Firemen let house burn to the ground

Very sad. Political nonsense.

It's disgusting. I get sick just thinking about it. :censor: :grrr: :shake:

Living here in TN I know how they are. They will come and spray your neighbors houses to keep them from burning if the fire is too bad, but if you have not paid your money they will let your house burn. It really stinks, cause if you can't afford to pay that, oh well, we can't save your house. It's not the "regular fire departments" that do this, it is the "Rural Metro" fire departments.

I read an interview done by him and he said his son's house caught fire a few years ago and the fire dept put it out without the fee. He said he went in a paid it the next day. Ok, great.

So he KNEW he could do that. So he was taking the chance he could do the same thing. If his house ever caught fire, he would just go in the next day and pay the fee. In the mean time, he was saving the $75. Sorry, he knew the rule, he knew about the fee. Forgot? Considering he had a past history with fires, what are the chances he really "forgot"?

Knew or not, common decency says you help someone in this much need.

His house was burning, they were loosing everything they had, how in this day in age can ANYONE just say oh well?

I am at a complete loss for words that accurately convey what I am trying to say here.

What if there had been someone in the home? They didn't even come to check, facts could have gotten confused.

I think remarkably less of Tennessee right now.

Josephhgoins said:

Knew or not, common decency says you help someone in this much need.

.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this.

This issue is not nearly as simple as much of the media is making it out to be.

And it's probably also one for iQuarrel.com - not here.

Its disgusting.........They need to change their policy....... Its their job to save homes. Thank god we don't have the type of policy where I'm at.
Fern

While I think it's tragic what happened, and the 'right' thing to do would have been to put the fire out once they got there -- since they were called to save a neighbor's house, not the one that was burning -- I don't think they were under any legal obligation to do so.

They offered a pay service to areas that normally would not have any coverage at all. You can get the same sort of deal in many places for trash pickup and municipal water supply. You pay, you get service, you don't pay, they shut you off. This guy knew that and made a choice and took his chances. Yeah, he says he forgot, but I bet he didn't forget his cable tv bill or his drivers license renewal.

He probably didn't have homeowner's insurance either, but I'll bet nobody will get up in arms when they don't replace his destroyed belongings.

I imagine they would have done differently if there were lives at stake in the burning home but since there were ONLY possessions I can understand why they would not risk their lives further.

And we can't assume that there is NO clause for people who can't afford to pay but would if they had the money.

I'm pretty much on the fence on this. He was aware of the "rules" when he chose to pay or not to pay. If the county collected taxes to proved for use of the neighboring counties firefighters then there wouldn't be an issue. Perhaps there will be regulation changes brought about by this situation that will be a win/win.

I would disagree that it's a firefighter's job to save a home. To save a life, yep.

I wonder if these are actual paid firefighters or if they are volunteers?

That is plain wrong.

This is why governments exist and why citizens pay taxes. A jurisdiction that would allow firefighting to be a paid subscription service is IMO evil. Firefighting should be a tax-funded service available equally to all.

Firefighters in a reasonable jurisdiction do not have the option to decide whose fire to put out. It doesn't matter if it is our friend's house or the house of the drug dealer down the street, and it doesn't even matter if they've paid their taxes or not, we'll put 'em all out. That's the way it should be.

I'm finding it harder to stay out of this thread - and I am now positive that iQuarrel.com is the proper place for discussion, so I'm making the temptation moot now.

Thread closed: Political discussion - please visit our sister site: IQuarrel- Intelligent debate and discussion forum

Thanks!