1271: What's Your Price?

[amyuilani]

They should have put the fire out because of the overall threat to the safety of the community that would have been caused by letting the fire get out of hand. Fires can move a lot faster than people can. That monthly fee is for insurance. Treat it like medical or auto insurance. If you don't have the insurance but you use the service, you pay the full bill for what the service costs. This would likely be in the thousands of dollars. If there was no known agreement ahead of time between the city and the residents about what the fire fee would be about, then the tenants should sue the fire department.

[Blitzgal]

Originally Posted by amyuilani

They should have put the fire out because of the overall threat to the safety of the community that would have been caused by letting the fire get out of hand. Fires can move a lot faster than people can.

This is it in a nutshell. Any fire needs to be put out immediately because there is a huge risk to the rest of the public.

The other issue that's really shitty in this story is that the county had another incident like this back in 2008, and they drafted a budget proposal that would provide fire protection for the entire county. It would have meant a $0.13 increase in property taxes. But no, you can't raise taxes. So now you have this fucked up situation where a small two engine town is being asked to cover a wide expanse of rural area outside of their jurisdiction. There was a very simple fix to this, and it was to raise the property taxes a few cents and get fire coverage for the entire county.

In the meantime, the only sane response would be to put out the fire and then bill the family for the full amount. They'll get socked with a several thousand dollar fine and believe me they'll never forget to pay that annual $75 fee again. This is how other communities have handled the situation.

[Jo_Culprit]

Originally Posted by DWarrior

I'm sure if the guy said "I already paid" they would have put it out. But that's not what happened, and don't try to twist it into that scenario, because it's not. And there's no obligations on the firefighters to be 100% certain that the person can't pay their fine. Besides, how would you even arrive at that certainty, what does that even mean?

Im not talking about the fire fighters here im talking about the registry in charge of knowing.

why cant that guy have the option of paying a fine later? thats why its a poorly thought out policy. Why is it automatically assumed that any person in this situation wont pay. What if someone recently got back from a long holiday and hadnt paid this years $75?

Bottom line is its fucken weird to just be standing there while it burns.
Why do firefighters have to be beaurocrats now, they should just put fires out.

I pose you this situation, what if one of the neighbors kids was unconscious somewhere on the property because of smoke inhalation and he was concealed from outside view so the firefighters didnt know he was there and the home owner didnt know he was there. Because that guy didnt pay the $75 that kid now dies because he was fetching a tennis ball or something.

Can you really say in any situation like that there is no chance of anyone besides the home owner getting hurt. Without fighting the fire can you really know if someones in trouble if theyre unconscious.

[Keith]

What if the guy was just about to make his yearly payment the day it was due, but the Cash Captain was sick that day? So now his house burns down??!?!?!?

Originally Posted by Jo_Culprit

end of story.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by amyuilani

That monthly fee is for insurance.

annual fee. That's $75 YEARLY. Don't get it twisted.

Treat it like medical or auto insurance. If you don't have the insurance but you use the service, you pay the full bill for what the service costs. This would likely be in the thousands of dollars. If there was no known agreement ahead of time between the city and the residents about what the fire fee would be about, then the tenants should sue the fire department.

It's not between city and the residents. It's between residents of some other place and a city, which agreed to provide courtesy service to the people neighboring it if they only paid $75.

The other issue that's really shitty in this story is that the county had another incident like this back in 2008

The $75/year courtesy service was instituted in 1990. You really think everybody immediately paid? Of course not. Do you honestly believe that there weren't any fires for 18 years among the free-riders? Of course not. The firefighters most likely put out the fires, tried to bill the people after the fact (if at all), and of course they got shafted. No shit, the person's house just partially burned down, if they were strapped for $75 before, how will they pay thousands now? They probably declared bankruptcy and the fire department got stuck with lawyer hours and a defunct IOU to post on their office wall. Then they said enough, and let a couple of properties burn down, I bet they got checks in the mail the very next day.

It would have meant a $0.13 increase in property taxes. But no, you can't raise taxes.

Whose fault was that?

I pose you this situation, what if one of the neighbors kids was unconscious somewhere on the property because of smoke inhalation and he was concealed from outside view so the firefighters didnt know he was there and the home owner didnt know he was there. Because that guy didnt pay the $75 that kid now dies because he was fetching a tennis ball or something.

It's farmland. With a trailer on it. There are no tennis courts on their property.

How about a more realistic scenario: what if the time these firefighters are out of the city helping this remote neighbor, a fire breaks out in the actual city and they can't be there to help?

What if one of the firefighters dies while trying to put out the fire?


What if on the way there, the firefighters get into a car accident and die or get injured, all because they were helping a free-rider?

Can you really say in any situation like that there is no chance of anyone besides the home owner getting hurt.

indeed

[mcbane89]

I can guarantee a couple of things happened here. The first is that the fire department responded regardless of the status of this guys payment. There isn't someone tasked with checking the payment history of every address that comes up in a fire alarm:

"Move move move! We got a five alarmer!
Johnson! You get the engine ready!
Jensen! You make sure the men are suited up!
Johannson! You get on Excel and go back through the last year of payments! You can't log in?! Did you leave the Cap Lock on?! It's case sensitive! I believe they're alphabetized by district! No! Not Maple Street! Maple Ave! I know! I've always thought the Sort interface was not intuitive at all!... oh... he didn't pay?... shut it down everyone, shut it down".

And secondly I can guarantee the department did an assesment when they went out and deemed the house too far gone to risk the safety of their men, and the resources on hand. They watched the house burn to make sure the fire did not spread to other homes, or the surrounding area, but if they had thought they could save it they would have. This happens all the time, they let the fire burn out. I completely understand that the man whose home it was will not understand that. That even past the point of it being too far gone he would have been pleading with the firemen, and would have given the same statement to the paper. It is an awful coincedence he didn't happen to pay the $75, but that did not factor in. It must have been incredibly hard on the firefighters on hand to watch this man go through that, I highly doubt anyone who has become a firefighter would take pleasure in watching a family lose everything because they decided to buy Halo instead of pay their fire fee. Some shit is far too real, and to have one man, let alone a group of men who risk their lives to help people all the time be that heartless is virtually impossible.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by mcbane89

things

Although your conclusion concides with mine, you're wrong on both things you guaranteed happened. First, the family was burning trash near their house, which got out of control. They couldn't put it out with their hoses, so they called 911. Since they didn't pay the service fee, they were told the firemen would not be coming to the rescue. A couple of hours later, and since they were still unable to put the fire out by themselves, it spread to their trailer home.

Once the fire grew large enough to spread to their neighbor's farm, he called 911 and the firemen responded to the call, since he paid the fee. Once they took care of their customer and made sure the fire wouldn't be back on the property, they went back to the city they're supposed to be covering.

I see this is going to be one of those issues where people make up a story about firefighters and a burning building, then draw conclusions based on their made-up stories. There's nothing more to say on this matter, you kids can have it all to yourselves.

[Jo_Culprit]

Originally Posted by DWarrior

The $75/year courtesy service was instituted in 1990. You really think everybody immediately paid? Of course not. Do you honestly believe that there weren't any fires for 18 years among the free-riders? Of course not. The firefighters most likely put out the fires, tried to bill the people after the fact (if at all), and of course they got shafted. No shit, the person's house just partially burned down, if they were strapped for $75 before, how will they pay thousands now? They probably declared bankruptcy and the fire department got stuck with lawyer hours and a defunct IOU to post on their office wall. Then they said enough, and let a couple of properties burn down, I bet they got checks in the mail the very next day.
--------------------
It's farmland. With a trailer on it. There are no tennis courts on their property.
--------------------
How about a more realistic scenario: what if the time these firefighters are out of the city helping this remote neighbor, a fire breaks out in the actual city and they can't be there to help?
--------------------
What if one of the firefighters dies while trying to put out the fire?

What if on the way there, the firefighters get into a car accident and die or get injured, all because they were helping a free-rider?

Im not gonna be a douche and push my argument further, my point was just about how well a judgement can be made about potential danger to human life in those situations, but you've raised better points so I concede.

Dwarrior you and Keith are right

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Jo_Culprit

end of story.

END OF STORY!!!

[Jo_Culprit]

Originally Posted by Keith

END OF STORY!!!

Cleary there was a sequel I wasnt aware of








I've been reassigned to the time-out corner of the Keith Fu Barracks, I suppose I'll go dig some holes.