Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Based on that reasoning, shouldn't you hold your husband responsible?
The reason why the first responders are lauded as heroes is because of that extraordinary risk they take. But at the same rate, it is a CHOICE to be a first responder. One I am grateful for, but a choice none the less.
I am not remotely advocating anyone mandated to leave not to, but if god forbid something happened to your husband, it isn't someone's fault.
So you don't think that if something were to happen to him while he was rescuing someone who could have left but refused to, the person he was rescuing has no culpability? What ever happened to personal responsibility in this world?
I'm not talking about him being injured rescuing someone who was injured in a car accident caused by a drunk driver, I'm talking about people who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way and then beg for help.
If it wasn't for volunteers, people would die every year. Not stupid people, but people who have accidents or get sick. My husband has SEVEN CPR saves in the past three years. That could have been your mother or grandfather. If he and people like him weren't around, there would be a lot more funerals.
He has no problem helping people who need help, but he has a huge problem with morons who refuse to help themselves.
But he is a volunteer. He has the right to CHOOSE not to go into certain situations.
Doesn't he have some responsibility of his own actions?
So you don't think that if something were to happen to him while he was rescuing someone who could have left but refused to, the person he was rescuing has no culpability? What ever happened to personal responsibility in this world?
LOL!! You are saying a VOLUNTEER has no RESPONSIBILITY in CHOOSING whether or not he goes into a situation. And then you are saying "what ever happened to personal responsibility?"/
I'm not talking about him being injured rescuing someone who was injured in a car accident caused by a drunk driver, I'm talking about people who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way and then beg for help.[/quote]
You mean people like your husband? No one is forcing him to be a responder he is CHOOSING. So if he puts himself in harms way, that is HIS responsibility.
I understand why you hold your sentiment, but its fundamentally flawed.
Saving people who disregard evacuation orders sorta creates a moral hazard. I'd never volunteer to risk my life to save someone who's stubborn, stupid, and/or delusional.
But he is a volunteer. He has the right to CHOOSE not to go into certain situations.
Doesn't he have some responsibility of his own actions?
He can't pick and choose which calls to go on. And sometimes something might look safe but you can't see a hidden danger below.
You all have short memories if you don't remember the Princeton firefighter who DIED last year in a water rescue trying to help someone who had refused to evacuate when asked to.
LOL!! You are saying a VOLUNTEER has no RESPONSIBILITY in CHOOSING whether or not he goes into a situation. And then you are saying "what ever happened to personal responsibility?"/
I'm not talking about him being injured rescuing someone who was injured in a car accident caused by a drunk driver, I'm talking about people who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way and then beg for help.
You mean people like your husband? No one is forcing him to be a responder he is CHOOSING. So if he puts himself in harms way, that is HIS responsibility.
I understand why you hold your sentiment, but its fundamentally flawed.[/quote]
You wouldn't feel that way if your house was on fire and the first responders decided it was too much of a burden to them to show up. You know what they say about karma.
You wouldn't feel that way if your house was on fire and the first responders decided it was too much of a burden to them to show up. You know what they say about karma.
yeah, you want first responders to get dispatched to a scene and then when they are there they turn away because its too dangerous for them? sure, they are often put in dangerous situations as its part of the job; no need to be wreckless about where to send them.
Oh course he can. He is a VOLUNTEER. No one can force him to go on a call it is a CHOICE.
Quote:
And sometimes something might look safe but you can't see a hidden danger below.
So he, who is a trained professional, is less capable of judging the safety of a situation than a lay person?
Quote:
You all have short memories if you don't remember the Princeton firefighter who DIED last year in a water rescue trying to help someone who had refused to evacuate when asked to.
Its a tragedy, and one that could have been avoided.
But the first responders also are making choices. They have a responsibility to their families and selves to take care of themselves FIRST.
You wouldn't feel that way if your house was on fire and the first responders decided it was too much of a burden to them to show up. You know what they say about karma.
Not the same situation at all.
And yes, firefighters should not go in if it isn't safe to. That is why they are the professionals, they are supposed to be trained to know when it is safe to go and when it isn't.
If it isn't safe for your husband to respond to a call, he should CHOOSE to exercise his professional expertise and shouldn't go. That is one of the reasons why their job is so hard, they are morally obligated to make the hard choices including not risking themselves.
Oh course he can. He is a VOLUNTEER. No one can force him to go on a call it is a CHOICE.
So he, who is a trained professional, is less capable of judging the safety of a situation than a lay person?
Its a tragedy, and one that could have been avoided.
But the first responders also are making choices. They have a responsibility to their families and selves to take care of themselves FIRST.
So they should all quit? That would leave over half of the state of NJ without fire or ambulance service. I can't wait to hear you HOWLING when your taxes go up about 15% to cover the cost of adding paid first responder services.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
