INIT915

The physical location of the fire stations is less of an issue then the bloated administration of them. No one is arguing that Colonie should condense all operations out of one or two stations. Rather, perhaps bringing them all, under one administration would save a significant amount of money and perhaps reduce operations from 12 stations to a few less than that. Also, a centralized command would undoubtedly be able to assure responses from other stations which would negate the need for at least a few of the apparatus mentioned earlier. Take into account the value of those units and at a few hundred thousand here and a few hundred thousand there, soon we start talking about real money. It's also great they have fund raising, but that's no excuse to spend money if it's not necessary. That fund raising can be used to lower the tax burden. Although its been argued that unless the budget is crippling the community, no action is needed, I would argue that couldn't be more wrong.

I would say, there has been a recent trend of posting an increasing number of non-local events that are hardly significant. Also, I have to agree with JJB, seeing an IA timestamped 5 minutes after the Journal News posted a story is useless.

Part of me would like to offer a rational response, but since we've starting delving into the "what-if's" and pretty far out there ones at that, I'm not sure any more good can come of it.

I understand that, but pulling a city alarm box doesn't trigger a siren.

I understand your position. My counter argument would be, are EMS calls a lower priority, therefore deserving of less precedence in notifications? The mere fact that there are less fire calls, to me, should have no bearing on the urgency which the volunteers are notified. If anything, I would almost argue just the opposite.

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110512/NEWS/110519943 Ambitious goal. Obtainable?

If I pass "Main and Union" on the same date they have a homicide there, I'm not concerned that they now have the ability to interview anyone (myself included) who happened to be in the area. If I had nothing to do with it, I'll be glad to say so when/if they get around to contacting me. However, in my opinion, it's a small inconvenience if it allows them to catch up with whomever it was that perpetrated the crime at that location. I shy (far) away from conspiracy theories and unwarranted overreactions. Moreover, based on some of the comments and questions posted, it appears to me people may be somewhat misinformed about how this technology works and is used. Perhaps better public education would clear things up?

Agreed. I think the fire service has more in terms of what I consider "tradition." Conversely, EMS has the least, for no other reason then its a comparatively younger service. Additionally, I think evidence based research and best practice reports are utilized more frequently in EMS than in either fire or law enforcement. That's not necessarily because EMS is more proactive in its approach, rather, EMS benefits from being a "relative" of established medicine who rely heavily on that educated, research based approach.

Yes, thank you for stating the obvious. However, this grant is not directed at career staffing.

Curious why you approve its use for fire, but not EMS calls?

So anyone, at anytime, can stroll by your front door and activate your siren?

That makes perfect sense. I think there have even been a thread or two regarding Greenburgh's multiple agencies, and the potential for consolidation. And that goes for both PD as well as FD.

From Wikipedia: But if it were 100 sq. miles, would that warrant 12 agencies? They have one PD and one EMS provider, both of which are probably busier, by call volume, then the FD.

I have to respectfully disagree. In this age of modern communications, I think the sirens are a thing of the past. If they were so necessary, why would career FD's and PD agencies not "need" them? If you need "two forms of notification", your pager and cell phone text message should suffice. The siren may be a tradition, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking it's the only way to get the job done.

More times than I care to count.

Do you actually follow politics?

The key is also having FF's that want to be there and take action. Having a crew of four guys stand there with you while all five of you wait the 20 minutes for a bus is not much of a step up from waiting by yourself.

Source/credibility of your rumor?

Agreed.

If I understand your logic correctly, you would have rather had a Warrant issued for your wife then have her license suspended? Assuming all the facts you presented, and I have no particular reason to doubt them, your wife's case was the exception. Otherwise, the system currently works fine. The idea of issuing thousands, upon thousands, of Warrants is not the practical approach. Just my humble opinion, coming from someone who deals with these matters all the time.

I would agree with that. At the same time however, I personally feel that few accidents occur in the center lane. In my experience, a majority involve the right or left lanes, for no other reason then, when accounting for medians/shoulders, there is more likelihood accidents end up there. (That's not a scientific analysis, just an observation from experience.) To get back to the original poster, Chief Technical Sergeant Promisel is, in my opinion, arguably one of the brightest men I know in law enforcement. He has a very impressive resume, and this type of analysis and implementation is his forte.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/04/24/california.chopper.shot/index.html?hpt=T2

The original premise of this thread revolved around civil liability. While, in common terms, you can sue anyone for anything, there is more to it then that. Each state (and the federal courts) do have some predefined actionable causes which you must relate your claims to. Essentially, the topic of this thread would be limited to state court action, as federal court actions must be linked to constitutional violations. The vast majority of federal suits are brought under USC Title 41, Chapter 21, Subd. I, Section 1983. State court claims do not have to be constitutional in nature, they can be for almost anything, and I emphasize almost. Everything from product liability torts to the more common personal injury claims. And again, these claims vary by state. Now, not to get off on a tangent, but if we tweaked the original posters question just a bit, and added a few new elements, we could potentially discuss the criminal liability. See NYS Penal Law Section 145.00 and 145.00. To make that case, the hole in the roof would have had to have been made with intent or recklessness to damage property, and with no possible legitimacy. That would be a nearly impossible argument to make on a fire scene. One could argue about the "need" for that particular ventilation, but the situation has an ironclad built-in affirmative defense.

The "NYS malfeasance laws"? I will continue to ask anyone who posts information regarding the law that is either unclear or has no basis in fact to be more specific. If your uncomfortable with that, feel free to avoid posting until you have had time to research the matter thoroughly, and can, in good conscious, know that what your offering the other members of this board is solid.

See. This is an example of a rational argument, being made by someone who had some actual experience. Whether you agree or not is fine, but at least he makes his case.