The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
No Pay? No Play!
Here's another story of a homeowner who didn't pay the subscription fee for fire protection, believing that, if he had a fire, the fire department would come anyway.
He was wrong.
This follows the same line of thinking of districts who shut down their departments, believing that, if they needed fire protection, they could rely on mutual aid.
What is wrong with that thinking?
Read the story from Tennessee: http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-bur...
TCSS.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Luechtefeld on
-
Oh, no, no - this is completely relevant to the current debate over the direction of the country and, by extension, its network of services.
It is the progressives such as I who advocate for a society that balances individual and collective responsibility. In a progressive society, no one would ever watch their home burn for want of payment. I am fortunate to live in such a place, on our Left Coast.
It is the extreme individualists - the libertarians - who would do otherwise. The rising Tea Party movement - a movement with deep roots in places like Obion County - seeks to root out and eliminate every grain of "socialism" in the name of pure individual liberty.
Don't take my word for it: this incident has sparked deep debate among conservatives about what is right and just.
As for progressives, we already know where we stand.
-
Permalink Reply by Vic Silverfish on
-
The distance between those two points is usually quite small.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
The rest of us know where the "progressives" stand, too.
"The problem with socialist is that they eventually run out of other people's money. Margaret Thatcher
What you advocate has been tried over and over with failures outnumbering successes.
The USSR - gone.
Greece - bankrupt.
Spain - close to bankrupt
Cuba - supported by other governments for decades. At least everyone is equally poor.
China - moving away from socialism and toward capitalism as fast as they can create additional foreign trade.
Many other European socialist or semi-socialst countries are cutting services and instituting mediocrity for all, because they can't afford anything else.
The Tea Party has roots everywhere - everywhere people who understand the U.S. Constitution, individual responsibility, and the benefits of limited government live. Focusing on Obion County is specious.
With the exception of one homeowner who lost a stupid gamble, the system there is working out just fine.
One homeowner's intentional failure to make an intelligent decision is no reason to institute a socialist system that is unaffordable and unsustainable.
If you want to study the roots of that "progressive" movement that you seem to like so much, read "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg, then get back to us.
Bring an open mind. You'll need it.
-
-
Daniel, that is a Straw Man logical fallacy.
-
-
The argument would be that once they saw the fire, they had an obligation to act. There's a legal term for this which eludes me at the moment...basically, a skilled person with the proper equipment MUST act in an emergency. Two problems with this:
1) If there was life at risk, this may apply, I don't know if this applies to property.
2) They still don't have a leg to stand on. The city had no obligation by mutal agreement with the homeowner! In fact, you could make a case that if they showed up and made him put out the barrels he was burning that the FD was trespassing!
The homeowner will sue,and that will make the papers. The lawsuit will get tossed out of court, probably via summary judgement, and that will not make the news at all.
-
-
No Daniel, you are completely wrong and on several counts.
Libertarian thought is indeed the home of "Night Watchman" government -the philosophy that the first and most important job of government is public safety.
On the federal level, that's the armed services. On the local level, it's fire, police, and EMS.
The situation in Obion County isn't based on ideology, it's based on economics. It costs the county homeowners less to pay the subscription fee and have South Fulton provide their fire protection than it would to start their own fire department.
The ideology here is simply an economic reality, nothing more, nothing less.
When you start citing a mega-biased source like Olberman, that's tantamount to self-dismissal, dude.
And, when you start looking for a "larger truth" in an issue that is indeed very narrow, then I'll flatly call B.S. there, dude.
So Daniel, how many times have you been to Obion County? How long did you live in Tennessee?
And if you are really a socialist, then you need to start taxing yourself and sending the money to Obion County so that they can have that socialized fire department that you so ardently believe they need.
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
The argument would be that once they saw the fire, they had an obligation to act
Actually there wasn't a duty to act, even with seeing fire. The duty to act fell with the neighbor, who paid the subscription, to protect exposures on his property.
There wasn't a life threat involved but a life threat trumps money issues. This is why many who are trying to make the case about MVAs etc doesn't apply.
-
-
I call shennanigans on that one, Vic.
People of all philosophies try to game the system to their benefit.
In this case, the homeowner just tried to be cheap and it cost him a lot more than the $75 subscription he didn't pay.
-
-
It's amazing how that works when you don't bring your absurd biases to the table.
(Tongue planted firmly in cheek)
-
-
There are lots of reasons to avoid responding out of jurisdiction to disasters or anything other call type.
Chronic underfunding.
Small department that needs mutual aid just to staff RIT.
Resource-need mismatch.
And the reason my department didn't send anyone to NYC for the 9/11 aftermath - we don't self-dispatch to incidents of national significance.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
