Monday, 4 October 2010

What are people Thinking?


 Click here to read the original article 

A quote from the subject article; 
"Obion County, Tennessee. In this rural section of Tennessee, Gene Cranick’s home caught on fire. As the Cranicks fled their home, their neighbors alerted the county’s firefighters, who soon arrived at the scene. Yet when the firefighters arrived, they refused to put out the fire, saying that the family failed to pay the annual subscription fee to the fire department. Because the county’s fire services for rural residences is based on household subscription fees, the firefighters, fully equipped to help the Cranicks, stood by and watched as the home burned to the ground."






I may not agree with the execution of the counties policy, but I do agree with their reasoning.  How their program failed is that they should have put the fire out and then sent the home owner a bill;  12 man fire team at 30$ an hour, a minimum of 3 hours.  Truck rentals at 10,000$ each.  Finally a 25,000$ ticket for not having paid the yearly fee and having the audacity of still causing a fire.


You hear about similar issues all the time.  You see an apartment fire on the news where they interview these people who have lost everything.  I feel for them.  It sucks to lose all your worldly possessions.  Then they add that they didn't have any sort of insurance and complain that they will not be able to recover from this.



  YOU DON'T HAVE INSURANCE!!!


Then the news station asks for donations to help these poor people who did not have the foresight to have renters insurance.

For a measly 340$ a year you can have all your possessions replaced as well as have the security of knowing that if you screw up and flood the building or burn it down, you will not have to pay for the damages because your insurance will. 

I digress.  What the fire department did to the Cranick family by letting the house burn down because the guy didn't pay the 75$ is disgusting.  But this man who refused to pay the optional tax is no less innocent of this whole debacle.  Would you honestly opt out of any type of protection?  It isn't like the people who choose to not have the signal lights installed on their car.  It would be similar to not having the seat belt, air bags and reinforced frame installed in your new vehicle so you can save on the purchase price.  Sounds idiotic doesn't it.  Well it does to me.  So does not paying 75$ a year for fire protection.

I pay 30$ a month for my alarm system, which provides smoke detection and break in protection.  I am going to pay the extra 75$ a year so that I can sleep at night knowing that if in that time of need, a firefighter is going to save my family and possibly save my house.  It should be interesting seeing how Mr Cranick is going to explain to his insurance company why the house burnt to the ground instead of just having major smoke damage.  This guy screwed himself.  He saved 75$, but I am pretty sure it will end up costing him close to 200,000$ if not more.



01 09 10