Firefighters let house burn down over $75

[Kasz216]

richardhutnik said:

Kasz216 said:

Mr. Cranick admitted he didn’t pay for the service.  He thought they would come anyway.  I feel because of insurance companies we do not take care of things as we should because we know they will bail us out. Lawyers, have caused us to want to blame everyone but ourselves and our country has gotten to a point where personal responsibility is no longer expected.  It’s not a good situation here.  As I said, the firefighters are taking a beating for something they have no control over.  They do not set policy.

This is a county problem and it is being forced on the cities.

Sincerely,

Kelly E Edmison
Chief of Department
Union City, TN

I do agree here.  Besides requiring firefighters watch fires burn by the unpaid person, and not acting as trained, the policy (and I will say default of the county) puts the firefighters in a place where they are at increased risk because they don't get to tackle the problem early enough on.  The fire could jump in multiple directions at once and things get out of hand.  And yes, you can take to task the person who didn't pay.  Anyone here also think it is sane that we train firefighters to do fire management that will cause a fire to not spread, but cause the house of someone else who doesn't pay to burn down as a "lesson" to others in society and them?

I think it's sane.  Based on the cities other options.

I mean, the city only has two other options.

1)  Put out fires for free for people who don't pay the subscription fee... and therefore not have enough funding like the other fire departments that do so.

2) Do not respond to fires at all outside of their city.

Both options do nothing but insure the lack of a fire department for anybody.