Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
Closed Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 119
  1. #41
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    [B].

    Again, you decided to mention me - unless of course it was that "other" Bossier Parish we talk so much about. Keep my name out of threads I have no real interest in and I probably won't post in them.


    If this thread was of so little interest to you, why were you reading it in the first place?


  2. #42
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,373

    Default

    jakes ...

    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 ... until George decided to draw me in.

    Oh that's right. He was trying to draw that other guy who posts from Bossier Parish in.

  3. #43
    Forum Member johnny46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    What was the O&C of this fire?
    What's O&C?
    Logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead.

  4. #44
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Cupcake NY
    Posts
    1,327

    Default

    Origin and Cause

  5. #45
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    jakes ...

    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 ... until George decided to draw me in.

    Oh that's right. He was trying to draw that other guy who posts from Bossier Parish in.


    If you readily admit that the "resources, manpower and operations are so different that there was no point in getting involved in the discussion", then I am wondering why you felt it was necessary to criticize the operation in the video.

    Whether you were "drawn in" or not, it doesn't mean that you are now in a position to criticize operations you clearly admit that you don't fully understand in the first place.

    You just can't help yourself. If your issue is the fact that you were mentioned, then post about that fact.

    But as usual, you throw the jab about a particular tactic, department or operation and when called on to be accountable for your words, you backpedal and retreat.

    The frequency in which you do this is alarming. Either you have no real opinions. Or you have no real balls. I am starting to think you lack both.

  6. #46
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Fred,thanks for posting this. NICE job! Who filmed it? T.C.

  7. #47
    Forum Member johnny46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonnyirons2 View Post
    Origin and Cause
    Tanks.

    4characters
    Logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead.

  8. #48
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,373

    Default

    Jakes ...

    Honestly it doesn't matter what you think.

    If you don't like my opinions, disregard them. I'm sure you already do as I generally disregard yours.

    My opinions are based on my belief system about what is right and wrong. Yours are based on the same thing.

    Life works well if you just know how to deal with others.

  9. #49
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Jakes ...

    Honestly it doesn't matter what you think.

    If you don't like my opinions, disregard them. I'm sure you already do as I generally disregard yours.

    My opinions are based on my belief system about what is right and wrong. Yours are based on the same thing.

    Life works well if you just know how to deal with others.

    I 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.

    Any validity to anything you might have to offer is mired in the fact that you consistently attack, criticize, backpedal and repeat.

    But I am free to hold you accountable to your words as long as you are going to offer them in these forums.

    And if you truly "generally disregard" my opinions, why do you find it necessary to counter everything I say to you?

  10. #50
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,373

    Default

    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.

  11. #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.

  12. #52
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,373

    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.

  13. #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.

  14. #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...

  15. #55
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,647

    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.

  16. #56
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,647

    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.

  17. #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.

  18. #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.

  19. #59
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,373

    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.

  20. #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.

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