Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/4-volunteer-firefighters-shot-2-killed-in-apparent-trap

Seriously? Where the hell did all these nutt cases suddenly come from?!

- First a crazy little punk shooting up a mall full of Xmas shopping families.
- Then a socially inept psycho shooting up a primary school.
- Now we've got some dumb little creep setting a fire and killing firefighters?!

This is getting just beyond silly.

If you really want to know, there is a very intelligent guy who talked about the media's way or reporting this things, and that way empowers it to happen. Please see the link below since it's more complex than a forum post can properly elaborate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uwAo8lcAC4

Random spree killings tend to cluster partly due to the sensational reportage by news media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4

Terrible.

Her eis a strange case, the shooter wasn't "legally" allowed to own weapons. Obviously he did have firearms.

So in this case, gun control did not work. That means the NRA will want us to start providing armed security for our firefighters at the scene.

Clearly firefighters should be armed.

We actually had a few guys at my old department that thought we should all carry guns. I always figured there are better ideas than running into a raging inferno with bullets on my side...

Wasn't this part of the plot to American History X?

yes the Nazi scum's dad was killed putting out a fire and that's why he turned to the moronic cult.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Good link juraigamer

 d-usa wrote:
Clearly firefighters should be armed.

We actually had a few guys at my old department that thought we should all carry guns. I always figured there are better ideas than running into a raging inferno with bullets on my side...

Last I checked, Firefighters don't just run into a raging inferno. They would also of course have the sense to remove any firearms before doing that if they had to go rescue someone.

If Firefighters wanted to have guns, they could just have them on the Trucks. They wouldn't need to carry them on their person during the fire.

There is so much wrong with that dumb statement that I don't even know what to say...

Well, talk then. You don't just run in do you?

Yes, actually you do. If there is a confirmed person trapped you are off that truck and ready to enter the dwelling the second you are on scene. Depending on agency protocol you might have a line with you or you don't. Confirmed entrapment is the only time you can ignore 2-in/2-out and don't wait for backup.

There is also no such thing as a secure truck to "lock up your guns".

Ok, thats still easy enough to work around. Just have the guns on the truck standard and not on the Firefighter's themselves.

Assuming you want Firefighters to be armed. I really don't have an opinion on the subject.

Maybe Firefighters should always have a police escort when they respond to a fire.

 Ouze wrote:
Wasn't this part of the plot to American History X?

Backdraft I think.

And who is assigned to watch all the trucks on scene to make sure nobody steals the guns?

I've known some firefighters in Baltimore and parts of the Bronx (NYC) who claimed the entire unit (Firehouse?,Company? Dont really know the term) carried, particularly when responding in certain areas because they would typically take fire from the local gangbangers whose meth lab had just gone up in flames...

A police escort would just be a waste of resources.

 d-usa wrote:
And who is assigned to watch all the trucks on scene to make sure nobody steals the guns?

Isn't there at least one firefighter with the truck operating the equipment?

 Grey Templar wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
And who is assigned to watch all the trucks on scene to make sure nobody steals the guns?

Isn't there at least one firefighter with the truck operating the equipment?

I think you just answered your own question as to why they can't look after the guns

Besides, if the guns are on the truck, they can't act as a magical protective device should the firemen come under fire when they are not near the truck

Nope.

Our usual setup would be this:

First in truck would lay lines and flow water.

If there was a hydrant the second truck would lay line from the hydrant to the first truck. If we were rural (75% of the time) the guys would grab their tools and leave the truck alone. Rescue And really, one of the safety factors for firefighters and EMTs has been that they are neutral. They are not the good guys or the bad guys, they help everybody that is hurt. People don't worry about them entering their homes because they are not the law and they are not armed. Arming firefighters will only add friction and tension into situations the are already very volatile.would setup lights a night, then grab tools and leave it alone. Brush rigs would grab tools and leave it alone. If we were running mutual aid we would leave all our trucks without anybody guarding them.

Grey Templar wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Clearly firefighters should be armed.

We actually had a few guys at my old department that thought we should all carry guns. I always figured there are better ideas than running into a raging inferno with bullets on my side...

Last I checked, Firefighters don't just run into a raging inferno. They would also of course have the sense to remove any firearms before doing that if they had to go rescue someone.

If Firefighters wanted to have guns, they could just have them on the Trucks. They wouldn't need to carry them on their person during the fire.

Good idea! From this point on, all firetrucks are to be retrofitted for turret-mounted machine guns.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Good idea! From this point on, all firetrucks are to be retrofitted for turret-mounted machine guns.

Well that would create Jobs. Someone has to man the twin 50's on the Tanker!

 Grey Templar wrote:
Ok, thats still easy enough to work around. Just have the guns on the truck standard and not on the Firefighter's themselves

What exactly is this going to do against an ambush? You know, a situation where you're shot and dead before you even realize there's a threat and it's time to get the guns out of the truck? Even carrying a gun probably isn't going to do very much in that situation. It's just a reflex assumption that somehow having everyone armed as god intended would magically make everything better.

So we've addressed gun control, and media sensationalism here. The more blatant issue with this scenario was the mans mental health. The man had killed someone before, and by all accounts was a nut case.

Why are these people roaming the streets?

Yeah this dude bashed his Grandmother's head in with a hammer. Why the HELL was he free to be anywhere much less shooting first responders and most likely murdering his sister?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Yeah this dude bashed his Grandmother's head in with a hammer. Why the HELL was he free to be anywhere much less shooting first responders and most likely murdering his sister?

Over-crowded, revolving door justice system that gives all rights to the criminals and leaves the victims out in the cold, would be my guess.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...the local gangbangers...

I can't help but snigger every time I heard these street gang guys called 'gangbangers', does that term have the same meaning in the US?


As for the OT, terrible business. It may or may not be a copycat style thing, but repeat shootings after a well publicised event are rather common. The above youtube video is spot on unfortunately, a lot of it is due to media coverage, but the public lap it up. And that's another problem.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
...the local gangbangers...

I can't help but snigger every time I heard these street gang guys called 'gangbangers', does that term have the same meaning in the US?


As for the OT, terrible business. It may or may not be a copycat style thing, but repeat shootings after a well publicised event are rather common. The above youtube video is spot on unfortunately, a lot of it is due to media coverage, but the public lap it up. And that's another problem.

Gangsters rob companies and business's, idiots and cowards rob people.

Somewhat, a Gangbang is still a gangbang, but a gangbanger is someone who participates in the hip hop centric gang culture and lifestyle.

 Themanwiththeplan wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
...the local gangbangers...

I can't help but snigger every time I heard these street gang guys called 'gangbangers', does that term have the same meaning in the US?


As for the OT, terrible business. It may or may not be a copycat style thing, but repeat shootings after a well publicised event are rather common. The above youtube video is spot on unfortunately, a lot of it is due to media coverage, but the public lap it up. And that's another problem.

Gangsters rob companies and business's, idiots and cowards rob people.

Companies and businesses are made of people.

Regardless of that "Gangster" and "idiot" (a case can be made for coward) are synonyms.

Not when the store is closed, and besides big companies have insurance to cover any loss or damages.