FFPCogs

Folks, WE are to blame, the American obsession with material possesions is to blame, the buy now pay later mentality for everything from homes to gas and groceries is to blame. belief in advertising that says you need item X when in reality you don't is to blame, speculation and greed both personal and corporate are to blame, the view of many that what you "own" defines who you are is to blame, irresponsible fiscal policies again both personal and business wise are to blame, corruption and ineptitude on the part of our elected (and re-elected) officials that WE put there is to blame, ignorance of where our money really goes is to blame...get the drift? Bail out or not we're FU*ked. A government "loan" may clear the current hurdle, but only fundamental changes of the American consumer to a more prudent and responsible lifestyle will SOLVE the problem in the long term. When 5% of the world's population consumes 25% of it's oil resources there's a problem, and this same gluttony extends to every facet of American consumerism. And for all the recent talk of "golden parachutes", they have been around for years. It is the shareholders of those companies who approrve them...and as for the CEO's ...who among you would turn down such a payout?..I can honestly tell you I wouldn't..hey it's the American way...get yours and screw the other guy right...a mentality by the way which is also to blame. Cogs

http://www.connpost.com/news/ci_10572149

Having started in a Department that faced this situation I can tell you this...The dedicated FF in Derby (some of whom I know and all of whom I respect) will get through this OK, and will be better off for having dealt with it. Are there lessons to be learned, of course...as I'm sure they will be. The 3 in question followed the standard pattern of arsonist FFs..starting small and as that thrill wore off setting larger and more destructive fires...all the while playing the first in "heroes". That their spree was relatively short lived is a credit to the FMs of both Derby and Ansonia. Job well done guys !! The only other point is this; If you suspect that a member or members of your department are engaged in arsons or exhibit the signs don't hesitate to voice your concerns to the proper authority. Better to be wrong, than to allow an arsonist any opportunity for destruction. And never be so arrogant as to believe "it can't happen here" Cogs

I'm fairly confident that some kind of "deal" will be reached and government will devise some package to prop up the credit markets. And make no mistake it is the "addiction to credit" so eloquently noted by abaduck that is at the root of the problem. Failure to "bail out" the financial sector, according to recent interviews with noted economist on ALL the networks/newspapers, will result in another "Great Depression". And I don't believe that the American voter is willing to suffer that possibility. But in reality a "bailout" is a no win sitiuation. Do give the money and taxpayers are on the hook for a long time to come and we begin to lean towards socialism, don't and banks and businesses will fail, revenues will drop and jobs will be lost...i.e. soup kitchens, shanty towns, "brother can you spare a dime" Do and other corporations will be lining up for their share..airlines and energy being the two most likely to be next in line, then where does it end, don't and those industries fail with all the associated repercussions and dominoes. And possibly worst of all: do and regardless of all the talk about oversight/regulation the flood gates will open and no lessons will be learned...and we can expect more of the same policies, greed and individual irresponsibility that caused this mess, don't and Americans will suffer to a degree unheard of except to the relative few who lived thru the Great Depression. I'm a firm believer that WE got ourselves into this mess because of 1) our over-reliance on credit for EVERYTHING and 2) for all the finger pointing when it comes right down to it government is US..we put them there, ...therefore only WE can solve the problem. That that may mean a depression and it's associated depravations to force a fundamental change in the American way of life may be in the end the only TRUE fix. But then again when it comes to the politics of Americans doing the right thing for Americans I'm a glass half empty guy..let's hope I'm wrong. Cogs

Has been for some time now...

I too am shocked by the news. So who will be the first candidate to say they didn't want the bailout after all? I can honsetly say I never liked the idea of the government bailing out business. To me it amounts to white collar welfare, and like welfare it is us..the middle class...who would bear the brunt of it. That money would have disappeared into a black hole never to be seen again by the taxpayers. It is those greedy financial firms and banks whose lending methods led to this mess that should face the consequences of their actions. Like a child who gets their pee pee spanked for whipping it out in public. Unfortunately, it is WE the regular middle class joes who will ultimatety be the ones that suffer most. To be fair though in our own ways we are partly responsible too. First we elected those official (Dem and Rep alike) that allowed the rampant speculation to grow. And second by choosing to live beyond our collective means. Living on credit will eventually catch up, and it seems to have done so in a big way all at once. With any luck maybe we will all come out better for it in the end..although without doubt the road will be long and rough. Has anyone heard of a plan B? Cogs

Call it what you like. I can say that the removal of the mechanic has been confirmed by another middle management Public Works employee, but he would neither confirm or deny the ultimate use of ther property. I realize E6 is a quint. I can't answer your question regarding the why other than to offer another. Why has the City done what it has to this point? Actually any questions would be better put to the local reps and Malloy and Co. Getting answers though is quite another thing. Cogs

OK all, I'm posting the following based on information provided me by a friend who works for Stamford Public Works. I will make the disclainer now that this may not be accurate information nor am I trying to spread rumors and anyone who knows the "truth" please feel free to correct my comments. According to the info, the end run on Haig Ave will move forward. The last mechanic will be moved to Magee Ave, and the trailer for E8 will be moved to the town yard property. E8 will be housed in the existing building, with the possible addition of E6 as Truck Co. While the source is relaible his information may be mistaken, and I just thought those interested would want to know the latest buzz. No finger pointing, recriminations or pot stirring involved. Cogs

A-f*ckin-men !!!!!

Great actor and even greater human being..he will be missed by millions and rightfully so. Rest in Peace Paul Cogs

As expected no revelations or real substance as far as I was concerned. If anything the debate just cemented or should I say re-cemented my choice as to who to vote for. Alot broad generalizations and very little specifics.....these giuys don't want to get pinned down an anything, but I must say it is Obama who is far more afraid of being tagged by his statements and plans. While there was no clear winner on substance, to me Obama is a much better speaker..but no suprise there he wants to "talk" his way out of every mess we're in. So in the end barring some major shift or revelation my vote remains the same. Cogs

It so happens that I was a member of a (semantics aside) volunteer fire dept. which did have paid personnel paid by checks with that departments name on them.....if the VFD is paying them then they are indeed employees of that VFD. Those paid personnel were answerable to the volunteer Chief and officers of that dept. not the municipality. It was the volunteer Chief who hired them, negotiated contracts with them ect ect. Sounds to me like they worked FOR the VFD. BTW there are depts who have similar set-ups out there. It is not always as simple as just community growth either...it has been known to happen that once paid firefighters are hired the volunteer ranks shrink..now I'm not saying this is right, just that it does happen. Nor should the potential loss of volunteers be an excuse to put public safety at risk by not hiring firefighters if they can be afforded. Hope is not a plan of action regarding hiring people either..we can hope all we want that to cover any shortfalls or response issues a department will just get the money or voter approval (if required) to do so. I must confess that at times I find myself shaking my head as well when the only solution offered is to just "hire career firefighters" regardless of whether that's feasible, practical or affordable. And in all honesty I am not one that is fimly convinced that career fire protection is automatically better....more reliable yes, but not necessarily a better quaility of service. And after all of the above I too find myself clearly thinking that as it stands hiring paid fireifhgters is the way to go in this instance. The fact remains though that if for whatever reason that is not possible other viable, and positive alternatives should be expressed and thoroughly explored to best serve the community. For me let me just say thanks for throwing out an alternative Raz. Abaduck that is an interesting alternative as well and for all the talk of public safety being the overriding concern I sure there are some who would find fault with it. Cogs

Absolutely, But what other avenues are there if there is NO money (or tax payer willingness) to pay for firefighters? This department is not alone in this situation, and not every community can simply hire personnel, for a variety of reasons right or wrong, to solve the problem....so what to do? I have no problem with any suggestion I may put forward being thoroughly scrutinized, and proven unfeasible, improper, or even simply ridiculous...but those residents and that (and similar) departments are still at risk. I have found this site to be full of experienced, knowledgebale and commited firefighters, and it was my hope that others would not only scutinize my ideas but actually put forth some of their own. This issue is widespeard to differing degrees throughout the volunteer sector and as a firefighting website some come here looking for insight in dealing with it. Unfortunately hiring firefighters is not always a practical "band aid" for it either, no matter how much they are needed. So again...what to do? Cogs

One FACT we all seem to be miising in all this is that apparently not the chief of said dept., nor I or anyone else here will make the choice. It's up to the taxpayers..the ones who will have to foot the bill be it the unlikely $200,000 or whatever, to choose. If those taxpayers choose not to fund 4 firefighters than it is they (and by default the VFD) who will have to live with that consequences. So while many here may believe that ONLY paid FFs are the solution, it may better serve the Chief, and the community involved (and any depts here in the same boat) to offer up alternative other than that of simply hiring FFs. As has been repeatedly pointed on this thread public safety is king..so if the money isn't forthcoming than what? Based on what little I know so far here's a few: 1) aggressive recruiting to fill out the magical 10 that according to the story will help relieve the situation (including incentives) 2) open up membership to neighboring districts/communities 3) recruit and train current town or county employees to respond during regular working hours on an on-call basis (with the attendant minimal compensation) 4) Reevaluate and redefine mutual aid agreements Anyone else? Cogs

Well other than a cough..the guy never missed a beat...........wow man I guess ganja does keep you calm. Cogs

It has and does happen that once career staff is in place, the need for more paid people increases over time. I'm not saying that paid personnel aren't needed, and without exception I DO NOT advocate refusing to hire personnel when they are needed simply to remain "all" volunteer. Public safety should ALWAYS be the paramount concern...anyone who doesn't think so needs to find somewhere else to hang their helmet. What I am saying is that IF volunteers can meet the needs of the community than there is no need hire firefighters and incur the associated costs. You may not agree with the former DCs thinking, but his concerns are valid from a volunteer point of view, and this is a volunteer fire dept we're talking about. Like I said his point has been known to occur and has to some extent influenced volunteer concerns about hiring FFs. Career personnel sometimes seem to forget that in situations like this they are employees of a volunteer fire dept, and the needs and concerns of those volunteers may take precedence. There are very different factors involved between paid firefighters in an all career dept vs those in a volunteer or combination system which those employees have to recognize and accept. And like it or not...right or wrong the concerns, emotions and opinions of volunteers potentially affected by this change will have an impact, and must be addressed along with the needs of the community. Unfortunately there are plenty of times when FFs have been hired into a volunteer FD and the career vs volunteer issue eventually rears it's ugly head. As is obvious by many of my other posts on this site I consider the hiring of FFs to be a last resort for a volunteer FD..but never...Never...NEVER at the expense of public safety. Another $.02 Cogs

I'm more or less with 585 here....until QUALIFIED fire service personnel are on scene to make a determination expect the worst. That's what we're here for, so to me any inconvenience incured on us by responding comes with the territory. Cogs

I'm all for putting paid FFs on when they are needed..and it appears they are, but as also mentioned 10 more volunteers would also help the situation. Maybe an concerted recruitment drive or redefinition of membership requirements may help fill those volunteer slots. My advice would be to pursue both avenues aggressively..even if the positions are filled with paid personnel...10 or more active volunteers surely wouldn't hurt either. My $.02 Cogs

Well one thing is what they apparently did...start a FIRE DEPARTMENT and leave the social club behind. Another may be to work with local/state government to develop statutes basically outlawing alcohol in the firehouse. There's plenty of precedence for this route as well as insurance/liability issues that the penny pinchers love to cite to squeeze departments...maybe it's time to use them to our advantage. Another may be (depending on by laws of course) to elect officers with the balls enough to stand up to the "social" clique and simply remove the problem. There's a story I heard here about a Company of one of the valley Dept.'s that on elction night voted in a Capt. who, with like minded firefighting oriented members, went down stairs with saws and tools and physically removed the bar...that very night !! Cogs I have to agree that there is a place for non-firefighters in any fire department, and they should have a say in the non-firefighting aspects of the running of that department. But alcohol in the firehouse IS a firefighting related issue as there is potential for misuse, and possible legal ramifications of serving alcohol which could effect the department as a whole.

Maybe the wake up call should be to those who continue to think drinking and firefighting belong in the same place. It's really pretty simple...If there's an in service fire truck sitting in your building, do yourself, your department and most importantly your community a favor...GET RID OF THE BAR ! Cogs

These types of incidents and the continued availability of alcohol in some (or many) volunteer firehouses is one of, if not the largest factor in the perception that volunteer firefighters in general are unprofessional. A definite case of a few bad apples. While the social aspect of any VFD is an important part of that organization, IMO it should take a far second place to operational matters. If having a bar is of that much importance to a department or group of departments either for social interaction or finances then they should rent or build a social hall removed from the firehouse and it's property. Nobody says don't drink...just don't do it at the firehouse. And I shouldn't have to say this but I will.....Never, ever under ANY circumstances drink and respond..you're not that important. Just my $.02 Cogs

Stateside I've always worked side mount pumps, in Iraq it was top mount. For me I prefer the side pump panel..but that has more to do with familiarirty than anything else..it's just what I'm more used to and comfortable with. As an MPO it doesn't really matter to me..I can read guages and pull levers no matter where I stand.... Cogs

Pat, I can fully understand and appreciate your difference of opinion regarding my thoughts on why things have taken the course they have. And while my facts may seem to be somewhat skewed, I came up in that system. I have first hand knowledge of the attitudes and policies of the Big 5. You may believe my criticisms of the volunteers is unwarranted or unfair and that is absolutely your right...maybe even your duty...but the traditional divisions between the member departments did and does indeed contribute to recent events. Had a more unified system been in place within the Big 5 there would have never been a need for SFRD personnel in ANY member department in the first place. Once that door was opened, and weaknesses within the volunteer system became an issue, those who for a very long time have wanted a consolidation of the Stamford Fire services had their opportunity. It seems to me (and others) that the steps necessary to achieve this "consolidation" are now being enacted, and following a pre-ordained course. But take heart, while the VFDs may share in the "blame" they are by no means the villian in all this..that distinction belongs squarely with Mr. Malloy and his cronies whose tactics, to many, border on criminal. In truth, to many not personally involved in this, it seems that there are factors above and beyond public safety or simple budgetary concerns at work here. Close scrutiny of the situation does raise some questions, to which the answers given if at all, are not really satisfactory. For us uninvolved but concerned bystanders this whole mess goes beyond Belltown vs the City or TOR vs the City, it is more along the lines of the volunteer system vs the City. The specifics may differ between the departments involved, but the end result wil be the same for all VFDs there. It also appears that the City (as pointed out in your post regarding a possible Haig Ave facility) is moving forward with plans to simply bypass the volunteers of Belltown, Springdale to to some extent TOR altogether. You (and others) may take exception to this view and again that is your right, but to us "outsiders" the tactics employed by the City and the response of the VFDs to them seems to bear it out. "Divide and conquer". As I stated in that post I express my views bluntly, and I will do so now. Failure to acknowledge and address that the actions (or inactions) on the part of the Big 5 volunteer fire departments as a whole have contributed to this situation will lead only to further degradation of the volunteer system in Stamford. Furthermore the traditional methods employed and attitudes of the Big 5 are no longer sufficient in maintaining that system as a whole....they are in part what got you all here. As it now stands finger pointing will not help, lawyers will not help, individual action will not help (but actually hurt), and differeing agendas will not help. Only cooperative and unified steps on and off the fireground on the part of the Big 5 will now stave off the ultimate elimination of volunteer firefighting in Stamford. On another note: I understand that the operational policies for on scene command ect are spelled out and that scenes are well run and the job is ALWAYS done. My point was that while this may be true the practical applications of those policies as they relate to the autonomy of the VFDs are at odds with the realities. But this was only an example, there are other factors relating to SFRD personnel in VFD houses off the fireground that are an issue as well. I am also aware that Greenwich has a system in place similar to what is envisioned for Stamford and depending on who you talk to it either works or doesn't. Personally I believe Stamford as a whole can do better. Cogs

Guilty as charged.... . Red, and X152 Thank you for the compliment and I too find your posts to be informative, and well thought out and presented...as are most here. Thank you also for having the decency to treat me and others with possibily differing views with respect and objectivity. This too is a sign of professionalism. Cogs