ckroll

Accuweather has it at 3.4 inches, and no offense boys, but this girl isn't going to get excited over 3 inches.

Accuweather has it at 3.4 inches, and no offense boys, but this girl isn't going to get excited over 3 inches.

Answers, no. but sympathy, yes. It was...22 years ago.... and yet I still remember the wait, it is unbearable. Instant scoring is no better, the print out for my medic being the longest 2 minutes of my life. All I can say is anyone who goes the distance and finishes EMT is a hero in my book. Trust me, you passed. If you didn't, then you practice and test again. At your tender age you still have a lifetime of community service ahead of you. Another week or two won't kill you.. but I know it feels like it will. Deep breath, you're going to be fine.

These are photos of a situation I came across this past fall in Antelope Island State Park which is located just north of Salt Lake City, UT...... I was driving through the park when out of the corner of my eye, I spotted what appeared to be an Excavator buried in the sand on the beach...... I turned the car around for another look and I was not hallucinating....... I did see an Excavator buried in the sand..... The story I was told was that a couple had set out to go out in the lake with their kayaks and had driven their Ford 4x4 pick up onto the beach..... As they made it onto the beach, the truck sunk into the sand/clay and they were now stuck and unable to get out...... They called a friend with another truck and he came out to help and also became stuck..... They then called another friend with an excavator to get them out and he also became stuck...... Actually he became buried....... As I was leaving, the news media satellite trucks were descending on the scene....... They were able to get the trucks out using rolls of chain link fence under the trucks tires but I am not sure how they got the excavator out.....Someone later told me they had to get a crane and lift it out..... As they say, No good deed goes unpunished....

I saw what appeared to be an excavator buried in the sand out of the corner of my eye as I drove into the park.....

I wasn't seeing things.....

As I pushed through the brush to get close, I noticed that these spiders were everywhere......The hell with the deer ticks!!!!!!!!!!!

I also came across this mule deer who seemed to be curious as to what all the commotion was.....

Wow, this isn't good.....

Working to free the original truck.....

These guys were headed towards the action too.....

This guy stopped for a drink.....

Everybody's helping out....... I'm not sure if its true, but I was told by a friend who lives nearby that they lifted it out with a crane..... I just hope the excavator owner had a "friend"

DOH policy statement 10 - 01 January 2010. Epi and AEDs were required to be on NY ambulances as of May 01 2010. Great job. Putnam Valley had the same experience back in 2001. We put epi on the rigs even though we had ALS back up. A woman presented with a hornet sting an hour old, having no reaction. The medic kicked it back to BLS and half way to the hospital she had a massive reaction. What seemed like a lot of money for something ALS could do for us turned out to be an excellent investment. It is wonderful to see BLS step up and have such a positive outcome. Well done.

"Expedite" is just a word. What one does with it is entirely up to the responder. It doesn't affect how I drive, but it does get me thinking about what I'm going to be walking into when I get there. "Expedite" actually tells me a lot. It means the scene is not under control and the person "in charge' is wetting themselves. That said, "Expedite" sounds a whole lot better than "I want my mommy!!!!"
Let's come up with something better. Ideas?
"35 Medic 1....'Clean up Aisle 5.'"

"Expedite" is just a word. What one does with it is entirely up to the responder. It doesn't affect how I drive, but it does get me thinking about what I'm going to be walking into when I get there. "Expedite" actually tells me a lot. It means the scene is not under control and the person "in charge' is wetting themselves. That said, "Expedite" sounds a whole lot better than "I want my mommy!!!!"
Let's come up with something better. Ideas?
"35 Medic 1....'Clean up Aisle 5.'"

Ah, another 'grasshopper'... What I would say is that 'shorter time to patient' is always better. That said, if this is THE goal, then there are many ways to achieve it. Every 'way' has a 'cost' associated with it. Cost/benefit is a decision that gets made long before we get dispatched to a call in the form of staffing and system management. The greater determinant in how long it takes to get help to a patient is how far away from the patient the help is, not how fast you drive.
Almost invariably, it is trained bystanders whose instantaneous help keeps a patient viable until EMS gets there that make the larger difference in outcome. And yet basic emergency tactics aren't even taught in schools. One can get a driver's license and not know what to do at an auto accident.
Minutes also carry different values. If time from injury to arrival of useful EMS is under 8 minutes AND it is a critical call, then shaving time here might make sense. If time from injury to EMS arrival is going to be 15 to 20 minutes, then shaving a minute or two here doesn't have nearly as much value.
As for RLS versus reckless, half of all drivers are below average. One need not be reckless to meet up with an inattentive driver who completely isn't prepared to stop or take evasive action.
Whether RLS has value needs to be evaluated case by case. I think the wise responder does this starting from the position that RLS is not worth it and then tries to build a case that it is,not the other way around.
These are good questions. If at 20, one does not have the 'fire in the belly' then one shouldn't be in emergency services. If one still has it at 50, then they also shouldn't be in emergency services. Remembering one of the great quotes on why a driver didn't go all that fast..."If the fire's any good it will still be going when I get there."

Ah, another 'grasshopper'... What I would say is that 'shorter time to patient' is always better. That said, if this is THE goal, then there are many ways to achieve it. Every 'way' has a 'cost' associated with it. Cost/benefit is a decision that gets made long before we get dispatched to a call in the form of staffing and system management. The greater determinant in how long it takes to get help to a patient is how far away from the patient the help is, not how fast you drive.
Almost invariably, it is trained bystanders whose instantaneous help keeps a patient viable until EMS gets there that make the larger difference in outcome. And yet basic emergency tactics aren't even taught in schools. One can get a driver's license and not know what to do at an auto accident.
Minutes also carry different values. If time from injury to arrival of useful EMS is under 8 minutes AND it is a critical call, then shaving time here might make sense. If time from injury to EMS arrival is going to be 15 to 20 minutes, then shaving a minute or two here doesn't have nearly as much value.
As for RLS versus reckless, half of all drivers are below average. One need not be reckless to meet up with an inattentive driver who completely isn't prepared to stop or take evasive action.
Whether RLS has value needs to be evaluated case by case. I think the wise responder does this starting from the position that RLS is not worth it and then tries to build a case that it is,not the other way around.
These are good questions. If at 20, one does not have the 'fire in the belly' then one shouldn't be in emergency services. If one still has it at 50, then they also shouldn't be in emergency services. Remembering one of the great quotes on why a driver didn't go all that fast..."If the fire's any good it will still be going when I get there."

Ah, another 'grasshopper'... What I would say is that 'shorter time to patient' is always better. That said, if this is THE goal, then there are many ways to achieve it. Every 'way' has a 'cost' associated with it. Cost/benefit is a decision that gets made long before we get dispatched to a call in the form of staffing and system management. The greater determinant in how long it takes to get help to a patient is how far away from the patient the help is, not how fast you drive.
Almost invariably, it is trained bystanders whose instantaneous help keeps a patient viable until EMS gets there that make the larger difference in outcome. And yet basic emergency tactics aren't even taught in schools. One can get a driver's license and not know what to do at an auto accident.
Minutes also carry different values. If time from injury to arrival of useful EMS is under 8 minutes AND it is a critical call, then shaving time here might make sense. If time from injury to EMS arrival is going to be 15 to 20 minutes, then shaving a minute or two here doesn't have nearly as much value.
As for RLS versus reckless, half of all drivers are below average. One need not be reckless to meet up with an inattentive driver who completely isn't prepared to stop or take evasive action.
Whether RLS has value needs to be evaluated case by case. I think the wise responder does this starting from the position that RLS is not worth it and then tries to build a case that it is,not the other way around.
These are good questions. If at 20, one does not have the 'fire in the belly' then one shouldn't be in emergency services. If one still has it at 50, then they also shouldn't be in emergency services. Remembering one of the great quotes on why a driver didn't go all that fast..."If the fire's any good it will still be going when I get there."

First, one of the things I love about sites like this is that anyone of any age or background can get us up and talking about stuff. I think this is great and this is not a bad question. We should all be able to answer it. To rephrase it a bit, why put them on in the first place ?
Any call for aid probably trumps what the majority of citizens are out doing in their cars on a given morning. The ability to cross the yellow line, to use the oncoming lane, to not wait for 6 cars waiting for a light to change and then turn left,.....well, lights or sirens help us do that. Abiding by every traffic control device and waiting for every driver in front of us is using a lot of time that most drivers will gladly give us if they know we have someplace to go. Lights and sirens let other drivers know a vehicle may not be where they expect it to be and that that vehicle would like a little courtesy.
Lights and sirens are like any other tool, useful if used wisely and for an intended purpose. Light functions in a straight line. It is very useful for signaling oncoming traffic and moderately useful for signaling same direction traffic ahead [if the driver is using his rear view mirror for more than hanging fuzzy dice]. Lights have no effect on traffic that is not direct line of sight.
Sound MAY--and that's a huge 'may'--- signal drivers not in line of sight. Physics here is key and I will skip the details unless people really want me to dig it up, but given sight lines in intersections, sound proofing in cars, reaction time of sober adults, and speed through intersections------- 10 to 15 miles an hour is as fast as a vehicle RLS can enter an intersection against a stop sign or red light. And that is if no one is texting.
So for me, lights [and much less often, sirens] is a way to say, "Excuse me." and move to the head of the line , but it doesn't mean one has to significantly increase speed. And if one does increase speed to the point that one outruns the usefulness of the lights and sirens, then that person is begging to have a collision for which that person will be responsible,and which will significantly increase response time for that call.
So, yes light and sirens are an essential part of the conversation that emergency vehicles have with other vehicles out on the road. But that conversation is a dialogue, not a monologue. Lights and sirens in no way give us the right to be aggressive with or disrespectful to other drivers.

First, one of the things I love about sites like this is that anyone of any age or background can get us up and talking about stuff. I think this is great and this is not a bad question. We should all be able to answer it. To rephrase it a bit, why put them on in the first place ?
Any call for aid probably trumps what the majority of citizens are out doing in their cars on a given morning. The ability to cross the yellow line, to use the oncoming lane, to not wait for 6 cars waiting for a light to change and then turn left,.....well, lights or sirens help us do that. Abiding by every traffic control device and waiting for every driver in front of us is using a lot of time that most drivers will gladly give us if they know we have someplace to go. Lights and sirens let other drivers know a vehicle may not be where they expect it to be and that that vehicle would like a little courtesy.
Lights and sirens are like any other tool, useful if used wisely and for an intended purpose. Light functions in a straight line. It is very useful for signaling oncoming traffic and moderately useful for signaling same direction traffic ahead [if the driver is using his rear view mirror for more than hanging fuzzy dice]. Lights have no effect on traffic that is not direct line of sight.
Sound MAY--and that's a huge 'may'--- signal drivers not in line of sight. Physics here is key and I will skip the details unless people really want me to dig it up, but given sight lines in intersections, sound proofing in cars, reaction time of sober adults, and speed through intersections------- 10 to 15 miles an hour is as fast as a vehicle RLS can enter an intersection against a stop sign or red light. And that is if no one is texting.
So for me, lights [and much less often, sirens] is a way to say, "Excuse me." and move to the head of the line , but it doesn't mean one has to significantly increase speed. And if one does increase speed to the point that one outruns the usefulness of the lights and sirens, then that person is begging to have a collision for which that person will be responsible,and which will significantly increase response time for that call.
So, yes light and sirens are an essential part of the conversation that emergency vehicles have with other vehicles out on the road. But that conversation is a dialogue, not a monologue. Lights and sirens in no way give us the right to be aggressive with or disrespectful to other drivers.

First, one of the things I love about sites like this is that anyone of any age or background can get us up and talking about stuff. I think this is great and this is not a bad question. We should all be able to answer it. To rephrase it a bit, why put them on in the first place ?
Any call for aid probably trumps what the majority of citizens are out doing in their cars on a given morning. The ability to cross the yellow line, to use the oncoming lane, to not wait for 6 cars waiting for a light to change and then turn left,.....well, lights or sirens help us do that. Abiding by every traffic control device and waiting for every driver in front of us is using a lot of time that most drivers will gladly give us if they know we have someplace to go. Lights and sirens let other drivers know a vehicle may not be where they expect it to be and that that vehicle would like a little courtesy.
Lights and sirens are like any other tool, useful if used wisely and for an intended purpose. Light functions in a straight line. It is very useful for signaling oncoming traffic and moderately useful for signaling same direction traffic ahead [if the driver is using his rear view mirror for more than hanging fuzzy dice]. Lights have no effect on traffic that is not direct line of sight.
Sound MAY--and that's a huge 'may'--- signal drivers not in line of sight. Physics here is key and I will skip the details unless people really want me to dig it up, but given sight lines in intersections, sound proofing in cars, reaction time of sober adults, and speed through intersections------- 10 to 15 miles an hour is as fast as a vehicle RLS can enter an intersection against a stop sign or red light. And that is if no one is texting.
So for me, lights [and much less often, sirens] is a way to say, "Excuse me." and move to the head of the line , but it doesn't mean one has to significantly increase speed. And if one does increase speed to the point that one outruns the usefulness of the lights and sirens, then that person is begging to have a collision for which that person will be responsible,and which will significantly increase response time for that call.
So, yes light and sirens are an essential part of the conversation that emergency vehicles have with other vehicles out on the road. But that conversation is a dialogue, not a monologue. Lights and sirens in no way give us the right to be aggressive with or disrespectful to other drivers.

First, one of the things I love about sites like this is that anyone of any age or background can get us up and talking about stuff. I think this is great and this is not a bad question. We should all be able to answer it. To rephrase it a bit, why put them on in the first place ?
Any call for aid probably trumps what the majority of citizens are out doing in their cars on a given morning. The ability to cross the yellow line, to use the oncoming lane, to not wait for 6 cars waiting for a light to change and then turn left,.....well, lights or sirens help us do that. Abiding by every traffic control device and waiting for every driver in front of us is using a lot of time that most drivers will gladly give us if they know we have someplace to go. Lights and sirens let other drivers know a vehicle may not be where they expect it to be and that that vehicle would like a little courtesy.
Lights and sirens are like any other tool, useful if used wisely and for an intended purpose. Light functions in a straight line. It is very useful for signaling oncoming traffic and moderately useful for signaling same direction traffic ahead [if the driver is using his rear view mirror for more than hanging fuzzy dice]. Lights have no effect on traffic that is not direct line of sight.
Sound MAY--and that's a huge 'may'--- signal drivers not in line of sight. Physics here is key and I will skip the details unless people really want me to dig it up, but given sight lines in intersections, sound proofing in cars, reaction time of sober adults, and speed through intersections------- 10 to 15 miles an hour is as fast as a vehicle RLS can enter an intersection against a stop sign or red light. And that is if no one is texting.
So for me, lights [and much less often, sirens] is a way to say, "Excuse me." and move to the head of the line , but it doesn't mean one has to significantly increase speed. And if one does increase speed to the point that one outruns the usefulness of the lights and sirens, then that person is begging to have a collision for which that person will be responsible,and which will significantly increase response time for that call.
So, yes light and sirens are an essential part of the conversation that emergency vehicles have with other vehicles out on the road. But that conversation is a dialogue, not a monologue. Lights and sirens in no way give us the right to be aggressive with or disrespectful to other drivers.

First, one of the things I love about sites like this is that anyone of any age or background can get us up and talking about stuff. I think this is great and this is not a bad question. We should all be able to answer it. To rephrase it a bit, why put them on in the first place ?
Any call for aid probably trumps what the majority of citizens are out doing in their cars on a given morning. The ability to cross the yellow line, to use the oncoming lane, to not wait for 6 cars waiting for a light to change and then turn left,.....well, lights or sirens help us do that. Abiding by every traffic control device and waiting for every driver in front of us is using a lot of time that most drivers will gladly give us if they know we have someplace to go. Lights and sirens let other drivers know a vehicle may not be where they expect it to be and that that vehicle would like a little courtesy.
Lights and sirens are like any other tool, useful if used wisely and for an intended purpose. Light functions in a straight line. It is very useful for signaling oncoming traffic and moderately useful for signaling same direction traffic ahead [if the driver is using his rear view mirror for more than hanging fuzzy dice]. Lights have no effect on traffic that is not direct line of sight.
Sound MAY--and that's a huge 'may'--- signal drivers not in line of sight. Physics here is key and I will skip the details unless people really want me to dig it up, but given sight lines in intersections, sound proofing in cars, reaction time of sober adults, and speed through intersections------- 10 to 15 miles an hour is as fast as a vehicle RLS can enter an intersection against a stop sign or red light. And that is if no one is texting.
So for me, lights [and much less often, sirens] is a way to say, "Excuse me." and move to the head of the line , but it doesn't mean one has to significantly increase speed. And if one does increase speed to the point that one outruns the usefulness of the lights and sirens, then that person is begging to have a collision for which that person will be responsible,and which will significantly increase response time for that call.
So, yes light and sirens are an essential part of the conversation that emergency vehicles have with other vehicles out on the road. But that conversation is a dialogue, not a monologue. Lights and sirens in no way give us the right to be aggressive with or disrespectful to other drivers.

A good question deserves a good answer. My volunteer department has over 100 active members, lots of associates. Some serve out of family traditions, some are adrenaline junkies, some believe in community service. There are even a few souls who come for the food, and my heart goes out to them. Yes, some people love to parade and those people go to parades. The last time I was at a meeting, which is a while ago, there was grousing from the parade people that so few people were turning out, it was a always the same few. Long after one has put on a scott pack for the last time, one can don a uniform and shiny shoes to go marching for the cause.
For every hour out at a parade, dozens of hours are spent in house, polishing, gear checking, maintaining equipment. Towns are extremely well protected when everyone is in house on a detail. I even remember a mutual aid call where not only did we make filthy the parade truck and the parade rack, we could have won best dressed department to a running brush fire.
It is hard to prove a negative. I can say without reservation that in my 20 years as a volunteer, my department never put parading above fire fighting. I cannot think of a time where service suffered when a truck was out of town, be it maintenance or a parade and I can think of many times a designated crew on stand by cut response time. I can remember the dozens of times that I was asked to stay home and stay frosty. I can remember the day of a department golf outing we handled back to back structure fires with over 40 members at scene. I can remember the night of the 2000 New Year's Eve gala when, party notwithstanding, we mounted an outstanding attack on a propane fueled house fire with easily 50 members at scene.
A volunteer fire department is a social enterprize. It is also a large and dedicated fire fighting organization. What we lack in paid performance is more often than not made up in brute size. If for 4 hours on a Saturday afternoon we are down 10 deputy chiefs with a combined age of 750 and one truck.... we still have 7 trucks and 80 members home cutting grass. Parades aren't on held on weekdays.
Here is a pair of questions for our paid brothers: How many fire fighters does a paid truck get to the scene.... 4 or 5?
Can our paid brothers point out times when participation at a parade has actually resulted in a negative outcome for a community served by volunteers?

Insurance data is valuable, but far from a full picture. Homeowner's insurance data does not reflect response to auto accidents, wild fires, searches, wires down, ice storms. In fact, structure fires is a small percentage of what we do.
I am aware of no studies on the subject, but 4 fire fighters will have a hard time handling a running brush fire 1/2 mile from the road or a search for a lost person..... and heaven help the person who actually needs someone to fight fire if they are the second call in district.
No one has made the case that towns are poorly protected if some manpower and apparatus is out of district. As a rule, a team of 4 or 5 individuals who are well trained can handle initial responses. I think the balance of departments can manage that and a parade.
Is there evidence to the contrary? Dare I say it, silence is deafening....

Insurance data is valuable, but far from a full picture. Homeowner's insurance data does not reflect response to auto accidents, wild fires, searches, wires down, ice storms. In fact, structure fires is a small percentage of what we do.
I am aware of no studies on the subject, but 4 fire fighters will have a hard time handling a running brush fire 1/2 mile from the road or a search for a lost person..... and heaven help the person who actually needs someone to fight fire if they are the second call in district.
No one has made the case that towns are poorly protected if some manpower and apparatus is out of district. As a rule, a team of 4 or 5 individuals who are well trained can handle initial responses. I think the balance of departments can manage that and a parade.
Is there evidence to the contrary? Dare I say it, silence is deafening....

A good question deserves a good answer. My volunteer department has over 100 active members, lots of associates. Some serve out of family traditions, some are adrenaline junkies, some believe in community service. There are even a few souls who come for the food, and my heart goes out to them. Yes, some people love to parade and those people go to parades. The last time I was at a meeting, which is a while ago, there was grousing from the parade people that so few people were turning out, it was a always the same few. Long after one has put on a scott pack for the last time, one can don a uniform and shiny shoes to go marching for the cause.
For every hour out at a parade, dozens of hours are spent in house, polishing, gear checking, maintaining equipment. Towns are extremely well protected when everyone is in house on a detail. I even remember a mutual aid call where not only did we make filthy the parade truck and the parade rack, we could have won best dressed department to a running brush fire.
It is hard to prove a negative. I can say without reservation that in my 20 years as a volunteer, my department never put parading above fire fighting. I cannot think of a time where service suffered when a truck was out of town, be it maintenance or a parade and I can think of many times a designated crew on stand by cut response time. I can remember the dozens of times that I was asked to stay home and stay frosty. I can remember the day of a department golf outing we handled back to back structure fires with over 40 members at scene. I can remember the night of the 2000 New Year's Eve gala when, party notwithstanding, we mounted an outstanding attack on a propane fueled house fire with easily 50 members at scene.
A volunteer fire department is a social enterprize. It is also a large and dedicated fire fighting organization. What we lack in paid performance is more often than not made up in brute size. If for 4 hours on a Saturday afternoon we are down 10 deputy chiefs with a combined age of 750 and one truck.... we still have 7 trucks and 80 members home cutting grass. Parades aren't on held on weekdays.
Here is a pair of questions for our paid brothers: How many fire fighters does a paid truck get to the scene.... 4 or 5?
Can our paid brothers point out times when participation at a parade has actually resulted in a negative outcome for a community served by volunteers?

That's it..... breathe......let the anger out.
I am reminded of the joke about the woman who when asked if she would sleep with the town drunk for a million dollars said, 'I guess so.' and at 50 dollars showed outrage saying, 'What do you think I am?' The reply was "We have established what you are m'am, we were trying to determine the degree."
Compensation is relative. Whether we do it for $10-$25 an hour or all you can eat shrimp once a year..... we are all underpaid and perhaps we can agree that probably makes us all idiots, just a matter of degree.
I meant no disrespect to paid service, [which I am 60 hrs a week], and if you found it in my post I apologize sincerely. I never said nor meant to imply that paid service lacks compassion. Some days I do not sense the enthusiasm, which you quite adequately addressed in your first paragraph.
In life, in EMS, it is not only where the path takes you, but how you choose to walk it.

We need to find some common ground here. Volunteers aren't holding anyone back, and speed is relative. Overworked paid systems have long response times as do rural areas.[ In most of the Adirondacks you will almost never get a medic and an ambulance will be coming from 20 miles away to take you to a hospital farther away than that.] And I see in the volunteer EMTs that I work with an enthusiasm and dedication to patient care that is too often lacking in paid services. Volunteers are there because they want to be, and it shows. I just wish they wanted to be there more often.
Paid systems are minimally staffed, so when it gets really busy they have extended response times, too. Volunteers, or those managing them need to step up on the hard issues. Sacrifice requires.... sacrifice. Volunteer EMS agencies have to set minimum standards and meet them. That may mean mandatory rostering in station and/or supplementing with paid staffing.
A distinction that needs to be made is that individuals VOLUNTEER, agencies by and large do NOT. I believe all agencies [locally] are funded by some combination of municipal funding and billing. Either through taxes or billing a patient is seeing the cost of running an EMS system. The money is there. How is it spent? One view is that spending money on ridiculously expensive ambulances with all the bells and whistles, fancy jackets, awards and steak and shrimp dinners will bring in and keep volunteers. If that is working, great. If it isn't, then consider the agencies that bill and use that money to supplement volunteer availability.
Volunteerism is fantastic. We do not need to get rid of volunteers; we need to make it possible for people to volunteer at the same time that we provide consistent, timely, EMS service. Billing was a hard pill to swallow for volunteers, but we got over it. Supplemental staffing or mandatory rostering is just as hard. We need to get over that, too.

I am asking for input for this topic. What I am looking for is a list of tips that we cant find in the books that work on the fireground. this could help everybody at sometime in thier career. No particular order at this point, if you have something share it with the rest of the crowd.
GROUND LADDERS
All ground ladders should be marked at the balance point for one man carries
Whoever has the Butt / foot of the ladder in a 2 man carry should anounce it so as you are approaching the building there is no confusion as to where it should be placed, and also so it cant get put upside down. That could never happen lol

And if all you've got is balls, then in my opinion, it's just another pair of fuzzy dice on the rear view mirror.

remember585 basically just summed it up.......if u cant take the heat stay out of the kitchen....ball breaking is a big part of our job in the kitchen and around the fire house. Everyone that is growing up now and so sensitve and has everything given to them and they are told that they are great.. society is becoming too soft.. every sport team i ever played on(basically hockey) there was a lot of ball breaking and it got me preppared for what they firehouse is like and plus i grew up around it and understand it..If yypur gonna be a baby and not be a man maybe this isnt the job for you

Censorship seems harsh. That said, free speech isn't free any more than 'freedom' is. Freedoms come with a responsibility to others to show respect,restraint. To paraphrase a well known opening line in a letter addressing a complaint.... Dear Sir, Thank you for sharing your views. I agreed with you until I read your letter....
I wasn't aware people were unhappy, thought it sounded less than serious..... but if there is one more comment about "grow a pair", "man up", or "quit being a girl" you're really going to piss me off. There is nothing wrong with having a 'full set' [a.k.a. two XX's] of chromosome 23. And there is no honor in being thick skinned if it leaves the person insensitive, indifferent, unable or unwilling to show compassion. Grow a thicker skin or take a walk is more or less the same as saying, my sandbox, my rules. The only person who has a right to say that on this forum has asked us our opinion about how to keep all participants engaged. We owe him better answers.
I've never met anyone from whom I could not learn something and to whom I could not teach something, if one actively keeps an open mind and an open heart. Pushing to the sidelines members who don't meet some 'manly' standard is giving up the opportunity to teach and to learn. I hope we are all here to do a little of both.
Is there value in anonymous posts? Require everyone put their real name on what they write... and maybe try 'girling up' once in a while.