10-04-2012, 09:23 AM #126"This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?
10-04-2012, 09:29 AM #127
jccrabby3084, I have a very small sampling of retired Navy personnel that were involved with fire fighting duties. Suffice it to say, you have a far better opinion of Navy fire training than they do.
I respect your opinions, but if you feel that fire fighters can be just as well trained for duty without actually having any fire in that training....we will have to agree to disagree.
To me, that's like having an airline pilot who has never flown an actual aircraft, but has hours in a simulator. The simulator is good training...but not as good."This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?
10-04-2012, 10:47 AM #128
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
Again maybe Im misreading things. But it seems like a lot of people seem to think that by "starting em early" that they will not only have a leg up early,but will continue to be ahead of the pack.Many times , I have found the exact opposite. The "station rats" are so focused on firefighting that if it wasnt taught in FF1 or 2 they havent learned it. Where as a guy joins up that has a broader "life experence" will be able to adapt to situations that arent in the book. Nothing wrong with a kid spending some time at the station, but many are so eat up with firefighting that they are missing out on on a lot of life.?
10-04-2012, 11:12 PM #129
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
The law says no live fire for minors and you appear to think it's "silly" and creates "lost training opportunities" that can provide future benefit. I'm not specifically sure if the law prevents a (licensed) minor to drive fire apparatus, but in all in likelihood, your insurance policy sets the minimum at 18 or 21. Whether or not this is "silly" may be debatable, but as I said before, it can easily be argued that this restriction also creates "lost training opportunities" that can provide future benefit. Do you feel the same way about both restrictions and why do you feel that way?
10-05-2012, 01:13 AM #130
Our insurance requires 21 to drive an apparatus in emergency conditions. Licensed driver can drive them in non-emergent situations.
Do I think the rule requiring age of 21 to drive in emergency mode is silly? Yes. What makes a 21 year old magically a better driver than a 20 and 11 months year old? I think a properly trained licensed driver should be allowed to drive. Are there 17-20 year olds not capable of driving? Yup. Are there 21+ year olds not capable of driving? Yup.
And again, I don't have dual steering wheels nor dual brake pedals to give me control of the truck when they are driving....so I am not as comfortable with those "lost" training opportunities. I can control a guy holding a hose pointing it at a small stack of pallets."This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?
10-05-2012, 11:06 AM #131Do I think the rule requiring age of 21 to drive in emergency mode is silly? Yes. What makes a 21 year old magically a better driver than a 20 and 11 months year old? I think a properly trained licensed driver should be allowed to drive. Are there 17-20 year olds not capable of driving? Yup. Are there 21+ year olds not capable of driving? Yup.
But I would agree, many a standard based solely on age are misguided. But in lieu of a standard, what other option is there? Hell, even with OSHA, NIOSH reports, state law, accepted practices based on NFPA, federal law, the fire service still manages to kill/hurt/maim children and adults in alarming fashion. In so called "training" situations.
Had this incident been a kid in his own back yard, and 1 moronic moment, it surely wouldn't be any less tragic for him and his family, but that's it. It would have been a local story. But the fact is, he was with and under the supervision of adults, who, from the article are purported to be trained fire professionals. So hence it's now a national issue, proved by the very fact we are here discussing it.
So until there is an accepted minimum standard adopted nationwide, and not just any hayseed can call themselves a firefighter, age limits are really the only alternative.
Last edited by SPFDRum; 10-05-2012 at 11:09 AM.My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
Elevator Rescue Information
10-06-2012, 02:53 AM #132
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Green Bay
And yet it is still considered good enough for the vets out there. The simple fact remains in the Navy, firefighting is a huge deal and is stressed on every platform out there. Of which there really is only a small handful of further trained personnel who are tasked with training the rest of the crew. Sure many people don't receive much more live fire training outside of a brief bootcamp introduction, but they are still expected to perform. So you have multiple training and done quite often, which creates a "muscle memory", and yet in those actual events, personnel still respond accordingly.
I would agree with the flight simulator aspect as well, but what you seem to be losing touch with is the fact that this is only an introduction into FF with such programs NOT a training academy. A pilot can have hours in the simulator, but before they get a license they do incur time behind the controls and so forth.
Same aspect here....these are CHILDREN....I could care less about their maturity levels and so forth....until one turns 18, they are considered children. There is no reason to have children engaged in FF operations, nor a reason that they should be exposed to live fire training then. There is much that they can learn without being involved with live fire training and much to help them when they do perhaps decide to become a full member when they reach adulthood and go for their FF CERTIFICATIONS. Until then, there is no reason they need to be trained with live fire, because there is already enough proof within the fire service that much can be learned without having to be exposed to live fire events to do so.The thoughts and opinions posted here are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the thoughts and or views of city or dept affiliation.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By RVFD506 in forum Volunteer ForumReplies: 7Last Post: 10-02-2004, 02:35 PM
By 42VTExplorer in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 11Last Post: 07-18-2004, 10:48 AM
By EFD840 in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 31Last Post: 07-08-2004, 11:56 AM
By sconfire in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 0Last Post: 02-07-2004, 07:06 AM
By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty ForumsReplies: 47Last Post: 05-29-2003, 09:47 AM