Firefighters let home burn

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Particle Man

Bet you they had no compunction against going out and buying a carton of cigarettes every week, too.

One carton = fire protection.

Would be rather ironic (and not that stupid Alanis Morrissette definition either), if the fire was started by a cigarette.

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Would be rather ironic (and not that stupid Alanis Morrissette definition either), if the fire was started by a cigarette.

Poetic

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

My compulsion to do the right thing frequently stops at the point where I would be rewarding people, for being assholes. I wouldn't let them die, but their 52" flatscreen can burn in hell.

Why do you make it sound as if the guy was a welfare scammer? I didn't see anything about a 52" Flat Screen being involved.

Originally Posted by RACER X

well this is the 2nd time this has happened in as many yrs, so it wasn't his first rodeo

Then maybe Rodeo is not the sport for him.

Originally Posted by RACER X

contracts are worth the paper they're written on. dude couldn;t pony up $75 a yr ago, ya think he'll have more $ after his double wide burned up?

So what you're saying is, if you're poor, fuck you? Nice.

Kentucky is seriously backwards, but I'm pretty sure they have courts there. There are any number of ways the fire dept could collect on a contract.

Originally Posted by Particle Man

Bet you they had no compunction against going out and buying a carton of cigarettes every week, too.

One carton = fire protection.

I didn't see anything in the story about cigarettes either, don't be a hater.

Now imagine this:

You pay your fee every year, like you're supposed to. Your house catches fire, but the 911 operator can't find your records, or someone forgot to enter your fee on the ledger that year. 911 says sorry, you're not on "the list", no water for you.

Anybody else see where this system is tragically flawed?

JC

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Why do you make it sound as if the guy was a welfare scammer? I didn't see anything about a 52" Flat Screen being involved.

General statement, not specific. Likely an issue of spending money on what's desired, rather than what's important.

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Kentucky is seriously backwards, but I'm pretty sure they have courts there. There are any number of ways the fire dept could collect on a contract.

You can't enforce a non existent contract and it's easy to say, "Well I want to pay it NOW!", when there's an immediate need. I don't get to pay for car insurance, right after I have an accident, then not pay it the rest of the time.

[skiergirl]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

$6.25/mo is waaayyyyyy too much when you're on the hook for $65/mo from Rent-A-Center for your flat screen, $250/mo for your truck payment, and $25/mo for an iPad... Sheesh, priorities man... gotta live 'white trash rich' in my trailer... fuck fire protection.

And this right here is the truth which is why I have zero sympathy. I'd bet if you went into any of those homes you'd find nice TV's, computers or laptops, video games and cell phones. Well, guess what - might want to re-think that cell phone and new PS3 and pay your fire Ins instead dumbass.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

General statement, not specific. Likely an issue of spending money on what's desired, rather than what's important.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

For all we know, all his "extra" cash goes towards dialysis.

JC

[RACER X]

so JC, does the homeowner bear any responsibility?

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Assumes facts not in evidence.

For all we know, all his "extra" cash goes towards dialysis.

JC

Watch the video, at the bottom of the linked page. "Didn't pay the $75.00 fee, because they didn't think a fire like that would happen to them", or words to that effect.

[Papa_Complex]

Looking a little deeper, it seems the situation is a bit different than the linked story indicates. In order to be eligible for the $75.00 annual fee, you have to secure fire insurance. Those trailers are apparently uninsurable, so they don't even qualify for the annual fee.

http://www.kfvs12.com/story/16201834...fighters-watch

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

You can't enforce a non existent contract and it's easy to say, "Well I want to pay it NOW!", when there's an immediate need. I don't get to pay for car insurance, right after I have an accident, then not pay it the rest of the time.

Agreed, which is why I wasn't suggesting that. I said a contract for services rendered, ie., the amount of money it costs to put the fire out. How much does it cost to put a fire out anyway? Figure six guys for five hours, (who were on the clock anyway) a bunch of water, some new flashlight batteries, and gas money for the truck. WTF, that's maybe two grand, tops.

Originally Posted by RACER X

so JC, does the homeowner bear any responsibility?

Yeah, about two grand by my math.

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Watch the video, at the bottom of the linked page. "Didn't pay the $75.00 fee, because they didn't think a fire like that would happen to them", or words to that effect.

OK, so he was wrong about that. In the interview, he said he and his neighbor both offered to pay $500-$5000 to put the fire out, but they still refused. If the guy was only living there for a few years, (just saying) the fire dept is coming out ahead on the deal. Instead, they stood there spraying water on someone else's house, and went home with dick.

Schmucks.

JC