Fire Chief watches house burn over $75 tax

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soco11

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soco11

.

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.

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soco11

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.

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.