The fire laws in Tennesse.

[Tara Evans]

I was reading the paper the other day about a man that lives in Tennessee who's house burned down to the ground because he pay his $75.00 fee. The neighbors saw that this man's house was on fire called them to come out there and put it out, but they just set there and watched it burn down to the ground. There weren't any people but there were 3 animals in there and they didn't even try to save them. What is yalls thinking on this?
Loading...

You need Adobe Flash Player to watch this video.
Download it from Adobe.




Upgrade to Flash Player 10 for improved playback performance. Upgrade Now or More Info.
close

10,761
views
10,761
views

AssociatedPress | October 05, 2010

[Glr]

I think it's horrible for what they did and didn't do. This person lost their home and everything in it over $75.00. Standing out there and watching it burn without offering any help is wrong on so many levels. Heck, I would have gladly paid the $75 for the person so they wouldn't lose their home.

[Tetas]

I hate that it happened, but it's kind of a catch 22.

The fire dept needs the $75 from the homeowners in order to run their department.
If the homeowners don't pay, they are not contributing to the dept, thereby saying "we don't need you."
Until of course, they do need them.

It's kind of like car insurance.
If an insurance company offered you a $400 dollar a year policy and you said no, you wouldn't and shouldn't be able to call them and say "I just wrecked my car, I want your policy".

On the other hand, the fire dept is offering a service instead of insurance, so I really think they should have put out the fire and billed the homeowner for the full amount of the costs for the job.

[~Ze~]

That policy has been in place for something like what? 20 years.. the homeowner knew about it and knew what he was getting into...

If the Department took the 75 bux at the site... then everyone would ONLY pay when they had a fire. Can't run the Department on that now can ya?

Riday has a point-

I really think they should have put out the fire and billed the homeowner for the full amount of the costs for the job.

[Guest022712-3]

Now a lot of people have been up in arms about the pets. BUT-- the owner had the time to attempt to put out the fire with a hose before 911 was ever called. Why in the heck did the owner not get their "beloved pets" out??