I know that's funny and may seem well deserved for him parking front of the hydrant, but was that the only way to solve the problem?
Our first priority is to preserve life, our second is to preserve property; how does breaking windows and flooding someone's car accomplish that if there is another way to lay the hose?
We've had the same thing and we simply slid the hose under the car and then attached it to the hydrant. In other circumstances you could put the hose around the car, over the car (which cause far less damage) or if the car was unlocked, move the car.
In my state, running over a fire hose is a felony, so if the hose is under the car the owner cannot leave until the hose is recovered, effectively allowing the PD to cite the owner and seriously inconvenience him or her without unnecessarily destroying the car. Which if there was another reasonable way to lay the hose, could very likely be seen as a tort and be grounds for a lawsuit against the FD, the municipality and in some states the officer who ordered it and the FFs who laid it through the car.
For example, in this photo how much time was saved by breaking and clearing the windows rather than laying the hose in front of the car? My answer is none, and it probably took longer than the non-destructive method.
Even if they are morons, the public are our customers and we cannot wantonly destroy property for the sake of making a point when you have more reasonable options at hand.
Ok lets say we dont save time besides the engine carries some water at least half a tank well on my station we do, but the reason for its that over here on my side running over the fire hose aint a crime so they can take off and they are stouborn that they do park alongside the fire hydrant, so most of the time we do exactly that give us relief that they will learn to never park along side the hydrant.
Im sorry that its hard for them and to pay their damages has well a big fine over here but if they take off and leave not only they will most certantly damage the supply hose they will take more time to put another one, and breaking it inside dude no where else to go.
California Vehicle Code Stats.1959, c. 3, p. 1683, § 21708:
"No person shall drive or propel any vehicle or conveyance upon, over, or across, or in any manner damage any fire hose or chemical hose used by or under the supervision and control of any organized fire department. However, any vehicle may cross a hose provided suitable jumpers or other appliances are installed to protect the hose."
Who doesn't want to do this when you can? I'd love to do it, but why open myself and the department and the city up to a potentially large law suit? Tort law sucks, but the scumbag lawyers know how to use it to their advantage.