3 ms·
In recent years, during wildfires in Colorado many homes have been saved by private firefighters because the owners had paid premiums to certain private insuran
by mkempe 8y ago
In recent years, during wildfires in Colorado many homes have been saved by private firefighters because the owners had paid premiums to certain private insurance companies, which are determined to actively save assets not just pay for damages. Without these private efforts those houses would have been destroyed (we know this because the neighbors lost their homes and all their belongings when government officials told them to evacuate and they had no personal or private solution in place).
Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones?
The government always resorts to banning or controlling new things. As a general rule, they're wrong; and their motivation is not the protection of your life, liberty, or property.
- oh_sigh 8y ago> Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? Yes. You don't get to hold up containment efforts for potentially thousands of homes because you believe that your home is more important. Private firefighters are fine, but they can't impede real emergency personnel.
- mkempe 8y agoNice insult: "real". The thousands of people who lost their homes during Colorado fires while some of their neighbors did not -- these victims wished they had had the right private fire insurance instead of only your "real" personnel. Using drones to observe specific fire activity around one's private property is entirely legitimate and can save both lives and assets. The State should remain neutral -- or encourage their useful uses; neither limit nor ban them. [added] If you're downvoting this you obviously have not lived through a Colorado wildfire and do not personally know victims of those fires. Even the public firefighters have expressed appreciation for the private firefighters' work. And saving a home from the flames does not somehow disrupt containment! Do you know anything about fighting wildfires?
- cmurf 8y agoPublic services are charged with protecting broad public interests: public infrastructure, land that if burned will cause floods the next time it rains, and the most houses, and conflagration to neighboring communities. It's entirely appropriate that private firefighting takes a backseat to public firefighting. It's no different than private security force having to take a backseat to the local police, or the FBI.
- mkempe 8y agoTo continue with your parallel, private security is not pre-emptively banned from owning nor using weapons.
- lovich 8y agoIt sounds like you just want everyone to act as a number of independent, autonomous collectives of one instead of as a society. While that level of libertarianism fine to hold as a political belief, it doesn't really matter for this discussion. We are not going to change how our entire society runs over private use of drones near fires, and so your argument that we should be running society differently counts for zero when we decide how drones should be handled in the context of our society.
- mkempe 8y agoOk then, society über alles!
- s73v3r_ 8y agoI don't believe a single word you've said, and flying drones where fire helicopters are trying to contain the fire is literally the definition of "Fuck you, I've got mine."
- mkempe 8y agoPrivate firefighters are real, no matter how rude you choose to be. Nobody asked you to believe anything. The facts speak for those who are willing to know. Clearly you know nothing of Colorado wildfires, nothing of how to fight wildfires, and nothing of how private firefighters work.