Type of paper: Case Study

Topic: Fire, Victim, Discrimination, Sexual Abuse, Criminal Justice, Victimology, Crime, Smoke

Pages: 3

Words: 825

Published: 2020/12/23

New WowEssays Premium Database!

Find the biggest directory of over
1 million paper examples!

The whole operation was mishandled right from the start when the incident was first reported. When the smoke emitting at the rear of the store was reported, the receiver of the message did not try to find out from who reported the matter what could be the cause of the smoke. On the other hand, the victim responded to the call and went to the scene without delay. When the victim arrived at the scene he started evacuation immediately. This was an excellent gesture on quick response and evacuation efforts to prevent death or injuries to the people who were at the scene. However, the victim also failed to find the cause of the fire or where exactly the fire was. The victim should have tried to find out from the people who were coming out of the building what could be cause of the smoke since the people who were at the store when the smoke started could have slighted hits as to what could be the cause of the fire. Additionally, the victim did not try to find out what was contained at the rear of the supermarket or how many people were working there when the smoke started emanating.
Moreover, the victim did not try to find out from the plaza manager or the supermarket manager if the layout of the whole structure had changed since he left the supermarket. The updated layout could have helped the firefighters to know the exact location of exits doors and the number of windows at the supermarket and the directions to take when things deteriorated at the supermarket. These measures if they were taken by the victim instead of leaving the scene, it could have helped to minimize the risk of the fire and provide significant information as what things were stored at rear of the supermarket, their inflammable status or their chemical reaction when they burn. This could have helped to know how poisonous the smoke was and what measures to take to minimize the effect of the poison (CDC, 2008).
The building was poorly constructed, it is reported that the smoke was about one foot thick across the ceiling. This shows there was poor ventilation system hence the smoke could not escape. Additionally, the report does not state whether the building had emergency exists or there were fire equipment (fire showers or extinguishers) inside the building. The roof made of metal sheet and the masonry brick walls were able to contain the heat and the smoke in the building and prevent free circulation of air.
The operation depended solely on the memory of the victim on the layout of the supermarket not the actual layout design map. It is reported that when the victim panic he lost his direction thus putting his life and that of the captain in danger. The fire fighters should have used the actual map of the facility when they tried to evaluate the situation of the fire. The captain and victim did not enter the building with a rope or uncharged hose (CDC, 2008). The rope or uncharged hose could have helped them find their way back. It is also noted that when the captain and they victim entered the building, the situation had already deteriorated and the visibility was obscured by the Heavy smoke. Although, they could not see clearly they preceded to the rear of the building. This was a wrong call they could have called off the evaluation exercise. Furthermore, since they were crawling they could not feel the heat or rise in temperature that’s why the victim was taken by surprise when he tried to open the door. On the other hand, there was no rescue arrangement when the victim and the captain entered the store. Thus, this is what caused the delay when the captain called for help. It is reported that when the local department Chief and a different volunteer Lieutenant entered the building, they had barely gone 15 feet inside the supermarket when their alarms on low-air went off. This shows that the victim and captain had low air content before they even reached the general beef section.

Conclusion

The whole operation was mismanaged by poor decisions. The fire fighters failed to find more information about the smoke or fire from the people who were reported the matter or who were at the store when the smoke fire started. Additionally, the whole operation depended on the memory of the victim regardless of the years he has been out of the store. Many things could have changed on the layout of the supermarket. The firefighter did not try to find out what was contained in the rear of the store or their combustion and poisonous status. The fire fighters were ill equipped and they did not have all the safety gears or rescue plans in case of something went wrong. These were the cause of the problem.

The fire fighters should try as much to find more information about the fire and the structure under fire from the people who call to report about the emergency. This will help in the evaluation of the seriousness of the fire and how to handle the situation
It is reported that Captain and probably the victim had no PASS devices on and the victim had to borrow safety gear from a colleague. This shows how bad they were prepared to combat the smoke and the fire. Thus, it is essential that the fire department put in place strict policy and rules that no fire fighter should go to the scene of fire without proper safety gears and equipment or even without a PASS device (CDC, 2008).
The exercise was poorly planned and executed. The victim and the captain had no uncharged hose line or ropes (safety lines) to use if they get lost or stranded in the facility. There was no rescue plan in case of the emergency. Thus, it’s necessary that the fire department put in place procedures to be used during emergency operations. The activities should be well coordinated and rescue missions should be well articulated (CDC, 2008). The firefighters should go inside the building with a safety lines so as to be able to get out easily incase the situation inside the building deteriorate.
It was reported that a fighter needs only 36 hours of training to qualify to be a firefighter. There is no additional requirement or regulation of further training. This shows the firefighters lacked skills since they did not train often to refresh their skills or learn new skills. Thus, it is essential that the firefighters be subjected to more training per year to update their skills (CDC, 2008).

References

CDC. (2011). Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/pdfs/face200834.pdf
 

Cite this page
Choose cite format:
  • APA
  • MLA
  • Harvard
  • Vancouver
  • Chicago
  • ASA
  • IEEE
  • AMA
WePapers. (2020, December, 23) Recommendation Case Study Sample. Retrieved September 25, 2021, from https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/
"Recommendation Case Study Sample." WePapers, 23 Dec. 2020, https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/. Accessed 25 September 2021.
WePapers. 2020. Recommendation Case Study Sample., viewed September 25 2021, <https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/>
WePapers. Recommendation Case Study Sample. [Internet]. December 2020. [Accessed September 25, 2021]. Available from: https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/
"Recommendation Case Study Sample." WePapers, Dec 23, 2020. Accessed September 25, 2021. https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/
WePapers. 2020. "Recommendation Case Study Sample." Free Essay Examples - WePapers.com. Retrieved September 25, 2021. (https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/).
"Recommendation Case Study Sample," Free Essay Examples - WePapers.com, 23-Dec-2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/. [Accessed: 25-Sep-2021].
Recommendation Case Study Sample. Free Essay Examples - WePapers.com. https://www.wepapers.com/samples/recommendation-case-study-sample/. Published Dec 23, 2020. Accessed September 25, 2021.
Copy

Share with friends using:

Please remember that this paper is open-access and other students can use it too.

If you need an original paper created exclusively for you, hire one of our brilliant writers!

GET UNIQUE PAPER
Related Premium Essays
Contact us
Chat now