Firemen Watch House Burn Down

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/10/firefighters-watch-home-burn-down-because-owner-hadnt-paid-75-city-fee/1

The mayor of South Fulton, Tenn., stands by his town's policy that led firefighters to watch from the sidelines while a man's county home burned to the ground because he hadn't paid the $75 fire protection fee, WPSD reports.

Gene Cranick, owner of the now-gutted house in Obion County, says he called 911 and offered to pay whatever it would take to get the firefighters to act, but they said they wouldn't do anything, WPSD reports.

They only responded when it looked as if the fire might spread to the house of a neighbor who had paid the fee.

"I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," Cranick tells the Paducah, Ky., TV station.

Mayor David Crocker says that's just city policy.

"Anybody that's not in the city of South Fulton, it's a service we offer, either they accept it or they don't," Crocker says.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I love this story and the debate it provokes. Long story short Guy doesn't live within the city/town boundaries, he lives out in the middle of nowhere. The city/town he lives closest too offers fire service to this area for a nominal fee of 75 dollars a year. He didn't pay it, his house catches fire, nobody comes to save him because he didnt pay the mandatory fee. Now people are pissed off at the town.

What's the problem???

Discuss

$75 could have bought ALOT of marshmallows & weenies.

They could have at least put the gd fire out then made hime pay the fee. His home was going up in flames and the fire department sat and watched. No one had to balls to step up and say, "*** this policy, this mans house is on fire and I am a fireman". The home owner probably lives outside of that county for a reaseon.

As long as no one was hurt and he had insurance, it shouldn't be TOO big of a deal. If he doesn't have insurance or someone was hurt, then it's really quite tragic.

Was it $75 a month or year? The radio show I was listening to this morning said it was $75 a month. I wouldn't have paid that crap. Would just spend that extra 75 bucks a month on better fire insurance.

If it was by year though, I could see myself paying that.

Just proves that the world is run by money. Even "selfless" firemen have to be bought.

Also this.

I'd like to think that firefighters have the balls to stand on principle and risk their jobs to help someone else. Especially when they are standing a couple hundred feet away with all the tools to do so.

Agreed.
And here I thought people took jobs like this to make a difference in the world. Oh well.

This^

And if they didn't intended to put out the fire, they shouldn't have went there to begin with. Since they were already there and had the means to put it out, they should have.

If they are that strict on policy and all, it shouldn't have bothered them if the fire spread to the neighbours house either, unless he (the neighbour) called it in himself.

The policy seems a bit harsh. While I understand the reasoning behind it, it's not like they couldn't put out the fire, and slap him with some sort of penalty fee. It's stories like this that make me lose faith in humanity...

Most counties / cities / towns etc, have a mandatory fee that's usually about the same price. This town's failure was making it optional. I'm sure every firefighter there wanted to jump on it, but their chief gets orders from the mayor.

Sucks for the people that lost their house, but, what can you expect when you take the cheap way out?

I personally volunteered for 5 years before making it a career, having volunteers could have cut the cost of that, but, if that area dosent get enough people willing to do the job for free, the only way keep homeowner's insurance down is to boost what's called an ISO rating, which is a number based rating each area gets based on hydrant locations, staffing at fire stations, types of apparatus at the station, hydrant locations... it even goes all the way down to the amount of training the firefighters are doing per month. The department I work for requires that we do 2 hours of training per shift (which has to be properly logged and is strictly limited to FIRE related situations) in order to boost the ISO rating, which lowers people's insurance costs.

lol, I dunno about that. Some of the faces of the firemen at the scene look like they don't give a crap. I'm guessing the whole ride over to the site, they were laughing it up about how they were gonna watch it burn unless it started to move to other places.

When you have a family to feed and are working in a profession that, since 9/11/01 has been flooded with a bunch of hero wanna-bes finding a replacment job could take several YEARS (yes years) Risking that over a house that is already on the ground isnt worth it. I understand the emotion, but by the time the fire dept was called the house was beyond saving.

They looked like they didnt even know what they were doing, regardless. In that picture, look at the fireload. It was on the ground, there was nothing left to save. The Fire dept was dispatched after that house was gone and it was spreading to the neighbor's house (who paid their fee)

THE ROOF, THE ROOF, THE ROOF IS ON FYAH! WE ALREADY HAVE WATER, BUT THE *** WILL STILL BURN. BURN BURN BURN BABY BURN!!!

I LOVE arguing with people who think this way..

What kind of example does it set for EVERYONE else who actually paid the $75 per year (who can't honestly afford this) if the guy gets his fire put out when he doesn't pay the fee???

He doesn't live within the city limits, he doesn't pay taxes, to this city.

Nothing stopping them from charging him more afterward.

If they never appeared, I wouldn't be bothered. The fact that they appeared and then sat there and watched it bugged me. That's like having no health insurance and getting a doctor to come to your house just to watch you bleed out.

He did offer to pay whatever they wanted. Seems like they just wanted to make an example of him. I bet they banked off all the people in the area who hadn't paid up and were scared by this.

So if the after charge is a few thousand dollars, will the fire department EVER see it? If so then I can see your point, but there is no guarantee that the fee will ever get paid, and we're back in the same spot, he got the service without paying. If the fee is a few hundred dollars and he does pay it we're STILL in the same place, I venture to say that if the system is; you don't pay the fee and it only costs 750 dollars if they come then why would anyone cough up $75/year to pay for something that is such a low risk?

You're system, asks the majority of people to be chumps... I shall deem it chumponomics.

I think it was more of a scare tactic for those other homeowners who didnt pay. I do agree with putting it out from the start regardless, then fining him for not paying his fee, but that's what the mayor gets for not having a backbone and making it mandatory.

Walking away from something actively burning will do nothing but give the mayor and firefighters a black eye. From what I saw in the video, several of them were volunteers, which are easily spotted by the sleevless shirt / non-professional clothing. One thing I will say about most volunteers is: They're volunteering to do the work for free out of passion / or to work up pussy, or both. I'm sure they were wanting to do their job, but politics cockblocked them.

I suppose you're one of those that's okay with a system where money buys things that are normally considered common courtesy.

I think you are missing the point. They went to this mans house, they already knew he hadn't paid the fee. For what reason? "just in case it spread to the neighbours house"?

Since when do firefighters go out to houses that aren't on fire? Do you really think the city would waste money on sending them out to houses thatmight or might not catch on fire? They obviously went there to make an example of this one man. Which is wrong.

lol, this reminds me of that/those Batman cartoon episodes. The mobsters would go around asking for money for something like "safety insurance". After a couple of weeks, they'd go and rob the people who didn't pay up.

Conspiracy Theory:

Well, one thing's for sure. They won't be getting much *** from this endeavor.