Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Inactive Member cosmo99's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 7th, 2005
    Posts
    503
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate




    By Brett Michael ****s brett Michael ****s – Tue Oct 5, 4:17 pm ET
    Just about anything can be fodder for an ideological dispute these days. Just consider news of the recent fire at Gene Cranick's home in Obion County, Tenn.
    Here's the short version of what happened: In rural Obion County, homeowners must pay $75 annually for services from the nearby city of South Fulton. If they don't pay the fee and their home catches fire, tough luck -- even if firefighters are positioned just outside the home with hoses at the ready.
    Gene Cranick found this out the hard way.
    When Cranick's house caught fire last week, and he couldn't contain the blaze with garden hoses, he called 911. During the emergency call, he offered to pay all expenses related to the defense of his home, but the South Fulton firefighters refused to do anything.
    ["Pay to spray" fire services: how they work]
    They did, however, come out when Cranick's neighbor -- who'd already paid the fee -- called 911 because he worried that the fire might spread to his property. Once they arrived, members of the South Fulton department stood by and watched Cranick's home burn; they sprang into action only when the fire reached the neighbor's property.
    "I hadn't paid my $75 and that's what they want, $75, and they don't care how much it burned down," Gene Cranick told WPSD, an NBC affiliate in Kentucky. "I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong."
    Watch a video report:
    The incident has sparked a debate in many corners of the Web. Writers for the National Review, arguably the nation's most influential right-leaning voice, have seized on the episode to discuss the relative merits of compassionate conservatism versus a hard-line libertarianism. (See their arguments here, here, here, here and here.)
    [Australia's "stay and defend" policy: another ethical dilemma for firefighters]
    Daniel Foster, a self-described "conservative with fairly libertarian leanings" who writes for the magazine, took issue with the county's laissez-faire approach to firefighting, calling it "a kind of government for which I would not sign up."
    "What moral theory allows these firefighters (admittedly acting under orders) to watch this house burn to the ground when 1) they have already responded to the scene; 2) they have the means to stop it ready at hand; 3) they have a reasonable expectation to be compensated for their trouble?" Foster wrote.
    [Elsewhere: Prince William helps make daring rescue with Royal Air Force]
    But Foster's colleague Kevin Williamson took the opposite view. Cranick's fellow residents in the rural stretches of Obion County had no fire protection until the county established the $75 fee in 1990. As Williamson explained: "The South Fulton fire department is being treated as though it has done something wrong, rather than having gone out of its way to make services available to people who did not have them before. The world is full of jerks, freeloaders, and ingrates — and the problems they create for themselves are their own. These free-riders have no more right to South Fulton's firefighting services than people in Muleshoe, Texas, have to those of NYPD detectives."
    Liberals are pouncing on the Cranick fire as an illustration of what they take to be the callous indifference of a market regime that rewards privileged interests over the concerns of ordinary Americans.
    "The case perfectly demonstrated conservative ideology, which is based around the idea of the on-your-own society and informs a policy agenda that primarily serves the well-off and privileged," Think Progress' Zaid Jilani wrote in a response to the National Review writers. "It has been 28 years since conservative historian Doug Wead first coined the term 'compassionate conservative.' It now appears that if any such philosophy ever existed, it has few adherents in the modern conservative movement."


    Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate | The Upshot Yahoo! News - Yahoo! News

  2. #2
    Inactive Member R13's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 25th, 2007
    Posts
    10,269
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    Conservatism for you.

  3. #3
    Inactive Member 89bluedevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 30th, 2005
    Posts
    763
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    Quote Originally Posted by R13 View Post
    Conservatism for you.
    Has nothing to do with conservatives or liberals. There is stupidity on both sides and this is just plain stupidity. You don't let a man's home and possessions burn to the ground for $75. Put out the fire and deal with the money issue afterwards.l

  4. #4
    Inactive Member cosmo99's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 7th, 2005
    Posts
    503
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    I agree, it would be the same concept if the fireman had been police officers and the man (whose house was burning) was getting robbed and his family murdered. Would they just stand by because he didn't pay the $75 for police protection?? What if there had been someone in that house while it was burning? It was stupid and selfish, plain and simple...

  5. #5
    Inactive Member imported_elp6n's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 31st, 2004
    Posts
    5,510
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    They may possibly find themselves on the receiving (and maybe losing) end of a legitimate lawsuit, by either the homeowners and/or their insurance company. They were on site (protecting the neighbors house) and refused assistance resulting in complete loss of home and belongings.

    Ultimately the fire department would have been paid more than $75 by the homeowners insurance, since emergency services are permitted to bill for services rendered. Now instead of being paid, they may do the paying.
    You'll shoot your eye out.

    [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v635/elp6n/santa.jpg[/img]

  6. #6
    Inactive Member burton2019's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 8th, 2004
    Posts
    7,723
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    Guess he should have paid the fees.

  7. #7
    Inactive Member Gotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 27th, 2003
    Posts
    2,592
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate

    Quote Originally Posted by imported_elp6n View Post
    They may possibly find themselves on the receiving (and maybe losing) end of a legitimate lawsuit, by either the homeowners and/or their insurance company. They were on site (protecting the neighbors house) and refused assistance resulting in complete loss of home and belongings.
    Exactly.

    From what I heard today the insurance company is almost certainly going to sue the FD. Unlikely a small FD has any chance of defending a major lawsuit by a large insurance company. Even if they do they will be out many times the $75 in legal fees. The reality however is that money wins lawsuits due to the quality of your legal rep. (lawyers). In other words the Insurance co. will win and the FD will be hurting in a big way.
    [img]http://www.lutte-wrestling.com/old-train2.jpg[/img]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •