Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
Closed Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    21

    Default

    MemphisE34a - I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about, and what your defending/attacking. Are you against the use of safety equipment, or a proponent of only using it when convenient, or when you're not in a hurry, or what? While I'll be interested to hear your "argument", your comments are dangerous, and as a bonus, ignorant. It's folks with your attitude that keep our injury/death rate up in the emergency incident category. Unless, of course, you're against seat belts as well - then we can move you into the responding category of inuries/deaths as well.

    Pretty sure there's quite a few of us that make you "sick to your stomach", but I could be wrong.

    I guess you're right, this is personal. It's a personal RESPONSIBILITY to act as safely as possible in the dangerous atmosphere we all work in - no matter how urgent the situation presents itself. It's our collective responsibility to promote safe practices as 100% of the time. It's ridiculous to suggest that you can serve an unproctected victim while being unprotected yourself. Sure, it happens - real hero stuff - but the odds catch up to you eventually. Are you gambling (risk management roulette), or responding as a well-trained and equipped profession ALL of the time.

    Second post - thanks for the welcome. Now please remove head from sand, and the 1950's.


  2. #22
    Back In Black ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeDV View Post
    MemphisE34a - I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about, and what your defending/attacking. Are you against the use of safety equipment, or a proponent of only using it when convenient, or when you're not in a hurry, or what? While I'll be interested to hear your "argument", your comments are dangerous, and as a bonus, ignorant. It's folks with your attitude that keep our injury/death rate up in the emergency incident category. Unless, of course, you're against seat belts as well - then we can move you into the responding category of inuries/deaths as well.

    Pretty sure there's quite a few of us that make you "sick to your stomach", but I could be wrong.

    I guess you're right, this is personal. It's a personal RESPONSIBILITY to act as safely as possible in the dangerous atmosphere we all work in - no matter how urgent the situation presents itself. It's our collective responsibility to promote safe practices as 100% of the time. It's ridiculous to suggest that you can serve an unproctected victim while being unprotected yourself. Sure, it happens - real hero stuff - but the odds catch up to you eventually. Are you gambling (risk management roulette), or responding as a well-trained and equipped profession ALL of the time.

    Second post - thanks for the welcome. Now please remove head from sand, and the 1950's.
    He was referencing your use of the word,"known".

    Do you only search for known victims?

    .
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  3. #23
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    21

    Default

    As usual, statements in print, especially on forums like this one, are without inflection,and lose some meaning. However, being "sick to my stomach" is pretty clear, and very insulting.

    Your question "Do you only seach for known victims?" - the answer is no. We search every fire involved structure while in the offensvie strategy, whether there are known victims in advance, or not. That of course is our primary mission. My emphasis on the word "known" was meant to illustrate that PPE is used in ALL cases. Just because we are led to believe (because of some added, unsubstantiated information) that there are victims does not mean we can short circuit the means we have to protect ourselves beacuse the "urgency" factor is now higher. Every time we go to a structure fire, it is an urgent situation. Every time we we respond, we should be doing everything we can at full speed, with all due diligence and professionalism. This includes using to best advantage every single tool we own, including the ones for our own protection. The clairvoyant ability to know in advance which protective gear is necessary leads to complacency and risk taking. It's minor, so I can leave the gloves off, or the eye protection at the truck; I've done it lots of times before and never got hurt. Or, it's so dangerous and I have to move so quickly, I can take a few shortcuts. Either end of the specturm is a potential for injury or worse.

    The reason we search every time, is because there is only one way to know - to open up, look with human eyes, and then decide if the risk we have thus far managed with our safety practices is worth any further exposure, or if the next thing that happens overpowers our equipment with no life safety payoff.

    We should always think there is someone to be helped until we prove otherwise for ourselves.

    All that being said, to imply that the use of PPE 100% of the time in any way is less aggressive, bad for potential victims, or some kind of "BS cliche" (everyone goes home - a BS cliche?) is - as I stated - dangerous and ignorant.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Backdraft Video
    By Captainron19 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-20-2007, 11:51 PM
  2. Backdraft Video
    By Captainron19 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-15-2007, 03:57 PM
  3. Backdraft caught on video
    By Capt790 in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 12-15-2006, 01:59 PM
  4. Backdraft or Smoke Explosion
    By phyrngn in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 07-26-2006, 07:34 AM
  5. Smoke Explosion
    By Smokeetr4 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-29-2002, 10:57 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