dwcfireman

Despite assurances that public safety, emergency services, and other essential functions will not be affected by budget cuts, the County Police will lose 5 positions in the 2013 budget and DES will lose 19. I can't imagine that there are 19 open lines at DES so these cuts must have an impact on operations and real personnel.
Where are these cuts coming from and how will DES be able to maintain their operations and support disaster responses (like Sandy) with almost 1/3 fewer people????
While discussing the roof is nice, the roof won't answer 911 calls or conduct training or staff the EOC!
I should add that there are no changes to the County Executive's or the Board of Legislators staffs proposed in the budget. They remain as is.

This company has been in Chapter 11 protection since January, for bankruptcy and the employees decide to strike with the company threatening to close it's doors if they did and now 18,500 are to be laid off for the holidays. Not too smart on behalf of the unions. As much as it sucks to get paid less, I would rather have a job with less money than no job at all.

Remember, this is still a few days out. The models aren't showing the accuracy that they did with the hurricane, but it is in everyone's best interest to prepare for it.

It was good times driving that Hawthorne Ambulance with you on those menacing Mondays. I will always remember you. Rest in Peace, brother.

This is the same fashion how the federal goverment repealed regulations that now allow commercial pilots to carry guns with them. Not all pilots carry guns, and some airlines (usually smaller, regional airlines) prohibit their pilots from carrying. I don't fully agree the new legislation, especially when I own guns myself. I would never carry a gun on the fire truck, so why should EMT's need them on the bus. It cracks open pandora's box to a world of hurt and liability. Going back to the airlines, I don't agree with pilots being able to carry, either. Company/Agency rules and regulations for carrying weapons are far less strict than those in law enforcement agencies.
Changing the subject a bit; An Army friend of mine once said, "You can teach anyone to fire a weapon and hit a target, but not everyone can be taught to shoot a person." Some people, even those in law enforcement and the military, freeze up in a situation where they're being attacked or have a gun drawn back on them. The same thing will happen when a gung-ho EMT draws his weapon on a man who just shot his wife and children. Will this 24 year old EMS know-it-all pull the trigger, or will he end up in the morgue after he himself gets shot? This is where I agree with some of the others in this thread that non-lethal tasers and/or mace may be more acceptable. Then again, we should just fall back on our training and stage elsewhere until the police come in and do their job. Fire departments fight fire, EMS fights death, and Police departments fight crime. I'll gladly wait 30 minutes for a police officer if that's what I need to do.

This is the same fashion how the federal goverment repealed regulations that now allow commercial pilots to carry guns with them. Not all pilots carry guns, and some airlines (usually smaller, regional airlines) prohibit their pilots from carrying. I don't fully agree the new legislation, especially when I own guns myself. I would never carry a gun on the fire truck, so why should EMT's need them on the bus. It cracks open pandora's box to a world of hurt and liability. Going back to the airlines, I don't agree with pilots being able to carry, either. Company/Agency rules and regulations for carrying weapons are far less strict than those in law enforcement agencies.
Changing the subject a bit; An Army friend of mine once said, "You can teach anyone to fire a weapon and hit a target, but not everyone can be taught to shoot a person." Some people, even those in law enforcement and the military, freeze up in a situation where they're being attacked or have a gun drawn back on them. The same thing will happen when a gung-ho EMT draws his weapon on a man who just shot his wife and children. Will this 24 year old EMS know-it-all pull the trigger, or will he end up in the morgue after he himself gets shot? This is where I agree with some of the others in this thread that non-lethal tasers and/or mace may be more acceptable. Then again, we should just fall back on our training and stage elsewhere until the police come in and do their job. Fire departments fight fire, EMS fights death, and Police departments fight crime. I'll gladly wait 30 minutes for a police officer if that's what I need to do.

This is the same fashion how the federal goverment repealed regulations that now allow commercial pilots to carry guns with them. Not all pilots carry guns, and some airlines (usually smaller, regional airlines) prohibit their pilots from carrying. I don't fully agree the new legislation, especially when I own guns myself. I would never carry a gun on the fire truck, so why should EMT's need them on the bus. It cracks open pandora's box to a world of hurt and liability. Going back to the airlines, I don't agree with pilots being able to carry, either. Company/Agency rules and regulations for carrying weapons are far less strict than those in law enforcement agencies.
Changing the subject a bit; An Army friend of mine once said, "You can teach anyone to fire a weapon and hit a target, but not everyone can be taught to shoot a person." Some people, even those in law enforcement and the military, freeze up in a situation where they're being attacked or have a gun drawn back on them. The same thing will happen when a gung-ho EMT draws his weapon on a man who just shot his wife and children. Will this 24 year old EMS know-it-all pull the trigger, or will he end up in the morgue after he himself gets shot? This is where I agree with some of the others in this thread that non-lethal tasers and/or mace may be more acceptable. Then again, we should just fall back on our training and stage elsewhere until the police come in and do their job. Fire departments fight fire, EMS fights death, and Police departments fight crime. I'll gladly wait 30 minutes for a police officer if that's what I need to do.

This is the same fashion how the federal goverment repealed regulations that now allow commercial pilots to carry guns with them. Not all pilots carry guns, and some airlines (usually smaller, regional airlines) prohibit their pilots from carrying. I don't fully agree the new legislation, especially when I own guns myself. I would never carry a gun on the fire truck, so why should EMT's need them on the bus. It cracks open pandora's box to a world of hurt and liability. Going back to the airlines, I don't agree with pilots being able to carry, either. Company/Agency rules and regulations for carrying weapons are far less strict than those in law enforcement agencies.
Changing the subject a bit; An Army friend of mine once said, "You can teach anyone to fire a weapon and hit a target, but not everyone can be taught to shoot a person." Some people, even those in law enforcement and the military, freeze up in a situation where they're being attacked or have a gun drawn back on them. The same thing will happen when a gung-ho EMT draws his weapon on a man who just shot his wife and children. Will this 24 year old EMS know-it-all pull the trigger, or will he end up in the morgue after he himself gets shot? This is where I agree with some of the others in this thread that non-lethal tasers and/or mace may be more acceptable. Then again, we should just fall back on our training and stage elsewhere until the police come in and do their job. Fire departments fight fire, EMS fights death, and Police departments fight crime. I'll gladly wait 30 minutes for a police officer if that's what I need to do.

This is the same fashion how the federal goverment repealed regulations that now allow commercial pilots to carry guns with them. Not all pilots carry guns, and some airlines (usually smaller, regional airlines) prohibit their pilots from carrying. I don't fully agree the new legislation, especially when I own guns myself. I would never carry a gun on the fire truck, so why should EMT's need them on the bus. It cracks open pandora's box to a world of hurt and liability. Going back to the airlines, I don't agree with pilots being able to carry, either. Company/Agency rules and regulations for carrying weapons are far less strict than those in law enforcement agencies.
Changing the subject a bit; An Army friend of mine once said, "You can teach anyone to fire a weapon and hit a target, but not everyone can be taught to shoot a person." Some people, even those in law enforcement and the military, freeze up in a situation where they're being attacked or have a gun drawn back on them. The same thing will happen when a gung-ho EMT draws his weapon on a man who just shot his wife and children. Will this 24 year old EMS know-it-all pull the trigger, or will he end up in the morgue after he himself gets shot? This is where I agree with some of the others in this thread that non-lethal tasers and/or mace may be more acceptable. Then again, we should just fall back on our training and stage elsewhere until the police come in and do their job. Fire departments fight fire, EMS fights death, and Police departments fight crime. I'll gladly wait 30 minutes for a police officer if that's what I need to do.

This is the same fashion how the federal goverment repealed regulations that now allow commercial pilots to carry guns with them. Not all pilots carry guns, and some airlines (usually smaller, regional airlines) prohibit their pilots from carrying. I don't fully agree the new legislation, especially when I own guns myself. I would never carry a gun on the fire truck, so why should EMT's need them on the bus. It cracks open pandora's box to a world of hurt and liability. Going back to the airlines, I don't agree with pilots being able to carry, either. Company/Agency rules and regulations for carrying weapons are far less strict than those in law enforcement agencies.
Changing the subject a bit; An Army friend of mine once said, "You can teach anyone to fire a weapon and hit a target, but not everyone can be taught to shoot a person." Some people, even those in law enforcement and the military, freeze up in a situation where they're being attacked or have a gun drawn back on them. The same thing will happen when a gung-ho EMT draws his weapon on a man who just shot his wife and children. Will this 24 year old EMS know-it-all pull the trigger, or will he end up in the morgue after he himself gets shot? This is where I agree with some of the others in this thread that non-lethal tasers and/or mace may be more acceptable. Then again, we should just fall back on our training and stage elsewhere until the police come in and do their job. Fire departments fight fire, EMS fights death, and Police departments fight crime. I'll gladly wait 30 minutes for a police officer if that's what I need to do.

Next we will be hearing this on the news. Ambulance company "A" and ambulance company "B" pull up to a scene. They argue who gets the patient. Guns are drawn by the EMS crews. You get the idea.

I am pro-gun... Correct me if I am wrong but from reading that article they just repealed the law that made it illegal to carry in an ambulance, but wouldn't it then be up to the agencies SOP's or rules regarding this issue... This isn't a notice for every EMT in Virginia to get a gun.. they just took it out of the states jurisdiction.

This discussion has taken place at least a few times before, and I understand your concern over the situation, however, it's a moot point to have this discussion again. Some departments have stubborn leaders who refuse to change, some departments have no leadership, and there's a few that have gotten lost along the way. It happens to many more departments than you think, just as every department has their problems. If you happen to be a taxpayer in the district you are referring to then you need to start a campaign to change it. If you belong to a mutual aid company that is responding to this district, voice your concerns up your chain of command.

This is the reason why the Concorde was decomishioned. Luckily B757's are of a more modern design, and the engines are capable of taking larger debris.
And the other hand, since take-off is the most dangerous part of any flight, losing 1 of 2 engines at this point is extremely critical, and can result in major catastrophe as the aircraft loses speed and gravity takes over.

No need for apologies Bro. I hope you keep on contributing to the board. Your knowledge is very valuable here.
Stay safe.

Sage,
As a young, now ex-officer, I can completely relate to your situation. When I turned 21, marking my 3 years as a firefighter and thus allowing (by by-laws) to run for lieutenant, I was pressured into running and becoming an officer. Low and behold, I became the youngest lieutenant [ever] in my hometown fire department. I had a lot of issues to face, not only from a training perspective, but to live up to my family name (my father was chief and my mother a lieutenant, both for several years). Being an officer is a terrible place for a young firefighter, no matter the situation.
Any how, let's get to your issue: How do we get the older guys invlolved in training and helping the younger guys learn and gain experience. I will tell you there is no right answer. And the older guys will tell you all the wrong answers (I'm not bashing anybody here, but let's face the fact that the older generation of firefighters are more susceptible to tradition than progression). So, I'm going to tell you my little secret.
Here's my secret: Find an ex-chief, or a firefighter that has been around a while, or any of the older guys that has a real passion for the job. And, if you're ready for it, because this is the hard part, ask for their help. Do this in a comfotable setting (for me, I pulled an ex-chief aside in the bar and asked him, "How do I do this?"). Most people in the fire service, when you ask, are more than willing to help...well, you should know that since you have plenty of responses to your question already. But let's get back on track...once you have that elder's attention, he or she will tell you what you need to do and how to do it (especially after a few adult beverages). Continue talking to them until they decide to go home. You won't believe the information that spills out of their mouths.
The other approach that I've taken was to be an authoritarian. This is where you put your foot down and say, "You are doing this, or you're not riding the fire truck. Period." This is a last ditch effort, however. Please refer to the previous paragraph as much as possible before resorting to the authoritarian approach. There's a time to be an @$$hole as an officer, but it should only be a last resort. I will tell you from experience, if you are a hard @$$ as an officer, volunteers will not show up. But, if they don't want to cooperate, remind those folks of the rules/by-laws, and show them who's the boss.
Bottom line, be confident in all of your decisions. Be confident in your training. As always, take more classes. If you need to, find guest instructors. But, most importantly, as an officer you cannot be afraid to ask questions. If you show the older guys (by asking them questions) that you want to learn more, and that your younger guys want to learn more, then they will be more willing to help out and show up to training.

First thing, classrooms are not the place to motivate firefighters. Unless you can offer something compelling. Take NIOSH LODD reports and recreate them on a white board. Explain to them the events leading up to what went wrong. This will stick in their heads.
Classroom time; limit it to 30 minutes before you break. Open the windows, doors, let fresh oxygen in as it depletes while everyone is sitting there and makes them sleepy.
Second thing, get them outside with the rigs and equipment. This is what they want to be doing in the first place. Be creative, but not dangerous.
The more imaginative you can be with your training the better it's going to go.
Get that gear and equipment out of those compartments. Let them get hands on with everything.
Lastly, have a simple goal in mind for the training session. One thing that you really want to stress, impress and make them remember.

Been there, done that, and thirty years later, I'm still doing that. I am continually stressing training in my Company/FD. For over thirty years (with eleven years as an Officer in my current FD) I have seen the same thing you are talking about.
The way I have done it, is to keep taking training courses. Go to seminars. Go to trade shows (http://newenglandfirechiefs.org/page.asp_Q_navigationid_E_1) is a good one I have gone to a couple of times. Keep learning. The more training you personally acquire, the more confidence you will have to pass this knowledge you learn to newer (and hopefully senior) members. The acquisition of knowledge will help you back up your position and hopefully get the respect of all members of your FD. With this respect comes the ability to hopefully change attitudes. It takes time, and I remember way back then (when I had five years in the FD) I was just like you. It just takes time.
Even with thirty years in my FD, I still attend at least one or two courses at the County Training Center each year, and attend trade show/seminars.
Expect to keep banging your head against the proverbial wall. That's what helmets are for .

Let's take a step back and look at what science has to say...The father's actions are justifably correct. Primal instinct (don't forget that we humans are still animals) is to protect your home and family no matter the circumstance. A close relative of ours, the gorilla, is even deadlier than we are. Then again, the gorilla has no laws to abide by.
I'm not saying this particular father was right, but I'm not going to say he was wrong. So now I'm going to ask what your instinct would be (DO NOT answer this question publicly. Please keep this in your own head.) What would you do with the molestor? Let him go? Beat him up a little? Kick the living snot out of him? Shove a double barrel shotgun down his throat and pull the trigger? Just because the human mind is much more advanced and capable of several dimentions of thought doesn't mean that someone will pause long enough to choose the action that society has deemed acceptable. Again, we are animals, and what ever you decide to do is the right thing to do at the moment. This case isn't pre-meditated murder, nor is it really any type of murder case. The father simply secured his role as the alpha male and protected his home and family. If you can't grasp this concept, highly I suggest watching the History Channel and Discovery Channel.

I really love this statement, and your follow up is spot on! If you want to use the wiord, go for it, but make sure you know what it means....and make sure it's in the right context.
To anyone that thinks that a "re-kiindle" is due to a fire not being fully extinguished, please re-examine your basic science knowledge. A fire consists of four things: Fuel, an Oxidizer, a Heat Source, and the Event that makes fire. The hardest thing to remover is fuel, and 99% of the time that's what we leave. I say this because I have never seen a fire department remove a house from a fire. Now, if you remove the oxidizer and heat from the triangle, yeah, you've extinguished the fire....however, there is stiull the possiblility of a new event re-igniting the fire (hence, the fire tetrahedron). That's where the word "re-kindle" comes into effect. Like I said before, something as simple as a light breeze can re-ignite the fire. But, speaking more literally, we see "re-kindles" in fires that are (a) hard to extinguish and ( are surround-and-drowns. These types of fires aren't as dangerous as they seem, however, we pose a threat to the public as we respond back to them.
x129K, you hit it on the head, too. Re-kindles happen. As long as you're aggressive enmough on the fire, you won't have one. My experience with these types of fires is to handle them once. Put enough water on the first time, and it becomes the only time.

I really love this statement, and your follow up is spot on! If you want to use the wiord, go for it, but make sure you know what it means....and make sure it's in the right context.
To anyone that thinks that a "re-kiindle" is due to a fire not being fully extinguished, please re-examine your basic science knowledge. A fire consists of four things: Fuel, an Oxidizer, a Heat Source, and the Event that makes fire. The hardest thing to remover is fuel, and 99% of the time that's what we leave. I say this because I have never seen a fire department remove a house from a fire. Now, if you remove the oxidizer and heat from the triangle, yeah, you've extinguished the fire....however, there is stiull the possiblility of a new event re-igniting the fire (hence, the fire tetrahedron). That's where the word "re-kindle" comes into effect. Like I said before, something as simple as a light breeze can re-ignite the fire. But, speaking more literally, we see "re-kindles" in fires that are (a) hard to extinguish and ( are surround-and-drowns. These types of fires aren't as dangerous as they seem, however, we pose a threat to the public as we respond back to them.
x129K, you hit it on the head, too. Re-kindles happen. As long as you're aggressive enmough on the fire, you won't have one. My experience with these types of fires is to handle them once. Put enough water on the first time, and it becomes the only time.

I think it is something to look into. A few more thoughts that have come to me over the past few days sort of branching from what I first thought of. I know that with health insurance lately it has become common practice for providers to give breaks and incentives to those they cover when they belong to a gym or in some cases covering their gym fees since in theory it reduces health risks induced from a sedentary or unhealthy life style. Auto companies as I pointed out gave breaks to drivers that have a safe driving record or go for defensive driving classes. I know that a lot of insurance agencies give price breaks to MOS that have taken classes in CEVO or EVOC (something that I believe is mandatory in most departments for drivers). Maybe the cost of sprinklers could be covered in some way by the insurance company, similar to health insurance companies paying for gym memberships? A break if homeowners attend classes on fire safety or learn about the benefits of home sprinkler systems. I have heard, but am not sure if it is true, that people who live with a hydrant in front of their property or on it they get a reduction on their insurance, if this is true what about people living in areas such as Armonk that had dry hydrants on their property if possible, may a reduction for them too? Just some ideas that came to me.

I really love this statement, and your follow up is spot on! If you want to use the wiord, go for it, but make sure you know what it means....and make sure it's in the right context.
To anyone that thinks that a "re-kiindle" is due to a fire not being fully extinguished, please re-examine your basic science knowledge. A fire consists of four things: Fuel, an Oxidizer, a Heat Source, and the Event that makes fire. The hardest thing to remover is fuel, and 99% of the time that's what we leave. I say this because I have never seen a fire department remove a house from a fire. Now, if you remove the oxidizer and heat from the triangle, yeah, you've extinguished the fire....however, there is stiull the possiblility of a new event re-igniting the fire (hence, the fire tetrahedron). That's where the word "re-kindle" comes into effect. Like I said before, something as simple as a light breeze can re-ignite the fire. But, speaking more literally, we see "re-kindles" in fires that are (a) hard to extinguish and ( are surround-and-drowns. These types of fires aren't as dangerous as they seem, however, we pose a threat to the public as we respond back to them.
x129K, you hit it on the head, too. Re-kindles happen. As long as you're aggressive enmough on the fire, you won't have one. My experience with these types of fires is to handle them once. Put enough water on the first time, and it becomes the only time.

Interesting idea, how would you go about it? A lot of programs I know are incorporated into schools and cub/girl scout programs. Not by any means bashing this idea, just wondering how you or others might go about continued fire education for adults. Maybe as part of a homeowners insurance program or agreement? Or maybe like some auto insurance companies do with defensive driving classes etc., a reduced home insurance rate for taking classes in fire safety or such?

Agreeably many people do believe that fire will never strike them; they roll the dice and take their chances. The well-to-do have more money and as such may be willing to roll the dice more often then the average person since they have the means to rebuild and start over again.
Education on sprinklers and how they work might help to allay of some fears that people may have regarding water damage, but no matter how much education you offer, there will be those who will skirt the edge and take their chances.