Lip Sky

Published on January 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 28 | Comments: 0 | Views: 199
of 8
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content


he did not
Second,


l LoLally agree Lo an explanaLlon of !eff vowellţ SouLh lulLon's clLy manager explalned laLerţ ºWe
have Lo follow Lhe rules and Lhe ordlnances seL forLh Lo usţ and LhaL's exacLly whaL we dldŦ"
1

While I agree the man should have paid the Iee, I do not bear anyone stand outside to Cranick
lost his house.
Without the payment oI Iees there are no IireIighters and no Iire trucks. People do make
mistakes, but Irom what I read the Iire department or another government department would try
to contact people that had not paid Iees multiple times through diIIerent channels to explain the
beneIits and risks when deciding whether or not to pay the Iee. You can only try so hard to help
people, but at some point they are going to do what they are going to do.
Every Iire department in the country, would like to have more money Ior equipment, training,
and labor. That is unbelievably reasonable.





Fischer argues that because the homeowner Iailed to pay a $75 IireIighting Iee, the Iire
department did the right thing in letting the property burn. Right thing is to argue that personal
choices should trump the obligations oI a civil society
A Christian worldview rewards responsibility and stresses individual responsibility and
accountability, which in the end makes everybody more saIe and more prosperous.
In this case, critics oI the Iire department are conIused both about right and wrong and about
Christianity. individual responsibility and accountability
No taxes, no services, no liIe.
I think a lot oI people do not realize that in smaller communities residents have to subscribe
to the local volunteer Iire department to subsidize their existence. I have lived in such
communities and the modicum Iee is a Iorm oI insurance. Now, how many oI you do not have an
insurance policy on your homes and your cars?
They guy rolled the dice and his tornado magnet (mobile home) went the way oI that torpedo
in the song by War; 'up in smoke.¨ Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. He lost. LiIe can
bite you when you make bad decisions.
I`m not sure Jesus would have let the dude`s home burn, but so Iar as I know, Jesus did not
run a Iire department in Smallville.

We should look out oI the box to solve this crisis management scenario: reIuse to put out the
Iire (accountability) or attempt to put out the Iire (ethics). Some people conclude that street-level
bureaucrats would not help anyone, unless there had paid some money.

1

While I agree the man should have paid the Iee, I do not bear anyone stand outside to Cranick
lost his house. Send the homeowner the Iull amount oI the bill when the job is complete and iI
he/she doesn't pay on time, put a lien on the property. Even iI the darn thing burnt to the ground
when you were trying to put out the Iire, the land still has value! Am I missing something here?
Because this seems like such a common everyday solution Ior other contractors that don't get
paid Ior work done on your property.

Did Beck mention the Iact that when Cranick called 911, he oIIered to pay whatever it took
to put out the Iire? That means the IireIighters could have charged him the Iull cost oI the call,
plus his $75 Iee, and they could have charged additional Iees iI they wanted. The reason they
didn't put out the Iire is not because oI the Iee itselI, but because they were *Iorbidden* Irom
Iighting any Iire where no human liIe is in danger iI the owner oI the burning property hasn't
paid the Iee. This short-sighted policy tied the hands oI the IireIighters and cost the man his
house and pets. They should have stipulated that iI the owner agrees to pay Ior the call, the
IireIighters can Iight the Iire. I haven't looked at what Beck said, but some people are trying to
spin this as Cranick simply not paying his Iee because he wanted to keep the money and then
expecting the IireIighters to put our his Iire Ior Iree, which is not what happened at all. This kind
oI distortion is typical oI media sensationalists and oI people who have agendas they think are
more important than truth.
People are willing to pay all costs when something they value is at risk. The man didn't value
the saIety oI the IireIighters beIore the Iire started. He didn't value the homes oI other people
beIore the Iire started. His actions and inactions were incredibly selIish. He valued his $75 more
than all oI his possessions, the lives oI IireIighters, the lives oI other Iire victims, and the
possessions oI every other person in the county.
He also had paid the $75 every previous year. I know that you never make a mistake and
have never paid any bill late or Iorgotten anything. However, that still is no excuse Ior what they
did as THEY STOOD BY AND WATCHED. They could have easily sprayed water on the
building WITHOUT ENTERING and at NO RISK, but they just didn't want to. It was the FIRE
CHEIF (who happens to be a Iireman) that ordered them not to.
Once again, when something people value is at risk there is almost no limit people will go to
to protect and save those things they value. A person willing to pay all costs to save something
they cherish only when it matters to them is selIish. A person willing to pay a nominal Iee to
properly equip and train IireIighters to protect that which you cherish, that which your neighbor
cherishes, and that which your neighbor's neighbor cherishes is acting in the best interest oI
society as well as his or her own interests. In this situation, they could only have easily sprayed
water on the building iI people paid their Iees. Without the payment oI Iees there are no
IireIighters and no Iire trucks. People do make mistakes, but Irom what I read the Iire department
or another government department would try to contact people that had not paid Iees multiple
times through diIIerent channels to explain the beneIits and risks when deciding whether or not
to pay the Iee. You can only try so hard to help people, but at some point they are going to do
what they are going to do.
Every Iire department in the country, would like to have more money Ior equipment, training,
and labor. That is unbelievably reasonable. The problems you see with this system rings oI
paranoia.
While I disagree with the Iactors that Iorced the IireIighters to reIuse to put out his Iire,
letting his house burn was NOT a penalty Ior non-payment oI the Iee. Running a Iire station
costs money. II you aren't willing to help pay Ior it, why should the IireIighters help you? II you
Iorget to pay your insurance premiums and your insurance company reIuses to provide you with
coverage, are they being cruel and heartless? No, because they'd quickly go bankrupt iI they paid
out settlements to people who don't pay their premiums. II the Iire Iighting service depends on
those Iees Ior its existence, they can't put out Iires Ior people who don't pay their Iees, because
then no one would pay their Iees, the Iire department would run out oI money, the IireIighting
equipment would eventually break down, and the whole Irigging county would burn down. In
this particular situation, however, he did say he would pay whatever they asked to put out the
Iire, so ideally they would have put it out and charged him a Iair price Ior the call and the service
Iee. However, they were Iorbidden to by their superiors because policy or law, I'm not yet clear
on this) Iorbids them Irom Iighting any Iire Ior which the property owner hasn't paid his Iee
unless a human liIe is in danger. I believe that IireIighting Iees should be included in property
taxes. FireIighting is one oI the Iew services that should not be privatized, because so many other
people are or can be aIIected by a Iire, including ones who pay their Iees. Un-Iought Iires can get
out oI hand and spread even with IireIighters standing by to try to stop the spread. This situation
should never have to occur. Though I believe privatization is good Ior many things, IireIighting
services is not one oI them.
The Iiremen know what their limits are - iI they are allowed to Iunction - ok? Is'nt it better Ior
them to be on every scene, iI only to prevent a homeowner or child Irom running in to save their
home, pet or photo oI their dead mother?
It is apparently clear that these people don't value the Iire department as much as they should
so spending money when money is not Iorthcoming as it should be seems a waste.
I did cover the Iact that he oIIered to pay whatever they asked. And you're wrong, the
IireIighters did NOT decide to kill innocent animals. Such an accusation is reprehensible. The
IireIighters didn't put out his Iire because they were not allowed to--it wasn't their choice, they
were ordered not to Iight the Iire by their bosses. The choice was made long beIore by some
short-sighted bureaucrat or policy-setter who apparently never envisioned the possibility oI this
happening.
They were ordered by the FIRE CHEIF who is a Iireman to stand around and watch. They
could have helped. They could have done so AT NO RISK by simply spraying water Irom the
outside. I know this is not as eIIective as entering the structure, but it seems that most oI the
people here seem to think that saving the lives oI innocent animals is wrong. That is, unless you
pay $75 - then the Iiremen's lives have no value (or at least $75 worth).
For the good oI the community everyone must pay Ior services rendered such as sewage,
garbage, etc. Some are already included in your taxes. It cost money Ior Iire dept to provide
services and that's why there's a minimum Iee. $75.00 is not too much to ask Irom a homeowner
and they could aIIord but chose not to. II you can aIIord to own a house $75.00 a year is worth
everything Ior those rare service. Besides, every homeowner paid except this one. Fire dept have
to Iollow county policy and iI blames are to be made, it's to the government.
I agree whizzjeI. From what I read, the reason Ior the $75 subscription Iee being introduced
was because in the 90's in that county a woman's house caught on Iire and there was no Iire
department to help. The county's residents continued to vote against a tax to Iund a Iire
department oI any sort that could help prevent that situation Irom happening again. The $75 Iee
paid to the city was a compromise. The voters that shut down the tax are to blame. What I Iind
atrocious is that this guy did not want to pay $75 to make sure the people (IireIighters) that might
risk their liIe Ior his one day could aIIord proper equipment and training, the kinds oI things that
could save their own lives when they put it in danger to save Cranick's liIe or another. Finally,
those people claiming the county's Iire department wouldn't save a person caught in a Iire are
terribly and grossly uninIormed. These same people should read beyond the headlines because
there is always more to the story. Imparting this advice makes me Ieel like a parent telling a kid
to eat his or her vegetables. You can read a headline and Iorm an opinion, but Iorming an opinion
and having an inIormed opinion are 2 diIIerent things. The mandate by which those IireIighters
operated makes it clear that they would save a liIe in danger, but these same IireIighters would
not put their own liIe in danger to simply save a person's possessions.
Then the homeowner says he knows oI others who paid aIter the Iact. II he can prove that,
then one good lawyer and he's got a hell oI a law suit! Now there may be a better way oI seeing
the Iee is collected, such as authorizing the bill be added to your taxes. But the other problem
here is that this was a city Iire department responding to a nearby house that had paid Ior
protection services. Go live in any county without a Iire department and call the nearby city Iire
department when your house in the county burns. They will not leave the city unless the
homeowners and/or the county have entered into agreement with them.
I understand what, not paying your bills can do. But the Iact still lies open, they are cold
hearted pieces oI s#$°!!!! Apparently you did not read the story. The man has paid every single
year, and this year it slipped his mind. I don't know how true this is, but Ior one minute lets
assume it is, he has been a honest payer, and one time he Iorgets, and the "government" says
screw you. How would you Ieel iI this was you, oh wait, I'm sure you pay all your bills on time,
even when you receive them late. Every one makes mistakes, that is what makes us human, and
we do have to pay Ior those mistakes, but to lose ever single thing you own, history, and pets,
well thats just a little to much to have to pay Ior a mistake. I'm sure you would not have cared to
lose any oI it, or your pets, I'm sure you would have said, its ok, i didn't pay, its all my Iault, let it
burn. That would make you just as heartless. But it is people like you in the world , that makes
the rest oI us bow our heads in silence, and tears and pray
I should have know you were a yankee, you seem to think everything that comes out oI your
mouth is right, and everyone else is wrong. LOL, well let me just say this only once, a leech,
well thats someone who does not pay, who wants society to do everythng Ior them. How can i be
a leech, when i pay all my bills, (we do not have Iees here) or they would all be paid, and you
know what, iI a Iamily member ,or a good Iriend, or neighbor, needed help paying one oI their
bills or Iee's iI we had them, then yes, i would be the Iirst one in line to help them out. Thats
what people in the south do, we help each other, now as Ior the north, apparently just in your
little comment, you make it clear how you people are, you would rather let then burn and die iI
they didnt pay, i sure hope, thats not all yankees, that would be a shame!!
Lipsky`s original and 30th anniversary edition Street level bureaucrats: public services orkers
who interact directly with citizens I the course oI their jobs, and who have substantial discretion
in the executive oI their work.
Street-level bureaucrats include oIIicers, IireIighters, and others who "walk the streets" with
regular citizens, and
Lipsky seems to be in Iavor or neither oI these solutions and instead suggests that restoring
the importance in human interaction in those processes that require discretionary action on a part
oI a Street Level Bureaucrats
Bob Hudson examines Lipsky`s street level bureaucrats and concludes that in the way oI
policy, Street Level Bureaucrats end up making policy because oI the strategies that are Iorced
upon them based on the circumstances oI their working environment. He stresses Lipsky`s title
in saying that it is not just the power that Street Level Bureaucrats hold but also the dilemma that
they Iace in their jobs. The power says Hudson, is in the Iorm oI discretion that Street Level
Bureaucrats hold in making decisions about other people. This is an intrinsic Iact oI agencies that
deal out state resources
Hudson gives examples oI the discretions oI Street Level Bureaucrats. These include the
Policemen deciding who to arrest and whose behavior to overlook
because it is relatively easy Ior workers to tailor their behavior to avoid.
program had dramatic consequences Ior street-level bureaucrats` discretion and
coping behaviors.
In spite oI a set oI required instruments/actions, the act leIt municipalities with a substantial
discretion in how to implement it, implying that considerable variation in practices can be
expected
among the 275 municipalities
By Iar most local governments have in-house staII, typically in the social
welIare department and its employment-training unit, whereas only a Iew contract-out these
services. In each municipality the municipal council and its social welIare subcommittee have
the
main responsibility Ior the implementation, but most Iunctions are delegated to the staII,
which also
has substantial discretion in implementing the act.
Although the national agro-environmental regulations are relatively detailed, local
governments
have wide discretion as regards enIorcement oI these regulations.
Given the wide discretion oI municipalities in enIorcing national environmental
regulation and substantial variations in both the economic importance oI agriculture and local
pollution problems Irom agriculture, we are likely to Iind substantial diIIerences in local
enIorcement practices and in the local political preIerences Ior the regulation and its
enIorcement.
For agro-environmental policy municipalities have more
local discretion in choosing relevant instruments.
This suggests that there is a high unexplained variation in coping due to a high
degree oI variation in street-level bureaucrats` discretion
Street-level bureaucrats
Ieel an enormous workload and experience a gulI between demand and resources. In this
situation
they use their wide discretion to apply various coping mechanisms, which decrease clients`
demand
Ior services, ration services, routinize work by classiIying clients in rough standard categories
and
using rules oI thumb Ior processing these categories, including creaming clients. Other
mechanisms
applied are controlling clients, modiIying policy objectives, and developing cynical
perceptions oI
clients. These coping mechanisms tend to distort the implementation oI social policies.
In emergency circumstances,
Bureaucracies shape government`s behavior and perIormance
'Anybody that`s not inside the city limits oI South Fulton, it`s a service we oIIer. Either they
accept it or they don`t,¨ South Fulton Mayor David Croker said.
2


In this case, Cranick decided to not pay the Iire Iee, he should bear responsibility Ior his
decision. We should not blame IireIighters Ior their decisions. However, I think IireIighters
should have saved Cranick` house.
Would find the right balance that ensures good results and strong accountability and
private organization the balance leans toward the goals.
Expansion of discretion

They also balance the upholding rules as well as structures oI authority and the implementing
their works. I know case, the IireIighters did their job that.
B
Utilitarian, Individualism, Moral rights.

They There are three approach theories to explain these activities, such as the
lscreLlon musL be conLrolledţ howeverţ and Lhus a second challenge aroseť ensurlng adequaLe
leglslaLlveţ [udlclalţ and publlc overslghL of publlc managemenLŦ

At that time, I use my discretionary job-Iunctions to make decision in crisis management
because oI the.



, depending on ethical dilemma.

This story makes neither ethical nor logical sense.
Implementation routines eIIectively are policy
Challenges Ior leadership are discretion and accountability.

2
'No Pay, No Spray: FireIighters let home burn¨ (October 6, 2010), http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/
us¸news-liIe/t/no-pay-no-spray-IireIighters-let-home-burn/#.TrCplJdwri4
The only way to get the money to pay Ior Iire service would be to raise the county tax, but
people who live in the towns and cities would vote it down because they wouldn`t want to pay
the tax too (and they pay Ior Iire service through their sales taxes). The only option is this Iee-
based model Ior many areas. You need to stop thinking about this as a 'the government Iailed to
protect this man¨ because there is no government` here to protect anyone. You need to think oI
it as 'the community decided to establish and pay Ior a Iire department out oI their own pocket,
but some decided not to participate¨.
hould not even call themselves Iiremen, they are a disgrace to the proIession.
The chieI is bound to enIorce this decision and the IireIighters are bound to Iollow orders.
Just like in the military, sometimes we have to execute orders we don`t agree with. II they ignore
orders they can be disciplined or worse may not be covered oiI they get hurt!
But the military requires soldiers to disobey illegal orders, and a IireIighter in this position
has a diIIicult but important obligation to reIuse to participate in an inhuman and cruel act.
Presumably the IireIighter would deIy authority ordering him to let a Iamily die in such a Iire.
This is less dire, but dire enough. A IireIighter shouldn`t work Ior an organization that would
mandate inhuman conductand letting the house burn is inhuman, whether it is contractually
justiIied or not. I see no diIIerence between this and emergency room personnel letting a patient
bleed to death on the Iloor because their insurance isn`t paid up.
Ok iI it did get out oI control and catch his house unintentionally that`s Iine. But iI you live in
an area with water bills and you don`t pay it, it gets cut oII. Same with electricity and gas. So
why is it that this guy, who knows he has to pay a Iee, gets to skate by? Is anyone going to
deIend him Ior intentionally not paying those bills, and want the electric company to Ieel bad Ior
him?

As I analyzed above, IireIighters have discretion to let the Cranick`s house burn to ground
because he decided not to prepay the Iire Iee.
Most oI the time a tax is levied Ior Iunding oI public saIety services.



because they have no means to help her.



Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close