V8 Beast Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 Again, he had it happen before and "forgot" again? I can't buy that. Sorry. I also don't think anyone "deserves' to lose everything, but it's not the firemens fault. I'll say it again: Let me drive your car into a tree w/o insurance and tell you to call any insurance company to come see the trashed vehicle an pay for it. Is it the insurance comapanies responsibility or mine? Where did I say it was ok for him to pay it on the spot? Are you reading some imaginary text that I cant see? Based on your response I'm left wondering why you even quoted me. If you didnt feel he deserved it then I probably wasnt talking to you. All I can think of is you assumed I was talking about you and wanted to throw your point out... again. I'll say again.. He is a real person that made a mistake. Its 100% his fault but I feel sorry for him because he is a person that had something bad happen. When quoting me please make sure that you have full comprehension of what I typed. Also avoid assumptions and an overly agressive tendency to attempt to prove your point. The result will resemble the post above where you assume I was referring to you, defend yourself, and disagree with something that was never said. I would suggest taking a step back, inhaling, and thinking through the response. This will assure it is on point with what was written and doesnt make it overly easy for someone to type some long as shit like this paragraph because of just how wrong you were in assuming that I thought it was ok to pay the $75 after the fact. Allowing him to pay the $75 on the spot would result in no one paying until the fire department got there to put out the fire. Here is what I wrote... I want to be on the fire departments side but these heartless people in this thread make me want to be on his side. I do feel sorry for the guy because a mistake cost him his pets and belongings... Maybe its because I see real people when I read stories while the rest of you are desensatized to real life due to too much interwebs. Its 100% his fault but I dont get how people are acting like he deserves it. Not paying $75 is a mistake, not a justified sentence of death by the karma police. He fubar'd bad.. the end. Where did I mention your name or say its the fire dept fault? I said it was his fault repeatedly and only mentioned the $75 in reference to people acting like he deserved it... who from what you typed isnt you. And this sentence is only here to make this long post even longer for no good reason.... While this sentence was typed with a rolled up, lit on fire check of $75 for ironic purposes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Beast Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 Damn, that didnt look that long when I typed it earlier. Cliffs... I agree with yenner but we are arguing anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russian rocket Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 I'll say it again: Let me drive your car into a tree w/o insurance and tell you to call any insurance company to come see the trashed vehicle an pay for it. Is it the insurance comapanies responsibility or mine? again and again i keep on seeing this quote but it has no bearing in this argument. i guess ill put it in words you can understand. the guy crashes his car into a tree and has no insurance. he takes it to the body shop and pays for all the damages. end of story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otis Nice Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 Here is what I wrote... I want to be on the fire departments side but these heartless people in this thread make me want to be on his side. I do feel sorry for the guy because a mistake cost him his pets and belongings... Maybe its because I see real people when I read stories while the rest of you are desensatized to real life due to too much interwebs. This is what I was replying to. You were talking about "heartless people" in this thread, which includes me. I see it as more of a logical stand point than heartless but potato, tomahto. When in Rome... again and again i keep on seeing this quote but it has no bearing in this argument. i guess ill put it in words you can understand. the guy crashes his car into a tree and has no insurance. he takes it to the body shop and pays for all the damages. end of story... No, I guess I'll put it in words you can understand (I think). "the guy crashes his car into a tree and has no insurance. he takes it to the body shop and pays for all the damages." = house burns to the ground and guy pays to rebuild without blaming anyone else. Guy crashes car and tells an insurance company to replace the entire car if he pays a small deductible when he wasn't covered by them in the first place = guys house burns and he only wants to pay $75 fee after the fact. Hopefully even you can understand it now. End of story.... ....I hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99FLHRCI Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 No, I guess I'll put it in words you can understand (I think). "the guy crashes his car into a tree and has no insurance. he takes it to the body shop and pays for all the damages." = house burns to the ground and guy pays to rebuild without blaming anyone else. Guy crashes car and tells an insurance company to replace the entire car if he pays a small deductible when he wasn't covered by them in the first place = guys house burns and he only wants to pay $75 fee after the fact. Hopefully even you can understand it now. End of story.... ....I hope. +63,473,556,743,543,569,778,434 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russian rocket Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 This is what I was replying to. You were talking about "heartless people" in this thread, which includes me. I see it as more of a logical stand point than heartless but potato, tomahto. When in Rome... No, I guess I'll put it in words you can understand (I think). "the guy crashes his car into a tree and has no insurance. he takes it to the body shop and pays for all the damages." = house burns to the ground and guy pays to rebuild without blaming anyone else. Guy crashes car and tells an insurance company to replace the entire car if he pays a small deductible when he wasn't covered by them in the first place = guys house burns and he only wants to pay $75 fee after the fact. Hopefully even you can understand it now. End of story.... ....I hope. apparently you lack reading comprehension.... no where in either one of the stories does the guy offer to pay the fee. your whole argument is based on false information.... from first link he offered to pay all expenses related to the Fire Department's defense of his home, from second link Cranick says he told the operator he would pay whatever is necessary to have the fire put out. lets see if you can understand it this way... say you have a 3rd party warranty on your car. your transmission goes out, you take your car to the dealer, pay the deductible and they cover the rest. now say you did not take that warranty, now you stuck paying for the full cost of the transmission. In this case, the guy was fully willing to pay the full cost of their services... now your next argument might be well how do you trust a guy who doesnt pay his annual fee with a 5k+ bill. once again, your transmission goes out on your car and the shop tells you itll cost 5k to fix it. they do the work first, than expect payment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otis Nice Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 You're right, I'm wrong. Can this be over now? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87GT Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 You're right, I'm wrong. Can this be over now? This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russian rocket Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 You're right, I'm wrong. Can this be over now? i guess.... i was just starting to have fun... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Beast Posted October 11, 2010 Report Share Posted October 11, 2010 i guess.... i was just starting to have fun... Based on your reply I have to argue this point. The frustration indicated in your word usage is far from a display of fun. Lets say an insurance company tried to ask you if you were having fun when you wrecked. If you said yes but were having an argument via text with your girl they would not cover the accident. Not because of the mood you were in but because you were texting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russian rocket Posted October 12, 2010 Report Share Posted October 12, 2010 Based on your reply I have to argue this point. The frustration indicated in your word usage is far from a display of fun. Lets say an insurance company tried to ask you if you were having fun when you wrecked. If you said yes but were having an argument via text with your girl they would not cover the accident. Not because of the mood you were in but because you were texting. frustration in text is added as a dramatic effect, it creates better responses from others Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otis Nice Posted October 12, 2010 Report Share Posted October 12, 2010 frustration in text is added as a dramatic effect, it creates better responses from others No it doesn't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Main3s Posted October 12, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2010 You're right, I'm wrong. Can this be over now? +Rep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.