View Poll Results: Is it worth agressive interior attack on known vacant buildings?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it is worth the risk

    20 55.56%
  • No, it is not worth the risk

    16 44.44%
Like Tree136Likes

Thread: Risk/Reward Interior attack vacant buildings presentation

  1. #251
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Wrong. The fact is that we do have a resposnibility to make decisions that do not endanger our personnel. Injuries are not part of the job, and certainly the death of a firefighter is not part of the job. I guess that is where we have a fundamental disagreement.
    Bobby... did you ever read the warning labels inside of a fire helmet? I am looking at the Cairns N6A that I passed onto my son when he graduated from the Massachusetts Fire Academy Call/Volunteer Class #34. Inside the helmet, on the impact cap is he following statement:

    DANGER
    Do not use this helmet until you read and understand the the information booklet,
    FIREFIGHTING IS A DANGEROUS ACTIVITY.
    YOU MAY BE KILLED OR INJURED WHILE USING THIS PRODUCT
    The only way to guarantee that anyone will not be injured or killed in the performance of firefighting duties is to not be a firefighter.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  2. #252
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Bobby... did you ever read the warning labels inside of a fire helmet? I am looking at the Cairns N6A that I passed onto my son when he graduated from the Massachusetts Fire Academy Call/Volunteer Class #34. Inside the helmet, on the impact cap is he following statement:



    The only way to guarantee that anyone will not be injured or killed in the performance of firefighting duties is to not be a firefighter.
    And on that we will always disagree.

    Again, if you consider putting members into situations where there is risk but no significant benefit, such as "saving" an abandoned structure, or even searching an abandoned structure when there is absolutly no history of occupancy issues in that area, have at it, but I for one, will have no part of putting my members, especially volunteer members, into that situation.

    And yes, I do everything I can to garantee that my members will not be hurt, which at times, means being extremly conservative in how I operate.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  3. #253
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Seriously, you can't be this damn stupid. And since I can't believe even you are this damn stupid the only other alternative is you are a TROLL. When you constantly post outfight LIES about what people have said there can be no other explanation.

    For the millionth time, what is it about "IF STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS AND EXTENT OF THE FIRE ALLOW, A SEARCH AND POSSIBLE INTERIOR FIRE ATTACK WILL BE DONE" that you simply can't comprehend? No one is saying don't do a size-up, no one is saying don't do a risk versus reward profile, no one is saying close your eyes, pull up your collar and do a suicidal Banzai charge into ANY building. So how about you stop posting nonsense and LIES, for one topic here? How about just once you give up being the narcissitic troll that you always are?
    And again where did I say any of that was the case?

    The bottom line to me is that there are structural issues that may not be visible during the size-up from the exterior. There are structural issues that may not be visible in the smoke. And there are structural issues that may not be apparent until the members step on that weak floor or apply water to that weak ceiling.

    Again, to many unknowns for too little potential benefit in my area. If you want to risk a firefighter injury for a standing dumpster, have at it.

    I have already done my risk assessment. It's simply not worth making entry unless there is a current, credible and relaible report of or indicators of occupany. Without that, there is simply no reason for me to order crews interior.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  4. #254
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Posted by LaFireEducator
    There is no meaningful gain in operating interior in those situations yet there is significant risk. Far too much risk for my volunteer crew, whose family is expecting him/her to be healthy enough to go to work the next day and earn a paycheck.

    Posted by Fryed
    If they are so worried about being injured or killed, to the point of being unable to act to save the citizens they supposedly protect, then they should quit and stop pretending to be firefighters.



    I doubt they are as worried about being killed or injured as I am about thier safety, but, that's my job as the senior man or the officer. It's my job to be the adult in the room and stop them when the situation, in my estimation, presents significant hazard or risk beyond the potential benefit.

    There have been times when they have been damn pi**ed that I had them backoff from a fire. There have been times that they have been pi**ed that I told them to slow down, or come to a complete stop at that red light because they felt they needed to get there NOW. But that's my responsbility. To see the big picture that they may not see and yes, keep them from getting hurt even though they may want to make entry or be more aggressive.

    Yes, I am the adult in the room. And it really doesn't matter what they want to do.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 04-03-2013 at 11:17 AM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  5. #255
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Posed by Bobby
    Again, if you consider putting members into situations where there is risk but no significant benefit, such as "saving" an abandoned structure, or even searching an abandoned structure when there is absolutly no history of occupancy issues in that area, have at it, but I for one, will have no part of putting my members, especially volunteer members, into that situation
    I think I will place a call to the Air Force and see if I can borrow the use of a B1B Lancer and a MOAB bunker buster bomb to try and get something through your thick skull...

    NOBODY IS ADVOCATING GOING ON A SUICIDE MISSION. IF A STRUCTURE IS FULLY INVOLVED OR HAS ALREADY COLLAPSED WE WILL NOT ENTER.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  6. #256
    Forum Member
    ThNozzleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Jefferson City, TN
    Posts
    4,339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    The moment some over-educated, over-thinking yard breather coined the term "everybody goes home", and then started to believe it.
    I love these guys. They parade around the talk circuit and spew this stupid philosophy in training rooms and academies across the nation. They get their jollies thinking they are saving the entire fire service from itself. The worst part about these guys, however, is their arrogance and their tendency to fault firefighters who dared take chances for their fellow man and lost their lives in the process, regardless of the circumstances surrounding the incident. They always find some way to place the blame on the dead firefighter. They must, you see, in order to continue validating their ideas and "solutions." What they just don't seem to understand is that I, and many others like me, are quite willing to take those chances. It's who I am...and I like it. My family understands. My son understands...as much as an 8 year old can. I am proud of the fact that our history and tradition is built largely on the fact that some people in our society are willing to do what others are not. Of course, this willingness to perform is balanced with common sense, training, and experience. Nobody ever claimed otherwise. But, the ultimate end result of the "everybody goes home" clowns is to just not respond at all...which I believe many of them would have absolutely no problem with. The entire fire service is turning into "me, me, me." I swear, if I hear one more recruit say "it's not our emergency", "the most important person on the fireground is me", or "everybody goes home", I'm going to throw up on their shoes.

  7. #257
    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 LaFireEducator View Post
    Sorry, but that is exactly what you ARE saying when you encourage entry into abandoned buildins with unknown structural hazards and stability in areas with no history of occupancy and no reliable information indicating occupancy.
    Gosh, I might be more safety conscious than you.

    Every building on fire has "unknown structural hazards and stability".... regardless of occupancy.

    Yet, we still go in.... It's a firefighter thing, you wouldn't understand.
    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."

  8. #258
    Forum Member
    EastKyFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Nippa, KY
    Posts
    3,144

    Default

    I've been involved in agriculture my whole life. I've known a few farmers, and heard stories from many others, who were killed or seriously injured farming. It is an occupational hazard. Farmers do the best they can to avoid it, but in the end that is a risk they shoulder to provide for their families.

    So do truck drivers, house painters, electricians, coal miners, TV reporters, and even actors. They all accept the potential to be killed on the job in order to earn a living. In some of those jobs, that risk is high, in others not so much.

    But they don't take the job (and the paycheck) and then let the fields go un-plowed, the load un-hauled, the house un-painted, the building un-wired, the coal un-mined, the news un-reported, or the role un-played. They do their level best, in most cases, to avoid injuries and death, but it's not always possible.

    How is the fire service any different?
    FF-Andy likes this.
    I am more than just a serious basketball fan. I am a life-long addict. I was addicted from birth, in fact, because I was born in Kentucky.
    ― Hunter S. Thompson

  9. #259
    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 LaFireEducator View Post
    Secondly ... Chicago, Columbus, Irvington NJ, Cincinnatti, Jersey City, Los Angeles, Las vegas, Minniapolis, South bend, San Jose, Knoxville, Detroit, Seattle, Las Vegas, Milwakee.......
    Not very much we have in common with most if not all of the places on that list.
    Not too much.... unless you consider these motor vehicle fires.

    http://bossierpress.com/index.php?op...ews&Itemid=134

    BTW, Kudos for the guys there for saving the occupied structure. They went (gasp!) interior and saved it.
    Last edited by ChiefKN; 04-03-2013 at 11:23 AM.
    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."

  10. #260
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    Gosh, I might be more safety conscious than you.

    Every building on fire has "unknown structural hazards and stability".... regardless of occupancy.

    Yet, we still go in.... It's a firefighter thing, you wouldn't understand.

    That last line .. Hahahahahaaaaaaaaa... Such a funny guy.

    An abandoned building has been unmaintained by it's owner for an idefinate amount of time. Sorry, but that screams "unknown structural stability" even before the fire has had an affect on it's ability to defy gravity.

    Sorry, but unless I know there is somebody in there, it's ano-go, not unlike lightweight truss commercial buildings and older mobile homes. Any kind of involvement in those buildings, even in many cases, if there is life involved, is also a no-go.

    Simply not worth the potential cost.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  11. #261
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    Not too much.... unless you consider these motor vehicle fires.

    http://bossierpress.com/index.php?op...ews&Itemid=134



    BTW, Kudos for the guys there for saving the occupied structure. They went (gasp!) interior and saved it.
    Funny thing you posted that ....... Given that I was involved in that operation.
    (Fire District 1 is most commonly known by our old volunteer department name ... "East 80")

    Frankly, there was very little risk involved in saving the structure as the involvement was more inside the rear wall as compared to the contents and the bedroom itself.

    Thanks for quoting that.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  12. #262
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Posed by Bobby


    I think I will place a call to the Air Force and see if I can borrow the use of a B1B Lancer and a MOAB bunker buster bomb to try and get something through your thick skull...

    NOBODY IS ADVOCATING GOING ON A SUICIDE MISSION. IF A STRUCTURE IS FULLY INVOLVED OR HAS ALREADY COLLAPSED WE WILL NOT ENTER.
    And again .. do what you want.

    I don't care if all 4 damn walls are standing and the roof is still intact. The risks posed by an abandoned building to my personnel far ouweigh the benefits of entry unless I have current, credible and reliable reports or exterior indicators of occupancy.

    I refuse to risk one of my volunteers twisting or tearing up a knee because of a bad floor or dinging up a shoulder in a ceiling collapse, and not being able to work, for an empty, unoccupied standing dumpster.

    It's really that simple.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  13. #263
    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 LaFireEducator View Post
    That last line .. Hahahahahaaaaaaaaa... Such a funny guy.
    We know you are PUBED.

    An abandoned building has been unmaintained by it's owner for an idefinate amount of time. Sorry, but that screams "unknown structural stability" even before the fire has had an affect on it's ability to defy gravity.
    So, if it is a recent "abandoned" building, than you'll go because it is assumed to be structurally sound? Is it really a "time" issue? I'm guessing not...

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Funny thing you posted that ....... Given that I was involved in that operation.
    (Fire District 1 is most commonly known by our old volunteer department name ... "East 80")

    Frankly, there was very little risk involved in saving the structure as the involvement was more inside the rear wall as compared to the contents and the bedroom itself.

    Thanks for quoting that.
    The point is that you DO have abandoned dwellings.
    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."

  14. #264
    Forum Member
    EastKyFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Nippa, KY
    Posts
    3,144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    An abandoned building has been unmaintained by it's owner for an idefinate amount of time. Sorry, but that screams "unknown structural stability" even before the fire has had an affect on it's ability to defy gravity.

    Sorry, but unless I know there is somebody in there, it's ano-go, not unlike lightweight truss commercial buildings and older mobile homes. Any kind of involvement in those buildings, even in many cases, if there is life involved, is also a no-go.

    Simply not worth the potential cost.
    An "abandoned" house could have been vacated yesterday. Some abandoned homes are in better condition than some occupied homes. You are clearly confusing the word "abandoned" for "dilapidated".

    And what do you mean by "any kind of involvement"? I agree that old mobile homes and anything with lightweight trusses pose a disproportionate risk compared to better-built structures, but we don't write off anything just because of its construction type.
    Last edited by EastKyFF; 04-03-2013 at 11:44 AM.
    I am more than just a serious basketball fan. I am a life-long addict. I was addicted from birth, in fact, because I was born in Kentucky.
    ― Hunter S. Thompson

  15. #265
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    We know you are PUBED.

    Yes, but I still respond to incidents as needed including structure fires, large brush fires and other fires and EMS calls as needed as dicated by staffing and simultanous runs. And still line on my VFD.


    So, if it is a recent "abandoned" building, than you'll go because it is assumed to be structurally sound? Is it really a "time" issue? I'm guessing not...

    I pretty much have a blanket policy ... Even if it may be recentlly abandoned, there still may be structural issues and I will not have the crews make entry unless there is a reported and credible report or indicators of occupancy. I find it far easier to keep things very black and white as compared to shades of grey.

    Funny thing, even recently abandoned buildings can have hazards. There was avery recently abandoned building in my neighborhood. We responded there on day on an EMS call - When the bank was trying to remove the appliances one of the workmen fell through an apparent weak spot in the floor and broke a leg. Very well could have been one of my crew if we enetered that building for a small fire. Not worth the risk.



    The point is that you DO have abandoned dwellings.
    That was a mutual aid run to South Bossier.

    And yes, we have abandoned dwellings in both my combo and volunteer districts. It's very common for people to move out of one mobile home when it rots out into a new one on the same piece of land, leaving the older one there, unoccupied, except for storage. That was the case at this fire.

    We also have several site built abandoned dwellings, most with obvious structural issues.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  16. #266
    Forum Member
    ThNozzleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Jefferson City, TN
    Posts
    4,339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    And again .. do what you want.

    I don't care blah, blah, blah.
    You know what's pathetic? Somewhere out on some motocross track, a 14 year old girl is willing to take more risks for fun and a small trophy than you are to save a child's life.

    And you call yourself a "professional"...lame.

  17. #267
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Posted by BossierBob

    I pretty much have a blanket policy ... Even if it may be recentlly abandoned, there still may be structural issues and I will not have the crews make entry unless there is a reported and credible report or indicators of occupancy. I find it far easier to keep things very black and white as compared to shades of grey.
    This job is full of "shades of gray", as no two calls are alike.

    Funny thing, even recently abandoned buildings can have hazards. There was avery recently abandoned building in my neighborhood. We responded there on day on an EMS call - When the bank was trying to remove the appliances one of the workmen fell through an apparent weak spot in the floor and broke a leg. Very well could have been one of my crew if we enetered that building for a small fire. Not worth the risk
    So.... did the guy with the broken leg have to extricate himself out of the hole in the floor because you stood by because it was "too dangerous" to go in and treat him? I ask this because using your criteria, you would have waited outside as the floor may have had additional "weak spots".
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  18. #268
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EastKyFF View Post
    An "abandoned" house could have been vacated yesterday. Some abandoned homes are in better condition than some occupied homes. You are clearly confusing the word "abandoned" for "dilapidated".

    Unless you can tell me that there are no structural issues, not worth the risk.

    And what do you mean by "any kind of involvement"? I agree that old mobile homes and anything with lightweight trusses pose a disproportionate risk compared to better-built structures, but we don't write off anything just because of its construction type.
    Maybe the collective "we" wouldn't but I sure as hell would. I understand how older mobile homes burn, in terms of speed and intensity, and anything greater than a partially involved room will likely get a no-go. Not worth it. In a truss building any kind of significant fire that has the possibly of transmitting heat to the unprotected overhead space will get an immediatte no-go. Again, not worth it.

    I have no issues writing off buildings based on construction type.

    Some buildings are built to burn. Some buildings are built to collpase. And some buildings exist to hurt firefighters. I will not commit my personnel into any of those 3 without a damn good reason and plenty of personnel.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 04-03-2013 at 04:38 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  19. #269
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Posted by BossierBob



    This job is full of "shades of gray", as no two calls are alike.

    My world is pretty much black and white. When it comes to operations in abandoned structures, that is certainly black and white.



    So.... did the guy with the broken leg have to extricate himself out of the hole in the floor because you stood by because it was "too dangerous" to go in and treat him? I ask this because using your criteria, you would have waited outside as the floor may have had additional "weak spots".
    Didn't make the call, so can't tell you how it was handled.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  20. #270
    Forum Member
    snowball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Just North of South Central
    Posts
    2,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThNozzleman View Post
    You know what's pathetic? Somewhere out on some motocross track, a 14 year old girl is willing to take more risks for fun and a small trophy than you are to save a child's life.

    And you call yourself a "professional"...lame.
    Yeah, no kidding. I'd better demand my entry fees back for the next three BITD races, sell my bike, and ask to be transferred to a slow house.
    IAFF

  21. #271
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Didn't make the call, so can't tell you how it was handled.
    Well then... when you use the word "we", it means that you were part of the crew.

    You didn't respond, so you have no clue as to what went on.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  22. #272
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Well then... when you use the word "we", it means that you were part of the crew.

    You didn't respond, so you have no clue as to what went on.
    "We" as in my combo department. And "we" did discuss the situation later that afternoon as a part of training.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  23. #273
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,084

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThNozzleman View Post
    I love these guys. They parade around the talk circuit and spew this stupid philosophy in training rooms and academies across the nation. They get their jollies thinking they are saving the entire fire service from itself. The worst part about these guys, however, is their arrogance and their tendency to fault firefighters who dared take chances for their fellow man and lost their lives in the process, regardless of the circumstances surrounding the incident. They always find some way to place the blame on the dead firefighter. They must, you see, in order to continue validating their ideas and "solutions." What they just don't seem to understand is that I, and many others like me, are quite willing to take those chances. It's who I am...and I like it. My family understands. My son understands...as much as an 8 year old can. I am proud of the fact that our history and tradition is built largely on the fact that some people in our society are willing to do what others are not. Of course, this willingness to perform is balanced with common sense, training, and experience. Nobody ever claimed otherwise. But, the ultimate end result of the "everybody goes home" clowns is to just not respond at all...which I believe many of them would have absolutely no problem with. The entire fire service is turning into "me, me, me." I swear, if I hear one more recruit say "it's not our emergency", "the most important person on the fireground is me", or "everybody goes home", I'm going to throw up on their shoes.
    very well said
    ?

  24. #274
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    "We" as in my combo department. And "we" did discuss the situation later that afternoon as a part of training.
    Whatever.....
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  25. #275
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    And again where did I say any of that was the case?

    You have sad it so many times that it is pathetic you would try to deny it.

    The bottom line to me is that there are structural issues that may not be visible during the size-up from the exterior. There are structural issues that may not be visible in the smoke. And there are structural issues that may not be apparent until the members step on that weak floor or apply water to that weak ceiling.

    How long will it be before yu stop anyone from ever going interior? There are alreadt TGI's. trusses with gang nails, trusses that are glued, and now the I-Stair. At what point will any fire in a structure be a reason for your justification of the complete pussification of the fire service?

    Again, to many unknowns for too little potential benefit in my area. If you want to risk a firefighter injury for a standing dumpster, have at it.

    How about you stop being such a pompous know it all jack ***? How about you shut the hell up about what anyone else does on the fireground? No one gives a complete damn about what YOU and your Louisiana rural fire departments do or refuse to do at a fire. Why can't you just be happy with that? Never mind, you are a masochistic narcissist that thrives on all the attention you can get, even if it is negative.

    I have already done my risk assessment. It's simply not worth making entry unless there is a current, credible and relaible report of or indicators of occupany. Without that, there is simply no reason for me to order crews interior.

    Then DON'T GO IN! Who cares, they aren't my friends and neighbors, it isn't my commnuity, I don't have to explain to the family, the fireboard, the media why no attempt at all was made to save someone. So do whatever the hell you want. No one gives a damn.
    I satnd by my ascertation that you are little more than a troll...
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. interior attack
    By whitefishfire in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 07-28-2009, 02:55 PM
  2. Is the risk worth the reward??
    By Rivwarrior in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-30-2005, 06:59 AM
  3. first interior attack
    By smfd232 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-29-2002, 03:43 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-13-2002, 02:09 PM
  5. interior attack communications
    By mtperry in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-02-2002, 04:25 PM

Tags for this Thread

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