So a fire fighter service let some guys home burn down destroying all he owns and killing his pets. All because the guy forgot to pay a $75 fee. I agree with his son and would have likely punch out the chief myself. What are your thoughts?
Also just to add a bit of conversation do you think this is comparable to the way US health care service is run?
(Oct. 6) -- A small rural community in western Tennessee is outraged and the fire chief is nursing a black eye after firefighters stood by and watched a mobile home burn to the ground because the homeowner hadn't paid a $75 municipal fee.
South Fulton city firefighters -- equipped with trucks, hoses and other firefighting equipment -- didn't intervene to save Gene Cranick's doublewide trailer home when it caught fire last week. But they did arrive on the scene to protect the house of a neighbor, who had paid his fire subscription fee.
"I just forgot to pay my $75," Cranick told ABC News. "I did it last year, the year before. ... It slipped my mind."
Later that day, Cranick's son Timothy went to the fire station to complain, and punched the fire chief in the face.
"He just cold-cocked him," Police Chief Andy Crocker told the Union City Daily Messenger. The younger Cranick was arrested and charged with felony aggravated assault, and South Fulton Fire Chief David Wilds was treated and released from a hospital, Crocker said.
Firefighters in South Fulton city are under orders to respond only to fire calls within their city limits, as well as to surrounding Obion County, but only to homes there where people have signed up for a fire subscription service.
Because Cranick hadn't paid his fee, firefighters doused the border of his neighbor's property to protect that house in case the flames spread, but wouldn't help him. He lost all his possessions, plus three dogs and a cat.
"They could have been saved if they had put water on it, but they didn't do it," Cranick told MSNBC.
Sponsored Links The fire began when Cranick's grandson set fire to some trash near the house, and the flames leapt up. Cranick said he told the 911 operator that he'd pay whatever fee was necessary, but it was too late.
"I have no problem with the way any of my people handled the situation. They did what they were supposed to do," South Fulton City Manager Jeff Vowell told the Messenger. "It's a regrettable situation any time something like this happens."
But one firefighting expert said the fee system isn't fair to homeowners or firefighters.
"Professional, career firefighters shouldn't be forced to check a list before running out the door to see which homeowners have paid up," Harold Schatisberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said in statement excerpted by MSNBC. "They get in their trucks and go."
I think I saw that video but the old lady pushed the cat into the trash and walked away. The owners then found the cat and I think the old lady is getting used or something.
Sad, really sad. They could've compromised or something, but I do think that it's wrong that the firefighters just put out the neighbors' fire and not do a thing to the house that was really, crumbling down. Lame.
Is there some sort of oath that firefighters take? This story is just sad, firefighters generaly deserve respect but this is going to damage the reputation for a while.
In most places in the US these services are paid for with city and state taxes as well. Again, this is not typical or even indicative of capitalism, it's a matter that the city council has some sort of decree/law for whatever retarded reason that only those who pay some fee get this service, most likely because they are in a rural area and don't pay into the city funding which covers the fire services. While I disagree with the way this system is operating in this town the firefighters were following orders from their employer, and it is sad that it happened, but we can only hope that an event like this ignites an overhauling of the current system in this town.
It sucks when professional and vocational duties conflict. But the law here probably needs changing... by default emergency services serve first, charge later... and those bills usually invoke the use of even more emergency services xD
It sucks when professional and vocational duties conflict. But the law here probably needs changing... by default emergency services serve first, charge later... and those bills usually invoke the use of even more emergency services xD
I fully agree. From what I could gather on the situation the gentleman lives in a rather rural area so my assumption is that the fee is for upkeep of the city fire services which his property and other taxes would not go to due to the location of his residence. While I can understand needing to collect those funds for the upkeep of the service I personally would have ordered the fire put out and then billed him for however much he was delinquent. This way the money is recouped and he still has his pets and home.
The right to a home. Clearly what should have happened in this instance would be to douse the flame and charge the hopme owner the full cost of it ie., the thousands of dollars it would cost the fire department to perform the service. That would have been infinitely more preferable to a burned down house and a son in jail for both parties.
What do you mean the only rights (or rather, services) you have are the ones you pay for? No matter if it's communism, socialism, or capitalism, YOU ARE PAYING FOR THE SERVICE. The only difference is how you pay.
Seeing as this guy was living in a trailer, under a more socialistic system, his service would likely be paid for by someone more affluent.
The only difference is that socialism takes money from you whether you are going to use the service or not.
Again, progressive taxation would ensure many people wouldn't have to pay, and indeed that the average cost of the service would go down.
It already IS publicly funded. Good job.
A publicly funded service is free at the point of delivery. It may be publicly subsidised to make the subscription fee lower, but this is clearly not publicly funded, otherwise people's houses being burnt down for $75 wouldn't be an issue.
It's not a national problem with capitalism, it's a local problem with a policy.
Here I agree. Well sort of. Capitalism is to blame here, however I don't think socialism would be a better alternative. The homes under that sort of system wouldn't be worth $75 to save.
Sometimes publicly funded services are better. They are not the answer to everything though.
I think all emergency services, like health, law enforcement and the fire department should be publicly funded, simply because they are a matter of life and death.
The right to own a home. The government must allow you to live in a home, not provide one from you. Regardless I agree with you that the fire dept. should have dowsed the flames and charged the man afterwords.
A publicly funded service is free at the point of delivery. It may be publicly subsidised to make the subscription fee lower, but this is clearly not publicly funded, otherwise people's houses being burnt down for $75 wouldn't be an issue.
I read somewhere that there was a fee because the fire dept. belonged to a neighboring county. This is what I read as a reply to someone else asking about the incident so I could be wrong. However, I wouldn't doubt that this is the case.
I think all emergency services, like health, law enforcement and the fire department should be publicly funded, simply because they are a matter of life and death.
I agree that law enforcement and the fire dept. should be publicly funded. Health should gain benefits from public spending but I don't think it should be completely funded by the public. That is a completely different debate I do not care to go into.
Regardless, I agree that the homes should have to pay their fee through slightly higher taxes so the fire dept. doesn't have to look at a list before they fight the fire. In this instance, the fire fighters should have fought the fire and charged the man afterwords.
I doubt the fire dept. is as guilty as we are making them out to be. The media likes to take shortcuts in creating stories, and because people are turned off when it comes to politics, they avoid politics whenever they can. Therefore, I am wondering if the fire dept. would have been charged any fees themselves or gotten in some other form of trouble if they had put the fire out.
I read somewhere that there was a fee because the fire dept. belonged to a neighboring county.
As I understand it rural counties rural counties in the US are often inadequately cared for by elected officials who get themselves elected on 'fiscal responsibility'.
I doubt the fire dept. is as guilty as we are making them out to be. The media likes to take shortcuts in creating stories, and because people are turned off when it comes to politics, they avoid politics whenever they can.
What I think the issue here is not necessarily what happened, but what didn't happen - someone dying. If someone was killed in the fire, would the same excuse still apply? If it all it does really come down to is cold hard money, why shouldn't it? That's where I, and I think the media takes issue with the policy.
Really it comes down to whether or not economic libertarianism can actually function in the real world. As this incident shows, it cannot.
This is stupid. The firefighters get paid to do their job, not to worry about a minuscule fee of domestic protection. They do not get paid from the said fees, though the fees will affect the outcome of their pay. What hospitals do to patients who enter the ER is have them be put on a tab if they cannot pay at that moment. They then pay at the end of the month. While this is complex at the medical level, this is SEVENTY FIVE DOLLARS. I do not have a job and I have more than this. A firefighting station, that is supported I might add, worries about a "rotection" fee, and cannot do their jobs out of the kindness of their hearts? Doctors and nurses do not let a patient die just because he or she cannot pay their fee.
SEVENTY FIVE DOLLARS where the loss was substantially greater. STUPID.
