Tennessee Firemen Ignore Burning House Over Unpaid Subscription Fee

Drolefille · #1 10-09-2010, 01:39 AM

The world I want to live in does not respond to someone experiencing such tragedy with "he got what he deserved.'

knight_shadow · #2 10-09-2010, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

The world I want to live in does not respond to someone experiencing such tragedy with "he got what he deserved.'

Would you feel different if someone's car was totaled, but s/he refused to get insurance?

Drolefille · #3 10-09-2010, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

Would you feel different if someone's car was totaled, but s/he refused to get insurance?

No, I wouldn't feel different. Might I feel slightly differently if they were driving drunk and totaled their car? Maybe, but not entirely.

No one 'deserves' tragedy. People are responsible for their actions, but I do not believe that people 'get what's coming to them' or that it's something to hope for.

PiKA2001 · #4 10-09-2010, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No, I wouldn't feel different. Might I feel slightly differently if they were driving drunk and totaled their car? Maybe, but not entirely.

No one 'deserves' tragedy. People are responsible for their actions, but I do not believe that people 'get what's coming to them' or that it's something to hope for.

I think you are reading into peoples comments wrong. No one is reveling in the fact that he lost his house and property. Like others have said, he made a gamble and lost.

Drolefille · #5 10-09-2010, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I think you are reading into peoples comments wrong. No one is reveling in the fact that he lost his house and property. Like others have said, he made a gamble and lost.

No where did I say 'revel.'

KSig RC · #6 10-09-2010, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No where did I say 'revel.'

I don't think anybody was "hoping" for a negative outcome for the family either, though - a fire, even an insured one, is a harrowing experience and nothing to wish upon anybody.

Acknowledging that the guy made a decision whether or not to pay a fee and thus gain fire protection isn't the same as hoping for the worst-case scenario. Similarly, feeling that it is a good thing to allow people to choose for themselves whether to purchase fire coverage isn't some sort of cynical or inhumane notion. Quite the opposite, in fact - I'd argue it's a sign of having faith that the average dude or dudette can make a rational decision in his/her own best interest and acknowledging that person's ideal risk tolerance. That's pretty positive, I think.

Does it always work out? Of course not, but that's life.

Drolefille · #7 10-09-2010, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I don't think anybody was "hoping" for a negative outcome for the family either, though - a fire, even an insured one, is a harrowing experience and nothing to wish upon anybody.

Acknowledging that the guy made a decision whether or not to pay a fee and thus gain fire protection isn't the same as hoping for the worst-case scenario. Similarly, feeling that it is a good thing to allow people to choose for themselves whether to purchase fire coverage isn't some sort of cynical or inhumane notion. Quite the opposite, in fact - I'd argue it's a sign of having faith that the average dude or dudette can make a rational decision in his/her own best interest and acknowledging that person's ideal risk tolerance. That's pretty positive, I think.

Does it always work out? Of course not, but that's life.

Sorry, you won't convince me that there's any 'best interest' or 'risk tolerance' in not purchasing fire department coverage. This wasn't insurance. That's neither cynical nor an optimistic view on life. It's just a bad idea.

It's pretty much the worst place to push a 'small government' argument in my opinion. And no, no one's been successful at influencing it.

knight_shadow · #8 10-09-2010, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No, I wouldn't feel different. Might I feel slightly differently if they were driving drunk and totaled their car? Maybe, but not entirely.

No one 'deserves' tragedy. People are responsible for their actions, but I do not believe that people 'get what's coming to them' or that it's something to hope for.

@ the bold: So, if someone makes a bad decision (drunk driving:refusing to get coverage), it makes sense that they'll have to deal with the consequences?

As everyone else has said, I'm not laughing and stroking my cat while sitting in my evil lair. It sucks that these people lost everything. I haven't lost anything in a fire, but I did have a lot of flood damage in a previous dwelling a few years back. I could have called my (car) insurance company and said that I'd pay a renter's insurance premium after the fact, but that's not how it works. I made a decision not to pay a fee and had to suffer the consequences.

The insurance company had the means to pay me for my damages, but that would have been at the expense of those that DO pay. How is that fair to them?

Drolefille · #9 10-09-2010, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

@ the bold: So, if someone makes a bad decision (drunk driving:refusing to get coverage), it makes sense that they'll have to deal with the consequences?

As everyone else has said, I'm not laughing and stroking my cat while sitting in my evil lair. It sucks that these people lost everything. I haven't lost anything in a fire, but I did have a lot of flood damage in a previous dwelling a few years back. I could have called my (car) insurance company and said that I'd pay a renter's insurance premium after the fact, but that's not how it works. I made a decision not to pay a fee and had to suffer the consequences.

The insurance company had the means to pay me for my damages, but that would have been at the expense of those that DO pay. How is that fair to them?

No shit he has to deal with the consequences. It's the idea of 'deserving' it and the acceptance of the situation that bothers me. This wasn't insurance, this was the fire department. It's considered a 'service' for a reason. I don't object to them paying for it, I object to the presentation of coverage as optional.

The situation never should have happened.

knight_shadow · #10 10-09-2010, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No shit he has to deal with the consequences. It's the idea of 'deserving' it and the acceptance of the situation that bothers me. This wasn't insurance, this was the fire department. It's considered a 'service' for a reason. I don't object to them paying for it, I object to the presentation of coverage as optional.

The situation never should have happened.

It's considered a service for those who pay for it. He knew the consequences of living in the country and was OK with it. That falls on him. The fire department of another city doesn't owe him protection.

ETA: I would agree that it shouldn't have happened if the option to pay had gone into effect, say, earlier this year. I seem to remember reading, though, that this has been in effect since 1990. It's not as if they were blindsided by a mysterious fee. They were aware of the procedure for 20 years and still did nothing.

Drolefille · #11 10-09-2010, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

It's considered a service for those who pay for it. He knew the consequences of living in the country and was OK with it. That falls on him. The fire department of another city doesn't owe him protection.

ETA: I would agree that it shouldn't have happened if the option to pay had gone into effect, say, earlier this year. I seem to remember reading, though, that this has been in effect since 1990. It's not as if they were blindsided by a mysterious fee. They were aware of the procedure for 20 years and still did nothing.

You're missing my point. It never should have been optional.

KSig RC · #12 10-09-2010, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

The world I want to live in does not respond to someone experiencing such tragedy with "he got what he deserved.'

I generally feel that compassion is an important part of life - it isn't an important part of running a business, though. For better or worse, the fire department is run as such by contractual obligation.

It's not that he got what he "deserved" - he did, though, get what he bargained for (literally). If he was misinformed or not at all informed as to what would happen, then that's really unfortunate and the county should take a hard look at the way it handles its business. However, it really seems he disregarded all of the information he had - just as we can say "A person's home and possessions shouldn't be compromised over a mere $75" that can be flipped on the homeowner, too, who thought that $75 apparently wasn't important to pay.