Rural Tennessee fire sparks debate
Personally while I feel bad for the guy I think he made an informed decision not to pay the dues. Sucks, I'd be really ticked... and I'm not sure why he couldn't foot the whole bill (probably a lot more then the dues would have been) but it is what it is.What do you think?
2 comments:
I don't see any way that the town FD could respond to the fire of an out-of-towner who didn't pay the fee, and not have it be stealing from those who did pay (whether by in-town taxes or by out-of-town fee).
A FD that serves people who do not pay into the service will have to charge more to those who do pay for the service. Unless all the payers have agreed to do this as charity, that is stealing (although there are others who might simply call it communism).
A FD that serves people who do not pay into the service will not be in their fire station waiting for a call when someone who does pay for the service needs them. That is stealing too (although there are others who would simply call it criminal).
The FD was right to not go take care of the fire of the guy who "forgot" to pay his fee.
While I agree that the FD made the right decision to NOT fight the fire (and for the same reasons C stated), I must admit that it will give the fireFIGHTERS an undeserved bad rep.
The guys that go into harms way like FFs or PD do couldn't care less about where the money comes from (it is NOT why they do it, after all) and; I can only imagine what was going through their heads to just stand there and watch.
I feel for those guys... While giving the utmost respect to them for following the orders from on high, even though they conflicted with their own training, desire, willingness, and personalities.
The call to not go in, though sound, can create other issues that I hope folks understand well enough to put the "blame" (if there is any here) in the proper place.
I suppose the moral of this story is to treat your "service dues" like insurance. Pay it and pray you don't ever need it.
Post a Comment