Tea Party less Gov.- Firefighters refuse to put out fire

[Joe234]

Tea Party less Gov.- Firefighters refuse to put out fire

Here's what happens where you rely on Al a carte fire protection
Tea Party style

Interview Todd Cranick - Fire Victim - 10/07/10 - Glenn Beck defends the policy

Conservatives Sit and Watch as House Burns Down

[sgreger1]

This is a small community of only about 1,000 people. They couldnt afford their own fire station so they contracted with the city next door. They had a sweet deal: we wont tax you and force you to pay for an expensivr several hundred thousand dollar a year firehouse, and if you like you may purchase fire extinguishing services for a reasonable fee of $75 a year.

They did the libertarian thing. Were not going to tax you and force you to buy fire insurance, but if you want it it is available for the low price of 75$ a year. Your an adult, you decide how you spend your money.

This guy didnt pay it and then when his house burned down he is wondering why fire insurance is not covering him. Someone please explain to me how this is different from life insurance? You know the deal, if you choose not to pay it than thats on you. The gov isnt going to force you to buy protection.


Honestly the right thing to do would be put it out and send him a bill, but that would **** everything up because then everyone will be as ignorant as this guy and say"ill just pay if a fire actually happens", at which point the fire dept will only make maybe 75$ a year since houses dont burn down often.




This is a lesson in being an adult. Next well start hearing people cry because someone robbed their house and they didnt have homeowners insurance.


Edit: And this has nothing to do with the tea party. That would be like me noticing the soviet union failed and saying "ZoMG, obama/dem party: entire nation implodes!!!!" when obama had nothing to do with it.

[Joe234]

This is a small community of only about 1,000 people. They couldnt afford their own fire station so they contracted with the city next door. They had a sweet deal: we wont tax you and force you to pay for an expensivr several hundred thousand dollar a year firehouse, and if you like you may purchase fire extinguishing services for a reasonable fee of $75 a year.

They did the libertarian thing. Were not going to tax you and force you to buy fire insurance, but if you want it it is available for the low price of 75$ a year. Your an adult, you decide how you spend your money.

This guy didnt pay it and then when his house burned down he is wondering why fire insurance is not covering him. Someone please explain to me how this is different from life insurance? You know the deal, if you choose not to pay it than thats on you. The gov isnt going to force you to buy protection.


Honestly the right thing to do would be put it out and send him a bill, but that would **** everything up because then everyone will be as ignorant as this guy and say"ill just pay if a fire actually happens", at which point the fire dept will only make maybe 75$ a year since houses dont burn down often.




This is a lesson in being an adult. Next well start hearing people cry because someone robbed their house and they didnt have homeowners insurance.


Edit: And this has nothing to do with the tea party. That would be like me noticing the soviet union failed and saying "ZoMG, obama/dem party: entire nation implodes!!!!" when obama had nothing to do with it.

If you watched the story you'd know that the neighbor had his check book out
and offered to pay $ 5-10 thousand and they still wouldn't put it out.

And as far as I'm concerned it is inhuman. Man has helped put out a neighbor's
dwelling fire for centuries. Well who said fascism is human?

[snusjus]

$75 a month for fire protection? I'd rather go with the "evil big government" approach and stick with paying taxes.

[justintempler]

If you watched the story you'd know that the neighbor had his check book out
and offered to pay $ 5-10 thousand and they still wouldn't put it out.

And as far as I'm concerned it is inhuman. Man has helped put out a neighbor's
dwelling fire for centuries. Well who said fascism is human?

Joe, There was no offer of $5,000 - $10,000. more like $500 You are just as bad as Glenn Beck making up your own facts.

The guy that's crying lived outside the city.
The annual fee is $75 a year for people that live outside of the city limits.
He started the fire himself accidently burning in barrels outside of his mobile home.
It's kind of stupid to try to save a burning mobile home after it's been burning for any length of time.

Taking $5-$10,000 from someone in desperation to save something you can NOT save would be evil.

These small town fire departments would not even exist if it was a pay as you go system.
$75.00 a year is cheap for fire protection.

This is no different then forgetting to pay your health insurance and then trying to collect after you find out you have cancer.

http://www.wbbj.com/NewsStories/1010...sSpeakOut.html

[Joe234]

This is no different then forgetting to pay your health insurance and then trying to collect after you find out you have cancer.

The difference is that with cancer one is not just left to die in this country.
The fire was left to burn.

----
This neighbor offered the fire department $5000. to also put out the original house that was on fire, but the fire battalion leader said that he would lose his job if he did.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/191077


It now turns out that this was the third house in this county to burn like this over the past few years, and in one case, a barn burned to the ground killing all the horses inside. At that fire, the firemen were apparently told before they left the station that the home owner hadn´t paid the $75.00 fee, so the fire truck never even left the station..

The recent fire eventually did spread to their neighbor´s house. But fortunately, that home owner had paid the $75.00 fee, so the firemen did keep the fire from burning down the neighbor´s house. This neighbor offered the fire department $5000. to also put out the original house that was on fire, but the fire battalion leader said that he would lose his job if he did.

[RobsanX]

The fire fighters were on the scene, with the equipment and means to put out the fire and save lives, but they chose to stand there and watch it burn, leaving a family homeless. All over a $75 dispute. I don't know how they sleep at night.

[justintempler]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...n-d-williamson

Pay-for-Spray Fire Department: Doing the Right Thing

October 4, 2010 12:44 P.M.

By Kevin D. Williamson

Dan, you are 100 percent wrong.

The situation is this: The city of South Fulton’s fire department, until a few years ago, would not respond to any fires outside of the city limits — which is to say, the city limited its jurisdiction to the city itself, and to city taxpayers. A reasonable position. Then, a few years ago, a fire broke out in a rural area that was not covered by the city fire department, and the city authorities felt bad about not being able to do anything to help. So they began to offer an opt-in service, for the very reasonable price of $75 a year. Which is to say: They greatly expanded the range of services they offer. The rural homeowners were, collectively, better off, rather than worse off. Before the opt-in program, they had no access to a fire department. Now they do.

And, for their trouble, the South Fulton fire department is being treated as though it has done something wrong, rather than having gone out of its way to make services available to people who did not have them before. The world is full of jerks, freeloaders, and ingrates — and the problems they create for themselves are their own. These free-riders have no more right to South Fulton’s firefighting services than people in Muleshoe, Texas, have to those of NYPD detectives.

[justintempler]

The difference is that with cancer one is not just left to die in this country.
The fire was left to burn.

----
This neighbor offered the fire department $5000. to also put out the original house that was on fire, but the fire battalion leader said that he would lose his job if he did.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/191077


It now turns out that this was the third house in this county to burn like this over the past few years, and in one case, a barn burned to the ground killing all the horses inside. At that fire, the firemen were apparently told before they left the station that the home owner hadn´t paid the $75.00 fee, so the fire truck never even left the station..

The recent fire eventually did spread to their neighbor´s house. But fortunately, that home owner had paid the $75.00 fee, so the firemen did keep the fire from burning down the neighbor´s house. This neighbor offered the fire department $5000. to also put out the original house that was on fire, but the fire battalion leader said that he would lose his job if he did.

Choices have consequences.

The county does NOT have a fire department. No one is stopping them from starting their own volunteer fire department.

If you don't want to start your own fire department, and you don't want to pay for someone else's fire department. How is that the city's fault?




P.S. I still want to know where the $5,000 figure that you keep repeating comes from. Have you bothered to check if it's true?

[Mordred]

I fail to understand the problem. There is a firefighting service that costs $75 a year. Those who don't pay don't get access to that service. End of story.

While I personally think that there are a lot of problems with the Tea-party movement (mostly the way it's being co-opted by the religious right a.k.a. Glenn Beck/Sarah Palin), I don't think that one man's unwise decision to not spend the money for firefighting services undermines the fundamentally libertarian ideals of the movement.

With freedom comes risk. This guy was given the freedom to spend his money as he saw fit. He chose poorly. Nevertheless, as Ben Franklin put it: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

[WickedKitchen]

It's $0.20/day for fire coverage. The guy shot himself in the foot at the end of the second video by saying that there will be people who say that they have the money and then don't have the money when it's time to pay the piper.

You can't wait until your house is burning down to get the coverage. Life simply doesn't work that way.

If they did put it out then they'd have to raise that $75/year to $77 or $80 so everyone else could pay the difference. Oh...the rich should pay for the protection of the poor? Isn't that how it works? WTF? Or raise the property taxes 0.15%...still, that's everyone else paying for it. It's not right. I'd gladly like to pick and choose what services I should pay for from my town. If there was a pay-as-you-go mentality I think our town governments (and state and federal for that matter) would be in for a rude awakening. Good for this town. It sucks for that guy, but he KNEW what he was getting in to yet expected others to bail him out. It's wrong. Terribly wrong. Now there's a charity set up for him. Huh. I bet they'll make out like bandits too...

Read "On Liberty" by John Stewart Mill...that's what this S is all about I think.

[tom502]

I would not tie this in with the Tea Party. I think they did the wrong thing, and was mad when I read their pets were killed, I'd be seeking revenge if that was me. They should have went there to put it out, and charged him the fee and maybe something extra for missing it.

[justintempler]

And you can't use the excuse that he just forgot to pay the bill.

http://www.nwtntoday.com/news.php?viewStory=46801

Tempers flare in SF after house allowed to burn; fire chief hit
By: Chris Menees, Staff Reporter
Posted: Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:05 pm
By CHRIS MENEES
Staff Reporter

South Fulton’s fire chief was assaulted Wednesday in the aftermath of a fire where firefighters were unable to respond because the property owner had not paid a rural fire subscription fee. South Fulton Fire Chief David Wilds was treated at an area hospital after being assaulted about 5:45 p.m. at the city’s fire station, located in the South Fulton Municipal Building. Timothy A. Cranick, 44, a resident of Buddy Jones Road near South Fulton, was arrested and charged with felony aggravated assault, according to South Fulton Police Chief Andy Crocker.

Crocker said the assault stemmed from a fire that occurred earlier in the day and he identified Cranick as a family member of the person whose property burned. He said Cranick allegedly came to the fire station looking for Wilds, according to witnesses. When the fire chief identified himself and asked if he could help him, Cranick allegedly struck Wilds. “He just cold-cocked him,” Crocker said, based on witness statements. Crocker said Wilds was knocked down, rendering him virtually defenseless. He said Cranick was pulled off the fire chief by other firefighters who restrained him until additional help arrived. Cranick was taken to the Obion County Law Enforcement Complex and was later taken to the hospital in Union City for treatment of a hand injury sustained in the incident.

South Fulton city manager Jeff Vowell told The Messenger that Wilds is “doing OK” today and is actually back at the fire station — despite what he characterized as a very emotional and trying day on the job Wednesday, made even more stressful by a local television news crew’s presence and then the assault incident. Wilds has referred any comment about Wednes-day’s situation to Vowell.

Fire call
The fire that sparked the controversy apparently broke out about 2:30 p.m. Wednesday at Gene Cranick’s property on Buddy Jones Road, located outside the city limits of South Fulton. Vowell explained that the property owner was not a paying member of the rural fire subscription service offered to county residents by the City of South Fulton. He said as per city policy, established by city ordinance, the call was declined and the city’s fire department could not respond.

“I have no problem with the way any of my people handled the situation. They did what they were supposed to do,” he said. “It’s a regrettable situation any time something like this happens.” He said the South Fulton Fire Department did respond to a request to protect the property of the adjacent property owner, who is a member of the rural fire subscription service. Vowell said county residents do not have guaranteed fire service since there is no countywide fire department to cover rural areas, but many municipalities offer rural fire coverage to residents in specified coverage areas for a nominal annual fee. South Fulton’s fee is $75.

However, Vowell said residents in those rural areas cannot be forced to pay the fee and it’s their decision whether to accept the coverage.

“We are a city fire department. We are responsible for the City of South Fulton and we offer a subscription (to rural residents). If they choose not to, we can’t make them,” he said. He said Obion County government has been thoroughly studying rural fire protection and “has looked at it 100 different ways,” with details of a proposal still being worked out. Ironically, the matter began to be discussed seriously just over two years ago following a similar situation where South Fulton firefighters could not respond to a rural call.

Rural service offered
South Fulton Mayor David Crocker said city officials don’t want to see anyone’s house burn, but he emphasized that South Fulton has a city fire department which is supported by city taxes in order to serve its residents — with a rural fire subscription service made available outside the city limits to county residents in the city’s designated rural coverage area. “We’re very sorry their house burned,” he said.

Mayor Crocker said if the fire department operated on a per-call basis outside the city, there would be no incentive for anyone to pay the rural fee. As an analogy, he said if an auto owner allowed their vehicle insurance to lapse, they would not expect an insurance company to pay for an unprotected vehicle after it was wrecked.

Vowell said people always think they will never be in a situation where they will need rural fire protection, but he said City of South Fulton personnel actually go above and beyond in trying to offer the service. He said the city mails out notices to customers in the specified rural coverage area, with coverage running from July 1 of one year to July 1 the next year.

At the end of the enrollment month of July, the city goes a step further and makes phone calls to rural residents who have not responded to the mail-out.

“These folks were called and notified,” Vowell said. “I want to make sure everybody has the opportunity to get it and be aware it’s available. It’s been there for 20 years, but it’s very important to follow up.”
Mayor Crocker added, “It’s my understanding with talking with the firefighters that these folks had received their bill and they had also contacted them by phone.”

“My worst nightmare is that, for whatever reason, you don’t respond to someone who isn’t (a rural fire service member). That’s why we’re so diligent and adamant,” Vowell said. “No one wants what happened yesterday. I don’t want it, the fire department doesn’t want it, the (city commission) doesn’t want it.”

Published in The Messenger 9.30.10

[justintempler]

I would not tie this in with the Tea Party. I think they did the wrong thing, and was mad when I read their pets were killed, I'd be seeking revenge if that was me. They should have went there to put it out, and charged him the fee and maybe something extra for missing it.

So tom you like paying taxes for something you don't want? I'm sure the democrats love to hear you say that when you pay your PACT and SCHIP taxes.... (remember they save lives)

[RobsanX]

Oh...the rich should pay for the protection of the poor? Isn't that how it works? WTF? Or raise the property taxes 0.15%...still, that's everyone else paying for it. It's not right. I'd gladly like to pick and choose what services I should pay for from my town. If there was a pay-as-you-go mentality I think our town governments (and state and federal for that matter) would be in for a rude awakening.

Have you seriously thought about this? What do mean by rude awakening? Are you saying that people would not pay for the service? What would happen if enough people decided not to pay the fire protection bill, and the fire department folded up? How is that a good thing?

Everyone pays, and everyone benefits. We call these people emergency responders because the respond to emergencies without the thought of money. Well, except for the South Fulton FD...