Cops Tase Father Trying To Save His 3-Year-Old Son From House Fire
- Thread starter eznutz
- Start date
As previously said at least where I am, at an active fire scene a Fire Chief or his deputies have almost Godlike power. That includes telling police to prevent people from entering the burning building. Given the lack of outrage in the articles I presume that is also the case in Missouri.
Nope. Does not matter. If Police and fire were not there, I woulda jumped his ass too and been perfectly justified to use all my power to hold him. In fact have done it. And it was right.
Once you softies cut out emotion.... This all becomes very clear.
Read the article -
"While firefighters started to knock down the fire, Ryan Miller kicked in the front door and tried to enter the burning residence. Police tried to restrain Ryan Miller, who became combative, Jenne said, and an officer used a stun gun to subdue him. As Ryan Miller was pulled back, one firefighter in full gear tried to enter the home, but "the heat just forced him back out."
Further, to this, you don't believe in two-way radios?
As has been pointed out repeatedly, the dad was not "set" on harming himself. He was set on saving his child. An act that may or may not have caused him serious or lethal bodily harm.
Frankly, I find it laughable that anyone would compare this father's heroics with someone trying to commit suicide.
People seem to have missed the headline of the article. Faulty electrical circuit causes fire.
Proper upkeep and safety of the home is the homeowner's responsibility. If the child's parents owned the house, they are responsible for the death of their own child because they failed to properly maintain the house. No different than a car owner failing to maintain his car that gets into an accident where someone is killed because of poor maintenance.
Proper upkeep and safety of the home is the homeowner's responsibility. If the child's parents owned the house, they are responsible for the death of their own child because they failed to properly maintain the house. No different than a car owner failing to maintain his car that gets into an accident where someone is killed because of poor maintenance.
Lack of working smoke alarms seems to be a bigger issue. By the time the smoke woke them, the fire was out of control. The article doesn't say, but I find it hard to believe they had an alarm.
Probably now is a good time for everyone to verify that their smoke alarms are in good working order, especially anyone with a family. While you are at it, confirm your carbon monoxide detector.
Electrical fire are the hardest to detect until it's too late as it can smoulder and spread inside the walls for a while and then virtual explode. They can start for the darnedest reasons, including water seepage or rodent damage. You're a little hard on the owners for their supposed neglect.
I won't comment or dispute that. My comment was based on the legal argument someone else made.....
As was also pointed out, the father would not be in any state of mind to make logical common sense decision about much, including the risk he was about to take entering the burning building. If it was engulfed in flame enough to beat back equipped firefighter there would be little chance or no chance of the son being alive, after smoke inhalation, breathing in super heated air and then the body fat literally bubbling and burning like a candled with the chard clothing acting as a wick. A fully grown body can burn for almost 8 hours. bones and teeth take longer as anyone who has had human remains cremated will tell you.
Alright, enough of this. I think the father had the right to risk his own life to save his child and you think the police had the moral/legal right to stop him.
.... and the wife and son have the right to live their life with their protector. He wasn't 'risking' his life, he was heading to a certain death for reason already stated.
