Yet another reason to search...

[FFFRED]

NY TIMES

June 10, 2007
5 Are Rescued From a Fire at a Grocery in Queens
By CARA BUCKLEY

Firefighters rescued five workers trapped behind locked metal gates as a blaze swept through a Queens supermarket early yesterday, the authorities and witnesses said.

One of the workers told investigators that the gates had been locked from the inside, but that he had left the key in a coat he could not get to because of the advancing wall of flames.

After the blaze broke out, the workers, believed to be immigrants hired to do renovation work while the supermarket was closed at night, took turns banging on the metal gates and crying for help while the others sought refuge in the supermarket’s basement, until firefighters cut through the gates with chain saws and helped the gasping men out.

“We’re going to die, we’re going to die! There’s no air!” the men cried in Spanish, according to a neighbor, as thick inky smoke billowed out from the supermarket, Met Foods on 101st Avenue and 102nd Street in Ozone Park. “No breathe, no breathe,” another trapped worker cried, according to the neighbor, Brian Plunkett, 27.

Investigators sifting through the wreckage yesterday had yet to find the worker’s missing key. It appeared that the fire was ignited by a propane torch the workers were using to loosen glue holding down old floor tiles, a spokesman for the Fire Department said.

The supermarket’s owner, Joseph Doleh, will likely be issued a summons for improper use of the torch, the spokesman, Francis X. Gribbon said. But it did not appear that the owner would get a summons for the shuttered gates, Mr. Gribbon said, because the workers had locked themselves in.

“It’s not a good practice, but that doesn’t mean it’s illegal,” Mr. Gribbon said.

The fire was reported at 3:25 a.m., and firefighters who responded heard the trapped men banging on the corrugated metal gates, and then falling silent. After two firefighters sawed though one of the supermarket’s gates, they found the five men huddled in the basement, crying, with blackened shirts pressed over their faces.

“They were distressed, they didn’t have long to go,” said Bradley Walls, a chief with Battalion 51. “There was smoke pouring out of the place. Time was critical for them.”

The blaze was extinguished shortly before 5 a.m. after 60 firefighters responded. Three of the workers were taken to Jamaica Hospital Medical Center, and the other two were taken to Mary Immaculate Hospital. All were treated for smoke inhalation and minor injuries, according to the Fire Department. A dozen firefighters were also treated for smoke inhalation and bumps and bruises, a department spokesman said.

The contractor in charge of the renovation could not be reached for comment yesterday, and the workers’ identities were not disclosed.

Neighbors said they had been working inside the supermarket at nights for the last three weeks. When the workers were in there at nights, the supermarket’s metal gates were always rolled down, according to another neighbor, Stalin Sanchez, who said he complained repeatedly to the owner about the late-night noise.

Although the Fire Department said it appeared that the supermarket’s owner had not shut in the workers, a number of supermarkets in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx have been faulted over the last few years for locking workers in without keys.

Immigrant advocates and worker advocates say that supermarkets lock in workers at night to prevent theft; padlocking the doors and pulling down window gates make it far harder for outsiders to rob the store and for those working inside to steal.

Yesterday’s fire left a blackened wasteland inside the Met Foods store, which is normally bustling with shoppers. Charred heaps of burned food, scorched glass, melted cleaning supplies and upended shelving were strewn throughout the store. Fruits and vegetables were in blackened puddles. Onions, garlic cloves, and a can of red kidney beans lined the curb outside.

One neighbor, Samuel Ruiz, 17, said the stench of smoke jolted him awake. “It was crazy, I woke up, I couldn’t breathe, I was choking,” he said.

Mr. Plunkett heard the trapped men screaming and after going outside said the smoke was so thick that he couldn’t see his own hand in front of his face. He said he grabbed a sledgehammer and was about to try to break down the metal gates when the firefighters showed up.

Yesterday afternoon, the supermarket’s clerks loaded bags of salvaged groceries into the car belonging to the supermarket’s owner, Mr. Doleh.

“At least nobody got hurt, that’s the main thing,” Mr. Doleh said. “I don’t know what else to say. The contractor has the key they used to get in and out of the building.”

Steven Greenhouse and Daryl Khan contributed reporting.

FTM-PTB

[FFFRED]

NY TIMES
June 11, 2007
Market Owner Is Cited in Fire Where 5 Men Were Trapped
By THOMAS J. LUECK

The owner of a Queens supermarket was accused yesterday of violating city codes after a blaze on Friday night in which firefighters rescued five workers who had been locked inside the store and were found in the basement, huddled, crying and blackened by smoke.

A spokeswoman for District Attorney Richard A. Brown said the owner, Yunes Doleh, was issued a summons for having a locked exit, a misdemeanor that could result in a fine. Having a locked gate also violated the city building code, said Kate Lindquist, a spokeswoman for the Department of Buildings.

A construction contractor who supervised the five workers, Jose Correa, was charged on Saturday with reckless endangerment, a more serious misdemeanor under state law that could lead to a jail sentence.

The fire, which firefighters said appeared to have been started by a propane torch, erupted as the five workers, all believed to be immigrants, were renovating the supermarket, Met Foods at 101st Avenue and 102nd Street in Ozone Park.

They were working at night when the store was closed, and the authorities said Mr. Correa, who was not present, had the key they needed to open a security gate and escape.

None of the men were seriously injured, but the fire prompted criticism of a practice by a number of supermarkets in recent years of locking workers in at night so that outsiders do not enter and the workers do not steal merchandise.

“We would like to see a program of inspections, hefty fines and, where appropriate, criminal charges,” said Artemio Guerra, director of organizing for the Fifth Avenue Committee, an advocacy group that has documented many examples of the practice involving food store janitors and stocking clerks.

In 2004, the group offered fire officials a list of 36 supermarkets where it said workers were being locked in at night.

Francis X. Gribbon, a Fire Department spokesman, said yesterday that top officials of the department would review the Ozone Park situation today to determine “if there is any reason to inspect other locations.”

But he said previous inspections, including those of each supermarket on the list provided by Mr. Guerra’s group, had turned up little evidence of unlawful working conditions.

Mr. Gribbon said the episode on Friday night was the only one in recent years in which outside construction workers, as opposed to store employees, were found to be locked in at night.

Mr. Doleh said yesterday that Mr. Correa and his workers had been hired to repair the floor in the Met Foods store and had been at work for “a couple days.”

He said he had “no idea what they were doing,” adding that “I assumed everything was O.K.”

Mr. Doleh said he has held the franchise for the Ozone Park store for eight years but does not own the building. He said that his regular store employees had never been scheduled to work after hours and that there had been no problems in the past related to unsafe working conditions.

[TurdFergeson]

You shouldn't need a reason to search besides the fact that it's your job to do it. It amazes me that people find excuses not to search.

[HotTrotter]

I hope Jose Correa gets the same treatment that Alan Baird got.

On another note. Kudos to FDNY for doing a great job.

[MattyJ]

I'll add that this is not the first time this type of thing has happened. It actually happens every few years around here. Yes, people are routinly locked in stores overnight, for security,work, and even living space! I remember being taught to check for pins holding the gate, inserted from the inside if we cant lift the gate after removing the locks. You would need to insert the pike end of the Halligan to push the pins in, usually near the top. So much for the "hey, its a locked up Supermarket late at night....there's probably nobody inside" arguement.

[fyrmnk]

Yep, even here in the smaller areas, some (a larger neighboring department) try to take the B!tch way out and make excuses not to enter on a fire for search OR a firefight. They just burned down a whole apartment building starting in a bush on the same day we had a ripping two level involvement on an apartment starting on a deck (we went in and saved ours, what an idea, fighting fire!).

Sorry for a highjack there, they just sicken me. We should search EVERY fire (unless obvious from conditions). We should also put away our skirts and be firemen!

(OK, some aren't safe to fight, but that's the exception not the rule).

[len1582]

Saw it on the news. You're right Matt. It happens all over. Probably in some places where they couldn't even imagine something like that. It's not just in Chinatown anymore.

[MalahatTwo7]

Seems to me this has been going on for well over 100 years, locking folks in to "prevent theft". The Triangle Building fire from early 1900s (can't recall exact year) had numerous deaths because of this exact reason. AND that was during regular work hours. :(

Well done to FDNY though, for getting everyone out.

[hwoods]

I think we should acknowledge the Neighbor who was starting(?) on the gate when FDNY arrived. People who are willing to try something are a lot better (in my mind) than those who stand there yelling "it took you a month to get here".

[nmfire]

This happened at our local small-town supermarket last month in fact. There were two kids inside stripping the floors and he cut his hand pretty bad. The first arriving units and the police officer go to the door of the supermarket. The kids are at the door saying "The owner locked the door, we can't open the door to leave until the baker gets here at 4am."

For once there was a fire exit not blocked by a stack of boxes or a rack of pretzels so the other kid opened that up for us. (I then propped it open with a nearby bag of doritos. If it was blocked, we would have been doing a few thousand dollars worth of damage to get in.

[hwoods]

NY TIMES

Yesterday’s fire left a blackened wasteland inside the Met Foods store, which is normally bustling with shoppers. Charred heaps of burned food, scorched glass, melted cleaning supplies and upended shelving were strewn throughout the store. Fruits and vegetables were in blackened puddles. Onions, garlic cloves, and a can of red kidney beans lined the curb outside.


Yesterday afternoon, the supermarket’s clerks loaded bags of salvaged groceries into the car belonging to the supermarket’s owner, Mr. Doleh.

“At least nobody got hurt, that’s the main thing,” Mr. Doleh said. “I don’t know what else to say."

FTM-PTB


Well, for one thing, a dissertation on Greed would be appropriate. Where were the "Salvaged groceries" going??......... I sincerly doubt that the stuff was being transported over to the landfill in the owners car.

But, a word of explanation: Here, As soon as he/she gets down the checklist to it, The Incident Commander has the Health Department respond for any event in a Food Handling establishment, such as Stores, Restaurants, etc. NO food or drink may be touched by anyone, except FD Members who need to move stuff during overhaul, until the HD has inspected the scene. Store Stock routinely fills a lot of dumpsters as cleanup proceeds. There have been a few instances where a business owner has tried to move stuff to another venue and sell it, only to get caught and charged with a Crime. The HD condemns something here, it must be destroyed. On a few occasions HD inspectors have remained on scene to be sure all contaminated items were properly disposed of. I don't like "Monday Morning Quarterbacks", but I'll be one in order to state that, based on press reports, the severity of the Fire indicates the entire contents of the store should have been seized and destroyed.

[TurdFergeson]

Yep, even here in the smaller areas, some (a larger neighboring department) try to take the B!tch way out and make excuses not to enter on a fire for search OR a firefight. They just burned down a whole apartment building starting in a bush on the same day we had a ripping two level involvement on an apartment starting on a deck (we went in and saved ours, what an idea, fighting fire!).

Sorry for a highjack there, they just sicken me. We should search EVERY fire (unless obvious from conditions). We should also put away our skirts and be firemen!

(OK, some aren't safe to fight, but that's the exception not the rule).

Hey fyrmnk, an FD down the highway from my department did the same thing recently to an apartment complex. They were in the Kansas City Metro area. Where was your neighboring department from?

[TurdFergeson]

fyrmnk,

Never mind, I figured out where you're from. That department's display of "courage" was disgusting, yet comical at the same time.

[nyckftbl]

Just wanted to point out this happened yet again, in a bodega in the South Bronx. Sq 41 removed 2 unconscious victims from a fire at a closed bodega at around 430 am a few nights ago.

[jasper45]

Just wanted to point out this happened yet again, in a bodega in the South Bronx. Sq 41 removed 2 unconscious victims from a fire at a closed bodega at around 430 am a few nights ago.


Well yeah, but how many green lights did they blow thru to get there? Remember, I don't want to hear the old 'seconds count' cap, cuz we all know that they don't.:rolleyes:







Nice job 41. Two people will open their store today, because you did your job last night. Nice job.

[LaFireEducator]

Maybe if we had those kind of issues in our response area we would worry about them, but we don't.

How often do I hear from the "big city boys" how thier local situation dicates locally specific tactics. I guess that doesn't apply to us little guys, huh? I guess we're just not smart enough to figure these kinda things out.

[nyckftbl]

Maybe if we had those kind of issues in our response area we would worry about them, but we don't.

How often do I hear from the "big city boys" how thier local situation dicates locally specific tactics. I guess that doesn't apply to us little guys, huh? I guess we're just not smart enough to figure these kinda things out.

Considering local conditions is fine when it comes to certain tactics. Every building is different (contrary to trotters statement), and tactics should be changed to suit the needs. However, SEARCHING A BUILDING is not a tactic that should be up for consideration. It is a basic premise of firefighting, and our duty to conduct. The only times a search should not be conducted are for the very obvious reasons of advanced fire (of course that will probably open a whole different debate) or for deteriorating bullding conditions. Even then, if victims are known to be inside, one should be able to use thier own training and experience to atleast attempt a rescue.

Not having anyone outside screaming "my child is in there" is no excuse to not conduct an aggressive interior search.

[DocVBFDE14]

Not having anyone outside screaming "my child is in there" is no excuse to not conduct an aggressive interior search.


But it is hot and the fire is in there :rolleyes:

[edge1317]

Well yeah, but how many green lights did they blow thru to get there? Remember, I don't want to hear the old 'seconds count' cap, cuz we all know that they don't.

Well I hope they blowed through the green lights, I don't know how many people stop at a green;).

Sorry just had to give it to you, I know what you mean.

[FFFRED]

Maybe if we had those kind of issues in our response area we would worry about them, but we don't.

You don't have what probably are illegal alliens?

You don't have working poor?

You don't have convience stores? (thats essentially what a bodega is)

FTM-PTB

[jerry4184]

I was gonna go with:

You don't have buildings?

Or you don't have destructive fires?

[paets1]

Maybe if we had those kind of issues in our response area we would worry about them, but we don't.

How often do I hear from the "big city boys" how thier local situation dicates locally specific tactics. I guess that doesn't apply to us little guys, huh? I guess we're just not smart enough to figure these kinda things out.

I'm a little surprised to hear that there's an area of Louisiana that has no convenience stores located in it where a store owner might be spending the night to deter theft. You must reside in a very upscale area.

[MattyJ]

Maybe if we had those kind of issues in our response area we would worry about them, but we don't.

How often do I hear from the "big city boys" how thier local situation dicates locally specific tactics. I guess that doesn't apply to us little guys, huh? I guess we're just not smart enough to figure these kinda things out.

Yes....you are right...local "situation" or as I like to say,variables, such as equiptment,building construction and configuration,population density,crime rate,water supply,traffic,building density,weather, etc.....all have an effect on tactics.....but exactly what tactic are you referring to? The tactic of not searching a building for potential victims? I dont belive that is a tactic. Thats as basic to firefighting as putting the fire out.

Your quote at the top, I think is the real issue. "Big city boys", "little guys" and "not smart enough". You appear to have an issue with guys who work in the larger cities in this country. From what I've seen over the years on these boards...most "big city" guys like to share ideas on tactics because they belive in them, and have seen them work day in and day out......not to push around the "little guys"...as you imply. Get over your hate, or fear or inferiority complex,or whatever it is, you apparently have towards the "big city boys"

[magperez]

Hi, I am a reporter looking at cases like these where workers are being locked in over night. I'd be happy to talk to anyone about how often this occurs, whether you're in NY or not.

Please feel free to contact me at magdalene.perez@gmail.com or 212-239-7585. My paper is amNewYork at www.amny.com

Thanks,

Magdalene Perez
amNewYork

[LaFireEducator]

I'll try this one more time.

We do search and do interior attacks in buildings that are salvagable and are likely to have victims.

In our district, an abondoned vbuilding is not likely to have a victim. Haven't found a victim in an abondoned building, ever, according to the old timers. We simply do not have squatters and kids using them to getb high and get laid. We simply do not. We're not going to hang out our boys necks on the VERY unlikley possibility that there is a victim in a building where the structural integrity is questionable at best, because it just doesn't happen here. Local situation/local tactics.

We do not have a crime problem that requires conveince store owners to spend nights in thier stores. Chance of a victim in a closed convience store in our district - Basicall nil. We'll look if we decide to make an intrerior attack, but again, chances of a victim are VERY, VERY slight. Local situation/local tactics.

We do not have employees locked in a store overnight in our district. It DOES NOT happen. It's simple. A closed store or business w/out any vehicles out front means that it is empty. We'll look around while dragging the line to the fire and may have a dedicated search team if manpower permits because it's not a priority, because it doesn't happen here. Local situation/local tactics.

Most of the neighborhoods here if someone tells you that someone is away for the weekend, you can beleive it. Maybe it's not like that where you are but it is still that way most of the time here. Again. we'll search at some point but, once we have no reason to beleive the house is occupied, extingushement is the priority.

If there is a reason in any in any of the above cases to beleive that there could be a victim, search becomes the priority AFTER line or two has been deployed to contain and extingush the fire.

I hope that clears things up.

We have been very successful .. well I guess I'd call no fire deaths in 15 the last years sucessful. Maybe we know a bit more about OUR district than you do?

[Rescue101]

Clears it up for me.I've never seen a district like the one you describe.Here in our little town of 5000/15,000 we have had a fire related death about every five years.We search EVERY building on fire unless it is impossible to get in.Interior ops are the norm,unless the volume of fire or the building condition precludes it.EVERY building is occupied unless proven by the FD otherwise.We have, over the years, had many of our brothers and sisters in the area for R&R.Most spend some time with us before returning home and all have shared experiences which have both entertained the crew and given us insight on some issue we might not otherwise have had experience with.There is always a better mousetrap and I want it. Fred,Matty,Kevin,Artie,Gonz,an d my regular brothers from Boston along with Boss Stapleton have all made my job easier and more interesting.You can learn a LOT from the "city"boys but you have to be receptive to the notion: LEARNING. And once in awhile they'll take back an idea from us,something you might see in the country but not the city.All in all,we get more than we can give but I appreciate every moment spent with these guys.And we have fun doing it.The door's always open,T.C.

[LaFireEducator]

I have absolutly no p;roblem learning from anyone, including the "big city guys" when thier tactics can be effectivly used on our occupancies, with my apparatus and equipment, at our level of training and manpower. Many of my ideas about firefighting have been formed by watching and reading about city departments. I grew up in a city, and my first department was a busy surburban department, who employed many "city" tactics and had several "city boys" as officers and members. The problem is few of thier tactics can be employed here due to significant differences in manpower, training, occupancies, equipment, water supply and apparatus.

The problem lies in that I have folks telling me that I have workers locked in my (one) supermarket, owners locked in thier convience stores overnight ready to blow burglars away, crackheads and squatters in all my abandoned buildings and neighbors who don't give a damn about thier neighbors giving us all kinds of false information, when none of that is true.

I am more than happy to learn, but I do have a problem with folks hundreds and thousands of miles away telling me that the stragety we use everyday in our district doesn't work because it wouldn't work where they are. The point is it works here. We search aggressivly initially when we determine there is a need to search aggressivly, which here is not very often. We are not going to tie up our limited initial manpower searching when we know the store is empty or dad tells us everyone is out of the house. Maybe you have the manpower to do that, but we don't, and the use of mutual aid for assistance in intial attack is simply
not an option due to distance.

As I said, I beleive our last fire death was at least 15 years ago, if not more. I have only been here 5.

[snowball]

So you can say, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that at no time, anywhere in your district, you know for a fact that every abandoned or empty building is completely void of human life? :rolleyes:


[In our district, an abondoned vbuilding is not likely to have a victim. Haven't found a victim in an abondoned building, ever, according to the old timers. We simply do not have squatters and kids using them to getb high and get laid. We simply do not.]

[DocVBFDE14]

In our district, an abondoned vbuilding is not likely to have a victim. Haven't found a victim in an abondoned building, ever, according to the old timers. We simply do not have squatters and kids using them to getb high and get laid. We simply do not. We're not going to hang out our boys necks on the VERY unlikley possibility that there is a victim in a building where the structural integrity is questionable at best, because it just doesn't happen here. Local situation/local tactics.

I am more than happy to learn, but I do have a problem with folks hundreds and thousands of miles away telling me that the stragety we use everyday in our district doesn't work because it wouldn't work where they are.


First- If there is no one in the building, and you have no one doing the stated items, how did the building go on fire in the first place? Spontaneous combustion?

Second- Based on your second comment, I do hope you will stop with this "national standard" farce you so effort-fully pursue.

[LaFireEducator]

DOVFD ..

Please tell me what national standard I pursue. Training? Operations? Equipment? If you have been reading my posts you know that I do not beleive in a national standard for anything. Every department needs to train and equip itself to deal with they face in thier communties. Please post something that says I support any kind of a national standard for any of the above.

In response to your other question, in the 5 years I have been here we have had 4 fires in abondoned structures, or on average, less than 1 a year. 1 was started by lightening, 1 was started by a neighbor's burn out of control, 1 was started from the spread of a brush fire (decision was made not to put much effort into that exposure was we knew the structure was abondoned), and 1 was undetermined, or more than likely arson,as evidence was found to support that theory but nobody was ever charged.

Snowball ..

Nobody can ever say that a building, abandoned or not, is ever empty. Different officers and senior firefighters on our department each have a differing perspective. In my opinion, the VERY low liklehood as demonstrated over the (and here is a phrase some in this room love to use...) collective experiences of this department over the last 60 years, the risk to my firefighters outweigh the possibility that there is a victim in an abaondoned (not vacant, and there is a difference). A vacant building (which is a building that may be occupied at times, but is not expected to be now, such as closed store) is a different set of decision parameters. If the store or business is closed, and there are no cars outside, I can say, with a pretty high degree of certainity, that the building is not occupied, and therefor the risk-benefit analaysis says not to send my boys in if it's well envolved. Decisions that I make are very situational, and there is little "always" in my thinking. Other officers are more aggressive. I am not. Each officer will have thier own line in the sand as to when they do and don't send the boys in. My line is much more on the safety side of the beach than some of the others because of the way I look at risk-reward (or benefit, if you like). It is just so unlikley that for me, it simply isn't worth it.

On the topic of truck company work, personnel from the rescue, which is set up as a service truck with fans and saws for fire duty, or personnel from staging arriving POV are generally tasked truck work by command. Rescue may arrive driver only, and in that case personnel from staging would be tasked with truck work with the driver (ventilation and utilities here .. search not considered truck work by our department. Forcible entry is usually accomplished by engine crew.), or if it arrives with a full crew (which is rare as we tend to put the career and part-time staff plus any vollie ride-ots on the 5 seats in the engine first) the crew may be tasked with truck work. It does get assigned, but staffing dicates who gets the task.
Our tanker is also set up with a fan, saws and salvage covers as it is technically considered a service truck, not a tanker, by the Louisiana rating system.

I guess this could go on forever. The point is, you know your district and we knolw ours. The way we as a department, and myself as a member of that department operates is based on what we know about our district. I have never once said to anyone here "you should always ..." or "you should never" (though I have been tempted there) because I don't know about your response area. I would expect the same cortesy.

That is all.

[E40FDNYL35]

General Principles of Firefighting
Modern firefighting techniques are founded on principles that predate almost all of their active practitioners. One of the most basic principles is that the firefighter’s responsibility is to protect life and property. Whether paid or volunteer, there isn’t a firefighter in the free world who is forced to join this profession. All do so by their own free will. When they take the oath of office, they commit themselves to uphold this ideal. It becomes their sworn duty. A further duty of all firefighters is to gain knowledge to perform new tasks. They must try to learn the reasons behind many of the functions that they perform. It may be sufficient for beginning firefighters to learn the manual skills of their trade and to operate under close supervision, relying on others for direction. A time soon comes, however, when all firefighters are expected to act independently. The decisions that a firefighter makes will affect the outcome of a fire to a greater or lesser degree, whether that firefighter is initially assigned to an isolated position on the roof, to stand behind the nozzle, or to perform a role of leadership--the ultimate challenge. In some cases, lives hang in the balance--those of civilians, fellow firefighters, and their own. Firefighters who make decisions must be fully aware of the consequences of their actions. Outward actions must be based on sound information and must come out of a proper decision-making process. This process should be founded on sound understanding and an appreciation of a number of firefighting principles. Consider these principles to be rules that you may break only under the most unusual circumstances rather than mere guidelines to disregard as you see fit. Some of these concepts may seem repetitious. In fact, they contain slight variations that need little explanation to the veteran. For those less experienced, the slight change in the conditions as described may serve to cover those special cases you’ll encounter sooner or later. With this thought in mind, let’s take a look at the ins and outs of fighting fires in the present day setting. The most basic principle of firefighting is that human life takes precedence over all other concerns. This rule may sound obvious, yet at times it can be overlooked. (Not intentionally, of course!) Still, on occasion, certain actions taken during the course of extinguishment can endanger occupants. Other times, actions that are overlooked can have the same effect.

[ehs7554]

We'll look if we decide to make an intrerior attack, but again, chances of a victim are VERY, VERY slight. Local situation/local tactics.


Very slight = There is still a chance. You may want to reword that to "No chance ever" if that is what you feel.

I am more than happy to learn, but I do have a problem with folks hundreds and thousands of miles away telling me that the stragety we use everyday in our district doesn't work because it wouldn't work where they are

Not doing a search because you "Know" there is no one inside is not a strategy....It is, however, not doing an essential part of your job!

[PFDTruck18]

This guy becomes more and more absurd with every post. Could it be that his "line in the sand" is drawn so close to SAFE that he no longer is capable of performing his sworn duty?

[FFFRED]

In my opinion, the VERY low liklehood as demonstrated over the (and here is a phrase some in this room love to use...) collective experiences of this department over the last 60 years, the risk to my firefighters outweigh the possibility that there is a victim in an abaondoned (not vacant, and there is a difference). A vacant building (which is a building that may be occupied at times, but is not expected to be now, such as closed store) is a different set of decision parameters. If the store or business is closed, and there are no cars outside, I can say, with a pretty high degree of certainity, that the building is not occupied, and therefor the risk-benefit analaysis says not to send my boys in if it's well envolved. Decisions that I make are very situational, and there is little "always" in my thinking. Other officers are more aggressive. I am not. Each officer will have thier own line in the sand as to when they do and don't send the boys in. My line is much more on the safety side of the beach than some of the others because of the way I look at risk-reward (or benefit, if you like). It is just so unlikley that for me, it simply isn't worth it.


You dont' have illegal aliens sleeping in places where they don't belong?

The NY Times did a story on workers being locked in Wal-Marts in some Southern States...not to far from you.

It has little to do with guarding against "crack heads"...more on the line of some people have no where else to live...I know of some resturants that illegally have SROs for their employees...hard to catch them in the act but they have them.

In the small town FD I worked in we had a job in a Radiator shop at 3am....found bed and living materials in rear...turns out the guy spends many nights sleeping there after working late...good for him, he decided to go home that night. IT CAN HAPPEN ANYWHERE.

If a building can be searched it will be period.(or the portions that allow us to search) That is what we are sworn to do....you once again prove you serve no purpose on a fire engine other than to take up space and oxygen.

FTM-PTB

[LaFireEducator]

The most basic principle of firefighting is that human life takes precedence over all other concerns.

That includes the lives of us. You don't risk a lot if the benefit is low.

Outward actions must be based on sound information and must come out of a proper decision-making process.

Wow. I have provided the info, and yet some of you persist in trying to tell me about our local conditions. We don't have a Wal-Mart. We have a supermarket where the night staff isn't locked in. We do not have restraunts that employ illegals. Yes, we have illegals but they don't sleep in the abondoned buildings.

Once again. We attack the fire and search if there is a reasonable amount of risk. We will take a little more risk if we have a reason to beleive that there are occupants. If we do not beleive there are occupants and we have ANY question about fire conditions or structural integrity, we, and especially me, will not risk our men on the unlikley possibility that there is a victim if we have no reason to beleive there is one.

We have a physically large district, but there are a limited number of buildings. Between us and the sheriff's deparrtment, we have a pretty solid handle on our district. It's that simple.

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.

[Nine3Probie]

For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.

:eek: :eek: :eek: Duck and cover...duck and cover!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

[nyckftbl]

The most basic principle of firefighting is that human life takes precedence over all other concerns.

That includes the lives of us. You don't risk a lot if the benefit is low.

Outward actions must be based on sound information and must come out of a proper decision-making process.

Wow. I have provided the info, and yet some of you persist in trying to tell me about our local conditions. We don't have a Wal-Mart. We have a supermarket where the night staff isn't locked in. We do not have restraunts that employ illegals. Yes, we have illegals but they don't sleep in the abondoned buildings.

Once again. We attack the fire and search if there is a reasonable amount of risk. We will take a little more risk if we have a reason to beleive that there are occupants. If we do not beleive there are occupants and we have ANY question about fire conditions or structural integrity, we, and especially me, will not risk our men on the unlikley possibility that there is a victim if we have no reason to beleive there is one.

We have a physically large district, but there are a limited number of buildings. Between us and the sheriff's deparrtment, we have a pretty solid handle on our district. It's that simple.

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.


Im going to have to calm down a bit before writing a legitimate response to this puke spewing from your mouth. For now...all I can say is that what you just wrote is the most ridiculous bullsh*t post out of all of yours...which is saying a whole lot. You should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking that you can any longer teach any of us ANYTHING simply because you are a coward.

[nyckftbl]

You speak of having "our heads in the sand", yet you now acknowledge you dont even want to talk to a dept that has suffered LODDs. (Guess its that whole hatred you seem to have for the "big city" boys, as you refer to us as).

You actually fight to have different training standards for vollies and career firefighters, then you complain when we think you dont have much to teach us, and you now imply we should be learning from you.

So because you have been lucky enough to not have suffered a death, we should only listen to you, and not the other way around? Whose head was in the sand again?

[FFFRED]

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.

I'm sure if the if the US ARMY asked you where they could learn everything they ever wanted to know about waging war and avoiding battle field casualties...you'd suggest they only have to speak to the French!

Perhaps a coward like you could take a lesson from them and hire mercenary firemen like the French Foreign Legion who can do what you aren't willing to do for yourselves.

I hear the Hessian's come cheap nowadays! :rolleyes:

All anyone could learn from you is the quickest way to have department charges prefered against them for deriliction of duty.

FTM-PTB

[jasper45]

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.



You are a complete and total donkey to say something so STUPID!

How many saves has your department made in that same period of time. None? I'm learning something from you, alright. :rolleyes:

Once again you show you have no comprehension of this job, and certainly no business being involved in it.

[Bones42]

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us. Hi. We have 0 FF LODD's and no fire deaths since 1981. YOU should listen to ME and apologize for saying something so stupid. Your free to come here and learn as much as you want.

PS - you probably won't like what we will be teaching you though.

[FFFRED]

You are a complete and total donkey to say something so STUPID!

No need to get the Irish involved! :eek: :D

FTM-PTB

[jlcooke3]

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.
Don't worry I'm learning plenty from you. How NOT to run a fire dept. How to be a firefighter in name only. And most importantly how to make myself look like a complete and total idiot. Thanks for all the lessons, I can now avoid all the mistakes that you continue to make.

[LaFireEducator]

You speak of having "our heads in the sand", yet you now acknowledge you dont even want to talk to a dept that has suffered LODDs. (Guess its that whole hatred you seem to have for the "big city" boys, as you refer to us as).

Was a reference to civilian deaths, not LODDs, as we are discussing civilian rescue operations.

Hi. We have 0 FF LODD's and no fire deaths since 1981. YOU should listen to ME and apologize for saying something so stupid. Your free to come here and learn as much as you want.

PS - you probably won't like what we will be teaching you though.

I am always willing to listen to any ideas from any department and apply them to the department I am working for as long as they will fit into our situation and system. Reality is Bones, from what I know about that part of Jersey (which I have been to several times) and what you have posted, your situation in terms of occupancies, response times, water supply, mutual aid availability and manpower is significantly different than ours, and it's not very likely that much of your operation could be intergrated into ours.

How many saves has your department made in that same period of time. None? I'm learning something from you, alright.[/B]

In the 5 years I have been here, we have had 3 "saves" in 2 seperate incidents. I have no idea how many we have had in that 15 year period.

This has truly become pointless. I tried to simply explain that we do not face the type of rescue situations in our district that are faced by more urban areas, and because of that we do not need to take the risks that our more urban brothers do. If I was a firefighter a few miles away in Shreveport or even across the district line in Bossier City, some of these issues would be a concern. However, for us they simply are not, and probably for many years to come, if ever, will not be a problem in our district. People and situations in "the parish" are significantly different than in "the city" right next door. It is not like the northeast, where I grew up, where the line between city and surburbia is blurred. Here, you know when you are in the "city" and when you are in "the parish" and the two are very different in many, many ways. Most of our members have lived here all thier lives and know how the district works. I am sorry that some of you don't grasp it, but in the end, it's really not important.

I refuse to commit my personnel to a hazardous situation if there is little or no chance of occupancy, or the fire has taken possesion of the building to the point where it will be bulldozed the next morning. If being a coward means being smart with how you manage your risks, that's fine. I would rather lose a civilian or lose a building than lose a firefighter, especially a volunteer firefighter. This is especially true in marginal manpower or water supply situations which we deal with from time to time despite excellent planning and smart apparatus purchases by our chief and board. Unlike many of you, I will not push the edge of the envelope, for a number of reasons including a mixed bag of experience (caused by very low fire numbers, which is source of pride in the department), travel times and lack of available mutual aid.

As I've said before, I'll put our record on the line against any small combo department out there.

[FyredUp]

For anyone that hasn't had a fire death in the last 15 plus years, we can talk. For those of you who have, maybe you should be learning from us.



Up until now I didn't think it was possible for you to say anything more ridiculous than you already had...I was wrong.

The absolute arrogance and stupidity of the above statement by you goes far beyond anything you have said to this point. Do you have near the population and fire calls of say New York? Milwaukee? Boston? Chicago? St Paul? or my suburb of Milwaukee? We had a fire death last year and frankly I think you are a complete jagoff worthy of no more consideration at all after this latest escapade. Before I found you merely ridiculous but now I find you a disgrace and simply completely brainless.

I will add you to HotTrotter on the ignore list because I would rather see dead air than your nonsense.

Nice job insulting every fire department that suffered a fire death last year.

Good bye.

FyredUp

[E40FDNYL35]

My 2 cents...If you dont search on regular basis what happens when the sh!t hit the fan? (and it will one day)..... What will you do? It's going over and over stuff that keeps you safe.

[FyredUp]

My 2 cents...If you dont search on regular basis what happens when the sh!t hit the fan.(and it will)..... What will you do? It's going over and over stuff that keeps you safe.

Excellent post and I could not agree more.

FyredUp

[nyckftbl]

My 2 cents...If you dont search on regular basis what happens when the sh!t hit the fan? (and it will one day)..... What will you do? It's going over and over stuff that keeps you safe.

See, knew you old farts were good for something other than telling me when we lost our job description! :eek: :D

[LaFireEducator]

That's right. We're all slackers and have absolutly no idea how to do our job. Maybe I should read the NY Times like FFred to find out about our local situation.

Maybe I'll read the NY Post or the paper in Milwaukee tommarrow and then come online and tell you guys about your local conditions.

I'm done.

[RspctFrmCalgary]

What about the guy that had a fight with his wife and decided to go to his place of business at 11pm and do some work? He was so upset he chose to blow off some steam by walking instead of driving his car. hmmmmmm

What about the lady who can't sleep and decides to go into the office to do some paperwork? hmmmmm

I'm from a small town of 5000. Presumably everyone on the fire department knows that my parents take off from October to April. And they frequently go away for short trips when they are home. But even though most of the firefighters know me, they sure don't know if I've come home for a visit! They sure don't know if my 16 year old niece got pissed off at her parents and took my sister's key and hid out at Granny and Grandpa's (that hasn't happened that I know of, just throwing a "SIMPLY DOESN'T HAPPEN" scenario out there). Or maybe my 14 year old niece got sent over to granny and grandpa's to water the plants after school because my sister was too busy. Or the 16 year old was sent over to granny and grandpa's while they're away to borrow a casserole dish etc. etc. etc.

The neighbors might or might not know if I'm there, but when I go home it's usually on the 1am bus, so if my parents are away, that first night the chances of anyone in town knowing that I'm there, other than my sister, is next to nil.

I hope to hell my hometown fire department doesn't think the same way LA does! :mad: :eek: :(

[DetroitFF]

I'm done.

If only that would happen.

[DonSmithnotTMD]

I hear the Hessian's come cheap nowadays! :rolleyes:
FTM-PTB

:: perk:: Cheap hessians - I was stationed across the river from Wiesbaden once. I love cheap Hessians!!!

Sorry, got distracted.

My department in GA probably hasn't had a fire death in at least 15 years. They've also probably had less than 30 structure fires in that time. Even the two or three annual brush fires seem to be more of a hazard to responders than anyone else. I guess it all depends on where you stand.