Las Vegas Casino Fire – “Las Vegas Is Burning”

[HFDCLanger]

Last week, a forum user posted a thread regarding the May 29th fire that destroyed the Moulin Rouge casino in Las Vegas (see http://cms.firehouse.com/content/art...2&sectionId=45 ). In this thread, the poster called into question the integrity or possibly even the existence of Nevada State and City of Las Vegas sprinkler retrofit codes (as quoted from another user’s post) and/or the effectiveness of automatic fire sprinklers. The thread has since been deleted seemingly due to its purely malicious intent.

This is an example of where a working knowledge of history and an awareness of national events can provide tremendous insight. As the article stated, the Moulin Rouge was the first integrated casino in Las Vegas. The term ‘integrated’ here does not mean an integrated hotel/casino or something of that sort. Integrated, as opposed to segregated, refers to “racially integrated.” The Moulin Rouge first opened in 1955, but despite a tremendous success, closed its doors six months later. This was some 25+ years before the Nevada sprinkler retrofit code was placed into effect.

As the article stated, the casino had been under renovation for the past several years, due to an interest in re-opening it in its original glory. What it failed to mention, however, was that it had been vacant for nearly half a century prior to the incident. As communication with fire officials confirms, had the casino been re-opened today, a full sprinkler retrofit would have been required.

Perhaps sometimes it is best to keep an open mind and allow history to provide us with the insight and perspective we need to truly perform our jobs to the best of our abilities.

[PAVolunteer]

Re: Las Vegas Casino Fire – “Las Vegas Is Burning”

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
In this thread, the poster called into question the integrity or possibly even the existence of Nevada State and City of Las Vegas sprinkler retrofit codes (as quoted from another user’s post) and/or the effectiveness of automatic fire sprinklers. The thread has since been deleted seemingly due to its purely malicious intent.

The purpose of that thread had nothing to do with the integrity or existence of Nevada State and City of Las Vegas sprinkler retrofit codes. There was no malicious intentions towards any official agency in the State of Nevada.

The one, single, only, solitary purpose of the thread was to "bust" on a former forum member (whom we all love dearly) who, in a past thread, had stated that "all high-occupancy buildings in Las Vegas are sprinklered" (that may not be the exact quote, but it's close enough to get the idea).

Perhaps sometimes it is best to keep an open mind and allow history to provide us with the insight and perspective we need to truly perform our jobs to the best of our abilities.

... same goes for the forums.

Stay Safe

[HFDCLanger]

PA Volunteer:

We all know what your intention for the thread was.

Although you weren’t directly questioning Nevada or Las Vegas codes, you questioned them indirectly through your comments directed at the alleged poster you quoted. You were either implying (to the poster you refer to):

1. “You don’t know what you’re talking about – there are no such codes in Las Vegas” (existence), which I showed wasn’t true.

2. “Yeah, they have all those great codes, but they obviously don’t follow through with them” (integrity), which I proved wasn’t true.

3. “Nice all the buildings are sprinklered, but look at what can still happen” (effectiveness), which I also proved wasn’t true.

4. Another invalid, indirect crack at the codes (let me know and I’ll prove yet again that it’s a lie).

5. A combination of the above; or

6. None of your implied claims were valid, you knew that completely at the time of the post, and the post was purely for humor. A type of humor the webteam has explicitly said they will not tolerate – even in a post they made immediately following yours – probably the reason they deleted the thread within days.

Would you like to explain?

[PAVolunteer]

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
We all know what your intention for the thread was.

Great, then why the inquisition?

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
Although you weren’t directly questioning Nevada or Las Vegas codes, you questioned them indirectly through your comments directed at the alleged poster you quoted. You were either implying (to the poster you refer to):

I questioned absolutely nothing about Las Vegas. Read into it what you like.

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
1. “You don’t know what you’re talking about – there are no such codes in Las Vegas” (existence), which I showed wasn’t true.

Where exactly did I post this?

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
2. “Yeah, they have all those great codes, but they obviously don’t follow through with them” (integrity), which I proved wasn’t true.

Where exactly did I post this?

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
3. “Nice all the buildings are sprinklered, but look at what can still happen” (effectiveness), which I also proved wasn’t true.

Where exactly did I post this?

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
4. Another invalid, indirect crack at the codes (let me know and I’ll prove yet again that it’s a lie).

No cracks against codes or Las Vegas ... only against one individual. Can something be a "lie" if it doesn't exist?

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
6. None of your implied claims were valid, you knew that completely at the time of the post,

First of all, there were no "implied claims." Hence, it didn't matter if the non-existent claims were valid or not. Do you work for the psychic network?

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
and the post was purely for humor.

No crap. Pure humor ... no claims (implied or not).

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
A type of humor the webteam has explicitly said they will not tolerate – even in a post they made immediately following yours – probably the reason they deleted the thread within days.

Thanks, dad.

Originally posted by HFDCLanger
Would you like to explain?

I would love to. Simple explanation ... IT WAS A JOKE. RELAX.

Stay Safe

[sconfire]

Isnt it amazing how the "original intent" of this thread still rears it's ugly head even though the "original intent" is not even performing.

read into it...

[HFDCLanger]

I see. Nothing to do with codes, nothing to do with Nevada or Vegas. Only against an individual. I must be quite slow here. Could you explain, then, why you posted a link to an article regarding a fire in an un-SPRINKLERED (former) casino in LAS VEGAS and tied it to a quote regarding LAS VEGAS and NEVADA SPRINKLER CODES?

What was the point? If you wanted to bash a poster, why not just do it outright. Don't you think it implied something about sprinklers in the city of Las Vegas? Wasn't the thread titled "Las Vegas is Burning"? Wasn't there a quote about sprinkler codes in the city. Didn't you say something to the effect of "How, then, did this happen?"?

Please explain (as I asked you before), if this has nothing to do with sprinklers, sprinkler codes, or the City of Las Vegas, why you mentioned them. Humor? You said that already. Can you tell us how it is tied to the humor?

What were you trying to prove by making the post? I'm all ears. Please tell.

Isnt it amazing how the "original intent" of this thread still rears it's ugly head even though the "original intent" is not even performing.

Are you implying something here?

[CALFFBOU]

Some info...

I am not quite following all of the info. regarding
this topic. Having a friend in the prevention section
of LVFD and what I know about them, they are top notch.

Here is an official link regarding the topic-

http://www.ci.las-vegas.nv.us/fire-rescue/108_6443.htm

[SPFDRum]

HDFCLanger, you are arguing 2 completely different points.
If there was ANY malicious intent toward LVFD and/or it's sprinkler codes, it was completely unintentional.
The post was a tongue-in-cheek, also known as a farce, or at a stretch, comical, response to some outrageous posts by former forum member.

If you wanted to bash a poster, why not just do it outright.

The intention of the thread wasn't to bash the poster, but the statements they made. I don't know if you where active back when the original postings took place, I was, and I remember it. What it boils down to, is a view of the big picture.

[hwoods]

Who???????????

Larry?

[DeputyChiefGonzo]

BINGO!

[HFDCLanger]

So, let’s see: Not bashing NV or Las Vegas codes, not bashing sprinklers, not bashing the poster, and he couldn’t have been bashing the statements made by the poster, unless of course, he was saying that they weren’t true, which is bashing the sprinkler codes, since they do, in fact exist. So what was he bashing?

The fact of the matter is that Las Vegas experienced 92 fire deaths and countless hundreds of injuries between the MGM and the Hilton fires in 1980 and 1981, respectively. Rather than sitting back and hoping it wouldn’t happen again, as happens in almost every other case, the fire officials decided to do something about it. They understood that sprinklers were the most effective and guaranteed method to save lives, and in a very short time, an unprecedented sprinkler retrofit code was put into place.

The casino was closed after only six months of operation 25 years before all of this. It has been vacant and not used as high occupancy building since. It was in the process of being sprinklered during its recent renovation AS REQUIRED BY RETROFIT CODE.

What is so funny about this? Every firefighter should fully support and advocate sprinkler retrofit codes, now more than ever. Wasn’t it only months ago that 100 people died in an un-sprinklered nightclub in RI? Why hadn’t they adopted the same kind of code Nevada put into effect over 20 years ago. Any firefighter posting information that could even be interpreted as a bashing of sprinklers is doing so in some name other than that of public safety.

PA, are you envious of these codes? You are posting from a state that has no code anyhwere close to the ones you mention, and has some of the worst civilian and firefighter death rates, injury rates and property loss rates in the nation, especially compared to Nevada.

The only way to achieve favorable statistics is to implement the proper codes and enforce them. The individual you “make humor of” was at the forefront of this, working to implement the Nevada codes that give the state such good statistics.

I started this thread for two reasons:

1. To call PA’s bluff, which I have already accomplished in my posts. I refuse to discuss this any further. Whether you want to admit to it or not doesn’t matter to me.

2. To provide some informative content, particularly for those who were misinformed by the implied meanings of the original thread, whether he admits to there being implied meanings in it not (the entire thread seemed solely of implied meaning to me – you still haven’t explained otherwise). I am happy to discuss this second intention with anybody who is curious or would like to understand the truth.


Firefighters, do you really understand our nation’s fire problem? What are you doing to help it? Are you making your decisions based on the statements of those only desiring some groundless humor? Or are you diligently researching what has worked for forward-thinking fire departments and fire officials, and implementing no-nonsense fire codes that have been proven to save countless lives?

The choice is yours.

[blancety]

1) HFDCLanger.....For two days you have had your answer, and for 2 days you have ignored it.

2) "Back in the day" the was an ISO God that posted here. Aside from continuely ripping the crap outta people for no apparent reason, he also made some really outrageous statements at times.

3) Had you been here and experienced the "thrill", you too may have sought a time to share a little "tidbit" that went against one of these "statements".

4) Since you won't accept this as the reason for that thread, I am wasting my breath.

5) I for one appreaciate the information you brought to this issue. Have nothing against automatic sprinklers, and look forward to the day when they are required in residences. But none of that has anything to do with the original thread...other than the word sprinkler is used in both.

Are you making your decisions based on the statements of those only desiring some groundless humor?

The only decision I make based on humor is whether or not to laugh.

Peace, Out.....

[Just a new name]

rumor has it he has been spotted in the north east. Did someone say his name three times?

[PAVolunteer]

I see. Nothing to do with codes, nothing to do with Nevada or Vegas. Only against an individual. I must be quite slow here. Could you explain, then, why you posted a link to an article regarding a fire in an un-SPRINKLERED (former) casino in LAS VEGAS and tied it to a quote regarding LAS VEGAS and NEVADA SPRINKLER CODES?

The link was to a photostory so everyone could see the pictures.

What was the point?

To bust on an individual (which is why the thread was deleted and why I was admonished and I promised the Webteam that I would not do it again).

If you wanted to bash a poster, why not just do it outright.

I did.

Don't you think it implied something about sprinklers in the city of Las Vegas? Wasn't the thread titled "Las Vegas is Burning"?

No ... and neither does anyone else.

Wasn't there a quote about sprinkler codes in the city. Didn't you say something to the effect of "How, then, did this happen?"?

Yes, I did say that ... to bust on a former forum member (see above as to the various "whys" of that action).

Please explain (as I asked you before), if this has nothing to do with sprinklers, sprinkler codes, or the City of Las Vegas, why you mentioned them. Humor? You said that already. Can you tell us how it is tied to the humor?

I did not mention them. I merely posted a quote from someone else.

What were you trying to prove by making the post? I'm all ears. Please tell.

I was proving that it is possible to bust on a former forum member by showing something could happen that this former member said could not happen. Good grief ... IT WAS A JOKE.

To call PA’s bluff

What bluff? IT WAS A JOKE.

If there was ANY malicious intent toward LVFD and/or it's sprinkler codes, it was completely unintentional.
The post was a tongue-in-cheek, also known as a farce, or at a stretch, comical, response to some outrageous posts by former forum member.

The intention of the thread wasn't to bash the poster, but the statements they made. I don't know if you where active back when the original postings took place, I was, and I remember it. What it boils down to, is a view of the big picture.

Everyone else can see this, why can't you?
Fire damage and fire deaths are not funny. Busting on someone else is (which I am extremely sorry for and will not do again on these forums).

So what was he bashing?

Am I on candid camera?

Stay Safe

[PAVolunteer]

To sum up this whole thing ...

I couldn't care less about codes in Las Vegas. If they have them, great. I'm sure they do a tremendous job.

Pennsylvania is way behind the times in its state sponsored support of fire protection, prevention, and the fire service. I have made reference to this on numerous occasions in numerous threads.

The single, solitary, sole, only purpose of the removed thread was to bust on someone who has made more than a few enemies on these forums. That's it.

I have answered all of your questions (most of which were irrelevant because they had nothing to do with the original thread). If you choose to not understand the simplicity of the answers and the original thread, I have no control over that. If you want to get yourself worked up over things that were not said, referenced or implied, I can not control that either. Everyone else seems to get it, why can't you?

Stay Safe