Firemen Let Man's House Burn...
 

...because he didn't pay a $75.00 fee.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/206536/thu...FIRE-large.jpg

A smoldering rage may be all that remains after Gene Cranick's home burned to the ground last week in Obion County, Tennessee.
(...)
Cranick lives outside of the city limits and he admits that he forgot to pay a $75 service fee that would have provided him with fire protection. Firefighters wouldn't lift a finger, much less the hoses that might have saved the house.

The fire reportedly started in some barrels outside. As the flames crept closer to the home, Cranick says he offered to pay whatever it would take. The plea fell on deaf ears. Hours later, the home was gone.

So were three dogs and a cat.

"They coulda' been saved if they put water on it. But they didn't do it," said Cranick.

The South Fulton firefighters did show up and managed to save a neighbor's field. The neighbor had paid the fee. But they would provide no heroics for the Cranicks. A local news report shows them climbing back on their trucks, flames still dancing over what was once the family's home. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_750272.html

That's sickening. Saving someone's home shouldn't depend on payment of a fee. Apparently they didn't give a rat's arse about the animals either. Way to go South Fulton firefighters; true heroes, eyh? "We were just following orders" just doesn't cut it...

I smell lawsuit after the firemen did not do their civic duty.

WHAT!!!????

I posted about this in the generic news thread too. Isn't that just the craziest thing you've ever heard!

I think Keith Olbermann, who interviewed Cranick on last night's broadcast, is looking to put together a fund raising effort to help him and his family.

If the civic duty has been reduced to a paid civic service by the local powers that be, can their actions be legally challenged? In other words: has Obion County broken some state or even national law(s)? Just wondering.

I feel bad for the family at the same time it seems that they could have afford the $75 fee

I am resisting the urge to make a political statement here.

Apparently Mr. Cranick lives outside the city (county?) limits that this particular fire department serves. The program that allows those outside the limit to receive fire services for the $75 fee has been in place for 20 years.

That's exactly what Mary and I asked when we first saw this story. When interviewed on Olbermann last night, Mr. Cranick admits that he 'forgot' to pay the fee but told the firemen at the scene that he'd pay whatever the cost was if they'd put out the fire.

Here's the story as reported by Keith Olbermann, including an interview with the home owner.

Pay to Spray?

You're a better man than I am. http://www.talkabouttennis.com/forum...ies/cheesy.gif

I'm sorry, but when you enter into certain fields- IMO, you should be expected to follow a certain ethical and moral code. When a senior (or, for that matter, a non-senior) calls me in some kind of trouble- do I tell them to go away if they're not eligible for and/or are not signed up with one of my programs? No- I do what I can to help, because I'm in the social services.

If you sign up to be a fireman- you are expected to put out fires and save lives and all of that. Forgetting for a moment that it's insane and evil that anyone should be expected to pay extra for basic safety services such as from the police and fire departments- they're right THERE, and they do NOTHING? With animals inside?!?!? They have no business then being firemen. May God forgive them.

I'm with you on this Nelslus.

Shtexas I would say this speaks for itself but somewhere someone is saying if he didn't pay the fee he was exercising his right as a citizen of this country. I'm not that person.

I'm kind of torn by this whole thing. I mean, yeah, they were right there and they watched his house burn down.

At the same time, the firemen don't own the rig, or the equipment, or pay their own salaries, etc. Mr. Cranick lives outside their city. I would say those in his position should be thankful that the city -- in which he does not live and probably does not pay taxes to -- has reached an agreement to provide these services for what I would consider a very reasonable fee of $75/year.

Sometimes "I forgot" just doesn't cut the mustard.

I am with you

I almost agree. But then, he was offering to pay whatever the costs were (and probably over and above that too!) to put it out. He wasn't saying "I'll pay my $75 now!". It didn't even sound dangerous, like entering a burning building. Just turn on the water and knock it down from the outside.

Instead this sounds petty and vindictive.

Welcome to a USA without social programs!

But if every home owner outside the city didn't pay until their house was on fire, the city wouldn't collect the revenue they probably need to insure they have the ability to respond when necessary.

It costs a hell of lot more than $75 to respond to a fire. It's the collective fees from all of those who pay in that allow the city to maintain the equipment and man power needed for the few fires that they do respond to.

You don't wait for your house to flood and then try to buy flood insurance.

Sometimes what is the rule, the law and what is the right thing to do, don't intersect. This is a failure of decency. When one human being can sit back and watch as another human being's house burns down without offering any sort of help, well it says something about some of our god loving citizens.

And now everyone realizes they don't have to pay the $75. Because if their house catches on fire the neighboring city will put it out anyway.

So now the neighboring city isn't collecting the fees and can no longer afford the equipment and employees to cover those who are outside the city.

So now no one is covered.

::

I'm not torn over this any longer. It's a tragedy to be sure. But if I forget to pay my car insurance and I'm involved in an accident...