What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Nice Planet 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I like the idea mentioned above, if you don't pay the original $75 they should put out the fire and send you a bill.

Yeah, that would be fine with me as well.
The article I referenced earlier though makes it sound like they had a system similar to that in the past (with a flat fee), and it didn't work.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I like the idea mentioned above, if you don't pay the original $75 they should put out the fire and send you a bill.

Yes. And it would be much bigger than the 75 bucks, "pay me now or pay me later." It's so simple, but the Savonarolas posting here, wrapped up in their moral certitude, just can't see any alternative to letting a family lose everything. That'll fix em, by cracky. And it will also encourage other scofflaws to cough up the fee, right? Ends justify the means, right?

They used to teach a doctrine in drivers ed called "the last clear chance," I doubt they still do. The idea was, regardless of who has the right of way, if you have an opportunity to avoid an accident you, should do so. Instead of plowing into another car, secure in the knowledge that you've got the right of way. And if they die, they die.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why you can't privatize everything.

I've seen people make that argument elsewhere, and while I probably agree with the statement, I really don't see any evidence for it here. This was a hardly a private fire department.

Isn't that a bit like me saying, "Well, this proves government is generally incompetent." ?

It's just something that happened, it doesn't have to prove one view or another.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I've read all the articles, but I saw nowhere in any of them that the victim in this case deliberately refused to pay--as you have assumed. Where is the source of that assumption, other than in your little head?

I never assumed or stated this. You're putting words in my mouth. I said that they didn't pay it. Not that they refused to pay it. Just that they didn't.

"It is always with the best intentions that the worst work is done." - Oscar Wilde

I don't give a chit what their intentions were.

And your comment about the fire fighters putting their lives at risk in the OTHER fire is contemptible and moronic.

Thank you for that reasonable comment. I have no rebuttal. You have clearly bested me in this argument / battle of wits.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I never assumed or stated this. You're putting words in my mouth. I said that they didn't pay it. Not that they refused to pay it. Just that they didn't.

"It is always with the best intentions that the worst work is done." - Oscar Wilde

I don't give a chit what their intentions were.



Thank you for that reasonable comment. I have no rebuttal. You have clearly bested me in this argument / battle of wits.

Oh no, withering sarcasm. Now tell me, how does the phrase "I'm not going to pay the bill," NOT connote intent?
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

It's amazing how many apparant descendants of Inspector Javert post here. In a similar situation, I'm guessing most of them wouldn't equate the loss of all of their worldly possessions with failure to pay a small fee, whether it was intetnional or not. And feel like they got what they deserved, because that's the attitude on display here. Not really very pretty.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

It's amazing how many apparant descendants of Inspector Javert post here. In a similar situation, I'm guessing most of them wouldn't equate the loss of all of their worldly possessions with failure to pay a small fee, whether it was intetnional or not. And feel like they got what they deserved.

Oh, come on now, Old Pio, that is clearly Commie talk.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

Oh no, withering sarcasm. Now tell me, how does the phrase "I'm not going to pay the bill," NOT connote intent?
You got me. I will amend my post to say "I did not pay the bill." But, it was not my point; it was a clarification of a callout of a mostly valid statement.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

Oh, come on now, Old Pio, that is clearly Commie talk.

You got me. Recently I've been reading about John Reed and other commies, and I think I'm having a slow motion change of opinion.

You don't suppose the "firefighters" involved were video taping the proceedings do you? And plan to show the tapes at their Christmas party or some other appropriate event? Complete with laughing and high fiving? I mean, it's just sick, deliberately letting a guy's house burn down. It wasn't a crack house. There were no wants or warrants for the occupants. Their sole "crime" was failing to pay a fee, which they said was unintentional.

There has to be some way to "punish" them for this transgression other than what was done.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

You got me. Recently I've been reading about John Reed and other commies, and I think I'm having a slow motion change of opinion.

You don't suppose the "firefighters" involved were video taping the proceedings do you? And plan to show the tapes at their Christmas party or some other appropriate event? Complete with laughing and high fiving? I mean, it's just sick, deliberately letting a guy's house burn down. It wasn't a crack house. There were no wants or warrants for the occupants. Their sole "crime" was failing to pay a fee, which they said was unintentional.

There has to be some way to "punish" them for this transgression other than what was done.
I keed, of course. This sort of an issue goes well beyond the realm of public vs. private or taxes and government. This is an issue of humanity and those who don't have it.

I would like to think that even the world's most cold-hearted, anarchistic, all-public-works-are-the-devil conservative would look at this story, see people sitting idly by while others suffer. **** orders, man. There was a time when people saw a fire and everyone around came by with their buckets to help. Not because they'd get paid, not so they can expect others to do the same if their home caught fire, but because its the right ****ing thing to do. That's something that gets lost in the entitlements of the insane left and the pompous elitism of the extreme right.

This is almost on par with that story about EMTs in New York that (going off of memory here) didn't help a pregnant woman because they were on break. The woman and her baby died.

A much more extreme example? Yes. Exact same principle? Yes.

For crying out loud, they were on the scene and sat by doing nothing. Meanwhile, a family loses a home, a lot of their history and all of their pets die a slow, painful death.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I keed, of course. This sort of an issue goes well beyond the realm of public vs. private or taxes and government. This is an issue of humanity and those who don't have it.

I would like to think that even the world's most cold-hearted, anarchistic, all-public-works-are-the-devil conservative would look at this story, see people sitting idly by while others suffer. **** orders, man. There was a time when people saw a fire and everyone around came by with their buckets to help. Not because they'd get paid, not so they can expect others to do the same if their home caught fire, but because its the right ****ing thing to do. That's something that gets lost in the entitlements of the insane left and the pompous elitism of the extreme right.

This is almost on par with that story about EMTs in New York that (going off of memory here) didn't help a pregnant woman because they were on break. The woman and her baby died.

A much more extreme example? Yes. Exact same principle? Yes.

For crying out loud, they were on the scene and sat by doing nothing. Meanwhile, a family loses a home, a lot of their history and all of their pets die a slow, painful death.

I really don't view this as conservative vs liberal. I'm the former and am horrified. It's pretty simple: the prime directive for fire fighters is to fight fires. Everything else is clutter.

And this was a very slow moving fire that started in trash cans out back. An early application of a little water and all we're talking about is heading to Wal-mart to get some new trash cans.

How can these guys sleep at night, knowing they're responsible for so much grief in the lives of others. Where's "To Protect and Serve?" (I realize that's for cops, but you get the idea). This is shameful. And I'm d***ed if I understand why so many of us evidently think it's perfectly okay for them to have acted that way.

Throughout this discussion I've been reminded of the Mikado's song: "The object oh sublime I shall achieve in time, to let the punishment fit the crime, the punishment fit the crime. And make each prisoner pent, unwittingly represent, a source of innocent merriment, of innocent merriment." We've evidently got several wanna-be Mikados posting here.

Or the scene in "Christmas Story" where poor Flick's tongue is frozen to the pole. He pleads with Ralphie not to leave him stuck like that. Ralphie responds: "but the bell rang." Well, Ralphie's got his priorities straight.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

Funny you should use that phrase to describe the requirement to intervene... Come on tech fans, I know you all get this reference.

dueling-facepalms-star-trek-facepalm-riker-jean-luc-picard-e-demotivational-poster-1268658138.jpg
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I really don't view this as conservative vs liberal. I'm the former and am horrified. It's pretty simple: the prime directive for fire fighters is to fight fires. Everything else is clutter.


it is not clutter. you want all these fires put out, but you dont want anyone to have to pay to have it done. are you george bush?

that is the point of the editorial (which you obviously missed). everyone wants the government to stay out of their lives and no one wants to pay taxes - but when it comes down to actually cutting services, nobody wants theirs cut

typical tea-party morons.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

it is not clutter. you want all these fires put out, but you dont want anyone to have to pay to have it done. are you george bush?

that is the point of the editorial (which you obviously missed). everyone wants the government to stay out of their lives and no one wants to pay taxes - but when it comes down to actually cutting services, nobody wants theirs cut

typical tea-party morons.

I don't recall a single point at which anyone said they don't have to pay... Are you stupid or Dan Quayle? But I repeat myself...

The point of the article aside, what the rest of us have been arguing about is that the fire department responded, and then sat and watched a man's house burn to the ground. This is completely derelict. They were there and had the opportunity. They could have sent him the bill for the fire and now this family's life is destroyed.

Typical knee-jerk liberal morons.
 
Re: Nice Planet 2010

it is not clutter. you want all these fires put out, but you dont want anyone to have to pay to have it done. are you george bush?

that is the point of the editorial (which you obviously missed). everyone wants the government to stay out of their lives and no one wants to pay taxes - but when it comes down to actually cutting services, nobody wants theirs cut

typical tea-party morons.

If you want to ejaculate about the TP, I'd suggest finding a better example. Not to mention a more truthful exposition of the arguments presented. Otherwise you're just another boring ill-informed monomaniac. The average high school debate team would eviscerate your "arguments." No one has suggested anything close to what you're yammering about. Wanker.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet 2010

I'm wondering if the "fire fighters" in that jurisdiction are sworn and wear badges like they do in major cities. If they ARE sworn, I'd imagine the oath doesn't have any escape clauses about letting the home of people who haven't paid the fee burn to the ground, while they send text messages to their girl friends about how much fun they're having watching it burn.

If they are sworn, they should all be fired for violating that oath. Sort of like when Reagan fired all the PATCO controllers who went on strike, in violation of their oath not to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top