• Welcome to RCCrawler Forums.

    It looks like you're enjoying RCCrawler's Forums but haven't created an account yet. Why not take a minute to register for your own free account now? As a member you get free access to all of our forums and posts plus the ability to post your own messages, communicate directly with other members, and much more. Register now!

    Already a member? Login at the top of this page to stop seeing this message.

fire dept in tenn lets house burn down cuz ownwer forgot to pay $75 annual fee

Well shit, I thought my example of people providing an essential life and property saving service to neighbors would be a good one, but I guess not...

I still disagree with the way their county is handling these services for those folks in Tennessee.....dammit! :lol:
 
This was a trailer fire when they go they go fast, this story has all the earmarkings of something spun up by one of our hard working "News Creators", you can't trust the news media anymore they used to report the news, now they create news. I'm calling bull shit on this story.
 
JeremyH said:
Well shit, I thought my example of people providing an essential life and property saving service to neighbors would be a good one, but I guess not...

I still disagree with the way their county is handling these services for those folks in Tennessee.....dammit! :lol:
Click to expand...
:ror:
If it's ok to put out the fire for one or two people who doesn't want to pay, then they should just offer the service free to everyone in that county. Then make the people of the city pay more tax to cover it. That's the only way to make it sustainable.

I'm done with this thread, it's been an interesting debate but I beleive we are at a stalemate. :ror:8)
 
Grizzly4x4 said:
If it's ok to put out the fire for one or two people who doesn't want to pay, then they should just offer the service free to everyone in that county. Then make the people of the city pay more tax to cover it. That's the only way to make it sustainable.
Click to expand...
No reason to be done....I agree with you on that. The politicians of that area should do just like the rest of the country.....use tax dollars to fund the necessary life and property saving services for it's citizens.

I never said that they shouldn't pay their fair share...."thumbsup"
 
Our volunter dept. does get state and federal offers/grants. We dont get any money or reimbursment for fighting fires in our surrounding cities/counties.


IMO if the "company/fired department" and it "workers/firefighters" got any of these grants then they ARE required to fight every fire, paid or not.

I would investigate and see if they ever recieved ANY state or fed funds.

If not, and they are just a buisness, then they have NO obigation what so ever.

But IMO if death or enjury was to ever be a result of thier non action, they can be liable in ciivil court, depending on council.

BUt if they have recieved money, EVER for equipment upgrades ect. then thay MUST respond to all, not just those who "contribute"
 
JeremyH said:
No reason to be done....I agree with you on that. The politicians of that area should do just like the rest of the country.....use tax dollars to fund the necessary life and property saving services for it's citizens.
Click to expand...


LOL I dont think thats working either

Couple months old
In Rick Perry's Texas, Firefighters Forced To Pay For Gear, Engine Fuel

In some cases, fire officials say, firefighters have had to pay out of pocket for basic necessities like proper protective gear and fuel to get them to the scene.
Click to expand...

:shock:
 
Last edited:
I know the state of texas has been real good to our frie department, and we are real small (poulation 500)

I can totallys see how that cant go on forever, betetr economy= more tax rev= more grant money. weaker economy= weaker tax revenue=less grant money. all dperatment, fire, school, police,ect have to cut back and set new priorities for thier budgets...its not easly, noonw likes cuts, but its neccisaary
 
JeremyH said:
The politicians of that area should do just like the rest of the country.....use tax dollars to fund the necessary life and property saving services for it's citizens.

I never said that they shouldn't pay their fair share...."thumbsup"
Click to expand...

This is all well and good, but do you realize the cost to purchase all the necessary equipment and pay the necessary personnel to have a fire department? I bet you it's a lot more than $75 a year per household. Simple solution... pay the fees or take the gamble... if you lose, you lose everything. Homeowners choice, no one told them they couldn't have fire protection, they chose not to. Would you go to work everyday if you weren't getting a paycheck? I doubt it... nobody would. I stand behind the fire departments decision. If I were paying for this service in that neighborhood for say 10 years and the guys house down the street who doesn't pay gets the same service I'd been paying for... I'd be pretty upset and looking for my $$$ back. Why should someone get free service when no one else does?
 
4u2nv said:
This is all well and good, but do you realize the cost to purchase all the necessary equipment and pay the necessary personnel to have a fire department? I bet you it's a lot more than $75 a year per household. Simple solution... pay the fees or take the gamble...
Click to expand...
No, I sure dont....and I agree, it is more than likely a LOT more than $75 per year. That is another reason why the government around there needs to tax the citizens appropriately so that they have the funding for the necessary life saving services that they deserve.
 
They should be ashamed of themselves to let someones home with pets inside burn to the ground because of a lousy $75.00

They should have put it out and gave him an option to pay the $75.00 or get a fine or something in that matter,not let someones home burn to the ground along with thier pets!

Someone would be getting a ass whippin if that was my home!
 
GREEDY GENIUS said:
They should be ashamed of themselves to let someones home with pets inside burn to the ground because of a lousy $75.00

They should have put it out and gave him an option to pay the $75.00 or get a fine or something in that matter,not let someones home burn to the ground along with thier pets!

Someone would be getting a ass whippin if that was my home!
Click to expand...

One more person late to the party and commenting without reading the full story.

Really mature of you, by the way. Whoop somebody ass, huh? That would accomplish a whole helluva lot. :lmao:

In both cases, they made sure that nobody was in danger. Do you really expect people to risk their lives for your pet?
 
GREEDY GENIUS said:
They should have put it out and gave him an option to pay the $75.00 or get a fine or something in that matter,not let someones home burn to the ground along with thier pets!

Someone would be getting a ass whippin if that was my home!
Click to expand...

Spend other peoples tax money processing the paperwork for the fine? Hoping they pay it? Taking them to collections for not paying the fine?

A 75$ fee turns into a (example) 300$ fine that costs others thousands of dollars in lawyer and court fees?

Yeah that seems like an option too. :roll:


Something tells me you would have paid the fee to begin with and still have your home if it was you. ;-)
 
EvilTwin v2 said:
One more person late to the party and commenting without reading the full story.

Really mature of you, by the way. Whoop somebody ass, huh? That would accomplish a whole helluva lot. :lmao:

In both cases, they made sure that nobody was in danger. Do you really expect people to risk their lives for your pet?
Click to expand...

Oh man im so sorry for responding soooo late to this thread,maybe i'll just quit my job,stop being a dad and just stand next to my computer with my eyes glued to it to respond to all the threads the minute they come up"thumbsup"

Now here's a tissue for your tears:flipoff:
 
Robbob said:
Spend other peoples tax money processing the paperwork for the fine? Hoping they pay it? Taking them to collections for not paying the fine?

A 75$ fee turns into a (example) 300$ fine that costs others thousands of dollars in lawyer and court fees?

Yeah that seems like an option too. :roll:


Something tells me you would have paid the fee to begin with and still have your home if it was you. ;-)
Click to expand...

Of course i would have paid man"thumbsup"
 
GREEDY GENIUS said:
Oh man im so sorry for responding soooo late to this thread,maybe i'll just quit my job,stop being a dad and just stand next to my computer with my eyes glued to it to respond to all the threads the minute they come up"thumbsup"

Now here's a tissue for your tears:flipoff:
Click to expand...

The problem
Isn't showing up late, it's talking out of your ass before you read more than the first post of the thread.

Now. Go back and read the thread and think for uourself before you
 
Rig Rocker said:
I don't have to read the entire story to know that it's still wrong to sit aside and let a persons home burn to the ground. He didnt pay the fee, but to me it's obviously focused on poor people.

Firefighters take an oath to protect and save lives. What if a child was inside? What the hell is wrong with peoples morals these days?????
Click to expand...

HOW WRONG YOU ARE! First of all, would you risk your life to run into a burning house? Not just a house though, a MOBILE HOME, "MOBILE" means its on a frame and can be moved. With that said, I am sure that you have never been in a burning house falling threw the floor or having a roof fall on you. I have! Fireman cant save all lives or protect all. Us fireman have to be safe in our decisions when it comes to a house fire. The home owner clearly had not payed his fire dues why in the hell would anyone risk there life for something that the home owner is not going to pay. Not all fire dept are state funded like you may think. Small towns AKA unincorporated towns have to fund themselves so in turn they have to charge a yearly fee. Whats 75 bucks a year to know your house will be protected. Yes, theres a chance it may burn up, but atleast everything would not be a 100% loss. How un happy would you be if your house was on fire and you payed your fire dues and the fire department was putting out someone elses house that had not paid there due and YOUR house burnt to the ground because the fire department was un able to roll all there hoses up and shut off hydrants and get to your house on the opposite side of the town.
 
GREEDY GENIUS said:
They should be ashamed of themselves to let someones home with pets inside burn to the ground because of a lousy $75.00

They should have put it out and gave him an option to pay the $75.00 or get a fine or something in that matter,not let someones home burn to the ground along with thier pets!

Someone would be getting a ass whippin if that was my home!
Click to expand...

You might woop one but all them other fireman that you aint gonna like wooping on you! :lmao:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top