5 ms·

The claim is that the firefighters didn't know if anyone's live was in danger because they didn't show up. The evidence is that they refused to show up when

The claim is that the firefighters didn't know if anyone's live was in danger because they didn't show up. The evidence is that they refused to show up when called and only showed up when called by someone else. Without being prescene at the scene it is not possible for a firefigther to know if someone's life is endanger or not because the person calling isn't trained to know that. The real evidence for the very basic claim is there.

jakear 4y ago
> Without being prescene at the scene it is not possible for a firefigther to know if someone's life is endanger or not because the person calling isn't trained to know that. Yeah... that's about the weakest argument I've heard this week. Firefighters don't have magical spidey senses to tell them whether someone is trapped in a burning building. They will go based on what the homeowner says -- it doesn't take special training to verify that 3 people live at your house and all of them are on the road with you watching it burn. Fire department certainly isn't risking life and limb to comb through an actively burning building verifying it to be empty when the homeowner themselves already said it was. >that the firefighters didn't know if anyone's live was in danger because they didn't show up. Person: Hello, my house is on fire come save it please. FireDepartment: Is anyone's life in danger? Person: No. FireDepartment: Thank you for letting me know. That's how easy it is, same conversation would happen whether or not they were on "the list".