Fire Fighters Refuse to Fight Fire, Homeowners Forgot to Pay Fee

There's a problem here...

One: You just admitted that you know of people that would do it. You defeat your argument that no one would do it. You completely contradicted yourself.

Two: I am not bragging. You were the one who started talking shit until my attitude got riled up. Now you want to distort what I've said. I simply stated What Is.

Clearly, your intent is nothing more than a very clear personal attack on my character. You are trying to call me a liar, an attention seeker and a charlatan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUI36tPKDg4


Adoucette- is that really the best you have to offer?
When it escapes you to think that other people might actually be willing to stand up for what is right- You must attack their character?

Character...hmm... Yeah, this is very telling about yours.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All those issues about the 9/11 operator not knowing.

Correct, but that's what happens when you have a SUBSCRIPTION service.

The fire dept has to figure out if they have to roll based on what they know.

Tough luck, but you get what you pay for.

Ah, all those emergency payments, which are PIDDLY, come from the STATE. The insurance money comes from the Insurance company. None of that comes from the City so I'm sure they could care less. Again, that's part of the problem with a subscription system and again, you get what you pay for.

All your BS about paying AFTER the fact WAS true, because the story shows that they HAD been doing exactly that, and clearly that wasn't working.

The evidence of which is that the City offered the county a deal for $3 a month to avoid these kind of situations and in essence the County said "Fuck You, we're not going to pay even a piddly $3 per month because we know you'll come out and put out the fires anyway".

Guess they will have to rethink that strategy.

Arthur

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I never said no one would do it.
I said someone who would, wouldn't likely say they would.
I said I thought you would have more empathy for the fire fighters.

You're the one who is running around beating his chest.



I seem to meet so many brave people on the Internet.

Glad to meet you Neverfly.

That is your real name, right?

Arthur

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Um, why wouldn't they?

I have more empathy for the homeowners.

Again, from experience, if a guy started hooking up the hose, he'd likely have been put on report. Not fired.
Secondly, in all this media attention, he probably woulda been off the hook, anyway.

Here's another brave guy on the internet...:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee6Raji8ojc

 

Now THAT was BRAVE.

:yawn:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee6Raji8ojc

 

Oh dear, dueling you-tubes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSo0duY7-9s

lol

 

Well... What do you know... It looks like you'll resort to being "Brave on the Internet" too, eh?

Which is the basic problem with your speculations. Isn't it?

The point has been made that by making the decision that he made, the fire chief ended up costing everyone a lot more.

The point has been made that the system they have in place is faulty. That each of the parties involved is guilty of fault.

The point has been made that the situation was handled very inappropriately and inhumanely.

The point has been made that Emergency Services don't get the right to decide on a whim who gets service and who does not.

The point has been made that the law is on the Cranicks side.

The point has been made that it's perfectly average and normal that many people will speak out against such things. Such is our history and it's quite full of people that will even stand up to authority.

And what is it now, after all these arguments you are most concerned with? Petty behavior.
All you can do is attack a persons character and make accusations about which you don't really KNOW what you are talking about-- and you'll even sink to lower behavior when pushed.

Here: Have a third helping.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNTLdmhdyIw&feature=related

In other words, Adoucette, your posturing and accusations are mostly unimpressive.

 

"The Cranicks said they also forgot to pay their fire service fee on time about three years ago. But the fire department then did not hesitate to put out a chimney fire and let them pay the fee the next day."

Does anyone know if this is just a rumor? Is he a repeat offender? Did the fire department already bend the rules for them once?

Insurance Journal News

 

Does anyone know if this is just a rumor? Are you a repeat poster?

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2629980&postcount=194

 

Neverfly? You should have used Gadfly.

Did you answer the question, smart one?

 

Others did.

It's a claim made by the Cranicks that has not been verified one way or the other.

 

Then Cranicks themselves are claiming to be repeat offenders and they didn't pay for the true cost of putting out the first fire. They only paid the $75. No wonder, he thought that they'd come again, and put it out whether you paid, or not. They did it before for him.
Give me a break...

 

The film clearly shows (at -2:26 minutes) that the fire started from two burning barrels without cover screens. That fact would have put the fire responsibility upon the negligent homeowner (where I come from).

 

Yeah, fun isn't it.
Don't you just love to challenge someone to Step Outside and settle it like REAL men?

Didn't cost the City or the Fire Department he works for a thing. The rest isn't the City's problem
BUT, fighting fires for which they aren't reimbursed is a big problem and if this gets the County to switch to full coverage for $3 per day, it will eventually save everybody money.

The city is guilty of nothing. The Fire chief is guilty of nothing. The fire chief and the mayor tried to get the County to install a better system, for a piddly $3 per month, and were told no thanks, we prefer the Subscription plan.

Handled exactly based on how the Subscription system they signed up for is supposed to work. Now when the City played by the rules it's just sour grapes.

It's not a whim. If people are in danger they come. If it's property that's in danger they don't come.

No law is on the Cranicks side. The only one who got arrested that day was a Cranick for punching the Fire Chief. No charges are pending against the City.

Yup, the whole County stood up to the authority of the City and said FUCK YOU, we don't want no Fire Service. Take your $3.00 per month and put it where the sun don't shine. Not working out that well for them though.

Oh my, you've hurt my feelings.....

What ever shall I do

:bawl:

Arthur

 

Nope,
They pointed out it was an exception the last time.
He has no expectation that they will continue to make an exception for him.
That's what exceptions are all about.
Arthur

 

You have been missing the point about the $75 since the beginning of this thread. How many times do you expect people to explain it. That is not how the system works.

 

This is a symptom of tight budgets, and rural denial of the cost of modern services. Be expecting to see a lot more of these cases, as the belt further tightens...