Like Tree33Likes

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

  1. #51
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,235

    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

  2. #52
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,610

    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.

  3. #53
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,235

    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

  4. #54
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,610

    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.

  5. #55
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,610

    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.

  6. #56
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,235

    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

  7. #57
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,610

    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.

  8. #58
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,235

    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

  9. #59
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,108

    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.
    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

  10. #60
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,235

    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

  11. #61
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    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.
    The Training Officer is the Deputy Chief. I am the Training Coordinator.

    Policy making lies with the DC. I am primarily responsible for the admin side of training and training delivery.

    I am not washing my hands of anything, but the truth is that any change in the junior program, or how junior members are utilized, would come soley fro the Chief Officer level. And as I have said, they have no issues with the current direction of the program.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  12. #62
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    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.

    And that was your evalaution, based in part on the department expectation that interior operations with 4 members is safe and acceptable.

    At one time, I would have agreed that ios is safe. However, my opinion has changed, especially in the casse of my current VFD.


    But now that it applies to your argument, it's okay?

    You are the one saying that since noboy was hurt, it was safe. Using the same logic, utilizing juniors in limited fireground capacities is also safe, simply because we have never gotten anyone hurt.


    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?
    If it applies to one arguement, it applies to another.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  13. #63
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    I'm pretty sure Wal-Mart is always looking for someone to push carts back inside.
    The risk v. reward profile on that probably isn't good enough for him.
    Chenzo likes this.

  14. #64
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,961

    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?
    In the eyes of the law, Yes.

    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.
    While that 17 year old may not be a greater safety risk than an 18 year old in that same position, child labor laws say that he can't be used in the same fashion as the 18 year old. It's really that simple.
    Chenzo likes this.

  15. #65
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    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.
    Some people are advocating for that course of action. However, again, minors playing high school football is not prohibited by child labor laws.
    Chenzo likes this.

  16. #66
    Forum Member
    HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    And how many firefighters do you have to assign to supervise the juniors and make sure the juniors don't go into the hot zone??? There's enough to worry about on a scene without having to babysit.
    For a junior to be on scene, they must be under the direct supervision of an officer. If the officer is too busy, does not trust/know the junior, then they will tell them to sit in the truck or stay at the station. For them to come to a scene, an officer has to ok it.

    Sorry to intrude on the LAFE vs. the world thread here. I am just letting you know how we do it and how it is different than his way.

  17. #67
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    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.


    First of all, not supporting minimum standards in something as important as firefighting is nothing to cheer about. Further, hopefully this will put an end to volunteers in your state and Texas wanting to be thought of as the same as career professional firefighters. Especially in Texas where career firefighters still must meet a state mandated training standard.

    So would you applaud as loudly and in equal support if there were no law enforcement standards? Or Pharmacist standards? Or Doctors? Or Teachers? Or Dentists? Or EMS? Or haz-mat? Or is it just that you don't like being told what to teach your firefighters because it usurps your kingdom?


    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.

    You do care you hypocrite, and then in the very next breath you go on to tell us about how your Chief, with no scba, enters a house with a known fire and extinguishes the fire with a fir extinguisher. With no back up line in place no 2 in 2 out, no RIT, no outisde command, no safety officer. Further you then go on to say yu had extension from the original fire. Just wondering if your chief ever exited to put on scba or if he just used his pretend magical shield to protect himself from toxic gases and smoke...Yet what LT Chenzo did in full ppe and scba was deemed unsafe by you. REALLY?

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

    At least our 2 that operated interior had full ppe, scba, and a charged handline. Not no scba and a fire extinguisher. Tell me again who seems unsafe here?

    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.

    No, but let's make it okay for your chief to run in without scba and a fire extinguisher...what a joke you are Bobby!

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

    I'll go there. I would put my knowledge up against yours any day. Because to be brutally honest you don't impress me and further I would hazard a bet you don't impress many others here either. You are a little fish in a puddle who desperately wants to be a big fish. Sorry, that dream isn't coming true for you.


    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.

    So they are allowed to utilize your combo FDs burn tower or they aren't? Which story are we going with here today?



    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.

    Um, yes. In the eyes of the law, unless that 17 1/2 year old has been emancipated he is a child. Believe what ever you wish. The negative impacts of your ignorance do not directly affect me.
    Just more of your doublespeak claptrap.
    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

  18. #68
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,108

    Default

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

    You have repeatedly questioned his actions and the safety thereof.

    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.

    Yeah, it's sad that you see saving lives and property as a negative fire service expectation.

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

    This sentence is so convoluted that you don't even know what the hell you are saying. You first say that you dispute it is not safe, meaning you believe it is safe, then you say never will be. What college did you go to again?

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

    Federal labor law...look into it sometime.

    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.

    Not relevant. Frankly another completely dumb azz comparison.

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

    Let's hope for the children's sake it stays that way.

    Maybe we should ban high school football if you are that concerned about minors being injured.

    Maybe you should try to stay on topic one time instead of going off on idiotic tangents of no relevance.
    Another dose of LA blather...
    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

  19. #69
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    The Training Officer is the Deputy Chief. I am the Training Coordinator.

    So what do you actually do besides spend the majority of your day sounding like a buffoon on FH.com?

    Policy making lies with the DC. I am primarily responsible for the admin side of training and training delivery.

    So you are nothing more than a robotic follower with no input, just garbage in garbage out type of employee. Wow! That must really be fulfilling.

    I am not washing my hands of anything, but the truth is that any change in the junior program, or how junior members are utilized, would come soley fro the Chief Officer level. And as I have said, they have no issues with the current direction of the program.

    Well, even if YOU had issues of it your describing yourself as the spineless follower, who wouldn't even mention failure to follow the seatbelt policy, wouldn't allow you to take any action anyways....now would it?
    Just more of the same from you LA.
    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

  20. #70
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    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.
    Yeah. Those lax standards worked out real well in West, TX. Wouldn't you agree?
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  21. #71
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    For a junior to be on scene, they must be under the direct supervision of an officer. If the officer is too busy, does not trust/know the junior, then they will tell them to sit in the truck or stay at the station. For them to come to a scene, an officer has to ok it.

    Sorry to intrude on the LAFE vs. the world thread here. I am just letting you know how we do it and how it is different than his way.
    I personally don't like either way. I would never agree to supervise a minor on scene, even if he were the offspring of Johnny Gage and Roy Desoto.
    Chenzo likes this.

  22. #72
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,235

    Default

    At my second department, they are in the beginning stages of transitioning the EMS explorers into the fire side of things. As I haven't been involved with the explorer program at all, I can't say as to what the end goal or their overall intentions are. However what I can say is that I will not be a party to minors on the fire scene, nor will I drive a rig out the door with an explorer in that truck for an incident.

    Train, hang out at the station and get to know people, go through the trucks, wash the trucks, clean equipment, whatever. I'm all good with an explorer program getting kids interested in the fire service, and getting them a jump start on their knowledge base. I'm not interested, and will not be a party to, minors on the fire ground though.

    Simple as that.
    "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

  23. #73
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,036

    Default

    in my state the drinking age is 21, not 20, not 20 and eleven months. Pretty good chance the judge wont think ,'well 20 is close enough"
    Chenzo likes this.
    ?

  24. #74
    Forum Member
    EastKyFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    3,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Originally Posted by LaFireEducator


    So a 17 1/2-year old is a child but at 18 he magically becomes an adult?
    Yes. Have sex with a 17 1/2-year-old and you'll find out all about that kind of magic.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    --General James Mattis, USMC


  25. #75
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,248

    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?
    Thereby reinforcing yet another stereotype we libs have about hayseeds like you in backward parts of the country.

    Were you and your wife related before you got married?
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register