If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WNEM)   93-year-old WWII vet freezes to death after power company cuts off electricity. Bill found on table with cash clipped to it   (wnem.com) divider line 527
    More: Sad  
•       •       •

28657 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jan 2009 at 1:59 AM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



527 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-01-27 02:49:20 AM
I love threads like this. They separate the 90% bleeding heart liberals from the 9% trolls, and the 1% rational people.

Liberals should learn someday that just because something happened that they think is wrong, doesn't mean that anyone should actually give a fark.

As others have said, the neighbors and family members of this man are much more responsible for this mans death than a faceless corporation.

Corporations work because they don't give a shiat about your humanity. Silly liberals, grow the fark up.
 
2009-01-27 02:50:01 AM
The infrastructure in this country was built with, at least in part, public funds. From transmission lines to tax breaks/credits for generating plants. As it has become obvious the system needs upgrading, the power companies are again looking for public funds. That makes it a public service which all taxpayers have contributed to, and will contribute more. So make it illegal for the power companies to cut it off, or send them a bill for the funds we have invested so their companies can make money, and don't give them another penny.

Not that our bought and paid for politicians would ever do that...
 
2009-01-27 02:50:34 AM
Pincy: dreadlocksFTW: Look - this is a sad story. It's not a reason for the government to start mandating how an economy is supposed to work. Learn the difference.

Actually, ya, it is. The economy works for us, not the other way around.


Exactly. You see, dreadlocks, capitalism should not have to apply to utilities and essential services. That's what the government is FOR, for having more widespread power than individual, competing companies can wield. If you really think competitive companies should have reign over life-essential services, then we might as well outsource all the functions of government to companies who will make decisions like Bay City Electric did. We'll decide whether we want our next president to be sponsored by Microsoft or Coca-Cola, and you can pay your parking tickets at the McCourthouse.
 
2009-01-27 02:51:03 AM
dlime16: Looking at this I'm really wondering where these friends and neighbors who are so upset that he died were when he couldn't pay the bill or when his power was shut off. None of them were keeping a tab on this guy or helping him out with this sort of stuff? He couldn't go in with any of them when his power went out and he started getting cold?

Pride is one of the last thing old or poor people lose. They likely wouldn't have known unless they poked around behind his back.

I'm guessing, and it is the most likely scenario that he died in his sleep.
 
2009-01-27 02:51:07 AM
I don't blame the power utility, but I do blame the society for this sad event. A 93 year old man shouldn't be left to fend for himself without neighbors, friends, family or social workers checking up on him periodically.

/hope I live to be 93 and am healthy enough to live by myself.
 
2009-01-27 02:51:37 AM
Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: SuperCatBarf: The attitude some of you show, claiming, "well gworsh, he ain't paid his bill, so I guess he done deserved it!" are the bottom of the barrel of humanity. Your shiatty attitudes toward your fellow man, especially your elder, are the cancer that will kill this country.

No, the attitude that everybody has a responsibility to everybody else simply for being born and that no amount of money is sufficient to ensure our collective safety and comfort is the cancer that will kill this country. It will rot us from the inside out until we are all bankrupt, indignantly self-righteous, and incapable of helping anyone, including ourselves.


No there's a HUGE difference between "no amount of money is sufficient" and not killing somebody over an unpaid power bill in the middle of winter.
 
2009-01-27 02:52:26 AM
Just to clarity here, it appears to be a government run electric company. This subjects the electric company to due process requirements. Due process in a nutshell requires certain procedural protections when life, liberty or property are taken. Disconnecting the power of an individual that you have apparently not had any contact with other then sending letters is very questionable when it comes to deciding if the process that the government employed here was sufficient to protect the life, liberty or property interests of the individual.

Here is a case i just dug up about disconnecting electricity by a state actor. Myers v. City of Alcoa 752 F.2d 196. and the following except: a recipient of electrical service in Tennessee has a property right in the continuation of electric service because it cannot be terminated except "for good and sufficient cause." Once it is determined that such a property right exists, the procedural due process protections which attach to it cannot be discarded simply because the utility unilaterally determined that it has sufficient cause to terminate. Stated differently, the "property right" which invokes due process considerations does not cease to exist simply because the utility's claim appears to be prima facie valid. Rather, as recently observed by this circuit in Lee v. Western Reserve Phychiatric Habilitation Center, et al., 747 F.2d 1062 (6th Cir.1984), once a property interest is established, federal due process attaches to protect the interest from being extinguished without some type of pretermination hearing.

while this is a Tennessee (decided by a federal court) case I would be surprised if Michigan didn't have a similar law on the books.
 
2009-01-27 02:52:40 AM
Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: SuperCatBarf: The attitude some of you show, claiming, "well gworsh, he ain't paid his bill, so I guess he done deserved it!" are the bottom of the barrel of humanity. Your shiatty attitudes toward your fellow man, especially your elder, are the cancer that will kill this country.

No, the attitude that everybody has a responsibility to everybody else simply for being born and that no amount of money is sufficient to ensure our collective safety and comfort is the cancer that will kill this country. It will rot us from the inside out until we are all bankrupt, indignantly self-righteous, and incapable of helping anyone, including ourselves.


Dude, get a grip. The guy served in WWII and was 93 years old. I'm not advocating handing free money to every lazy jackass alive. If you feel that's what I was saying, take a step back, RTFA, and understand you're projecting your vile attitude onto message of common decency.
 
2009-01-27 02:53:06 AM
dlime16: And this is still sad, I just don't think the power company is to blame.

So you think they should have turned off his heat and let him freeze to death, under any circumstance? I don't see any way that they're not to blame for turning it off, which they had to know would kill anyone living there in that weather.

Phil Moskowitz: The sick thing about it is I know you're cuddling your copy of Atlas Shrugged thinking you have all the answers to the universe

Oh no, he claims he's never heard of it. I'm starting to think he was trolling and I bit.

I'm going to bed. It's too late to argue with Objectivist retards anyway.

I'll just leave with this Q & A with Ayn Rand:

Q: What do you think of the Libertarian movement? [FHF: "The Moratorium on Brains," 1971]

AR: All kinds of people today call themselves "libertarians," especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies, except that they're anarchists instead of collectivists. But of course, anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet they want to combine capitalism and anarchism. That is worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It's a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don't want to preach collectivism, because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. The anarchist is the scum of the intellectual world of the left, which has given them up. So the right picks up another leftist discard. That's the Libertarian movement.
(new window)

/no relevance really
/I just enjoy pointing out that Rand detested Libertarians
 
2009-01-27 02:53:28 AM
tallguywithglasseson: Kierkegaard's Pseudonym: isn't the electric company's fault.

It's not their fault he was living alone, but they are the ones who cut off his heat in below zero weather, so yeah, it's their fault he's dead.

IMO this shouldn't happen, and as I said earlier in our state we have a law in place to ensure that it doesn't.

dreadlocksFTW: Who decides how late you can be? You? Me? The electric company? When should it be? March? April? Based on a temperature? Is it just when it gets warm again? How warm? 50 degrees? 55? 60? Who decides that? Who decides they decide it?

Look who's talking about difficult concepts. How much clearer can I make it? You can't cut off the heat in the winter. That's it. In the spring, you can cut it off. All the while you can send collections agents, etc, after the money - which is still owed after the service is cut.
This is state law. We just try not to let, you know, poor people freeze to death because they can't pay their bills, it's so awful, I know.


Just go ahead and finish the straw man off dude, don't leave it hanging with just the insinuation! Believe it or not, humans were able to survive for thousands of years without the electric company. Equating the electric company turning off the power to murder (like some are doing) is entering a realm of stupid that I dare not follow you into.

dreadlocksFTW:Haven't read her work, but knowing that you hate it makes me intriqued.

Riiiiiight.


Right. Haven't read it, but will look into it. Thanks for you concern.

dreadlocksFTW:Look - this is a sad story.

You think this is exactly what SHOULD have happened, I don't buy that you think it's "sad", nor would it make a bit of difference if you actually did.


So you're telling me I think the old man SHOULD have died and you're telling me I don't think that's sad. Tell you what sport, when you're alone on the toilet seat later on rubbing one out to your Che bathtowels, you can have this discussion again. You can be you, and then you can be me too. But right now, I'll speak for me, if that doesn't put you out too much. I don't think the old man should have died, and I absolutely think this is sad. Deal with it.

Your problem is you think me thinking the power company should operate their business based on 'you get what you pay for' is sentencing a man to DEATH. It's not. Deal.

dreadlocksFTW:It's not a reason for the government to start mandating how an economy is supposed to work

This is absolutely and example of where a government should regulate an industry, and in this case, a farking monopoly. To save people's lives.

Learn the difference between a life and a dollar.


If there cannot be other competition then monopolicies, in most cases, should be regulated. This news story is not a reason for any regulation. And if you really would enter into a dependency relationship with the government for the sake of saving your life or the lives of others, you're too far wharblarrrrrr to get a logical thought past that shield of ignorance.

But hey, just like Rush Limbaugh, crazy assholes are entitled to their opinion. So go for it man. Tell everyone how much we need the 'gubbmint' to save us. Good luck.

Sleep beckons. Night all,
 
2009-01-27 02:55:00 AM
According to another source, the limiter would not be tripped if he were using the heater... Apparently he was using his electric stove as his heat source, which tripped the limiter.

The furnace was in working order, according to city officials.

The temp in the house when rescue workers found the body...30-35 Degrees.
 
2009-01-27 02:55:42 AM
dreadlocksFTW: tallguywithglasseson:
(...)
Look - this is a sad story. It's not a reason for the government to start mandating how an economy is supposed to work. Learn the difference.


Sure, it's his own fault for not being a billion-dollar-losing bank, then they would just have handed him bags of cash. Because that's how capitalism works, if you're a poor schmuck and you're broke, too bad, please freeze to death. If you used to be stinking rich, sure, here's a few billion and welcome back to the golf club you old chap.
 
2009-01-27 02:55:45 AM
The power company should now include a pic of the dead frozen guy in all their past due bills. With an amusing caption, perhaps.
 
2009-01-27 02:56:02 AM
Hiro's Protagonist: Pride is one of the last thing old or poor people lose. They likely wouldn't have known unless they poked around behind his back.

So let me get this straight. It's an old man, who is capable enough to get the mail, read it -- understand it -- place it on the table, and attach an amount of cash equal to the bill. He deceived his friends and neighbors to the extent of his problems, hiding this dark secret that would inevitably kill him because his pride is the last thing to go... and it's the power company's fault?
 
2009-01-27 02:56:03 AM
relaxitsjustme: No there's a HUGE difference between "no amount of money is sufficient" and not killing somebody over an unpaid power bill in the middle of winter.

Where does it end though? Should we have to pay for every homeless person in America to have a roof over their heads, heat, food, running water, medical care, drug rehabilitation? If not, then how can you put a price on life?

Also, they didn't "kill" him. That implies intent and a positive action. Stop exaggerating, it's beneath you.
 
2009-01-27 02:57:05 AM
ragnarqk

Before you continue spouting off about how we need all government utilities realize that Bay City Electric is a government utility

FTFA: "where the municipal power company had restricted his use of electricity."

HMM Municipal, like that means its run by the city, right!?

You libtards always crack me up, and you never realize, You are the problem!

"That's what the government is FOR, for having more widespread power than individual, competing companies can wield. If you really think competitive companies should have reign over life-essential services, then we might as well outsource all the functions of government to companies who will make decisions like Bay City Electric did."

If we did have a McCourthouse, things would be a hell of a lot more efficient. Because in search of the almighty dollar, people find ways to do things more efficiently, or they get fired.

/Laissez-faire for life
 
2009-01-27 02:57:08 AM
Lots43
There was farkups on both sides. The guy had NEIGHBORS, he wasn't six miles from anyone in the ass-end of nowhere. Why didn't he knock on a neighbor's door after the lights went out?

Maybe he did and noone was home. It doesn't take long for hypothermia to set in at his age. He was 93 and the elderly have extremley low tolerance for cold, their skin isn't as protective as it was when they were younger and their body's ability to maintain a constant internal temperature also decreases with age. If a chronic condition affects the circulatory or neurologic system or the thyroid, then their risk is even greater. Physical or behavioral limitations can also interfere with an older adult's ability to react to their environment easily. Even a relatively mild indoor temperature - just 60 degrees - can put elderly adults at risk for hypothermia. - It is especially dangerous if they are not wearing warm clothing and not aware of the signs of hypothermia.
 
2009-01-27 02:58:46 AM
The average 93 year old is about as capable as the average 7 year old. If they don't have someone taking care of them (usually family), they're screwed.
 
2009-01-27 02:59:38 AM
Loucifer: The power company should now include a pic of the dead frozen guy in all their past due bills. With an amusing caption, perhaps.

"To fight the chill, pay your bill."
 
2009-01-27 02:59:52 AM
SuperCatBarf: Dude, get a grip. The guy served in WWII and was 93 years old. I'm not advocating handing free money to every lazy jackass alive. If you feel that's what I was saying, take a step back, RTFA, and understand you're projecting your vile attitude onto message of common decency.

Oh, so you get to decide a person's "worth" and whether they are deserving of free heat/food/shelter or not? Tell me, if I were homeless, would I be spared in your infinite wisdom? I didn't choose to serve in the military like this guy did (we don't know why, or in what capacity), so perhaps I die in the cold and become soylent green while GI Joe gets checks in the mail?
 
2009-01-27 03:01:05 AM
dreadlocksFTW: Your problem is you think me thinking the power company should operate their business based on 'you get what you pay for' is sentencing a man to DEATH. It's not. Deal.

They cut service of a necessity of life.

We can assume they did not bother to talk to the man in person over the phone, when they posted a letter on his door, or when they sent the crew to put the fuse on the connection to his house. We can also assume they did not put the man in contact with a local agency that might help pay his bill, or find him shelter.

If they had, that would be the first thing their PR department released.

So they exposed themselves to a big liability for negligence. They were in the last position to prevent this man's death, and thus bear the ultimate negligence.

I don't know why you are arguing so hard against millions of hours of law, to justify your lack of morals or desire to participate in society beyond what benefits you collect below cost.
 
2009-01-27 03:01:23 AM
dreadlocksFTW
Tell everyone how much we need the 'gubbmint' to save us

I've seen that phrase before and I don't get it. I understand what it means but I don't get the reference.
 
2009-01-27 03:01:35 AM
nuclear_asshat: Ibikkurikun: Cannot blame the powercompany. Why is a 93 year old living alone with no one checking on him?

When you are 93, you may not have friends and family around to check on you. Also, he could have perished within 24 hours of the power outage.


Yes, but he got plenty of warnings, it's not like to cut of the power suddenly without warning.

Maybe blame the local community/local government for not taking care of its elderly. Again, I do not think that that is the responsibility of a powercompany.

I lived in western Europe, where we have all kind of social systems in place for those in need of care. When my elderly mother still insisted on living alone, she got visits twice a week from the local care worker, checking on her, including things like mail and bills. I also lived in Asia where the family/neighbourhood will take care of their sick, old and disabled.

But if you have neither of those systems in place in your society, who is to blame really?
 
2009-01-27 03:01:40 AM
The blame belongs to everyone who fraudulently uses this country's social services.

The Great Society programs were supposed to take care of folks such as this fellow. Instead it employs and sustains innumerable leeches. And while the squeaky wheels get the help, an old soldier quietly died in his home - alone.
 
2009-01-27 03:02:07 AM
Correction:
the word 'gubbmint' not the whole sentence
 
2009-01-27 03:03:18 AM
GoSurfing:
If we did have a McCourthouse, things would be a hell of a lot more efficient. Because in search of the almighty dollar, people find ways to do things more efficiently, or they get fired.

/Laissez-faire for life


Are you joking? I mean, I'm not saying the system right now is perfect, but come on. Take the medical industry. As it stands, doctors are already set on whisking patients into the rooms, handing them a prescription, and sending them on their way, all in 15 minutes if they can. The last thing we need is making it even worse by reducing the time AND quality of it. Obviously the idea of dissolving the government in favor of a corporate government was an exaggeration, but the point still stands. Regardless of what you think about a company's rights to make money in the world, letting an old man freeze to death is always, always wrong. Even if they didn't do it on purpose, it still happened, and it happened because they shut off his power.
 
2009-01-27 03:03:44 AM
GoSurfing: I love threads like this. They separate the 90% bleeding heart liberals from the 9% trolls, and the 1% rational people.

Liberals should learn someday that just because something happened that they think is wrong, doesn't mean that anyone should actually give a fark.

As others have said, the neighbors and family members of this man are much more responsible for this mans death than a faceless corporation.

Corporations work because they don't give a shiat about your humanity. Silly liberals, grow the fark up.


Ah, except this gentlemen saw his friends die so that you could have a free country to post whatever you fee on blog commments. Yeah, silly liberals, for wanting to give this man some respect.
 
2009-01-27 03:03:48 AM
turtle-tracks: I've seen that phrase before and I don't get it. I understand what it means but I don't get the reference.

Presumably, an extremely stupid person would mispronounce the name of the very construct they expect to save them from themselves. Hence, "gubbmint."
 
2009-01-27 03:04:52 AM
Kierkegaard's Pseudonym: So let me get this straight. It's an old man, who is capable enough to get the mail, read it -- understand it -- place it on the table, and attach an amount of cash equal to the bill. He deceived his friends and neighbors to the extent of his problems, hiding this dark secret that would inevitably kill him because his pride is the last thing to go... and it's the power company's fault?

The power company had the right to cut his power, but in order to do so without incurring a potential liability there is due process.

They could have talked to the man.

How is that objectionable?

If you are beating around the bush trying to discuss your larger ideology, please be explicit in future. When I say the power company is liable for his death, and rightly so, it's not some kind of metaphor
 
2009-01-27 03:05:51 AM
pion

Aahahahhahahahah, typical.

Bring up his WWII as if it is somehow relevant to a power company shutting off service that wasn't paid for.

Sometimes life really is that simple, and you really are that dense

Again, corporations work because they don't give a shiat about your humanity.
 
2009-01-27 03:06:00 AM
pion: Ah, except this gentlemen saw his friends die so that you could have a free country to post whatever you fee on blog commments. Yeah, silly liberals, for wanting to give this man some respect.

You don't know any of that. Stop exaggerating.
 
2009-01-27 03:06:24 AM
Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox
Presumably, an extremely stupid person would mispronounce the name of the very construct they expect to save them from themselves. Hence, "gubbmint."

Gottcha :) I thought maybe it was a Fark cliche in reference to some RL event or something

/newer here
 
2009-01-27 03:06:29 AM
Well, this is very sad, to be sure. The power company probably should have made an effort to contact him in person and perhaps arranged a payment plan, and why couldn't they have a limiter that just limits flow, rather than blowing out like a fuse? In any case, the "no power shut-off in the winter rule" sounds like a good one.

Having said all that
, it's not unreasonable to expect a customer to pay for the products or services that they consume. How would a company function and continue providing valuable products for everyone, if they announced in effect that paying is optional?

And you do realize, of course, that if enough people continue to get free energy, the company will be forced to raise the rate for everyone else in order to cover it. Are you willing to buy power for people who for whatever reason won't pay?

If so, will you pay for my power? It's been an unusually cold winter here in Western Washington, and my power bill has been ridiculous!
 
2009-01-27 03:08:44 AM
eh.. why is it that every forum i look at is overwhelmed by insignificant debate and arguing? the fact is it's incredibly sad... but this is an ethical question. The law is the law and apparently in Michigan, they were within their legal rights to shut off his electricity during the winter, no matter how unethical and greedy it may seem to some
 
2009-01-27 03:08:57 AM
This is unheard of where I live.

/Got nothing
 
2009-01-27 03:09:17 AM
what the heck happened to my trollerific response i wonder? fark ate my post. (heheh... yeah right, like it wasn't user error)

i said something like:

Meh, all the real heros died during the War.
 
2009-01-27 03:09:51 AM
ragnarqk

You said we need to let the government run all of our utilities.

I responded by informing that the electric company is a government utility. It is run by the city.

So...what about your brilliant plan again?
 
2009-01-27 03:10:08 AM
JustTheTip: Well, this is very sad, to be sure. The power company probably should have made an effort to contact him in person and perhaps arranged a payment plan, and why couldn't they have a limiter that just limits flow, rather than blowing out like a fuse? In any case, the "no power shut-off in the winter rule" sounds like a good one.

Having said all that, it's not unreasonable to expect a customer to pay for the products or services that they consume. How would a company function and continue providing valuable products for everyone, if they announced in effect that paying is optional?

And you do realize, of course, that if enough people continue to get free energy, the company will be forced to raise the rate for everyone else in order to cover it. Are you willing to buy power for people who for whatever reason won't pay?

If so, will you pay for my power? It's been an unusually cold winter here in Western Washington, and my power bill has been ridiculous!


I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the way they do business, but something like this happening is a persistent risk. If they're going to have policies like this, then for better or for worse, they had better be ready for the possible consequences. Ignorance is not innocence, just ask anyone who ever got a speeding ticket for not paying attention to the speedometer.
 
2009-01-27 03:11:07 AM
I agree - this is a very sad story.

But I'm a bit confused by a lot of the comments here. They said the power company cut him, and I see people ranting about how his heat was cut off.

How the HELL was the power company supposed to know he didn't have gas, oil, or wood heat? Do you really want the company to know EVERYTHING that's going on inside your house?

Someone said it very early on here. He's an account # to them, and they still obviously tried to reach him multiple times and could not. And if you think the power company should be footing the bills to have a 'crack team' out there checking every bad account to make sure it's not an old veteran - will you be the same people biatching that your power bill went up? Or do you expect that crack team to work out of the goodness of their hearts and fondness for old veterans?
 
2009-01-27 03:11:25 AM
bikkurikun: Maybe blame the local community/local government for not taking care of its elderly. Again, I do not think that that is the responsibility of a powercompany.

I lived in western Europe, where we have all kind of social systems in place for those in need of care. When my elderly mother still insisted on living alone, she got visits twice a week from the local care worker, checking on her, including things like mail and bills. I also lived in Asia where the family/neighbourhood will take care of their sick, old and disabled.

But if you have neither of those systems in place in your society, who is to blame really?


The power company assumed incorrectly that those other systems existed. As such they should have followed a process including talking to the man before cutting off his power.

They had the last clear chance to prevent his death (involuntary so manslaughter.)

They were lazy and sent a letter.

If they want to reduce their liability, they will lobby for more social programs. Self-correcting system the corporate way
 
2009-01-27 03:12:10 AM
Phil Moskowitz: dreadlocksFTW: I certainly don't, and I reject just about every premise in your paragraph.

I always try to resist the notion that Americans seem to talk and act like they were raised by wolves, but you farkers really make it difficult sometimes. Do you feel debased? Because you express almost perfectly a debased, amoral intellect.


Keep in mind dread boy is half troll, half goblin. They didn't have electicity in the 16th century, so all surviving 93 year olds should just deal or die.

He wants a cookie for something. Baked on an open earth fire with wheat from the land.
 
2009-01-27 03:12:25 AM
krautgeist: How the HELL was the power company supposed to know he didn't have gas, oil, or wood heat? Do you really want the company to know EVERYTHING that's going on inside your house?

The telephone is older than the 93 year old guy who just died.

Is that enough of a clue?
 
2009-01-27 03:12:43 AM
JustTheTip: Well, this is very sad, to be sure. The power company probably should have made an effort to contact him in person and perhaps arranged a payment plan, and why couldn't they have a limiter that just limits flow, rather than blowing out like a fuse?

It would likely not be safe to limit pressure. I think most gas consuming devices expect a certain amount of pressure to keep pilot lights lit, etc.
 
2009-01-27 03:12:47 AM
Who the heck uses purely electric heat? That's a hella expensive way to do it, per BTU.

Hmm, was he still paying the gas bill I wonder?? Well, without electricity you can't run the blower on the furnace though.

There are ventless gas heaters which don't require electricity, but you need an accessible gascock to attach it to. Minor carbon monoxide risk.

Or, equally desperate, if you have an old (like 70's) gas oven with a gas pilot light and mechanical thermostate which doesn't require electricity to run you can just leave it on with the door open. You can freak out about carbon monoxide if you like, but hey ovens are MADE to run unvented. It's what they do. They don't produce carbon monoxide unless they're not running right. Which, well, something 30+ years old that's a possibility, but it beats freezing to death. If you know what you're doing you'd just check the flame color, blue is healthy yellow is bad.
 
2009-01-27 03:13:08 AM
Hiro's Protagonist: The power company had the right to cut his power, but in order to do so without incurring a potential liability there is due process.

They could have talked to the man.

How is that objectionable?

If you are beating around the bush trying to discuss your larger ideology, please be explicit in future. When I say the power company is liable for his death, and rightly so, it's not some kind of metaphor


I'm not trying to talk about any larger ideology; I'm talking about this one case. And if you're so certain that this is a clear violation of the man's due process, then please cite the relevant Michigan case law to support your claim.
 
2009-01-27 03:13:53 AM
Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: SuperCatBarf: Dude, get a grip. The guy served in WWII and was 93 years old. I'm not advocating handing free money to every lazy jackass alive. If you feel that's what I was saying, take a step back, RTFA, and understand you're projecting your vile attitude onto message of common decency.

Oh, so you get to decide a person's "worth" and whether they are deserving of free heat/food/shelter or not? Tell me, if I were homeless, would I be spared in your infinite wisdom? I didn't choose to serve in the military like this guy did (we don't know why, or in what capacity), so perhaps I die in the cold and become soylent green while GI Joe gets checks in the mail?


You're yammering on and on about specific points without having taken in the message in posts you've decided to take on. You should submit your responses, along with the entire text of posts to which you're responding, to some of your law professors. Better yet, submit them to your parents, and your friends and neighbors.

I understand you're flexing your "smart guy" muscle, but you need to realize there's more to what's being said that the points you've chosen. You're failing miserably to support any sort of argument you might have in mind, because you've neglected to address any post in its entirety.

Be a lawyer in school, or at your job, but take some time in the rest of your life to think and act like a human being.
 
2009-01-27 03:14:25 AM
McJudo: Just to clarity here, it appears to be a government run electric company. This subjects the electric company to due process requirements. Due process in a nutshell requires certain procedural protections when life, liberty or property are taken. Disconnecting the power of an individual that you have apparently not had any contact with other then sending letters is very questionable when it comes to deciding if the process that the government employed here was sufficient to protect the life, liberty or property interests of the individual.

Here is a case i just dug up about disconnecting electricity by a state actor. Myers v. City of Alcoa 752 F.2d 196. and the following except: a recipient of electrical service in Tennessee has a property right in the continuation of electric service because it cannot be terminated except "for good and sufficient cause." Once it is determined that such a property right exists, the procedural due process protections which attach to it cannot be discarded simply because the utility unilaterally determined that it has sufficient cause to terminate. Stated differently, the "property right" which invokes due process considerations does not cease to exist simply because the utility's claim appears to be prima facie valid. Rather, as recently observed by this circuit in Lee v. Western Reserve Phychiatric Habilitation Center, et al., 747 F.2d 1062 (6th Cir.1984), once a property interest is established, federal due process attaches to protect the interest from being extinguished without some type of pretermination hearing.

while this is a Tennessee (decided by a federal court) case I would be surprised if Michigan didn't have a similar law on the books.


So then, it's similar to the case where a guy paying child support has to keep paying even if they determine the kid isn't his? Once the connection between the two entities is established it cannot be broken without court intervention?
 
2009-01-27 03:14:30 AM
Hiro's Protagonist: krautgeist: How the HELL was the power company supposed to know he didn't have gas, oil, or wood heat? Do you really want the company to know EVERYTHING that's going on inside your house?

The telephone is older than the 93 year old guy who just died.

Is that enough of a clue?


And I bet they tried to call him. What if his phone was cut off? What if he didn't answer (he didn't come to the door to receive the notice)? This is a very sad story, but you guys are expecting way too much from the power company.
 
2009-01-27 03:16:06 AM
daniellaaa
eh.. why is it that every forum i look at is overwhelmed by insignificant debate and arguing? the fact is it's incredibly sad... but this is an ethical question. The law is the law and apparently in Michigan, they were within their legal rights to shut off his electricity during the winter, no matter how unethical and greedy it may seem to some


This is off topic but saying "The law is the Law" doesn't mean you always blindly follow it. "Law" doesn't mean it's just. Jim Crow was the law at one time, so were a host of other unjust laws.
 
2009-01-27 03:16:48 AM
Kierkegaard's Pseudonym: I'm not trying to talk about any larger ideology; I'm talking about this one case. And if you're so certain that this is a clear violation of the man's due process, then please cite the relevant Michigan case law to support your claim.

Dude, the last clear chance doctrine is much more than michigan state law.

The negligence could extend further however, was the man informed that a certain amperage would blow the fuse causing the power to be cut while he slept? I assume that was their way of avoiding the question of shutting off heat during the winter; in that case they would be in breach of that as well
 
Displayed 50 of 527 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report