Comments on: Ricci Zombeck Would Let Your Kid Drown

By: JoeCop

JoeCop — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:24:21 +0000

Any firefighter that would stand by and watch someone drown SHOULD hang up his/her gear and go to work doing something they may be good at. Rescue is obviously not one of them. I’ve been a LEO for 27 years, and on the east coast where I work, it would have been a footrace between the PD and FD as to who got out there first. I guess the west coast does things differently, but to be filmed standing there with your hands in your pockets watching someone drown, sad. And yes, suicidal people can be dangerous, but that’s the job we’re paid to do. Don’t like it? Quit.
Dammit, have some respect for your self and your profession.

By: Tylerle13

Tylerle13 — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 00:53:00 +0000

Chris, there is nothing that can be said that will justify the ACTIONS & ANSWERS that came straight from the horses (Zombecks) mouth. Everything being said about Zombeck is well deserved because it is based upon his actions & the actions of people under his command. This guy makes $300K a year, yet fails to live up to the minimum expectations that the tax payers have of them. They did not even attempt to make contact with the man. They did not request the service/ equipment of all of the other bay area departments like they told us they did(They just called them, they never asked for assistance). They did not try to think of a way to save his life, they just looked for a way to spin this death into additional funding for them.

Zombeck does not deserve the title of “Public Servant” and he sure as hell does not deserve a paycheck for pretending to be a hero. Dr Kevorkian went to jail for basically doing the same thing that Zombeck did, but atleast Kevorkian’s victims were chronically ill, Zombeck let this man die either because Zombeck is a coward or he was looking for a reason to demand more money, either way Zombeck is a dispicable human being and should be fired.

By: Mal Robison

Mal Robison — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:52:04 +0000

I was born and raised in Alameda and am a proud gradute of Encinal High School, class of ’66. I moved to Texas in 1971 and have lived in the Dallas area ever since. For the first time in my life, I am ashamed to say I am from Alameda. How can there even be a debate over this? Having worked for 30 years in corporate environments with companies such as Xerox and American Airlines, I am well aware of the importance of complying with established policies and procedures, but in a life and death situation all that goes out the window. How could these men, trained rescue workers, sit by and watch someone die like that? I would have hoped that these normally brave men would save the victim and worry about what rules might have been broken later. What is on the side of the Alameda Fire Trucks and EMT vehicles? Something like protect and serve? Maybe an addendum should be added that states “unless it contradicts with policy and procedures…”

By: LB Firefighter Chris

LB Firefighter Chris — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:49:11 +0000

Perhaps you could share what your experience is with volunteer fire departments that assures you that they tend to have more public spirit? Or that they (or a private fire brigade) would have affected this rescue?

By: CalWatchdog

CalWatchdog — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 21:28:57 +0000

I love the excuse-making by firefighters. Zombeck’s people just watched a guy drown and did nothing. Then he was asked if he would save a drowning child in the same situation and he clearly said he would not do so while on duty. Yet even his own admission isn’t sufficient for his fellow firefighting defenders. I used the word “kid” for the headline fit, but the reporter asked if he would save a child. The answer was no. This is the kind of thing that is common by highly paid, unionized firefighter/bureaucrats. The 72 percent of the nation’s firefighters who are volunteers tend to be a much more public-spirited lot.

By: LB Firefighter Chris

LB Firefighter Chris — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 21:17:08 +0000

You guys have all the answers. I guess I should hang up my gear and get a job doing something meaningful.

Chief Zombeck gave two responses to the question. The author chose the most convenient for his own agenda (everyone paid by the government is a phony, evil leech), and deliberately crafted it to suit his own purposes. That is irresponsible. Zombeck was not willing to draw out the differences in each situation at that moment out of respect for the deceased, and it caught him off guard. I would hope that I would have answered a little differently, but it was a losing proposition.

A 280 lb suicidal wader is not the same thing as a drowning child. We all know this.

The article is irresponsible because it is supremely disrespectful. Mr. Greenhut clearly states that Chief Zombeck would let your kid drown. He did not say that (and my “kid” is a child, thank you very much). If Chief Zombeck’s career has been anything like mine, he has held far too many dying children in his arms, and it would truly be a painful blow to be accused of this.

It is the modern day equivalent of calling a returning war veteran a baby killer.

Using such language should be reserved for the worst offenders of humanity, and while I don’t know Chief Zombeck, there is nothing about him that warrants this type of vitriol. I am stunned at the venom toward firefighters I find here.

If anyone wants to discuss this over coffee, I’ll be in San Francisco this week. You may have heard that there will be a funeral, and it’s not for a roofer or taxi driver.

By: Tylerle13

Tylerle13 — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:10:23 +0000

Firefighter Chris, Zombeck himself said he wouldnt go in to save a child if he were on duty, how is the author being irresponsible for reporting that? If you have a problem with firefighters being portrayed in this way, take it up with Zombeck, he is the one who went out of his way to NOT save the person and he is the one who tried to justify their inactivity by saying he would do the same thing if it was a child in the water.

Its not reporters that are making the fire department look bad, its the fire department themselves & the disgusting attempt to justify their inaction & use the death as a call for more money.

By: A resident in Alameda

A resident in Alameda — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 16:47:25 +0000

That should have been “leaders” in the post above.

By: A resident in Alameda

A resident in Alameda — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 16:46:33 +0000

The water that day was like a big pond. 63* according to the National Oceanographic Data Center. The water was calm. The firemen, policemen, mayor, and other top dogs in Alameda are all making excuses for the laziness of the “leader” here.

By: Tylerle13

Tylerle13 — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 19:03:03 +0000

Not to take away from how much of a COWARD Zombeck is, but rest of the “Public Servants” that stood on the beach that day and watched a man die need to be exposed just as much as Zombeck. Any one of them could have told Zombeck to f-off and walked into the water and avoided this whole situation.

Zombeck would have punished them according to their “Procedures” but the firefighter can just call up his union rep & the local news and his punishment would be immediately repealed & the news outlets would report how he had the courage to do what was right. That is the whole point of these guys having union representation, so they dont get fired for doing the right thing. If the unions do not serve that purpose any more then they are useless and should be abolished.

Every other coward that stood on that beach is just as guilty as Zombeck and all of them should resign out of shame. They have disgraced an entire profession and have exposed themselves as worthless union pawns who do nothing to make the public any safer.