I am just shocked that a device specifically made for firemen to protect them while they are fighting fires was approved, when it malfunctions in extreme heat or if it gets wet. (Duh!) Who in their right mind would approve this gizmo for manufacture? Hummmmm… could someone have a financial incentive and/or connection here? Can you say “conflict of interest”?
Steve,
Do you have any information to connect these devices to the administration or are you just another nutcase that thinks every problem is related to Bush? Maybe you can post your version on the daily kos or move on and have it picked up as verified news by Katie C, Chris M or Dan R.
What I would have liked to have seen is any statistics/documentation on the lives it may have saved. We may just e looking at the only two failures in the millions of units out there.
As much as we would like to see perfection, a device such as this is going to have a certain failure rate, and based on what was in the article, the failure rate appears to be .0002 percent.
People will use the argument that they won’t wear a seat belt since it could jam and prevent them from getting out of a burning car, but I don’t think that there is much argument that seatbelts do save lives – substantially so.
The example used involving NY firefighter Thomas Brick isn’t exactly on-point. Having personal knowledge of this case I can share the following. This individual had a reputation as being “gung ho” and was the first one to enter a burning building. On the date of this incident, he chose to ignore departmental protocols and wait for his team. He took off on his own and his team never even knew he was in the building until they made their exit and somebody noticed he wasn’t around. The second floor caved in and pinned him under smoldering mattresses. I doubt anyone could hear much of a signal in that scenario. It didn’t take them long to find him once they realized he was missing. Even at that, firefighting carries an assumption of risk. No safety device is 100% effective.
You can tell it’s election year. Schumer want publicity anywhere he can get it. He hasn’t done a thing proactively, but he sure knows how to pile on when something happens. With all due respect to NYC’s bravest…….sometimes a little common sense and caution might save lives.
Not trying to be lighthearted here, so stay with me.
This is the same device used in the Duracell commercials. In all fairness, when was the last time the battery was changed. The device won’t sound as loud with an older battery.
And everyone else who pointed this out is rigt – no device is ever 100% effective. Ever. Sucks but it’s true.
I wonder — Maybe Steve was being sarcastic. Who made you judge, jury and executioner of what people are allowed to post or not post on IJ? Go back to neokkkon.com and let people post here with the freedom they deserve.
Ouch Johnnie, you really got me! Maybe you and Stevie can get together and compose a post that relates to insurance. Encase you were unable to follow, I didn’t inject politics into this.
So who are you to decide who can post here?
I am just shocked that a device specifically made for firemen to protect them while they are fighting fires was approved, when it malfunctions in extreme heat or if it gets wet. (Duh!) Who in their right mind would approve this gizmo for manufacture? Hummmmm… could someone have a financial incentive and/or connection here? Can you say “conflict of interest”?
Maybe we should plant a GPS chip in all firefighters….
Or is it made by another contractor with commections to the Bush White House?
Steve,
Do you have any information to connect these devices to the administration or are you just another nutcase that thinks every problem is related to Bush? Maybe you can post your version on the daily kos or move on and have it picked up as verified news by Katie C, Chris M or Dan R.
What I would have liked to have seen is any statistics/documentation on the lives it may have saved. We may just e looking at the only two failures in the millions of units out there.
As much as we would like to see perfection, a device such as this is going to have a certain failure rate, and based on what was in the article, the failure rate appears to be .0002 percent.
People will use the argument that they won’t wear a seat belt since it could jam and prevent them from getting out of a burning car, but I don’t think that there is much argument that seatbelts do save lives – substantially so.
The example used involving NY firefighter Thomas Brick isn’t exactly on-point. Having personal knowledge of this case I can share the following. This individual had a reputation as being “gung ho” and was the first one to enter a burning building. On the date of this incident, he chose to ignore departmental protocols and wait for his team. He took off on his own and his team never even knew he was in the building until they made their exit and somebody noticed he wasn’t around. The second floor caved in and pinned him under smoldering mattresses. I doubt anyone could hear much of a signal in that scenario. It didn’t take them long to find him once they realized he was missing. Even at that, firefighting carries an assumption of risk. No safety device is 100% effective.
You can tell it’s election year. Schumer want publicity anywhere he can get it. He hasn’t done a thing proactively, but he sure knows how to pile on when something happens. With all due respect to NYC’s bravest…….sometimes a little common sense and caution might save lives.
Not trying to be lighthearted here, so stay with me.
This is the same device used in the Duracell commercials. In all fairness, when was the last time the battery was changed. The device won’t sound as loud with an older battery.
And everyone else who pointed this out is rigt – no device is ever 100% effective. Ever. Sucks but it’s true.
I wonder — Maybe Steve was being sarcastic. Who made you judge, jury and executioner of what people are allowed to post or not post on IJ? Go back to neokkkon.com and let people post here with the freedom they deserve.
Trudi-
I guess you think you’re funny but this is an insurance site for comments related to the article. If you want to talk sports go to espn.com.
Much like the discussion which started with politics and ended with who can and can’t post on this website.
Ouch Johnnie, you really got me! Maybe you and Stevie can get together and compose a post that relates to insurance. Encase you were unable to follow, I didn’t inject politics into this.