Posted on 02/16/2006 3:52:53 PM PST by LouAvul
Edited on 02/16/2006 6:43:01 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
MONETT, Mo. (AP) - Rural firefighters stood by and watched a fire destroy a garage and a vehicle because the property owner had not paid membership dues.
Bibaldo Rueda - who was injured battling the flames Monday - offered to pay the dues as the fire blazed away, but the Monett Rural Fire Department does not have a policy for on-the-spot billing, Sheriff's Detective Robert Evenson said.
(Excerpt) Read more at modbee.com ...
I can certainly understand and respect your position on this. You have well thought out reasons for your decisions.
I wasn't there so I don't know. I am beginning to wonder about listenhillary's comment about the meth lab thing. This area is so full of that awful stuff, I wouldn't put it past the fire department to stand by and watch if they were aware. Maybe, maybe not. But with a town of perhaps some less than 10,000 (7,396 last census), I bet they would be aware if it was going on. It's really the only thing that makes sense, despite what horrible things people have said about volunteers on this thread, it really comes down to the only thing that does.
**Everyone else around here knows you either pay or your house burns down.**
Remember the big tornados that went through Pierce City and areas north of Monett. Many Mexicans didn't know about the tornado warnings and did not understand Tornados and they didn't take shelter.
Considering the fire ban and windy weather lately I think the Fire Chief put the area at risk. Personally knowing Monett (I live about 15 miles away) I think this was an antiMexican move by the Fire Department and I can understand the problems they have with the Mexicans. Still you reap what you sow and Monett may have racial trouble in the future in part for the Chief's action.
Amen to that!!
Nite.
Leno's on! Have to hear the latest jokes about poor Cheney. I feel nothing but sympathy what he's had to go through but can still laugh at the jokes.
As a former volunteer firefighter, I just do not understand volunteering, responding, and then refusing to put out the fire. Silly me. But I just don't F'n get it.
One thing is for sure, though. this guy will never have a good thing to say about the Department, and will be vocal about it. For an organization that depends on good will (from which comes money) to survive, I really question the wisdom in that.
I can see handing him a bill, even getting him to sign a waiver of liability if you do not have good samaritan law protection for the Department and its members (which your jurisdiction should have), but not refusing to put out the fire.
Mexican trouble or meth trouble? The more I think about listenhillary's comment, the more sense it makes to me.
Oh, you have freepmail! You must live not too far, how nice to have a freeper so close!
uh ok
Well we never get the whole story in these cases so you may be right.
In my volunteer fire department, we didn't have such a thing as a service fee. We did have an annual BBQ and received donations from various corporate entities in the area. Personally, I think this kind of thing sucks and while it may be legal and even common practice, it still smacks of the worst kind of selfishness.
All you need to know -
MONETT FIRE DEPARTMENT, ****LOCAL 2001#****
http://www.cityofmonett.com/city_departments/fire_department_index.htm
"Properly administered, a fire tax levy can be a great boon to both fire and EMS services in an area. It sounds to me like voters in your area are all gambling they won't need those service, at least any more than they are paying for."
I agree. We have a wonderful property tax supported volunteer force where live. They are the best group of people you could imagine. We've put up a good number of fire stations and equipped them well.
The Airlift/EMS and fire service fees are common in southern Missouri. That is their choice.
I wouldn't have a problem putting the fire out and handing him a bill, but it sounds like they might get into lawyers and collection agencies and make things very complicated.
I don't live in Monett, but I don't begrudge them their choice of government funded services. They are probably sick of funding new schools for the influx of immigrants. I think the Hispanic population has risen to 11%. I'm not sure what in what time frame this has occurred. I'm guessing it has mushroomed over the last 15 years.
There may be an anti-immigrant slant to this story. It wouldn't surprise me. That also seems to be a common thread on FR. I'm not against immigrants, just those that want a free ride on my tax dollars.
You shortened it. I don't get it. It was already excerpted. It was below the 300 word max.
I wonder if this fire was set and by whom? Couldn't possibly have been someone associated with the Monett Rural Fire Department. Nahhhh.
But then...if he hadn't paid the membership dues, why'd they show up at all? Just to watch the building burn and to taunt Mr. Rueda? Nahhhh.
The original report that the Associated press "edited"
http://www.monett-times.com/NF/omf/monett/news_story.html?[rkey=0021251+[cr=gdn
Setting up a pay-as-it-burns plan to make it reflect the risk-reward to the homeowner and to the FD would be a difficult job even for an insurance company. I believe there is really no precedent in the entire insurance industry. I suppose my comment was really no more than an arbitrary change to blueprints for a castle in the sky.
That said, I can't argue that financially-driven arson by firemen wouldn't happen -- a post regarding arsonist firemen was earlier than my post -- and I don't think I'm insulting anybody if I suggest that a fireman would have a better chance of making an arson look like an accident, But IMO it's really a poor risk-reward ratio -- a piece of a couple of thousand dollars vs. hard time all by yourself.
Even assuming that a lucrative payback is possible, we just have to trust our firemen not to burn our houses down in the same way we trust our policemen not to burglarize us when we're away for the weekend. Furthermore, I believe that serial-arsonist firemen and burglarizing policemen have been a problem only in big cities, not in small towns.
Wonder whose cars those were and who was living in the trailers? mexicants, maybe?
I am a former volunteer firefighter.I volunteered to do a job. I can't understand volunteering, responding, and then refusing to follow through and put out the fire.
We got more donations from the people we helped than those who had never needed us.
Bill the guy for a few hundred and people get the idea about the $20--cheap insurance, and much cheaper than the bill.
As for: Why avoid pre-marital pregnancy? Why choose not to commit crimes? Just rely upon the forgiveness of others. Give me my life insurance proceeds, never mind I waited until after the cancer diagnosis to take out the policy, spare me your affection for extrapolative hyperbole. With the 'logic' you use, no one should be born, after all they are just going to die, anyway.
i only know what is posted on this thread, but cultural and language issues MIGHT be part of this. If he was raised in latin america he may have never heard of this.
I am in my 30's and from Mississippi and I NEVER knew what 'volunteer fire department' entailed until I read this thread. I have seen many 'xxx volunteer fire department' buildings throughout the south and never knew that you have to pay for it or be excluded, but then again I have never lived in a volunteer fire area.
The community chose to have a volunteer FD, each citizen or home or business paying $5 a month for fire department service.
I agree it is a sad situation, but if a small town chooses to go that way, the guy should've either paid or not expected fire service.
I honor your service as a volunteer firefighter. I respect your opinion and your sentiment of wanting to help others. We disagree on how best to do that in this case. I do agree with your point about those who have received help donating more than those who have not. I saw this a lot when I chaired a local Make A Wish Foundation Board, as well as in my own experiences with groups such as Hospice, etc.
Fire protection services arrangements vary widely throughout the country. These days most people are taxed for these services, and that seems the best way to go, even when the actual services are provided by volunteer fire departments, as in the town I live in. But in this case there were no taxes. People paid a relatively small amount in order to receive the services if needed. No one is forced to pay, but the downside is not being entitled to the services if later needed-- unless there is a possible loss of life involved, when those who did not "sign up" for the service still get it. As long as everyone knows the rules, I don't see anything wrong.
Providing him the services, even though he didn't pay his dues, then billing him "substantially more than his $20 tag would have cost" might make sense, but there are problems with that approach as well.
How much would the bill be? If everyone behaved as this man did, how would the equipment to put out the fire be purchased in the first place? Should he be billed the cost of the fire engine and other required equipment? Or just the additional cost of actually putting out his fire?
Could the fire department collect its "bill"? Would the man have to agree to pay the actual cost, or whatever amount was determined necessary because he didn't pay like everyone else? What if he did NOT agree to pay? Your posts sound like you would still provide the services.
As for my comparisons to other situations, such as multiple unmarried children and "after the fact" requests for public support, I was just pointing out how the great majority of Freepers support the concept of personal responsibility in other situations. If this man had acted with a very small level of personal responsibility by paying his $20 per year, the whole issue would have been avoided. My point was that we encourage promiscuity and out of wedlock births when we subsidize it by providing money to these unwed mothers. The natural reaction of those who had been paying their yearly fees, or at least many of them, would be to wait for the fire to come, then just pay the bill.
All of that said, I agree with you that the normal human reaction of good people like those on FR is to help those in need, whether they deserve it or not. It is a tough issue. I just can't call these volunteers bad people for following through on a policy that everyone knew or should have known was in place.
Never lived in the Country>? Thats what they called me when I joined the DC Fire. Country. Damn do you ever read a post?
I guess the old saying you get what you pay for exists in Mo. Thats great, they can have it. If thats Country its not the country I come from Thank God. In my part of the country we help people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.