The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 26    Average: 2.9/5]
110 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 10554
Rating: 2.9
Category: Misc
Date: 12/07/11 11:13 AM

110 Responses to Firefighters Watch As Home Burns

  1. Profile photo of kitteh9lives
    kitteh9lives Female 70 & Over
    8044 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 10:07 am
    Link: Firefighters Watch As Home Burns - Firemen refused to help because a fire fee hadn`t been paid. When the owner begged to pay now, they were told `too late`
  2. Profile photo of ggolbez
    ggolbez Male 18-29
    1933 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:16 am
    That`s why there are taxes. I would sue SO HARD!
  3. Profile photo of FoSchizle
    FoSchizle Male 18-29
    330 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:18 am
    Is it me or is half the video inaudible?
  4. Profile photo of vVvBrock
    vVvBrock Male 18-29
    177 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:21 am
    It`s $75. Jesus Christ people, just pay the money. If I get into a car accident without insurance, and then I go to an insurance company and say "Okay, I`m ready to pay now, then you fix my car." No, it doesn`t work that way unfortunately. It`s not like lives were in danger here either, so I have no remorse if these people thought that saving $75 for risking everything they own was a good idea.
  5. Profile photo of Buzzard250
    Buzzard250 Male 18-29
    342 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:22 am
    How else are we supposed to afford 3 new firetrucks every year. I cant even keep the lease on my Mercedes. oh the agony!
  6. Profile photo of Pheeshy5
    Pheeshy5 Male 18-29
    1312 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:27 am
    This same thing happened to an older man last year. So messed up
  7. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:31 am
    Well there`s your privatized services at work...or I guess NOT at work.
  8. Profile photo of EgalM
    EgalM Male 30-39
    1707 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:34 am
    @ggolbez By-Laws are a bitch like that, they are different from city to city.
  9. Profile photo of BritInvasion
    BritInvasion Male 18-29
    311 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:39 am
    agreed vVvBrock

    @ggolbez: How would you sue? The rules are posted, the people knew about the payment, they didn`t pay.

    @Buzard250: How much gas do you think a firetruck goes through when it has to get to a scene and then use the same gas to pump hundreds of gallons of water a minute. Then you have maintenance, and salaries on top of that as well as any taxes/bills etc that need paying to keep the fire station running.
  10. Profile photo of jav805
    jav805 Male 18-29
    104 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:39 am
    So much for being PUBLIC servants.
  11. Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2415 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:40 am
    simple solution- if you pay your 75$, you can get your house put out unlimited times in the year.

    if you dont pay, you can get your house put out but it costs 3500 each time.

    keeps things like this from happening, and still leaves the incentive to pay.
  12. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36694 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:42 am

    They know they aren`t covered unless they pay and they chose not to pay.
    It is the same as any other type of insurance.

    Stop Whining!
  13. Profile photo of kru2wuero
    kru2wuero Male 13-17
    65 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:46 am
    disturbing to hear that money comes first than humanity
  14. Profile photo of SunnyNphilly
    SunnyNphilly Male 18-29
    645 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:50 am
    pay taxes and you get fire fighters... how does it worK!?
  15. Profile photo of korahn
    korahn Male 30-39
    1302 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:52 am
    Wait, there are places where you need to pay for public services? So, as an example, if you don`t pay the "police" they can`t give you parking tickets?
  16. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:00 pm
    Crassus allegedly came up with a "better" idea over 2000 years ago.

    It`s said that he`d turn up to a burning house with his fire fighters and offer to buy it from the owner (currently watching his home burning) for a fraction of what it was worth. If the owner protested that it was worth much more, Crassus would remind them that it would be worth much less after it had burned down. He`d also offer to make sure the fire didn`t spread to neighbouring houses...if the owners of those houses paid him enough.

    This city is missing a trick - they could acquire land and housing at a very low price. Since money is the key thing for them, that`s what they should be doing.
  17. Profile photo of bataleon27
    bataleon27 Male 18-29
    1178 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:10 pm
    Yes they should have paid. But at the same time, the firefighters should be joining the force to help people, not to adhere to rules. If I was a firefighter and was instructed not to help those people, I`d tell my boss to drat off and do it anyway. I`ll pay the damn $75 for them...
  18. Profile photo of Deviros
    Deviros Male 18-29
    535 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:11 pm
    Ok. This has been hashed over and over again, but here`s what it comes down to:

    The homeowner is in an area where fire coverage is optional. You can opt to not pay the fee. If you don`t pay the fee (I.E. don`t get taxed) then you don`t get fire coverage.

    It`s pretty simple. People are blaming the fire department, or the government, or the town, when the person responsible for this is the home owner - and NO ONE ELSE.

    It`s not inhumane. They will make sure that no one is hurt, dying, etc. But they aren`t going to put out the fire - because then they set a dangerous precedent where you don`t have to pay your fire tax to get fire coverage, and then no one will.

    If you don`t pay your electric bill, do you expect to get electricity? No.
  19. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2765 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:12 pm
    On one hand I thought "But you are right there!!! Stop the fire!!" But on the other hand I was thinking "Well I bet you wish you paid that 75 dollars now don`t you?" My next question is, do they have a black list or something? Do they stop to check before each fire whether or not they are allowed to put it out?
  20. Profile photo of pmarren
    pmarren Male 40-49
    4575 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:14 pm
    Deviros is right. As usual, the media doesn`t give you all the facts. IF there had been a person in danger, they would`ve stepped in - fee paid or not. If it`s a fire that`s only destroying property, they will let it burn if you didn`t pay.

    The homeowners don`t live in the city where the fire department is, they don`t pay taxes for that service like the residents in town, therefore, the fee.

    I have no issue with this at all, it`s just sensationalism as usual by the media.
  21. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:19 pm
    So the moral of the story is: Always tell the fire dept. that someone is inside burning alive.
  22. Profile photo of freddyferret
    freddyferret Male 40-49
    11741 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:24 pm
    If they knew the people hadn`t paid, why bother showing up at all? When they called 911, they should have been told "Sorry, you didn`t pay". They were just being more insulting by showing up. I don`t believe they didn`t know before they showed up either. That`s a waste of money. If they have to take time to check it either way, do it before you send out people and trucks.
  23. Profile photo of uunxx
    uunxx Male 30-39
    120 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:25 pm
    What`s the purpose of taxes in USA if you have to pay for everything anyway?
  24. Profile photo of kilroy5555
    kilroy5555 Male 30-39
    496 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:26 pm
    A similar situation happened a few months ago.

    This is an unincorporated township which does not have typical municipal services (or pay a tax for those services). In order to get fire services, the residents have to pay a fee to receive fire coverage. If the fire company showed up and put the fire out to a nonpaying customer, then no one would pay. If they accepted the payment at the time of the fire, then no one would pay until their house caught fire; if this happened, no one would pay until their house caught fire.

    While understanding that point, something still didn`t sit right with me. My solution is this: the fire department still puts your fire out, but charges you for the full amount of the actual cost it took to extinguish your fire (gasoline, labor/salary, etc). That way, there is still incentive to buy fire insurance (i.e. to avoid paying the full firefighting cost), but no one`s house burns down.
  25. Profile photo of patchouly
    patchouly Male 40-49
    4746 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:28 pm
    Crazy. It`s supposed to be covered by their taxes. More and more things that are covered by taxes, are starting to become things you pay extra for. What the Hell are they doing with the tax money?!?
  26. Profile photo of kilroy5555
    kilroy5555 Male 30-39
    496 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:29 pm
    freddyferret - they show up to ensure the fire doesn`t spread to their paying customers. It is kind of like adding insult to injury though.
  27. Profile photo of pmarren
    pmarren Male 40-49
    4575 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:36 pm
    patchgrabber, yeah, good plan. Tell them someone inside is dying so you don`t have to pay the $75 bucks. Something tells me that you`re not grasping this whole thing, but I respect that you have your opinion and seem to be stuck pretty hard to it.

    Oh yeah, and it`s not a privatized service, this is the government at work here.
  28. Profile photo of sosueme1966
    sosueme1966 Male 40-49
    439 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:40 pm
    @patchouly- way to understand the story. Those people don`t live in the town where the fire fighters are. They pay NO taxes to that town. They live in an unincorporated area outside of it. The fire service is offered to them at a very reasonable price. If they start offering free service to people who don`t live in the town and pay no taxes, that increases the burden on taxpayer who reside there.
  29. Profile photo of MichaelBored
    MichaelBored Male 40-49
    206 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:41 pm
    Libertarian Paradise
  30. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:44 pm
    @pmarren

    I must have misplaced the /sarcasm at the end of that last comment, I wasn`t being serious. I also know it`s not privatized fire dept. but if it were privatized that`s exactly what it would look like.
  31. Profile photo of sosueme1966
    sosueme1966 Male 40-49
    439 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:45 pm
    @kilroy5555- and immediately after delivering that bill, they might as well write it off, because if those people weren`t willing to pay $75, they sure as hell aren`t paying the hundreds or thousands that bill would be. You would wind up with no money for the firehouse and a nice black mark on the credit of the people whose house just burnt down.

    The "solution" was to pay the damn $75.
  32. Profile photo of pmarren
    pmarren Male 40-49
    4575 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:50 pm
    patchgrabber, dude, sorry. I didn`t pick up on your intent. My bad.
  33. Profile photo of max5121
    max5121 Male 18-29
    272 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:50 pm
    If i am not mistaken, living outside of the city limits you do not have to pay taxes for stuff like this, you instead pay an annual fee. If you don`t want the protection you don`t have to pay it.
  34. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 12:58 pm
    pmarren

    No worries. They`re idiots for not paying for a service like that, but it`s also a drated-up system overall. This whole thing reminds me of Petoria.
  35. Profile photo of BritInvasion
    BritInvasion Male 18-29
    311 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 1:06 pm
    @freddyferret: In case someone is in danger, they don`t know from a simple 911 call if someone is in there.
  36. Profile photo of mal_BB
    mal_BB Male 18-29
    1231 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 1:34 pm
    Wait...what? So if you live outside the city you pay an annual fee instead of taxes?? Is that why volunteer firemen exist in small towns in the US?
  37. Profile photo of tleking536
    tleking536 Male 30-39
    69 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 1:36 pm
    In my town if there is a fire a fire or more come and put the fire out. No fee. It should be a right to have emergency personnel assist you.
  38. Profile photo of tleking536
    tleking536 Male 30-39
    69 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 1:37 pm
    Sorry was supposed to be firetruck.
  39. Profile photo of jendrian
    jendrian Male 18-29
    2516 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 1:51 pm
    wait let me guess this straight. The city doesn`t make itself responsible for people in the county around it for fire-related accidents unless they pay a fee?

    What`s next? "We don`t make ourselves responsible for giving you clean water, get your own goddamn treatment plant if you want clean water"
  40. Profile photo of Pandabee
    Pandabee Female 40-49
    857 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 1:53 pm
    $75..what`s that £50? Oh sweetheart, that is a tight budget your on if you can`t afford that. Maybe services that important should be paid monthly in advance, with no exceptions.
  41. Profile photo of Amurika
    Amurika Male 30-39
    282 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 2:28 pm
    I`m sure the crony insurance companies would also call it fraud for not paying the $75. Keep it classy scum bags!!
  42. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 2:37 pm
    tleking536-"should be a right to have emergency personnel assist you."

    So, you would FORCE someone to assist you for no charge? Hmm, I thought we did away with slavery... (Be careful what you call a `right`).

    endrian-"The city doesn`t make itself responsible for people in the county around"

    The city IS NOT responsible to anyone exept within its territory. It OFFERS the service, for a fee, to those outside the city limits. Personally, I`d pay the $75. (They probably weren`t insured, either...gonna claim that State Farm should replace their stuff anyway?)

    endrian-We don`t make ourselves responsible for giving you clean water, get your own goddamn treatment plant if you want clean water"

    More than likely, the area involved does NOT have a `goddamn treatment plant`. Many rural areas still use individual wells. And if they get water, they PAY for it. (bad comparison on more than one front)
  43. Profile photo of Fwoggie2
    Fwoggie2 Male 30-39
    1803 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:04 pm
    We got rid of this bs back in 1850`s. I`m shocked that it still exists in America, I had no idea. It`s farked up. That`s horrific.
  44. Profile photo of simbha
    simbha Male 30-39
    412 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:06 pm
    Yeah, clearly the fee is optional and these people chose not to pay it (i.e., they paid for something else instead).

    One other point, to add to the mix -- I`m fairly certain that some of the fees received go to covering insurance costs for the firefighters. There`s no point in a firefighter risking their life for someone who hasn`t paid the nominal fee - as pointed out in the story itself, this would set a dangerous precedent for others to not pay the fee.
  45. Profile photo of jendrian
    jendrian Male 18-29
    2516 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:21 pm
    haha all I`m saying is they let the house burn just because they didn`t pay, endangering everyone around them. Sure if they didn`t get insurance to get their burnt stuff back that`s their problem, but the house burning should be covered federally.

    as for my comment with the clean water, well isn`t the city responsible for the infrastructure of the water pipes? it doesn`t matter if the city has a treatment plant or not, so my comment is spot on
  46. Profile photo of Neagle
    Neagle Male 30-39
    1405 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:21 pm
    What backwards ass_poo state has an emergency service plan that permits for an optional fee instead of a tax? I`m all for less government interference but government does serve a function.
  47. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:28 pm
    Fwoggie2-"We got rid of this bs back in 1850`s."

    I know that some people are trying real hard to get rid of this bs of personal responsibility in the US, but it still exists.
  48. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:29 pm
    @MeGrendel: With your level of intelligence, something tells me you couldn`t afford the $75. Enjoy YOUR tax-payer funded fire protection, hypocrite.
  49. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32829 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:34 pm
    @Neagle: iirc, the courts ruled the city couldn`t levy a tax on them, since they were outside city limits (which makes sense, actually). BUT they can ask for money on a voluntary basis.

    You pay? You get the service!
    No pay? NO service.

    Seems simple enough.
  50. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:38 pm
    jendrian-"endangering everyone around them."

    Sorry, but it wasn`t that big of a fire.

    jendrian-"but the house burning should be covered federally. "

    But it`s not, so it`s their repsonsibility.

    endria-"isn`t the city responsible for the infrastructure of the water pipes?"

    Many time, no. In some rural areas, the well is nothing but a pump with a pvc pipe going to the water table. The city has nothing to do with its installation nor its maintenence

    it doesn`t matter if the city has a treatment plant or not, so my comment is spot on"

    Nope, it`s not. (please try and get your facts straight)
  51. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32829 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:40 pm
    @jtrebowski: Um, yeah! He`ll enjoy the fire protection HE PAID FOR! You got a problem with that?

    Shoe = fits, so wear your hypocricy proudly @jt...
  52. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:40 pm
    Neagle-What backwards ass_poo state has an emergency service plan that permits for an optional fee instead of a tax?"

    Generally speaking, states only have emergency service plans for emergencies that effect on the STATE level. (Such as hurricane, earthquake, etc...and even then each city has to have its own plan also, as it is the primary responder.)
  53. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:48 pm
    Pay $45 for a small metal storage unit per month to keep your keepsakes safe and F UCK the cowardly fire department. All about the benjamins. What a bunch of ass HOLES. Worthless F uck-a-roonies.
    Next time somebody falls down and hurt themselves, ask them for a fiver for help. WTF?
  54. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:52 pm
    trebowski-"With your level of intelligence, something tells me you couldn`t afford the $75."

    Aaaaaannnnd, you continue to be wrong...(hey, why change now?)

    trebowski-"Enjoy YOUR tax-payer funded fire protection, hypocrite."

    I enjoy the tax-payer funded fire protection, as I PAY the taxes for it (and many enjoy it without paying the taxes). I do NOT expect my fire department to put put fires in the next town.

    I`ve also lived in areas that HAD no tax funded fire protection, we had a volunteer force (which I was also a member of, along with being on the fire team at the plant I worked at), and each household was expected to pay an annual fee. The difference is that they would put out the fire no matter what. If you hadn`t paid the fee, you got charged several thousand dollars.

    Why is it that you think they should receive services for no free? You DO realize that firetrucks, bunker gear, SCBA, and etc actually cost MONEY,
  55. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:53 pm
    If somebody was in the house, would they let them burn?
  56. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:54 pm
    Would they put out the fire if I was to pay in installments?
  57. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 3:56 pm
    obosnitz-"Pay $45 for a small metal storage unit per month to keep your keepsakes safe and F UCK the cowardly fire department"

    And what do you do when the storage unit goes up in flames and your keepsakes are not insured?




    And you DO realize that the owners of the storage units are not responsible for any damages to your stuff? It`s right there on the agreement you sign.
  58. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 4:02 pm
    robosnitz-"If somebody was in the house, would they let them burn?"

    South Fulton Mayor David Crocker said firefighters will help when people are in danger, regardless of whether they have paid.

    robosnitz-"Would they put out the fire if I was to pay in installments?"

    Maybe they`d put it out in installments.
  59. Profile photo of the_windy
    the_windy Female 18-29
    1589 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    Why didn`t they put out the fire, then bill them for it after? Like if you have to take an ambulance. "Sorry ma`am, I see you haven`t paid the ambulance tax, I`m going to have to let you die."
  60. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 4:30 pm
    @Windy

    But then there would be no incentive for anyone to pay the fee except for those effected by fire, and thusly, there would be no money for the fire dept.

    Now in reality, the county should simply vote to levee a higher property tax to avoid situations like this.
  61. Profile photo of MrPeabody
    MrPeabody Male 30-39
    1920 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 4:45 pm
    "but it`s also a drated-up system overall."
    Not really, they live outside the city`s jurisdiction, therefore the city cannot directly levy a tax on them. The city offers them services that they would not have otherwise, so if they refuse to pay for it, why should the city be to blame?
  62. Profile photo of snuffy2009
    snuffy2009 Male 18-29
    241 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 4:48 pm
    aaarrrggghhhhh FOR THE LOVE OF GOD I`M BUUURRRRNINGGGG!!!! Sorry maam we will need your 75 dollar fee first.AAARRRRGGGGHHHHHH ok sure no problem wait here whilst i retrieve my wallet. ARGH I`M DEAD...
  63. Profile photo of nijd
    nijd Male 18-29
    267 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 5:40 pm
    They refused to pay, they can suffer the consequences for their choice. If they just put out the fire, not only would it be telling everyone that they don`t really have to pay, but it would make everyone who DID pay pretty angry.
  64. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 5:47 pm
    Rawrg-"the county should simply vote to levee a higher property tax."

    The City attempted to get the County to do just that. They refused, and the Court determined that the City did not have any jurisdiction to levy a tax for this purpost. No jurisdiction for tax = no jurisdiction for fire coverage.

    Thus, the City offered a voluntary fee. Those that chose not to participate chose not to have coverage.

    Simple.

    the_windy-" Like if you have to take an ambulance."

    Generally speaking, an ambulance is a private enterprise. They charge you when you use them.

    If you actually read follow up articles, the woman interviewed: 1) realizes it was a bad idea they didn`t opt to pay, 2) are not upset at the fire department and 3) were happy they were on hand to keep it from spreading.
  65. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 5:51 pm
    snuffy2009-"aaarrrggghhhhh FOR THE LOVE OF GOD I`M BUUURRRRNINGGGG!!!!"

    "NO REDNECKS WERE HARMED IN THE FILMING OF THIS ARTICLE"

    Plus, there was no danger to life in this situation. And, if you paid attention to people who have actually researched it, there is a procedure in place that any person in danger is saved/treated no matter what.
  66. Profile photo of CreamK
    CreamK Male 40-49
    1423 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 6:19 pm
    Are you kidding me? In a civilized country both firedepartment and ambulance service should belong to everybody, free of charge no matter where you live.
  67. Profile photo of M_Archer
    M_Archer Male 18-29
    525 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 6:40 pm
    How outrageous! Because as we all know, someone "need" is instantly a moral blank check to claim the lives and effort of other people! How dare the firefighters set the standards and conditions for which they work!
  68. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14628 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 7:17 pm
    Fire protection money.
  69. Profile photo of SilverThread
    SilverThread Male 30-39
    3431 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 7:46 pm
    I would prefer to not pay for a military until we were actually under attack.

    I would prefer to not pay for maintenance on a highway until I have to use it.

    I would prefer to not pay for Life Insurance until I was on my death bed.

    But since I don`t know when those things might happen I will hedge my bets and help out my community because the only way society will work is if everyone participates.
  70. Profile photo of SlothOfDoom
    SlothOfDoom Male 30-39
    2033 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 8:05 pm
    Maybe the firefighters just thought the area was being improved by a controlled burn?
  71. Profile photo of mmneely932
    mmneely932 Female 50-59
    25 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 8:07 pm
    "Yeah everybody jump on the firefighters and blame them. But who`s going to pay if one of them is injured fighting a fire outside their jurisdiction? If these firefighters had worked the fire and been injured they would not have been covered by their insurance, they would have been on their own. If these people didn`t have the money, they could probably have set a payment plan with the department. Most insurance companies will pay part of, if not most, of the subscription fee.
  72. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 8:39 pm
    CreamK-"In a civilized country"

    Anytime a person starts off a statement with the words `In a civilized country`, you KNOW the remainder of the statement will involve distributing/controlling/confiscating the proceeds/property/services of the productive members of society.

    This one was true to form.
  73. Profile photo of eovogt
    eovogt Male 18-29
    197 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 8:53 pm
    I would agree with SlothOfDoom, but this would never happen in Canada.
  74. Profile photo of AWESOMEBOT
    AWESOMEBOT Male 30-39
    67 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 9:28 pm
    If I`m not mistaken, her name is Vicki Vale. Should could have gotten Batman to help her if she had not been so rude to him back in 89.
  75. Profile photo of ForSquirel
    ForSquirel Male 30-39
    2166 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 10:24 pm
    ever seen one of those trailers go up though? Honestly, what`s the point of putting the fire out? They burn so quickly that it really is better to let it go than risk injury to anyone. And I`m sorry, but I`m pretty sure they could have found the $6+ bucks a month to have fire service.
  76. Profile photo of xelous
    xelous Male 18-29
    2513 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 10:26 pm
    I like that they wasted the resources just to go and watch a fire burn, that`s pretty good use of taxpayer money. Nevermind that they didn`t put it out, they wasted money NOT putting it out. Idiocy
  77. Profile photo of ivoryjak
    ivoryjak Female 18-29
    7 posts
    December 7, 2011 at 11:54 pm
    they went in case there were injuries. not to fight the fire. They probably are the first responders for the area, i.e. the nerest trained rescue professionals, since even if they aren`t paid, they would save lives, not material goods. Thats sort of a clear-cut moral solution.
  78. Profile photo of Mister_C
    Mister_C Male 18-29
    663 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 12:30 am
    Would never happen in the UK either. This is disgraceful.
  79. Profile photo of Fleaman1797
    Fleaman1797 Male 18-29
    718 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 12:43 am
    wow. humanity really is a worthless blight on the earth isnt it? i mean seriously. what a bunch of pricks.
  80. Profile photo of vegascartman
    vegascartman Male 30-39
    735 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 1:13 am
    Wasn`t this old news months ago?
  81. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 2:02 am
    Dat der wuz wun dam fyne traler home iffin ya ask me...
  82. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 2:09 am
  83. Profile photo of pigsnout5
    pigsnout5 Female 18-29
    546 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 3:22 am
    ok by south fulton they mean GA right? i am so ashamed to say that i`m from this state. this is horrible. i don`t care if it`s a mobile home or a million+ mansion. FIRE`S SHOULD BE PUT OUT! if there is a fee, they can pay it later, like a bill. to just sit back and watch is just wrong! damn city should stop taking all the taxpayers` money for themselves.
  84. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 5:32 am
    "Are you kidding me? In a civilized country both firedepartment and ambulance service should belong to everybody, free of charge no matter where you live."

    The world doesn`t work like that. The funding has to come from somewhere, otherwise you`re asking a bunch of people to work for nothing.
  85. Profile photo of drworm2002
    drworm2002 Male 30-39
    662 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 5:35 am
    2vegascartman no, this is the second time in the same place...
  86. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32829 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 5:39 am
    Wasn`t this old news months ago?
    I thought so too @vegascartman, but really this is like the 3rd time it`s happened in that area. The first time was a year or so ago and was a house. It was on IAB too (iirc).

    So we should give people service that they DON`T pay for? And everyone who DOES pay is a sucker? Nice, liberal thinking there!
    And if these folks are "so poor" they cannot afford $75, we`ll bill them thousands for the service? Great idea liberals!

    How about this: you get what you pay for!
  87. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32829 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 5:42 am
    vv @drworm is on the ball! lolz!

    @pigsnout5: Sure, they`ll put out the fire with the firetrucks they haven`t got, because NO ONE PAID for them! Imaginary firetrucks don`t work that well, eh?
  88. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:12 am
    why should the city be to blame?

    When did I say to blame the city? It`s a messed up system BECAUSE they should be allowed to levy a tax for those services.
  89. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:16 am
    if there is a fee, they can pay it later, like a bill

    I actually agree with this. If I have to use an ambulance (in a non-life-threatening scenario), they send me a bill afterward in the mail. My health insurance covers a certain amount for ambulance services, so why wouldn`t a system like that work?
  90. Profile photo of Tsik
    Tsik Male 30-39
    34 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:25 am
    ""Are you kidding me? In a civilized country both firedepartment and ambulance service should belong to everybody, free of charge no matter where you live."

    The world doesn`t work like that. The funding has to come from somewhere, otherwise you`re asking a bunch of people to work for nothing."

    One question. Where are the tax money go ? If not in social services (like firemen) Where ????
  91. Profile photo of Izaq
    Izaq Male 30-39
    173 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:35 am
    Fair enough: They didn`t pay so they get no service!

    BUT, why do people need to pay a fire fee? It ought to be paid by the state. It`s really horrible how poor people are left completely on their own. How can a "civilized" country leave some people the choice between say education and fire fees. Horrible country...
  92. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:40 am
    pigsnout5-"they can pay it later, like a bill"

    That would cut not number of payers from `those who want protection` to `those who use the service`, which meant the `bill` would be to the tune of thousands of dollars. Many of those WOULD not pay, causing the Fire Department to lose money. Soon, the area would have NO fire protection?

    pigsnout5-"city should stop taking all the taxpayers` money for themselves"

    The city is not taking ANY of these taxpayers money. THAT`S the point. The City can not Levy Taxes on them, so they are not responsible for fire protection in that area. They OFFERED it for a fee.

    patchgrabber-"should be allowed to levy a tax for those services."

    Agreed, good thinking. They should, but it has been ruled they `don`t have the jurisdiction`. A non-jurisdiction is a non-jurisdiction, which means no-taxee, no-servicee.
  93. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:45 am
    Hey idiots, PAY YOUR BILL! If you don`t pay your electric bill, they turn off your electricity. If you don`t pay your cable bill, they shut off your cable. If yout don`t pay your fire bill, they let your house burn down. Personal responsibility, half-wit morons! Guess what, it should be the same with your health insurance -- if you`re too irresponsible to buy it, you don`t get life-saving treatment. Welcome to real life!
  94. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:54 am
    Izaq-"It ought to be paid by the state"

    And where is the state to get the money?

    Fire departments in the United States are LOCAL. They are paid by taxes from the people in the area they cover, be it City, town or (sometimes) County.

    In this case, these people live in an unincorporated part of the county. They chose to live outside the city. The wanted Fire service, but when the city tried to levy a tax to cover the expense the courts ruled they have no jurisdiction to levy taxes in the county (probably after someone in the county sued), which also means they have so jurisdiction of responsibility to provide fire service.

    As a former member of a small town volunteer fire department I will tell you that the State & Feds only gives you regulations on how to run your departmen, not anyway to fund it.
  95. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 6:57 am
    AvatarJohn-"Hey idiots, PAY YOUR BILL!"

    While I agree with the advice, tone it down on the insults. If you researched this you will find out that the couple REALIZES they made a mistake and do not hold the Fire Department accountable.

    The couple also expressed appreciation for the firetruck being on scene to make sure the fire did not spread to neighbors, and also for the city for the assistance they`ve received since the fire.

    They made a bad decision, and are not blaming anyone but themselves.
  96. Profile photo of alikabul
    alikabul Male 18-29
    695 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 8:23 am
    Imagine someone coming into the ER mortally wounded: "Excuse me, did you pay yourhealth insurance? Oh well... Let him die!"
  97. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6174 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 10:04 am
    alikabul-"Imagine someone coming into the ER mortally wounded."

    Not equivalent. One deals with human life, the other with ~$200 worth of trailer.

    Numerous findings by multiple courts has maintained that Municipal Fire Departments/Districts are not required to provide Fire Protection Services to areas that are not subject to taxes or levies by that municipality, or that have not entered into a contract with said municipality. (That may include unincorporated area or, in some cases, federal military reservations.)

    Hospitals, on the other hand, are required BY LAW (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act amoung others) to provide care to anyone needing emergency healthcare treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay.

    Please check your facts.
  98. Profile photo of Orchideous
    Orchideous Male 18-29
    361 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 10:06 am
    "IT`S A CONTROVERSIAL POLICY WE`VE DEALT WITH BEFORE..."

    Woah, had my speakers full blast so I could hear the quiet woman, that made me jump out of my skin >:|
  99. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10732 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 10:09 am
    That would cut not number of payers from `those who want protection` to `those who use the service`, which meant the `bill` would be to the tune of thousands of dollars. Many of those WOULD not pay, causing the Fire Department to lose money. Soon, the area would have NO fire protection?

    Not really, you`d still have the incentive to subscribe and pay cents each month which would easily be covered by your paycheck, as opposed to having to pay serious dollars for a usage fee that would potentially obliterate your savings account.

    Either way, with or without the usage fee* that was administered for not subscribing earlier it would still be like calling up DAN and ask them to cover your trip to and stay in the hyperbaric chamber without subscribing beforehand.

    *Reminder: the usage fee only comes if they DO help you.
  100. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 12:08 pm
    I`m pretty sure this is a repost.
  101. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 12:23 pm
    So the firetruck is there. They have the means of combating the fire. They are, in fact, using the water to prevent the fire from spreading anyway.

    ...and yet, they refuse to help fellow human beings whose entire lives are going up in smoke?

    What a sad, sad state of affairs. I don`t care if a person is the biggest non-nice individual in the world, or how many times they haven`t paid a fee--if you see a human being suffering in front of you, and you have the means to prevent further suffering sitting in your hands, you HELP THEM.
  102. Profile photo of Sonsglow
    Sonsglow Male 18-29
    201 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 4:33 pm
    As a human, on a moral level, they probably should have saved their home; however, when you live in an area where there are fees to provide fire protection, and without those fees there are no: firefighters, fire engines, hoses, other equipment, etc - and you abstain from paying the fees, you also opt out of the protection. If NO ONE PAID there would be NO FIRE PROTECTION. People like this are why things like socialism and communism would never work, and they are why, to the detriment of most human beings alive on Earth, capitalism is so flagrant and valiantly fought for.
  103. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    December 8, 2011 at 11:14 pm
    There should be an option for the owner to pay the FULL cost of fighting the fire, including a share of the cost of the supplies, equipment, the fire house. For a trailer fire, that would maybe be about $2000.

    "Want us to put that out? Sign here, and press hard; you`re making three copies."
  104. Profile photo of thehitcher
    thehitcher Male 18-29
    237 posts
    December 9, 2011 at 12:17 am
    damned aluminum wiringin those old trailers.
  105. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    December 9, 2011 at 4:36 am
    @Tsik

    "The world doesn`t work like that. The funding has to come from somewhere, otherwise you`re asking a bunch of people to work for nothing."

    When I visited Chile a few years back I learned that their firefighters are all unpaid volunteers (only the equipment was paid for by government).

    So, for at least one part of the world, unless it`s changed since my visit, yes...yes it DOES work like that.
  106. Profile photo of Musuko42
    Musuko42 Male 18-29
    2850 posts
    December 9, 2011 at 4:41 am
    @MeGrendel

    "And what do you do when the storage unit goes up in flames and your keepsakes are not insured?"

    Bury them?

    It worked for Samuel Pepys. :P
  107. Profile photo of PierreJeanFR
    PierreJeanFR Male 40-49
    1360 posts
    December 9, 2011 at 5:20 am
    USA! USA !
    United States of A-holes
  108. Profile photo of varnsen
    varnsen Male 30-39
    36 posts
    December 9, 2011 at 7:00 am
    Once again, Americans proving they are the dicks of the world.
  109. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36694 posts
    December 9, 2011 at 8:28 am

    "I want what I want when I want it" is a childish outlook on life.
    They don`t actually live in that city so they don`t pay taxes to that city. But they expect the city to go out there and provide service {fire}. The city gave them the option of a low $75 fee but they chose not to pay it and STILL expect the city to provide services.

    You make choices in life and you live with the consequences. Stop whining.
  110. Profile photo of LtotheG
    LtotheG Male 18-29
    17 posts
    December 12, 2011 at 10:48 am
    THIS is why I oppose the gradual privatisation of public services in my country. America is barbaric, you wont heal the sick unless they can afford it, you wont put out a fire unless the owner can afford it. We are so much better than this as a species.

Leave a Reply