Let Me Make This Perfectly Clear
Departments
EDITOR’S OPINION
Last month, I had a point to make. I wanted to bring comment on the litigious society we’ve created—even in the firefighting industry. JLI Webster defines litigious as, “inclined to judicial contest” or “fond of litigation.”
In the recent past, our apparatus manufacturers have borne the brunt of such legal actions I lowever, to be upset at something concerning the fire service and making myself clear in print is difficult without getting involved emotionally, especially when my heart goes out to both parties.
Since my July editorial “hit the streets,” my thoughts have been interpolated, misinterpreted, manipulated, and construed in ways in which they were never intended.
As Richard Nixon used to say, “Let me make one thing perfectly clear.” In order for me to accomplish that, I guess I have to put on my street personality and return to my firefighting asphalt management to make myself understood.
In all my firefighting experience, I have never met an apparatus manufacturer who was not as concerned with our safety as we are. Fire apparatus is engineered for safety. Small, custom variations are added only in response to the dictates of the purchasing fire department. Because a recent court action has received a great deal of press, both consumer and professional, I felt that it was time that someone came to the defense of the manufacturer.
I have also spoken to fellow fire officers across the country in Michigan, New York, California, and New England. They all agree. The apparatus manufacturers are getting a bum rap, and, in one case, legally mugged!
I’ve said it before, there is virtually no way to design safety into unsafe acts. Safety policy, awareness, and training are the only answers.
Although I have received a number of phone calls agreeing with last month’s message, there were a few people on the opposite side of the fence who wanted to read a message that was simply not there.
I hope I’ve made myself perfectly clear.
