jayhalsey

Does the law, as it relates to the justifiable use of deadly physical force take into account whether it's an automobile headed toward a crowd of kindergartners or an airplane flying over populated communities?

I wouldnt think it would by the letter of the law, but I am not a cop or a lawyer, nor do I play one on tv. I would think there would be an emotional difference for the person that has to shoot down a plane over a crowded community vs. taking an automobile out. Potential for a big difference in the loss of life there.

At issue is whether or not a vehicle, by virtue of being in the air as opposed to on the ground or water, is subject to different rules and jurisdiction.

Big difference being the potential loss of life due to where it chooses to come to a stop. Not many cars or trucks have the same capacity, not only of passengers, but also the amount of damage it can do once it impacts due to size as well as fuel capacity and velocity.

My recommendation for the complaining boaters, don't use your boat, go camping instead.

You can't be serious.

I know in my fathers PD they use their onduty Glock 22 .40s for raccoons.

Seems a little, pardon the pun, overkill, no?

I always thought they used .22s to euthanize raccoons and other small animals. Is this no longer the case?

Luckily the patient didnt need to get to the hospital quickly. They had the time to act like children. Ridiculous.

you were shocked by this? really? I am a frequent offender of blocking hydrants, fire lanes, etc but only when convenient parking options are unavailable. Maybe in the minutes before you arrived there were no convenient spots. Nothing like coming outside after the delivery truck, engine, RMP, and dbl parked cars are gone to see my ambulance sitting in the middle of the street all by itself. He's not on a call, so yes he could absolutely park somewhere else but is this really that big of a deal? Its the fire lane and the curb cut is still easily accessible.

More importantly, you knew where the offender was. Did you take this up with them personally or just come here to whine about it?

My guess is that is the OPs dark colored car in the picture.

While I understand why they changed policy, wouldn't the better solution be to reconsider the budget situation and fund water rescue equipment/training again?

So, the policy now allows for "commander discretion". Discretion for what, getting his people hurt? If a situation was objectivley too dangerous to handle without special equipment and training one week, it will still be too dangerous next week. Or was it not that dangerous to begin with?

"Commander discretion" makes me think, the powers that be are simply trying to take the "blame" off of themselves and shift it to the IC at the incident. "Well he chose not to effect a rescue". Quite simply, how do the citizens of this ISLAND let the powers that be do away with their WATER RESCUE program? I would hope they would have been up in arms about it before this happened, more so after this incident.

And to echo some of the comments made in this thread, it is always fascinating how many will post messages cutting down the responders that were at the scene without knowing all the facts. It came out very quickly that the water rescue training and equipment was discontinued years before this incident. Maybe there are alot of people here that are in the habit of putting untrained personnel into probable death causing situations.

As expected I tend to see the term advice differently, or maybe it is wording which states that the BoR can change it with 2/3 majority WITH the advice of Chiefs. of both SFRD and each VFD district affected. My understanding is that the term "with" when used in this context usually denotes a requirement. And quite frankly if all that was needed was a 2/3 majority or enacting an ordinance this would have been settled long ago. But as our former mayor found out the fact is the VFDs have to agree to ANY changes to their districts.

Events should begin to move now as there is an announcement pending today about this. We'll see.

Cogs

I guess it would be open to interpretation. I would certainly hope that both parties being affected would be included in the discussion, and would have to sign off on any changes. But, as we have seen, sometimes the powers that be arent interested in hearing the "advice" from both parties affected. I am curious to see what this announcement today is going to bring, though.

Mayor overstates challenges to unified fire service

Published 06:36 p.m., Wednesday, June 1, 2011

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/opinion/article/Mayor-overstates-challenges-to-unified-fire-1405426.php

The next question is: Which of Stamford's Volunteer Fire Chief's would advise the BOR's to make the appropriate changes? I think we should make the next wheel round. Stay tuned...

"Advice" makes me think they just wanted to make sure that the two parties involved would each have their voices heard. One does not need to heed "advice". If they had swapped "advice" for "approval" that would be a sticky point.

Yes they do. They record before and after it's tripped. But I forget how many seconds it records for. It's something like 15secs before and after.

Huh?

How can it record "before it is tripped"?

Soooooo-

I just got a new Dell Dimension 570. Have a SimpleDrive external hard drive. Plugged it into a USB port in the back of the tower and it works. Now today, wake the computer up from sleep and hard drive seems to have corrupted. Hard drive is stil under warranty.

But......

Put the hard drive in a USB port in the front of the computer, and it works. Whats going on?

Sounds like maybe something isnt setup with your hibernation settings. I was having that issue with my internal drives not waking up from hibernation. Something weird in Windows 7. It seems to be a fairly common problem. Some tweaks in the sleep/hibernation settings and it was fixed. Maybe something along those lines such as USB ports losing power during sleep.

I also have issues with USB, remote port's wont work with my cameras for some reason, they have to be plugged into the front of the computer.

What do you mean by "remote ports"? Are you talking about a hub?

I had the same problem. I would have to leave the external hard drive unplugged until the dell would be up and the plug the drive in. Now I have a old MAC and all is good.

I have a Western Digital external hard drive, and if I leave it plug into the computer while the computer when it boots up, the computer runs the external hard drive. For some reason it will not run the programming in the computers hard drive so it freezes and locks up. I can only plug it in after the computer is up and running. Dell sucks, I will never buy one of their pieces of crap again. Worst customer service ever.

This is a problem in your bios. You have USB listed in your bios as a bootable option before hard drive. You need to go into your bios and change your boot order so that USB is after your hard drive.

Wasn't this the third season that just aired?

I hate negative firefighters press, but I'm not sure that this article is an unnecessary attack on firefighters. Read carefully and the article appears to be relaying facts and not filled with personal opinions of the writer.

The husband was arrested too. It would be wrong if only she was arrested and they mentioned him by name and his position as a firefighter...

"A Wilton fire department lieutenant and his wife -- a former stock broker -- have been arrested in New Canaan..."

"Funds from the victim were paid to charities, credit companies and other financial institutions, then transferred by Halloran and Michelsen for their own personal use, police said."

"One "charity" was supposedly created to support firefighters. Michelsen is a career firefighter and the president of the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 2233, according to the town. Neither the Wilton Fire Department nor the union was implicated in the scam, according to police."

There are plenty of rags out there slamming our brothers.... This guy, just like if he were a Mayor, Town Supervisor, Foreman of the DPW, or any other public official has been named and identified by profession.

I agree with this post. If the lieutenant wasnt arrested, then I think the OP would have a point. But to say that "There was no need to drag the womans husband into it" is simply ludicrous. He was, after all, arrested in this matte. The article I read made a point to explicitly state that the lieutenants department and union had nothign whatsoever to do with the alleged crime. If the writer really wanted to disparage the fire service, they would have left that part out. Also, the OP states that there was a proper way to title the article. That proper way lists the womans profession, but not her husband. Why would that be proper and not disparaging to financial advisers?

The more I read this thread, the more I come back to the same point. You have a car that was in an accident. Fled that accident and was involved in another accident. Passenger in this car is now permanently injured. How does anyone know that his injuries were solely from the second accident, rather than the first?

Someone was able to prove which accident caused the brain injury? And no mention of the driver that hit and ran?

how is an agency gonna know about a persons driving record? someone correct me if im wrong by the place were this incident took place is a VOLUNTEER agency. your gonna tell me that every agency should do driving record checks on ALL the members that drive?? are u crazy...thats just a straight up WASTE of money!!! ill tell u right now i've had accidents in my personal car 2 of which i totaled my car... you mean to tell me that the agency that i belong too shouldnt let me drive because of my PRIOR driving record??? honestly if there is a good driver training program out there its the EVOC class. people get in ACCIDENTS every day...THATS WHY THEY ARE CALLED ACCIDENTS!!!

do i think what this guy did was wrong? yes i do. and he should be held responsable for his actions because he knew he took the sleeping aid.

Do agencies perform a criminal background check before letting someone join? If not, they should. Would you want someone in your department that had been convicted of armed robbery? Manslaughter? These background checks are definitely not a waste of money, in my opinion. Why shouldnt that background check extend to the driving record? If there is an opportunity that that individual is going to get behind the wheel of a piece of machinery that weighs a hell of a lot and cost a hell of a lot it seems pretty straight forward. There is a reason that driving records are kept. If someone has gotten into a bunch of accidents, chances are it will happen again. Sure it could be a string of bad luck, but what are the chances of that?

CDLs and Q endorsements are great, but they are just a start. As someone said, there is alot that goes into driving a fire truck/ambulance. THe licensing should be just one requirement. The others being time in the department, as well as driver training on the piece that you will be driving. Every truck will behave differently, so you need to train and get to know how YOUR truck will handle and perform.

"The fees don't apply to fires, or to heart attacks, just car wrecks."

I wonder what happens if a heart attack causes an accident that then leads to a vehicle fire.

Sounds like a guy that was on scene of a structure fire called for more resources. Once senior personnel arrived and assesed intervention efforts as well as personnel already at the scene, those additional resources were deemd unnecessary, and were cancelled. Seems like that is the way it is supposed to work, no?

In terms of cops going inside a structure, I would have to say it should be left to their judgement.

But what sort of judegement would they have with no fire training? Would they know to look for warnign signs of a backdraft, or signs of potential collapse, etc? If you start training police in firefighting, where do you stop? Do you issue them bunker gear? Do you start putting pumps on cruisers? There are problems with this, many of which have been mentioned.

Police pull up on a fire. Pound on the door, and alert any occupants. Clear the area of traffic. Keep any occupants that came out in a safe area, protected from the elements, etc. Gather information for the firefighters, as to number of occupants thatmay still be inside, any special hazards, etc.

A portion of that 28K did go to the LRFC, exactly how much wasn't published on the Stamford website. But the exact amount is immaterial. The point is that this family paid a sizable amount of money in taxes and expected to receive basic services in return. Unless negigence is a generally accepted basic service, I think this family was short-changed. Meanwhile, city dwellers paying 1/10th that amount in downtown Stamford receive a standard response 24/7/365 without all this drama and the emotional and ego-driven decisions to cancel responding apparatus.

The concept of engendered reliance also comes into play here. Fire departments have certainly cultivated an environment where the public relies upon them and to fail to provide the service(s) expected creates additional liability.

So they did get some money from the city and arent operating on a $0 budget?

If you do bring it back, how about an option to not ahve it show up. i know that I can minimize it each time I visit the page. I am talking abotu a setting, so one never sees it. I find that it slows down the page way too much. And I never read anything in it anyway.

So this 28k that people are talking about. That went to LRFC?