Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 86
Like Tree33Likes

Thread: So tell me again what the point of this is??

  1. #41
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    So.... On your department, in your mind, and you fundamentally believe, that minors who have meet and exceeded specific and training and performance requirements can operate on an active fire scene in backup positions and in positions operating exterior handlines while under direct supervision of senior members or officers, and that's considered safe in your mind.

    Not that this scenario is for my combo department only where we have access to far more live fire props. the juniors go through the same live fire training as adult members, including burn time, under direct supervision. the juniors on my VFD have no such advantageous, and as such, are much less familiar with live fire situations.

    But, conducting interior operations, with a 4 man crew of all adults who have been properly trained, after a proper size-up was performed, and the calculated risk assessed and it was determined it was safe to make an interior attack, is unsafe?

    Depends on if you are referring to your crew or mine. You may consider your crew to operate under such conditions. I may not consider my crew trained or experienced enough to operate under such conditions.

    Jesus man, do you listen to yourself think? Do you read what you post?
    Again, I have no issues in placing responsibility in some pre-defined situations, in the hands of competent and trained junior members when directly supervised by experienced members. Neither does my department.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.


  2. #42
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Again, I have no issues in placing responsibility in some pre-defined situations, in the hands of competent and trained junior members when directly supervised by experienced members. Neither does my department.
    And Alan Baird had no trouble placing an untrained new member in a live fire training acquired structure with virtually no experience using an SCBA and then set fires beneath him that doomed him and severely burned others.

    My point? Just because you have no issue doing something doesn't make it A) Safe, B) Right. Remember, you are the guy who said openly on these forums you can write off victims and have no issue sleeping at night...Just because you can do that doesn't make it right.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 05-03-2013 at 08:43 AM. Reason: clarity
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  3. #43
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Sometimes we did interior attack with (wait for it)......a three man crew.
    Show offs.

  4. #44
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    On your department, in your mind, and you fundamentally believe, that minors who have meet and exceeded specific and training and performance requirements can operate on an active fire scene in backup positions and in positions operating exterior handlines while under direct supervision of senior members or officers, and that's considered safe in your mind.
    So which is it? Are you understaffed and can't have enough people there to make an interior attack, or do you have an abundance of staffing so that you can supervise children on the fire scene? Don't turn this into a "this is my combo, not my volunteer" department bullscat, because you've said repeatedly on these forums that you have staffing issues with both.
    Again, I have no issues in placing responsibility in some pre-defined situations, in the hands of competent and trained junior members when directly supervised by experienced members. Neither does my department.
    I guess if nothing else you're consistent. Hell, you'll let a kid burn to death in a car because you don't have PPE, why not let them get injured or killed on a fire scene, right?
    You're absolutely ridiculous. You don't want any sort of minimum training level, you won't send trained members interior because it's dark and scary, and you'll let minors operate on a fire scene....

    Holy schitt dude, it's time for you to get out of the fire service.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  5. #45
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Again, I have no issues in placing responsibility in some pre-defined situations, in the hands of competent and trained junior members when directly supervised by experienced members. Neither does my department.
    Of course you or your department has no issue with it.

    You're an idiot and your department is a joke.

    I would expect nothing less.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  6. #46
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    And Alan Baird had no trouble placing an untrained new member in a live fire training acquired structure with virtually no experience using an SCBA and then set fires beneath him that doomed him and severely burned others.

    My point? Just because you have no issue doing something doesn't make it A) Safe, B) Right. Remember, you are the guy who said openly on these forums you can write off victims and have no issue sleeping at night...Just because you can do that doesn't make it right.
    First of all, this isn't about ME. The organization determined how involved trained and compenetent junior members who have demonstrated the ability to perform specific performance standards would be in firefighting operations long before I arrived, just like my previous VFD determined how involved trained and compenet junior members would be involved in the firefighting operation.

    Do I have an issue with it? No, as they must complete a skills checklist per DEPARTMENT POLICY demonstrating competency before they are allowed to participate in backup roles during active firefighting operations.

    This isn't my p[olicy to stop or start. It's the policy as determined by the command staff, and they obviously have no issues with it at the current time. You just keep giving me way too much credit.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  7. #47
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    You're absolutely ridiculous. You don't want any sort of minimum training level, you won't send trained members interior because it's dark and scary, and you'll let minors operate on a fire scene....

    First of all, I never stated anywhere that I did not want any minimum training requirements. I stated that i did not want any state imposed mandated minimum training.

    I have stated many, many times that I feel that every department should have department-developed minimum training standards based on thier specific needs.

    I was responsible for the development of a mandated rookie class at my VFD. I assited in developing newe minimum training standards for promtion at my VFd which are currently being implemented. So before you start throwing around the claim that I don't support minimum training standards, know what you are talking about.

    As far as dark and scary ... No. Increased fire lods, increased heat release rates and less stable structures, yes.

    And see the above post about department policy .. not ME, though I have no significant issues with the practice as in my experience, we have had no problems giving them some experience in backup roles.


    Holy schitt dude, it's time for you to get out of the fire service.
    Nope. Not yet.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  8. #48
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    First of all, this isn't about ME. The organization determined how involved trained and compenetent junior members who have demonstrated the ability to perform specific performance standards would be in firefighting operations long before I arrived, just like my previous VFD determined how involved trained and compenet junior members would be involved in the firefighting operation.

    Do I have an issue with it? No, as they must complete a skills checklist per DEPARTMENT POLICY demonstrating competency before they are allowed to participate in backup roles during active firefighting operations.

    This isn't my p[olicy to stop or start. It's the policy as determined by the command staff, and they obviously have no issues with it at the current time. You just keep giving me way too much credit.
    The problem is YOUR continual changing of how valuable, or rather how influential, you are on these FDs. One minute you are mandating stopping at green lights and stopping people from going interior and the next you can't even say "HEY PUT YOUR SEATBELT ON!" I just find it hysterical that when you are getting your azz beat over some idiotic, indefensible policy your FD has suddenly you are a nobody with nothing to say and no influence. Even YOU should be able to pick out how ludicrous that is.
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  9. #49
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    First of all, this isn't about ME. The organization determined how involved trained and compenetent junior members who have demonstrated the ability to perform specific performance standards would be in firefighting operations long before I arrived, just like my previous VFD determined how involved trained and compenet junior members would be involved in the firefighting operation.

    Do I have an issue with it? No, as they must complete a skills checklist per DEPARTMENT POLICY demonstrating competency before they are allowed to participate in backup roles during active firefighting operations.

    This isn't my p[olicy to stop or start. It's the policy as determined by the command staff, and they obviously have no issues with it at the current time. You just keep giving me way too much credit.
    It's absolutely about you. You are the guy who comes on here constantly condemning and criticizing other departments for conducting interior operations with what you consider unsafe circumstances, who had an issue with the way I (SAFELY) conducted my incident the other day, and who has openly admitted they would let a child burn to death in a car because you didn't have proper PPE.

    But then in the same breath, you turn around and justify having minors on the fire scene, actively engaging in operations at the incident, and because they are doing X or they are doing Y and not doing Z, that makes it safe.

    It doesn't matter what your department policy is. While I disagree with it, that's not the purpose of MY posts. My posts are simply to point out that you are a spineless hypocrite, who is willing to risk the lives of children, but won't break his own finger nail for fear of his own personal safety.

    Do you not see the hypocrisy, and idiocy, of what you say and think? Are you truly that dense?
    Last edited by Chenzo; 05-03-2013 at 11:31 AM.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  10. #50
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    The problem is YOUR continual changing of how valuable, or rather how influential, you are on these FDs. One minute you are mandating stopping at green lights and stopping people from going interior and the next you can't even say "HEY PUT YOUR SEATBELT ON!" I just find it hysterical that when you are getting your azz beat over some idiotic, indefensible policy your FD has suddenly you are a nobody with nothing to say and no influence. Even YOU should be able to pick out how ludicrous that is.
    On my combo department, I have very little influence, and this is the department to which this discussion applies.

    The fact is wwe have been using juniors in this manner for the past 20 years, and in the eyes of the command staff, it has worked as we have produced some very good firefighters who already had real-world experience upon turning 18. I see no reason why they would change course now.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  11. #51
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    First of all, I never stated anywhere that I did not want any minimum training requirements. I stated that i did not want any state imposed mandated minimum training.

    I have stated many, many times that I feel that every department should have department-developed minimum training standards based on thier specific needs.
    It sounds like you shouldn't be the judge on what your department needs, because your needs and thoughts are not consistent with the rest of the fire service.

    I was responsible for the development of a mandated rookie class at my VFD. I assited in developing newe minimum training standards for promtion at my VFd which are currently being implemented. So before you start throwing around the claim that I don't support minimum training standards, know what you are talking about.
    So, before I start throwing claims around, I should know what I'm taking about? You mean kind of like how you shouldn't chastize the way any other department conducts their incidents because your grasp on the fire service only includes the knowledge that we drive big trucks and wear helmets.

    As far as dark and scary ... No. Increased fire lods, increased heat release rates and less stable structures, yes.
    That's why you train. To be able to recognize when the increased fire loads and heat release rates will lead to a cataclysmic schitt storm that's about to develop.
    And see the above post about department policy .. not ME, though I have no significant issues with the practice as in my experience, we have had no problems giving them some experience in backup roles.

    It's absolutely about you when you coming on here armchair-warrioring everyone else's incidents because they were unsafe, then say you have no problem putting children in harms way[/COLOR]
    I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart is always looking for someone to push carts back inside.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  12. #52
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    It's absolutely about you. You are the guy who comes on here constantly condemning and criticizing other departments for conducting interior operations with what you consider unsafe circumstances, who had an issue with the way I (SAFELY) conducted my incident the other day, and who has openly admitted they would let a child burn to death in a car because you didn't have proper PPE.

    But then in the same breath, you turn around and justify having minors on the fire scene, actively engaging in operations at the incident, and because they are doing X or they are doing Y and not doing Z, that makes it safe.

    It doesn't matter what your department policy is. While I disagree with it, that's not the purpose of MY posts. My posts are simply to point out that you are a spineless hypocritical whale's vagina, who is willing to risk the lives of children, but won't break his own finger nail for fear of his own personal safety.

    Do you not see the hypocrisy, and idiocy, of what you say and think? Are you truly that dense?
    Again, the post regarding your operation was not about YOU. It was about the fact that as a service have somehow accepted that operating with 3 or 4 members at a scene and going interior is somehow safe because most of the time we walk away from the incident.

    And you by the far are not the only one that have been trained that way. I see it here at my combo departyment and to a lesser extent at my VFD.

    That's simply not the case. LODD after LODD report has shown that operating interior with that amount of manpower is simply NOT safe. Yes, we get away with it more times than not, and that simply reinforces an unsafe practice, but no, it's not safe.

    Problem is that now is has become a common, accepted practice, even though 3 or 4 members is clearly not a safe number to operate with on the fireground, especially if something bad happens.

    Should my Chief had likely waited for additional manpower from the AMA engine before they made entry. Yes. Would I likely have? Yes. And would it have caused increased property damage? Yes. But that is not in the end, my issue. My problem is the safety of the personnel under me. If I can minimize damaghe to the homeowner, fine, but the priority should always be the safety of my men and operating without enough exterior backup to man a backup line or perform a basic rescue operation is NOT safe.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 05-03-2013 at 11:07 AM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  13. #53
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    So, in the other thread LA, you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you consider that safe?

    IC on the nozzle... I'm sure he was able to keep track of the complete scene from there.

    Safety tied to the pump panel.

    No rapid intervention capability.

    Ya, sounds like a good idea to me.
    How exactly is that not directed at ME?

    Regardless of that fact, we'll throw out the incident I had, and the incident you had where your chief was operating interior without an SCBA. We'll ignore those.

    Fyred brought it up earlier, that you chastised an exterior firefighter, climbing a ladder with no SCBA, to rescue an infant from a properly equipped interior FF who had PPE and SCBA on.

    You've repeatedly said you won't make an attack without what you deem to be a proper amount of qualified members on scene, and continually bit*h about manpower.

    You also repeatedly said that you would allow an infant/child/person to BURN to death in a car if you came upon it in your personal vehicle, or you were ill-equipped PPE-wise.

    BUT THEN you come on here and say that you fundamentally believe it's okay for MINORS to operate on a FIRE SCENE? While they are being supervised by a senior firefighter.

    Hm. Okay.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  14. #54
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Originally Posted by LaFireEducator

    It sounds like you shouldn't be the judge on what your department needs, because your needs and thoughts are not consistent with the rest of the fire service.

    I know for a fact that most volunteer Chiefs in LA do not support mandated minimum standards, and based on the aricle I posted in another thread, it sure sounds like that is the case in TX too.

    I think if you got out more, you would find that those that support minimum standards are in the minority nationwide.


    So, before I start throwing claims around, I should know what I'm taking about? You mean kind of like how you shouldn't chastize the way any other department conducts their incidents because your grasp on the fire service only includes the knowledge that we drive big trucks and wear helmets.

    I really don't care what you do. if you felt that it was safe, fine, but I woukld not consider that safe with the majority of the personnel at my VFD, and certainly that would be the case for just about all of the departments in my parish as the training and experience simply sin't there to safely support that level of aggressiveness.

    If you feel that you can operate interior with 4 folks on the fireground, and something goes bad, have at it.

    That being said it should not be an expectation that every department should be able to make an interior attack with 4 members on the fireground.

    As far as my knowledge about fire service operations, I doubt you want to go there.


    That's why you train. To be able to recognize when the increased fire loads and heat release rates will lead to a cataclysmic schitt storm that's about to develop.

    No disagreement there.

    Tha being said, to effectivly do that requires the ability to conduct live burns. Fact is most departments in this area have no or very limited burn capability. That is the case with my VFD.



    It's absolutely about you when you coming on here armchair-warrioring everyone else's incidents because they were unsafe, then say you have no problem putting children in harms way[/COLOR]

    So a 17 1/2-year old is a child but at 18 he magically becomes an adult? Sorry, but a trained and competent 17 year old poses no greater safety risk when involved in a backup rolethan an 18-year old in the same position.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  15. #55
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    So, in the other thread LA, you said:


    How exactly is that not directed at ME?

    Regardless of that fact, we'll throw out the incident I had, and the incident you had where your chief was operating interior without an SCBA. We'll ignore those.

    Fyred brought it up earlier, that you chastised an exterior firefighter, climbing a ladder with no SCBA, to rescue an infant from a properly equipped interior FF who had PPE and SCBA on.

    You've repeatedly said you won't make an attack without what you deem to be a proper amount of qualified members on scene, and continually bit*h about manpower.

    You also repeatedly said that you would allow an infant/child/person to BURN to death in a car if you came upon it in your personal vehicle, or you were ill-equipped PPE-wise.

    BUT THEN you come on here and say that you fundamentally believe it's okay for MINORS to operate on a FIRE SCENE? While they are being supervised by a senior firefighter.

    Hm. Okay.
    Never did I say that you made a bad call.

    You were operating in the manner that you have been trained. You were operating in amanner that likely meet department expecatations. And sadly, that has become fire service expectations.

    However, I dispute that any interior operation with only 4 me3mbers by any department is not safe, and never will be.

    Minors that have completed the exact same training requirements and demonstrated the same level of competancy as thier adult counterparts.

    Funny thing is more kids will be injured at the first high school football game down the road here in septemeber than we ever have injured allowing junior members to perform limited fireground tasks in the history of this fire department.

    (Which by the way is ... Wait for it ...... ZERO)

    Maybe we should ban high school football if you are that concerned about minors being injured.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 05-03-2013 at 11:30 AM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  16. #56
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So a 17 1/2-year old is a child but at 18 he magically becomes an adult? Sorry, but a trained and competent 17 year old poses no greater safety risk when involved in a backup rolethan an 18-year old in the same position.
    I'm pretty sure that Federal Labor Laws would vehemently disagree with you. I'm pretty sure that a parent of a child that you injured would vehemently disagree you, while they were suing you, the safety officer, the chief, all other officers of the department individually, the department itself, and your parish......
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  17. #57
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    I'm pretty sure that Federal Labor Laws would vehemently disagree with you. I'm pretty sure that a parent of a child that you injured would vehemently disagree you, while they were suing you, the safety officer, the chief, all other officers of the department individually, the department itself, and your parish......
    That would be an issue for department leadership, not me.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  18. #58
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Never did I say that you made a bad call.

    You were operating in the manner that you have been trained. You were operating in amanner that likely meet department expecatations. And sadly, that has become fire service expectations.

    However, I dispute that any interior operation with only 4 me3mbers by any department is not safe, and never will be.

    Minors that have completed the exact same training requirements and demonstrated the same level of competancy as thier adult counterparts.

    Funny thing is more kids will be injured at the first high school football game down the road here in septemeber than we ever have injured allowing junior members to perform limited fireground tasks in the history of this fire department.

    (Which by the way is ... Wait for it ...... ZERO)

    Maybe we should ban high school football if you are that concerned about minors being injured.
    Now you're delving into MY argument, that YOU agreed with in the other thread that was wrong. I said something along the lines of I took the calculated risk, we did what we did, no one got hurt, so I considered it a safe operation.

    But now that it applies to your argument, it's okay?
    Funny thing is more kids will be injured at the first high school football game down the road here in septemeber than we ever have injured allowing junior members to perform limited fireground tasks in the history of this fire department.

    (Which by the way is ... Wait for it ...... ZERO)
    So now because it applies to you and your junior program, the same argument I made concerning trained, well equipped firefighters making an interior attack now applies?
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  19. #59
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    On my combo department, I have very little influence, and this is the department to which this discussion applies.

    Okay so is this the truth or the other story you have been selling for years here of how you are an integral member of the command staff?

    The fact is wwe have been using juniors in this manner for the past 20 years, and in the eyes of the command staff, it has worked as we have produced some very good firefighters who already had real-world experience upon turning 18. I see no reason why they would change course now.

    Well, apparently since your state has no training standards for volunteers that makes everything okay. Right?
    Just more of your flip flop nonsense. At least your consistent in your rambling nconsistencies.
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  20. #60
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    That would be an issue for department leadership, not me.
    That's your answer to everything. Wash your hands of it. Are you training officer at this department? Do you assist with training ever? Do you have any interactions with the juniors? Than it's also YOUR issue, because as a parent, I would be after anyone who had any influence, help, assistance, guidance, leadership, etc with the junior program, with the training program, who was on scene at that incident, what ever.

    You can't just simply wash your hands of it because you think it's a department issue, and not your issue.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. America's low point
    By DennisTheMenace in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-04-2005, 07:00 PM
  2. Low Point in High Point
    By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-05-2003, 06:02 PM
  3. Need help to prove my point...
    By tgc204 in forum The Engineer
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-14-2003, 09:55 AM
  4. need help to prove my point....
    By tgc204 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-06-2003, 09:00 AM
  5. 3-point vs. 4-point stabilization?
    By rmoore in forum University of Extrication
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-07-1999, 04:33 PM

Posting Permissions

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