posted on Jan, 13 2020 @ 08:22 AM
One of the responsibilities that I have had over the years was a hypothetical of in case of a fire to not open the sealed fire doors in order to
compartmentalize the smoke. That is to say: allow others to die to keep others out of danger. Added twist of the knife was that I could indeed
override the doors and open them even during a fire when others could not.
It was a hypothetical. And the closest it ever came to practice was that some nurses burnt popcorn in a new microwave and that smoke triggered the
doors. And I can tell you that “little bit of smoke” made the decision easier if the hypothetical was put to practice. People on the wrong side of
the door were indeed going to die despite my every fiber wanting to breech to rescue them.
As for me personally. I have entered an enclosed space and put out a propane tank whose rubber line had cracked and was on fire before. The space was
enclosed with plastic sheets around a scaffold. After the fire was out, I was indeed suffocating from the smoke and disoriented. Almost stabbed a
fireman that arrived as I cut my way out because he tried to grab my hand to pull me out. Seeing me press against the plastic to find my way.
As to this question. Still a tough call since I don’t have a dog. But it would probably come down to which I could successfully rescue by my
estimation. All things equal, it would probably be the person. Unless there was a circumstance in which the dog was helpless but trying and the person
was hopeless and not trying, like kick some burning boards out of the way to clear a path for the dog or something while the person was suicidal or
paralyzed with fear. But fear can be distracted by getting them to help me help the dog.
Good question, but lacks deeper details that makes the decision easier. But I’d say person first then animal. You can always beat the hell out of
them later if they deserved to die in the fire.