Trying to save your home will get you tased

Trying to save your home will get you tased

cbs3.com

Police Use Stun Gun On Pa. Man Battling House FireNORTH BELLE VERNON, Pa. (AP) ― Police had to use a stun gun on a Pittsburgh-area man whose house was on fire because they say the man was endangering himself trying to battle the blaze with a garden hose.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Its a interesting dilemma...your home is on fire...you should have every right to battle it...its your home, your property...at what point is it no longer your home and you must evacuate the premise?

I have no doubt the guy was doing some dangerous actions by trying to battle an inferno with a few drips...but, isn't it his (darwinian) right to defend his own property if he so chooses? He was warned, repeatedly, of the dangers and to please stop...

Whats the proper course of action...can a cop tase you for endangering yourself on your own property?

cbs3.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

In the upcoming lawsuit he may or may not, recover some funds to get a new house.

If they'd done nothing and the guy had died in the fire, the city, the police department, and the fire department would likely all be facing lawsuits for not stopping him. Seems to me their choice was get sued for letting him kill himself or get sued for stopping him. Rock and a hard place if you ask me.

The police "had to".

No, they didnt HAVE TO.

They could have restrained the man, or escorted him to a safe area without this kind of treatment. Its really not that hard. If they cant restrain one man without causing him harm, then what good are they?

OR. They could have just turned off his hose?


This is the interesting part...

"Baker told WTAE-TV he was just trying to save his pet reptiles. Five of his snakes made it out of the fire, but six didn't survive.

Police say no charges will be filed against Baker."

Well, I doubt the police can say the same for themselves. Im sure there will be a lawsuit. Rightfully so too.

edit

[edit on 7-9-2010 by Common Good]

It's a crime to do for yourself. Once you or somebody else has called the lords you're life, liberty and property are forfeit.

Did you happen to see the footage of the cops at the roadblocks this morning around the CA fires refusing to let people gather belongings? Even pets. They were turning away sobbing people wishing to collect their pets. Threatening to arrest them even.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? I may burn to death up there trying to get my pets out but I also may not. If I sit here in my car they will surely burn to death and I will surely develop a deep and intense hatred and distrust for the cops and the government.

It's better than allowing them to burn to death just because they are too emotional to think clearly.

So if a unit without a tazer was unavailable would they just have shot the guy? I mean if they'd be half decent cops they would've helped the guy and tried to make sure that he doesn't get hurt.

Originally posted by Soshh
It's better than allowing them to burn to death just because they are too emotional to think clearly.

Actually, the intent isn't the question here, its the precidence...

if this is acceptable behavior, then what next...if your roofing, a cop can tell you to get down from your roof because of the danger, forcing you off the roof by any means necessary...

I dont think the police were trying to come off as big brother in this case, but again, this is more than just the intent behind the actions, but where this little step is moving towards...once the institution no longer allows home owners to decide what is best for themselves and their property...then we truely are creating a nanny state.

Originally posted by SaturnFX...once the institution no longer allows home owners to decide what is best for themselves and their property...then we truely are creating a nanny state.

We're waaaaaaay past that point.

Home owners havent been able to decide what's best for them and their property for over 125 years now.

reply to post by SaturnFX


I don't agree with the use of the taser, but then again I wasn't there. They tried three times to stop him. He could have been violent or threatening towards them, he could have been built like a brick lavatory and the taser was the safest way to subdue him for all concerned.

I don't think we should automatically assume that the officers were being unreasonable.

North Belle Vernon family of four flees fire, but snakes die

Police Use Stun Gun On Pa. Man Battling House Fire

Believe it or not these two headlines are about the same story.

As is usually the case, emotions run high from a very short article with an obvious slant on the story. Here's some information from a more lengthy article, with more information and even comments from the man who was tased, who "holds no ill will toward the officer". The officer did try to pull him away before he stunned him and the owner even understands it was a judgment call although he thinks the officer was wrong.

Damon Baker said he was using a garden hose to try to douse the flames before firefighters arrived. He acknowledged the water wasn't much help, but said he refused to obey a North Belle Vernon police officer's order to stop.

The officer, Damon Baker said, pulled him away from the house. Damon Baker said the officer used a stun device on him when he went back toward the house.

"It shocked the hell out of me," he said. "I took a few steps back."

Damon Baker said he wasn't injured, and he holds no ill will toward the officer.

"It was a judgment call," Damon Baker said. "In his opinion, he was right to do it. In my opinion, he was wrong for stopping me from protecting my property."

When firefighters arrived, they immediately tried to save the snakes, Damon Baker said.

"A couple of the brave ones carried them out for us," Damon Baker said, describing the snakes as non-venomous. "I can't give those guys a big enough pat on the back."

North Belle Vernon family of four flees fire, but snakes die

A garden hose to put out the fire? Come on, even the guy said it wasn't doing much. You think no one should have done anything to prevent the guy, who was emotionally concerned about his snakes, from injuring himself? The snakes that were saved aren't even expected to survive due to the smoke. I'm guessing the guy wasn't thinking right as he seemed more concerned about the snakes instead of remaining alive and well for his two children and wife that's pregnant with triplets.

Everyone who disagrees is right. The police should have left him alone and left the scene, the firefighters should have been called away and the guy should have been left on his own to put out the fire at his house, and his neighbors, with his garden hose.

Originally posted by Three_moons
You think no one should have done anything to prevent the guy, who was emotionally concerned about his snakes, from injuring himself? The snakes that were saved aren't even expected to survive due to the smoke. I'm guessing the guy wasn't thinking right as he seemed more concerned about the snakes instead of remaining alive and well for his two children and wife that's pregnant with triplets.

If that's what he wanted. Let him choke and burn and knowing it was under his own volition the wife should not be able to sue anyone. Liberty lets people do stupid things.

Everyone who disagrees is right. The police should have left him alone and left the scene, the firefighters should have been called away and the guy should have been left on his own to put out the fire at his house, and his neighbors, with his garden hose.

If that's what he wanted and his burning property posed no threat to the property of others.

it Reminds me of this




Man Arrested for trying to save his drowning dog


as there a lot of Drama Stress and Extreme Tension


Im not sure what i would do in this situation ...

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Their job is to keep him alive.

Bloody "nanny state" this is a state where you are the property, not the owner of property. It is not a free society, nor even an ethical one, but more like one where a farmer thinks for his sheep (not really because he cares for them) but because he owns them.

I absolutely hate it; and when there is a 2nd revolution I hope that whoever gave the Nazi order to fire will one day have his house burning down (in a rather similar situation!)

Once people over 18 could make they're own decisions, for they're own buisness. Now it only applies when you're dead & buried in the grave!

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

But there was a threat to other property. The neighbors house was also destroyed, you must have not seen that part.

This is the problem.

When firefighters arrived on the scene, one homeowner was trying to fight the flames with a garden hose. Police say they tried three times to remove Damon Baker from the scene, but he wouldn't budge, so officers had to subdue him.

Fighting a structure fire is very complex. If you enter a home and so much as stand upright in the doorway you can make it impossible for firefighters to save your home.

Here is why. A structure fire has to be fought from the inside. In order to do this the heat has to stay layered. The room that is on fire will have layers of heat. At the very top is super-heated gasses at about 2,000 degrees F. average. The middle portion is at about 6-800 degrees, the floor between 150-350 degrees.

We have to figure out the best place to enter without driving the fire through the unburned portion of the structure. Once we decides where to gain entry we crawl in. The reason being is that if you walk through a doorway that is at this point the biggest inlet vent for air it will cause the rushing incoming air to vortex. When this happens what was hot 2,000 degree gases at the ceiling gets hit with the vortex it now hits the floor and everywhere in between.

If this happens we can no longer gain entry and fight it from the inside. We then lose the home and any living beings inside. This is just a very small example of fire science and Firefighting.

When the FD arrives let them do the job they were trained for or get ready to lose everything. So many things happen that the general public does not understand.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by LoneGunMan]

All good points but bit irrelevant as I understand he was trying to put out the fire with a garden hose from the outside. That isn't even that dangerous. I know from a photoshoot I did with a fire department burning down a condemned building for practice. Sure the heat radiation is really hot and the smoke is bad if the wind happens to act up. It's not dangerous enough to warrant someone tazering you over it.

ok to every one who thinks they should have let this guy alone to do what he was trying to do call your fire department and tell them to NEVER come over your house if there's a fire that you want your freedom to burn with it .
The guy was over emotional and he needed a calm head to step in simple and to the point.
as for not just grabbing the guy you would all be yelling police brutality .
like it or not being tazed is a lot less likly to cause permanent damage then being drug away kiking and screaming.
the guy was worryed about the snakes ? when he has a wife and kids and more on the way?
sure let him burn then you can all yell about how she now needs state help to feed the kids and how much of a louser she is.
you people need to find issues with every thing.
You would probly cural up in a ball if you couldnt find something to say was bad alest once a day.