1. #51
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    absolutely disgregard your opinions about firefighting as I have yet to see a thread of credibility in anything that you say lately. Each time you are pressed to clarify your point or rationalize your words, you fail to do so and hide behind some nonsense about your location.

    Fact is, all tactics are based on location.

    Structure age and type. Occupancy trends. Density. And yes, how likley people are to be in abondoned structures and typical indicators of occupancy in residental structures.

    Resources. Training. Water supply. Access to mutual aid. Experience. response times. Station proximity. They are again, all local factors.

    It has nothing to do with nonsense. It's called knowing and how you operate based on your local area.

    Which is EXACTLY why your criticisms are met with such hostility.

    I have told you this at least a dozen times, but it still rings true...

    You cannot use your local conditions to dictate how OTHERS should operate. Yet you do this CONSTANTLY. And then when pressed, you retreat and say that you were only speaking about how YOU would do things, yet your words say otherwise and your flaunting of LODD's is disgraceful.

    This thread is no different. You criticized the operations in the video and stated that they "risked themselves to save nothing", and that "nothing was gained by going offensive", despite the fact that a member who was operated at this fire said the fire was contaiend to toilet paper and stock in the front of the store only!

    Letting this simply burn up would be a huge mistake and failure to perform your duties. Yet strangely enough, on this point you are silent.

    If you are uncomfortable going into fires, so be it. But your local and personal limitations have nothing to do with the operations of others. And if you are going to continue to be so critical of things you know nothing about, I will continue to hold you accountable.

  2. #52
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    jakes ...

    Never did I say ... "They should have not .....". that is telling others what they should do.

    I have a perfect right to voice my opinion about if the operation was too offensive or defensive for my tastes. Never once did I say they should or shouldn't.

    You cannot use your local conditions to dictate how OTHERS should operate. Yet you do this CONSTANTLY. And then when pressed, you retreat and say that you were only speaking about how YOU would do things, yet your words say otherwise and your flaunting of LODD's is disgraceful.

    That is amusing coming from you. How many times have I explained the local conditions that dicate our procedures for abondoned structures and you constantly tell me how wrong they are.

    This thread is no different. You criticized the operations in the video and stated that they "risked themselves to save nothing", and that "nothing was gained by going offensive", despite the fact that a member who was operated at this fire said the fire was contaiend to toilet paper and stock in the front of the store only!

    And how much of the remainder of that stock was slavagable after the fire and water damage even if it wasn't burned? Probably verry little or none. They did risk themselves to save nothing as 95% of the unburned stock was probably tossed.

    Letting this simply burn up would be a huge mistake and failure to perform your duties. Yet strangely enough, on this point you are silent.

    With the resources of the FDNY and the more than likley strong water supply, you could be wrong, though I argue and will continue to argue that the only "duty" we have is to train, prepare and show up with the resources we have. Everything we do beyond that is an option.

    In our situation, we may not have the resources to fight the fire aggressivly. We may simply have the resources to control spread to adjoining structures. We may have the resources to fight it aggressivly but not staff a RIT. In that case, do we still have the duty to attack the fire as we are lacking an important firefighter safety resource? I would argue no, which is why we tread around commercial structures very carefully as large incident staffing fluctuates quite a bit for us.

  3. #53
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    With the resources of the FDNY and the more than likley strong water supply, you could be wrong, though I argue and will continue to argue that the only "duty" we have is to train, prepare and show up with the resources we have. Everything we do beyond that is an option.
    This is the most ridiculous statement I have ever seen or heard. You have solidified your hold on the title "Zero Credibility Queen".
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  4. #54
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Penny Lane
    Posts
    390

    Default

    It's clear that the FDNY brothers did an excellent job applying the proper tactics here, making a real difference in the outcome of the fire. It's also fortunate that they have sufficient manpower to deal with some of the crap fires that they're faced with.

    Having said that...

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    The video was interesting but given the amount of manpower and resorces on scene v. our mapower and resources, the operations were so different that there was no point in getting involved in the discussion as it would be apples v. oranges ...
    ...I don't get this. We have $hit for manpower and resources - if we have two engine companies, each staffed with a driver, officer, and firefighter, on scene within a reasonable amount of time, it's probably a good day. Other than that, everything is mutual aid, including the first-due truck.

    Yet I still don't see how it's "so different" or "apples v. oranges". Stretch appropriate lines to the right place, establish a water supply, gain entry, search for victims everywhere possible, check exposures, get to the roof where appropriate, overhaul...What should be done differently with low manpower and resources? Sure, it's not going to unfold like the nicely choreographed operation we've just seen, but I don't see how the basic tasks required and tactics applied are changed.


    But I guess that's probably why I'm driven mad when I see an "Operations" and "Safety" vest running around a PD fire, with three companies working, and nobody's conducted a primary search yet...

  5. #55
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Actually, I think I'll post wherever I want.

    Originally, it wasn't in this one.
    Dude did you stick your tongue out at the screen and go nah ner nah ner when you typed that? Oh my god what an immature little child you are.

  6. #56
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    jakes ...

    Never did I say ... "They should have not .....". that is telling others what they should do.

    YOU DO THAT ALL THE TIME. Pouncing on LODD's and using them to announce over and over how you have never lost a firefighter. You attack, criticize, belittle and ponitifcate on how anyone else fights fire if it isn't your offbeat methods.

    I have a perfect right to voice my opinion about if the operation was too offensive or defensive for my tastes. Never once did I say they should or shouldn't.

    This time. Yet with no personal knowledge or experience on this type of fire you felt free to say you would not have done what they did. You would have gone totally defensive. Your way may have cost the block. BRILLIANT.

    That is amusing coming from you. How many times have I explained the local conditions that dicate our procedures for abondoned structures and you constantly tell me how wrong they are.

    You want to claim that right yet you hammer others when they try to explain they do what gthey do because of years of ecperience doing it. Seems you want it both ways.

    And how much of the remainder of that stock was slavagable after the fire and water damage even if it wasn't burned? Probably verry little or none. They did risk themselves to save nothing as 95% of the unburned stock was probably tossed.

    More important than the damaged stock is the fact that the fire didn't spread. But I guess that escaped you.

    With the resources of the FDNY and the more than likley strong water supply, you could be wrong, though I argue and will continue to argue that the only "duty" we have is to train, prepare and show up with the resources we have. Everything we do beyond that is an option.

    Good lord man, seriously, do you believe the absolute BS of the above statement? I bet your citizens would love to see that slogan on the side of your department vehicles.

    In our situation, we may not have the resources to fight the fire aggressivly. We may simply have the resources to control spread to adjoining structures. We may have the resources to fight it aggressivly but not staff a RIT. In that case, do we still have the duty to attack the fire as we are lacking an important firefighter safety resource? I would argue no, which is why we tread around commercial structures very carefully as large incident staffing fluctuates quite a bit for us.

    AND, as I tried to tell you a few days ago, as long as you stop attacking everyone else's tactics then you will see a major decline in responses and attacks on you.
    I know you don't feel like you are in the wrong at all, ever, but you are.

  7. #57
    Forum Member
    johnny46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    This is the most ridiculous statement I have ever seen or heard. You have solidified your hold on the title "Zero Credibility Queen".
    I second. Can we have a vote?
    Logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead.

  8. #58
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I argue and will continue to argue that the only "duty" we have is to train, prepare and show up with the resources we have. Everything we do beyond that is an option.

    Everything you say from this point foward in any thread on any topic will be against the backdrop of this incredibly cowardice statement.

    You have now been forever relegated to complete irrelevance as you are clearly nobody's peer on any level.

  9. #59
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    Our obligation is to do what we can while keeping our personnel alive and unhurt.

    If that means we can go offensive and do that, that's what we do.

    If that means we go defensive, that's what we do.

    If that means we do absolutly nothing, such as in a rescue situation in which we have no training or equipment for, I would certainly hope that we would not atteempt to perform the rescue.

    We have an obligation to be prepared in terms of apparatus and equipment. We have an obligation to train for expected scenarios and operations. We have an obligation to respond in a timely manner.

    We do not have an obligaion to act if it risks our safety as our primary obligation to to return to the fire house alive AND unhurt. We do not have an obligation to attempt rescues in unforeseen situation is which we are not trained or equipped for.

    If the incident is within the bounds of our training, experience and resources, that obligation does exist.

    If that makes me a coward, so be it.

  10. #60
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    If that makes me a coward, so be it.
    It does.

    So be it.

  11. #61
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    Good lord man, seriously, do you believe the absolute BS of the above statement? I bet your citizens would love to see that slogan on the side of your department vehicles.

    Of course it doesn't apply.

    We have sufficeint volunteer resources supported by a core-fulltime staff, apparatus, water, training and experience to deal withy just about anything the district can throw at us including vehicle and technical rescue.

    We rarely have to backoff.

    Deep seated commercial fires are the exception. In that case, we know we are outgunned and we do take the option to simply start defensive from the start.

  12. #62
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jakesdad View Post
    It does.

    So be it.
    It most CERTAINLY does.

    I tried awhile back to get you guys to ignore this ignoramous. He already got kicked off the IACOJ site for this type of behavior. We need to ignore him to the point he goes away.

    I call for a vote.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  13. #63
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    So waht type of behavior is this george?

    Saying that our lives are worth more than the civilians?

    Is that such a horrible thing?

    Saying the we weight the chances of success v. the chances of failure, and that if the chances of failure greatly outweigh our chances of sucess, we don't risk our lives?

    At what point did I commit to dying for the life of a civilian?

    We have the right to make that decsion at every call. And our family expects us to make that decsion.

  14. #64
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    What got me kicked off IACOJ was that i dared question the right of career firefighters to have a job at the expense of volunteers.

    That I dared say that volunteers in many places are the best and most cost effective way to deliver fire protection and that paid members are a waste of money when volunteers are still demonstrtating they are vaialable and still responding.

    And yes, I question the aggesssived traditonal approach and crap like "the building ain't empty until we say it is".

    My focus is us coming home. ALL THE TIME.

  15. #65
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    What got me kicked off IACOJ was that i dared question the right of career firefighters to have a job at the expense of volunteers.

    That I dared say that volunteers in many places are the best and most cost effective way to deliver fire protection and that paid members are a waste of money when volunteers are still demonstrtating they are vaialable and still responding.

    Your rabid hatred of paid firefighters must just tear you up inside, well since you get paid now. Do you tell yourself you are a waste of money?

    And yes, I question the aggesssived traditonal approach and crap like "the building ain't empty until we say it is".

    And you attack that over and over and over. WHY? Because your point of view is simply so far off the scale that only a damn few, 2 or 3, will side with you on occasion.

    My focus is us coming home. ALL THE TIME.

    There is only one way to guarantee that...DON'T GO!
    I just laugh and laugh and laugh at you...what a mess you are.

  16. #66
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    Your rabid hatred of paid firefighters must just tear you up inside, well since you get paid now. Do you tell yourself you are a waste of money?

    Honestly, our department could likely operate without any paid personnel.

    Our EMS response might suffer a bit.

    Our rating would more than likley drop 2 points, possibly 3, as there really isn't any way that any VFD is LA can hit the bonus points for pre-planning with a district as large as ours. A few other areas may suffer a drop as well, but in terms of delivery of fire protection service the impact would be minimal.

    There would be significant insurance premuim increases, well beyond the salaries of the FT employees, however.

    As far as my job personally, as I have expanded some pubed programs and daytime training has become much more consistent since i have been employed, so the extra time has allowed me to increase internal and external services, but yes, there are still days that I question if this role really needs to be filled in my department by a paid member.

    I really beleive that we should be an all volunteer department. Other than the rating points and increased insurance premuims, an all vollie system would work quite well.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 06-19-2009 at 07:13 PM.

  17. #67
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Your rabid hatred of paid firefighters must just tear you up inside, well since you get paid now. Do you tell yourself you are a waste of money?

    Honestly, our department could likely operate without any paid personnel.

    Our EMS response might suffer a bit.

    Our rating would more than likley drop 2 points, possibly 3, as there really isn't any way that any VFD is LA can hit the bonus points for pre-planning with a district as large as ours. A few other areas may suffer a drop as well, but in terms of delivery of fire protection service the impact would be minimal.

    There would be significant insurance premuim increases, well beyond the salaries of the FT employees, however.

    As far as my job personally, as I have expanded some pubed programs and daytime training has become much more consistent since i have been employed, so the extra time has allowed me to increase internal and external services, but yes, there are still days that I question if this role really needs to be filled in my department by a paid member.

    I really beleive that we should be an all volunteer department. Other than the rating points and increased insurance premuims, an all vollie system would work quite well.

    Again, laughing at you try to spin how your FD should be all volly and yet you justify your own job. Ridiculous and massively, off the scale hypocritical. AND, still I am not surprised in the least by your behavior.

  18. #68
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Why does anyone(particularly you LA)feel the need to criticise ANY part of this textbook,coordinated fire attack by the members of FDNY?This is a bread and butter job,one they do often,captured here on film for our BENEFIT and enjoyment. And a DAMN nice job,if I do say so myself. Try one of those security shutters sometime,they're a PITA. This was a NICE job,done right,start to finish.One to LEARN from, even if you live in the sticks(or the bayou). Way to go guys,T.C.

  19. #69
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,017

    Default

    I dont want to pile on , but good lord La ----- did you re-read that statement ? Sounded pretty gutless to me.

  20. #70
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    Why does anyone(particularly you LA)feel the need to criticise ANY part of this textbook,coordinated fire attack by the members of FDNY?This is a bread and butter job,one they do often,captured here on film for our BENEFIT and enjoyment. And a DAMN nice job,if I do say so myself. Try one of those security shutters sometime,they're a PITA. This was a NICE job,done right,start to finish.One to LEARN from, even if you live in the sticks(or the bayou). Way to go guys,T.C.

    I never criticized them. I said, after being dragged in and having my department insulted, that it was little too offensive for my taste.

    Again, laughing at you try to spin how your FD should be all volly and yet you justify your own job. Ridiculous and massively, off the scale hypocritical. AND, still I am not surprised in the least by your behavior.

    If they decided tomorrow that they were going to go all-volunteer that would be fine. Could easily go back to the ambo and make more money.

    I don't have to justify my job. The powers that be decided that the position was needed and I was asked to take it. I was doing 75% of the pubed I do now on my own time (or as a part-time employee) before I was hired. If they decided tomorrow they didn't need me I would simply go back to doing pubed as a vollie/part-time employee. The training portion would just shift back to the Deputy Chief, which would make his job a lot tougher.

  21. #71
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    I dont want to pile on , but good lord La ----- did you re-read that statement ? Sounded pretty gutless to me.

    No problem.

    Interpret it however ya want. We decide what we do on the fireground. The only obligation we have is to our families to return from the call alive and unhurt.

  22. #72
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Why does anyone(particularly you LA)feel the need to criticise ANY part of this textbook,coordinated fire attack by the members of FDNY?This is a bread and butter job,one they do often,captured here on film for our BENEFIT and enjoyment. And a DAMN nice job,if I do say so myself. Try one of those security shutters sometime,they're a PITA. This was a NICE job,done right,start to finish.One to LEARN from, even if you live in the sticks(or the bayou). Way to go guys,T.C.

    I never criticized them. I said, after being dragged in and having my department insulted, that it was little too offensive for my taste.

    Um, at the very least you questioned the validity of their tactics. At best you criticized their tactics.


    Again, laughing at you try to spin how your FD should be all volly and yet you justify your own job. Ridiculous and massively, off the scale hypocritical. AND, still I am not surprised in the least by your behavior.

    If they decided tomorrow that they were going to go all-volunteer that would be fine. Could easily go back to the ambo and make more money.

    BULL *****...I am calling you on this. Are you independently wealthy? Seriously, you left a higher paying job to become a paid fire educator. REALLY?? Is your ego and need to call yourself a paid firefighter so big that you did this for the status? You are so full of crap and yourself if you expect anyone here to believe this latest line.

    I don't have to justify my job. The powers that be decided that the position was needed and I was asked to take it. I was doing 75% of the pubed I do now on my own time (or as a part-time employee) before I was hired. If they decided tomorrow they didn't need me I would simply go back to doing pubed as a vollie/part-time employee. The training portion would just shift back to the Deputy Chief, which would make his job a lot tougher.


    Once again I am simply sitting here laughing my *** off at you. You are such a hypocrite and so 2 faced that I am amazed that you remember a damn thing you have ever said here. You were doing the job for free as a volly and the chief decided to pay you. Yeah, sure, umm, okay, whatever. You whine and wail and **** and moan about the destruction of the volunteer base and then what do you do? Become one of those you crybaby about. BRILLIANT!! Yeah, you would say "No thank you, I don't really need to earn a living and pay my bills...Please let me go back to volunteer status. Oh Please Chief." Excuses, BS and story telling, that's all you have.
    Just once again, laughing at your unbelievable load of crap.

  23. #73
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    BULL *****...I am calling you on this. Are you independently wealthy? Seriously, you left a higher paying job to become a paid fire educator. REALLY?? Is your ego and need to call yourself a paid firefighter so big that you did this for the status? You are so full of crap and yourself if you expect anyone here to believe this latest line.

    Nope. Better retirement. After 2 years, better sick days and vacation time. Much closer to home. Fewer hours. More office time and less street time so less fatigue. Home every night. And I enjoy doing pubed. Having to fight fires now and again sucks though. my wife actually wanted me to take the job more than I did. I really enjoyed doing this as a volunteer more.

    In the long run the benefits and retirement will catch up with the pay reduction the first 3-4 years.


    Um, at the very least you questioned the validity of their tactics. At best you criticized their tactics

    So the FDNY is always right because .... They are the FDNY? Sorry but we all have the right to say to aggressive/not aggressive enough for our own tastes irregardless of who the department is.

  24. #74
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    "Having to fight fires now and again sucks though. "
    posted by LAFireEducator

    WOW, Did you really just say that on a forum for firefighting tactics!! Well that pretty much sums it up as to why you think the way you do.

    Hello my name is LaFireEducator and i do NOT like going to fire!

  25. #75
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    As my primary job in the department is to prevent fires, as the department's public educator, going to a fire means I have failed in my primary role.

    The fact is anytime we as a service go to a fire, we have failed to educate and we have failed in our primary role - prevention.

    And besides, I'm getting too damn old for this crap.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. What is 'taxpayer'
    By bum291 in forum Probie House: The Place for Newbies
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-06-2010, 02:05 AM
  2. Dear Taxpayer
    By RetJaxFF in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 05:38 AM
  3. Backdraft: Taxpayer Ventilation Problems
    By agaudio in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-22-2006, 04:36 AM
  4. Its begining to look a lot like....
    By WannabeintheFD in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-04-2003, 10:01 PM
  5. Taxpayer fire codes
    By CambAuxFF in forum Emergency Services Administration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-20-2002, 12:16 AM

Posting Permissions

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register