By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Firefighters let house burn down over $75

voty2000 on 06 October 2010
mjk45 said:

BTW doesn't a similar thing happen in the USA in regards to sick people being refused ambulance care if they don't have insurance, or is that an urban myth.


That's a myth, kind of.  In case of an emergency, a hospital cannot refuse care:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMTALA

Now, for non emergency situations, it's a state by state thing but most states are similar to this:

http://www.lsnjlaw.org/english/healthcare/hospitals/hospitalcare/



Around the Network
HappySqurriel on 06 October 2010

If the fire department puts out the fires for people who don't pay them why would anyone pay their fee?



johnsobas on 06 October 2010
HappySqurriel said:

If the fire department puts out the fires for people who don't pay them why would anyone pay their fee?


nobody said there shouldn't be consequences for the people that owned the house, but that doesn't mean you watch the house burn to the ground.  



currently playing: Skyward Sword, Mario Sunshine, Xenoblade Chronicles X

Lyrikalstylez on 06 October 2010

So what if there were kids or people trapped in the house, would there deaths be justifiable just because of $75?

 karma is a bitch and I they deserve what comes back to them



johnsobas on 06 October 2010
Lyrikalstylez said:

So what if there were kids or people trapped in the house, would there deaths be justifiable just because of $75?

 karma is a bitch and I they deserve what comes back to them

there were 3 dogs and a cat that died inside the house.  Not humans but it is something.



currently playing: Skyward Sword, Mario Sunshine, Xenoblade Chronicles X

Around the Network
famousringo on 06 October 2010
johnsobas said:
HappySqurriel said:

If the fire department puts out the fires for people who don't pay them why would anyone pay their fee?


nobody said there shouldn't be consequences for the people that owned the house, but that doesn't mean you watch the house burn to the ground.  

I guess you can do the uninsured health care schtick. Put out the fire and slap an enormous bill in the owner's hands. The fire dept. probably didn't have the framework in place to charge for services like that, so they did the easy thing and refused service.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

johnsobas on 06 October 2010
famousringo said:
johnsobas said:
HappySqurriel said:

If the fire department puts out the fires for people who don't pay them why would anyone pay their fee?


nobody said there shouldn't be consequences for the people that owned the house, but that doesn't mean you watch the house burn to the ground.  

I guess you can do the uninsured health care schtick. Put out the fire and slap an enormous bill in the owner's hands. The fire dept. probably didn't have the framework in place to charge for services like that, so they did the easy thing and refused service.

the man said he would pay whatever it takes.  Obviously the house would have been worth far more than the bill.  



currently playing: Skyward Sword, Mario Sunshine, Xenoblade Chronicles X

izaaz101 on 06 October 2010

I don't see a problem with what happened. At first glance it seemed dickish, but after reading some more, I have no problem with the sequence of events.



richardhutnik on 06 October 2010
HappySqurriel said:

If the fire department puts out the fires for people who don't pay them why would anyone pay their fee?

Should police handle a crime done to someone who didn't pay for police services?  Hey, should police be like the fire department there?  You know, someone commits arson on your home but you didn't pay for police services, or another crime.  You didn't pay the bill.  So, the police don't do anything... particularly if they knew ahead of time and could of stopped it.

One thing about fires is you better get them put out ASAP because you never know what will happen if you just let one burn in an uncontrolled environment.



Farmageddon on 06 October 2010
johnsobas said:
Lyrikalstylez said:

So what if there were kids or people trapped in the house, would there deaths be justifiable just because of $75?

 karma is a bitch and I they deserve what comes back to them

there were 3 dogs and a cat that died inside the house.  Not humans but it is something.

Shit, I'd set the fire dept on fire myself lol

Really, I get that they have to enforce their tax if they want to keep the system, but letting the house and animals burn down is just downright anal.