 |
| Only part of the conversation... |
I recently participated in a social media conversation started by a former colleague of mine who openly questioned the response to a working house fire. At issue wasn't the emergent response but the manner of the response. I don't normally engage in these types of conversations, because there is rarely any real resolution achieved. However, seeing as I was an unwilling audience to the cacophony orchestrated that evening, I joined in.
Some background: I live in a "planned community" east of Rochester, NY. Not much happens there at night; traffic is generally non-existent after 10:00 pm except for residents coming home or going to work. I've lived there for nearly 9 years, and it's not a bad place to catch some shuteye without the drone of vehicles all night.
So imagine my surprise when, at 11:00 pm, I hear what can only be described as a "mayday alert" traveling through the neighborhood. Multiple pieces of apparatus were rolling through to the aforementioned house fire using every audible warning device available on the vehicle: siren, Federal Q, airhorn. Simultaneously, and without relief.
Now, I have absolutely no concern with using sirens at night. In fact, state law requires it when lights are activated. However, situational awareness (and a little common sense) might dictate that the usage of all warning devices is overkill considering the hour, historical traffic pattern, and no reports of persons trapped. Needless to say, my statements to these conditions did nothing to appease the supporters of the local departments. One poster continuously pointed to "thanking" volunteer firefighters, another pointed to V&T law (which I had already agreed with), then provided the "kill:" you weren't there so you don't know if vehicles were failing to yield; maybe they did it on purpose; etc.
Therein lies the rub: as a public safety professional, you are held to a higher standard. If vehicles aren't yielding, back off, don't drive more aggressively. If you're raising the dead on purpose, someone needs to be held accountable. These are not the actions of a professional. If it's attention you're desiring, it's attention you will get, though I doubt it will be positive.
I'm going to add my own theory, something I'll call adrenaline. Adrenaline is a funny thing: it makes us go into Sonic mode ("gotta go fast..."). Unfortunately, those in the business of responding to emergencies need to harness that adrenaline and slow down. Making all the noise in the world and driving like a man possessed isn't going to get you there any faster (or safer).
Department leaders need to start stepping up and reviewing their response policies. This is already happening with the agencies I work with: all BLS responses and many ALS responses are now "green." There's just no data to support the usage of lights and sirens to be a time-saver in all but the most extreme cases of medical severity (think choking, cardiac arrest, or stroke) or distance. Before I get heckled for my lack of knowledge of fire behavior, I get it: fire doubles in size in seconds. But again, unless it's the most extreme cases (such as people trapped), there is zero need to make yourself look foolish to those you ask to support you.
