Fireman in Tenn allowed a fire to burn a house down.
Do you think they were wrong by not putting out the fire?
Do you think they were wrong by not putting out the fire?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Why did fireman just watch as this fire burn a house down
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
- Status
If that's the law in the city there, then yes, they were right to let it burn. They apparently are at that point a contracted service. If he wanted fireman coverage, he should have paid for it. Unfortunately he didn't.
What about his neighbors? Did they try to help?
What about his neighbors? Did they try to help?
Nope.
I saw the same thing happen in my home town. A bar bq restaurant refused annexation by the city, even when they told him he would no longer have fire protection.
A few months later, his restaurant burned to the ground as firemen watched.
He wanted the protection but he didn't want to pay city taxes to have it.
He got what he deserved...and what he paid for.
no .
Bob Alkire
New Member
I believe he got what he paid for. I have been in that position when I was in Ar. It was a volunteer fire department, if you paid for the service you got it. I didn't pay so I didn't call, due to my foolishness I had about $10,000.00 damage and my home insurance wouldn't pay either, in the policy I had to have fire department service for the policy to pay for fire damage.
I believe I know how this man feels now, I know how I felt.
I believe I know how this man feels now, I know how I felt.
Did the firefighters have a responsibility to put it out? Nope.
However, if the firefighters had decided that they were going to show grace and try and save this man's house from burning down, I would have enthusiastically supported them.
Did they need to or have to do such? Of course not. But had they done it, I think folks would have really been proud of them for unselfishness.
Of course, had they put it out...then you lean on that homeowner to pay the fine, after the fact.
Conclusion: No, they didn't have to...but I kinda wish they would have; if nothing else, just to show how profoundly unselfish so many firefighters are on a regular basis.
Just goes to show you: actions (or inaction, even when it's caused by forgetfulness) have consequences.
However, if the firefighters had decided that they were going to show grace and try and save this man's house from burning down, I would have enthusiastically supported them.
Did they need to or have to do such? Of course not. But had they done it, I think folks would have really been proud of them for unselfishness.
Of course, had they put it out...then you lean on that homeowner to pay the fine, after the fact.
Conclusion: No, they didn't have to...but I kinda wish they would have; if nothing else, just to show how profoundly unselfish so many firefighters are on a regular basis.
Just goes to show you: actions (or inaction, even when it's caused by forgetfulness) have consequences.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
Seriously? There are places where you have to pay a fee for fire service? I've lived in some pretty rural places with volunteer fire departments before, but I've never heard of this. The homeowner should have paid the $75 fee, but if I'm one of the firemen there's no way I would stand and watch the house burn. I'm unhappy with the Jacksonville City Council for raising property taxes, but this is one case where I'd be begging for a tax hike to cover fire service. The whole concept of paying an optional fee for fire coverage is crazy and insane.
Yes, this is very common.
I've been a volunteer fire fighter in a rural area and you would be suprised how much opposition there is to accessing property owners taxes for fire protection. We tried and it failed to pass. There were some very ugly acting people who opposed it. Lies were abundant. Funny though, some of the very people who staged the revolt were the first to call when their house caught on fire.
The firemen were right in what they did. The sad thing is what would have been the fall-out if they HAD gone ahead and went to his home when he called and fought the fire. Now they are providing services without getting paid. Everyone else will say "They'll come out anyway because they are nice people." and will no longer pay for the service.
I'm sorry but if you don't pay, you don't get the benefit.
$75 a year? That's nothing. My village provides our fire coverage via a volunteer fire department. My village taxes are near $5,000. My total property tax bill is close to $15,000 before our exemptions. If I STILL had to pay an additional $75, I'd be happy to.
I'm sorry but if you don't pay, you don't get the benefit.
$75 a year? That's nothing. My village provides our fire coverage via a volunteer fire department. My village taxes are near $5,000. My total property tax bill is close to $15,000 before our exemptions. If I STILL had to pay an additional $75, I'd be happy to.
Bob Alkire
New Member
My friend, be careful when you help someone. Back in the early 80's I pulled over to help at a car crash at about 2:30 AM just out of Winona, Ms. I put the fire out and but the three people inside kept yelling , I got them out. The driver was drunk. I was taken to court by two of the three, trying to blame part of their after problems on me. I cost me over $17,000.00 to beat the case.
I did it again in the late 90's not far from Clinton, SC, at about 4 AM. I called 911 but after a half an hour no help, I got the woman out of the burning car, as I was carrying her the gas tank went off and we both went air born, I came down on her and bruised her up. Again I found my self in court, but all came out well, just cost a good amount of money to prove yourself.
Bob Alkire
New Member
I've seen the same thing down here. So many don't want to pay but when they need the service, they think you should come.
Look at health insurance, folks want the service of a $25,000.00 policy and pay for a $5,000.00 policy. One does not want to pay till, they need the service.
Last edited by a moderator:
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
That's absurd. If you're not going to use property taxes to pay for fire service, what the purgatory are the taxes for? Fire service seems like one of the most basic things to be paid for out of tax revenue.
The unincorporated portion of Obion County does not have a fire dept. The County has an agreement with the CITY of South Fulton to provide fire service on a pay-basis. Another words residents of Obion County DO NOT pay taxes to the city of South Fulton.
Now do you understand?
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
I know that. Obion County should either start a fire department or contract with the City of South Fulton and pay them out of property tax money.
Then they will have to either raise property taxes or cut other services.
It's as simple as that.
OK, who makes the decision - the politicians or the by vote of the people?
and if the vote of the people say no taxes - pay your own way - would that be acceptable to you?
And why should it be by property tax? Why not sales or some other tax. Here in NY we have fire districts.
- Status