bureaucracy in it's purest form.
Do you think people notice there isn't a fire plug on the street when they
move to a pastoral, rural area?Of course, there are well-equipped
fire departments in the state. Are they obligated to respond to YOUR fire? Why
do you think so?The political debate rages on when some school
districts have more money to spend on students...and they spend it. Politicians
tell us there must be something done.So, we want parity of fire
protection. Time for the legislature to create a state-wide firefighters'
union and set the rules for all of us.Sorry for your loss,
ma'am. Tell me your GoFundMe page and I'll send you $10. But, if you
live on a hill...or a flood plain...or downwind from a landfill...or in the path
of a runway...or in a rural area, expect the odds of the downside.
This is what happens in the "free market." Wouldn't it
just be easier if we had one police/fire department?Today, you have
HOA messes, rivalries between departments, etc.
When you shout "Donuts" in a crowded (whatever) police from multiple
jurisdictions will show up. All the rules go out the window.Okay,
that was tongue in cheek, but I think that most firefighters like donuts just as
much as the next guy.A few years ago in the south (I believe it was
Missouri) a town went bankrupt and dissolved their fire department. The fire
department from a neighboring jurisdiction took over the responsibility, but
with a proviso: You had to pay a monthly fee (a replacement for the taxes they
could not legally levy) to that fire department. Several people did not pay and
the fire department stood by and watched the houses burn. Next the home owners
found out that because they did not have a fire department, their home owners
insurance was null and void.
A similar thing happened a few years ago in a well publicized case in the South.
I used that case in a law class that I taught. While there are legitimate
arguments on both sides, this Utah case seems more clear cut than the other
case. There is, in my view, a duty was abrogated here and there should be
liability. There is duty of responders to protect the public interest and put
aside petty jurisdictional issues. This woman deserves justice.
Watching it burn used to be a common thing. Your fire insurance included a
number on the side of your house. Your insurance paid for specific people to
fight your fire. Other folks just as capable sat around and watched the fire.Your real protection is insurance against loss. I'm glad your
family got out safe.
Governmental immunity in this state is a joke. It’s is used as a sword
rather than a shield, by municipality entities and employees who choose to
protect overtly negligent conduct rather then its true purpose.
Wow, government immunity shouldn't cover up for intentional or
unintentional idiocy. From the article it certainly seems she has proof of
malfeasance by firefighting management.Isn't there a
firefighter's sworn oath to the serve the community unselfishly? Perhaps
obeying your commander comes before serving the public?
Somebody needs to go to Jail.