Firefighters show up, watch house burn to ground

having read most of that, IMO its garbage. its kind of disheartening knowing it came from my states school.

you, or I have no right for someone else to provide us adequate housing. you have a right to take the actions inside the law needed to secure adequate housing. but it shouldnt be handed out on a silver platter.

your last point.

did the state "destroy" the home? or did it simply stand by and watch (although there seems to be alot of mis information going around, according to Olberman the fire fighters showed up only once the fire had spread. they didnt show up and crack open a beer to watch this guys home burn, they simply werent there)

letting natural consequence take place and actively destroying something are =/=

on the same note, if my home needs a new roof and the state is there to "protect and improve" then why can i not expect the state to pay for a new roof? and if they dont, and the rains come damaging everything in my home, the state has actively had a hand in destroying my home? (see what i did there :)
 
STOP MAKING THESE TERRIBLE ANALOGIES!!!! i swear to god, in every thread you talk about libertarian values (read: every thread possible) you make these dumb analogies. "oh well why dont you just pay for this for me? why not just give me your credit card number?" you know DAMN WELL those are not sound analogies, and its bothersome because your posts are otherwise pretty intelligent and logical, if heartless and detached (in my oh so humble opinion).stop misrepresenting the situation. the firefighters watched as the house burnt to the ground though they were already there with all the equipment, over $75. that is what happened, and the logical progression from that is NOT that the fucking city is going to pay for your leaky roof or whatever and you KNOW it.

when a human cares more about $75 and/or an absolutely retarded (not to mention unusual) law, well... that's a sad state of affairs. it really is.

 
people who live in quebec have it the easiest to pay for school (its like 1 tenth anybody else on here would pay and your dumb and ugly and only walmart would hire you putting you at minimum wage in quebec which is pretty low compared to the rest of canada meaning less money comes out of your paycheque for taxes meaning

you are an ugly lazy french bitch who pays unreal low school fees and hardly pays any tax and your tatoos are fucked hopefully technology willl someday be able to save you

 
Most of you on here are way to young to understand how any of this works but first of all its incredibly expensive to run a fire department. Just starting up the trucks and getting them moving costs a ton not to mention the start up cost of buying all the equipment and pay the firefighters.
Secondly its a dangerous job the firefighters could have been hurt in the process which could have lead to much larger lawsuits from the fighters family.
In the end they didn't pay for their insurance, so they get no coverage. That would be the same if I crashed my care and expected Geico to pay for my car because I crashed and I cannot hold a job now that I lost my car. Or for the fire, asking my neighboring cities fire dept to come save my house when I don't even pay taxes in that town. Yeah a burning home sucks but you need to take responsibility for your actions.
 
look chief i dont think anyone on here is too young to understand that it costs a lot of money to run a fire department. nice try though. the argument is that it's retarded that a 75 dollar fee is valued over a family's house, ESPECIALLY when he offered to pay whatever he had to to get them to act as they sat there with all the equipment. i dont think anyone's arguing that it doesnt make sense in light of the rule,we're arguing that it's a stupid system and to value such a dumb system over someone's entire house and life is inhumane
 
Sorry, I needed an extreme example of exhibition of the bystander effect. I dont think they're equal in scope at all, just for the record, but they do both bring up the same moral issue. Why not help out a fellow human being?
 
How can you be too young to understand that fighting fires costs money?

And please everyone stop making the insurance analogy, it does not apply.

If you want to make valid situational analogy it would be: A car insurance company has the power to stop an accident but does nothing because neither of the cars are insured.

And economically this is also very stupid. I guarantee the cost of just putting out the fire before it reached the house is much less than the cost of replacing the house. Not to mention the loss in property values this neighborhood will have, bad press, and the lives of 3 family pets.
 
if its a service then why cant the fire dept just send them a bill afterwards for the cost of putting out the fire and a premium for not paying the 75 fee.
seems like the mayor just wanted to be a dick.
 
I still can't believe people are still 100% behind the firefighters actions. Way to see the big picture. It's easy for somebody who wasn't affected by this in any way to say, "Well fuck em, they deserve it". The fact that the firefighters wouldn't come, to make an example out of them is pretty sick. The fact that they came to put a neighbors field out, watched the house burn and then left is really fucked up. Plus if they had just put the fire out in the first place, the dudes house would have never caught fire and the neighbors field would never have burned.

Everyone is super cool to just say that they did the right thing here.
 
I could see how firefighters would be limited in their actions by the government. What I find really reprehensible is that as human beings they didnt at least try to help the guy, even without the city's equipment.
 
Honestly, for this argument to continue, one of the people defending what happened needs to explain why they couldnt have their house saved and pay out the ass for it, which they pleaded the firefighters to do.

try to tell me people are going to watch someone's house burn to the ground, then pay thousands and thousands of dollars rather than $75, and then say "oh gee that makes me want to not pay the fee." so if the money is taken care of, and the "making an example" is taken care of, what else do you have to argue from?
 
the fact that the man probably would have never paid them.

think about it, his house was in the process of burning down. Do you think he was thinking rationally? "oh, i've got constant stable income, and though my excess income will be gone, i can pay off the costs!"

No, it was probably more like "i'll sell you this house, my children, my wife, and half my belongings if you save this"

its a service he didn't pay for, thus, he didn't receive. Sucks, but i doubt he'll opt out of paying the fee next time
 
Do you actually read any of the other posts or just keep saying the same thing over and over?

Also I hope when you need help a technicality prevents you from receiving it.

 
FOR ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO FEEL SO STRONGLY THAT IT WAS THE WRONG THING TO DO I WANT TO SEE YOU PAY THE $75 RIGHT FUCKING NOW YOU FUCKS DON'T KNOW THE FIRST SHIT ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY IT COSTS TO FIGHT FIRE. THATS RIGHT I DON'T SEE FUCKING ONE OF YOU PAYING.. SO SHUT THE FUCK UP
 
i read them all, but no one is saying anything that hasn't been said 6 times already so i keep using the same response. Do you think no one else in 3 pages has thought they should have put it out, then charged him?

and it wouldn't happen to me, because i'm not a fucking dumbass who would rather save $75 and risk losing everything. I'd have paid, and would now be sitting in some hotel somewhere saying "good thing i paid, otherwise no one would have helped"
 
not to mention if you actually read what was happening they were burning trash near their house... and it got out of control... thats negligence and pure stupidity... and they were doing it without having fire protection... It's sad to see stupid people lose their home and expect someone else to take care of their problems and sad to see so many you people sympathizing with them... maybe you should pay for everyones unincorporated fire and police costs...
 
"The state will protect and improve houses and neighborhoods rather than damage or destroy them. "

to that is what i was referring with the leaky roof.

IMO it doesnt apply to the city acting to protect your home from fire, or a leaky roof. my example was exaggerated for effect.

THE STATE DIDNT DESTROY THE HOME and it didnt damage it, (unless not acting is now a crime?)

ill give you the roof analogy isnt perfect, what can i say, we all slip up once or twice ;)
 
I'll feed the troll cause I'm bored. You should go play in traffic. The money it cost to fight fires is barely relevant in this whole story. The fact is he would have paid them anything to stop his house from burning. Stopping it early would have stopped it from actually catching his house, and damaging another's property. The fact that they went there and watched the house burn after helping the neighbor is fucked up. They deserve to get in some shit for this. Burn in troll hell.
 
fuck their stupid. they stop the fire from burning, charge the fee and everyone is happy! americans and their fucking rules laws and lawsuits.
 
Should be something like 75 bucks annually, but it the homeowner did not pay and got into a situation like that, then the fee is something like $500 or $1000.

But refusing to put the fire out is just plain wrong.

Sorry if this has been said but I didn't want to read 4 pages of stuff.
 
that's not really what the analogy would be..

suppose you go to a person's house to fix a leak that is going to destroy his house in minutes, and he hasnt paid the
 
Ok now lets make that equal to the actual situation:

You go to someones house as a plumber and their water main is gushing water into their house, you have the tools to stop the leak but you don't because they owe you $25 from your last visit. So their house floods and everything they own is destroyed. (and all their family animals die)...

This thread is dead, lets all let it die. May it forever be know as the tread that made me lose hope in our generation.

"If one is given the power to stop evil, and does nothing, they are as guilty as that evil."

We are all humans on this earth together, lets leave the allowance of evil things to god.
 
I literally just facepalmed reading this. Stop talking about plumbing, it is a fucking analogy. Now I have lost faith in our generations mental capacity.
 
That's a shit example. If you are fixing the link, that is your job. Whether a contractor or plumber. You are doing it to make a living. The point of being a fire fighter is to put out fires. Some are volunteer, some get paid. But if somebodies house is on fire and you are there and have the ability to put it out, it's your fucking duty to put it out.

And they offered to pay. They were told tough shit, you should have paid months ago, even a billion dollars won't make us care about you at this point. It was a pretty twisted way to set an example for your rule.
 
I pretty much had a long time ago. But I have that sliver of hope that people will start using their brains a little more.
 
I assume you are referring to the lowlife tactics of the homeowner who tried to cheat the fire department of their deserved money when you say "evil".
 
fuck this thread, one because it's depressing from some of the responses, and two because it KEEPS FUCKING CUTTING MY LONGS POSTS OFF. fuck it im done!
 
i'm not taking it any further than this. unless you can recognize the human need for housing, and the vast range of situations and living conditions across the world, i'm not putting any more effort into this debate.
 
yea i'd say this has pretty much run it's course, especially since the end of the last page was debating plumbing...
 
The point of being a prize fighter is to put motherfuckers out. Some are amateur, some get paid. But if somebody's face needs rearranged and you're there and have the ability to put em out, it's your fucking duty to put them out!!

Fire fighters arn't robots or angels sent from heaven. They are just regular people with families to provide for. They should risk their livelihood by illegally using the city's property?
 
This thread blows. People still trying to defend this as a completely logically situation.

"They wouldn't have even left the fire hall if it wasn't close to other houses of people who had paid, it's not their jurisdiction to protect people who aren't covered by their hall." Dude they were actually there watching it burn, and then left. This thread needs to die before anymore retarded posts get dropped.
 
Jesus man. Shut up. For real. They would be risking their lives by spraying water on it from the street so it didn't light anyone else' houses on fire, instead of waiting till it almost did to show up, then no do shit about the og fire.

Fuck you.
 
Because it would be so dangerous to spray some water on it with the hose at the very least.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.

This thread blows.
 
Except were you were the person doing the bumping so once again, you said you were going to let it die, why not?
 
You-are-so-dumb-You-are-really-dumb-fo-real.jpg


haha, you're so bad at this, you can't even form a coherent sentence.
 
i still think a hefty fine for fire services when you aren't 'on the list' would be an effective enough deterrent for most people to pay the $75, cover the costs of the fire department and not needlessly add another family to the homeless population.
 
i'm pretty sure in this instance it started as a garbage fire outside the residence; i'd think there are probably heaps of fires that start on people's property that could be controlled before the actual residence is damaged.

of course there's a chance of the family ending up homeless whether or not the firefighter's assist. But if we're trying to minimize that risk, not sending the brigade doesn't make sense.

I will say, i do recognize a problem with the firefighters responding to the non-paying resident call only to have a paying resident call in with their own fire. Now you're having the non-payers take the resources from the paying resident. Of course you can immediately pull the resources from one house to the other, but it's not a fast transition and you could end up losing both houses.

I'd say this whole situation could have been avoided if we earmark a bunch of funds for the rural firefighters... but nope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top