"If all fire departments are short handed why doesnt the government produce funds to pay more and keep firefighters?"

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on November 13, 2009 at 12:24pm

I have issues with the answers stating fire is a "local problem". I think those who answer in this way miss the big picture. Surely we could blame local government to an extent. If any positions should be volunteer, it should be our elected officials. They claim to be so concerned with local issues, so serve for free, with no benefits. I guess nobody would run huh?

It is NOT a local problem. That doesn't equate to the view on law enforcement does it? Crime is considered a National problem, and we all know how disproportionate the funding is for law enforcement compared to the fire service.

It's a disgrace that the Fed Government cannot help bail-out our distressed cities and assist in funding the emergency services. That is governments priority, right? Safety and well being of our citizens? We spend billions to aid Country's that are in need from tsunamis and other natural disasters, yet cities such as Detroit are still burning down, and stations close, companies are out of service...and we continue to provide aid for other Nations. And for that matter, the same goes for our mega-wealthy entertainers who make their fortune from this Nation's worshipping fans, only to have them invest millions in some remote area of Africa...or whatever.

But that's rambling, I realize that. Considering most of our Nations fire protection is provided by free labor (volunteers), I would say the fire service IS a bragain already. Yet the volunteers STILL have to work bingo and sell pancakes just to exists to provide home-town protection. Something wrong here, huh? Ever see the Police operate a coin drop?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on November 13, 2009 at 1:10pm

In 2008, fire departments responded to 403,000 home fires in the United States, which claimed the lives of 2,755 people (not including firefighters) and injured another 13,560, not including firefighters (Karter 2009).
(http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Fire-Prevention/fires-...)

In the US in 2008 there were (to show just a few):
89,000 rapes
16,272 murders
834,885 aggravated assaults
(http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm)

I'm pretty sure the cops are not making up their need for manpower and hiring. And criminals do have a tendency to travel, from one town to the next, or to the next state, or across country, so perhaps there is a need for more federal funding.

Given the relatively low risk of fire and easy remedies to reduce or eliminate fire, many people overlook the risk of fire when weighed against the risk of crime. People prefer to play the percentage and where fire is concerned the percentages are in their favor.

No fire department should have to have 'coin drops' (whatever that is) or any other fund raiser, they should be fully supported by their community. So if a community is served by a volunteer department they should be paying the tab for all equipment, apparatus, station(s), training and anything else the department needs to function as a professional fire department.

If the community can't or won't support their VFD then the department needs to re-consider their mission statement, consolidate or regionalize. Some funding should be available through the county or state and Federal grants already are available. The problem with grant money is typically it doesn't show up unannounced, it has to be applied for.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on November 14, 2009 at 2:09pm

Sorry Jack, I disagree with you. First off, a "coin drop" is when volly members stand in high traffic areas, usually at intersections, and either hold a bucket, or a boot to fill for donations. You see, donations are really nothing more than asking the taxpayer to shell out more from their pockets, except that it is somewhat disguised. You need to ask these local politicians where DOES the local tax money go? I have seen communities in which the residents have to take their own trash to the dump, have very little public works services, if any at all, no library,depend on County roads and grounds, and yet the local fire companies, who provide free labor, must earn every bit they need to operate by holding various functions of which the members time and effort is the only way they can afford to provide the service to the community.
And there's nothing wrong here? Where DOES the local taxpayers money go?

As for making up crime and statistics, well I could argue that point just as well. It's simple. Crime rate goes up, need more cops on the streets to bring it back down. Crime rate goes down...better maintain that current staffing or else it will go back up, and even add more to keep it down, or lower it even more. How about funding from DUI/DWI fines? There are many different ways these funds are pumped back into law enforcement. Yet let's look at the costs involved in providing fire, extrication, and EMS at a motor vehicle collision that involves DUI/DWI. Far more resources, and expensive ones at that, are required to provide for patient/victim care and extrication, then are required of traffic control (to provide those crews to pefrom safely) and the subsequent investigation. Again, where DOES the funding go?

Before you label me some anti-law enforcement whacker, I can assure you nothing could be further from the truth, yet I don't need to go into it any further to defend my stance. I think we all understand that much of the criminal problem would be solved by Judges who did their job.

Now, where exactly do you come up with "relatively low risk of fire"? Discuss this with the Brothers and Sisters from Detroit, for example, the very group who is losing companies and staffing all the time, and tell them how low the risk is in many of our inner cities. I suggest you'll find it just may parallel crime, to a degree, and don't forget the fire-service based EMS problems that are draining resources as well.

Well we can make stats work either way, right. I will also argue it takes far more resources to work a working fire job than it does the vast majority of LE situations. I would think much of the financial needs of LE could be reduced with the formation of local volunteer police agencies...Constable's, or whatever to provide service in smaller communities, to augment the on-duty force, and handle various issues of a non-iolent threat.

Of course this kind of discussion angers most LE Officers to no end.

The bottom line IS that there is NOT anywhere's near the amount of federal funding for the fire service, and it is NOT a local problem, and if the federal government cannot help our distressed cities maintain a safe level of protection, thats pretty pathetic.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on November 14, 2009 at 2:15pm

Jeff, I would say it comes down to the simple mindset of the taxpayer when it comes to fire and law enforcement.

If the neighbor's house burns, rarely does the next person really think about their own homes. Rarely would they ensure smoke alarms are working, do a fire drill with the family, look at a sprinkler system etc.
yet
When the neighbor's house is robbed, then they want the police presence known, they look for security locks or systems for their homes etc.

Pretty much why you see law enforcement getting the funding over the fire service.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by lutan1 on November 14, 2009 at 2:22pm

As a taxpayer, I and many others would suggest that I get more bang for my dollar with Police than i do a Fire Department.

It may only be a mindset, but I see Police patrolling, doing stuff. I see an FD with the doors down, the truck sitting in the bay.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ralph L. Carr IV on November 14, 2009 at 2:23pm

Government doesn`t "produce" funding.

All the government does is tax and spend. I understand your point, but in today`s world, we are almost taxed to death. We need to cut BS spending "pet projects" and "entitlememnts" and get on with the real business of governing. Safe roads, safe BORDERS, staffing emergency services, safe EFFICIENT schools, the list goes on and on. The BS entitlement craze and the "get mine" attitude from people thinking they are screwing "the man" to get SSI, medicaid ect, school loans (then never attend, just take the money and sign up for 1 class) has got to stop.

Just my 2 cents....

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on November 14, 2009 at 2:52pm

The government doesn't "have" any money, either. It's "our" money. Whatever the government gives away doesn't magically appear, it is taken out of our pockets.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on November 16, 2009 at 7:33pm

Perhaps YOUR local fire department remains behind closed doors. Are you part of it? By the very nature of the service, OF COURSE police are "out on patrol". But there are proactive fire departments that are so community oriented you would be surprised at what can be accomplished, and just how effective a fire department, with solid leadership and forward thinking, can be.

I guess the problem is really in how your local department operates. A fire department that provides quality prevention, inspections, EMS, and various levels of technical rescue abilities such as water rescue, high angle rescue, extrication, collapse/trench rescue, haz mat, and other services such as community programs providing services for the elderly, CPR instruction, and after-fire services that help provide initial necesssity replacement for example, is a department that is proactive. And I would suggest that such departments provide just as valuable as ervice to their community as any local police department does. Don't get me wrong, BOTH can and do provide invaluable services. But just because the police department is out on patrol does not necessarily make it that much more valuable than the fire service.

I DO understand such sentiment though. Sadly, some...too many firefighters feel they signed on "just to fight fires" and don't want to be involved with the full aspects of providing service...REAL services to the community. But to provide the FULL service, as exampled above, the costs of providing the training and the equipment to deliver these services are extremely high. Fire departments that market themselves strictly on firefighting alone have a hard time keeping their piece of the financial pie, especially when the community may only experience a few working fire a year. However in the case of the department being staffed and equiped sufficently to provide for rapid rsponse, often insipient fires are knocked down well before they become news worthy.

In this case the value of the fire department is proven, except that it is harder to show the public when the only measurement is "how many big fires did we have last year", and not how many fires were knocked down quickly enough to keep them from making the papers front page...or even worthy of mentioning.

Sadly, when the public see's a plice officer, they feel safe and protected, yet when they see a staffed engine company they seem to equate it with excessive costs. Only our own Brothers and Sisters can put an end to that perception. Something wrong when our own people fuel this attitude.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last