AFS1970

Happy Thanksgiving

All I could think about was this, when I read that. fredfiretruckcolor.bmp

I don't think there is a way to get written test scores to reflect race, despite the usual claims of bias. THat is why I said it would take pictures to ensure that the right people got 100. I am not sure about this time, I didn't follow it that much. A few tests ago they attached pictures to applications during the interview portion, to "refresh the commissioner's memories".

Until the pictures are attached, we will not know if the right people got 100 or not.

Date: 10/12/2015 Time: 17:19 Location: 61 Taylor Reed Pl District: GFD Units: E34, E6, E7, E1, E4 (RIT), T1, R1, U4 (Command), C312 (GFD A/C), U35 (Utility), U6 (Safety), U7 (Safety), U121 (Mechanic), FM112 (Marshal), FM110 (Marshal), U2 (SFD A/C), U11 (SFD A/C), SEMS: M2, M901 (EMS Supervisor) SPD: 8S3 (Sgt), 3D48 Relocations: E8 from TRFD1 to SFD 1 (Was there on a detail already) Call back units U5 (SFD DC / Citywide Tour Commander) Other Volunteer units staffed: T31 (Glenbrook), E41, E42 (Belltown), E52 (Springdale), R66, T67 (Turn of River) Description: Report of fire inside garbage & recycling transfer / sorting building. First engine on scene (E34) reporting heavy smoke, stretching a line, calling for a supply line. Multiple calls for heavy smoke in area. This building is located in between two sections of Metro North railroad tracks, The Northeast Corridor, and the New Canaan branch line. E34 was first due due to E6 being on a delayed response due to a detail at another station. All hands working as of 2nd MARC timer

Fire under control, Recall holding all companies.

Date: 10/10/2015 Time: 18:23 Location: 71 Riverside Av District: Stamford Units: E5, E3, E1, E2(RIT), T3, R1, U4(Command), U210(Safety), FM105(Marshal), U121(Mechanic), M1, M901(EMS Supervisor) 2nd Alarm: E4, T2 3rd Alarm : E6 Relocations: E7 from Springdale to Glenbrook. Norwalk FD (Egine & Truck) to Stamford Station 1, E73 from Long Ridge 1 to TRFD 1, E41 from Belltown to Stamford Station 5. E8 Relocating from TRFD 1 to Stamford Station 3. Callbacks: Stamford E12 in Service at Stamford Station 4 Additional Volunteer Units in Service (may be cross staffed): E34 (Glenbrook), E42, R44 (Belltown), E52 (Springdale), E64,T67, R66, K68 (Turn of River) On scene Relief: E12, T1 Description: Initial call was from a neighbor for heavy smoke coming from a chimney and an audible fire alarm, that call was canceled before completion after homeowner reported to neighbor that there was no emergency, that smoke was in house due to lighting a fire in the fireplace to try and get a racoon out of the chimney. Second call from homeowner reporting an unknown fire outside the house near the river, changed to the siding of the house was on fire. E5 arrived on scene and reported a working fire at 18:28 U4 declared 2nd alarm at 18:34 U4 declared 3rd alarm (Engine Only) at 18:58 U4 declared fire under control at 20:32 Relief companies sent to the scene at 21:46

No word on the status of the raccoon yet.

I have never understood why any bill regardless of subject ever expires. If something is good enough to pass muster through the legislative process and gets the votes and the final signature, then why does it have a built in expiration date? Especially in the case of an incident based bill like this, where the survivors are a finite number, that is not getting any larger, there is no need for the bill to expire. It would have essentially become obsolete on it's own at some point in the future. Then again didn't we have to repeal a never expired tax a few years ago that was originally to pay off the Spanish-American war debt?

Fire under control at 20:32

All hands still working after 4th MARC time. All visible fire knocked down.

Date: 07/30/2015 Time: 19:26 Location: 24 W Washington Av District: Stamford FD 5 Company Units: SFD: E5,R1,E2 (Haz Mat Co),T2 (Haz Mat Co), HM1, U4 (Command), FM111 (Fire Marshal), SEMS: M3 Description: Resident reported strange smell in apartment for past 3 hours causing burning and itching sensation in eyes. Haz Mat & Rescue companies investigated throughout an occupied multiple dwelling including two residential units. After investigation with multiple meters source of smell was found to be a window air conditioning unit on the second floor (initial report was from first floor residents), unit removed by FD. 19:27 Haz-Mat response with Medic dispatched 19:30 U4 requested Fireground channel to replace Tactical Channel, Ground 2 assigned 19:57 U4 requested a Fire Marshal to the scene 19:58 FM111 Enroute 19:59 U4 releasing M3 20:33 Units begin clearing up 20:46 Incident Closed

Date: 07/09/2015 Time: 14:13 Location: 26 Mill River St (Across from Hotel in Park) District: SFD 3Co) Units: SEMS: M1, M901 (Supervisor) SFD: E3, T3, U4 (Deputy Chief) SPD: 1C30, 1D57, 2C41, 3C12, 2C53 8S1 (Sergeant), 4A296, 2A49 (at previous Incident) Description: Initial report was for a man down in the roadway, vomiting, possibly intoxicated. M1 & E3 were dispatched. While responding a second caller reported the man was in the river. Units arrived and found that the male had taken off his clothers and walked or jumped into the shallow river. The male was found sitting down in the river. Additional units were called for assistance with removing patient from the river. Police responded to the scene to confirm if the male subject was the same person police had chased from a nearby incident although it turned out to be a different person and the calls were unrelated.

Not sure, I wondered the same thing. E3 special called T3 to assist in getting the man out of the river. That being a strange border land between 3Co & 5Co makes it seem all the stranger, as they were like just as close as well as being the designated water rescue company.

This should be a rational discussion, however it is not about the war between the states and it never was. If this had anything to do with that terrible time in our history, then this would have been brought up some other time since the 1870's. This recent disdain for a flag that bears some resemblance to a flag used by some confederate forces is all about political correctness. It is being tied to a horrible event that it had little to do with. While it is tempting to say that we should get rid of things that divide us, the fact is that if we continue to revise history then we have created a worse crime than any historical event could have. This is about a very vocal minority pushing their agenda on the rest of the country. We should never forget those that died in the war between the states, on either side. If we forget it, it will happen again.

Only semi related to the parade, to Broad Channel's (or any of the other NYC VFDs) unit numbers have anything to do with FDNY's numbering scheme? Are there conflicting / duplicate numbers? I thought I remembers seeing a department in Queens with really high numbers like up in the 900's and I thought that was done to eliminate confusion, but I see BCFD has numbers in the low 200's.

Yes I do believe that it is cowardly to remove the flag now. As has been pointed out it has been flying there since the 1960's. Thus is is not any more or less racist now than it was in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990 ect. To remove it now because it has suddenly become something just because someone who did something bad also happened to own this flag is cowardly. There have been many attempts to remove not only this flag but to change any flag containing this flag and most if not all have failed. Regardless of what motivated the state of South Carolina to fly this flag after 50 years of so, it could be argued that even this new use of the flag has become historical. History should never be revised. I have an idea. Because in our oh so hateful past, we used to think of witchcraft as a crime, and because fire was used in some but all executions of witches, and because we now understand witches to be nice nature loving people, perhaps all fire departments should have to change the name to extinguishing departments as the mere presence of the word fire could potentially be seen as possibly offensive to a small number of people. For that matter should red even be allowed as the color of fire apparatus? I mean it too reminds one of fire. Perhaps we should remove the Maltese cross, as that is a symbol of the crusades and could be offensive to both Jewish and Muslim citizens and certainly could be seen as a sign of medieval violence. Or maybe we could just calm down and grow up. Crimes are committed by criminals not the posters criminals hang on their walls.

I have a confederate flag, and oddly enough it looks only a little like the battle flag that was on top of the General Lee. That is because the Southern Cross was never the flag of the confederacy. I also have a Gadsden among other various flags. Mass killings, especially in a church, are something that most normal people can not even conceptualize. Thus in order to make sense out of the senseless, we blame inanimate objects. We see this often with guns, but in this case it is a flag. While I think that the governor of SC caved in to liberal pressure, I can honestly say that as a state governor it is her right to be that cowardly and Lilly-livered. I could not defend states rights as a concept and take any other stance. As for all the corporate shunning and banning, well we have the chance to fight that with a good old fashioned pocketbook protest. TV Land has announced they will no longer carry the Dukes of Hazard, I suggest we let them know that we will no longer be watching Emergency! or CHiP's on that channel either. As for enforcing the law about flags, well I hope to see you all at Old Navy this week when they unveil this years illegal American Flag T-Shirt. The US Code about flags specifically prohibits the flag from being used as an article of clothing or for advertising purposes. I refused to eat in a restaurant that was flying a tattered flag. The flag of treason brings up an interesting point. I had a friend years ago who insisted that it was illegal to fly the confederate flag because it was the flag of a vanquished enemy. He could not explain why then it was not similarly illegal to fly the flags of Japan, Germany or even Great Brittan. He did try and claim that those countries were now under different governments, although that simply is not true in the case of Great Brittan. I argued that the Confederacy was no longer the government of any of the southern states.

I heard that Warner Brothers has said they will no longer license any General Lee products. This of course because a show about two convicted felons who repeatedly ran from the law was not a bad idea. But the car they drove in the 1970's having the same logo as one owned by someone else in 2015 who may never have even seen the show, well that's clearly racist.

Has anyone ever actually seen the military use one of these "militarized" vehicles? Just wondering.

Plus the Supreme Court has firmly established that they will now legislate from the bench, thus ending the separation of powers we were all taught about in school. In many recent (and sadly some not so recent) decisions they have shown that the Tenth Amendment is a meaningless nothing to them. Sadly it is that amendment that gives both sides of issues like the SAFE act their ability. This sort of ruling creates "constitutional rights" out of thin air without bothering to actually amend the constitution.

Date: 06/08/2015 Time: 00:02 (Initial Report) 00:05 (Upgrade) Location: 57 Brookhollow Ln (Map Grid 104D) District: TRFD / SFRD 9 Units: SPD 4A37, 4D30, 1A291, 8S4 (Sergeant), SEMS M4, M901 (Supervisor), TRFD: R66, C612 (Assistant Chief), V615 (Lieutenant) SFD: E9, R1 (SCUBA), E5 (SCUBA SUPPORT) Description: Initial report of moving violation in neighborhood, police were responding for a car speeding in area. Prior to arrival multiple calls came in that car had rolled over into a pond. Call was upgraded to MVA response with SCUBA. C612 arrived on scene and confirmed that vehicle had rolled over but was not in the water and was unoccupied. The SCUBA response was then canceled. Single occupant of vehicle self extricated prior to FD arrival. Surrounding area checked for additional victims with negative results. Driver of car in police custody. The scene was turned over the SPD. Car towed from scene. SPD's Collision and Reconstruction Squad was already operating at another serious (probable fatality) scene and would have been delayed had this been as serious as reported.

There was a case I read about where a freelance reporter used a drone to shoot video of an collision scene. As he did with ground based video, he was planning on shopping the footage around to various new outlets to see who would buy it from him. However the police investigating the collision took exception to the drone and set about finding the operator, who was not that far away and not hiding. I forget if he was arrested or just given some type of ticket, but he appealed and won, as he was not interfering and it was nominally a freedom of the press issue, even though he was not an employee of any of the news outlets he regularly sold footage to.

The Broward County Sheriffs FD was a take over of an existing agency. I remember reading about it when it happened. Essentially they just put the Sheriff in charge of the fire department. I have no idea how good or bad this works.

This is a very new field. A while back I posted a video taken from a drone in Germany that was apparently used by an IC for recon purposes. The news media is going to be intrusive no matter where we put our yellow tape. I am actually surprised they have not thought of buying their own ladder truck for this. However in today's internet driven media world, the lines between private citizen and news media become very blurry. Yesterday's fire buff may be today's reporter. As for banning drones within a certain distance, this is very uncharted legal territory. Would anyone even stop to worry about someone with a model airplane near a fire scene? As for there being a difference between flying for enjoyment or making a statement on constitutional rights, that is a dangerous line of thinking. I do not need to be making a statement in order to have or maintain rights. I am not sure that freedom of speech pertains here but I am not a constitutional scholar. Free speech might apply to me showing the video I got, but maybe not to taking the video. As for the firefighters trying to spray the drone? Well attacking distractions like that is no different that trying to spray a bird or anything else in the sky. Loosing site of tactics is not really the problem of the drone operator. That is like saying we should ban airplanes because someone on the ground might point a laser at the cockpit. It is clearly not the airplanes fault that a laser gets pointed and thus I would not blame the drone for a hose line being directed towards it. I think the property issues here would biol down to how high air rights go. I saw a documentary on the building of Grand Central Terminal, where they talked about the railroad asserting the right to property on top of the railroad, which made them the owners of vast tracts of land in Manhattan. Now obviously airplanes are allowed to fly over these buildings without paying rent to the MTA, but I wonder if any court has ever actually set an upper limit of where the public space begins? If so this would seem to apply to drones also, even though they may not be capable of the same altitude that airplanes are.