# Teen dies trying to save cats from fire



## MA-Caver (Jan 7, 2007)

> *Teen dies trying to save cats from fire*
> 
> Sun Jan 7, 6:45 AM ET
> 
> ...



This is really sad. The boy would still be alive if he hadn't gone back into the house. Firefighters tell us time and time again, once you're *out* of a house fire *DO NOT GO BACK IN! * This boy saved his aunt's life but lost _his_ to save a couple of cats? Oh man that just makes me sick. A cat can be replaced, true maybe not the exact same cat nor the memories associated with it but a cat is a cat is a cat! A young human life is irreplacable. Chances are those cats probably got out on their own... they're not stupid and their sense of self-preservation is probably a hellva lot more fined tuned than ours. 
This is a tragic loss. I pray for the family in their time of loss.

:asian:


----------



## exile (Jan 7, 2007)

People develop tremendous affection for their pets; many of them have an overwhelming drive to protect them and save them from any dangermy son is that way with our cats. I think it's particularly strong in children, who don't understand what it means for them to put their own lives in peril. It's true, the cats probably got out in time, they're much savvier about things being not quite right in their environment than we are. Incredibly sad...


----------



## Carol (Jan 7, 2007)

exile said:


> People develop tremendous affection for their pets; many of them have an overwhelming drive to protect them and save them from any dangermy son is that way with our cats. I think it's particularly strong in children, who don't understand what it means for them to put their own lives in peril. It's true, the cats probably got out in time, they're much savvier about things being not quite right in their environment than we are. Incredibly sad...


 
I can't help but wonder if there is a connection to the bond the boy had with his cats and the fact that he doesn't seem to live with his parents.

Children - people - need to feel like they are loved.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Jan 7, 2007)

sad.  on the other hand, there are worse ways to die than doing something you think is important.

too bad it's folks like this who die, but we can't even get those chronic drunk drivers to fall asleep smoking....


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 7, 2007)

bushidomartialarts said:


> sad.  on the other hand, there are worse ways to die than doing something you think is important.
> 
> too bad it's folks like this who die, but we can't even get those chronic drunk drivers to fall asleep smoking....


Sorry -- I don't think there's a "good" way to die like this.

Pets are pets.  They're family members -- but they are NOT people.  And, no matter how loved, a pet's life isn't worth a human beings life.

I once responded to a fire alarm because the idiots at the alarm company couldn't handle calling the right phone number, and after the 3rd or 4th call -- I was sent just in case, so that the fire department could respond if needed.  Well... there was a fire.  As I get there, the homeowner is coming up to me, and tells me that "we've got to save the babies!"  OK.  Babies.  Fire fighters are on the way, there's tons of smoke, but I can't see fire upstairs.  I'm about to go in after them...  And I asked the guy where they were.  "In the basement!"  My brain kicks in...  "What are the babies?"  KITTENS.

This idiot damn near had me going into a burning house after kittens.  Kittens that were only in his house because they'd been forcibly removed from his sister's house because she was a "cat hoarder."  As in she had so many cats in her house that it was found unfit for human habitation by the fire marshall, and she was barred from having pets pending completion of the court process.  I damn near had to arrest the idiot to keep him from going into the house himself.

Every year firefighters are killed or injured looking for someone's pets.  PETS ARE NOT PEOPLE!  People should not be injured trying to save pets from a burning house.


----------



## exile (Jan 7, 2007)

Carol Kaur said:


> I can't help but wonder if there is a connection to the bond the boy had with his cats and the fact that he doesn't seem to live with his parents.
> 
> Children - people - need to feel like they are loved.



That's a great insight, Carol. And they also have a huge capacity for affection that has to find some expression. I see this capacity, and the need to express it, in my own child. My wife and I and our cats are all entities he can use for that purpose. And as you say, without his parents around, and the need to channel that affection...

ach, it's too sad to think about for very long...


----------



## jdinca (Jan 7, 2007)

It's amazing the emotional attachment people can have for their pets. I've searched burning houses for pets before. I've talked to homeowners who are watching everything their homes and everything they own burn but the overriding concern is for the animals.

Carol had impressive insight. I can see a 14 year old running back into the burning building if that was the case.


----------



## Kacey (Jan 7, 2007)

I'm not married, and I don't have kids... and yes, if my house were burning down, I would go back in for my dog.  It's not even a question.


----------



## MJS (Jan 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> I'm not married, and I don't have kids... and yes, if my house were burning down, I would go back in for my dog. It's not even a question.


 
My wife and I have a dog.  We have no kids either, but we treat our dog as if he were our child.  He's our furry child.   I would do everything humanly possible to rescue the dog.  Fortunately, he is rarely left home alone, so in the event of a fire while we were away, he'd never even be in the house.  If the house were to catch fire while we were in it, you can be sure that he'd be coming out with us.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> I'm not married, and I don't have kids... and yes, if my house were burning down, I would go back in for my dog. It's not even a question.


 
Same her for my cat.

I do feel for this child and his family, though. While I understood what he did, and why, I would rather he had not done this, of course.


----------



## Mariachi Joe (Jan 7, 2007)

If you choose not to go back in for your pet, that's you, who are you to tell someone else they can't.  If my home was on fire I WOULD go in to get my dogs, my choice not yours.  I respect this kid for what he did and think it's a horrible tragedy he is no longer with us.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jan 7, 2007)

I've become emotionally detached from pets. I like 'em and will care for them to the utmost ... (won't spoil them though), but if I lose the pet, I'll probably be like ... oh darn it. He/she was a good dog / nice cat. But beyond that... no. Probably because I grew up around pets all the time and have lost one after another for various reasons, old age, accident (car run-over) run-away, moving to a no-pet residence because there were no other choices available at the time, sickness ... whatever! 
The last pet I cried over was a St. Bernard that was murdered by one of our neighbors... to this day we still don't know why. She was chained up in the back yard and there was a fence around (she was chained because she liked to dig under said fence). We as a family left for about an hour to eat out... and when we came home she was dead of a broken neck and there were obvious signs of abuse. I cried and cried for hours over her body. 
Afterwards, I never cried over a lost/dead pet again. I felt sad yes but heart broken and torn up... no. It's just a pet, a dog, a cat, a snake. I miss some of them of course but don't get all teary eyed, sniffy and choked up over it. 
That what once was can come again with another dog/cat/whatever! 
Thoughtlessly running back into a burning building without proper equiptment (read: fire-fighting gear) is asking for a death sentence. There are poisonous gasses and noxious fumes from the paint, insulation, and whatever else that's burning, then the appalling thick smoke and the overwhelming heat from the flames themselves. Within seconds you lose your capacity to think and coordinate yourself to be effective in looking for your pet. 
It's just plain common sense. Even if the dog/cat were an AKC best of show award winner quadriple champion blood-lines... they're *still* not worth the life of a human being. 
It's sad to lose a pet, one that's been part of the family, but they can be replaced and they can be remembered. A human being can only be remembered... never replaced. 
It's just how I feel about it. 
(end-rant off soap box) :asian:

Edit: I'll further clarify... to hopefully avoid misunderstandings. I'm not so callous as to simply "screw the dog/cat". If I'm running out of the house with my sig other/family or roomies ... and I/we have a pet then I will, AS we are moving through the house to the nearest exit, call the animal to escape with us/me... like "(whistle-whistle) here boy/girl...c'mon move your ***, lets go... c'mon atta boy/girl..." but If I run out of a house engulfed with flames then turn around and the animal isn't anywhere to be seen... obviously back inside the house... well... shoot. My animals usually have free run of the house/apt (except for snakes) so they'll head for the nearest exit where-ever possible. Like I said an animal's sense of self-preservation is usually more fine-tuned than ours.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 7, 2007)

Mariachi Joe said:


> If you choose not to go back in for your pet, that's you, who are you to tell someone else they can't.  If my home was on fire I WOULD go in to get my dogs, my choice not yours.  I respect this kid for what he did and think it's a horrible tragedy he is no longer with us.



If you bring the critter out with you, be it lizard, spider, goldfish, puppy, horse, or elephant -- that's fine.  That's your business.  But once you're out -- stay out!  Stay alive.

And if it's at a scene where I'm supporting the fire fighters...  If you try, you'll get yourself arrested.

Pets are great.  I'd grieve if my wife's dog died, especially in a fire.  But she isn't going to go back into the house after him if he didn't get out on his own if I have to sit on her and cuff her.  And I'm not sending a firefighter in after him, either.  PETS ARE NOT PEOPLE, even though pets are definitely family members.

I'm not suggesting leaving an animal to suffer, I'm not suggesting that you don't do reasonable things to get your dog/cat/horse/guppy/whatever out in a fire -- but those reasonable measures stop being reasonable when YOU are endangered.

Maybe I come across kind of strongly on this because I work alongside those fire fighters, I've been there when they got hurt for stupid reasons, and damn near became a potential casualty myself over kittens.


----------



## MJS (Jan 7, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> If you bring the critter out with you, be it lizard, spider, goldfish, puppy, horse, or elephant -- that's fine. That's your business. But once you're out -- stay out! Stay alive.
> 
> And if it's at a scene where I'm supporting the fire fighters... If you try, you'll get yourself arrested.
> 
> ...


 
I'm sure every fire dept across the world has their own policies and procedures, however, in CT. I've seen many stories on the news and in the paper of firefighters rescuing animals.  If they're going in to fight the fire, and they come across an animal, they will attempt to rescue it.

Mike


----------



## Mariachi Joe (Jan 7, 2007)

If you don't feel that an animal is worth your life and chose not to go in after it fine, that is your decision and I won't argue it.
If I chose to go in after my animal then that is my decision, feel free to argue with me if you please but get in my way and there will be a problem.  I would leave my dad, sister, or animal and in a burning home and anyone between myself and my family member is just asking for a fight as far as I am concerned.
I also disagree with the pets can be replaced comment, each animal is as unique as ever person, there is only one and will never be another just like it ( similar yes, identical no ).


----------



## Kacey (Jan 7, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> Maybe I come across kind of strongly on this because I work alongside those fire fighters, I've been there when they got hurt for stupid reasons, and damn near became a potential casualty myself over kittens.



That's your choice, and you're welcome to it - but it's also my choice to respond otherwise.  Yes, if there are firefighters there, I will let them go in after my dog, if they deem it unsafe for me to do so - but if they're not, he's *my* dog, and he's *my* responsibility.  I took him into my home and made myself *responsible *for his safety and well-being - and not just when it was convenient for me, or safe, or cheap - just as surely as if he were a person, and in some ways, *more* than if he were a person, because unlike most people, he will never be self-supporting.  But please don't tell me it's *stupid* for me to take my responsibility seriously because you disagree with my priorities.

And tell me... does your wife know that you'd "sit on her and cuff her" if she attempted to save her dog against your say-so?  The fact that you would state it in such terms leads me to suggest you think that her opinion may differ from your own.  Perhaps you should sit down with her and discuss it... before, God forbid, it comes to that point.


----------



## jdinca (Jan 7, 2007)

Just want to throw this out there for thought, not to voice an opinion one way, or another. If you return into the structure to look for your pet, you are taking a very real risk of becoming part of the incident in the form of a rescue. The level of risk the responding firefighters will take upon themselves is VERY different if there is a rescue vs. a basic structure fire with all occupants accounted for. In addition to that, the fire damage to your home will be that much worse because the number one focus of the first crews on scene will be to get you out, not to put the fire out. 

When you make the decision to return, or not, please remember that your life is not the only one you're risking. The choice at this point is yours and, if you choose to go in, my thoughts are with you. I hope nobody has to face this dilemma.


----------



## Mariachi Joe (Jan 7, 2007)

jdinca said:


> Just want to throw this out there for thought, not to voice an opinion one way, or another. If you return into the structure to look for your pet, you are taking a very real risk of becoming part of the incident in the form of a rescue. The level of risk the responding firefighters will take upon themselves is VERY different if there is a rescue vs. a basic structure fire with all occupants accounted for. In addition to that, the fire damage to your home will be that much worse because the number one focus of the first crews on scene will be to get you out, not to put the fire out.
> 
> When you make the decision to return, or not, please remember that your life is not the only one you're risking. The choice at this point is yours and, if you choose to go in, my thoughts are with you. I hope nobody has to face this dilemma.


 

I would rather loose my house than my dog, he IS my family and it's what I would do for anyone that's family.


----------



## Mariachi Joe (Jan 7, 2007)

Kacey said:


> That's your choice, and you're welcome to it - but it's also my choice to respond otherwise. Yes, if there are firefighters there, I will let them go in after my dog, if they deem it unsafe for me to do so - but if they're not, he's *my* dog, and he's *my* responsibility. I took him into my home and made myself *responsible *for his safety and well-being - and not just when it was convenient for me, or safe, or cheap - just as surely as if he were a person, and in some ways, *more* than if he were a person, because unlike most people, he will never be self-supporting. But please don't tell me it's *stupid* for me to take my responsibility seriously because you disagree with my priorities.
> 
> I agree, my dog is my responsibility and I would not abandon him.  If others don't feel that way that is fine with me.


----------



## Drac (Jan 7, 2007)

I have 6 cats and I will take my chances to rush back inside a burning structure to save them...I  have put my life on the line numerous times for kooks, weirdos and wackos who just as soon spit on me than say thanks..You think I would risk it for animals who have shown me nothing but love since they moved in???


----------



## fireman00 (Jan 8, 2007)

I've been a firefighter for 14 years and have had the same type of issues; folks think that they'll be able to run back in an find their pet(s) and get them out.  A.) a pet will be VERY scared and will most likely find a place to hide - where you will most likely NOT be able to find them through the dense smoke.  B.) If you are able to find the pet they will most likely be so scared that they will  bite/ scratch/ fight you  c.) when you go back in to search for your pets you have just endanged the lives all the first responders that have been dispatched to your house as they will ikely now have to rescue/ recover you.  d.) a fire will double in size every 3 to 4 minutes so a single room fire can VERY quickly consume an entire floor in less then 10 minutes.  The resulting smoke and heat will overcome anyone in this environment that does not have on full protective turn out gear and breathing apparatus. e.) I'm a huge animal lover and I would certainly try to save my 2 dogs and I would mourn for weeks/ months if they were to die.  I'd rather mourn then die myself or worse yet have someone else get hurt or die while trying to find me.


----------



## jdinca (Jan 8, 2007)

Mariachi Joe said:


> Kacey said:
> 
> 
> > That's your choice, and you're welcome to it - but it's also my choice to respond otherwise. Yes, if there are firefighters there, I will let them go in after my dog, if they deem it unsafe for me to do so - but if they're not, he's *my* dog, and he's *my* responsibility. I took him into my home and made myself *responsible *for his safety and well-being - and not just when it was convenient for me, or safe, or cheap - just as surely as if he were a person, and in some ways, *more* than if he were a person, because unlike most people, he will never be self-supporting. But please don't tell me it's *stupid* for me to take my responsibility seriously because you disagree with my priorities.
> ...


----------



## MA-Caver (Jan 8, 2007)

Mariachi Joe said:


> Again, I'm making no judgement in regards to your own personal decision, I'm actually quite fascinated by the responses and am looking to gain further insight into the way people think, especially under extreme situations.


I've learned that no-one person, no matter how well trained, has fore-knowledge of exactly what they will do in any given situation.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 8, 2007)

Kacey said:


> That's your choice, and you're welcome to it - but it's also my choice to respond otherwise.  Yes, if there are firefighters there, I will let them go in after my dog, if they deem it unsafe for me to do so - but if they're not, he's *my* dog, and he's *my* responsibility.  I took him into my home and made myself *responsible *for his safety and well-being - and not just when it was convenient for me, or safe, or cheap - just as surely as if he were a person, and in some ways, *more* than if he were a person, because unlike most people, he will never be self-supporting.  But please don't tell me it's *stupid* for me to take my responsibility seriously because you disagree with my priorities.



You're welcome to make your own choices -- but my fundamental priority is the preservation of HUMAN life.  If I'm at a fire scene, and someone other than a firefighter is attempting to enter the fire, my job is to stop them.  

Someone else also mentioned firefighters who have rescued animals.  That's their choice to do so; most of them that I know who have pulled animals out of a fire did so in the course of fighting the fire, not as a specific effort aimed at saving an animal.  That's a very different situation; they weren't looking for the animal, but they happened to find it.  

Again -- I'm in no way intending to devalue the life of a companion animal, *except *in comparison to human life.  Pets are parts of families; reasonable efforts to facilitate their escape or even get them out are fine.  But the reasonableness of the efforts are directly and inversely related to the risks to human life.



> And tell me... does your wife know that you'd "sit on her and cuff her" if she attempted to save her dog against your say-so?  The fact that you would state it in such terms leads me to suggest you think that her opinion may differ from your own.  Perhaps you should sit down with her and discuss it... before, God forbid, it comes to that point.



Yes, she does.  In fact, having discussed this issue on more than one occasion (often in response to an article similar to the one that started this whole mess), she'd expect me to do so if she lacked the presence of mind to stay out of the fire herself.


----------



## thepanjr (Jan 8, 2007)

It makes me sad that kid was brave to do that. That kid must have had a quite a bond with his cat and his aunt. I even wonder if i could do that. I hope that person, good luck in heaven or wherever he is.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 8, 2007)

fireman00 said:


> I've been a firefighter for 14 years and have had the same type of issues; folks think that they'll be able to run back in an find their pet(s) and get them out.  A.) a pet will be VERY scared and will most likely find a place to hide - where you will most likely NOT be able to find them through the dense smoke.  B.) If you are able to find the pet they will most likely be so scared that they will  bite/ scratch/ fight you  c.) when you go back in to search for your pets you have just endanged the lives all the first responders that have been dispatched to your house as they will ikely now have to rescue/ recover you.  d.*) a fire will double in size every 3 to 4 minutes so a single room fire can VERY quickly consume an entire floor in less then 10 minutes.  The resulting smoke and heat will overcome anyone in this environment that does not have on full protective turn out gear and breathing apparatus. *e.) I'm a huge animal lover and I would certainly try to save my 2 dogs and I would mourn for weeks/ months if they were to die.  I'd rather mourn then die myself or worse yet have someone else get hurt or die while trying to find me.



There are two points that are barely mentioned here that I'd like to elaborate on.  First, most homes today have many items (including computers used to post on message boards) that contain materials that emit poisonous gases during a fire.  And that's apart from the byproducts of the fire itself.  Without a good oxygen source, you're simply not likely to last very long.  And you now become a burden to be rescued.  

Second, smoke fills a house incredibly quickly, to a degree that you really have to see to believe.  It makes it very difficult to navigate, see or do anything.  In the fire I described, when I arrived, the fire was confined to the basement.  The entire house was already filled with smoke that was almost like looking at a solid wall.  Standing at the open front door, I could only barely see a few feet into the house.  "But it's your house, and you know it" someone will probably argue in response.  Most people have stubbed their toe on something in their own home moving around in the dark (and sometimes in the daylight!).  And that's when they're relatively calm!  If you really think you might have a chance to navigate your house well if it's filled with smoke... Try wearing a blindfold, and moving through it quickly.  (Wear shoes... Toes are sensitive and it hurts like hell when you run into a door jamb, chair or other object.)

The bottom line is simple.  I personally and professionally place HUMAN life and it's preservation above that of an animal, and I am *required* to strive to preserve human life, which includes using necessary force to prevent someone from going into a fire.  Do all you can on your way out to get your animals out.  I don't even have a problem with advising the firefighters of the animals -- and in fact, encourage it!  They might be able to save the animal, but, more importantly, they won't be coming around a corner completely unprepared to face a terrified Rottweiler!


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 8, 2007)

OOPS...  post duplicated itself...


----------



## jdinca (Jan 8, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> Someone else also mentioned firefighters who have rescued animals. That's their choice to do so; most of them that I know who have pulled animals out of a fire did so in the course of fighting the fire, not as a specific effort aimed at saving an animal. That's a very different situation; they weren't looking for the animal, but they happened to find it.


 
That was me and I should have clarified. When I mentioned searching for pets it's more like we know the pet is in there and we keep an eye out while we try and put the fire out. Once we get to the salvage and overhaul stage, we may put a little more effort into it.


----------



## jdinca (Jan 8, 2007)

jks9199 said:


> There are two points that are barely mentioned here that I'd like to elaborate on. First, most homes today have many items (including computers used to post on message boards) that contain materials that emit poisonous gases during a fire. And that's apart from the byproducts of the fire itself. Without a good oxygen source, you're simply not likely to last very long. And you now become a burden to be rescued.
> 
> Second, smoke fills a house incredibly quickly, to a degree that you really have to see to believe. It makes it very difficult to navigate, see or do anything. In the fire I described, when I arrived, the fire was confined to the basement. The entire house was already filled with smoke that was almost like looking at a solid wall. Standing at the open front door, I could only barely see a few feet into the house. "But it's your house, and you know it" someone will probably argue in response. Most people have stubbed their toe on something in their own home moving around in the dark (and sometimes in the daylight!). And that's when they're relatively calm! If you really think you might have a chance to navigate your house well if it's filled with smoke... Try wearing a blindfold, and moving through it quickly. (Wear shoes... Toes are sensitive and it hurts like hell when you run into a door jamb, chair or other object.)
> 
> The bottom line is simple. I personally and professionally place HUMAN life and it's preservation above that of an animal, and I am *required* to strive to preserve human life, which includes using necessary force to prevent someone from going into a fire. Do all you can on your way out to get your animals out. I don't even have a problem with advising the firefighters of the animals -- and in fact, encourage it! They might be able to save the animal, but, more importantly, they won't be coming around a corner completely unprepared to face a terrified Rottweiler!


 
You are correct. The vast majority of people that die in fires are dead before the heat ever gets to them. It's the byproducts of combustion that do it, especially in our plastic filled lives. In addition, the heat layer is quite dramatic in a structure fire. While you may be able to crawl out, if you stand up, you can be done. One lungfull of superheated air sears the airway and causes massive vasodilation (blood pressure plummets).


----------



## Just4Kicks (Mar 3, 2007)

Kacey said:


> That's your choice, and you're welcome to it - but it's also my choice to respond otherwise.  Yes, if there are firefighters there, I will let them go in after my dog, if they deem it unsafe for me to do so - but if they're not, he's *my* dog, and he's *my* responsibility.  I took him into my home and made myself *responsible *for his safety and well-being - and not just when it was convenient for me, or safe, or cheap - just as surely as if he were a person, and in some ways, *more* than if he were a person, because unlike most people, he will never be self-supporting.  But please don't tell me it's *stupid* for me to take my responsibility seriously because you disagree with my priorities.
> 
> And tell me... does your wife know that you'd "sit on her and cuff her" if she attempted to save her dog against your say-so?  The fact that you would state it in such terms leads me to suggest you think that her opinion may differ from your own.  Perhaps you should sit down with her and discuss it... before, God forbid, it comes to that point.



*claps* That was well put. I totally agree. I love my dog and I would feel terrible if she died and I could have stoped it. Same with my family too, I hope that this will never happen to us.


----------

