Cost cutting, firefighters watch house burn down.

Apparently in this county in Tennessee, if you want your house not to burn down you need to pay a $75 insurance to the town/county instead of it just coming out of your general taxes. Well one family figured they'd never need it, well they were proven wrong. When they called 911 and offered to pay whatever was needed for the firefighters to go to work, well the answer was basically "fuck you got mine"

http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-the-ground-104052668.html

 

pssss' your firehouse is on fire..

 

wow that is so messed up

 

How do we sleep while our beds are burning?

 

welcome to the america run on principles of "personal responsibility"

does sarah palin have a fiddle?

 

i just found out that there were 3 dogs and a cat inside that house; all dead now

that's bad enough; what happens when it's people?

 

I highly doubt they didnt ask if anyone was still inside when the homeowner called

but ya..I understand not protecting property if the person opted out of paying the required fee for the service....its like car insurance..you cant buy coverage from an accident scene and expect them to replace your vehicle...

I hope they would have came if someone was inside..but as usual the reporter probably did not report the whole story

 

^ so it's okay to let animals die?

what happens with renters? who pays, and how does the other party know that it's been paid?

what happens if an unpaid house starts burning, snug tight next to paid houses? and the flames spread?

seems regular taxation might be a smidgen less complicated, no?

 

you have to ask the owner why he left his animals inside

renters need to educate and protect themselves and their own property with renters insurance

if you live next to someone who isnt covered you have to make sure you have house insurance coverage of your own just in case

yes...regular taxation would be easier...but maybe this county is not regular...maybe its a rural community and they really need that $75 from each person to cover the cost of providing the fire service...it shouldnt be expected for them to protect someones property if that person declined the service

 

I hate to break it to you guys, but ALOT of places are like this, especially in rural areas. Some of these houses are almost impossible to find even with a map, and can be hours from the nearest fire station - often a volunteer brigade. IDK about this instance, but there is a fee in our state for houses outside city limits to support fire and other city services. Yes, its a point of debate for those who live fifty yards outside the limit, but you cant expect your fire crews to work for free if they have to use a GPS to find your place in the woods!


You want to live away from the hustle and bustle of the city, that means avoiding those noisy fire engines too. Even if a fire truck shows up, there may not be a hydrant, so it takes more than just a few dollars for gas.

It may not be right, but it is how it works.

 

back in the day.. here in volunteer land .. if you didnt have a sticker on your house.... It burned...

 

yep..lots of places here the fire truck is paid for by groups of homeowners who get together and form a co-op type situation where they can pay someone who lives close to wherever the truck is to come out

some places have nothing and just have to be extra careful

 

If I don't have car insurance and my car burns down.. I don't get a new car. -shrug-

 

if you have animals in the car take them out or people will get mad

 

But kids are okay.

 

Notice how car insurance is mandatory, much like in most sane towns paying for firefighters is mandatory through taxes. Should we have opt out for police too? I mean what do you do if your house also catches fire because the firefighters next door wouldn't put out the fire.

 

I live in the country and our fire department is all volunteers. We do not have hydrants and all water has to be pumped and brought in.

I pay a higher premium for insurance as in all likelihood if there is a fire, they will not be able to save the house or buildings.

I wonder what kind of person can stand and watch a place burn down who is trained to fight fires?

Sad, politics and money.

 

It's not mandatory here.

 

Fuck this taxes are paid for a reason. The 75$ was to raise extra revenue, not help protect peoples home or property, just another scapegoat.

 

It can't be mandatory because the family of the story weren't residents of the city the fire department was a part of, so they can't be taxed by the department's municipality. They paid no taxes to help fund the city's fire stations, and the city has no legal way of enforcing them to pay taxes, regardless of whether the county has a station or not.

Which is why they offer the service for a fee.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's fucking stupid regardless of their reasoning behind it. A fire is a public safety concern; simply "not responding" is extremely irresponsible as evidenced by the fact that they had to inevitably respond anyways once the fire had spread to a neighbor's house. Fires can easily get out of hand and having firefighters sit on their ass while one rages on yields the potential for it to become out of control very quickly.
The reasonable solution here is either the county starts up a volunteer service, or the city's station charges the full amount of whatever a call costs in the event that they have to save the home of a person who hadn't payed the fee.

Either way, sitting on their ass while people's homes go up in flames over $75 is pathetically petty and really goes to show how money is more important than the most basic reasons of what makes us human. I can understand why they do it though.

On the other hand, the entire situation kind of gives off a mafia vibe. One can easily imagine fire fighters making rounds to places who haven't payed the fee.
"That sure is a nice house you've got there...."