JJB531

Similiar to when fire apparatus double park on single lane two way streets so they can go grocery shopping for their 3 course dinner....

So would Stiloski's like if another tow agency picked up one of their jobs on the Saw Mill? Glens was very capable as would have been Marks's who also have Heavy Duty Wreckers! I am sure if Glen didn't think he could handle it, he might have made such a suggestion of Stiloski's. He is that type of man!

Why did they have to shut down the opposite 2 lanes for a simple upright of a truck? Seems unprofessional to me and a little bit of an outdated technique. Glenns should get a bigger truck. Like the red one on the site here. Nice excavator

Since I'm one of those guys who has taken multiple companies out of our jurisdiction for training, I can tell you this - every time I do it I can't help but wonder if it's a bad idea. But, every time we've done it, we have two Engines and a Ladder covering us, whether it's all Mutual Aid or a combination of our own units.
As a multi-company department, it is important for us to work together often and keep up our skills. We can only do so many drills in our own area, but we don't have much to use. The Fire Training Center is a great facility with so many options for people to fine-tune their skills. It is of the utmost importance to us, as a department, to drill on a regular basis, especially because our call volume isn't that high. We used to try "Department Drills" using only one or two rigs, and those from the other companies wouldn't come because they remained in town to staff their apparatus for any calls we might have. This is why we now have multi-company drills and department drills involving all companies, and depend on Mutual Aid help to cover the home turf while we improve ourselves.
It's a pain in the a**, I can't lie, because most of us here (volunteer and paid) don't have the proper facilities to do live fire training, so traveling out of town isn't an option, it's the only way we can do it.
We all want to be better firefighters, fire companies and fire departments, so if that means occassionally pulling companies out of service / out of town to train, that's what we have to do. Pulling resources out of town for a parade or other parties and not keeping people behind to mind the shop, that's just begging to get caught with your pants down. I have nothing against parades, I LOVE THEM, but what I hate is how to some people it's nothing more then a chance to put on their uniforms, get hammered and embarass those of us that actually still give a s***.
I've said it before on here, uniforms & booze don't mix. It's these public displays of stupidity that make all of us have to defend ourselves to everyone as not being a bunch of drunken firemen!
Be proud, but be smart. Remember our priorities in the fire service - response, training, prevention and education.

So, because of a social event, Mohegan (and I say Mohegan only because that was the agency mentioned) has acknowledged that they will be unable to cover EMERGENCY calls within their jurisdiction, and has depleted another agency of both fire protection and EMS coverage. Personally, I don't see how this is beneficial?
Perhaps a better course of action would have been to have this event within their jurisdiction (if that is possible, depending on the type of event I guess) so they can roster a sober crew (if alcohol is being served at this event) to man their first due fire apparatus (I guess, I don't know the first thing about fire department operations) and their first due ambulance.
If the event is outside of their jurisdiction, unfortunately some members should be rostered to cover their first due fire apparatus and ambulance, instead of attending the event. Which takes priority, the social event or providing fire protection and EMS coverage for the residents of our respective districts?

I never understood how people can say this out loud and think that it sounds like a logical argument in defense of their position. I'd rather be without the extra yahoos that show up for the "big game" as they generally tend to:
-Get in the way of people who are properly trained and practiced.
-Make the situation worse by making the wrong decisions.
-Use resources that would be put to better use in more capable hands.
-Complicate the chain and scope of command.
I'm not denying that big games draw big crowds, but to hear people put that forth as a positive thing is ridiculous. Give me a small army over a large armed mob anyday.

As someone who has worked more EMS jobs then I care to remember, I can tell you this. Every VAC / FD-EMS has changed in the time I've been involved. Some agencies should be proud of themselves, others need to check their egos at the door and come up with a solution FAST! I'm not going to use any agency names, but I will share some examples.
One VAC that I used to belong to is almost not a VAC anymore, rather it is nearly all paid. Part of the problem here was that certain people seemed to want it all to go paid and made it almost fail completely as a VAC. Luckily, some of the volunteers are still there as volunteers and others are there to get paid. Either way, the level of care is one of the best in Westchester.
Another VAC I belonged to barely covered anything for a while. Then some new members came and they were the dependable ones in the area. A change of officers made some of the die-hards almost vanish, and Mutual Aid became more frequent. Another change of officers, back up to covering calls again. Yet another change, and probably one of the worst periods in this VAC's history. A recent change appears to be helping, but I really don't think it will sustain, simply because it seems like more of a "proving a point" thing then anything. Once these people get tired of what they're doing, it will be back to three tones and out.
My current EMS affiliation used to be FD based. People literally raced to get the ambulances out for calls and would stay at the firehouse waiting for them. Some leadership problems, personality conflicts and a lack of trying to resolve things by our leadership sent us down the toilet. I still believe that if certain Chiefs put forth some effort, we could of improved things, but I firmly believe there was always a personal agenda involved and now EMS is on it's own. Ironically, EMS is doing much better. In the beginning it was mostly FD people who were waiting for something to change in order to motivate them, so we were getting out all the time. The open membership started, and the new influx of people have been picking up the ball and running with it. The biggest problem, however, is that the call volume keeps growing, especially during the day when most people are working, and it truly taxes the agency. Especially when almost one call a day is Mutual Aid to someone else - you get tired of bailing others out.
If every VAC could crew every rig they have, then this wouldn't be an issue. It kills me to see VACs with 3 or 4 rigs that allow calls to go Mutual Aid 3,4,5 times a day. Why not sell a rig and hire an EMT/Driver?! ALS knows exactly who I am talking about, and so does anyone with a scanner.
My time in paid EMS revealed all kinds of agencies to me. Some VACs always covered their calls, others were almost non-existent. Sadly, this goes back about 10 years and in some places, IS THE SAME NOW!!!! I remember waiting over an hour once for an ambulance for a nose bleed when working in Heritage Hills. When we finally had an ambulance responding, the gentleman stopped bleeding and said, "Forget it, I'll f---ing drive myself to the ER."
I have heard and been there to dispatch calls that have gone as far as six, seven, eight and even NINE agencies until we covered them. But as long as the rigs are washed, people have new t-shirts to wear and they win parade trophies, they'll never see a problem. I've seen some VACs have 20-30 people at a parade, but two hours later they need Mutual Aid for a nursing home FDGB call. Nah, keep on wishing on rainbows and eating the magical cupcakes....everything is fine....
But I will say this. If ever a family member needs EMS, and that EMS doesn't respond and/or there is a major delay they couldn't avoid (bad weather, etc.) then I guarantee my name will be in a load of letters to the agency, municipality and media. This much I promise!
I know a lot of you commenting on this thread, especially ALS & JJB - and I know how tired of this s*** you are, and being the professionals you are, I know it's getting to a point where you just can't bite your lip anymore.
Stay strong brothers!

I don't think anyone is second guessing the officers involved in this incident or their professionalism, nor should anyone because without being there we don't know what transpired. But unforunately this incident, as well as the New Rochelle incident does send the wrong message to the general public.
When police involved shooting incidents occur, I frequently see questions being asked by people along the lines of, "Why couldnt they shoot the gun out of his hand?", "Why didn't they just shoot him in the leg?", and now, "Why didn't they just Taser him?". Unfortunately, when it comes to force-on-force encounters, the general public only knows what they see in Hollywood and the occasional reality TV show such as Cops. Obviously, if true police officers possessed the skills of Steven Seagal, Sylvester Stallone, or any one of the many "action hero" police officers in Hollywood, all we'd have to do is look at criminals and they would surrender. And reality shows such as Cops rarely show force-on-force encounters which result in the use of deadly physical force. In fact, I can only recall one episode where a police officer in Massachusetts shot a perp who charged him with a knife in the middle of the roadway.
The problem with applying a less lethal option against an armed adversary who has threatened deadly physical force is that it looks all great in the paper and in the eyes of the public, but what about the next Police Officer who appropriately applies deadly physical force to an armed adversary? Members of the general public, especially critics of Law Enforcement, as well as the media, will drag that Police Officer through the mud, questioning why he/she couldn't just disarm the perpetrator. Law Enforcement today has become more concerned with looking good in the eyes of the public and critics of Law Enforcement tactics, which in turn is jeopardizing the lives of Police Officers, as well as the reputation of certain Police Officers who use appropriate tactics and follow the use-of-force continuum.
With that being said, the Officers involved in this incident should be applauded because they did do a great job. They were able to disarm and apprehend an armed subject without injury to themselves or any members of the public.
Remember, it was our fantastic current Governor who, prior to being Governor, introduced a bill that would have forced Police Officers to "shoot to wound".

I don't think anyone is second guessing the officers involved in this incident or their professionalism, nor should anyone because without being there we don't know what transpired. But unforunately this incident, as well as the New Rochelle incident does send the wrong message to the general public.
When police involved shooting incidents occur, I frequently see questions being asked by people along the lines of, "Why couldnt they shoot the gun out of his hand?", "Why didn't they just shoot him in the leg?", and now, "Why didn't they just Taser him?". Unfortunately, when it comes to force-on-force encounters, the general public only knows what they see in Hollywood and the occasional reality TV show such as Cops. Obviously, if true police officers possessed the skills of Steven Seagal, Sylvester Stallone, or any one of the many "action hero" police officers in Hollywood, all we'd have to do is look at criminals and they would surrender. And reality shows such as Cops rarely show force-on-force encounters which result in the use of deadly physical force. In fact, I can only recall one episode where a police officer in Massachusetts shot a perp who charged him with a knife in the middle of the roadway.
The problem with applying a less lethal option against an armed adversary who has threatened deadly physical force is that it looks all great in the paper and in the eyes of the public, but what about the next Police Officer who appropriately applies deadly physical force to an armed adversary? Members of the general public, especially critics of Law Enforcement, as well as the media, will drag that Police Officer through the mud, questioning why he/she couldn't just disarm the perpetrator. Law Enforcement today has become more concerned with looking good in the eyes of the public and critics of Law Enforcement tactics, which in turn is jeopardizing the lives of Police Officers, as well as the reputation of certain Police Officers who use appropriate tactics and follow the use-of-force continuum.
With that being said, the Officers involved in this incident should be applauded because they did do a great job. They were able to disarm and apprehend an armed subject without injury to themselves or any members of the public.
Remember, it was our fantastic current Governor who, prior to being Governor, introduced a bill that would have forced Police Officers to "shoot to wound".

I'm assuming Goose is referring to the number of unnecessary casualties because of the inability of the EMS system in Westchester County to properly and adequately respond to a "larger scale" disaster or mass casualty incident. EMS in Westchester County is a disaster in itself. Personally, I don't think it has anything to do with volunteer or paid services, but rather the system as a whole.
First problem is an overall lack of coordination. With all of the different agencies out there, all of the different Captains and Chiefs, all the different dispatching agencies, and all of the different unit designations that don't follow the County's designation system, in the event of a larger scale disaster, coordinating a multi-agency response would prove to be rather difficult.
60 Control has manpower to handle their current workload (or at least I guess they're supposed to!). If more agencies became a part of the 60 Control dispatching system, 60 Control would have to hire more dispatchers to handle the increased workload. With their current manpower and technology, can 60 Control handle the increased workload if there is now a significant county-wide disaster where they are attempting to coordinate a number of agencies, especially agencies that do not utilize 60 Control as a dispatching resource?
I think the second problem is a lack of training and education. This is a problem that doesn't just fall on the County or any of the County agencies, but it also falls on the EMS providers. I think it's great that everyone goes through NIMS compliance training, but how many EMS providers are truly confident with responding to an MCI in terms of establishing sectors and following the standards for MCI response? In the event of a disaster, how many EMS responders are properly trained or equipped (even in terms of basic personal protective equipment) to handle treating patients in an austere environment, whether it be a collapse or confined space environment, operating in the warm zone of a hazardous materials environment, or operating within the warm zone of a tactical environment in the event of an active shooter scenario?
A lot of of this training is not readily available to EMS providers. The OFPC won't allow you to take a Rescue Tech-Basic course or a number of other courses they offer unless you have completed basic firefighter training. So what's the alternative, pay hundreds of dollars out of your own pocket to recieve this training through private training organizations? And then when this training does become available, how many EMS providers will actually take advantage of the opportunity? I know myself along with a handful of other providers will, but unfortunately the majority won't. So now what happens when that large scale disaster happens, everyone is out there doing their own thing, and then someone gets hurt because they didn't have the proper training or equipment? Now those untrained providers are becoming more of a hinderance then a help.
The County handed out these Level B hazmat packs a few years ago, I believe 10 or so to each agency. Has anyone ever looked inside of them? How many EMS providers know how to properly don and doff the equipment in those packs? When was the last time anyone checked the filters for expiration dates or damage to the foil packaging they come in to ensure that they are still in good working condition? How many agencies have trained with the equipment?
The County went out and purchased and equipped MCI trailers. Does anyone know what's inside of them? What are the capabilities of the equipment inside of them? Who is responsible for ensuring that these trailers make it to where they get to get to in the event of a disaster?
This is the kind of half-a** provisions that the County makes for its EMS providers. But what else can they do? They have no real authority when it comes to EMS. As long as EMS providers go to a bunch of CME's and pointless call audits, it's all good, we're doing a good job. Let's go celebrate at Playland everyone!
In the event of a large scale disaster, we can really only count on active EMS units that are currently in service to respond. I'm confident that a number of volunteer agencies will staff their ambulances and be ready to respond, but we can't count on every agency having the appropriate manpower to staff EMS units. Commercial providers will more then likely pull transport units to provide extra assistance as well, in addition to mutual aid units from outside counties as well (Rockland, Putnam, etc.).

at 2:30 in the afternoon on a monday how many firefighter do you expect can show up??? try and factor in how many of these people are working , or dedicated to some other issue in their lives ??? THAT IS WHAT MUTUAL AID PLANS ARE DRAWN UP FOR give them a break. christ even my department had a lil bit of a hard time getting the engine out but we provided sufficient manpower to mohegan. Given the time of day and that no one was home we all (meaning all the dept.'s that responded) , and where the fire started and how it traveled made one hell of a stop on that house and to all the members of this site that are members of the departments that responded to that fire you/we made one good stop guys good job!!

In the line of work we're in time and experience is not enough to earn respect. I don't want to be respected just because I've been a provider for 20+ years... I'd want to be respected because I am a competent provider, not because of the amount of time that I have in the field. I've met plenty of 20+ year EMT's who I don't even trust to take a simple blood pressure, and I've met some EMT's whose ink on their cards is still wet, but I trust them and their skills enough to take a blood pressure or to set up an IV bag for me. IMHO, respect needs to be earned, not granted just based on how many years of experience you have.
Competence is important in our line or work. It's nothing personal. It says nothing about the kind of person the incompetent provider is. They can be the nicest person in the world with their heart in the right place, and I will commend anyone who tries to do the right thing and is willing to learn. But as a provider, I'll respect the 2 day EMT who's competent over the 20 year EMT who's incompetent any day.
Unfortuately the thinking that "I've been and EMT for 20 years" equates to one being a competent provider is a dangerous way of thinking because you don't allow yourself to realize your own deficiencies because providers end up with the "I know it all" attitude. You never stop learning... I find myself sometimes going to younger medics now with questions, especially since I left the field full time, and I am not ashamed to ask or get a second opinion.

In the line of work we're in time and experience is not enough to earn respect. I don't want to be respected just because I've been a provider for 20+ years... I'd want to be respected because I am a competent provider, not because of the amount of time that I have in the field. I've met plenty of 20+ year EMT's who I don't even trust to take a simple blood pressure, and I've met some EMT's whose ink on their cards is still wet, but I trust them and their skills enough to take a blood pressure or to set up an IV bag for me. IMHO, respect needs to be earned, not granted just based on how many years of experience you have.
Competence is important in our line or work. It's nothing personal. It says nothing about the kind of person the incompetent provider is. They can be the nicest person in the world with their heart in the right place, and I will commend anyone who tries to do the right thing and is willing to learn. But as a provider, I'll respect the 2 day EMT who's competent over the 20 year EMT who's incompetent any day.
Unfortuately the thinking that "I've been and EMT for 20 years" equates to one being a competent provider is a dangerous way of thinking because you don't allow yourself to realize your own deficiencies because providers end up with the "I know it all" attitude. You never stop learning... I find myself sometimes going to younger medics now with questions, especially since I left the field full time, and I am not ashamed to ask or get a second opinion.

"...and who cares?..." Lots of us do, apparently. In the fire service response times are crucial. That is why they are tracked and recorded. It's simply not good enough to say, "we do the best we can", or "these times aren't exact", "what's the big deal?", etc. It is a big deal. SECONDS COUNT. If we can improve response times, we will save lives and property. What is more important than that, someone's feelings?? QTIP.

Has anyone read this letter yet? Well I for one couldn't agree more with what this REAL American has to say to our President.
Make sure to follow the link in the article linked below and read the whole letter
http://www.kitv.com/politics/2233810...il.html?hpt=T2

A 48 year old man masturbating over a webcam to someone whom he believed was a 15 year old girl is not as serious a crime as some are making it out to be? Please, please, tell all of us on this website that you are joking, or that you have re-thought the seriousness of this offense and have changed your mind. A 48 year old who engages a 15 year old in any kind of sexual chat or activity is a sexual predator, plain and simple.

A 48 year old man masturbating over a webcam to someone whom he believed was a 15 year old girl is not as serious a crime as some are making it out to be? Please, please, tell all of us on this website that you are joking, or that you have re-thought the seriousness of this offense and have changed your mind. A 48 year old who engages a 15 year old in any kind of sexual chat or activity is a sexual predator, plain and simple.

In addition to saving money, I think the other positive part of regionalization and/or consolidation between Fire, Police, and EMS when it comes certain services, such as Water Rescue, Rope Rescue, etc. is that you have a wider pool of talent to choose from. When it comes to some of these specialized services, I don't necessarily think it's the line of work you're in that makes you a good technician, but I think individuals from each of these services may have something to bring to the table. An individuals experiences,past employment, and even hobbies can all influence their competence in some of the different aspects of rescue work. Someone who is a avid rock climber may be a good candidate for rope rescue work. Someome who is an avid Scuba Diver and/or swimmer might fare well on a water rescue team. When you have a FD doing their own thing, a PD doing their own thing, and well, EMS never really does anything specialized around here, you're limiting yourself to the members of your department.
IMHO I believe that it would be beneficial that we start working together some more and break the barriers of PD, FD, and EMS.

This might as well just be closed now, because the answers were not provided last time I highly doubt they willl be provided this time and its just going to set everyone off all over again.

I don't post on here often, and when I do I keep my posts to a minimum. I like to get involved in debates about sensitive issues just as much as some other members do, but I don't get involved in serious debates on this site because you say one thing and right away 10 people are crying that you're bashing or criticizing. Quite frankly, it's a turn off for a lot of people who may be able to contribute positively to the forum, but don't want to get all mixed up in the nonsense.
I don't think that outright attacks should exist in this forum. I don't think this forum should become the equivalent of an NYPD Rant type forum where a bunch of disgruntled emergency services personnel talk about who is the worst paramedic, or the laziest cop, or the buffiest firefighter. I think this forum should remain a constructive place for local emergency services personnel to debate and discuss the issues that exist in emergency services, whether at the local or national level. Chris192's post in the other thread related to this topic is a perfect response I think... if only I could put it so eloquently, but honestly I don't care much about being eloquent.
Emergency services personnel generally have Alpha/dominant personalities. They're leaders, they face things that the general public does not face, and we do things that the general public does not do. Having an alpha personality means sometimes you have to grow some thick skin. If someone throws a jab at volunteers, don't cry about it. Come up with an educated rebuttal that disputes what that member is saying. Problems exist across the board with paid, volunteer, and combination departments. Discussing these problems is not bashing, it's a discussion to talk about the problems that exist. If you don't like the fact that your agency has faults that someone pointed out in this forum, get over it. Maybe the points brought up here are valid points, so instead of crying about it, do something about it. Make necessary changes, ask how things can be improved, ask what you can do to bring your agency up to the recognized standards.
The simple fact is that in an area where there is so much diversity amongst its emergency service personnel, there's always going to be conflict and debates. Just because someone's views on a certain person, agency, service, or method of doing things aren't your own views, as JFLYNN says, QTIP.
I can only hope that too many members of the general public don't read the nonsense that goes on here. Some of the threads are fantastic, with great input from a lot of educated and experienced individuals. The moderators do an excellent job of weeding out posts that are not constructive.
While I don't personally know you Seth, I know you value this forum for what it is and I know that you and the staff have put a lot of time, effort, and money into creating this forum. All I can say is, don't let all the petty complaints and other nonsense get to you. If people have a problem with things that are said here or topics that arise, let them move on, and find another forum where everyone holds hands and sings songs around a campfire. If they choose not to move on, then they are going to have to learn not to be so sensitive and grow some thicker skin.

I don't post on here often, and when I do I keep my posts to a minimum. I like to get involved in debates about sensitive issues just as much as some other members do, but I don't get involved in serious debates on this site because you say one thing and right away 10 people are crying that you're bashing or criticizing. Quite frankly, it's a turn off for a lot of people who may be able to contribute positively to the forum, but don't want to get all mixed up in the nonsense.
I don't think that outright attacks should exist in this forum. I don't think this forum should become the equivalent of an NYPD Rant type forum where a bunch of disgruntled emergency services personnel talk about who is the worst paramedic, or the laziest cop, or the buffiest firefighter. I think this forum should remain a constructive place for local emergency services personnel to debate and discuss the issues that exist in emergency services, whether at the local or national level. Chris192's post in the other thread related to this topic is a perfect response I think... if only I could put it so eloquently, but honestly I don't care much about being eloquent.
Emergency services personnel generally have Alpha/dominant personalities. They're leaders, they face things that the general public does not face, and we do things that the general public does not do. Having an alpha personality means sometimes you have to grow some thick skin. If someone throws a jab at volunteers, don't cry about it. Come up with an educated rebuttal that disputes what that member is saying. Problems exist across the board with paid, volunteer, and combination departments. Discussing these problems is not bashing, it's a discussion to talk about the problems that exist. If you don't like the fact that your agency has faults that someone pointed out in this forum, get over it. Maybe the points brought up here are valid points, so instead of crying about it, do something about it. Make necessary changes, ask how things can be improved, ask what you can do to bring your agency up to the recognized standards.
The simple fact is that in an area where there is so much diversity amongst its emergency service personnel, there's always going to be conflict and debates. Just because someone's views on a certain person, agency, service, or method of doing things aren't your own views, as JFLYNN says, QTIP.
I can only hope that too many members of the general public don't read the nonsense that goes on here. Some of the threads are fantastic, with great input from a lot of educated and experienced individuals. The moderators do an excellent job of weeding out posts that are not constructive.
While I don't personally know you Seth, I know you value this forum for what it is and I know that you and the staff have put a lot of time, effort, and money into creating this forum. All I can say is, don't let all the petty complaints and other nonsense get to you. If people have a problem with things that are said here or topics that arise, let them move on, and find another forum where everyone holds hands and sings songs around a campfire. If they choose not to move on, then they are going to have to learn not to be so sensitive and grow some thicker skin.

I don't post on here often, and when I do I keep my posts to a minimum. I like to get involved in debates about sensitive issues just as much as some other members do, but I don't get involved in serious debates on this site because you say one thing and right away 10 people are crying that you're bashing or criticizing. Quite frankly, it's a turn off for a lot of people who may be able to contribute positively to the forum, but don't want to get all mixed up in the nonsense.
I don't think that outright attacks should exist in this forum. I don't think this forum should become the equivalent of an NYPD Rant type forum where a bunch of disgruntled emergency services personnel talk about who is the worst paramedic, or the laziest cop, or the buffiest firefighter. I think this forum should remain a constructive place for local emergency services personnel to debate and discuss the issues that exist in emergency services, whether at the local or national level. Chris192's post in the other thread related to this topic is a perfect response I think... if only I could put it so eloquently, but honestly I don't care much about being eloquent.
Emergency services personnel generally have Alpha/dominant personalities. They're leaders, they face things that the general public does not face, and we do things that the general public does not do. Having an alpha personality means sometimes you have to grow some thick skin. If someone throws a jab at volunteers, don't cry about it. Come up with an educated rebuttal that disputes what that member is saying. Problems exist across the board with paid, volunteer, and combination departments. Discussing these problems is not bashing, it's a discussion to talk about the problems that exist. If you don't like the fact that your agency has faults that someone pointed out in this forum, get over it. Maybe the points brought up here are valid points, so instead of crying about it, do something about it. Make necessary changes, ask how things can be improved, ask what you can do to bring your agency up to the recognized standards.
The simple fact is that in an area where there is so much diversity amongst its emergency service personnel, there's always going to be conflict and debates. Just because someone's views on a certain person, agency, service, or method of doing things aren't your own views, as JFLYNN says, QTIP.
I can only hope that too many members of the general public don't read the nonsense that goes on here. Some of the threads are fantastic, with great input from a lot of educated and experienced individuals. The moderators do an excellent job of weeding out posts that are not constructive.
While I don't personally know you Seth, I know you value this forum for what it is and I know that you and the staff have put a lot of time, effort, and money into creating this forum. All I can say is, don't let all the petty complaints and other nonsense get to you. If people have a problem with things that are said here or topics that arise, let them move on, and find another forum where everyone holds hands and sings songs around a campfire. If they choose not to move on, then they are going to have to learn not to be so sensitive and grow some thicker skin.

I don't post on here often, and when I do I keep my posts to a minimum. I like to get involved in debates about sensitive issues just as much as some other members do, but I don't get involved in serious debates on this site because you say one thing and right away 10 people are crying that you're bashing or criticizing. Quite frankly, it's a turn off for a lot of people who may be able to contribute positively to the forum, but don't want to get all mixed up in the nonsense.
I don't think that outright attacks should exist in this forum. I don't think this forum should become the equivalent of an NYPD Rant type forum where a bunch of disgruntled emergency services personnel talk about who is the worst paramedic, or the laziest cop, or the buffiest firefighter. I think this forum should remain a constructive place for local emergency services personnel to debate and discuss the issues that exist in emergency services, whether at the local or national level. Chris192's post in the other thread related to this topic is a perfect response I think... if only I could put it so eloquently, but honestly I don't care much about being eloquent.
Emergency services personnel generally have Alpha/dominant personalities. They're leaders, they face things that the general public does not face, and we do things that the general public does not do. Having an alpha personality means sometimes you have to grow some thick skin. If someone throws a jab at volunteers, don't cry about it. Come up with an educated rebuttal that disputes what that member is saying. Problems exist across the board with paid, volunteer, and combination departments. Discussing these problems is not bashing, it's a discussion to talk about the problems that exist. If you don't like the fact that your agency has faults that someone pointed out in this forum, get over it. Maybe the points brought up here are valid points, so instead of crying about it, do something about it. Make necessary changes, ask how things can be improved, ask what you can do to bring your agency up to the recognized standards.
The simple fact is that in an area where there is so much diversity amongst its emergency service personnel, there's always going to be conflict and debates. Just because someone's views on a certain person, agency, service, or method of doing things aren't your own views, as JFLYNN says, QTIP.
I can only hope that too many members of the general public don't read the nonsense that goes on here. Some of the threads are fantastic, with great input from a lot of educated and experienced individuals. The moderators do an excellent job of weeding out posts that are not constructive.
While I don't personally know you Seth, I know you value this forum for what it is and I know that you and the staff have put a lot of time, effort, and money into creating this forum. All I can say is, don't let all the petty complaints and other nonsense get to you. If people have a problem with things that are said here or topics that arise, let them move on, and find another forum where everyone holds hands and sings songs around a campfire. If they choose not to move on, then they are going to have to learn not to be so sensitive and grow some thicker skin.

I don't post on here often, and when I do I keep my posts to a minimum. I like to get involved in debates about sensitive issues just as much as some other members do, but I don't get involved in serious debates on this site because you say one thing and right away 10 people are crying that you're bashing or criticizing. Quite frankly, it's a turn off for a lot of people who may be able to contribute positively to the forum, but don't want to get all mixed up in the nonsense.
I don't think that outright attacks should exist in this forum. I don't think this forum should become the equivalent of an NYPD Rant type forum where a bunch of disgruntled emergency services personnel talk about who is the worst paramedic, or the laziest cop, or the buffiest firefighter. I think this forum should remain a constructive place for local emergency services personnel to debate and discuss the issues that exist in emergency services, whether at the local or national level. Chris192's post in the other thread related to this topic is a perfect response I think... if only I could put it so eloquently, but honestly I don't care much about being eloquent.
Emergency services personnel generally have Alpha/dominant personalities. They're leaders, they face things that the general public does not face, and we do things that the general public does not do. Having an alpha personality means sometimes you have to grow some thick skin. If someone throws a jab at volunteers, don't cry about it. Come up with an educated rebuttal that disputes what that member is saying. Problems exist across the board with paid, volunteer, and combination departments. Discussing these problems is not bashing, it's a discussion to talk about the problems that exist. If you don't like the fact that your agency has faults that someone pointed out in this forum, get over it. Maybe the points brought up here are valid points, so instead of crying about it, do something about it. Make necessary changes, ask how things can be improved, ask what you can do to bring your agency up to the recognized standards.
The simple fact is that in an area where there is so much diversity amongst its emergency service personnel, there's always going to be conflict and debates. Just because someone's views on a certain person, agency, service, or method of doing things aren't your own views, as JFLYNN says, QTIP.
I can only hope that too many members of the general public don't read the nonsense that goes on here. Some of the threads are fantastic, with great input from a lot of educated and experienced individuals. The moderators do an excellent job of weeding out posts that are not constructive.
While I don't personally know you Seth, I know you value this forum for what it is and I know that you and the staff have put a lot of time, effort, and money into creating this forum. All I can say is, don't let all the petty complaints and other nonsense get to you. If people have a problem with things that are said here or topics that arise, let them move on, and find another forum where everyone holds hands and sings songs around a campfire. If they choose not to move on, then they are going to have to learn not to be so sensitive and grow some thicker skin.