'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

This is reminiscent of the firemen standing by watching a house burn down and I know the same old same old political spin will most likely take over but I don't care if it was policy or not. I know that if I worked for the fire or police dept. I would not have stood by and watch that guy do that. No one in the crowd did anything either. What the heck is wrong with people today?

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

"This just strikes me as not just a problem with funding, but a problem with the culture of what's going on in our city, that no one would take the time and help this drowning man," Alameda resident Adam Gillitt told KGO.

Nuff said.

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

I know it's tempting to blame it on the fire department - or the bystanders....It's also easy to say, "I wouldn't have stood by...." but the truth is the blame, if there is blame to be placed, belongs squarely on the budget cuts which were made.

This sentence here sums it all up -The previous policy was implemented after budget cuts forced the department to discontinue water rescue training and stop maintaining wetsuits and other rescue gear, D'Orazi said Tuesday

We have no idea what the water conditions were like - or how big the man was or how strong or how determined he was. Let's not overlook the fact that the man's own family was present and they did nothing, either. I'd think there was a damn good reason for that, wouldn't you? Letting your own family member drown is even harder to do than letting a stranger drown, isn't it?

I've been there - I've been part of a water rescue trying to bring in a suicidal person. They fight you - they are every bit as likely to pull you under as you are to pull them out - maybe more so since they are unconcerned with anyone's safety, including their own. If their own life doesn't matter to them you can be darn sure that your's doesn't either.

Plus, if the water's cold, and you have no wet suit or other protection, you are placing yourself in grave danger....something we are all taught, first thing, that you are NOT supposed to do. You do so and you not only jeopardize your own life but the lives of every coworker on the scene with you. It is Rule #1 in rescue work - make sure the scene is secure before entering. A suicidal man in frigid water with an undertow - and a rescue team without wet suits, protective gear or water rescue training - this is NOT a secure scene.....this is the perfect set up for black arm bands, badge hoods and a fire department funeral.

I vote "not their fault," on this one - this is not similar to the house which burnt down several months ago - those firemen had the proper equipement, the proper training and the scene did not pose an unnecessary risk to them. This one did.

This is unfortunate, this is sad and this is a direct result of not having the right gear or the right training.

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

Says the man that was on scene and also did nothing to help the man... the Irony is rich in this quote.

My honest opinion, he decided to take his own life, and he did. Why is this the rescue personnel fault? Swim at your own risk, when you try to take your own life, you just may succeed.

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

Shocker: people trying to commit suicide sometimes succeed!

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

If the conditions were such that a rescue was unlikely or extremely dangerous then I would agree. We don't know that it was or wasn't and I will concede that it was at least somewhat dangerous and possibly quite a bit more. There have been many stories and accounts of rescues that went above the technical call of duty(by both pros and citizens) and I can remember footage of citizens jumping into icy waters to save a girl and other passengers going under in a plane crash that went short of a runway and landed at a bridge(for the life of me I can't remember the bridge).
None of them had cold weather gear. I'm not trying to dictate that people should be required to be heroic. I don't want to judge but I can't help but thinking in days past that some would have attempted to save this guy.

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

I think part of it is the situation. Clearly some people realized what was going on, but I have to think most did not. An adult is in water, not screaming for help, etc. -- would you think to go in and "save" him?

otoh, if I'm out at the beach and see a little girl get swept off a jetty, I'm going to go in and try to get her, as I'm sure many other people would

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

The situation undoubtedly played a big part in the crowd, police and firefighters reaction. But is rescue off the table because the guy threatened suicide? Yeah he did it to himself and I would feel a lot worse if a little girl drowned but this part of the story has been eating away at me.

Was he looking for help one last time and when it didn't come he gave into his demons?

Re: 'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die
 

I wasn't even referring to the suicide aspect of it, actually.

I was referring to the fact that it's an adult man in water as opposed to somebody less capable who clearly is in trouble. I just skimmed the article, but it's not even clear to me what would lead a passerby to conclude he was in trouble.

(I'm not referring to the police /firemen because of the reasons others have already put forth re. dangers, as opposed to policy. Maybe the suicide angle did impact them, I don't know.)