abaduck

Unless it's something which is truly actionable, in which case moderators may have to take a firm stand (as in direct threats to a member, for instance), I'm firmly in the 'man up and get on with it' camp. This is a fire/EMS (primarily) discussion board, not a knitting circle. Some strong language and forthright expression of opinions is to be expected. I've said before, you shouldn't go locking threads when things get hot, you should be dealing with members individually when they cross the line. Saying things that would get you yelled at if said face-to-face is fine. Saying things that would get your lights punched out in bar, or get you arrested, isn't. As for respect... well that is not a given, it has to be earned - here or in the firehouse. Chief Flynn, for example... I don't like some of what he says, or the way he says it, but he often has a point, and he's a Chief in a department with a very solid rep., and is due respect for that rank and experience. At the other extreme, if some know-it-all kid starts spouting off in the firehouse he's going to get little respect for that, and I wouldn't expect too much different here. I've participated in many internet fora on many topics over the years, and this place is pretty tame compared to many!

SOUTH WINDS OF 25 TO 35 MPH WITH GUSTS TO 60 TO 70 MPH ARE EXPECTED THIS AFTERNOON ACROSS PORTIONS OF NORTHEAST NEW JERSEY... COASTAL PORTIONS OF THE LOWER HUDSON VALLEY... AND COASTAL SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT... AS A POTENT FRONTAL SYSTEM IMPACTS THE REGION. Bad enough already and forecast to get worse early afternoon with possible thunderstorms.

Pardon me for not pulling punches, but that's a dumb example: there IS no 'correct' answer to a word association test! Such a question has no place in an exam - not because it's somehow biased but because it *has no single correct answer* (as you go part-way towards pointing out). Word association is for a psych interview, not a graded test!

Interesting. Probably true; I'm sure there are racists in every department in the country. I'm sure black firefighters have been denied promotion, or failed out of courses or probation because of racism. Or just not got hired, or were discouraged from applying. I'm sure the Vulcans had a hell of a fight at times. I don't see a single damn word in the article which explains the judges theory that it's possible to devise WRITTEN EXAMS which are slanted or biased against a particular skin colour. So far the only overt racism I've read about in this case is from the judge.

I've previously posted this elsewhere, and I make no apology for repeating it here: Now I'm a relatively recent immigrant to the USA (a transplanted Scotsman), I don't really 'get' American racial politics or American attitudes to race at all. And I'm fairly new to the fire service. But: "Last July, the judge ruled that the exams used to screen applicants between 1999 and 2007 were slanted against blacks." Could someone please explain to me how, in the 21st century, a judge can say that with a straight face? Last time I checked, all brain matter was grey, not white, black, or anything else. How do you 'slant' an exam against someone who has black skin? I don't believe it's possible. Either you're smart, or dumb as a brick. Either you're fit, or you're not. Either you work hard, or you're lazy. Either you give 110%, or you're on cruise control. But... either you're black, or you're white? To even suggest that it's POSSIBLE to 'slant' exams in such a way that black candidates will do worse than white candidates seems to me to be a profoundly racist statement. I do not, and fear/hope I never will, understand it.

As I understand it, Orthodox Jews are supposed to pray at specific times, and would think nothing of praying on an aircraft if it that's where they happen to be at the required time. So nope, he couldn't pray at home or in a hotel room; I'm not about to tell anyone when, where or how to pray and frankly neither should you IMHO. No 'excuse' for praying required. I've seen Jewish prayers done on aircraft myself, and I knew exactly what they were talking about as soon as Tefillin were mentioned. And I'm Scottish, raised with no exposure to Jewish culture whatever, only been in and around NYC for ten years. I'm pretty surprised that no-one on a flight crew operating out of New York understood what was going on. As to whether or not the diversion and investigation was an over-reaction or not... I wasn't there. I'm not going to Monday morning quarterback the flight crew!

I found that out today. I'd heard at least some departments rank candidates based on combination of test & CPAT scores. So I might just put my name down here! Thanks!

Hmmmm. No age limit. If it wasn't for the fact the youngsters would run rings round me in the CPAT, I'd think seriously about applying for this!

I guess you must have missed the 'Devil's Advocate' bit, or didn't understand what that means! (Because that's what his lawyer will say in court you know... he'll claim he didn't believe she was really 15, it was just a fantasy etc. etc. etc. And he'll make the point that actual sex with 15 year olds is perfectly legal in lots of places, like Canada, so it's no big deal anyway... you get the picture)

Disgusting yeah, and a disgrace to the USMC. But I'm going to play Devil's Advocate for a little here, guys. The 'girl' was pretending to be 15. Not 12 or 13 or even 14, 15. He could have done what he did, and a hell of a lot more, and it wouldn't have been a crime at all with a consenting 15 year old in many countries. And I'm talking about civilized Western countries with lower ages of consent, such as Canada, Germany, Spain, or France, not 3rd world failed states. So, yeah he's disgusting, sleazy, creepy, call it what you like - it would be pretty damn sleazy even if it wasn't illegal. Yeah, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with him either, Tom. And yes as a father I reserve the right to be as hypocritical as I like when my own daughter turns 15! And yes it's a crime in NY. But just perhaps it's not as serious a crime as some are making out, if it wouldn't be a crime at all in other civilized countries? I can't take this too seriously... I'm damn sure a hell of a lot of those sex chat rooms are full of fantasists, someone claiming to be a teenage girl is probably a fat 60 year old guy who gets kicks from that. Or they could be a cop! Mr. Ritter needs to learn to think with his head, not his - he can't be too smart to get caught in a sting like that.

I don't know much about marine firefighting, but that's certainly part of our remit, at least inshore. So what do we do? Equip every town and village along the Hudson with a serious fireboat? No? Every second town? Every third town? Who decides, and on what basis, and who pays? No, I think that's something that shouldn't be down to individual communities. Exactly. You're half right, the problem with that is that Westchester is *only one side* of the damn river! With no disrespect to those agencies that currently provide river rescue and firefighting capabilities, the only logical way, IMHO, to approach this is to take the geography the river gives us - and to me it seems a Lower Hudson River Fire & Rescue Authority would be the logical conclusion. This would distribute the required resources (rescue and fire boats) in the optimum positions on both sides of the river. This isn't something it's appropriate to handle at the town, county, or state level. This approach is used for other public services - the MTA and PANYNJ for instance - so I don't see why it shouldn't work. (All dumb ideas are mine and mine alone; I speak for myself, not my department!)

Pumps in the UK are 100% rear mount and 100% enclosed: They don't seem to have any problems with it.

We disagree a little less than you might think. Remember I said kids have to learn "to make their own decisions, and to accept responsibility for their own actions, and the consequences"? the 'consequences' may include discipline, of course! However your attitude still smacks a little of helicopter parenting - trying to hover over the kids. I firmly believe you have to let kids take as much responsibility for themselves as possible, and give them as much power & control over their own lives as possible, from as early an age as possible. The fact is that approach *works*. Read about Montessori some time - I happen to believe she was an unmitigated genius: http://www.montessori.org/sitefiles/Montessori_101_nonprintable.pdf You've also reminded me of an essay which was written by a friend of a friend. Now it is about raising Pagan boys, but if you ignore all the Pagan religious stuff she talks a hell of a lot of sense about how boys should be raised - this is pretty much the way I'm raising my kids, in fact: http://blog-in-the-box.blogspot.com/2005/09/raising-pagan-sons.html Interesting stuff. Mike

Unless you're talking about toddlers I have to disagree. The responsibility of parents is to teach children, from an early age, to THINK FOR THEMSELVES, to make their own decisions, and to accept responsibility for their own actions, and the consequences. Kids generally get in trouble when they're away from parental supervision, and can't think for themselves. Then they do dumb things, or let dumb peers do their thinking for them. And, what kind of spineless administration *closes schools* because of concerns over a few troublemakers? It's the troublemakers who should be worried, knowing they'll be watched closely at school and not allowed to get out of line. Police in schools! <shakes head>

Just a thought... are we spreading ourselves too thin? Is this kind of water rescue too specialised for us, and too far outside our - or what should be our - core competence: fire prevention and suppression? Perhaps a lesson from the UK is in order: in the UK, water rescue in large bodies of water is generally performed by the RNLI - the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, a charity. They operate several hundred lifeboats around the shores and on the inland waterways in the UK, staffed 100% by volunteers I might add. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_National_Lifeboat_Institution They are tasked and co-ordinated by Her Majesty's Coastguard, an agency of the UK government, which has ultimate responsibility for SAR activity, and operates SAR helicopters. Involvement by UK fire & rescue services in water rescue is relatively minimal. Rivers and seas are large and flow naturally from town to town, county to county, state to state. If there was ever an obvious case for consolidation on a very large scale, this is it. IMHO. I speak for myself, not my department.

I'm skeptical. I doubt that would be allowed; word will inevitably get about that a HELP truck may be operated by an LEO. How do you think the regular HELP truck operators will feel about that? What risks might it expose them to? There was a debate along similar lines not so long ago when a fire chief permitted cops to wear turnouts for purposes of deception, to end a siege situation.

Chief, You owe me a keyboard.

Or hit it with the damn deck gun from a safe distance if you have any doubts about it; the only life hazard is US.

Seth, Disclaimer: I'm not from Dutchess and I'm not EMS. I've read none of the threads in question. I have however been involved in internet discussions for more years than I care to remember. Whenever things get heated or nasty, there are basically three options: 1. Let it run and devil take the hindmost. 2. Shut down discussion on the most controversial topics. 3. Shut down the members making the most egregious comments. Maybe, just maybe, you've reached for option 2. when option 3. would have been more effective? Otherwise the lesson taught is, getting seriously out of line gets the discussion shut down. Getting the members in question kicked out might be a better lesson. Mike

I'm flying to Scotland in a week or two, they better not try anything... they're not likely to forget the last time they were stupid enough to try that... Headline of the year, right there!

I'd call that a good point Tom.... respect to the officers who went in and got the job done, but... what's the concentration that will drop you within few seconds? 10,000PPM? Something like that I'm pretty sure... That's *high* but 'only' ten time what these guys had to deal with. On a point of order, what does the average cop know about CO - causes, effects, symptoms etc.? Is that something they get trained in at all?

Speaking for myself and not my department... 1. If you have a combination department it makes no sense for members to respond to the house; the career FFs on duty will have the apparatus on the road before any volunteers can get there, unless they live next door. The same could apply with a volunteer FD with a well-organised rota of duty drivers, especially if they actually do duty tours at the house. What works best is whatever gets the maximum number of FFs to the scene fastest; that's where they're needed! 2. POV clusters... well that's down to having and enforcing discipline and SOPs for responding, parking on scene etc. etc. - if you have POV discipline you won't have POV clusterf*cks.

Thanks Chris, I thought I was correct. The other aspect of this, to which I alluded, is that the FAA are unlikely to PERMIT the Sheriff to investigate this, or press interference charges - for precisely the reason you stated; if the FAA allowed such, it would allow local LE to use local laws to implement de facto unofficial no-fly zones, going right up against FAA jurisdiction and procedures. (Still doesn't make the news station any less dumb; no shot is worth jeopardizing your relationship with your local LEOs!)

I'm not defending the news crew but... Chris, you should be able to answer this: airspace is emphatically NOT in the jurisdiction of the Sheriff, correct? If I recall correctly the FAA are likely to slap down anyone infringing on their jurisdiction. The correct approach, if you have a problem, is to ask the FAA to restrict the airspace - issue a TFR, NOTAM it?

They're called 'Battenburg' markings and wikipedia have a good page on them: http://en.wikipedia....enburg_markings They're pretty much universal in the UK, I'm not sure they'll ever catch on here... tradition! If I'm approaching an incident scene on a highway at night, what catches my eye is the NUMBER of lights in use... between FD, ambulances, troopers, and wreckers, there's a veritable forest of strobing lights - I can quite see how Joe Public could get disoriented; it can be almost epilepsy-inducing! What the answer is, I'm not quite sure. I think what *might* be an interesting study would be seeing how people respond to random strobing vs. all apparatus on a scene strobing 'in sync' if you see what I mean; I think that might lessen the disorientation effect.