.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=268x3976

[Pithlet]

47. Did they vote down a measure to fund any vital services?

Like this county did? Not all of them do. But this one did. And it's wrong. No community should be allowed to get away with it. Everyone suffers when they do. Including the providers. I'm sure it wasn't easy for the firefighters to stand there and watch. I bet it was incredibly difficult. But they had to consider the people in the city whom they serve. It isn't their fault the county is trying to leach off of them. The city residents don't deserve to have a reduced city fire department and the dangers that entails. It's not a matter of beaurocracy. Taxes are a necessity.

[EFerrari]

49. You don't take it out in lives and property.

That's simply wrong.

[Pithlet]

50. It's even more wrong to take it out on the citizens of the city they serve

And that is what will happen if you force the city firefighters to serve the county for free. That's what you're asking them to do. By telling them they can't "take it out" on those who voted not to fund them. They have to work for free. And the citizens of the city will now suffer. And then other Libertarian/baggers in other communities can now know they can get away with it, too. And those of us surrounded by them are endangered.

No. You simply cannot let communities like that get away with it. They HAVE to vote to pay their share. They have to. There is a reason why the fire company they did this. You think it's because they're monsters? Really? Think about it.

[EFerrari]

51. No one is advocating what you suggest. n/t

[Pithlet]

52. That is exactly what is being suggested.

This county voted against funding the fire department. It's that simple.

[EFerrari]

53. Nope. People are suggesting that the way to resolve this issue

is not at a fire. It's that simple. We don't resolve other emergency services at the scene. This is no different

[Pithlet]

54. And the way they're suggesting it

means the fire department would have to work for free. Where would the money come from exactly? See, they tried that way. Fighting the fires anyway? That's what led to the scenario we're talking about. They were losing money. It doesn't work. They were pressured into it by a community that had no interest in paying them. They tried your way. It didn't work. So they said forget it. You don't want to pay us. We're not going to work. You can't insist they work for free. You just can't.

Do you think other communities can hold neighboring communities hostage in a similar manner like that? Just vote to stop paying for vital services just cause they don't wanna? And neighboring communities are bound to keep providing them? Because there's just some moral obligation because people reading the news story will be shocked. And that's fair how?

[EFerrari]

56. No, it doesn't mean that and that has been explained to you over and over again.

Have a good night.

[Pithlet]

58. Yes, it's been explained to me. They're apparently supposed to just keep working for free.

And that's stupid.

[BzaDem]

64. No they are not. They could bill thousands if they had to put out a non-subscriber's fire.

They could bill whatever amount it cost to put out the fire, plus an amount to cover salaries/maintenance/etc. It would be thousands of dollars or more. But it would be far less than the value of the house that burned down.

If you are an uninsured motorist and you get into an accident, you have to pay the cost to repair your car. Not the cost to replace your car (assuming the cost to repair is less than the cost to replace). In this case, the cost to repair a house (putting out the fire) is orders of magnitude less than the cost to replace the house.

[Pithlet]

140. It's not just this one man's house. It's the cost to provide service

for the entire community. They're being asked essentially to be a fire department, with the size and resources of a city AND county, but only be funded for city. That's what's being asked of them. Because they aren't getting any funding from the county. See? Because the county members aren't paying their fees. They weren't paying after the fact when these guys did show up anyway. So they said enough. That's what happened here.

And now some of you are screaming cruelty. I'm not, because they had no other choice at this point. They can't keep being city and county when they only have funding for city. They'll eventually go bankrupt, and then no one will have a fire service. That's not fair to the city residents, who are paying their taxes.

[BzaDem]

404. They can charge for the fire, AND the proportional cost of the truck, maintenance, etc.

They ABSOLUTELY can keep being the city and county fire department with tax funding from the city, and one-time response fees from non-subscribers.

[Hannah Bell]

225. uninsured motorists have to pay because there are state laws with enforcement.

there are no such laws, or enforcement in this case. there are separate jurisdictions, in which the larger entity HAS REPEATEDLY OPTED NOT TO PAY, and wishes to freeride on the smaller entity.

almost like they're trying to bankrupt the small public service.

[jeff47]

306. They tried that

Most of the county residents refused to pay the bill. Since they weren't in the city, the usual tools like liens weren't available.

The evil here is the county that refuses to pay for basic services. Not the city.

[BzaDem]

405. Then they can sue, just like hospitals do. n/t

[jeff47]

411. No, actually they can't.

There was no contract over which to sue.

[reggie the dog]

205. if i could save my neighbors house

i would do it and i would not ask for any money, my 2 year old is learning this by watching cartoons of the litte miss and little mister people. in one mr strong comes up on a farmer who is freaking out because his corn field is burning, mr strong picks up dudes barn, goes to the river, fills it with water and puts out the fire for him BECAUSE HE IS SO STRONG AND HE CAN! the farmer says thank you mr strong says "its nothing" and when the farmer insists on rewarding him mr strong accepts a basket of eggs in return for saving dudes corn and the rest of his land from the fire. why did mr strong do it????? BECAUSE HE COULD!

[Hansel]

335. They are not working for free. Give it a rest. nt

[Hannah Bell]

124. there have been multiple attempts to resolve it. two attempts to establish a volunteer fire dept in

the county, which failed. previous policy was to charge county residents after the fact, failed because most residents never paid.

county reps voted 19-1 for the libertarian solution of having each county resident contract individually with the city -- because they "didn't want to force anyone" to pay for fire protection.

[reggie the dog]

200. so the county reps duped a bunch of yokels

and you say it is fine to let the swindled yokels house burn down????

[Hannah Bell]

219. lol. you're really reaching. do you think the man couldn't afford $6 a month, or not?

do you think he was intelligent enough to apply for usda subsidies, but too stupid to understand when the city wrote him & telephoned him asking if he wanted to buy fire service?

county officials have no reason to "dupe" residents into not getting fire service. it's rather the residents who would pressure the officials not to tax them for fire service.

really, really weak.

[reggie the dog]

248. you assume the county officials work for the people

and not the large landholding corporate farms.....

the yokel in question already learned that you can just pay when they come as his son did when he had a fire, plus the local farm co op may have helped all members apply for subsudies. i see large factory farmers buying politicians all over the world right now and you are asserting that the little people got the county commissioners to put this bullshit 75 dollars for everyone (75 dollars for the huge corporate farm that can easily be 100 times bigger than this dudes land and 75 dollars for someone living in a trailer) policy in place, the rich large landowners should pay way more than 75 dollars per year for this service in property tax and the smaller landowners should pay far less

[sabrina 1]

385. So, what lesson was learned from letting the house burn and

the pets die?

The Insurance Co. will have to pay out more to cover the cost of the house.

All over the country, sympathy is with the homeowner and donations are being raised to help the family rebuild.

That city, and county, will be viewed as pariahs, just as the people in NYC who would not help a woman being raped and murdered to this day, are viewed.

From now on even fewer people will feel the need to pay. The way they will see it is that even if the FD lets their house burn down, they will get a brand new house from the Insurance Co. and people will come to their assistance.

If you're going to teach lessons, you better have some experience in how to do so.

As a lesson, this was a complete failure. As an example of humanity, it was a abysmal.

[_ed_]

82. Yeah,

why do anything if there's not a monetary reward attached? It's not like we can be human beings unless there's a profit motive.

This is a supposedly liberal site, right?

[Jamastiene]

281. Lately, I have wondered if it really is liberal any more.

It sure doesn't look like it.

Welcome to DU...even though you are seeing it at its worst. :(

[Juneboarder]

93. "It makes no sense for this fire department to show up anyway and fight the fires."

I'm a lifeguard, but it makes no sense for me to save a life at the pool or beach.

I'm a bartender, but it makes no sense for me to mix a drink.

You, Pithlet, are making no sense with your statement.

[Egnever]

86. Except they were doing that

and they werent getting paid. So they should just continue to bill and not get paid till they go under?

[Hannah Bell]

111. that was the previous arrangement, & more than half the people in the county who got their fires

fought never paid the bill.

they didn't have to because the city has no authority to collect from county residents.

that's why they moved to fee service.

75% of the fire calls to the municipal fire department were from the surrounding (non-paying) area.

good way to bankrupt the fire dept.

[JuniperLea]

327. Glenn Beck agrees with you... aren't you proud?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9261426&mesg_id=9261426

[Bodhi BloodWave]

114. problem there is that the fire department has no authority to actually collect it

They had already tried the 'defeat the fires and bill afterward' solution, if i remember correctly it was 500 dollars, around or slightly less then 50% of those bills were paid

[Salviati]

333. And an equal number of people also brought up the fact that this is what they used to do...

and 50% of the people whose homes were saved, stiffed the fire department after the fact. Apparently including this guy.

[Parker CA]

40. Kick and Rec!!!!

[Bluebear]

48. USA! USA! USA!

[underseasurveyor]

59. Better goes and talks to the House of Representin' bout this.

Yep more and more it's getting to be an 'Idiocracy out there'.

Sad isn't it.

[underseasurveyor]

61. dupe

[itsrobert]

55. Please provide the link on letting animal die that weren't dead already

Waiting.

[itsrobert]

60. IMO, without evidence either way, the animals would have died

"The couple claims" Just because they claim, doesn't make it a fact.

By Heartland News

SOUTH FULTON, TN (KFVS) - An Obion County couple claims they lost their home, three dogs and a cat last week because South Fulton firefighters refused to put out the blaze.

[onestepforward]

57. K&R

[sabrina 1]

65. They are Republicans. So we should not be surprised.

[Cronus Protagonist]

68. The bank probably owned it before the fire

Now the insurance company owns it. Sucks they lost their personal belonging, but I would have bought myself a nice sized bunch of damn good fire extinguishers and installed fire hoses in several places before I would have refused to pay the fee. And I bet I would have lost a lot less than that in any fire.

I have two fire extinguishers in my apartment right now, and there's a fire hose at the end of the hallway, and three more fire extinguishers - one at each end and the middle of the hallway.

[NYC Liberal]

69. I cannot believe anyone is actually defending this.

Wow.

[katnapped]

72. Wait until the police start doing this!

"In the process of being raped or murdered? Please tender your credit card number and an officer will be dispatched shortly". Because, as you know, costs MONEY for a police force too!

And don't be surprised if a large number of DU'ers are all for it.

[reggie the dog]

206. exactly

[Trekologer]

73. I don't think it is a good idea but something needs to tip the scale

On the interview last night, Mr. Craik stated that a similar situation occurred with his son's property a while back and the fees were not paid then either but the fire department put out the fire anyway and he paid the annual fee afterward. I don't think that I buy the idea that he forgot to pay. I seems that there was a presumption that he wouldn't have to pay the fee and the fire department would come out and fight a fire anyway.

Legally, the fire department was correct: you don't get what you don't pay for. Morally...not so sure about that outcome. But it should serve as a wake up call to the anti-tax-but-keep-my-medicare-or-social-security-flowing/government-is-the-problem-until-I-need-it crowd.

What the county should be doing is either organizing a fire department of their own to cover the unincorporated areas or simply collecting payment for fire protection and distributing it directly to the nearest city. The latter was recently voted down by the county government. Perhaps this will shame the government officials into changing their positions. Or energize the population to change their government officials.

[smirkymonkey]

100. Neither can I. I'm completely speechless.

This isn't the DU I knew when I joined 7 years ago.

[OneGrassRoot]

177. And I especially can't believe some of the DUers defending it...

The world has turned upside down for sure.

I don't understand anything.

Anger -- often righteous anger -- seems to have turned people's hearts stone cold. We used to have empathy and compassion as the common denominator on our side of the aisle. Now we don't even have that.

What a sad commentary.

:cry:

[reggie the dog]

209. dont leave, please dont leave

the more progressives and liberals leave the more the centrists and paid shills get to set the agenda as they had done before the internets came about..... i also have seen quite a change since the days when this site was farther left than smirkingchimp

[smirkymonkey]

394. I am not planning on leaving, I think the progressive/liberal wing

of the Democratic party needs to stick around to give the others hope, because I remember how hopeless I was before I found this site. Thanks for caring :hi:

[Tsiyu]

74. I read these threads with some amazement

Privatized everything is what the Teabaggers and their generous benefactors want.

Privatized military, killing, maiming and torturing with impunity to make a fortune off corporate wars.

Privatized healthcare, making a fortune allowing thousands to die for lack of money.

Privatized prisons making a fortune destroying families and sending kids into their gulags only for those kids to face a lifetime of indentured servitude to the System.

De-regulation of financial markets and lending practices, causing massive numbers of people to LOSE THEIR HOMES. Lack of affordable housing so that millions HAVE NO HOMES TO BEGIN WITH.

Privatization of vote-counting systems...

Elimination of and lack of creation of new programs to help the poor, the disabled, the homeless, so that they are treated as human refuse and allowed to be harrassed, tormented and left to die on the streets.

And now one house burns down and suddenly everyone cares about the horrible consequences a mere $75 can make to someone's life? Amazing that's all it took.

All I can guess is that all of the "Suddenly-outraged-over-how-money-is-more-important-than-humanity" types are homeowners and all at once they feel it personally. They see themselves as potential victims of this sort of society.

It's not a good feeling, is it?

[reggie the dog]

212. we are not suddenly outraged

the outrage has been there for years, long before i bought my 2 bedroom condo....

[VMI Dem]

75. Those firefighters are pieces of shit.

[lunatica]

76. Everyone who thinks this is justified in the name of money is disgusting

This is after reading this thread. DUers who are arguing that this is justified, even in a minor way are disgusting.

Go ahead and alert me. I give a fuck.

[Tsiyu]

79. I've felt the same way many times on DU

Everyone has their triggers.


I couldn't let someone's house burn. No matter their party or religion or whatever.

But there are a lot of things going on I am having trouble comprehending these days...and I have felt rather alone in that.

Not minding all the new company, just surprised at what it takes to wake people up.

[reggie the dog]

214. i cant believe how many people here

have views which are seen as extreme right wing in France, the country i have lived in for the past 7 and a half years......my birth country has gone to shit

[_ed_]

83. Don't let anyone tell you

that this is a liberal or progressive website. It's just a Democratic Party website now. If it's just for Dems, then you have to put up with "Reagan Democrats" and the like that aren't actually liberals or believe in progressive principles. The surest sign is when people defend stuff like this, especially if their argument concerns money. Anyone who cares about money over people just isn't a liberal, period.

[reggie the dog]

202. god damned right you are!!!

[Hansel]

337. Nice try however...

some of the people making the arguments that are so disturbing are self professed "liberals" who hate Obama because he is a corporatist and too right wing and are are constantly making the same argument against anyone who doesn't agree with them that you are trying to make.

Your generalizations that all of those who claim to be liberals and progressives are saints while Democrats are all Reagan Dems falls straight through the floor by just taking a cursory look at who is making which arguments.

[Odin2005]

77. I can't beleive people are actually defending this shit.

[blue_roses_lib]

194. +1. nt

[reggie the dog]

215. there is no way the people defending this are liberals or progressives

they may vote democrat but they are centrists, blue dogs, republicans fucking with us or paid shills

[Hansel]

341. Oh give it a rest.

Some of the people making some of these arguments are constantly claiming to be great liberals who hate Obama because he is so far to the right.

The people who are making these arguments are assholes and it doesn't matter which type of Dem they are. Your attempts to try to make all "real" liberals seem like saints who couldn't think this way and trying to use this tragedy to say that moderate Democrats are all horrible hateful people that think like this is inappropriate. Especially based on who is making what arguments.

This "us versus them" crap in terms of who is the most saintly is ridiculous. This isn't a liberal versus Democrat discussion. This is a few individuals that clearly are too emotional and rabidly passionate about hate that they can't stop to think for 2 seconds about what they are saying. Their hate for the Tea Party and the right is making them irrational.

[reggie the dog]

401. liberals are not saints

we have our faults like anyone; i just dont like seeing "marxists" claim it is ok to let this happen. I see this as a liberal versus republican thing, even most moderate dems would likely want the fire put out because moderate dems do take to heart some liberal ideas like the idea that society should exist and that people should be helped, i made the comment because some of the people arguing in favor of this shit, like you said, claim to be angry liberals who dont like obama, perhaps they are angry republicans???

[Brewman_Jax]

78. The teabaggers' libertarian paradise

isn't such a paradise after all.

For too many of the teabagger persuasion, good government gives ME money, services, etc.; bad government gives you/those people/them money, services, etc.

[struggle4progress]

80. If the people of Obion County are upset by this, they can tax themselves enough

to fund a county fire department or to pay for municipal FD coverage throughout the county. If the people of Tennessee are upset by this, they can tax themselves enough to fund fire departments covering the entire state. If people of the United States are upset by this, we can tax ourselves enough to fund fire departments covering the entire country

If you live in Obion County and don't like reading stories like this, you can lean on county government to work out more satisfactory coverage throughout the county. If you live in Tennessee and don't like reading stories like this, you can lean on state government to work out more satisfactory coverage throughout the state. If you live elsewhere in the United states and don't like reading stories like this, you can lean on the federal government to provide funding for more satisfactory coverage options throughout the country

Bitchin & whinin is just empty noise

[HughMoran]

81. It's disgusting

I agree - K&R

[Scout]

84. just curious, how did the fire start?

and why didn't the homeowners rescue their pets?

when i had a fire at my house, the first thing i did AFTER calling fire department was get my dog and my bird out.

[_ed_]

85. As a former volunteer firefigher in a rural area

and a current friend of several firefighters, I'll just go ahead and say it:

These assholes aren't real firefighters. Every firefighter I know would have told the mayor to go fuck himself and put out the blaze and let the chips fall where they may.

These "fire-watchers" are moral and physical cowards.

[EFerrari]

87. I know guys in San Francisco

in the department and I can't imagine a single one of them going along with this. Even in these times, in this economy when good jobs are hard to come by. There's no way.

[_ed_]

88. Right.

Being a firefighter isn't just a job where you cash a check. It's about serving your community. These pieces of human filth don't give a shit about their community.

[mkultra]

94. your out of line and over the top

They were following orders. It has been clearly shown that this guy was trying to dodge the fee intentionally. he clearly has no respect for the fire department or his community. Fire departments require money to operate and sloughing that burden off to the rest of the community doesn't make you a martyr.

[_ed_]

137. "They were following orders"

Great argument. Where have I heard that before?

I gave the perspective of a firefighter. You gave the perspective of a person who is concerned fees and money. Got it.

Only on DU: The former firefighter who thinks these guys are cowards is "out of line," but the greedy jerks who only care about money are the reasonable ones.

[Bluerthanblue]

144. I don't believe you are out of line- I don't

agree with the characterization of them 'less than human'- but they didn't act like any firefighters (professional OR volunteer) that I've ever known.

What about homeowners who are behind in their property taxes? There are many people in that situation in our town- they haven't contributed the funds needed for the support of our local volunteer Dept, yet no one suggests letting those homes burn down?

This situation is beyond defensible.

:hi:

[mkultra]

169. because those people are part of a collective that funds fire services

and the city WILL collect the taxes eventually. The valuable services those men provide are worth more the giant middle finger.

[mkultra]

168. This is a small city fire department that offers extended service to people

in rural areas if they subscribe to the system. So to you, they are cowards because they didn't respond to someones call that didn't subscribe? They did their job and are under no obligation to risk life and limb to save this douchebags property. This guy intentionally didn't buy the service believing all along they would put out his house anyway. I say screw him. If he doesn't have any respect for the fire department or his community, then his house is his problem.

[Citizen Kang]

348. This is over the top

The fire fighters made sure the scene was safe and that no human lives were in jeopardy. They made sure the fire was contained and did not spread to the adjacent property where the people did pay to have fire service. All that was lost were possessions. Did they train you to risk your life for supposed animals in a structure when fighting a fire? If so, that is one screwy fire academy you attended.

You attack the firefighters who did their jobs, kept the fire from spreading and kept human lives safe. But no hate for the politicians who implemented this system.

Sorry pal, the firefighters did their job here. They are not to blame.

[_ed_]

389. I'm not your pal

and I don't give a good goddamn whether or not you think I'm out of line. And I could care even less about your uninformed ideas about fighting fires.

I would have helped the family. You wouldn't. Got it.

[Bluerthanblue]

138. WORD !

as someone who was married to both a volunteer firefighter in rural NH and a professional FireFighter EMT- I completely agree.

:hi:

[Lorien]

382. ...

:thumbsup: :yourock:

[mkultra]

89. you should blame the douche who didnt pay

his quote was "i thought if i didn't pay, they would come anyway"

When you get multiple warnings and you still ignore reality, you get the concrete.

Its cartoonish to think that putting out a house fire is not mortally dangerous to firemen. Its also cartoonish to think that they should risk their lives for cats and dogs.

[moondust]

90. On Countdown he said he forgot.

My first reaction was also to assume that he was an anti-government teabagger type who refused to pay his taxes and therefore shouldn't expect services. Then on Countdown he said he "forgot" to pay the fee. I don't know what the truth is.

[mkultra]

91. one of the most recent articles quoted him as saying that he was refusing to pay

and he payed the cost.

[seabeyond]

95. he lied. he was quoted as saying he thought they would put out fire even if you didnt pay.

his son didnt pay. had a fire and they came out and put it out. he had the same expectation. on olberman... he forgot.

they are sent out a notice to pay. then they get a call to pay. not a matter of forgetting but chosing not to pay.

[mkultra]

132. "I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong,"

said Gene Cranick.

http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-the-ground-104052668.html

[seabeyond]

136. yup

i was posting quote all over last night adn got tired of finding, copying and pasting.... thanks.

[reggie the dog]

218. so to teach him a lesson about the importance of 75 dollars

or roughly 5 grams of weed up in chicago, you let his house burn down, over 5 fat joints worth of fucking paper called money???

[mkultra]

223. Or, to show him that collective community services are worth while enough

to not shit on and still expect service.

[reggie the dog]

244. so let a family lose everything to teach a lesson????

yeah this one little farmer is going to change the opt out law put in place by county officials working for the factory farm corporation that pays for their campaigns

[mkultra]

254. Its not an opt out law. Its an opt in service

Its people like this guy who don't see any need for collective services. As far as im concerned, its fools like him that make real social services impossible in america. He needs to pay the cost of his convictions.

[TwilightGardener]

97. Does $75 make a fire less mortally dangerous?

[mkultra]

113. It makes it an obligation

Is your house not worth $75?

[TwilightGardener]

118. I see putting out a fire as an obligation no matter who paid what.

[mkultra]

131. well, thats the part of your assumption that isnt true.

No one is obligated to risk their lives putting out a fire unless they agree to it ahead of time. Thats what fire covenants are all about. This guy didn't give a shit about the fire department or his community. He reaped what he sowed.

[TwilightGardener]

135. Public servants serve the public, no matter who's on record for having

paid taxes or fees for this or that (and records can be wrong). It doesn't serve the public to have the fire manpower and equipment stand by for hours watching a fire. The time to judge is not during a disaster. Everything can be sorted out when public safety is no longer endangered.

[mkultra]

164. Those people are outside the area of responsibility for those public servants

That is a CITY fire department that will come out to a rural area for fire protection if you choose to join the service. They are under no obligation to help anyone anywhere. They offer extended service for an additional fee. They didn't come out and watch it burn, they just didn't respond. When the neighbors grass(the one who DID buy the service) caught on fire, they responded and put that out.

Those pricks who choose not to buy the service don't get it for free.

[TwilightGardener]

172. The FD served the area under subscription. It doesn't serve the neighbors

who paid if the wind had picked up or shifted and the fire moved beyond control or required more responding units, or a propane tank had exploded, or their trees and landscaping burned, or smoke/water damage occurred from trying to keep it from spreading. As I'd said before, I'd be livid to watch firefighters standing by my house OVER HERE rather than putting it out next door, OVER THERE, no matter how much of a jackass my neighbor was. The time to sort this out is not during an emergency, and a fire is an emergency, and the humane and wisest thing to do is put it out if the units can respond and do so. Doesn't matter if they've tried billing afterward and the non-subscribing folks still don't pay. You can't assume this person won't based on what others have done--and the laws can be changed to extract payment or property from those who were served. Public entities and utilities generally get their money for services rendered one way or another. But some really dumb or forgetful or mentally slow people may never get their lives back in order (we all need protection from our own bad choices at times), and someone may indeed lose a life inadvertently in a situation like this.

[mkultra]

239. well, outside of municipality

Those who are paying the subscription get service. If it is declared a county emergency, funds are released and other departments join in.


This guy BLATANTLY flaunted buy a subscription believing they would still help him. Essentially putting the burden of the equipment and facilities costs on those people who DO pay while still hoping to get the benefit.

They didn't come out and "sort it out" he called and they verified he was not serviced and didn't respond.

This is like trying to buy auto insurance after you have a wreck. Its a COLLECTIVE to offset the costs for the benefit of the communal unit.

[TwilightGardener]

311. Bullshit on the insurance argument--insurance is generally for profit, it's

not a public service. You can't sign up and receive reimbursement the day after you get into a wreck because then State Farm would instantly lose money on you. Public fire and police service only get what it costs to protect you, no profit. If he had paid the $75 the week before, the day before, or at the scene of the fire, it makes no difference to the department if they decided that it takes $75 per household to put out fires. Withholding protection is just meant to make an example of him, not a sudden hard cost decision--they wanted his head on a pike. I guess we're lucky this didn't happen to someone who wasn't so obviously an irresponsible dick--someone who lived in a trailer or shack, close to the bone, and really didn't have $75, or an elderly lady who misplaced the bill or was confused about it. Or someone who didn't realize that someone else in their household was actually home, sleeping.

[mkultra]

396. nope is exactly the same

The only difference is that the for profit system can reject people from participating based on risk assesment and they charge more to make a profit.


Fire departments work exactly the same way. You know that the estimate to put out a house fire is somewhere around 30K. The ONLY reason that a victim doesn't pay that cost is because the entire community shares the risk to gain security. This is exactly how insurance works.


If you picked up an auto policy the week before and had a wreck, then they would pay.


This happened specifically BECAUSE this guy was able and willing and had decided to shirk the service. They had sent him several letters and had gotten calls from the fire department on several occasions about dangerous burning practices based on complaints from neighbors who pay for the service. This info is all in the stories.

[COLGATE4]

273. That's just wishful thinking, unsubstantiated by fact and law. If

they provide the service and then try to bill him he can tell them to stuff the bill where the sun doesn't shine and the town doesn't have any recourse. That's why they gave up that system, when 50% of those who they billed just didn't pay. End of story. So let's not pretend that the town can suddenly make up all the lost revenues by sprinking pixie dust or something.

[TwilightGardener]

305. What? What is wishful thinking? Everyone can tell everyone they owe

to stuff it, it doesn't usually work--not for long. Especially not when one is dealing with city and county services. And aside from many of the reasons why they shouldn't have let the house burn is the fact that sometimes records are wrong or not updated, and clerks make mistakes--and if the man offered to pay on the spot or offers to pay when billed, it's pure spite and a desire to make an example of him that they let his house and pets burn up and endangered the neighbors. That is unconscionable. City and county funding issues are to be dealt with and decided in public halls, not over the burning heap of someone's property.

[mkultra]

399. And this issue had already been dealt with

the county voted down a measure to provide fire services to the entire district. This system is the one that works.

He let his own pets die. It took two hours for the fire to go from the trash pile to his house.

[mkultra]

398. the actual number of non payers is 70%

Those people that have just been through a house fire are far less likely to pay a bill like that. Some say it costs somewhere around 30K to put out a house fire in a regular city.

[reggie the dog]

222. i teach kids and i never ask if their parents pay taxes

over half of us pay no income tax here in france, income tax funds our schools, should i refuse to teach to the kids of parents who pay no taxes???

[mkultra]

226. If your services where subscription based

And someone brought their child in, fully capable of paying, and simply demanded services for free, would you still teach them?

[reggie the dog]

237. yes

because i know that the govt will be on their asses to collect the taxes, i live in a civilized country now where people cannot opt out of paying for basic social services (including health care)

were it subscription based i would teach the kid and let the administration sort it out

[mkultra]

240. yeah, the part where you are mistaken is the belief that this was a tax.

Its not.

[reggie the dog]

243. i know it is not a tax

that is why i pointed out that in civilized countries there is no option of opting out of paying for public services unless your reason for not paying is poverty

[mkultra]

246. do you want a fucking cookie

your disdain for america doesn't change the reality of this situation.

[reggie the dog]

250. move out of the usa and you will see it for the shithole it is

i was born and raised in the usa by american parents, i left when i was 24 and discovered civilization here in france and in all of western europe, the usa is homophobic, backwards, overly religious, and in dire need of a welfare state. i have disdain for fox news to because i know that "liberation" and the bbc do such a better job why is it wrong to have disdain for the usa when they are fucking up so badly?

[Hissyspit]

211. Bullshit.

[mkultra]

242. nope, its the truth.

[_ed_]

390. Got it, Glenn

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/05/beck-producer-mock-firefighters/

[mkultra]

400. This guy is one of these no tax people

That doesn't believe in paying for collective community services. he got what he deserved. no lives where lost, only possessions.

[_ed_]

391. Thanks, Glenn

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/05/beck-producer-mock-firefighters/

Does it even bother you that you're parroting Glenn Beck? Or is that intentional?

[aikoaiko]

92. Sometimes a tragedy is needed so that people understand the importance of social goods

I feel bad for the animals and the family, but the homeowner chose this himself, his family, and pets.

[Juneboarder]

96. I feel bad for you...

humanity has escaped from your mind.

[pecwae]

160. No kidding!

Incredible what I've been reading here. Judging from these threads there's more than one whose humanity comes into question.

[aikoaiko]

197. Thank you for your thoughts and feelings.

But maybe this tragedy will lead to more people supporting their fire departments and other social goods better and that may save more lives in the long run (human and otherwise).

[Juneboarder]

207. As a resident of the city

they do pay taxes. They may not have paid their measly $75 annual fee for "protection", however I'm sure the fire department accepts tax dollars regardless of the $75 fee. If they are accepting tax dollars, then this poor family has been paying the fire department. Hopefully nothing this unfortunate ever happens to you or someone close to you.

[aikoaiko]

224. Bad things have happened to me and mine, and, I'm sure, shall again happen.

I deeply regret my decisions that, in part, brought about those decisions. And those are mine to own and live with.

As I understand it, this person was not a resident of the city, but of the county where taxes are lower because they do not contribute the some of the social goods others pay for in city taxes. To receive services, people pay directly. $75 is really a very low fee for fire department services. Paying for additional services is common in many unincorporated areas.

[Juneboarder]

229. As a county resident they pay taxes too...

I would bet the fire department sees at least a penny from those county residents. It's sick and twisted that government officials let it get to this point. It's sick and twisted that civil servants bow down from their duties. It's sick and twisted that we live in an in-humane society, where people try and justify a family's home burning down because they didn't pay $75.

[mkultra]

257. they are not residents of the city

Volunteer fire departments in small towns are completely city funded. municipal property tax pays their budget and this guy is rural and pays no city millage.


I lived in a small town and this was the way it was. If you lived outside of town in the boondocks, and you wanted fire service, you could buy it for a very SMALL yearly fee.


You don't get to buy car insurance after you have a wreck.

[Juneboarder]

283. VOLUNTEER fire departments.

Look at the first word in that trio there. Volunteer. A volunteer looks beyond the funding at the time of a crisis. A volunteer is there to help those in need without expectations. If a firefighter was at your house while it was burning and refused to put it out because you didn't pay $75 would you be okay with that? Would you just sit there on the curb, rest your hand on your head and go boy, what an idiot I am for not paying my annual fire fee. I guess I'll rebuild my home, pay for rent in the mean time, accept that I lost priceless photos that cannot be replaced, lose my animals that I love...

No. You'd fight, that is human nature. Acting humanely towards a neighbor SHOULD be just as much an act of human nature; not hate and self entitlement (just because you were lucky enough to pay your $75).

[mkultra]

299. The equipment didnt volunteer

It costs money. You don't get to buy car insurance after you wreck your car. Same thing applies here. And YES, i might be angry, but i would be smart enough to know its my fault. I would also be smart enough to buy the damn service though.

[Juneboarder]

322. I disagree...

an auto wreck happens in a matter of seconds. We are talking about a fire, where the homeowner called the appropriate authority for help and they chose not to help over $75. They chose to sit and do nothing for hours and let the man watch his home eventually burn. That is sadistic and unreal in a legit world. It's power control at its finest.

[happyslug]

358. The "appropriate authority " was his COUNTY Government, which refused to provide the service

This house was NOT in the city, but outside the city limits, as such the City Fire Department was NOT the "appropriate authority". Tennessee is a State where you can have places where there is no local Government, this man decided to live is such an area. Thus he could only look to his County and State for Fire Protection NOT the City he did NOT live in.

Remember, to call the City in question the "appropriate authority" is like saying, New York City is the "appropriate authority", for the simple reason New York City has a Fire Department. Neither the City in Question NOR New York City had jurisdiction over the area where the fire occurred. Thus NEITHER was the "appropriate authority". The nearest "appropriate authority" was the County Government, and it has long decided NOT to provide that service. The problem is the County not the City, the City is trying to solve the problem caused by the County's refusal to fulfill that duty.

Furthermore, even Volunteer Fire Departments are NOT Free, someone has to pay for the Diesel, the equipments, the insurance and the training. None of which is cheap. If you want fire protection you have to be willing to pay for it, and this county has decided NOT to pay for it.

[mkultra]

395. It is probably more about this douchbags disdain for collective public service

We pay taxes to support fire service in municipalities because as a whole, we can bear the cost but individually we cannot. We pay a small share of a collective that maintains and keeps ready a service that we may need in an emergency.


This guy clearly doesn't give a damn about the concept of collective well being and gets exactly what he deserves. He is one of those "ownership society" people but expects a helping hand when he needs it.

Surprisingly, he believes in home owners insurance, so he has that going for him.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

98. Or not. He said he forgot to pay. That may even be true. -nt

[seabeyond]

107. he had said earlier he didnt pay because he thought they would come out anyway

and put out fire

his son didnt pay and had a fire and they came out and put it out

they send a notice. then follow it up with a call (when they forget)

[TwilightGardener]

99. No. Really, a tragedy is not needed. Especially when the manpower

and equipment are on the scene. No one should lose everything, including innocent animals, no matter how stupid, willful, distracted, teabaggish, penny-pinching, forgetful, confused, or ignorant. And no neighbor should have to wait next door, breathing the smoke and watching the cinders, praying that this fire dept. really has the situation under control while the fire goes on and on.

[CBR]

101. Maybe the "example" tragedy will hit a little closer to home next time. nt

[EmeraldCityGrl]

104. On some level I agree with you.

I actually lost sleep over this story last night. I was horrified that this could happen in this country, especially in a small
community the type that always boasts how they take care of their own, how they are the real Americans and a Katrina
type tragedy could never happen to them because they would all pitch in and get the job done. They don't need no
damn FEMA.

Yeah, I have the phone numbers of all the Obion County officials and I was going to call today and speak my
mind and if there was a fund to help the Carick family I was ready to donate. Then I read Mrs. Caricks quote that stated she
didn't blame the firemen, they were just "doing as they were told." Oh well in that case it's ok I quess. I watched Mr.
Carick's interview with Keith Olbermann and sorry to say he struck me as the kind of man that wants "guvment" out of
his life. There was such a lack of outrage. He was so ready to accept the consequences of his forgetfulness and seemed to
completely lack the capacity to understand the candidates he most likely votes for each election is supporting a way of government
that acts against his best interests. All so that he can have the choice to decide whether or not to spend a lousy $75 a year
for fire protection. The entire situation is sad beyond belief.

[Bluenorthwest]

129. I saw that interview. The did not speak of politics, Parties nor

candidates. Just hard to comprehend that you get 'struck' with a bunch of detailed information and then declare it to be true. To me, he looked like a traumatized person, stunned. You were expecting him to orate on partisan politics in front of the rubble of his home?
You do not know how he votes, do you? If so, where did you hear this?

[reggie the dog]

227. you should still call

this guy is duped, who pays more in property taxes a small family farm owner or the large company who does factory farming??? who buys the local politicans??? who can afford to put out their own fires???? this guy is duped into thinking he got what he deserves while the rich fucking factory farm corporation is the real winner by paying lower taxes for a service they probably provide for themselves anyways....

[EmeraldCityGrl]

262. The Cranicks own Gene Cranick Farms.

They are not a small time operation. They are one of the largest property owners in the county. So, makes you wonder if there was more to this than
what's been reported. Maybe there were some political payback or bad feeling on the part of someone making the decision whether or not
they should have been helped. Just seems to be so viciously mean it's hard to believe it's the norm for these people. In the end it doesn't matter
the Cranicks net worth, every human being in that county deserves the right to basic emergency services whether the bill is paid or not.

[reggie the dog]

271. gene cranick farms

is not big agro biz, corporate farms have holdings which are often far more than an entire county worth of land, some own plots of land as big as some of our smaller states, also how many family members are a part of it??? perhaps they pooled together all the land held by their family into one company to compete with the truly big agro biz companies? if that is the case their "large farm" is nothing more than a co op that happens to be amongst family members

[EmeraldCityGrl]

290. Very true. My point is just that

Mr. Cranick is not a stupid man and it's a shame there are so many people like that that are willing
to accept their fate when their local government acts so irresponsibly.

[reggie the dog]

292. i am with you 100% on that

[flvegan]

102. It doesn't have to be either/or.

We can still be human, and still get paid for services.

As I stated before, the fire department should have responded and done what they could about the fire and the pets. Then they should have billed and subsequently liened the property for the cost of putting the fire out.

If the FD is concerned about not getting paid, a Resolution should be put up and supported that makes the FD lien on par with property taxes, so that it would take priority in title as an encumbrance on the property.

Simple, see?

[aikoaiko]

106. Or, simpler still, the county can charge the taxes/fees on everyone.

[flvegan]

108. Didn't they already put that up for vote?

I thought I read that they tried that and it was voted down.

[aikoaiko]

109. True, but I was responding to what I thought was best --

The problem with post hoc pay for services like firefighting is that it still leads to free loading. I suggested making the post hoc fee cost plus penalty and someone suggested that it would lead to arson.

I dunno.

I suppose the people in that county voted and got what they wanted.

[flvegan]

110. Ah, okay.

I understand. I agree, ideally fire services would be an ad valorem assessment paid with the taxes.

[reggie the dog]

228. voted down by the county reps who are bought and paid for

by the local factory farming corporation who wants to pay lower taxes at all costs in their efforts to "think of shareholders"

[Hannah Bell]

122. the problem is the separate jurisdictions, county & city. the city residents can't "vote"

to tell the county what to do.

when they previously charged after the fact, the majority of county residents who got their fires fought by the city never paid.

the only remedy i can think of is suing each county resident for costs -- which gets expensive.

everybody's crying in their beer about the inhumanity -- fact is, the policy came about because of the county residents' freeloading & willful refusal to establish a sane fire protection policy in their jurisdiction.

it's funny to see DUers painting the city as libertarian, when it's the libertarians in the county who forced the policy.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

128. I'm so happy we don't have that "county" bullshit here.

There's federal, state, and municipality. Period. Fire departments are state level, with branches in each city. And they do their job rather well.

[happyslug]

370. No municipality in this area

Wikipedia says Brazil and Mexico have no unincorporated areas (as does New England and New Jersey).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area

When Townships are discussed in Wikipedia, it shows that Pennsylvania and New Jersey follow the same pattern, each have several townships in each county and no land, other then in a Borough or City, is outside and township. Thus these states have no area outside a some sort of local government.

Now, outside of Texas, Vermont and the 13 original States, every area of the US was surveyed by the Federal Government into Townships. These are different from the Townships of Pennsylvania in that these are form only for sale of the land under the Land Ordinance of 1785 along with the related Northwest Ordinance of 1787. While the Northwest Ordinance only covered right is now called the Midwest, the land ordinance of 1785 was extended to the rest of the US (outside of the 13 original states, Vermont and Texas) when those areas were settled.

Now, the midwest states (the old Northwest, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota) retain much of the Land Ordinance and the Northwest Ordinances use of the term Township, but modified them to make them more effective units of local Government (Thus the difference between "Civil Townships" which are local governmental units, and "Survey Townships" which were product of the Land Ordinance of 1785). The Midwestern States tended to followed Pennsylvania in retaining Townships as local government unless there were annexed into a city.

For more on the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Ordinance

For the related Land Ordinance of 1785 see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Ordinance_of_1785

Wikipedia on Township as used in the US:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Township_%28United_States%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_township

On the other hand the South followed Virginia's lead and did NOT have any local Government. The Northwest Ordinance Township lines were used to sell land, and then NOT used as any form of local government. This reflects the traditional difference between the North and the South. The North Emphasis local Government and the need for such Government to provide local services even at the cost of higher taxes. The South preferred no taxes and thus no local Government unless the people agreed to form one in the form of a corporate Municipality i.e. a City.

Tennessee follows Virginia role, it has NO local Government EXCEPT Municipalities that ask for and get a Corporate Charter from the State. Thus outside the City, you have No local Government. When I lived in Texas was the first time I ran across this, coming from Pennsylvania where if they was no City or Boroughs (A name used in the Pennsylvania Legal System meaning a small City), there was some sort of Township government. Almost all the Pennsylvania Local Volunteer Fire Departments are formed on Township lines (Cities, as that term in used in Pennsylvania, almost never have a Volunteer Fire Department, instead have paid Fire Department, boroughs can and do have both and some of the First Class Townships also tend to have both Volunteers and professional full time Fire Departments).

My point here, is Tennessee is like the rest of the South, unless it is provided by the State or County Government, outside of Chartered Corporate Cities, you have no local Government to provide such services. Most have School Districts that cover such areas, but those Government units are restricted to Education, and tend to be under funded for that purpose (thus can NOT expand and become an effective local Government).

This has been a difference between the Rest of the US and the South since the 1700s, it was noted even in the 1600s how different the two Sections were when it came to local government AND care for your fellow citizen. The North, thought nothing of providing such local government and support (including fire protection) but the South see no reason to do so. It is a cultural difference that has survived 400 years, and may survive another 400 years.

[SidDithers]

112. They should have put the fire out...

and then billed him the full cost of the response.

There's no way in hell that they should have let the house burn. There should be a moral obligation to put out the fire, and worry about the financials later.

Sid

[Bodhi BloodWave]

119. ok, they put out the fire, send a bill to the owner

and the owner refuse to pay the bill, what then? That fire department has no way or authority to collect money from the area that fire was in if they don't pay it

[SidDithers]

121. Then you get a judgement against the homeowner...

enforced through garnishment if necessary.

Or you negotiate a settlement, to recoup a portion of the cost.

Or you forgive the debt.


What you don't do is let the house burn down.


Sid

[COLGATE4]

141. That sounds wonderful, but how exactly do you propose that

they do that? There's no underlying legal agreement that would permit a garnishment. Assuming that the firefighters had gone ahead, put out the fire and then tried to bill him he gets a lawyer who tells the court that the firefighters were acting as "officious intermeddlers", i.e. they acted when there was no legal basis to act. It's the same proposition as your coming home and finding one of your neighbors thought your house needed paint so he painted it for you. Do you owe him for the paint job? ( A. No, you don't.) Likewise, if there's no underlying legal basis for garnishment or suit, then what makes you think that the homeowner would like to 'negotiate' anything? So, you're left with 'forgive the debt', exactly the situation that the law requiring the annual fee was designed to avoid.

[SidDithers]

146. I guess if the Fire Department shows up...

and the homeowner tells them to go away, but they put the fire out anyway, they could be considered "officious intermeddlers" :)

But if they show up and the homeowner gives consent for them to put out the fire, would that constitute an agreement that could be enforced?

No argument that it's a complicated situation. Thank dog it's not something that I have to personally worry about.

Sid

[COLGATE4]

149. Sure - if the homeowner gives them permission, then they

would have entered into a contract. The big problem there would be the amount he would have to pay, assuming that the fire people at the scene even had the authority to enter into such a contract.

[Hannah Bell]

213. they used to bill the residents after they'd put out the fires. more than half of them never paid.

moreover, the county twice voted down proposals to start volunteer fire depts.

19-1 they voted to let individuals contract for fire service with municipalities -- because they "don't want to force anyone" to pay for fire protection.

face it, they're a bunch of freeloaders who want service but don't want to pay.

that, combined with the fact that this guy had a fire problem in the past, ignored notification in writing and by phone about the service, & had his son burning on his property, which is how the fire started -- & has a homeowners policy that will pay for it (how did he get such a policy?) -- as well as said son assaulting the fire chief & going on national tv to bad-mouth the fire department --

something funny in this picture.

[jeff47]

307. Can't sign the contract in that situation

"But if they show up and the homeowner gives consent for them to put out the fire, would that constitute an agreement that could be enforced?"

I don't think you could form a legally binding agreement in that situation. This situation is one step away from literally holding a gun to the homeowner's head. They'd claim they were forced to sign under duress, and void the contract.

[seabeyond]

142. 50% of the people opt out on payment. leaving the local taxes from city to pay.

what happens when this county breaks the back of the cities FD? that is located in another state.

court fees cost money. cheaper to right it all off.

[Hannah Bell]

147. 75% of calls to the municipal fire depts are from outside, & under the previous

policy of charging after the fact, more than half of the callers never paid up.

the city would be in court pretty regularly.

adding more costs.

the city's (south fulton) population is <3000.

the county's population is 32K. it has no fire service, & relies on the fire depts of 5 cities within it to protect its unincorporated residents.

three now charge fees, two still do it "for the love" & try to get the freeloaders to pay after the fact.

[Mimosa]

406. Majority of 32K people don't to have a fire dept?

Dumb. Sorry.

[pecwae]

161. So what?

Really, so the fuck what? Man, this is all about the fucking almighty dollar with too many posters. Next we'll be scolded for not displaying "personal responsibility". Who the fuck does that sound like?

[reggie the dog]

231. not only that

the people caring about legal contracts etc also have marx as their avatar yet think it is ok to let libertarian shit like this happen.

[Dawson Leery]

155. Perhaps the next time the South Fulton TN fire department

passed the boot around, everyone should ignore it.

[Rex]

189. Totally agree, this is social regression at its finest.

I wonder if the FD were all Glenn Beck listeners?

[Dappleganger]

117. What if it was homeless family in an abandoned home

which hadn't paid the fire tax. Would they have let that burn to the ground too?

[mainer]

171. Yes. After ensuring no human life was in danger.

You are talking about a home that's being squatted in, right?

[Dappleganger]

295. Yes, squatters.

And they are everywhere in FL.

[Name removed]

120. Deleted message

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

[ck4829]

123. Awful. K&R.

[Bluerthanblue]

133. being human comes ahead of politics- we treat others the way we

would hope they would treat us-

If we judge who is worthy of our help in times of emergencies, who the hell to we think 'we' are?

This is what I'd expect from 'libertarian/right-wing conservatives' every man for himself, or for himself and his 'buddies'-

screw that.

[hayu_lol]

166. The city in Kentucky paid taxes to support their CITY fire...

department. The city made an offer to service the large rural area for $75/year per residence. The county commissioners in the TENNESSEE county put the matter to a vote of the Tennessee county residents and the residents(democracy at work)voted the issue down.

What could be clearer than that.

The city, approx. 3000 people, did pay the taxes for the fire dept. Should they also pay taxes to support massive legal staff to handle inter-state/inter-county incidents of non-payment?

The fire was started as a trash burn. Took TWO HOURS to reach the house where the pets were at the time. Fire was not controllable. Plenty of time to remove pets and/or humans threatened.

**I noticed on one thread or another that the dispatcher in Fulton, Kentucky had a list of residences/properties who had paid the required fee for coverage...but did not check the list before sending the unit out. Good thing they did send it because the fire crossed property lines and threatened the neighbor's house--the neighbor had paid the fee and the fire was properly put out.

Free Riders are what these people are called.

[Hannah Bell]

176. south fulton is in tennessee. fulton is in kentucky. looks like they're effectively one city.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Fulton,_Tennessee (pop 2500)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton,_Kentucky (pop 2700)

not sure if they share a government or not, not clear from wikipedia.

but news reports talk about south fulton's fire dept.

interestingly, an old outpost of united fruit company.

i agree that the county (pop 32K) is free-riding.

[seabeyond]

179. so they even had time to get the fuckin animals out and this is who the people on du defend

hwo could they not get those animals out. did they leave them in there as an emotion tug on fire dept to put the fire out? why the hell didnt they get the animal out.

one reasonable explanation....

[Bluerthanblue]

284. I don't 'defend' the landowners who didn't get the animals out

for not getting them out. HOWEVER- I cannot defend firefighters not coming to the aid of people in need either.

What pisses me off is that it is all about money. THAT is a huge part of what I've come to despise about my country. America hasn't always been like this. Community is important- doing for others because you have the ability to do so- even if it isn't in your own financial interest is what makes for a strong healthy society. We are far too fixated on the almighty dollar- this incident is just another example imo.

peace

[seabeyond]

308. a ity in another state is funding the FD. if 50% of the other county puts no money in, that drains

their resource adn they no longer have a functioning fd for their own use.

do you get that.

what you are bitching about in defending these people that dont pay is ooposite of what you are saying.

the democractic principle of a collective group putting into use for the whole is broken, when 50% of an area refuses to put money in but want to use the resources.

[Bluerthanblue]

316. I don't agree with you, and in MY opinion the democratic principal

that is the important one here is the understanding that we ALL live together in community- and regardless of what the fucking dollar figure is, when it comes to ESSENTIAL SERVICES like fire/police/medical aid, it shouldn't matter whether an individual has 'paid their dues'- we do what is right for each other because it's the right thing to do!

If we are willing to let others suffer and possibly die because of a $75 fee for 'services' then we are truly the losers- in every way that really matters.

Defending the stance of the FD in this issue is a libertarian position- with no regard for the greater good- just the individual. It makes for a pretty ugly society, as this fire demonstrates. The neighbor of this family- who DID pay the fee, and called in the FD dept, asked the Firefighters to help the family that didn't- and said THEY'D pay whatever if they'd just come help. I can't believe how some on DU are defending this action.

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

317. what good does it do anyone when this cities FD is no longer functional to provide service to anyone

because a community that is not their own is not willing to pay their share?

what good does it do anyone when this FD no longer works.

or

do we raise the city in another states taxes to pay for these people, 50% of their community that dont want to pay because FD is a socialist program not because they cannot afford it?

two choices here.

either city tells these people, you dont pay, we dont provide.

or

raise taxes on this city that is providing a service for a county that refuses to provide their people FD or mandatory tax for FD.

[Bluerthanblue]

320. the fire dept is obviously able to respond - they did for the person

who lived next door.

There shouldn't be an "opt in" when it comes to essential services.

Many MANY people pay for services they never use. Childless people pay thousands of dollars to educate children that they don't have any vested personal interest in. Fire/Police/Medical are essential services which cannot be doled out on a 'pay to play' fashon if we hope to have any kind of society.

this is indefensible.

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

323. then we agree adn with many of the people on du. there should not be opt in/out

taxes.

[reggie the dog]

234. am i a free rider because i am so poor

i pay no income tax as most of my french social services come from income tax????? i guess i am....

[ShroomDuke]

175. No mention of pets burning to death in "Conservative Corporate Media Cartel"

Didn't Pay $75 Fee? Firefighters Watch Your Home Burn To Ground
http://consumerist.com/2010/10/firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-ground.html

No mention of the fire department letting the Animals burn to death but they did say

"Later someone went to the fire station and assaulted one of the fire fighters."

in fact I don't think i heard anything about the pets except on Randi Rhodes (and DU)

[seabeyond]

180. especially since it took TWO HOURS for fire to reach house. adaquit time to get animals out.

lets hear more of this story

[Egnever]

210. Wow two hours to reach the house...

You have a link to that cause if that is true this home owner becomes even more of an ass.

[Hannah Bell]

233. His son was burning in the yard -- knowing there was no fire protection.

Though the family had been contacted twice about it.

Then the son who started the fire went down & assaulted the police chief.

The father gets agricultural subsidies in two states.

I'd lay money that they're teabagger types.

[mkultra]

266. there are no real fire codes in the rural areas

People out there can act really stupid sometimes.

[Tsiyu]

357. Lets' not make this a "bash rural people" issue,

Our volunteer fire department does an outstanding job ....for donations, and they never bother anyone for money, though they do hold a Friday night fundraiser with Gospel music. I don't go to that but have donated items for their sales.

They work with a local town department and the larger county sometimes, though we are up on a plateau in the far reaches of our county so it's hard for the county to make it in time. The town is in another county but also on the plateau and always assists.

From October to May we must call the forestry department to get burn permits, which are good for three days.

I have lived in the woods here for almost 12 years. Only had to worry about one forest fire set by kids on Halloween. The fire department was able to contain and extinguish it.

I live in rural TN.

[mkultra]

267. do you have a link on that ?

[Hannah Bell]

289. here's one: (reports it was a grandson burning rather than the son who assaulted the chief)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/

[Mimosa]

408. Thanks, Hannah.

All that time and they didn't take the animals out of the house? My first move in a dangerous situation would be to make sure my pets are safe from harm.

The firefighters cannot be blamed for that.

[Hannah Bell]

221. "someone" = the man's son -- you know, the guy who started the fire by burning on the property --

the attacker was the person who started the fire in the first place -- the fire which took 2 hours to reach the house.

makes you wonder.

[LTX]

241. I'm kind of puzzled about the pets burning to death, too --

There's no link in the o/p, and I can't find any mention of it in the news stories. It would be nice to see some confirmation of this. Otherwise, it just looks like a ploy to add some moral outrage to the story.

[seabeyond]

182. arent we a bunch of dummies. fire out in back yard. why the hell didnt owners get their animals out

of house BEFORE the fire reached the house and burned their animals to death.

one report TWO HOURS before it reached the house. those animals died, blame the fuckers who left them in the house.

[reggie the dog]

235. i am a liberal socialist and i dont tell "dummies"

tough shit your "stupidity" means you reap what you sow so fuck off and watch your shit burn. i try to help people live well in spite of their "stupidness"....

[seabeyond]

252. the stupidity is in US on DU buying they couldnt get their OWN pets out of house before the BURNED

to death. the fire is outside in the yard. they could have easily saved their animals. if those animals died, as they claimed, it is their fuckwad self to blame.

[reggie the dog]

253. perhaps they got the grandkids out

perhaps they were in the yard trying to put the fire out themselves, perhaps their pets ran and fucking hid somewhere and by the time they knew it was too late, as a liberal i believe in helping people even if they need help because of their own poor decisions

[seabeyond]

256. wow... all kinds of excuses allowing pets to burn alive. the fire was well out into the yard

kids... pets.... deal with issue.

[reggie the dog]

260. deal with issue and expect no help????

like i said i am a liberal and i help first and try to figure out why people needed help later. for the sake of the animals i would have saved them even if the guy was using them as an excuse to get the firefighters to come put the fire out.

[seabeyond]

263. if it was my neighbor i would have been in the house getting em too, but probably pull gun for

tresspassing....

[reggie the dog]

272. that actually made me laugh!

good one

[seabeyond]

275. my treat....

i know... you are still disgusted, go without saying. lol

[mkultra]

269. Then send these people $75 dollars.

[seabeyond]

270. ya... all us liberals can send these 50% of county teabaggers 75 bucks to pay their way

really put our money where our mouth is. because what people are really suggesting is the city that has this FD should be the ones paying for this 50%. maybe those poor city folk are saying, fuck those teabaggers... too.

[reggie the dog]

280. the county should never make public services

opt out possible.....that is what i am saying, the towns people should only subsudize the rural folks in the same way rural folks should subsudize the townies, if your land is worth more you pay more, worth less you pay less......

[seabeyond]

310. we agree. 2008 they did a report stating .13 from all would ensure service for all.

today, what, .50.

[Hansel]

339. Oh, so it's because they are Tea Baggers.

What makes you any different from them then?

[seabeyond]

360. i willingly and happily pay my taxes adn thank the services i receive.

to begin with. i can go on and on and on if you would like

[reggie the dog]

274. give me their adress

and i will send them 75 dollars of my "sharif afghanistan" hash (stamped with that in gold letters in english when we buy it), about 8 grams worth.... or perhaps 5 grams at tennessee hash prices, i would send them homegrown weed but they have so much of that down there that it is not really worth anything at all

[mkultra]

277. Sounds dangerous, they woudl probably burn their house down smoking it

But on an up note, they will have plenty of cash to buy a pipe as they apparently had insurance.

[reggie the dog]

well that would be a bummer man.....

at least they can afford a pipe though.... otherwise i would have send an empty coke can with holes punched in it....

[mkultra]

296. or a pipe made from a carrot

[reggie the dog]

297. those are great

back in high school you could burn a nickle bag in a carrot and if the security came up just eat all of it in one gulp...

[Rex]

183. What about organized capitalism don't you understand?

Money pays for protection...where have you heard that line from? No? Break his fuk'n kneecaps, Paulie!

[Hannah Bell]

230. completely mistaken comparison. A city of 2500 assesses taxes to fund a fire department

for its residents as a social good.

A county of 32K refuses to assess taxes to fund a public good because its citizens think they can freeride on the smaller public service.

County residents have a higher median income than the city residents as well.

So who's knee-capping who?

[Rex]

303. Not at all, the fact is they should have put the fire out. The petty amount

of protection money not paid caused this. Now $75 will turn into a million dollar lawsuit. What a stupid thing to do, put the fire out.

[moondust]

191. I think the FD should be morally or ethically obligated.

What if someone happened to be inside and nobody knew it? Or animals. Or whatever. What if Republicans in Congress shut down the government and he doesn't receive his Social Security check in time to pay the fee by the delinquent date?

The insurance case could be interesting.

Perhaps there needs to be a code of ethics for firefighters.

[COLGATE4]

282. What if Martians invade tomorrow? You can play ":what if"

until you go blue in the face but it doesn't change the facts as they stand. Even if the FD is "morally or ethically obligated" they are required to follow the law of the town, just as all law-abiding citizens are. And here the law apparently was that persons who did not opt in to paid fire protection would not receive service. End of story.

[moondust]

319. Bad law.

It's simplistic, draconian legal thinking but I suspect that's not uncommon especially in intolerant red states. Who is going to enforce a law like that? Would anybody scream about firefighters ignoring a bad law to save somebody's home and worldly belongings?

There's no way anybody should end up homeless, possibly unable to generate an income, and potentially out many thousands of dollars depending on the insurance situation over a crummy $75 fee. It would be different if he only suffered a $75 loss.

[northernlights]

236. link please

I haven't seen any mention of animals in any articles...only here.

And it took some time for the fire to reach the house. Plenty of time for the owner to get any animals out.

This isn't ringing true for me.

[Jamastiene]

255. Agreed

Especially considering how hard times are right now, a little bit of simple courtesy and a plan to pay the bill later would have been incredibly human of them. To stand by and allow that was really pissy of them. I don't care who the people were. They could have saved their home and their pets.

[COLGATE4]

285. A little courtesy and an unpaid bill for some thousands of dollars

for the town.

[COLGATE4]

261. No, the Owner did. House burned for over 2 hours before the

FD arrived - Owner apparently couldn't rouse himself to save his 'beloved pets'.

[activa8tr]

287. How do you come to this conclusion? The pets might have been dead in 5

minutes.

[hack89]

302. Cats and dogs aren't worth the risk to a single firefighter.

if there were no human lives at stake then it was the proper decision given the circumstances.

[Lorien]

383. Firefighters put out fires all the time when NO living thing is inside

should they not risk their lives for property either? Maybe you believe that property is more important than a child's beloved pet? their best friend?

Fucking sick.

Warehouse fire? Let the town burn until a human life is at risk! :crazy:

[hack89]

388. The warehouse owner paid for fire protection

this guy gambled his house and pets for $75 and lost.

[Politicalboi]

312. Poor animals

But, try buying auto insurance after the accident. I doesn't happen. He should have bought the fire insurance. And if the story is true that they had 2 hours to save the animals, then I can only say that he killed his own animals, not the fire dept. I could see if it were cows, horses and goats and chickens, but dogs and cats? How much effort to put them in a vehicle or in a safe building?. Or cage them up outside away from the fire. I feel for the animals, and I wish it had a different ending. This was the farmers choice, and now he must live with it.

[Hansel]

342. It's not insurance. It's a fee paid to the government thus a tax.

You do not have your house burned down for not paying your taxes on time.

[femrap]

314. Poor animals....

it wasn't their fucking fault that the homeowner forgot to pay the $75. Damn it....be cruel to someone else, you fuckers. Animals are defenseless against stupid asshole humans.

[seabeyond]

318. the fire was way out in back yard. took lots of time to get to house. why didnt owner get animals

out of the house?

and he didnt forget. he made a statement prior he thought they would come out and put out fire even if he didnt pay.

and his son had done the same thing three years prior and FD put fire out adn told them, not again.

[femrap]

350. If that's the case, shot

the POS....those animals don't deserve to die because of moronic males....they are getting on my last nerve of late. Do they try to be stupid? Do they try to be mean and cruel?

I love animals....people suck.

[femrap]

403. I wish the dude had

died instead of the animals. I'm sick of selfish, stupid, mean people. Too bad the dude bred....another stupid, selfish, mean person.

Fucking assholes.....all of them. Maybe the animals are relieved not to have to be with this fucking jerk.

[rpannier]

326. Crassus would have been so proud of the (ahem) fire department nt

[Puregonzo1188]

336. That was my first thought--What if the guy had had pets? That's just

terrible. I wonder if there will be DUers defending this?

[RoccoR5955]

338. More proof that Capitalism does not work.

We need a more socialist system here, so that EVERYONE can get the help that they need.

This is all about money, don't kid yourself.
Capitalism has destroyed communities, destroyed the middle class, and only made us more slaves to the rich.
Time to bring it to an end!

[ebt12]

343. People have stopped beng human over money a long time ago

All of the morals, ethics, and preachings about being kind, generous, helpful, "we're all in this together", goes out the window once money is involved. I think Douglas Adams nailed it with this from "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy":

"Most of the people on it were unhappy for pretty much of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movements of small green pieces of paper, which is odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy."

[nolabear]

345. Olbermann did a nice job interviewing the man.

He's just a guy, one of those people the tea party says is them. And He was abandoned by his government. I'm telling you, if you leave it up to the tea partiers, the ultra conservatives, the Glenn Beckians, society is going to break down and none of us will have the basic safety we've come to expect. This is just horrible.

[seabeyond]

361. just a guy, that left animals in house to burn? the fire was well out in his back yard

and as it got closer and closer to his house, he didnt think or "forgot" to save his animals?

he is a teabagger. a teabagger that does not want to pay taxes cause it is socialist and expects service anyway

[Canuckistanian]

354. Kick

[donheld]

359. There is no excuse for this

in spite of the many excuses I've seen offered here at DU

[midsummer]

364. Social Darwinism has no place in civilized society

People should not be able to vote down or privatize public services that protect everyone, just as they should not be able to vote away someone’s constitutional rights, as with Prop 8. We've seen these conservative policies at work for the past 30 years, and they have failed us as a people, and as a country.

[MindandSoul]

372. I absolutely agree!

[happyslug]

393. Quit paraphrasing William Jennings Byran in the Scopes Monkey Trial

That was his position and why he wanted HUMAN evolution not taught in public schools (He had NO objection to evolution itself, and in the trial pointed out the Story of Genesis were NEVER intended to be stories of what actually occurred, but stories to tell a message). Bryan had seen Social Darwinism becoming more and more popular during his life time, and he opposes it. By the 1920s Social Darwinism and the teaching of HUMAN evolution had become so intertwined among certain social elites that he could NOT see how you could separate the two ideas. Thus his opposition to teaching Human evolution in the Public Schools, more to do with opposition to Social Darwinism (Which Darwin himself supported, as seen by Darwin's opposition to Vaccination, for it permitted the "Weak" to survive).

[BlancheSplanchnik]

365. KICK and RECOMMENDED MOST HIGHLY

yes, I'm screaming.

[liquid diamond]

368. I can't believe people here defend this.

[go west young man]

369. Fucking america. What a joke your are these days.

Taxes used to pay for all public services. Now there is a fee for everything. The corporations and privatizing
everything will only make matters continue to get worse. America is a failed capitalist experiment and cases
like this easily point it out. Federal taxes fund fire departments in other countries. Only in the U.S.A. does it
all trickle down to local government who max out property taxes and pass the bill directly onto the citizen.
It's a ridiculous form of government. As with insurance these days, even if you do pay, there is no guarantee
of you getting the benefit. Corporations always find a way to preserve themselves first. Afterall their goal is
to generate profit. Not to save you. Saving you is the ruse that allows them to make money. Ah unbridled
capitalism! What a crock of shit you are!

[MindandSoul]

371. This same type of "law" was in effect in Belgium. . .400 years ago!

[Enthusiast]

373. K&R

What kind of a country do these idiots want to live in? They better be careful what they wish for. Too stupid to know they're stupid.

[Lorien]

374. Since when? Reagan. And apparently the New Reaganites are right here

on DU. The "Me first, pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, the law is the law" soulless authoritarians who claim to have never, ever missed a payment of any kind in their entire lives."It's there own fault. WE shouldn't have to pay because THEY forgot to send in that check. Those kids DESERVED to have their pets die because daddy is forgetful!!" Hell, I'm sure they've never even turned in a library item late...oh wait, they probably oppose public libraries too because EVERYTHING must be privatized. If you can't afford to pay, well then, off to the gutters with thee!

[seabeyond]

378. the fire was way out in back yard. the owner coul easily have gotten animals out of house

and still hand time to stand around before fire got to his house. why did he let his animals die? i say he lied. no animals died. have seen nothing in any report. only him on olberman.

he said he forgot.

prior to that he said... i thought they would come out and put out the fire even if i did not pay. guess i was wrong. he did not forget. he didnt pay. over 50% of the people in the county dont pay. they are more populated than town supporting the fd and higher incomes.

his son had started a fire at his house three years before. hadnt paid. FD put fire out and said that was it, you dont pay, we dont service

the FD sends a bill then does a follow up call.

the man didnt forget.

just orrecting your facts... believe what you want.

[Mimosa]

410. Something's fishy.

Sea Beyond, years before Katrina we sometimes had minor storms and the occasional evacuation. What was our first priority? Making sure we knew where our cats were and having them contained to remove. It wasn't hard.

Each evacuation we took our cats. Their welfare came first. Thse clowns had 2 hours to get the pets -if there were any- out of the house. If they had no kennel cabs they could have put them in a car and a family member could have driven them to safety.

[Hippo_Tron]

387. Whether they had a moral obligation to put out the fire misses the big picture

This was a systemic failure due to the fact that Obion County has no public fire service for rural areas. Sure, if the guy making the call to put out the fire or not had been altruistic then the fire would've been put out.

Nobody should have to rely on the morality of a fire chief to put out a fire. The fire chief should be required to put out the fire or be out of a job and probably face criminal charges and certainly civil charges if he doesn't put out a fire. Because that's the only way to make sure it happens.

[gulliver]

392. The guy who didn't pay the $75 should be kicking himself

I'm basing that on posts above that indicate he thought he would get service anyway. Even if he were someone in my family, I would feel the same way. He screwed up big time. Property losses to anyone else living in the house, not to mention the dead dogs and the cat, are his fault.

The county voters (from other posts above) got exactly what they voted for. They probably still think it was a good vote. You can bet a lot more people will be coughing up their $75 now. With that money, the city FD might be able to improve their equipment or increase their ranks. Maybe they get a new "jaws of life" or a pump truck that saves someone else's life or house. Maybe the many "opt-outs" before this "lesson" occurred indirectly cost someone their life or property. It evens out.

Personally, I don't think you should be able to opt out of things like this.

[kerkes]

402. There's no legal obligation by South Fulton Fire Department but there is an ethical obligation

No one should be getting something for free, however there should be a backup contingency plan in place by the South Fulton Fire Department (and any other rural fire department), to allow for protection against total loss and life of animals or people. This South Fulton situation is not abnormal with fees, and anyone whose lived in mountain areas (or the like) is extremely familiar with this kind of potential hazard; odds are, the owner Cranick was probably well aware of the hazard but dumbly didn't foresee it occurring. There should be an emergency fire plan in place, even if there is a hefty fine instituted for receiving emergency services after the fact of an upaid bill; there should be SOMETHING in place that allows for service. The owner said he was willing to pay whatever necessary for the fire to be extinguished.

While we may not have a legal obligation in this type of emergency fire situation, people and our country do have an ethical obligation. People make mistakes, apparently sometimes life-threatening ones. In regular economic times, people screw up or don't pay bills. Particularly in the current economy, people also don't pay every bill, particularly those they (maybe stupidly) feel are less vital at the time. Firefighters are in an emergency profession and there needs to be an emergency contingency in place, for situations like this, even if it means the city needs to attach billing (as police departments, other agencies do) to tax refunds, etc, to ensure being paid.

The world can only be glad that the view of South Fulton Fire Department is not shared by all firefighters, as leaders of firefighting organizations have said:

http://www.wacktrap.com/government/government-bodies/city-government/firefighters-watch-house-burn-over-75-four-pets-killed-

[dugaresa]

407. sounds like a libertarian type of set up