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 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.