Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Funny how the story now changes.... Tennessee fire

It's odd how a story can change.....  On October 3,  Mr. Cranick said that he figured that the fire department would put out his fire regardless if he'd paid his fee or not.  Yesterday, he said he just forgot to pay his fee, like that excuse should be a magic panacea and erase the fact that he still DIDN'T PAY.

I am sorry that his stupidity cost the lives of their pets.

Of course, stepping up for personal responsibility is bad/horrendous/inhuman/indecent and this guy's house burning down is the Tea Party's fault.  No I don't know how, but the MSM is trying its level best to put the blame where it DOESN'T belong.

But c'mon people, if you don't pay your mortage or for your car, your house and your car will be taken away from you.  If you don't pay your insurance, even if you paid the year before, you are no longer covered and they will not pay for any damages when you get sideswiped by some bint who's in a hurry to get around that corner.  It's the same thing, just a different degree. Sasha Brown-Worsham over at The Stir says it better than I can.....

2 comments:

Linoge said...

We live in similarly "rural" Tennessee - even though we are part of a geographically-defined "city", we still have to pay for our own fire department coverage, and if we do not, if the fire department responds, you are going to be out megabucks when they put out your house.

Our department will actually put out your fire if you have not paid them, though... and drop off their bill as they roll away (my understanding is that even unfurling a hose puts you into the five digit range, right off the bat). However, we crunched the numbers, and realized that an absurdly-low three-digit yearly "subscription" beats the everloving pants off their response fee, and we pay it.

'Course, our home insurance had something to say about the matter, too...

I am of two minds about the department not actually putting out the fire and charging the hell out of the "customer", as opposed to breaking out the weenies... but if he did not pay, he did not pay, and has no claim to their services.

Midwest Chick said...

I think their argument was that the legal fees, etc. trying to recoup the money for services rendered from someone who wouldn't even cough up $75 were just not worth it. AND their system has been in place for 20 years so it's not like it was a surprise or anything. I think the fire department was right. It was a tough lesson though.