Pay to Spray??? Homeowner looses everything...

kawizx9r

inspiredsports wrote: »

Sad yes, but in the Chicago story, there was no lack of payment so I don't understand the correlation. Are you thinking the NJ house might have burned to the groudn even if the owner didn't refuse to pay the fee?

What I was getting at is, even though it wasn't my house that had burned down...you can't even imagine how that family felt seeing them there as they watched all their possessions/memories taken away from them unless you've experienced it yourself. I never have but after witnessing that, it really hit me hard.

I guess the FD proved a point when they refused to help due to the situation, however I still think they should've had the heart to help out. If it were me, I would've.

inspiredsports wrote: »

Does the homeowner get a new home if he also didn't pay homwowners insurance? Car if he didn't pay car insurance? Life if he didn't pay life insurance? Free health care. Guaranteed job? Free lunch?

I didn't buy a lottery ticket. Do I win 42 million?

Really? Let's be reasonable here...

tonyb

He is being reasonable Freddy. We are talking material things here, not human life. A car,house, bike, airplane,boat, if lost or damaged without insurance, is on you, not the taxpayer. You don't think the firemen wanted to put it out ? They would lose their jobs in an area were jobs are not easy to come by and the sucky economy isn't helping. I would like to think in the event a human life was at stake,it would have turned out different. So no life was at stake,and you expect the firemen to sacrifice their job because some guy didn't want to pay up ? Oh yes, the dogs, well...I'm sure he spends way more than 75 bucks a year to feed these animals. Whats the priority here, getting a dog,or securing your home in case of a fire ? Like I said,I feel for the guy,but he created this scenario,not the fire dept.

kawizx9r

I'm not saying if he lost his house and didn't have insurance that he should be compensated for it or anything. If he has no insurance, that's on him (and any/everyone else)

I meant, the FD should've at least tried to put it out that's all.

inspiredsports

kawizx9r wrote: »

What I was getting at is, even though it wasn't my house that had burned down...you can't even imagine how that family felt seeing them there as they watched all their possessions/memories taken away from them unless you've experienced it yourself. I never have but after witnessing that, it really hit me hard.

I guess the FD proved a point when they refused to help due to the situation, however I still think they should've had the heart to help out. If it were me, I would've.



Really? Let's be reasonable here...

OK, and it wont' be me, but someone who feels the guy was screwed STEP UP and start a fund for him. The rest who agree chip in. Polkies, let's quit moaning and do something! Put your money where your mouth is.


Oh, but wait, the rest of you who DON'T agree will also be levied a donation just because you are a member of CP.

kawizx9r

Start a fund for him?

Never did I mention such a thing. Whether he had insurance or not, that's the homeowners fault. As I stated before, that goes without saying for anyone.

The only thing I've emphasized on or even talked about is the fact that the FD was there and they did nothing.

I'm only 25 years old but a disabled veteran that's gone to Iraq several times, you don't see me asking for a fund or a parade in my name...

Tony M

inspiredsports wrote: »

OK, and it wont' be me, but someone who feels the guy was screwed STEP UP and start a fund for him. The rest who agree chip in. Polkies, let's quit moaning and do something! Put your money where your mouth is.


Oh, but wait, the rest of you who DON'T agree will also be levied a donation just because you are a member of CP.

I would like to quote a bunch of posts I really agree with but don't know how yet.I'll get it one day.

I do agree that americans that think he was wronged could put in 5.00 to a fund and he'd have 10 million bonus dollars for being a victum probably.

I'm not one of them but I still feel for the poor pets. Just a sad story all around.
My wife thinks the firemen should've tried to put it out but then she said it was a shame there were rules that the firemen had to abide by. I agree with another post their JOBS were definitely on the line if they didn't follow the rules. Oh, my wife and I have tried to follow the rules in our lives.Don't like some but...

There are millions of people who now think rules are meant to be bent, broken or challenged. Look around at the millions of RED light runners at every intersection all day long.
..SAD..

inspiredsports

kawizx9r wrote: »

Start a fund for him?

Never did I mention such a thing. Whether he had insurance or not, that's the homeowners fault. As I stated before, that goes without saying for anyone.

The only thing I've emphasized on or even talked about is the fact that the FD was there and they did nothing.

I'm only 25 years old but a disabled veteran that's gone to Iraq several times, you don't see me asking for a fund or a parade in my name...

Freddy, I was by no means aiming at you. Just suggesting that without rules EVERYBODY should get EVERYTHING. Any rational person understands that. Life is NOT FAIR and what happened sucks, but the homeowner also knew that.

In MSNBC interviews, the trailer owner admitted his own son's place caught fire last year and the son had also failed to pay the $75. He said he knew of MANY homes in Obion County, TN (where then incident happened) that had been allowed to burn to the ground over the past 3 years.

kawizx9r

inspiredsports wrote: »

Freddy, I was by no means aiming at you. Just suggesting that without rules EVERYBODY should get EVERYTHING. Any rational person understands that. Life is NOT FAIR and what happened sucks, but the homeowner also knew that.

In MSNBC interviews, the trailer owner admitted his own son's place had burned last year, and that he knew of MANY homes in Obion County where he lives that had been allowed to burn to the ground over the past 3 years.

Don't worry, I take no personal offense...afterall, this is merely a discussion sharing similar and/or different views right?

Btw, I just read the post regarding the firefighters risking their own jobs had they helped and put the fire out. As a whole though, I think they could've done it but yeah, life can suck.

Tony M

kawizx9r wrote: »

Start a fund for him?

Never did I mention such a thing. Whether he had insurance or not, that's the homeowners fault. As I stated before, that goes without saying for anyone.

The only thing I've emphasized on or even talked about is the fact that the FD was there and they did nothing.

I'm only 25 years old but a disabled veteran that's gone to Iraq several times, you don't see me asking for a fund or a parade in my name...

I think you're a REAL man already, compared to the victum of the fire. He had to be the one who complained to the press and cried unfair.

I thank you for your sacrifice for my freedom now since I don't think I have before.

I met a wounded warrior in therapy and we talked for 30 min. and I was humbled by his presence and sacrifice. I was really proud to sake his hand and say thank you and sorry he was injured fighting for our freedoms.He did 2 tours and was scheduled to go back for a third. No purple heart either since only one person per Hummer in an incident can receive one. He was hurt the worst but didn't get picked for the medal for reasons he didn't want to discuss.
BS on that rule. That's one of those that is moraly rediculous. I could challenge that one on principle alone. 4 injured and only one purple heart, come on....RANK? maybe..

I really believe you would have done what's right and paid your 75.00 fee ahead and this scenario would never have come up.

shack

MacLeod wrote:

This has me pissed off almost as much as those scumbags that protest soldiers funerals. The firemen that stood there and watch this guys house burn to the ground over the course of 2 hours are pure scum! Nothing more than human debris! So the guy didnt pay the $75 - so what. Youre gonna let his house and everything he owns slowly burn to the ground while you stand there and watch to "teach him a lesson"? That is the most idiotic thing Ive ever heard. Talk about the punishment not fitting the crime! "Oh you were doing 60 in a 55 mpg zone therefore we're going to cut off one of your hands". Jesus Christ people, how bout a little common sense here. Put the fire out then bill him for whatever you want. There is no intellectually honest way you can say he deserved to lose everything he owns because he didnt pay a $75 bill.

Other towns have this setup as well. They call em "dues". You pay your dues and we'll come put out your fire. If you dont pay your dues, we'll still come put it out but instead of the $100 in dues, itll be a bill for about $1000. This guy offered to pay whatever they asked if theyd just put out the fire.

What makes it worse is that these miserable scumbags drove out to the house to sit and watch it burn over the course of 2 hours!

Then the son goes out and attacks the scumbag chief and gets arrested. Good for him. I hope he f**ked him up.

This is extremly harsh and uncalled for. These people are firefighters and were doing their job...as they were hired and required to do. You can disagree with what happened but for you to call them scumbags and human debris is just wrong.

inspiredsports

MacLeod wrote: »

This has me pissed off almost as much as those scumbags that protest soldiers funerals. The firemen that stood there and watch this guys house burn to the ground over the course of 2 hours are pure scum! Nothing more than human debris! So the guy didnt pay the $75 - so what. Youre gonna let his house and everything he owns slowly burn to the ground while you stand there and watch to "teach him a lesson"? That is the most idiotic thing Ive ever heard. Talk about the punishment not fitting the crime! "Oh you were doing 60 in a 55 mpg zone therefore we're going to cut off one of your hands". Jesus Christ people, how bout a little common sense here. Put the fire out then bill him for whatever you want. There is no intellectually honest way you can say he deserved to lose everything he owns because he didnt pay a $75 bill.

Other towns have this setup as well. They call em "dues". You pay your dues and we'll come put out your fire. If you dont pay your dues, we'll still come put it out but instead of the $100 in dues, itll be a bill for about $1000. This guy offered to pay whatever they asked if theyd just put out the fire.

What makes it worse is that these miserable scumbags drove out to the house to sit and watch it burn over the course of 2 hours!

Then the son goes out and attacks the scumbag chief and gets arrested. Good for him. I hope he f**ked him up.

Well I guess we should start a fund for you too and send you some money because the way you write, it seems there will be "victim" status in your future too.

exalted512

inspiredsports wrote: »

Does the homeowner get a new home if he also didn't pay homwowners insurance? Car if he didn't pay car insurance? Life if he didn't pay life insurance? Free health care. Guaranteed job? Free lunch?

I didn't buy a lottery ticket. Do I win 42 million?

Way to compare apples to oranges.

No, you should not get paid for life insurance if you dont pay the premium. I've personally talked to one of my old customers that dropped her insurance because she couldnt afford it when she lost her job and her car got stolen. She was still stuck with a $15,000 note.

If I had the power to stop her car from getting stolen, I would have.

These marshmallow roasters (theyre obviously not fire fighters) let this guys house burn to the ground in front of their eyes while they did nothing. That's pathetic. They had EVERY CAPABILITY TO DO SOMETHING AND THEY DID NOTHING.

That is the difference between what they did and not paying insurance premiums.

The guy didn't have adequate insurance. That also could have been every bit of his agent's fault than it is his. Not saying it was, but as an insurance professional, an agent should let their customers know if they have enough coverage and give their customers the right tools to realize that. Now if he just refused, then that's on him and I don't feel sorry for him in that respect.

Also, State Farm, for one, does not write replacement cost policies on trailer homes that are over 20 years old (at least in Texas). So it very well could have been just an insurance rule that kept him from having enough coverage to replace his property.

And some of you city guys might not know this...but A LOT of people in the country burn their trash. Its not a random thing. We used to do it all the time...albeit not close to the house.

This is a sad day for mankind.
-Cody

kawizx9r

tony millard wrote: »

I think you're a REAL man already, compared to the victum of the fire. He had to be the one who complained to the press and cried unfair.

I thank you for your sacrifice for my freedom now since I don't think I have before.

I met a wounded warrior in therapy and we talked for 30 min. and I was humbled by his presence and sacrifice. I was really proud to sake his hand and say thank you and sorry he was injured fighting for our freedoms.He did 2 tours and was scheduled to go back for a third. No purple heart either since only one person per Hummer in an incident can receive one. He was hurt the worst but didn't get picked for the medal for reasons he didn't want to discuss.
BS on that rule. That's one of those that is moraly rediculous. I could challenge that one on principle alone. 4 injured and only one purple heart, come on....RANK? maybe..

I really believe you would have done what's right and paid your 75.00 fee ahead and this scenario would never have come up.

Heh thanks, means alot

I'm still fighting for my purple heart (even after being out of the corps for over a year and a half). My friend just got his a few months ago (suffered a broken/fractured hip) after being ejected out of our humvee because it ended up rolling to it's side after being hit by an IED. Yeah, we were in the same truck and if anything he deserves it more than anyone else in our company that deployment. However, due to a certain someone....it never happened up until recently after fighting for it for awhile.

I'm done with derailing threads :eek:

Hopefully though, anyone that reads the story (regarding what the thread is originally about) learns from this and pays their damn dues! Just wish that it was taken care of, oh well...

megasat16

I think Firefighters fight Fire no matter what! It's their solemn duty.

Now, these guys are the hired firefighters. They are like hired guns to fight. There is no fight if there is no pay.

It makes sense if they don't call themselves Firefighters. It's a shame on the other Firefighters who is willing to give live to save lives.

So, I wouldn't call these guys Firefighter now or ever.

If they want to set an example of it, hose down the Fire and kill it first. Do some negotiations beforehand if they want to. And let the man knows there is penalty and extreme charge like 5K or something. Then, kill the Fire and sends him the bill.

I am pretty sure it'll come in the news and everyone around will send their $75 the next day coz of the hefty finds and know they will end up like the poor guy if they don't pay now.

I will never blame the Fire dept for stashing the poor man $5K for his own fault. But letting a house burn down to ground, it's really heartless thing to do.

inspiredsports

So I guess this begs the question; Is fire protection by firefighters a right?

megasat16

It's called providing public service by public servants. Someone gotta pays. If he doesn't pay, he should be penalized later. But public servants should do their job. They don't check their books for who paid or who doesn't before providing public service as important as fighting fire.

I think it should be like 911 call. You will end you up with a hefty bill if you don't pay your 911 service fee. And if you don't have insurance, you will have to pick the tab for the 911 ambulance calls and everything else.

But the public service should be available when needed. In this case, these guys are there watching the house burn down to ground. A Shameless thing to do!

Of coz, I understand we all have to chip in a little extra for the ones who doesn't pay. But we can recover these expenses later on by penalizing the ones at fault.

Look at another way- Will doctors neglect a homeless person to die in their hands coz there is no insurance?

But is it a right to receive fire protection? Yes, in this country, you have to ask. In other parts of the world, people do what they need to do.

In other part of the world and in poor countries I've been to, everyone in the neighborhood get a bucket of water to fight fire coz there is no fire engine or professional fire fighters. And no one asks a penny or a dime from anyone either.

inspiredsports

exalted512 wrote: »

Way to compare apples to oranges.

No, you should not get paid for life insurance if you dont pay the premium. I've personally talked to one of my old customers that dropped her insurance because she couldnt afford it when she lost her job and her car got stolen. She was still stuck with a $15,000 note.

If I had the power to stop her car from getting stolen, I would have.

These marshmallow roasters (theyre obviously not fire fighters) let this guys house burn to the ground in front of their eyes while they did nothing. That's pathetic. They had EVERY CAPABILITY TO DO SOMETHING AND THEY DID NOTHING.

That is the difference between what they did and not paying insurance premiums.

The guy didn't have adequate insurance. That also could have been every bit of his agent's fault than it is his. Not saying it was, but as an insurance professional, an agent should let their customers know if they have enough coverage and give their customers the right tools to realize that. Now if he just refused, then that's on him and I don't feel sorry for him in that respect.

Also, State Farm, for one, does not write replacement cost policies on trailer homes that are over 20 years old (at least in Texas). So it very well could have been just an insurance rule that kept him from having enough coverage to replace his property.

And some of you city guys might not know this...but A LOT of people in the country burn their trash. Its not a random thing. We used to do it all the time...albeit not close to the house.

This is a sad day for mankind.
-Cody

Every day is a sad day for mankind. I think that's called the human condition.

I'm not clear on your logic. If the guy could not properly insure his trailer for replacement, would he not be more careful to pay his $75 for local fire coverage. And if he has burned his trash outdoors for years, he's not doing it in a metal "burn barrel" far away from combustible things (like his underinsured, un-fire-department protected dwelling)?

Also, are you saying you are/were in the insurance profession, but you believe people should receive coverage even if they do not pay for it ??

nooshinjohn

kawizx9r wrote: »

I'm only 25 years old but a disabled veteran that's gone to Iraq several times, you don't see me asking for a fund or a parade in my name...

Thank you for your service and your sacrifice.:cool:

kawizx9r

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Thank you for your service and your sacrifice.:cool:

Appreciate it bro

We've got alot of Vets on the forum as well, have yet to personally meet any of'em though.

Just hope this thread doesn't get too out of hand. I can agree to disagree with some of the members regarding said-topic. No use going in circles about it.

inspiredsports

megasat16 wrote: »

It's called providing public service by public servants. Someone gotta pays. If he doesn't pay, he should be penalized later. But public servants should do their job. They don't check their books for who paid or who doesn't before providing public service as important as fighting fire.

I think it should be like 911 call. You will end you up with a hefty bill if you don't pay your 911 service fee. And if you don't have insurance, you will have to pick the tab for the 911 ambulance calls and everything else.

But the public service should be available when needed. In this case, these guys are there watching the house burn down to ground. A Shameless thing to do!

Of coz, I understand we all have to chip in a little extra for the ones who doesn't pay. But we can recover these expenses later on by penalizing the ones at fault.

Look at another way- Will doctors neglect a homeless person to die in their hands coz there is no insurance?

But is it a right to receive fire protection? Yes, in this country, you have to ask. In other parts of the world, people do what they need to do.

In other part of the world and in poor countries I've been to, everyone in the neighborhood get a bucket of water to fight fire coz there is no fire engine or professional fire fighters. And no one asks a penny or a dime from anyone either.

That brings up a great point. The county admittedly does not have a fire department. That's why they have to make arrangements with a distant community that does, and pay $75 per property for protection. So where were the burned out man's neighbors when all of this was going on? It's a dense-packed trailer park with many dwellings per acre and surely they must have water, hoses and buckets. I think you're on to something here.

disneyjoe7

Well that's a sad story for sure, but..... I can see why the fire department did what they did. And why not does car insurance work this way, I'm sure they not paying out if you didn't pay in.

exalted512

inspiredsports wrote: »

Every day is a sad day for mankind. I think that's called the human condition.

I'm not clear on your logic. If the guy could not properly insure his trailer for replacement, would he not be more careful to pay his $75 for local fire coverage. And if he has burned his trash outdoors for years, he's not doing it in a metal "burn barrel" far away from combustible things (like his underinsured, un-fire-department protected dwelling)?

Also, are you saying you are/were in the insurance profession, but you believe people should receive coverage even if they do not pay for it ??

I'm saying as a human...and ESPECIALLY a fire fighter, you have a duty, no matter what. The NYFD didnt hesitate to risk their lives in a building they knew was falling apart when they went into the twin towers. I believe THAT is going above and beyond the line of duty. These marshmallow roasters sit and watched while this man's house burned to the ground. It killed part of his family that was helpless against it. A dog should never have to suffer when it does nothing wrong just because his owner failed to pay $75 WHEN PEOPLE WERE THERE THAT HAD THE CAPABILITY OF STOPPING IT. Much less burn to death. Like I said earlier, what the owner did (or didnt do) was irresponsible, but what the marshmallow roasters did was immoral. I can deal with irresponsible, but immoral people piss me off.

As far as do I think people should get insurance coverage when they dont pay, no, I dont...I thought I had made that clear when I said:

exalted512 wrote: »

No, you should not get paid for life insurance if you dont pay the premium.

-Cody

exalted512

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

Well that's a sad story for sure, but..... I can see why the fire department did what they did. And why not does car insurance work this way, I'm sure they not paying out if you didn't pay in.

Again, not a valid comparison.

Car insurance doesnt work that way because:

You dont pay the premium and your car gets stolen. You dont all of a sudden to get to pay your $100 premium and expect the insurance company to pay out the $25000 to replace your car. I dont expect the guy to pay $75 and not a cent more and expect his home to be covered...unlike car insurance, a FD has more options, just like an ambulance does.

Lets say there were 5 firefighters working for 5 hours on the fire as $20/hr. $500 in labor. On the generous side, $500 for gas/water/equipment/misc. Unlike car insurance, I cant just say, okay, go ahead and replace my $25000 car and I'll pay you back the $25,000...makes no sense.

In this case, it makes sense. Hey, I'll pay you the $1000...even $5000 to the fire department to save my, probably minimum, $20,000 house with $40,000 in contents, and my priceless stuff and pets that are inside.

And to just sit there and watch it burn...pitiful. That's like seeing an old lady on the side of the road with a flat tire and honking as you drive by and giving her the bird.

Hey, she didnt pay for AAA right? Screw her.

Ridiculous.
-Cody

nooshinjohn

exalted512 wrote: »

Again, not a valid comparison.

Car insurance doesnt work that way because:

You dont pay the premium and your car gets stolen. You dont all of a sudden to get to pay your $100 premium and expect the insurance company to pay out the $25000 to replace your car. I dont expect the guy to pay $75 and not a cent more and expect his home to be covered...unlike car insurance, a FD has more options, just like an ambulance does.

Lets say there were 5 firefighters working for 5 hours on the fire as $20/hr. $500 in labor. On the generous side, $500 for gas/water/equipment/misc. Unlike car insurance, I cant just say, okay, go ahead and replace my $25000 car and I'll pay you back the $25,000...makes no sense.

In this case, it makes sense. Hey, I'll pay you the $1000...even $5000 to the fire department to save my, probably minimum, $20,000 house with $40,000 in contents, and my priceless stuff and pets that are inside.

And to just sit there and watch it burn...pitiful. That's like seeing an old lady on the side of the road with a flat tire and honking as you drive by and giving her the bird.

Hey, she didnt pay for AAA right? Screw her.

Ridiculous.
-Cody

Agreed... and there is always a tax lein that can be placed against a property to recover expenses.

sucks2beme

They are hired firefighters of the TOWN. The TOWN said no pay, no
spray. Does doing your job as described by your employer make you a lowlife?

Once again, we don't know the dynamics here. What we do know is
everything happened the way it was supposed to by the rules.

We can't change the rules.

Only the people involved can change the rules.

Could they of bent the rules? Sure. Did they want to bend the rules?
Who knows but them. Maybe they would of if they liked the guy, Maybe
not. The real outrage should be if they DON"T FIX THE PROBLEM.
That goes for the city, and the people around it. My guess is it fades
from the news, they put the new tax up for a vote, and they vote it down.
Why do I say this? Because this kind of stuff happens all the time.
Most of the time people vote with their wallet in mind.

exalted512

If my job was to sit and watch while someones house burned down with their dogs in it I'd quit right after I tried my best to put out the fire. There's not a doubt in my mind of that.

I personally could not live with that on my conscious.
-Cody

hearingimpared

I think it boils down to this;

1) If the guy was an irresponsible lazy bastage who was a dead beat, then I can see some of the attitudes about this fellow here but it still doesn't make it right that his house burned to the ground with pets dying while the firefighters were on the scene.

2) the guy hit hard times like many, many of us here. He was probably doing everything he could to squeeze two pennies together to try and make a nickel's worth of goods available.

Either way, there is no excuse, firefighter insurance (I'm sure they have it), equipment costs (so what, its the mans dwelling), rules (big deal), etc. All are no reason to let a man's home burn to the ground and have pets dying while on scene. Think about this, how did the firefighters know there wasn't a human inside the dwelling?

As far as having the money to pay to feed his pets Tony, as a lover of pets, one of which you just terribly mourned the passing of and I still feel your pain, who knows, maybe the guy was shooting or trapping varmints on his property to feed his pets. Who knows what the guy was doing to scrape by.

Very judgmental. I posted a thread about Antny going above and beyond to help us as well as touting the family atmosphere of CP. I was still judged by people who had no idea what my wife and I have been doing and sacrificing to make ends meet and put food on the table. Rush to judgment; I didn't sell my main rig!!! I've done everything else necessary to keep us afloat but still judged because people had no idea of what the real circumstances are.

I believe the same is being done to this fellow.

tonyb

Judgmental Joe ? The difference is you didn't plaster yourself all over the media.
Some of you conclude that the fire could have been put out at extreme cost and billed the guy later. If a life was at stake,I'm sure thats the way it would have gone down,but there wasn't. What makes you think this guy could pay a couple grand to save his house through a billing process when he couldn't pay 75 bucks in the first place ? Not to mention the additional costs of lawyers fee's to the fire dept to chase the guy for payment, then before you know it,that 75 bucks becomes 125 for everyone. Yes, they have a moral obligation, to save human life, not property. I also find it somewhat suspect that the son,who started this fire,had his own house burn down and had also not payed the 75 bucks. Sorry folks, this lays clearly on this guy's shoulders for not securing fire protection for his home and the life's of his animals.

exalted512

tonyb wrote: »

Judgmental Joe ? The difference is you didn't plaster yourself all over the media.
Some of you conclude that the fire could have been put out at extreme cost and billed the guy later. If a life was at stake,I'm sure thats the way it would have gone down,but there wasn't. What makes you think this guy could pay a couple grand to save his house through a billing process when he couldn't pay 75 bucks in the first place ? Not to mention the additional costs of lawyers fee's to the fire dept to chase the guy for payment, then before you know it,that 75 bucks becomes 125 for everyone. Yes, they have a moral obligation, to save human life, not property. I also find it somewhat suspect that the son,who started this fire,had his own house burn down and had also not payed the 75 bucks. Sorry folks, this lays clearly on this guy's shoulders for not securing fire protection for his home and the life's of his animals.

What makes me think he could pay a couple thousand when he couldnt pay 75?

So what you're saying...is that the man could possibly be so poor that he couldnt afford to pay an extra $75...and since he didnt, we should let the only things he has left burn down? Brilliant.

I guess my moral obligation extends more to just someone's life. It also extends to animals that can't help themselves and to people's personal property when they're down on their luck.

Not to mention, that it's not like they weren't already out there using resources and labor anyway to water his neighbors yard.
-Cody

megasat16

tonyb wrote: »

Judgmental Joe ? The difference is you didn't plaster yourself all over the media.
Some of you conclude that the fire could have been put out at extreme cost and billed the guy later. If a life was at stake,I'm sure thats the way it would have gone down,but there wasn't. What makes you think this guy could pay a couple grand to save his house through a billing process when he couldn't pay 75 bucks in the first place ? Not to mention the additional costs of lawyers fee's to the fire dept to chase the guy for payment, then before you know it,that 75 bucks becomes 125 for everyone. Yes, they have a moral obligation, to save human life, not property. I also find it somewhat suspect that the son,who started this fire,had his own house burn down and had also not payed the 75 bucks. Sorry folks, this lays clearly on this guy's shoulders for not securing fire protection for his home and the life's of his animals.

Tony,

I respectfully disagree with you on this. The lives of the human weren't at stake but there were the lives of pets (3 dogs and a cat) lost in this. Pets might have burnt before the firefighter arrives there but it's not up to them to decide or find out.

It's their job to fight the fire at the scene no matter who or what inside is dead or alive.

About several thousand payment, they could auction off his entire home if they want to and put a lien on it or sell the due to the collectors.

Getting the money paid wasn't a problem. I am sure there are some hidden facts that is not revealed in the whole story. The guy could have been a jerk in the neighborhood so no one cares about him or everyone is thinking "serves him right" there. It might be some personal matters. I hope the story will uncover itself in time.