1. #176
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Your all bitchin and moaning "HE DESERVES RECOGNITION"
    "HES NOT A FIREFIGHTER HE DOESNT BELONG ON THE WALL"

    The fact in all honesty is the article stated he wasnt responding to a call for his department, so he wasnt even line of duty if he WAS a firefighter. He was just another person killed in a MVA.

    Does no one here realize he is being recognized plenty by all of you? A name on a wall doenst mean recognition.... I can go read graffiti of someones name, doesnt mean anything to me.

    If the wall said Chris's entire story thats another thing, but just because his name is on the wall it doenst do anything. Noone but the people who know of chris will care if his name is there, and all the people who know of chris are right here on this board.

    My point is that he is getting all the recognition he needs right here on this board by all of you. Putting his name on a wall wont prove anything or make his story more recognized.

  2. #177
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Mistake On The Lake
    Posts
    470

    Default

    I have to agree, that he was just another unfortunate pedestrian struck. If I'm out of town, or even in town, and go whack an out of district call, and get tboned on the way there, no one here is gonna fight to say I was a LODD. So why are we doing that for Chris. He wasn't even going to his own call, and he couldn't respond on calls anyway. How can you justify him chasing a siren that wasn't even his, when he can't respond to the alarm anyway, a LODD?

  3. #178
    Forum Member
    FDAIC485's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeast aka Dixie
    Posts
    653

    Default

    I think this has been said several times before. However, if we continue to make exceptions respect for the fire service will continue to drop. So what's next? Commercials peddling vehicle insurance with the theme "It so easy even a firefighter can do it."

    Everybody rags on FD-based EMS. However, is not there are standard of you must be at least 18 years of age before you can take the EMT certification test. I guess that is the closest thing that we may ever get to who can or who cannot act in a certain capacity.

    I believe he should not be considered a firefighter.
    I believe them bones are me. Some say we are born into the grave. I feel so alone, gonna end up a big ol' pile a them bones

    -J. Cantrell

  4. #179
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    If we allow young members to perfom duties on the fireground then they are indeed firefighters. The minute you become a member of the department you are in fact a firefighter. Some departments require no training at all prior to joining. If he isn't considered a firefighter then neither is the guy who does nothing but fire police. Remove the age descrimination here. It's very basic, did he or could he help out on the fireground? If he helped out on the fireground then he is a firefighter, no matter what his age. FYI, I was 3184.

  5. #180
    Forum Member
    ThNozzleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Jefferson City, TN
    Posts
    4,334

    Default

    If we allow young members to perfom duties on the fireground then they are indeed firefighters.
    No, they're children being somewhere they shouldn't be because of fools like you. Period.

  6. #181
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Mistake On The Lake
    Posts
    470

    Default

    NO, HE COULDN'T! His own chief has said as much. He wasn't allowed to respond to a scene. He was limited to washing the trucks after they came back from calls, and hanging out on drill nights. He doesn't even fit the definition of firefighter most people that are FOR putting his name on the wall are giving.

    It's as simple as this. If you feel comfortable calling a 14 year old a firefighter, that's your business. If you furthermore, feel that a 14 year old, who pretty much just washes trucks, and equipment, at the firehouse only, a firefighter, that's your business too. Don't feel bad though, when I happen to disagree, and think all the time I put into training, and still put into my training, as well as actually responding on calls, puts me in a different class than a 14 year old kid, who wasn't even allowed to go to a scene, much less perform any firefighting functions outside of washing my facepiece after a house fire.

  7. #182
    MembersZone Subscriber
    dday05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,331

    Default

    It's very basic, did he or could he help out on the fireground? If he helped out on the fireground then he is a firefighter, no matter what his age.

    So if I tell a bystander to move hose for us would that person be considered a firefighter? From reading most of this I feel we all need to come up with something across the board that states if you're not under 18yoa then come back when you're of age. This debate will go on and on forever. I see both sides but we can't keep killing kids. They need to finish shool as that should be a number 1 priority.

  8. #183
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    16

    Default

    You are right on dday05..I feel that the term ''firefighter'' is thrown around a bit to loosely..

  9. #184
    Forum Member
    FDAIC485's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeast aka Dixie
    Posts
    653

    Default

    Loosely is not the proper description. It appears as though people want to delute it down to were a boy scout patch will qualify someone as a firefighter. Boy, that makes me happy!!!!

    Yeah! I'm going to get viscious right here but I have to. Do you honestly think that this child name needs to be up on the same wall next to likes of a Ray Downey. I'm sorry, if you even need to think about it put the turnout gear down and go home!
    Last edited by FDAIC485; 04-23-2007 at 02:40 PM.
    I believe them bones are me. Some say we are born into the grave. I feel so alone, gonna end up a big ol' pile a them bones

    -J. Cantrell

  10. #185
    Forum Member
    HeavyRescueTech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDAIC485 View Post
    However, is not there are standard of you must be at least 18 years of age before you can take the EMT certification test.
    No. NJ allows you to test for EMT at age 16. and I don't think NYS requires you to be 18 to complete FF1
    If my basic HazMat training has taught me nothing else, it's that if you see a glowing green monkey running away from something, follow that monkey!

    FF/EMT/DBP

  11. #186
    55 Years & Still Rolling
    hwoods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Glenn Dale Md, Heart of the P.G. County Fire Belt....
    Posts
    10,739

    Thumbs down Well..............

    I've tried to stay out of the mud, but in so many other threads, everyone is so quick to jump up with the magic phrase "Whatever works for us" and folks say "sure, whatever you're comfortable with" EXCEPT HERE. Do I have a problem with a 14 year old doing an interior attack? In 2007, Absolutely. Did I have a problem being the 14 year old on a line myself, back in 1957? Nope. Times Change. But, to each his own....... My problem with this whole mess is that a Court of Law just made a determination of what a Firefighter is, and in my not-so-humble opinion, that determination is wayyyyy too narrow. Unless this ruling is overturned on appeal, or Congress changes the law to force the issue, There will be a drop in LODDs. ON PAPER ONLY. Decreasing the number of LODDs by changing the rules is a slap in the face to all of us. For instance, every year, a few LODDs are those who are struck while directing Traffic at Emergency scenes (Fire Police) They are no longer considered "Firefighters" by the Court. Same for EMS people who are members of a VFD, but only do EMS work.
    Never use Force! Get a Bigger Hammer.
    In memory of
    Chief Earle W. Woods, 1912 - 1997
    Asst. Chief John R. Woods Sr. 1937 - 2006

    IACOJ Budget Analyst

    I Refuse to be a Spectator. If I come to the Game, I'm Playing.

    www.gdvfd18.com

  12. #187
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    492

    Default

    hwoods, I agree with your thinking on this also. I think it is setting a dangerous president (sp) for all FF's. It does not take much for a politician to grab ahold of an issue to try and save money. What I mean is an LODD occurs while not doing an interior attack, are some (Politicians) going to jump on a band wagon and say that the FF was not doing the job described by the courts and not want to pay and try to get the bill changed. I could see some of them trying to turn this bill around if the defination of Firefighter gets changed in some of their febal (sp) minds.

    I know the courts said Chris could not go in and is why he was denied. But watch out for the politicians.

    BTW - I agree with the courts on this suit...nuf' said.

    T.J.

  13. #188
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,678

    Default

    I take it as the courts are not saying the denial is not because he was not inside fighting the fire. I take it as the court is saying he was not trained and able to be inside fighting a fire.

    And I have no problem with an EMS person not being considered a Fallen Firefighter.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  14. #189
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    492

    Default

    That is correct Bones.

    T.J.

  15. #190
    Forum Member
    FDAIC485's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeast aka Dixie
    Posts
    653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    I take it as the courts are not saying the denial is not because he was not inside fighting the fire. I take it as the court is saying he was not trained and able to be inside fighting a fire.

    And I have no problem with an EMS person not being considered a Fallen Firefighter.
    I agree!

    To be a firefighter you must be able to do just that, fight fires. Junior firefighters and EMS-only members/employees are part of a fire department but do not fight fires. (I'm not Anti-EMS. I am also a Paramedic. Something fun to do between fires. )
    I believe them bones are me. Some say we are born into the grave. I feel so alone, gonna end up a big ol' pile a them bones

    -J. Cantrell

  16. #191
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDAIC485 View Post
    I agree!

    To be a firefighter you must be able to do just that, fight fires. Junior firefighters and EMS-only members/employees are part of a fire department but do not fight fires. (I'm not Anti-EMS. I am also a Paramedic. Something fun to do between fires. )
    So let me ask this. We have members who only run water shuttles, set up the water source, run the water shuttle, direct traffic, etc. Are these people fighting the fire or not. The only people actually fighting the fires are the ones who put the wet stuff on the hot stuff. Just because one doesn't go inside does that mean they are not a fire fighter?

  17. #192
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThNozzleman View Post
    No, they're children being somewhere they shouldn't be because of fools like you. Period.
    I guess that is the diofference between you and me, I treat everyone equally. Doesn't matter what their age, sex, religion, or race. Novel concept

  18. #193
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    So let me ask this. We have members who only run water shuttles, set up the water source, run the water shuttle, direct traffic, etc. Are these people fighting the fire or not. The only people actually fighting the fires are the ones who put the wet stuff on the hot stuff. Just because one doesn't go inside does that mean they are not a fire fighter?
    Are they trained and able to do fire attack? In your little 5% hydranted area, do they attack the fire? If ALL they do is direct traffic, then No, they are not FF's but are members of a fire department. There is a difference.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  19. #194
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    I guess that is the diofference between you and me, I treat everyone equally. Doesn't matter what their age, sex, religion, or race. Novel concept
    If you treat a 14 year old the same as a 21 year old, you are a naive man.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  20. #195
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Are they trained and able to do fire attack? In your little 5% hydranted area, do they attack the fire? If ALL they do is direct traffic, then No, they are not FF's but are members of a fire department. There is a difference.
    But what about the guys running the water shuttle? Or how about the chief, who by definition does no fire fighting, his job is to manage and direct. Stay in the little circle know as the command post and work from there. After all, the fire police people are usually old guys who have the training but are just not willing to go interior anymore.

  21. #196
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    If you treat a 14 year old the same as a 21 year old, you are a naive man.
    Ahhh, there was a day when you became 8 your started doing chores, and by 10 you were in the field doing real work. My opinion, we spend to much time babying our young adults.

  22. #197
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Mistake On The Lake
    Posts
    470

    Default

    And at the same time, there are too many people willing to call a 14 year old, a mature adult. You are supposed to treat children as children. Pretending they are adults, and fully capable of doing everything someone in their 20's, 30's or 40's can do, is just wrong. Sure, there can be a mature 14 year old, but at the end of the day, he's still 14 years old, and needs to be treated accordingly.

  23. #198
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jerry4184 View Post
    And at the same time, there are too many people willing to call a 14 year old, a mature adult. You are supposed to treat children as children. Pretending they are adults, and fully capable of doing everything someone in their 20's, 30's or 40's can do, is just wrong. Sure, there can be a mature 14 year old, but at the end of the day, he's still 14 years old, and needs to be treated accordingly.
    And the 60 year old looks back at the young 30 year old kid and says the same thing. Treat them like adults and they will act like adults.

  24. #199
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Mistake On The Lake
    Posts
    470

    Default

    You can't simply treat everyone as adults. Especially those, that *gasp* aren't adults. So 14 year olds should be able to vote now, and carry concealed weapons, and join the military, and do all the other things we reserve for adults.

    There is a reason we wait for someone to be 18 to vote, or 21 to drink and own a pistol (at least here). It's because it's been shown again and again, that the majority of people before this age, simply can not grasp the long term implications of the choices they make, and can not seem to choose responsibly. Does this mean there aren't mature 14 year olds, no. But I'm not about to give a 14 a badge and a gun, and tell him to enforce the law, when everyone else his age, is beating the crap out of someone for liking a different TV show than they do.

    Chris could have been the most mature, responsible, greatest kid in the world. However, per his own chief's initial remarks, he wasn't a firefighter. He was a 14 year old kid. Yeah, let's all remember him, and regret the loss of someone who one day could have been the greatest firefighter of all. But, since when did we start putting people's names on memorial because of what they could have turned out to be, and not what they did/were.

  25. #200
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ChiefReason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Illinois-where pertnear is close enough!
    Posts
    5,636

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    I guess that is the diofference between you and me, I treat everyone equally. Doesn't matter what their age, sex, religion, or race. Novel concept
    If you treat children the same as adults, then you could find yourself in a whole lot of trouble.
    Especially where the OPPOSITE SEX is involved.
    Think about THAT!
    CR
    Visit www.iacoj.com
    Remember Bradley Golden (9/25/01)
    RIP HOF Robert J. Compton(ENG6511)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Chris Kangas Update
    By Diane E in forum Fire Explorer & Jr. Firefighting
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 05:59 PM
  2. Solider Killed Not in Afghanistan but in Hawaii
    By plhansen84 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-14-2007, 11:03 PM
  3. DOJ Appealing Chris Kangas Decision
    By 91068fd in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 01-24-2007, 09:43 AM
  4. Chris Kangas Update
    By Diane E in forum Pennsylvania
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2006, 03:03 PM
  5. Request fo Assistance (Chris Kangas)
    By BrookhavenFD in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-07-2004, 02:13 AM

Posting Permissions

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register