It's the law. If they helped him this time, then everyone will "forget" to pay, and then no more fire service for everyone in the city.
It's like insurance, if you didn't pay for the insurance, and you expect they rebuild your house?
Btw, LIK tries every single way from every angle to bash China, that's funny, man. Not that I agree or not. The article has absolutely nothing related to China. It's just funny how hard he tries to spread the hatred in his heart.
thats non-sense!!!
what make it different from paying those corrupted cops/fire-fighters way back ...
chunsh 發表於 2010-10-6 10:11
can we put it this way, if you don't pay for the fee, does it imply you don't need it?
whether it is the fire dept to verrfy you are not willing to pay or forget to pay?
thats non-sense!!!
what make it different from paying those corrupted cops/fire-fighters way back to 60s in hk (otherwise no one will save u when u got into trouble)
if there is such a law about having to paid for the fire-fighting service, put out the fire, then giving those civilian the bills is another story
And after ridiculous things like this happens, it gets reported by the media, and the government wil ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-6 08:59
Lik, don't try to shift the focus and avoid facing the reality. We are talking about 消防局拒絕救火, but not whether incident like this will be reported.
Second, how do you know the state government is forced to change this rule? Instead, what I saw in this article is - 該市經理沃威爾(Jeff Vowell)說：「我們需要遵守為我們而設的法律及附例，而那正是我們要做的事情。」事件令到克拉尼克非常生氣，但他現在只能清理火警留下的一片頹垣敗瓦。
Third, how would you know incident like this will not be reported in China?
發表於 2010-10-6 06:49
| 
