Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
THE MATRIX

Tennessee family home burns while firefighter

82 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

questionmark

Well if you think about it too:

In a more sparse or rural area. By the time the someone thought to call the fire department and they arrived; a trailer probably was beyond saving anyways. Once a fire has spread enough it would cost more to fix it than to just let it burn to the ground and buy a new one. Maybe it was already past the point of saving by the time they got there. It'd make for a more sensational story if you didn't mention that.

At a closer look a fitting assessment. If the thing burns to the ground it has no rest value to be discounted from the insurance money at payout time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

In Ancient Rome, the fire department equivalent was run much like this, they'd turn up to a fire and say "ten sisterci" or something similar and then put out the fire. Sometimes they'd buy the house while it was on fire and put the fire out after buying it.

I'm not sure whether the situtation in America is a step up or a step down from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_Snstr

At a closer look a fitting assessment. If the thing burns to the ground it has no rest value to be discounted from the insurance money at payout time.

That's a very good point. It's right up my alley too; such a sinister act, done with altruistic intent.

Edited by Mr_Snstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ninjadude

First of all, IMO, fire, police, etc should be paid by taxes not subscriptions. It is in a societies best interest to put out fires, catch criminals,etc. What is being done there is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
little_dreamer

The firefighters should have asked them to pay the $75, or a higher amount, when they showed up at the scene. Though there is probably a law against this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Order66

Where did it say that the family were in any danger? And why should the fire department make an Exception for them when everybody else have to play by the same rules?

Well if Conservative firemen ever come to help you, I fully expect you to refuse their help purely on principle :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THE MATRIX

Well if Conservative firemen ever come to help you, I fully expect you to refuse their help purely on principle :yes:

So let me get this straight. Conservatives believe that everyone

should be able to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps

and not freeload of on others who they don't have a right to. SO this

family that didn't pay their $75 for fire services deserve to get free

service for not paying. So basically since this family did not pay for

this service you are advocating that that it's OK for them to try and

freeload of the fire department. This is what makes Conservatives

a bunch of HYPOCRITES! Not only that, but now you are just trying

to justify your Flimsy argument that it's OK to FreeLoad of the Fire Dept.

base on the fact that it is Naturally Moral and Ethical. And to say

that the Fire Dept should have put out the fire and then have them

billed late is nothing but a bunch of bullcrap. Why should this couple who

were unwilling to pay the $75 for the fire service should be treated any

differently when others did pay the fee and were paying by the rules. This

only shows that shows how Conservatives and how their DELUSIONAL

beliefs works. Hell bent on making others follow in their LOCKSTEP

ideas and beliefs yet they themselves can't seem to follow it

and when being called out on it try to justify with FLIMSY and PATHETIC

arguments.

SO I ASK AGAIN. WHY SHOULD THEY BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY WHEN OTHER RESIDENTS PAID THEIR FEES AND WERE PLAYING BY THE RULES? RATHER THAN JUST GIVING ME SOME FLIMSY ARGUMENT ABOUT HOW IT IS MORAL AND ETHICAL? BECAUSE LIKE I SAID IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT PUT OUT ALL FIRES MORALLY AND ETHICALLY THEY WOULD BE BROKE BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY. OR ARE YOU AND OTHER CONSERVATIVES NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Order66

So let me get this straight. Conservatives believe that everyone

should be able to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps

and not freeload of on others who they don't have a right to. SO this

family that didn't pay their $75 for fire services deserve to get free

service for not paying. So basically since this family did not pay for

this service you are advocating that that it's OK for them to try and

freeload of the fire department. This is what makes Conservatives

a bunch of HYPOCRITES! Not only that, but now you are just trying

to justify your Flimsy argument that it's OK to FreeLoad of the Fire Dept.

base on the fact that it is Naturally Moral and Ethical. And to say

that the Fire Dept should have put out the fire and then have them

billed late is nothing but a bunch of bullcrap. Why should this couple who

were unwilling to pay the $75 for the fire service should be treated any

differently when others did pay the fee and were paying by the rules. This

only shows that shows how Conservatives and how their DELUSIONAL

beliefs works. Hell bent on making others follow in their LOCKSTEP

ideas and beliefs yet they themselves can't seem to follow it

and when being called out on it try to justify with FLIMSY and PATHETIC

arguments.

SO I ASK AGAIN. WHY SHOULD THEY BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY WHEN OTHER RESIDENTS PAID THEIR FEES AND WERE PLAYING BY THE RULES? RATHER THAN JUST GIVING ME SOME FLIMSY ARGUMENT ABOUT HOW IT IS MORAL AND ETHICAL? BECAUSE LIKE I SAID IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT PUT OUT ALL FIRES MORALLY AND ETHICALLY THEY WOULD BE BROKE BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY. OR ARE YOU AND OTHER CONSERVATIVES NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mekorig

This is the kind of incidents that happens in the USA that, as a citizen of other country, i can not understad. Here the firemen are like the policeman, public servicemen backed by the state and supported trough common taxes. The idea of "mercenary" firemen is really weird to me.

Edited by Mekorig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dredimus
When I'm called to duty god

wherever flames may rage

give me strength to save a life

whatever be its age

Help me to embrace a little child

before it is too late

or save an older person from

the horror of that fate

Enable me to be alert

to hear the weakest shout

and quickly and efficiently

to put the fire out

I want to fill my calling and

to give the best in me

to guard my neighbour and

protect his property And if according to your will

I have to lose my life

bless with your protecting hand

my children and my wife

Edited by Dredimus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xYlvax

I agree that they shouldn't have helped to a degree.. They could've let it burn half-way and then put it out. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

This is the kind of incidents that happens in the USA that, as a citizen of other country, i can not understad. Here the firemen are like the policeman, public servicemen backed by the state and supported trough common taxes. The idea of "mercenary" firemen is really weird to me.

There where people are unwilling to pay taxes and even oppose the idea of others paying taxes there is no such a thing as the service for the common good by the government. There is just the service for the government and everybody else is on its own. Like Europe used to be in the Middle Ages....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword

This is the kind of incidents that happens in the USA that, as a citizen of other country, i can not understad. Here the firemen are like the policeman, public servicemen backed by the state and supported trough common taxes. The idea of "mercenary" firemen is really weird to me.

Actually I've never heard of this either. Where I live there is no annual fee for fire fighting services. My only explanation is that Tennesee is a very poor state and the county where this happened must be very very poor compared to most Americans.

If that's not reason then this is an even huger disgrace than it already seems to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

This is the kind of incidents that happens in the USA that, as a citizen of other country, i can not understad. Here the firemen are like the policeman, public servicemen backed by the state and supported trough common taxes. The idea of "mercenary" firemen is really weird to me.

It's not a common occurrence or situation hence the reason it made the news.

Almost every state has a few outlying areas in counties that collect a fee for a volunteer fire department and it pays for the equipment only. It is mostly in rural areas that can't afford to have firefighters on the payroll 24/7 and a lot of them aren't officially trained. It is usually voted on in the local elections and most people know by the time the firefighters get to their remote location the house will be a total loss. There may not even be a fire hydrant for miles and only one tanker truck in service.

Your neighbors are the best defense in most situations in these sparsely populated areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

Actually, after looking around, there are a lot more places with firefighting fees than I expected. So, this is probably not as uncommon as I thought.

A new fee for firefighting services has received the state’s OK despite complaints about its financial burden to rural Californians.

The surcharge passed by forestry officials on Monday was less than previously announced, with many families qualifying for discounts.

The state Board of Forestry and Fire Protection unanimously approved a maximum $90 emergency fee on habitable buildings outside cities.

Read more: http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/thousands-of-residents-hit-with-new-firefighting-fee/article_25852ec8-cdf9-11e0-b7b1-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1g41W1tja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoIverine

Just curious, but what if there had been kids, or animals in the house while it was burning down, and the firefighters were just there roasting their marshmallows and hot dogs? Then what? Someone will have to die for this stupidity to end.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

Just curious, but what if there had been kids, or animals in the house while it was burning down, and the firefighters were just there roasting their marshmallows and hot dogs? Then what?

The first order of business is to ensure pets and people are safe. That is the extent of their commitment if the fees have not been paid.

Edited by Michelle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

Just curious, but what if there had been kids, or animals in the house while it was burning down, and the firefighters were just there roasting their marshmallows and hot dogs? Then what? Someone will have to die for this stupidity to end.

Even though many states have passed Good Samaritan laws (I am not sure about Tennessee) there is no law implying a "Duty to Rescue" in the US (as exist in Canada or many European countries) for anybody. Best that can happen to a non-volunteer is that he/she gets fired for failure to act unless the person failing to act caused the situation.

Failing to rescue anybody can get you a maximum of a few thousand in fines in the US. Failure to report the incident can get you a jail sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

Even though many states have passed Good Samaritan laws (I am not sure about Tennessee) there is no law implying a "Duty to Rescue" in the US (as exist in Canada or many European countries) for anybody. Best that can happen to a non-volunteer is that he/she gets fired for failure to act unless the person failing to act caused the situation.

Failing to rescue anybody can get you a maximum of a few thousand in fines in the US. Failure to report the incident can get you a jail sentence.

The Good Samaritan law doesn't apply to firefighters...volunteer or not. They are required to ensure everyone is safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

The Good Samaritan law doesn't apply to firefighters...volunteer or not. They are required to ensure everyone is safe.

Yania Vs Bigan (Penn 1956) denies that and Castle Rock v. Gonzales does, so does People v. Beardsley.

They have a duty within the terms of their employment. If their terms of employment seez that they don't have to help those who have not paid the fee it falls under the Good Samaritan law at best. They have to call whoever is responsible to rescue and that is the end of it. If there is nobody responsible, well, tough luck.

The only ones with a definite obligation to rescue are common carriers but that is limited to their patrons (de Vera VS. Long Beach Public Transportation), property owners have to rescue invitees (but not trespassers see Buch VS Amory), spouses have the duty to rescue their spouse, parents the duty to rescue their children (that also applies to all professionals acting in place of parents, babysitter, teacher and so on), creators of a peril have the obligation to rescue whomever fell into it and professional rescuers within the scope of their obligations (wherein their obligation does not extend to just anybody anywhere as ruled three times by the Supreme Court.)

Now, I would not know whether the South Fulton rules say that thy have to rescue people but not douse fires. If that was the case you would be right.

Edited by questionmark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
randym23

i think it's appalling that there is even a fee. I certainly hope it's because this is a rural area with only a volunteer fire department. If its not, then this situation is insane. what if someone was dying in there? would they not go in then either?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
randym23

If they didn't want to pay taxes to fund the fire department and would rather pay a fee for service than it is what it is. You can't compare Katrina to this. This is about not wanting to pay and trying to get something for free and when crap hits the fan, they tried to wiggle their way out of it by wanting to pay at the last minute. Sorry but it doesn't work that way. I say TOUGH S***!. they deserve to have their home burn to the ground. They and the people of Tennessee wanted this type of Conservatism then they have to live with the results of it.

you are a sociopath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr_Snstr

i think it's appalling that there is even a fee. I certainly hope it's because this is a rural area with only a volunteer fire department. If its not, then this situation is insane. what if someone was dying in there? would they not go in then either?

There's no state income tax here in Tennesee. We prefer our services al a cart. :lol:

That place is a rural area, I believe it was a volunteer fire department as well. The fee generally goes toward equipment.

Which makes me beleive what questionmark suggested earlier even more. That letting it burn to the ground would have allowed a bigger, and simpler insurance payoff. Or that it was already beyond saving by the time they got there.

Why volunteer then turn your back? It makes no sense. I bet there's more to it than meets the eye.

But that it also made for a sensational sounding story, "firefighters turn their back on a burning home because of failure to pay 75$ fee." the more you think about the more ridiculous it sounds.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were all in on scamming insurance companies with this. Don't pay your fee, they don't put out the fire. *ca-ching!* It's payday...

Either that or methlabs...

Edited by Mr_Snstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

There's no state income tax here in Tennesee. We prefer our services al a cart. :lol:

That place is a rural area, I believe it was a volunteer fire department as well. The fee generally goes toward equipment.

We are talking a family that lives in a trailer, which probably means that they would not have had the $75 fee to spare. It would be very social of South Fulton to exempt those from the fee who are hardly capable of surviving to start with.

Besides can't South Fulton just impose a income dependent council tax to pay for these things?

Edited by questionmark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly

I can't believe they stood around and let it burn just fer spite. ... a might peculiar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.