this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
64 points (97.1% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35844 readers
1664 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HairyHarry 63 points 1 month ago (5 children)

There were many arsonists who were actually firefighters:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefighter_arson

Those indeed came back to the scene.

[–] Lost_My_Mind 27 points 1 month ago (2 children)

"Alright, listen fellas, the city has cut our budget as firefighters. They say the city is TOO safe, and there's not enough fires to justify paying rent on a building with a stripper pole, and 15 men sleeping in the same room. So as of next month, our city will no longer have firefighters."

"Well......what if we did still keep being firefighters?"

"What do you mean? There's not enough fires to justify our budget."

"........I have an idea. It's a bit of a wildcard idea though."

The gang become firefighters

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Isn't this really close to the plot of Fahrenheit 451?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

TIme to pull a Crassus on the city.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

As a professional fire performer and fuel tech, you have no idea how many times people jokingly accuse me of arson. Like please, I'm not a novice, the guys set themselves on fire half the time. The state has my fingerprints anyways.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So THAT'S why you say you're a Tiefling IRL

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Actually that checks out completely

[–] lgmjon64 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The crazy thing is that there's apparently no official database that tracks that. There was just a California firefighter charged with multiple counts of arson and in the article they mention that the statistic isn't tracked, they went on to do a database search that showed how frequent it is.

[–] HairyHarry 6 points 1 month ago

There are figures that suggest a different picture, but hardly anyone knows them. In 2013, the former Schwyz public prosecutor Lorenz Müller wrote a "behavioral analysis of serial arsonists". Based on a survey of German-speaking Swiss cantons, he examined 19 series of fires with a total of 21 perpetrators. Of these 21, three were current and one were former firefighters - their share was therefore just under 20 percent. Müller's conclusion: the firefighter as arsonist is not "such an unjustified cliché" after all.

translated paragraph from https://www.nzz.ch/gesellschaft/loeschen-was-der-kollege-angezuendet-hat-ld.1815687

[–] stupidcasey 4 points 1 month ago

lieutenant! Why are you sitting around?

Sorry sir there is nothing to do.

Then make some work for yourself!

Burns down building.

[–] jeffw 1 points 1 month ago

Combining your article with UCR data, that’s about .3% arsons.

We have .1 arsons per 1000 ppl annually in the US. Looks like the rate for firefighters is about twice that

[–] jeffw 30 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It’s a trope that people jack off to fire?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There are quite a few high profile (in the media anyhow) cases where nutjobs get off on starting fires, yeah. But the really dark shit starts to happen when (ahem) alternative media sources start to imply that all arsonists are paid state actors and/or sexually aroused political players doing all the arson.

It's usually insurance-related. Or accidental. Nothing that sexy in the vast majority of them.

My favorite was last year during the very real wildfire issues affecting western canada where the flat-earthers kept posting video of actual forestry worker helicopters torching brush piles (something they actually do, during the off-season, to clean up tinder piles) and conflating it with "treaudeauh-paid ANTIFA super-soldiers out to bring in 15 minute cities and permanent state control by burning society to the ground" or whatever the hell. The absurdity of it all kinda turned me on in the other direction, ngl.

[–] lgmjon64 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Here in California they just keep blaming the super-secret Jewish space laser for starting all the fires. But it doesn't burn things that are blue, which is why so many people have blue roofs in China.

[–] teamevil 3 points 1 month ago

How do you think they made the pagers blow up... Those space lasers are activators

[–] Mango 1 points 1 month ago

Also, what's that relief from?

[–] Num10ck 19 points 1 month ago

i thought the cliche was insurance fraud? ive never heard of the relief part, where are you seeing it?

[–] Boozilla 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The trope I'm familiar with is that a criminal always returns to the scene of the crime to enjoy watching the aftermath and/or observe who is investigating. There's also a trope about serial killers exhibiting a creepy triad of behaviors in childhood: bed wetting, arson, and animal torture. I'm not an expert but I think the science is dubious.

Movies and TV shows have used these tropes and countless variations. Are you maybe remembering one where the arsonist liked to have a wank? It would not surprise me if it was used in one or more procedural crime dramas. If it's a common trope, it's news to me!

[–] Don_Dickle 7 points 1 month ago

When I was younger I used to work at a liquor store with a firefighter. I asked him about arsonists since we had 3 whole trailer parks go up in flames. He told me they always had someone in their civis and would wonder thru the crowds or people parked nearby. He said there were a couple of fires where they caught the guy because I quoting here that he would jerk off to his fires. But one time I guess he did the fire wrong and burnt the shit out of hit nether regions and when he went to the hospital they reported it.

[–] yesman 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Too many innocents go to jail behind false arson accusations. You never know if the building was into it at the time, but then felt ashamed later and cried arson. And then it's just your word against the fire investigators. Just the accusation can destroy your reputation, no trial or nothing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

With the first sentence I thought you were going to talk about the very real abundance of bias and unreliability in arson investigation and other forms of forensic science.

https://www.science.org/content/article/forensic-experts-biased-scientists-claims-spark-outrage

[–] Rhynoplaz 2 points 1 month ago

I mean, did you see the siding on that house? It was totally asking for it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

I often relieve my on fires I've started