Firefighters let home burn

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Captain Morgan

True, but what if the guy doesn't have the money to pay the hourly rate? You can't get blood from a turnip. By the time they check to figure out if he can afford the rate, the house is already burned down. If they put the fire out before checking and just send the guy a bill, he can simply not pay that one, the same as he didn't pay the $75.

I wasn't talking about doing a credit check on the spot and then deciding to fight the fire

They charge him whatever hourly rate and then if he can't pay it, they take whatever other steps they'd need (collections, etc). People would probably still bitch about how "it's not fair that they charged him to save his house" but he'd at least have his pets and stuff.

Then they reposess his house and have a cool firefighter hang-out pad

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Particle Man

I wasn't talking about doing a credit check on the spot and then deciding to fight the fire

They charge him whatever hourly rate and then if he can't pay it, they take whatever other steps they'd need (collections, etc). People would probably still bitch about how "it's not fair that they charged him to save his house" but he'd at least have his pets and stuff.

Then they reposess his house and have a cool firefighter hang-out pad

Charging an "hourly rate" doesn't take into account the costs for the firefighters' down time when they have to be ready to respond, but aren't actually active.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Charging an "hourly rate" doesn't take into account the costs for the firefighters' down time when they have to be ready to respond, but aren't actually active.

It can when done right. Part of the reason why medical transport by helicopter is so expensive is the person being transported pays for a portion of downtime, maintenance, and all the other expenses that go along with having the helicopter. They don't just pay for the expenses related to their trip.

I already posted how I would guarantee payment. Put a lien on the property and deny building permits for repairs from the fire. If the lien isn't satisfied in a reasonable amount of time foreclose on the property.

[Papa_Complex]

Thank you Captain Morgan. You have made it unnecessary for me to say any more on the matter

[G-Rex]

I heard about this yesterday and was infuriated.

I agree with the policy, TO A POINT! Sure, he didn't pay, and I get that, but think about this. I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it directly.

We all too often say *poor animals* when something like this happens. I hate it, and it pisses me off that pets were left to die in that house. There's a special place in hell for people that will knowingly do that.

However, what if there were a PERSON inside. Can you imagine the uproar then? Surely those firefighters would not have just let the fire burn knowing there was a person inside. Let's forget firefighter ethics and responsibilities to the community. What the hell happened to BEING A DECENT HUMAN BEING?!

I can assure you the town of South Fulton would be facing lawsuit after lawsuit right now if a person had died as a result of that fire.

[the chi]

Something else to consider, since it appears everyone thinks that fire service is standard for where this happened and this guy had a right to services, but these firefighters had to respond outside of their service area to get to this place.

Those folks asked to pay the $75 service fee are outside of the normal service area, and the service is rendered after the fee is paid as an option only, just like the insurance analogy Capt. used.

If the fire department didnt want to, they wouldnt have to respond to fires outside their area of service. So they offer services for a fee. And $75 annually considering the fuel costs alone for driving to the back of beyond to fight a fire outside your service area is a pretty darn good deal.

Someone still should have saved the animals, but do we know that they were told there were pets in there? Or was the owner simply screaming and hollering at them to save his house? Having a few country cousins of my own, they dont give 2 shits about their pets, animals just show up and disappear at will and they just toss out some food...if it came down to it, they'd be hollering about their houses and only realize hours later that a few animals are missing. Do we know the animals were killed in the fire? Or did they run off in fear and just haven't shown back up?

[Papa_Complex]

The truth, however, is that animals are not humans. They are generally considered to be property under the law. Sure, they're bastards if they let pets die, but where do you draw the line?

Every now and then, on a local board, I'll butt heads with a self-professed "anarchist" who thinks that he shouldn't have to pay taxes, because he doesn't have the choice of only paying for only the services that he uses. He's one of the few members of that board I've actually met, a student at this university, so I happen to know that he's made extensive use of heavily subsidized education, government backed student loans, etc..

I agree with those who say that his house should have been saved but he should have been hit with a massive bill for it but then again, as others have also noted, how do you guarantee payment?

I also think that his insurance company would be well within their rights to deny him coverage for the incident, based on him not paying the fire department stipend.

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

The truth, however, is that animals are not humans. They are generally considered to be property under the law. Sure, they're bastards if they let pets die, but where do you draw the line?

Every now and then, on a local board, I'll butt heads with a self-professed "anarchist" who thinks that he shouldn't have to pay taxes, because he doesn't have the choice of only paying for only the services that he uses. He's one of the few members of that board I've actually met, a student at this university, so I happen to know that he's made extensive use of heavily subsidized education, government backed student loans, etc..

I agree with those who say that his house should have been saved but he should have been hit with a massive bill for it but then again, as others have also noted, how do you guarantee payment?

I also think that his insurance company would be well within their rights to deny him coverage for the incident, based on him not paying the fire department stipend.

Thank you. Very well said, guys.

Yes, it's shitty. But, it wasn't a secret. I wonder how many times this has happened in the past 20-years.

[pauldun170]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...logical-debate

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by pauldun170

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...logical-debate

Favorite post within that...

Here's an idea...let's have a universal fire fighting protection bill passed and force everyone in America to pay an additional $75 in taxes so this guy and every free loader can have fire protection. After all, I'm sure somewhere in the Contstitution we are gauranteed the right to federal fire protection.....No?