View Full Version : Fire Chief watches house burn over $75 tax
SA Friday
10-09-2010, 12:00
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39535911/ns/us_news-life/?GT1=43001
What a piece of shit... Put it out, send him a bill, but don't stand there and watch his house, possessions, dogs, cats all burn to ashes. What next, cops stand there and watch theives rob a house because they hadn't paid their state taxes yet? Absolutely disgusting. You wear a badge, you take an oath, you are there to serve the public, not pick and choose based on who paid what tax.
Hitman 6
10-09-2010, 12:09
More proof that firemen are douchebags.
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 12:41
But hey wait a minute.
we want smaller government and fewer taxes right?
I Mean there are those in here that don't want to pay for schools because they have no Kids, or they don't want to pay for roads because they don't use em.
What about those complaining about the Phone Taxes because they don't use phones out in the boonies.
Don't get me wrong people, I agree that we do need smaller government, but be careful what and how you wish for it.
You could be looking at a smoldering house because a check arrived late.
[Rant1]
2ndChildhood
10-09-2010, 12:49
I really have mixed feelings about this one.
My knee-jerk reaction is the same as Friday and Hitman.
Then there's the tax angle, these folks enjoy low taxes and have voted to keep them low, thus there is no government organized fire department. If people figure out that the fire department will put out fires even if they don't pay then the department's revenues will drop towards zero. Maybe the FD could put out the fire on a non-subscriber and then place a lien on the property for the bill.
Most of us dislike taxes and overpaid public employees, but at least they won't pull this kind of BS. Personally, I'd just as soon pay the taxes rather than have this happen in my town. There are no winners in a story like this.
North of Fort Collins, there's the Rist Canyon VFD which covers a large area of foothills and enjoys strong support from those who live in the area. They have an annual fundraiser and a solid force of volunteer firefighters. No subscription fee required. If a fire breaks out, they color code your driveway with tape so that fire teams bypass properties that have not cleared a "defense space" around the structures. Those properties that have good D-space will have a volunteer with radio on-site if/when a fire is nearby. It seems like a good setup and they are doing well with limited resources.
SA Friday
10-09-2010, 13:15
I really have mixed feelings about this one.
My knee-jerk reaction is the same as Friday and Hitman.
Then there's the tax angle, these folks enjoy low taxes and have voted to keep them low, thus there is no government organized fire department. If people figure out that the fire department will put out fires even if they don't pay then the department's revenues will drop towards zero. Maybe the FD could put out the fire on a non-subscriber and then place a lien on the property for the bill.
Most of us dislike taxes and overpaid public employees, but at least they won't pull this kind of BS. Personally, I'd just as soon pay the taxes rather than have this happen in my town. There are no winners in a story like this.
North of Fort Collins, there's the Rist Canyon VFD which covers a large area of foothills and enjoys strong support from those who live in the area. They have an annual fundraiser and a solid force of volunteer firefighters. No subscription fee required. If a fire breaks out, they color code your driveway with tape so that fire teams bypass properties that have not cleared a "defense space" around the structures. Those properties that have good D-space will have a volunteer with radio on-site if/when a fire is nearby. It seems like a good setup and they are doing well with limited resources.
Nothing knee-jerk in my reaction at all, and I know you are not insinuating that either. I just want my stance in this to be clear. You wear a badge, you take an oath, you do NOT have the option of picking and choosing who get's your services, period. Tax, fees, bla bla bla... You swore to serve. Emergency public services are not free enterprise, they are PUBLIC. I don't care if you are volunteer or if you are county payroll. Absolutely disgusting display of lack of morality. This fucking douchebag showed up, put out the fire threatening the neighbor, and then stood there and watched another man's life burn to the ground over an unpaid $75 fee. NO! You put the fire out and let the county figure out how to deal with the fee/payment for the services. Disgusting...
BushMasterBoy
10-09-2010, 13:38
Having smoke detectors, water hoses, fire extinguishers at the ready I dont worry too much about a house fire. If the guy had home insurance, he should be covered.
If you are a member of CO-AR15 you should have at least one fire extinguisher even if you live in a camping trailer. Carbon Monoxide detectors are a good idea too! You are more likely to die in a fire in your home, than be shot by an intruder. Maybe we can all learn from this story.
I pay to have my trash hauled, I have to mow my lawn or pay to have it done.
Evidently in this case the property owner failed to pay for fire service.
I see no problem.
Is a private security firm obligated to protect a business that has not paid for the service?
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 13:58
Nothing knee-jerk in my reaction at all, and I know you are not insinuating that either. I just want my stance in this to be clear. You wear a badge, you take an oath, you do NOT have the option of picking and choosing who get's your services, period. Tax, fees, bla bla bla... You swore to serve. Emergency public services are not free enterprise, they are PUBLIC. I don't care if you are volunteer or if you are county payroll. Absolutely disgusting display of lack of morality. This fucking douchebag showed up, put out the fire threatening the neighbor, and then stood there and watched another man's life burn to the ground over an unpaid $75 fee. NO! You put the fire out and let the county figure out how to deal with the fee/payment for the services. Disgusting...
it wasn't "fucking douche-bag's" call, it is the law, Policy created by the officials elected into office by the people and he could probably have gone to jail for misappropriation of government services and equipment or some shit. and I can only imagine the shitstorm had a firefighter been injured while working that scene.
I Disagree with the policy but I Don't so much blame the man.
Just another cog in the system.
I have a PERFECT Solution.
Lets start a COUNTY Fire service and increase the countytaxes about 8% to pay for all of the individual trucks, property, the Firefighters, training, Insurance, etc etc etc....
As he said, The FIREFIGHTERS tried to replace the Subscription system with a TAX System, but as soon as people hear "TAX" they panic and knee-jerk and scream NO!
long and short, I Agree, he should have paid his $75.
I don't fault the department. Someone has to pay the bills, and the LAW Says....
Mr. Homeowner was given the option to opt in to the city's fire protection district for a whopping $6 a month. He chose not to, and city policy dictated that when he lost that gamble, he paid the price. IF he had homeowner's insurance (50/50 chance) there's a good chance that they will not cover his loss because he chose not to take an inexpensive precaution.
That being said, most firefighters I know would have been sick, being forced to watch someone's home burn to the ground.
There is also the factor of putting firefighter's lives at risk. I trust no one thinks that firefighting is just a simple matter of dumping some water on a bonfire. It is not, of course. Every single fire that is responded to is a deadly trap awaiting the firefighters. There is a huge liability resting on the shoulders of fire commanders every time they order their men into the blaze.
Now--this guy's own relatives started the fire, according to the news sources. They evidently had not prepared in any way to take care of the problem once they started the fire either. In addition, he refused to pay $6/month for these firefighter's to put their lives in jeopardy for him. And...suddenly the government is expected to take care of everyone, even people who refuse to take responsibility and do their part, and all the rest of us are supposed to pay for it? Hmmm, that is the thinking that leads to societal irresponsibility, big government and more taxes, isn't it?
I vote that every time another bunch of idiots gets trapped climbing at Garden of the Gods, we rescue them for free and then charge those who think that it is government's job to take care of everyone, no matter how reckless or stupid or negligent or criminal they are.
Just because the media goes around looking for some outrageous case to make their case for bigger government and less individual responsibility, we don't have to suck it in and swallow it whole.
OneGuy67
10-09-2010, 16:50
I saw this article earlier in the week and we had a spirited debate on it at work. Many of my co-workers live in the boonies and have to contract with a lot of their basic services.
We came to the conclusion that it must have been a very hard decision to make by the Fire Chief and most likely, very agonizing for his men to just stand and watch, but....the person opted to not pay his fees for inclusion into their protection system. Not much different than driving without insurance and once you get into an accident, calling the insurance agent and asking for insurance coverage.
Very sorry for this man's loss; however, the responsibilty lies with him on this.
I just want to know why a "volunteer" firefighter didn't put it out[Pepsi]
What ever happened to lending a helping hand, doing the right thing, etc. etc.
there is the law that says let the guys house burn and everything he owns will disappear, then there is the simple fact that as another human being you should at least have the common decency to say, you know what, I have the power to help, I have nothing else to do, the guy is helpless as this point and the animals/posessions/home will be an ash pile if I don't do something.
I don't blame the law, sure I blame the guy for not paying the $75, but at the end of the day the Fire Chief should have stepped out, been a man and put out the fucking fire.
hope the fire chief loses his job, not because he didn't do his job, because he did, but just for being a complete fucking dick and not even being a man.
well if the guy refuses to pay property tax does he expect "volunteers" to pay his taxes for him?
My libertarian leanings don't like big govt and taxes, but fire dept is one thing I have no problem paying for.
Roads, bridges, bombs. All good.
Abortions, bloated govt worker salaries, welfare and schools that don't work... not so much.
HBARleatherneck
10-09-2010, 17:26
anyone a fireman here? go ask who pays for fire truck. federal and state grants, federal and state loans, federal and state taxes. so this homeowner in some way paid for the services. i live in a very rural area. i know my house will burn down before the first volunteer fireman gets here. i am ready for it. i have insurance.
but, i can guarantee you that this homeowner in some way paid for the equipment and or training the city uses.
also insurance companies actually foot some of the bill for equipment grants. they have a vested interest in seeing fires put out quick.
Sad, but he did have the option to pay. I'll bet it was hard for the Chief to stand by and be defensive, but if he made an exception, all would want service for nothing. Who pays for the equipment and insurance for the Fire Department?
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 17:51
Could you, as a Fire chief send men to put out a fire at a home that was "outside" of the fire protection subscription KNOWING that if:
you will probably lose your job at a Minimum, if not go to jail.
put firefighters at undue risk and if any are injured THEY ARE NOT COVERED.
If, powers forbid, a firefighter is injured and it is deemed "outside of the scope of normal operations" his family will lose everything and so will you.all because someone didn't pay their "Fire tax" or "Subscription"
semantics.
and as far as the "Volunteer" Fire dept... someone still has to cover all of those costs. in Rural areas like that they dont get State, County Tax Monies. It is a Subscription based income. Should you decide to "opt out" by not assisting with those costs, so be it.
As a Former firefighter I have to agree that it would be very difficult NOT to help fight the fire... BUT I Wont put my life at risk unless there is a life AT Risk.
Your house... your choice, your house in of itself isnt worth my life, especially when it isn't worth $75 to you.
I Can see it now had it spun a very different way
"Firefighter killed while putting out a house that hadn't paid their subscription."
The Chief is Jailed for reckless endangerment, misappropriation of department resources. The Municipality and Department is sued by the grieving widow and Orphans for wrongful death because it wasn't part of his job. ALL other "Subscribers" Sue the departments for fraud and stop paying for their subscriptions.
Would you pay for something knowing your neighbor was getting the same thing for free?
Even just turning the hose 20 degrees to the left would have been better than nothing. Don't want to risk guys lives for a property behind on taxes? I completely understand, but standing next to a burning house that you are ignoring doesn't sound like the most safe solution either.
I'm reluctant to say I feel 100% one way or the other, but for the most part, I'm in SAFriday and Sniper7's camp. Shit, I think my neighbors are worthless pieces of trash, but I'd still point a hose over there to put out a fire (especially since they are attached to my place!).
There is no way in hell the Chief would catch any grief if a firefighter was injured fighting that fire. Fire fighting is a dangerous job, and the presence of a paid tax doesn't make any other fires less dangerous. I doubt he'd even lose his job either, but I really have no idea on that one. Would a police officer get into trouble if he upheld the law outside of his jurisdiction? Probably, but a lot less trouble than if he just watched some crime happen that could have been prevented. If you are in uniform, there is no such thing as "off duty."
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 18:36
Even just turning the hose 20 degrees to the left would have been better than nothing. Don't want to risk guys lives for a property behind on taxes? I completely understand, but standing next to a burning house that you are ignoring doesn't sound like the most safe solution either.
I'm reluctant to say I feel 100% one way or the other, but for the most part, I'm in SAFriday and Sniper7's camp. Shit, I think my neighbors are worthless pieces of trash, but I'd still point a hose over there to put out a fire (especially since they are attached to my place!).
he wasn't "behind on his Property Taxes" he Refused to pay for his fire protection for whatever reason, for a NON GOVERNMENT FUNDED fire agency.
now this bunch of people has some people REALLY hard about the whole illegals not paying taxes and sucking up the resources etc.
how
is
this
different
?
He was expecting benefits from something he isn't paying for.
Fuck, why should anyone pay for the fire protection? Lets socialize everything? Right? I mean we should just EXPECT it, right? Fire protection, Ambulance services, Medical, Food, Pay?
Fuck, I'm gonna go out and vote for Michael Bennet and re-elect OBAMA!
/sarcasm
and HBAR, Out east their VFDs are VERY Different.
in NC I got a whipping $5/ Call and a $20 Annual. Our department worked on a subscription based system also. the only time we got city or county funds is when we were called by them to assist on their scenes.
we paid for our training.
we paid for our trucks
we paid for our insurance
we got nothing from the state.
we were so privatized that we had to be individually licensed to run a red beacon.
We had Private Plates, not Government plates on the trucks.
and we were told flatly, we were NOT to respond to any call with Dept resources unless dispatched by the chief or the emergency dispatch center. Anything else was a crime unless loss of life was imminent.
I'm starting to think this is an unexplainable situation
Wait, how can it be a CRIME to respond to something if you are a totally private company?
Also, $10 says if this was an illegal's house it would have been put out. Take that how you will, I'm not even sure how I mean it.
patrick0685
10-09-2010, 19:02
being from TN i was sad to see this bad press about my old state, but as sad as it is i think the fire chief did as he should, one of the things nice about TN is the low taxes, they have 9% sales tax, no income tax, $28 for your car (the roads are way better too). So if the guy knowing that he could pay a $75 dollar tax decided on his own will that he would NOT pay tax for fire protection then it was his own dumb ass fault that his house burned down. They announce it for months that your payment is due, and apparently take late checks. Im sure if there was a life at risk or something like that they would have been saved but I dont believe they should risk anything for a guy that is unwilling to help himself. From what i read they didnt even roll the trucks out until the neighbors called so their house wouldnt burn, so more than likely by the time they got there they couldnt do much for his house. Is the system the best, no, but he was willing to save 6 dollars a month (two trips to starbucks, one trip to out to eat) on fireprotection then he got what he paid for. He didnt want a general tax for the protection, he didnt want to pay the 75 bucks, he didnt really want his house i guess.
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 19:04
Wait, how can it be a CRIME to respond to something if you are a totally private company?
because as with any great bureaucracy, Governemnt controlled and government funded are 2 different things.
We had raffles, Bake sales, car washes and dances to by a new brush truck (read 1-1/4 ton Army surplus willys conversion) but the state, county and fed had their say in Color, lighting requirements TAXES as well as safety equipment, manning requirements equipment, controls positioning, Numbering, etc etc.
patrick0685
10-09-2010, 19:09
well said Byte Stryke, id put $10 if it was an illegal's house and he paid the tax it would have been save, if not it woulda burnt too.
My parents live on the outskirts of Knoxville. The VFD came to their house, laid out their services, and said that if would be $XXX a year for coverage. No asking for donations. They expected a check to be written right then.
I live in a VFD area and they cover all properties, whether you donate or not.
I guess my question would be why not put the fire out then send the home owner a bill. What if this back fires and home owners quit paying the $75 duty?
Does home owners insurance track if these fees are paid or not? I'd guess their fire ratings would definitely change.
patrick0685
10-09-2010, 20:12
The VFD came to their house, laid out their services, and said the if would be $XXX a year for coverage.
what? In KY they have a similar system but if you dont pay the coverage and your house catches on fire they come out and then send you the bill, if you dont pay put a lien on your house. Sounds somewhat better but I bet even with the lien people wouldnt pay for a while. to many of those people and the department would go broke and the people that paid would be shit out of luck.
I've been thinking about this, and while I still think that an attempt to put the fire out should have been made, I'm not at all sorry for the guy since he didn't pay his fee.
patrick0685
10-09-2010, 20:27
I've been thinking about this, and while I still think that an attempt to put the fire out should have been made, I'm not at all sorry for the guy since he didn't pay his fee.
the longer i thought about it, the more i thought he was a dumb ass too
Good thing nobody came running out of the trailer on fire- they probably would have to turn around for that.
GreenScoutII
10-09-2010, 21:03
In general I'm in favor of smaller government and greater personal freedom and responsibility, but any idea can be carried to an illogical extreme.
For a fire department to not make an attempt to extinguish a fire sounds pretty illogical to me. Especially over 75 bucks.
Not everything should be profit driven. Some things, such as fire protection, should be a public service.
If nothing else, they could have put out the fire then billed him for actual costs of putting it out.
Troublco
10-09-2010, 22:11
I bet if they'd turned a hose on it, he would have happily given them the $75 and been a good spokeperson for the area on why others should do the same. Considering the services a lot of folks who don't pay taxes receive, this seems a bit extreme. Do the people in this country who don't pay taxes get denied services when a natural disaster strikes their area? (Katrina comes to mind.) No. If we're going to start picking and choosing who gets services based on paying taxes, then we might as well pull cops out of a lot of bad inner city areas and let those people fend for themselves. FEMA can save a lot of money not helping people who don't pay taxes. CCW holders are supposed to help others if they witness someone else who needs assistance (protection wise), but they don't get paid for it. (Yes, I know, they're not govt) The Fire Department, volunteer or otherwise, should respond to a fire. I seriously doubt this guy would have been fired for helping out; I bet now there's a lawsuit no matter whether he paid or not. Of course, I suppose it's possible that the Fire Department has no requirement to put out a fire; just like there is no constitutional right to police protection.
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 22:15
Good thing nobody came running out of the trailer on fire- they probably would have to turn around for that.
Imminent danger to life.
By Law ANYONE must make an attempt at that point. This is where you folks are missing the point
Not everything should be profit driven. Some things, such as fire protection, should be a public service.
If nothing else, they could have put out the fire then billed him for actual costs of putting it out.
The whole point of this is that there is no profit, its a rural VFD controlled by the government and funded by YOU, the homeowner. It is NOT a TAX... its a FEE, you can OPT IN or OPT OUT by not paying the FEE. AGAIN not a Government TAX.
So lets say you DON'T pay the FEE and call the VFD and they come out and save it anyways.
"Did you hear about the fire at the Johnson's? they didn't pay and the fire department came out and put their fire out. I Don't know why we pay if they don't have to."
Now more people aren't paying.
And as stated before, a lien means shit. To this day I still have an outstanding lien on a house I worked on in 1994 to the tune of just over $7K.(Tile Remodel)
That and $10 will get me some McDonald's.
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 22:39
Lets imagine that a new county sprang up in the Middle of nowhere.
Now we all live in this new county and we have an election and we say NO TAXES!
EVAR!
great, But now what about emergency services?
we have no police,No Fire and no Ambulance services because we cant pay them!
Its OK, we will handle it!
Well you know, I work late at night and I Don't like my wife and son home alone. But I hear oneguy67 is a certified law enforcement official. Him and I work out a deal where if my wife sees a prowler or whatnot she can call him and he will come to investigate matters.
But his time and energies aren't free.
We agree that I have to pay him 50 "clams" a year for this service.
Now if my Neighbor, "TheInternet", who DOESNT pay calls Oneguy67 and says someone stole his polishing compound and Oneguy67 goes rushing out there and investigates it. Hows that make me feel?
I want my friggin money back.[Rant2]
You gave them the services for free you can give it to everyone for free!
Can't afford it? you could afford to give it to them on MY Dime. Its not like it was life or Death!
BTW, my old station-house is having a fundraiser
Support your and other VFDs or FPDs (http://www.stoneypointfire.com/)
Who here can tell me why its a .com and not a .gov?
;)
Also, $10 says if this was an illegal's house it would have been put out. Take that how you will, I'm not even sure how I mean it.
http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001100935/bigstockphoto_hammer_striking_nail_w_sparks_333329 _answer_1_xlarge.jpeg
The home owner should have paid. But the volunteer fire department has zero integrity on this issue. So much for a man "doing the right thing even if no one is looking."
Do VFD's give out merit badges for being assholes?
Sort of surprised PETA hasn't sued for letting the pets burn alive.
Byte Stryke
10-09-2010, 23:00
It's all a matter of Who is paying the Bills.
VFD?FPDs are NON-PROFIT NON Government owned departments CONTROLLED by the government (See Bureaucracy)
So these shitbags didn't want to pay a Tax to fund a fire department (Voted on in an election)so a FPD/VFD (See above) was set up on a subscription system, because well, Some people wanted a FD and were willing to contribute to this benefit of society.
Then the same shitbags, cry because the fire department they didn't want to pay the Taxes or FEE for, didn't rush over to put out their burning shit... because they didnt want to Pay Taxes or Fees...for services they want for free
THEN, you "Anti-socialists" vilify the FD for holding their ground and following the law.
[LOL]I give up.
theGinsue
10-09-2010, 23:09
I'm all with GreenScout & Trouble on this, but I also think this guy should have paid - if his home was near enough for FD resources to make a difference; which appears to be the case.
My parents live out in the middle of nowhere in Missouri. The nearest town (where their mail comes through) has a Fire Department (Volunteer I believe).
I recall someone with the FD coming to talk with my folks when we first moved into the home back in '79. This guy was soliciting for a Fire Protection fee just like the one in this situation.
I recall my dad asking this guy what the chances were of them getting to our house in time to save the home in case a fire broke out. The guy honestly answered that there was really no chance of them getting there in time to save the home if a fire broke out in the home.
BUT!.... He also pointed out that if a fire broke out at a neighbors home and spread to our property, they should be able to make it to our property in time to save our home.
My dad paid the fee.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39535911/ns/us_news-life/?GT1=43001
What a piece of shit... Put it out, send him a bill, but don't stand there and watch his house, possessions, dogs, cats all burn to ashes. What next, cops stand there and watch theives rob a house because they hadn't paid their state taxes yet? Absolutely disgusting. You wear a badge, you take an oath, you are there to serve the public, not pick and choose based on who paid what tax.
Hmm, reminds me of a certain group of folks who just take, take, and take without paying for jack or s**t; sort of creates a problem for those of us who do in fact contribute doesn't it? What if the whole county has the same "f*** your fee!" attitude? I'll bet their fee would be much higher. I'll bet he wont go thinking he's so damn special now when he does one of two things that he should have done before: pays the fee or moves somewhere else. [BooHoo]
Troublco
10-09-2010, 23:36
I think the guy should have paid too. I think a lot of people ought to be paying taxes, who aren't. But I also think that Byte wants a perfect world, and it ain't happening. Hell, if we had a perfect world we wouldn't have illegals soaking up billions of dollars in free (to them) medical care. We wouldn't have people using welfare as a lifestyle. We wouldn't have all the libs wanting other people to go in harm's way so they don't have to. And so on. Do I want things to be better? Hell, yes. I pay my taxes, and serve (till they finish tossing me out) my country, and want better for my kids than I had, and all the usual stuff. But if every single person was held to an absolute, black and white, yes and no, on or off standard then we'd all be in jail or on probation, even all of the cops and judges. Byte wants things done right, no matter what, all the time, and that's great. I admire that, but let me know when that starts working for you, and how you got it to work that way.
If we're going to let the house burn if one guy didn't pay, we need to start denying police and medical response if someone doesn't pay taxes. How about we start keeping records of who does and doesn't pay taxes, so we know who to tell that we can't send the cops to their place when some gangbangers break in to steal their property and rape/kill them and their families? Then we can start prioritizing responses based on how much tax is paid; those who pay more can get a faster response or get priority if more than one call is received at the same time. "Yes, sir, we can come help you. But according to our records, your elderly mother doesn't pay tax anymore, so we can't help her." How does that work? What happens if the bureaucracy that will have to exist to track all this goofs and tells the Fire Dept. that someone didn't pay when in fact they did, and then afterward they find out they goofed? "Gee, we're sorry we let your house burn down. We had a glitch in our records. Next time, we'll make sure we respond promptly."
I understand the frustration about those who sponge off the system. I don't like it either. Maybe what was done in this instance is the answer, but I see it fraught with problems.
SA Friday
10-09-2010, 23:58
Hmm, reminds me of a certain group of folks who just take, take, and take without paying for jack or s**t; sort of creates a problem for those of us who do in fact contribute doesn't it? What if the whole county has the same "f*** your fee!" attitude? I'll bet their fee would be much higher. I'll bet he wont go thinking he's so damn special now when he does one of two things that he should have done before: pays the fee or moves somewhere else. [BooHoo]
Sounds like a great arguement for rolling the fee into everyone's property taxes. Then everyone pays or just moves somewhere else...
Sounds like a great arguement for rolling the fee into everyone's property taxes. Then everyone pays or just moves somewhere else...
I personally don't agree with the "fee" they have set up but they'd probably never say anything if that was the case. Heck, for all we know they might be the town scumbags and the chief said "fork em". Sets a good example IMO.
I used to work with a fire dept. that worked like this
I worked on an ambulance and worked out of a ton of fire houses, city, county, district, volunteer, and private (fee based)
This article isn't fully accurate as to how this really works, in most cases when there is a private fire dep't they will put out a fire on a building in their area, even for a non-subscriber, BUT, the owner of the property then has to foot the bill for all of it, which can be a huge amount of money, frequently more than the structure itself, while the subscriber doesn't have to pay for anything more than their subscription.
As cruel as it sounds, every home and business was given the option, and they didn't need to pay a high tax for fire services in the government covered areas, and the subscription fee was usually much less.
If you are going to cheap out on a $75 fee for fire services, don't get pissed when you have a fire, if he lived in a gov't controlled district, he could get locked up for not paying his taxes
As a person familiar with all of the options for fire depts, I prefer the private option. They tend to be the cheapest for the people and provide great service, while avoiding the bloated spending of most public entities. Sorry to my old friends in the public FDs, they got paid a ton and had really really nice kit, but it was mostly a waste. Amazing, the .gov wastes, I know!
rellik74
10-10-2010, 07:42
If it only cost $75 to put out a fire.
A used fire truck cost $30,000 to $100,000
You need to find 10 guys to volunteer to learn how to put out fire's.
You need to buy them PPE Personel protective equipment $2000 each.
The VFD need to purchase insurance $3000
Build a building $40000
I could go on and on with cost of a volunteer fire department
Being a volunteer fire fighter, one saturday a month you do training 8 hours training, Dont drink no beer when you get off work couse you might need to go put out a fire, When a fire tone goes off at 2am you go to the call, if your out till 5am you dont sleep you go to your real paid job work 8 hours cause my boss dont pay me to fight fires. If a fire happen when Im working and I go I dont get my pay.
So it dont cost $75 to put out a fire.
Byte Stryke
10-10-2010, 10:55
If we're going to let the house burn if one guy didn't pay, we need to start denying police and medical response if someone doesn't pay taxes.
IT IS NOT A TAX!
IT IS A PRIVATE SERVICE.
IT IS AN OPTION
HE CHOSE TO OPT OUT.
I REPEAT, IT IS NOT A TAX.
STOP COMPARING AN APPLE TO AN ORANGE.
It's SORT of like Cable TV, you pay, you get it, you don't pay, they stop service.
Newspaper, stop paying, they stop delivering.
Fire protection districts and Volunteer departments are very different from Newspapers and cable TV Companies, I know, but only in the services provided. HOWEVER, they are all SUBSCRIPTION based Services.
Wrap your heads around the fact someone didn't want to pay for shit and they didn't get it.
As far as it being a perfect world and me wanting it that way?
Yes, yes I Do want a perfect world. Do I Expect it? Nope.
I do know that if you let one guy slide, everyone wants to slide, then everyone just stops paying and then we wind up with the government taking care of everything for us. He should have been a big boy and paid for the service that they didn't want the government to provide. Kinda like Obama-care in a way.
Sorry, but I Do Not need that sort of Babysitting.
Who wants to bet that someone calls it a tax again? Takers?
[ROFL1]
Rellik74
Thank you.
How did they know that there wasn't a life in imminent danger if they didn't even show up until other people called in to have their homes protected?
steveopia
10-10-2010, 11:18
IT IS AN OPTION
HE CHOSE TO OPT OUT.
But would he have had to pay taxes on the option had he opted in?!? Oh snap!! [Poke]
Just kiddin' man. Another analogy could be purchasing a warranty on any sort of electronics when you buy them. You do, something happens, you get it replaced. You don't, something happens, you're screwed. All of the sudden hindsight is 20/20 and you look to place blame but ultimately it's your fault for not getting the warranty. Kind of a lame analogy but it's what I thought of when I was reading this.
Troublco
10-10-2010, 11:39
IT IS NOT A TAX!
IT IS A PRIVATE SERVICE.
IT IS AN OPTION
HE CHOSE TO OPT OUT.
I REPEAT, IT IS NOT A TAX.
STOP COMPARING AN APPLE TO AN ORANGE.
Yes Sir, Sorry Sir, Right Away, Sir.
My apologies for misinterpreting everything you said.
HBARleatherneck
10-10-2010, 11:42
so basically this reinforces the fact that, back east sucks. most Coloradoans would not watch someones house burn down, no matter the facts.
for Byte, i am not sticking up for the guy who didnt pay. i am not sticking up for the fireman who watched it burn.
but, that not how we roll. here in the West.
SA Friday
10-10-2010, 12:01
so basically this reinforces the fact that, back east sucks. most Coloradoans would not watch someones house burn down, no matter the facts.
[Beer] Well, at least someone gets what I'm saying.
[Beer] Well, at least someone gets what I'm saying.
true that
Imminent danger to life.
By Law ANYONE must make an attempt at that point. This is where you folks are missing the point.
Do the animals inside count?
If not them why do fds that I pay for save a dogs life in the middle of a lake or a kitten in a tree. I am being a bit fececious here of course.
I agree with what you have said I know he should have paid the fees and I understand the consequences of the fire department losing money to people who don't subscribe because this guy got a free ride.
My issue is they stood and watched it burn with the animals inside. Those can never be replaced just as a human life can't be either. I know that a human and dog aren't the same but they truly are mans best friend and I love my dogs. That is why I have a issue with this. Had it just been a house then oh well I hope he had insurance.
BushMasterBoy
10-10-2010, 15:10
If it was my neighbors house I'd be tempted to wrap my left arm around the Fire Chiefs' neck and with my right hand put a gun to his head...then I would be giving the orders!(When in doubt, use force)
And yes I have done crazier things than that...
Do the animals inside count?
If not them why do fds that I pay for save a dogs life in the middle of a lake or a kitten in a tree. I am being a bit fececious here of course.
I agree with what you have said I know he should have paid the fees and I understand the consequences of the fire department losing money to people who don't subscribe because this guy got a free ride.
My issue is they stood and watched it burn with the animals inside. Those can never be replaced just as a human life can't be either. I know that a human and dog aren't the same but they truly are mans best friend and I love my dogs. That is why I have a issue with this. Had it just been a house then oh well I hope he had insurance.
So it is alright to put the firefighter's lives in danger for the dogs and cats? Send those firefighters in to put their lives in deadly danger to get that cat! Heck, their wives will never miss 'em if they are killed in the fire! The homeowner doesn't care enough about his house and family to pay $6/month but the chief should put all his firefighters into deadly danger for the guy's cats? Yah, that is much better thinking! Thanks for sharing today.
ChunkyMonkey
10-10-2010, 15:35
The homeowner doesn't care enough about his house and family to pay $6/month but the chief should put all his firefighters into deadly danger for the guy's cats? Yah, that is much better thinking! Thanks for sharing today.
So for $6/mo, he will?
How did the fire department know no one was in the house if they didn't bother to even show up until the neighbors called?
.
So it is alright to put the firefighter's lives in danger for the dogs and cats? Send those firefighters in to put their lives in deadly danger to get that cat! Heck, their wives will never miss 'em if they are killed in the fire! The homeowner doesn't care enough about his house and family to pay $6/month but the chief should put all his firefighters into deadly danger for the guy's cats? Yah, that is much better thinking! Thanks for sharing today.
obviously the word facetious has no meaning in your vocabulary....
but I digress; so you are telling me that the firefighters who are .gov paid with my taxes should risk their lives for a dog in a freezing pond or a cat hoarders kitten stuck in a tree, but a fee based PFD should not save a dog or cat in a house that is on fire where the animals will be burned alive?
I've already said screw the guy for not paying his fee and that if his house burned down then I just hoped he had insurance, but intentionally letting his animals be burned alive somehow doesn't see quite fair to the animals who, even if they wanted to, couldn't afford the $6 a month so they wouldn't be burned alive.
patrick0685
10-10-2010, 20:20
i wouldnt send it people to risk their lives to save my pet, i love my dog and would be crushed if/when he dies but i could not or would i want the guilt of know someone's husband/wife/child/parent died trying to save my dog.
So for $6/mo, he will?
Now you got it! Yah, that's precisely the amazing thing. For a lousy $6/month these firefighters will put their lives on the line every day. But for nothing--they won't. Pretty amazing, isn't it? For only $6/month they will save a person, or a cat, from a burning building, but they won't do it for free. If you value their services at zero, that's what you get from them.
Now you got it! Yah, that's precisely the amazing thing. For a lousy $6/month these firefighters will put their lives on the line every day. But for nothing--they won't. Pretty amazing, isn't it? For only $6/month they will save a person, or a cat, from a burning building, but they won't do it for free. If you value their services at zero, that's what you get from them.
In the same context, is their service only worth $6/month?
for the price of a meal at McDonalds, should I expect the same type of service from the fire department? The reality is, you usually get what you pay for.
ronaldrwl
10-11-2010, 14:56
I think he is double screwed, because his fire insurance company will probably not pay because of his decision to not pay for fire protection. Very dumb decision and I support the freedom to make dumb decisions. But they gambled and lost. No shame on the fire department IMO.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.