Firemen were told to simply let a residence burn in rural Tennessee last week. An unpaid $ 75 fee was given as the purpose they did not fight the fire. Some enraged homeowners are saying the actions of the firefighters aren’t to be defended. At the very same time, most are questioning the cost-sharing arrangement for emergency services that led to this tragedy. Should homeowners be denied emergency services if they do not pay a fee, fine, or tax to help pay for them. Resource for this article – Unpaid fee means firefighters let house burn in Tennessee by Personal Money Store.
Cranick home burns down with Firefighters on the watch
The grandson of Gene Cranick was burning trash outside his home last week. This was a home in Tennessee. The fire begun to get out of control. The Cranicks called 911 in order to get help. Rather than right away dispatching the fire department, the dispatcher informed Cranick that his address was “not on the list” of residences who had paid the $75 firefighting payment. This caused the firefighters to treat the home differently than other. Rather than working to get the fire out to save the home, they just made sure the fire was controlled.
Why firefighters let the residence burn
”The list” did not consist of the Cranick’s home as the $75 county fee hadn’t been paid. That payment was for firefighting. The city limits are really clear. Gene Cranick lived outside of these limits. Obion County, Tenn., does not have a fire department. This is exactly why the property is designed to be covered by the nearest city. South Fulton charges individuals living outside city limits $75 per year to cover the rural areas. All of the rural fires are covered by this payment because it pays for the larger fire department and tanker trucks. Cranick claims he “forgot” to pay the payment that year — which could have easily been done with a no fax payday loan. Not paying the fee was bad. This meant Cranick wasn’t covered when a fire happened.
Really should firefighters have done something
There has been a huge debate on whether or not the Cranick home fire should have been put out. Pay-as-you-go emergency services are hotly argued. Numerous say they can’t work because it isn’t sustainable with individuals only getting covered with an emergency. Many think the firemen didn’t do their job by letting the house burn up down. They are supposed to protect public safety and didn’t do so. What do you think? Are firefighters responsible to keep the home from burning down? Is this true even if the Cranicks hadn’t paid for the service?
Articles cited
MSNBC
msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/
Slashdot
idle.slashdot.org/story/10/10/06/1332252/Firefighters-Let-House-Burn-Because-Owner-Didnt-Pay-Fee?from=rss
No comments:
Post a Comment