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 Ben Waller on
-
John,
Thanks for pointing out that personal feelings aren't pertinent.
You are correct.
-
Permalink Reply by Herb Genelly III on
-
Ben,
You want some cheese with that whine? I'm retired, so at least I have an excuse for hanging out on the blog all the time. What's your excuse dude?
Ben.............why don't you answer my questions about Tactics & Strategy when addressing non-subscribers homes? That's right................you can't!
-
-
Herb,
I'm not confused at all. I have a very clear picture of the issues here, and I don't resort to non-factual information and logical fallacies in an attempt to shore up my position. You have done both, repeatedly. That seems to indicate that the confusion is squarely on your part.
We're not talking about abortion, so that example is nothing more than a Red Herring. Are you REALLY trying to use every logical fallacy in the book to justify your position here?
The fire department EXACTLY did the moral thing - they didn't unfairly provide free services to someone while charging his neighbor for the same services.
And Herb, your post here isn't accurate. The engine crew was not "doing nothing" They were standing by to protect their subscriber's property as necessary.
In other words, they were doing EXACTLY the moral, ethical, and legal thing.
And Herb, the fire department did EXACTLY what they were supposed to do.
-
-
So Keith, are you saying that it is moral to charge the neighbor for fire protection and to give it to the other homeowner for free?
-
Permalink Reply by M.J. 6821 on
-
I agree with you Keith they did not do the moral thing you have a person asking for help because his house is on fire and they said no. Its not our job to determine who paid what and when. Our job is to help people at least thats why I joined.
-
-
Eric,
Why should there be mandatory, tax-supported fire protection in a jurisdiction that has repeatedly demonstrated that they don't want it?
That sounds very much like "taxation without representation".
-
-
Herb,
What you are advocating here is bribery.
Do you SERIOUSLY think the fire chief should listen to the homeowner offer him increasing levels of bribes to have him violate his city's written policy?
Are your really supporting the homeowner in his attempt to bribe a public official?
So much for your "MORAL" argument.
-
Permalink Reply by Vic Silverfish on
-
Ben,
Oh jeez...that brings up a whole raft of other issues.
-
-
Sam,
"...because we take an unspoken oath to protect property and lives."
Wrong. An "unspoken oath" isn't an oath.
Further, those spoken firefighter oaths have conditions. A common one is that you promise to protect life and property "within your jurisdiction" or "within your area of responsibility".
The fire in question was neither in the fire department's jurisdiction (it was outside the city limits) nor was it within their area of responsibility (it wasn't a subscriber's property).
-
-
Herb, another ad hominem attack from you - yet another logical fallacy.
Namecalling is juvenile. My children gave it up in middle school.
-
-
Unless you can show some evidence that the new fire chief "...decided he was also the new sheriff in town..." then I call B.S.
I think you just made that up.
Unless you can show some evidence, that's the logical interpretation.
-
-
"The act of not acting to someone's house on fire and watching it burn is wrong regardless of where you live."
Really, Michael?
What about a vacant house in Detroit that has had several previous fires, is a neighborhood nuisance, and which has no value?
What about an isolated house threatened by a wildfire when all available resources are needed to protect savable groups of other houses?
What about a house contaminated with hazardous materials and the fire extinguishment will create a bigger hazard than letting it burn?
What about a booby-trapped house containing a meth lab?
And Michael, the fact that the neighbors were furious has no bearing on whether or not the fire department did the right thing. I can be furious that my local fire department won't provide me with free fire protection, but that doens't mean that I'd be right.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
