Police shoot man with stun gun to stop him from saving step son in burning house

[Ernie S.]

Why did the firemen take their jobs if they were unwilling to try to save a 3 year old?

They didn't sign up to commit suicide. My son is a firefighter and I was back many years ago. It's a dangerous job and is sucks to lose anyone, especially a kid in a fire, but a dead fireman today is of no use to anyone tomorrow.

 

[Katzndogz]

If you really cared about all this freedom, you would certainly be working very hard to end all liability against municipal agencies, and the officers individually, for those people who wish to act foolishly. Then men could dash into burning buildings in full freedom knowing that there was no recourse whatsoever for permitting such insanity.

 

[Katzndogz]

Why did the firemen take their jobs if they were unwilling to try to save a 3 year old?

They didn't sign up to commit suicide. My son is a firefighter and I was back many years ago. It's a dangerous job and is sucks to lose anyone, especially a kid in a fire, but a dead fireman today is of no use to anyone tomorrow.

This is the Hollywood World! If a fireman can rush into flames in the movies, they can certainly do it for the housefire down the street. This is the result of the blurring between fantasy and reality. It looks so real, it could happen. Therefore it should happen. There is no doubt that the poor man in his pajamas thought that he could dash in and heroically stride out with the babe in arms, only having his hair artfully singed. What would happen is that the man would be screaming as he was burned alive and everyone would be wondering why the fire department didn't run in and save HIM.

 

[Esmeralda]

Why did the firemen take their jobs if they were unwilling to try to save a 3 year old?

They didn't sign up to commit suicide. My son is a firefighter and I was back many years ago. It's a dangerous job and is sucks to lose anyone, especially a kid in a fire, but a dead fireman today is of no use to anyone tomorrow.

Exactly.

 

[novasteve]

So if they weren't duty bound to Dave the child why stop the father if they wouldn't be duty bound to save him in the same building?

 

[Esmeralda]

So if they weren't duty bound to Dave the child why stop the father if they wouldn't be duty bound to save him in the same building?

Are you dense? If they went in to try to save the child, both the fire fighter and the child would die. Same thing if the father went in, both he and the child would die. There was no chance of surviving going back into that fire. The child most likely would have already perished. The fire fighters could prevent the father from dying; they could not prevent the child from dying. They did their job.

The point about fire alarms is very significant. Everyone should have good smoke detectors in working condition throughout the house and maybe something like this would not have happened. I just had the management of my building in checking my smoke detectors the other day. It is something that needs to be done regularly.

 

[novasteve]

Imagine if they taxed the mother, the reaction by statists would be different

 

[Jarlaxle]

True. But knowing your infant child burned to death is the stuff of nightmares.

The kindest thing they could have done was let him go and let him die.

Killing kids is kind?
Twisted!!
Fire rarely kills.
It's usually smoke that is the cause of death.

Please do not reply to anything I have posted until at least 48 hours after your last bong hit.

 

[BobPlumb]

Is that their fucking choice to make? So you can have an abortion, but you can't save your child?

When the fire dept is called, yes it is their fucking choice to make. That prevents the family from suing and crying "Why did you let him go in there?".

Look, a trained fire fighter in full gear was unable to get in because of the heat. You think the stepdad, dressed in pajamas, would have made it in and back out?

it's possible.........., miracles do happen, i believe GOD would have protected him, BUT ..........., who knows ????????

Then God should had made the step dad power on inside of the house in spite of the electric shock .

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why did the firemen take their jobs if they were unwilling to try to save a 3 year old?

They didn't sign up to commit suicide. My son is a firefighter and I was back many years ago. It's a dangerous job and is sucks to lose anyone, especially a kid in a fire, but a dead fireman today is of no use to anyone tomorrow.

Actually, it's NOT an especially dangerous job. Offhand, I am more likely to die on the job than a fireman.

 

[Katzndogz]

So if they weren't duty bound to Dave the child why stop the father if they wouldn't be duty bound to save him in the same building?

The child was already in the building. The authorities had an affirmative duty to keep anyone from entering the building after it was engulfed in flames. It is nonsense to think that the police or fire department would be prohibited from preventing someone from entering the building and at the same time be obligated to run in and save them once they were in the building.

The law is designed, as much as possible, to help people not be foolish. This necessarily results in a certain loss of freedom. There is no right to walk across the freeway for instance. There is no right to enter burning buildings, there is no right to pretend you are spiderman and climb along the outside of sky scrapers. Most people do not act foolishly and never notice the loss of these "freedoms".

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pauli007001 wrote that "Jake stated that I had a selfish or self centered world view."

Yup, Pauli is willing to put his own selfish needs in front of the safety of others. If Pauli ran into the building, the fire fighters would have to follow him in.

Pauli, my buddy, you are not the center of the world.

 

[Katzndogz]

The cop had the legal authority since it was the cop's job to secure the scene and make sure no one got hurt. It wouldn't bother me if people were allowed to be really stupid and get themselves killed, but the surviving family members have a habit of suing the police, fire department and city for allowing people to be really stupid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pauli rails on with "Fire fighters are not obliged to enter a burning building. I am constitutionally allowed to go into my own home."

Fire fighters are required to protect you, which you have no right to waive.

No, you are not constitutionally entitled to endanger others and yourself, in or out of your home.

You are not the center of the world.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Killing kids is kind?
Twisted!!
Fire rarely kills.
It's usually smoke that is the cause of death.

Please do not reply to anything I have posted until at least 48 hours after your last bong hit.

I don't use drugs.
I am allergic to THC.
You are wrong, I am right.
The father in question did the right thing.
The pig is a power crazed sadist.
If he ordered you to suck his dick, would you?

Please do not reply to anything I have posted unless and until you are back in the psych ward and back on your medication!

PS--If you think I defend cops, you are dumb as a rock, haven't read my posts, or both!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Are you STONED or are you STUPID? There are no other possibilities. The sheer IDIOCY of ranting like that at someone who has (repeatedly) referred to the police as "the most dangerous street gang in the country" is just stunning.

Either you are ON some heavy drugs you should not be, or you are OFF some heavy drugs you SHOULD be on!

 

[Jarlaxle]

No, you're lying...again and still.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I keep seeing the cop end up like Fanucci

 

[JakeStarkey]

Many of us are moderates or further to the right.

Pauli007001 is simply an anarchist, with no consideration for anyone else but himself.

 

[BobPlumb]

The "pig" did not kill the kid; the fire did.