Recent Comments
Re: “The Roof, The Roof, The Roof is on Fire: Let the MF-er Burn or Not?”
I want to reiterate, the owner of this home didn't think his/her's life, pets and property were worth a mere $75 a year to save in the event of a fire. A fact many seem to want to overlook. They had a choice and made it. But for some reason, some cannot grasp the concept that this is about the homeowner taking responsibility for his/her own choices.
Re: “The Roof, The Roof, The Roof is on Fire: Let the MF-er Burn or Not?”
This has nothing to do with the tea party....unless you also want to ad a comment for your side that we should take care of you even though you REFUSE to contribute financially. It's an unfortunate fact that pets typically perish in home fires regardless of response from a department. They usually run and hide under beds and cannot be coaxed out & a firefighters life isn't worth taking time looking for fluffy while a building burns down around him. Furthermore, I would believe if a person had been in the building it would have been a very different story.
Re: “The Roof, The Roof, The Roof is on Fire: Let the MF-er Burn or Not?”
Why should someone risk their life protecting something you didn't think was worth $75 a year to protect yourself? Most rural areas are NOT taxed for fire protection. So burrito is incorrect in assuming this home was already paying taxes for fire protection. This home was outside the city limits, therefore since an ESD(Emergency Services District) was not in place in which the homeowners paid taxes to, then they were not paying taxes for fire protection. The department, which is funded by city taxes and responds to fires within the city limits(the people who actually were paying taxes for fire protection) had no obligation to respond to a fire outside the taxing jurisdiction. This is why the subscription was started for homes outside the city limits which pay no taxes for fire protection. I live in a rural area and it is like pulling teeth to get voters to vote for an ESD which places a tax based on property value which goes directly to emergency services such as fire and ambulance. It is amazing how many feel they should receive these services for free, not realizing people must volunteer their time away from their families to save their property and family members in the event of a fire. If they believe filling their car with a tank of gas costs a lot, how about that tanker to send to your home filled with water, the expenses incurred in keeping equipment in running order so it will start to get to your fire, the overhead expenses, or the bunker gear which costs thousands of dollars per set to try to keep firefighters safe, some of who never return home to their families because they died protecting something you didn't feel was worth spending money to protect to begin with...think about it.
Re: “The Roof, The Roof, The Roof is on Fire: Let the MF-er Burn or Not?”
And why do people believe they should recieve such an important service for free? If they lived in the city limits, they would have been paying taxes for this....If you take care of it without them having paid the $75, what incentive is there for anyone else....and do you know what it costs to run a fire department?....I just don't get it.