Mandates
As always, thanks to Bobby Halton for sharing his talents and gifts with the American fire service. “Mandatory vs. Voluntary Choice vs. Compulsion, Part 2” (Editor’s Opinion, October 2021) was outstanding and will offer encouragement if we have to encounter the mandate situation. I’m paraphrasing from one of his speeches, but one of our most important jobs as leaders is standing for those who may not have a voice or be part of the biggest group.
In a leadership position, it doesn’t matter if I’m vaccinated or unvaccinated or what my personal beliefs may be. I have to support those members on the outside or who are not part of the biggest group.
John Turner
Chief
Derby, Kansas
I just read Bobby Halton’s editorial in the October issue. I’m sure he is getting swamped with correspondence right now, but I wanted to thank him for what he said. I am currently facing the end of my 24-year police career as a result of what is currently going on.
As an FDIC instructor, I wanted to reach out and share the letter I sent to our Borough Council regarding the issue (https://emberly.fireengineering.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/daly-memo.pdf). I took a different approach to the argument, from that of an occupational health and safety specialist. I am personally outraged that the health and safety folks at the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) refuse to take a stand on this, and I have my own theories on the motivation of the IAFF’s decision. Regardless, I figured I would share this memo in hopes that Fire Engineering could pass it along to those firefighters who are fighting this issue on their own. As many of the politicians who are making these decisions have not thought this whole thing through, when someone asks them the questions I have posed in the memo, it makes the politicians realize what they have done or are considering doing to the finances of their respective municipalities. Anyone who needs help can feel free to copy and paste the questions and send them to their “leaders” for answers.
Chris Daly
Drive to Survive
West Chester, Pennsylvania
The Reason We Exist
The article “Civilian Rescue: The Reason We Exist” by Brian Bush and Anthony Kastros (July 2021) is excellent. The concept of collecting detailed data about fire incidents and the actual behavior of firefighters to control and mitigate the loss from fire will help firefighting doctrine become more effective and efficient.
When we combine the clinical (real time under life-and-death conditions) with our ever-expanding laboratory research (controlled environment, no life hazard), we will begin to get science- and research-based knowledge, skills, and abilities about firefighting. This will help us increase our professionalism.
The challenge remains to change our thinking from manual fire protection as our first principle to automatic fire protection as the primary mitigation factor to reduce civilian and firefighter morbidity and mortality. The risk to firefighters and civilians will continue to increase if our future fire culture is stuck on 20th-century dogma about people on pumpers and ladder trucks racing to the fire to save people. Whether it is another World Trade Center, western forest fires, Grenfell Tower, or a single-family house fire, the “fire bandit” will continue to win when the bell in the firehouse rings if we don’t change the odds in favor of citizens and firefighters. Until we change the fire culture, our chances of winning at the “fire casino” are not good.
We need to be honest and add the impact of building/fire codes, smoke alarms, and fire sprinklers (and not building structures in the wildland urban interface) into our clinical and laboratory science and research. If we don’t, we will not be telling the truth about what firefighters can and cannot do to save citizens or ourselves.
The data is in on the efficacy of codes, smoke alarms, fire sprinklers, and not building in high-fire-risk zones. Automatic fire protection is the best way to save civilians and firefighters.
Remember, telling the truth is the foundation of why a profession exists, even the fire service.
Dr. Burton A. Clark, EFO
Retired, National Fire Academy
Mt. Airy, Maryland
Emergency Signals and Their Effect on Civilians
For almost two centuries, the fire service has used many methods of warning signals to alert people of our presence and ask the right-of-way in traffic. However, it is my belief that the warning signals we use have a much deeper meaning to the people we serve and protect.
First, let’s review a brief history of the warning signals we have used over the years. Originally, bells were used on the first fire apparatus, along with a red lantern. This was the case until the 1900s, when the mechanical siren was invented. It turned with a hand crank and later incorporated an electric motor that gave a sharp wail that warned drivers on the road to pull safely to the right and yield the right-of-way to emergency vehicles. With the mechanical sirens came red lights, which were like headlights with a red-tinted lens that did not flash and often had the word “Stop” emblazoned on the glass.
In 1965, the electronic siren was invented. It replaced the arguably more efficient and louder mechanical siren, which had a farther reach and much better sound profile that traveled farther and was more audible.
As the sirens changed, so did the lights. Flashing lights that blinked much like a turn signal were followed by rotating lights. In the 1980s-1990s, the standard became LED lighting. These were mostly red and white but often accompanied by blue or green.
So, what do these signals mean to civilians when they hear them, and what is their purpose? Now, we often get complaints from the neighbors that the sirens are too loud or even wake them up. For the people who call us, it is often their worst day, and something has happened that they cannot fix. Whether they are sick, they are injured, their house is on fire, or they are trapped somewhere, they call 911 and, no matter what, we come to fix the problem. Often, we hear people say, “I heard the sirens, and I knew things were going to be OK,” or “I felt a sense of hope when I heard the sirens.” That is what I believe the meaning of our warning signals to be: hope. We are the hope that, if they are trapped or injured or their loved one isn’t breathing, we are coming to make it better.
I can attest to this. When I was a child, we had a fire in the apartment that my mother and I lived in. I remember calling 911 and reporting the fire, as it had been drilled into me by my mother and uncle, who was himself a firefighter and taught me what to do in case of a fire. After calling 911, I ran out of the house and alerted the neighbors to tell them to evacuate. The first firefighter to arrive did so in his own vehicle. I remember him running into the house while I was knocking on the door below our apartment. He used his radio to call in a working fire, then scooped me up and brought me outside. I told him there was a disabled couple in the front of the building; he made the grab on them and then came to comfort me.
It was then that I began to hear the sirens only moments after my call and began to calm down because I knew that everything was going to be OK and the firefighters were going to fix it. Often in my career, when I have rolled up on a scene, whether medical or fire related, I’ve seen a look of relief on the caller’s face as soon as we arrive.
One often hears from the senior members who have been on the job for a while that the sirens are useless, that they “only shave off a couple of seconds,” or that nobody listens to them anyway. Many decide to roll silent on most calls unless it “sounds serious,” is a confirmed fire, or is an arrest/difficulty breathing call. What gives us the right to say this and decide what is serious or not before we even get on scene?
So, why is it we are so reluctant to use these signals when responding to a call? What are we worried about when we respond? We are supposed to help people, so would the argument not stand that using our warning signals as we respond should be standard practice? Even if it is not a major emergency by our standards, why not respond with them so that people may be less panicked when we arrive and know that help is on the way rather than just being told over the phone? If we are here to help people, why only take care of their physical needs rather than also taking care of their mental state by using our warning signals to ease their mind and let them know that help is nearby?
It is my hope that this letter will spark many conversations at kitchen tables in firehouses across America and even abroad. I hope we better ourselves as a service so that we may complete our mission as a whole and take care of the community to the fullest extent of our capability.
Patrick Harvey
Firefighter/EMT-B
Oglesby (IL) Fire Department
