The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Tennessee Firefighters Let Home Burn Over Subscription Issue
JASON HIBBS
WPSD
Reprinted with Permission
OBION COUNTY, Tenn. - Imagine your home catches fire but the local fire department won't respond, then watches it burn. That's exactly what happened to a local family tonight.
Related
- WPSD: Firefighters Watch as Home Burns to the Ground
- WPSD: More Fallout Following House Fire
- USAToday: Firefighters watch house burn because owner hadn't paid $...
- MSNBC: No pay, no spray: Firefighters let home burn
FireEMSBlogs.com Updates
A local neighborhood is furious after firefighters watched as an Obion County, Tennessee, home burned to the ground.
The homeowner, Gene Cranick, said he offered to pay whatever it would take for firefighters to put out the flames, but was told it was too late. They wouldn't do anything to stop his house from burning.
Each year, Obion County residents must pay $75 if they want fire protection from the city of South Fulton. But the Cranicks did not pay.
The mayor said if homeowners don't pay, they're out of luck.
This fire went on for hours because garden hoses just wouldn't put it out. It wasn't until that fire spread to a neighbor's property, that anyone would respond.
Turns out, the neighbor had paid the fee.
"I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick.
Because of that, not much is left of Cranick's house.
They called 911 several times, and initially the South Fulton Fire Department would not come.
The Cranicks told 9-1-1 they would pay firefighters, whatever the cost, to stop the fire before it spread to their house.
"When I called I told them that. My grandson had already called there and he thought that when I got here I could get something done, I couldn't," Paulette Cranick.
It was only when a neighbor's field caught fire, a neighbor who had paid the county fire service fee, that the department responded. Gene Cranick asked the fire chief to make an exception and save his home, the chief wouldn't.
We asked him why.
He wouldn't talk to us and called police to have us escorted off the property. Police never came but firefighters quickly left the scene. Meanwhile, the Cranick home continued to burn.
We asked the mayor of South Fulton if the chief could have made an exception.
"Anybody that's not in the city of South Fulton, it's a service we offer, either they accept it or they don't," Mayor David Crocker said.
Friends and neighbors said it's a cruel and dangerous city policy but the Cranicks don't blame the firefighters themselves. They blame the people in charge.
"They're doing their job," Paulette Cranick said of the firefighters. "They're doing what they are told to do. It's not their fault."
To give you an idea of just how intense the feelings got in this situation, soon after the fire department returned to the station, the Obion County Sheriff's Department said someone went there and assaulted one of the firefighters.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Thanks for the kind words Art.
-
-
Ricky,
You failed to see the point as Jack points out. When you are griping about some people can't afford $75 for a subscription for fire service, then that would mean that there wouldn't be cable/ satellite TV, internet, cell phone, etc because those are "wants" and not "needs". Point is the cost for such items are typically more than $75 a MONTH vs a year.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Well then I bow down before you and your expansive knowledge and abilities.
As regards the issue at hand, I'm sure the best you could do would be a cartoon and construction paper drawing - I was a seabee and I'm well aware of the failings of many jarheads marines.
In my department we wouldn't stand by either, but then that's because everyone has fire protection. We are rather advanced beyond the Obion County standards. But nonetheless, I stand by all my comments. If you think your high moral values are just that, all well and good. It still doesn't change the facts that the fire department had NO duty to act and were there to protect the PAID subscriber.
Personally I think you're in the wrong profession, rather than collaring a suspect, I suspect that maybe you should wear a collar. It would suit both your need to be in a uniform as well as your need to save everyone.
-
-
Ah John and Jack.......you obviously have no clue of the meaning of duty to act.....you have no moral values.............you must both be the sons of politicians
Actually I do have a clue about a duty to act and there was no duty to act in this case. I also understand about following orders and orders were followed in this case.
I can't tell you what a dept. in my state would do if we even had this kind of situation. But your gonna tell me that you as a human being and a firefighter would not feel like you needed to do something in that incident?
Chances are there are not subscription services in your state, meaning that tax dollars cover the expenses for fire protection. Also when orders are given they are followed....considering your profile pic, I would hope you understand that concept....regardless of what one "wants" to do.
So he was a fool and decided to be different and not pay. Probably was a typical guy and said to himself, "That'll never happen to this house, I've made this a safe fortress". Well when the place caught fire I'm sure within seconds he learned his lesson.
And when there are floods and no insurance, one can't expect to get it when the waters are rising. When one gets in a car accident and doesn't have insurance, they aren't going to get covered for the incident after the fact. He gambled and lost, plain and simple.
I learned over the years sometimes you have to know when to make decisions that go against the rules but in a tactful way to accomplish a job.
And when you ignore orders, that constitutes freelancing. Again, someone with military experience should understand the importance of following orders even if not agreeing with the order.
-
-
Thanks for providing some more info in which some of us here have been saying but many are not hearing.
The county has made a efforts to get fire coverage to that area and the only people that ever show up to the meetings are the people that do not want there taxes to go up. The last thing the county offered was a tax that would make the property tax go up $50.00 per property that a person owns.
This goes to show that one does get what they pay for (or don't pay for). The right thing to do is paltry when the very people receiving the service don't want to pay any more for it.
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Gormley on
-
I am very put off by this incident because it involves 2 failures. First is the failure of the local government to do what is right and second, the failure of the local public service to do what is right. If you are involved in public service, then you do what is right, even if your politicians deem it the wrong course of action. That is why we are a democratic society. I do not see the mayor getting re-elected after this failure. To demand a fee for a public service is just insane. I am glad I live in Texas where we even have volunteer Fire Departments that will risk their lives for no payment whatsoever.
No offense intended but the supposed "fire fighters" in the news story represented a failure in humanity and society. I would hope everyone learns from this mistake and if they are working for a similar institute, they will do what is right and humane.
This is America, not some Communist country. Requiring a yearly payment for Emergency Services is a very Communistic approach and should be challenged at all levels. It is my hope that that all areas that have a "pay before you are saved" policy, are challenged to the end, to stop their Communistic ways.
-
-
One case being a helicopter pilot that after asking his crew first, put his huey down in the middle of a fire fight so his crew chief could save a wounded Marine
It is about context Mike. The situation I mentioned is about standing by while two other countries duke it out. The situation you are replying about consists of another Marine down, not about sitting back. Basically, the issue is that in this case, there is no duty to act by the fire dept....just like there would be no duty to act if observing two other countries duke it out.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Which "community". The one with the fire department, or the one that intentionally chose to not have a fire department and to let their individual homeowners contract with the neighboring jurisdiction's fire department...or not?
-
-
I agree, John.
The military helicopter analogy doesn't fit the context.
-
-
First is the failure of the local government to do what is right
Perhaps. It probably would be better for a tax based service rather than subscription, but if you read Billy's reply, that isn't what the public wants....in a democratic society.
second, the failure of the local public service to do what is right.
They did do what was right. They protected the exposures of the property owner who did pay for the service. The FD had no duty to act for the fire in question.
The mayor in question is not an elected official for this community. The residents of which the mayor governs pay taxes and receive said services. The community which this occurred chose instead of paying taxes for the service, or having their own service, deemed that subscriptions would be done for fire service. The onus of responsibility falls solely on the person who had the fire.
I am glad I live in Texas where we even have volunteer Fire Departments that will risk their lives for no payment whatsoever.
Make no mistake the issue isn't about the firefighters responding without expectation of pay. This issue lies with the elected officials and not the fire dept.
Requiring a yearly payment for Emergency Services is a very Communistic approach and should be challenged at all levels. It is my hope that that all areas that have a "pay before you are saved" policy, are challenged to the end, to stop their Communistic ways.
Easy there McCarthy, slow down a bit with the communist propaganda. So are you thus saying that paying taxes is a communist approach? This community does NOT....I repeat NOT, pay taxes for fire service. Instead it was deemed subscription would be available in lieu of taxes, thus placing the burden of cost on the property owner.
Also, make no mistake, even in a volunteer dept, there is still significant cost involved. Equipment must be purchased, equipment breaks down and needs repairing, training involves cost, fuel involves cost and so forth. Do you think fire depts go out and get money from the money tree out back? No, that is why people pay taxes.....in this case, instead of taxes, you pay a subscription....if you don't wish to pay that subscription....don't expect service.
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Klaene on
-
First I say not one of us should be faulting the firefighters that obeyed orders and stood by. Without order there is chaos and that is not ever good especially on a fire scene. That said there is blame that should be placed. I agree the county officials definitely share some responsibility here as does the homeowner. If a county/city enacts fees like this you can't just assume that if you didn't get paid then that was the homeowners choice. What happens when teh property sells or payment of letter is lost in the mail? For a system like this to work you should charge everyone the tax but allow folks to come in and sign a waiver to decline the tax. It has to be signed every year and any time the property changes hands. This is the only sensible way to handle something like this. Even if they refuse it should be stated that life saving efforts would be done or any other action as deemed appropriate to protect other property and that the homeowner would be charged for those services.
the decline must be an "informed" decision
If a child was trapped would the results had been the same
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Henderson on
-
Communism? Really? You have a funny defition of communism. This policy is Laissez Faire Capitalism at it's finest. You pay the fee you get protection, you don't your screwed. You're not forced to pay for anything - you have complete economic control over what services you get from the government.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
