ADVERTISEMENT

firefighters suing siren maker

And firefighters all over the nation and anyone who needs a firefighter and apparently from the article most every manufacturing job. Everyone wins with these types of battles to better civilization. You have some questionable priorities when you rise to defend the government's right to abuse the hearing of firemen.

So you want lawyers to work for some sort of regulated fee structure? Maybe government lawyers to simply step in and regulate this? I think the status quo is actually closer to what cons call justice, because libs could think of a lot more direct way to get what we call justice.

No. I want the victims to get more money than the lawyers. I'm surprised you don't too. But the Dems and lefties just love the class action slip and fall lawyers. I thought you were a little more progressive than this.
 
No. I want the victims to get more money than the lawyers. I'm surprised you don't too. But the Dems and lefties just love the class action slip and fall lawyers. I thought you were a little more progressive than this.
Did I not just say I was for a more direct regulatory solution? I suspect it's the cons who might object, not the libs. Even here, how do you propose shifting the funds from the people who brought the lawsuit often at their own risk to the plaintiffs many who don't even have to testify to get paid? Are you not calling for some regulations to accomplish this or are you just wishing into the wind?
 
Quiet sirens is an oxymoron. This whole thread is stupid.

They blow a goddamn air raid siren after every goal at hockey games. Should I be able to sue for that?
If it is causing injuries of course you should. And when you do you will be a hero to all those future hockey fans you save.
 
If it is causing injuries of course you should. And when you do you will be a hero to all those future hockey fans you save.

No, you can't sue for that. It says right on the ticket that the ticket-holder assumes all risk of injury.
 
No, you can't sue for that. It says right on the ticket that the ticket-holder assumes all risk of injury.
I think they are lying to you and hoping you won't challenge them in court. A real hero would push back against that assault on rights. Go sue them.
 
Did I not just say I was for a more direct regulatory solution? I suspect it's the cons who might object, not the libs. Even here, how do you propose shifting the funds from the people who brought the lawsuit often at their own risk to the plaintiffs many who don't even have to testify to get paid? Are you not calling for some regulations to accomplish this or are you just wishing into the wind?

I wouldn't object to a regulatory solution to mass tort or product liability damages. It would warm my heart to rid the world of the class action vulture attorneys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KitingHigh
I wouldn't object to a regulatory solution to mass tort or product liability damages. It would warm my heart to rid the world of the class action vulture attorneys.
Be careful what you wish for. Getting rid of class actions mean we now have the need for more regulation and oversight to accomplish the same task the private sector does for us now. That's a very liberal path you are walking down, I'm proud of you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pablow
Be careful what you wish for. Getting rid of class actions mean we now have the need for more regulation and oversight to accomplish the same task the private sector does for us now. That's a very liberal path you are walking down, I'm proud of you.
Or we could get rid of both and let people be free from both instances of tyranny.
 
Or we could get rid of both and let people be free from both instances of tyranny.
I keep telling you, deal in the real. Most people see the tyranny of problems as more concerning than the tyranny of addressing the problems. That's why they are called problems.
 
I keep telling you, deal in the real. Most people see the tyranny of problems as more concerning than the tyranny of addressing the problems. That's why they are called problems.
Having a few problems is preferable. It's people's asinine idea that all issues should be eradicated that is leading the world to voluntary slavery.
 
What's that going to do?
Tell any guy a problem. How does the conversation go? They start telling you how to solve it. Even if their plan is crap, they always have a plan. Tell any woman a problem. How does the conversation go? They start telling you about their own problem and break out the cheese cake. If you want problems to sit around unresolved, elect women.
 
Last edited:
I'm reading they're closer to 130 dB.
If they were closer to 105, his employer might have a case that he never exceeded 90 TWA, but at 130 you might have a case for damage from short term exposure.

In my opinion the employer is ultimately responsible here for not taking reasonable measures to engineer the noise from their workers. (Or at the very least provide personal protection where it made sense)

For those arguing against ear plugs-properly fitted plugs allow you to hear conversation while blocking ambient noise. Or, wear a communication headset similar to a pilot, which still allows for conversation. Or, design the cab of the truck to block the noise. If the siren is blaring, I doubt the driver will be able to hear anything Regardless of the earplugs.


Can't argue with any of that although at 105 dB all you would need is an hour worth to hit the 90 TWA. He'll just at 110 dB you're already over if you go to like two or more calls in an 8hr shift.

Saving grace is that like 90% of fire departments are volunteer. I know in Iowa OSHA won't go after volunteer FD, after some bad publicity dealing with citing a volunteer department after two members died while responding to a tank that was on fire and ended up exploding in Truesdale sometime in the 90's.
 
A little bit of clarification. There is no way the noise level of a siren inside of a truck is 105 decibels. The scale I found is that is a car horn standing in front of the car. Inside a trick, a siren isn't as loud as a conversation with your partner, at least in trucks made in the last 20 years. Our radio is typically much louder. Sirens are mounted on the grill or bumper so the sound is directed down and forward. In the old days, 30 years ago, the sirens were mounted on the roof and were much louder.

I can't believe this fire fighter can prove that his tinnitus is relatable to sirens. When I'm in the back of an ambulance I can barely hear the siren at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icu81222
A little bit of clarification. There is no way the noise level of a siren inside of a truck is 105 decibels. The scale I found is that is a car horn standing in front of the car. Inside a trick, a siren isn't as loud as a conversation with your partner, at least in trucks made in the last 20 years. Our radio is typically much louder. Sirens are mounted on the grill or bumper so the sound is directed down and forward. In the old days, 30 years ago, the sirens were mounted on the roof and were much louder.

I can't believe this fire fighter can prove that his tinnitus is relatable to sirens. When I'm in the back of an ambulance I can barely hear the siren at all.


Isn't there open seating in fire trucks behind the cab?
 
Weird ideas in this thread. Guy goes to work, gets hurt while operating according to normal work practices and its his fault for showing up and being at work. He should be suing the city and the fire truck maker too. If you create a situation that subjects people to harm, you are in the wrong. And when you risk treasure and scorn to hold people to task for being wrong, you are indeed acting something like a hero.

Oh natural, well done as usual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
No one forces anyone to be a fireman.

Just like no one forces anyone to clean up nuclear waste, or swim into the ocean to save someone from drowning, or confront dangerous criminals. Some jobs come with inherent risks. People took these jobs knowing of the risks and shouldn't be able to accept that risk, get hurt, and then sue later.

I figured I'd highlight (one of) your misconceptions: it appears that these firemen did not know of the long-term repercussions...which is usually the case. In fact, in many instances the owners/people in charge affirmatively know about the dangers yet do nothing about it, never tell the employees.

Look at coal mining, they weren't required to take those jobs, right? Black lung be damned. That $30,000/year they made was worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
Weird ideas in this thread. Guy goes to work, gets hurt while operating according to normal work practices and its his fault for showing up and being at work. He should be suing the city and the fire truck maker too. If you create a situation that subjects people to harm, you are in the wrong. And when you risk treasure and scorn to hold people to task for being wrong, you are indeed acting something like a hero.

Agree.

But, he didn't work for the siren company. He worked for the city who purchased and utilized the siren.

Sue your employer.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT