abaduck

There are a variety of potential charges. As ny10570 already noted, Obstructing Governmental Administration and Obstructing Firefighting Operations are possible. Other potential charges couuld also exist depending on the circumstances.
There is no "freelancing" charge in the law, perhaps we should propose that though!
As for the "please leave". If the police or fire department say "please leave" to someone on an emergency scene, that constitutes an official order and there's no defense. The "Good Samaritan Act" defends people against civil action for intervening before responders arrive. The GSA doesn't protect someone if they're interfering with responders on scene or purporting to be something that they're not.

People are injured/killed intervening in law enforcement incidents all the time. However, and these are just a couple of examples, good samaritans saved countless lives when they retook control of Flight 93 on 9/11 and train riders subdued Colin Ferguson during his shooting rampage on the LIRR so there are examples.
These humans were trying to save other humans trapped in a burning building. They were not professionals nor were they probably aware of the hazards associated with their actions but they did try to do something when others routinely stand idly by. I won't be so quick to condemn them.

X2321 summed it up. We have heard from all sides and because of the emotions associated with this matter, the thread is now closed.
Thank you.

Great copy and paste, but a ridiculous point when you say "call the following people". I'm getting really tired of you throwing peoples' names around. Have some respect that you claim to major in apparently. You've made your point about the Mahopac fireman. Obviously some agree, and some don't. DO NOT start throwing around deceased Brothers and Sisters names here. How dare you!

I recently came across another "fine" video on another site of a training session gone bad (for lack of better terms I really want to use). Unfortunately it is of a department that is in the coverage area of this site.
Just like the title says, what were you thinking?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
As a certified instructor you all should be givin' a swift kick on the backside, this was not funny, this could have been even potentially worse outcome. And why even post it?????
I don't care if I get reprimanded or suspended from the site for posting this. Everyone involved should be suspended by their officer / chief. Morons!!!!!
Obviously no one believes in safety anymore.

(Seth and mods, if you take this down, please me know by a PM. Thank you.)

Read, digest, comprehend and then respond. If you do these things you'll realize that I have a lot more than negativity to bring to this topic. It's called constructive commentary. As for your writing; I'm not trying to insult you. I'm simply pointing out that if you want your point to be taken seriously, you should be able to string a properly constructed sentence together. No one is looking for perfection, but I have to read your post about 4 times to make sense of it. Part of a respectful argument is to address everyone here like well read adults.
As for PCFD/RBFD operation; why should be not discuss that here? Isn't that the point of this forum? What should be do, buff out to apparatus and incident photos all day? Or perhaps we should only give big pats on the back for a job well done after every incident. No, that's not what this is for. We have this forum and it allows us to do many things. We get to share photos, report incidents and most importantly, discuss operations in the hopes of improving them. If all of those things can't be done, than why are Seth and the rest of the staff killing themselves and spending money keeping this site open?
As for the RBFD issue, lets cut to the chase. Everything is not fine. Those guys are in a position of having to do too much with not enough. Sorry, but waiting for PCFD to show up is also not appropriate as a first due means of providing emergency service. How about night time? Do you REALLY think that the lone chauffeur of engine 59 thinks showing up in front of a building fire at 2 A.M. is fine? I DOUBT it. What do you think residents see? They see a big red truck and a guy killing himself to hook up to a hydrant or whatever, but then they have to wait a few LONG minutes waiting for people to arrive to actually fight the fire. That's B.S. for that fireman to be in that position and B.S. for the residents.
There are many ways to skin this cat, but the system as it exists now is in fact NOT working. It is not sufficient and it puts a lot of firemen and civilians in danger, let along property. This is not about the dedication of those who work or volunteer in this two department system. This is about not being provided with the tools or manpower to do the job. Why are you defending this system? Is it because, "this is the way we've been doing it for 175 years", as someone said? Well, I guess we should dust off the hold hand drawn pumpers because they worked fine a century ago, right? Why examine a system to look to improve it?
If this doesn't get through....nothing will. I'm going to put the soap box away for now....

http://www.lohud.com/comments/article/20111028/NEWS02/110280325/Yonkers-Fire-Department-seeks-more-minority-hires

Nice to see someone getting their priorities straight; this IS an emergency services forum. Everyone went home.
If anyone wants to discuss the finer points of Sharia law, or what the 'average Muslim' believes, there are numerous religious fora for that.
Mike

It all comes down to the NYS training requirements which are an absolute joke. Include FF 2, survival and FAST as the basic FF course. If the training is too much, go join the Elks lodge.
My department encourages everyone who is an interior firefighter to train with the FASTeam and eventually join. However, you cannot put non-FAST trained members on a FAST assignment though, which is why it comes down to a special team in volunteer departments in NYS. Unless you require every interior member to be certified with survival and FAST, then it is going to have to be a special team.

I think the concept is being lost on some departments that create special teams for FAST when it should be the function of aany/every FF instead of "special teams" that aren't always available.
In a large career department every FF can be FAST. In smaller departments and most volunteer agencies it's treated like something special and not everyone gets the training.

In this country you are 100% INNOCENT until convicted by a jury. 'guilty but never charged' is an oxymoron. That's the way it is. Like democracy itself, it's sometimes a lousy system - but it's FAR better than any of the alternatives. What do you want? Mob rule? Conviction by accusation? Star chamber? Lynching?
Mike

In this country you are 100% INNOCENT until convicted by a jury. 'guilty but never charged' is an oxymoron. That's the way it is. Like democracy itself, it's sometimes a lousy system - but it's FAR better than any of the alternatives. What do you want? Mob rule? Conviction by accusation? Star chamber? Lynching?
Mike

In this country you are 100% INNOCENT until convicted by a jury. 'guilty but never charged' is an oxymoron. That's the way it is. Like democracy itself, it's sometimes a lousy system - but it's FAR better than any of the alternatives. What do you want? Mob rule? Conviction by accusation? Star chamber? Lynching?
Mike

After 34 years OTJ, I can tell you there are many, many more Collyers Mansion places out there than you would tend to think. The ones on the TV show are mild cases compared to what you might respond to.
My first was as a FF. It was an ordinary multiple dwelling, six floors, open stairs, fire reported on about floor 3. We forced the door at the lock side, but it refused to swing. One FF reached around the door to feel for a possible victim and felt furniture. We went to the hinge side and when that side was free the door still stood there. We managed to get the door out into the hall and my partner started passing furniture to me so the hose line could advance. Things were getting a little touchy at this point since the fire was growing fast and we had no way to control the doorway.
After we removed maybe a room and a half of furniture, my partner and I started a search and the hose line went to the fire. I remember not being able to crawl because the floor was COVERED with booze bottles that rolled as you tried to crawl across the floor. I felt what appeared to be a doorjamb. I felt clothes up at about 3 ft off the floor and shoes on the floor beneath the clothes. OK, it's a closet. I'll move forward til I hit the other door jamb. Next thing I know iI was feeling a couch and coffee table. What happened to what I thought was a closet? I completely lost my bearings.
The hose team bumped into the victim as they advanced, also sliding on the bottles. They passed the victim to us and we were 1...2...3... yanking her toward the door as the bottles piled up into a mound. The more we moved the higher the mound got. I finally took my flashlight, look at her signs of life from about 2 inches away because that's the visibility allowed. I pronounced her dead, pulled my mask out from my chin so I could be heard, and announced her death to the Chief who was outside the door. The answer back was to "get on the fire."
The cleanup after the fire found she had over 500 bottles in a 1-bedroom apartment. Not only was she a hoarder, but a recluse and alcoholic. Sadly, there was a picture on a table that was charred pretty badly, but you could make out the form of a Firefighter.
So, back to business. What can you expect when you discover you've got a Collyer's Mansion? Anything.

I'm failing to see the problem. They were hired as probationary firefighters, and one of the terms of their employment that they had full knowledge of and agreed to was to become state certified EMT's , which they failed to properly complete, and in lieu of termination they were afforded an opportunity to resign and be rehired upon successful completion of passing the exam. If there are terms of employment that an employee must meet to remain employed, then they need to meet the minimum standards set forth by the employer, otherwise dismissal is appropriate. They knew they had to pass this exam to keep their job, and for whatever reason, they failed to do so. Sorry but maybe there are 7 others out there who are better suited for the position then.

No-one else has posted it, but it's in the public domain so I don't mind mentioning it here...
http://www.townofmam...-09-08_pm154127


I guess we must be doing something right for once!
Mike

Seth will be along in a moment to correct me if I'm wrong, but I *think* the reason for the apparent inconsistency is we're talking about very different types of photo posts/threads.
In a thread like this, someone posts a photo or photos as an education/training matter and positively *invites* critique. That's fair enough.
But there are other threads where fire scene photographers simply post their work, as 'news'. Seth, I think, wants these posts and threads to be off-limits for such criticism/nit-picking - because he wants to encourage fire scene photographers to post their work without fear of people nitpicking the department being photographed to death! That's also fair and sensible in my view.
So the apparent inconsistency actually makes perfect sense :-)
Mike

[sigh] The vehicle is nothing more than the conveyance for a person or persons to a scene. It shouldn't matter what the side of the vehicle says.

The only thing I can make of this post is your either friends with the subject of the photo, in the department, or both. Either way why can't we agree at the very least in hindsight it was a bad idea. You know what this website is becoming notorious for? People to the end defending some real bad tactics. We have a number of people sticking by using hyraulic spreaders to lift a car in another thread even after some of us have shared our experinces where things didn't work or are too dangerous to be used as a tactic. It's never good to be in the spotlight like this but it ocassionally happens to even the best out there the difference is they realize their mistakes and don't let them happen again. A previous post just aluded to it and I'll bet there are some officers on here that won't allow this to happen if they are in the same situation now that they have reviewed this. That's the reason that the secret list posts this stuff.

Seth will be along in a moment to correct me if I'm wrong, but I *think* the reason for the apparent inconsistency is we're talking about very different types of photo posts/threads.
In a thread like this, someone posts a photo or photos as an education/training matter and positively *invites* critique. That's fair enough.
But there are other threads where fire scene photographers simply post their work, as 'news'. Seth, I think, wants these posts and threads to be off-limits for such criticism/nit-picking - because he wants to encourage fire scene photographers to post their work without fear of people nitpicking the department being photographed to death! That's also fair and sensible in my view.
So the apparent inconsistency actually makes perfect sense :-)
Mike

Seth will be along in a moment to correct me if I'm wrong, but I *think* the reason for the apparent inconsistency is we're talking about very different types of photo posts/threads.
In a thread like this, someone posts a photo or photos as an education/training matter and positively *invites* critique. That's fair enough.
But there are other threads where fire scene photographers simply post their work, as 'news'. Seth, I think, wants these posts and threads to be off-limits for such criticism/nit-picking - because he wants to encourage fire scene photographers to post their work without fear of people nitpicking the department being photographed to death! That's also fair and sensible in my view.
So the apparent inconsistency actually makes perfect sense :-)
Mike

From what I can see, the department are just assisting ConEd. The firefighter in the street is wearing turnout pants, helmet, and vest; which seems appropriate PPE for this type of call.
The ConEd guy is on the engine (for such it is; appears to be jeans, t-shirt, vest, and white hat)... well it's his electricity system. If he deems it appropriate to deal with the incident in this manner, and requests FD assistance, that's his call.
Now I'm speculating here, but perhaps he was the first ConEd guy on scene, in an SUV or small van, and decided that the fire needed to be knocked down to minimize damage. He used a little creative thinking and enlisted the help of the FD, as the big ConEd trucks weren't on scene yet?
That's what it looks like to me, anyway.
Mike

As I said in my response on the original thread, I'm not sorry I found out this poisonous crap was around, but I'm glad it's gone from here. Good call.
Mike

I'm sure Barry will be along shortly to give an informed answer, as he's forgotten more than I'll ever know about the ISO system, but I'm pretty sure I'm correct in saying that attendance records - how many guys show up to calls - play a part in the ISO rating. In other words, you can have all the fancy equipment etc., but if you don't get enough well-trained members responding, you won't get that rating. And I think I'm correct in saying there's a 'three for one' system; ISO requires three volunteers to respond to be counted the same as one career guy riding on the rig?
And I'm pretty sure MA isn't a factor in ISO ratings. Barry?
Mike