Here is a story that will get a debate going.
Seems a town in Tennessee arranged with another town to give it fire protection. Then everyone in the town was told to pay $75 per year for fire protection to pay the other town.
So a house caught on fire and the guy had not paid. The Fire Dept responded to keep the neighbors house - who had paid - from catching fire, but did nothing to put out the original fire.
So the debate rages now. Should the fire dept have put out the fire anyway and saved the guys house?
Its a no-win situation. If the Fire dept puts it out, then there is no incentive for any other citizen to pay the fee.
The guy actually admitted that he deliberately did not pay the fee. He said he thought they would come and put out the fire anyway.
This does speak to the role of government. Everyone on their own is not necessarily a good thing.
I think this is why in most most areas taxes are collected from everyone to avoid such a situation.
You kind of missed the point! He had the chance to make the decision - even if it was the wrong one as it turned out! They didn't just take his money whether he thought he would ever need them or not!
ReplyDeleteI wonder if those firefighters at the Twin Towers would have checked to see if everyone had paid there fee before rushing into the Twin Towers!
They ought to FIRE them ALL - especailly those who were involved in that incident in your story!
They had to take the equipment out there to protect the surrounding buildings then chose to dishonor their own oath - "To protect life and property"!
I'll bet the Insurance Companies have the last word! By raising all the rates on the property owners of both towns. (The Hatfields and the Mc Coys.)
ReplyDeleteIts the same type arrangement Rural Fire District 5 (parkerfield) has with Arkansas City.
ReplyDeleteIts just that its added to everyones taxes there, but if they had started that rural fire dept. that they talked about a few year ago, they might have had this system.
Well here is the last paragraph on an article on CNN today!
ReplyDeleteIts about a Father who has had to endure the ordeal of reliving the nightmare for two weeks in court of his family being killed! (wife and daughters raped then their house burned!)
They were wondering where he got his strength to endure the stress and agony of being forced to relive the event daily in court as the criminals were tried and eventually convicted!
"Over the last couple of weeks, I just kept trying to tell myself that good will overcome evil, and we'll keep trying to do good things and [I'll] try to refocus myself on the positive and stay away from the negative," he said.
Do you think that someone who chose not to buy car insurance should get a new car from the insurance company if they wreck theirs?
ReplyDeleteThat is what this boils down to. The guy took a risk (to save $75) and lost. The fire department was in the right.
The fire department was in the right.
ReplyDeleteThey sure were and probably setting on the Pumper trucks roasting marshmellows off the heat from the guys house!
One of these days there will be a screw up on billing and they will get roasted!
There is simply NO excuse for them to have the equipment on site and refuse to use it for the very purpose it was designed and for them to refuse to do the job for which they were trained!
But in Todays world two wrongs do make it RIGHT!
Welcome to the new world order. A world where cities, towns & counties scrap for every penny.
ReplyDeleteFirst off...if you divide $75 by 1 year it comes to approx. .20 cents a day. Pretty cheap to insure theres a crack team of firefighters at your beck and call 24/7.
Quote: "I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong."
Quote: "I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong."
ReplyDeleteNice try, but they would probably JUMP at the chance to practice their training on an old abandoned building! (Especially if it was owned by a KEY politician or someone of economic status in the area!)
But when faced with the Real EVENT! Break out the marshmellows!
They are a disgrace to the Firefighters profession!
@9:12 ahhhh...no, they're not. Not to forget, the decision was not theirs to make. They are employees. The decision was the homeowner's to make. He chose not to pay the measly $75. Hard? Yes? Ever make a decision that you regretted later? Sure. We all have. I hate to see anybody lose their home. But...facts are facts. The homeowner is to blame. It is his fault. I bet he pays it on time from now on. What you bet? $75.00 is nothing to the FD. It won't pay for trucks, people, insurance, food at the dept., training, radios, equipment, etc., $75. is a gift. Just something to say: "we charged you something". This guy refuses to pay even that.
ReplyDelete$75.00 is nothing to the FD. It won't pay for trucks, people, insurance, food at the dept., training, radios, equipment, etc., $75. is a gift. Just something to say: "we charged you something".
ReplyDeleteBoy you couldn't have made my point any better than what you just did!
$75.00 probably just paid for the hotdogs and marshmellows!
$75. is a gift. Just something to say: "we charged you something".
ReplyDeleteBtw: I wonder if Real Firefighters would have put out the Fire and then just sent him a BILL for his $75.00 that he didn't pay?
Here is the part that is going to get interesting!
ReplyDeleteI wonder if that Town with the Fire Dept. (even if its a volunteer FD) gets any funding/assistance from Federal, State, or County tax coffers to which that indivdual contributes/pays taxes?
Then to just to make him an example they withheld help (when they were already there) for the non payment of $75.00?
Oh, I bet if he wants to push it - it gets Smokey!
No doubt..there's a few lawyers salivating over this right now. Lawyers....:( what are lawyers good for? You watch any TV lately? "If you took this medicine, call 1-800". "If you worked here, call 1-800" I have a better word: Ambulance chasers. Anyways, whatever. Like I said...I bet the gentleman pays his measley 75.00 now. Wanna bet?
ReplyDeleteWanna bet?
ReplyDeleteWell I don't condone the non payment on that individuals part!
But, the point is - that Fire Dept. is a Public Service owned by a PUBLIC ENTITY not PRIVATELY OWNED!
They no doubt are funded/assisted by other PUBLIC ENTITIES! (At least State and County!)
They should have put out the FIRE using PUBLIC OWNED EQUIPMENT and PUBLIC (Trained/PAID?) EMPLOYEES then let all the other details GET WORKED OUT!
after the EMERGENCY!
The example would have still remained - that $75.00 was a tiny amount compared to a significant loss!
I don't like lawyers who defend willfully negligent or reckless PEOPLE!
BUT
I really don't like PUBLIC OFFICIALS who assume the use of their POWER to make examples at the expense of basic law abiding indivduals!
(There was no law that he had to buy the coverage!)
If it was a PRIVATE COMPANY they have a right to do whatever they CHOOSE! (unless they are under some sort of contract.)
If the thing you value the most is MONEY!
($75.00?)
Then COMMON SENSE has no VALUE and can't be bought/found anywhere! (On the part of the individual or the part of the FD/City!)
because then
Money determines RIGHT and WRONG!
The PUBLIC in question who paid for the truck etc was the town, not the county where this took place. The guy knew what he needed to do to be protected, and he chose not to do it. Plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with the "pay to spray" way of doing things, but if the FD broke their rule for him, then nobody would pay and the FD would not have the funds to keep going.
The common sense part is - If they had put the fire out they are still protecting their paying clients (from that fire)! Then they should probably charge a higher rate for those non-paying customers to encourage their/others participation!
ReplyDelete