(Closed) Spinoff of a spinoff: If you had the choice (the fire!)

posted 5 years ago in The Lounge
  • poll: Would you risk your life to go back into the fire?
    I saved the baby. Back in for the pet immediately! : (49 votes)
    57 %
    I saved the baby. I wouldn't risk my life for a pet. : (29 votes)
    34 %
    I saved the pet. Back in for the baby immediately! : (6 votes)
    7 %
    I saved the pet. I wouldn't risk my life for a baby. : (2 votes)
    2 %
    I scarpered without saving either. : (0 votes)
  • Post # 3
    Member
    8487 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper
    • Wedding: April 2014

    Well one of my dogs is small, so I’d probably be able to grab both him and the baby at the same time. But I would go back in and try to get my other two dogs.

    Post # 4
    Member
    10714 posts
    Sugar Beekeeper
    • Wedding: June 2012

    I’d save my son, I wouldn’t know how to live in a world without him knowing I could have done something to save him.

    Then I’d go back for my cats immediately. 

    Post # 5
    Member
    8461 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper
    • Wedding: April 2013

    I voted save pet, back for baby.  The reality is, if I can get out, my dog can get out, so all I’d need to do to save him is open a window or door, then I’d have more time to look for the baby.  After that, if there was time, I’d go back for the other pets (lizards, tarantulas, etc).  It’s not that I wouldn’t be sad about the other pets, but there is much less attachment to those pets.  This is assuming it’s my dog and a friend/relative’s baby. 

    If I were in a building with a strange dog and a strange baby, I’d grab the baby and then open the door and get out and hope the dog followed.  The only reason I wouldn’t grab the dog in that instance is due to safety (unfamiliar animals can be unpredictable is stressful situations).  I’m going to guess that most people will grab one and go back in for the other.

    Post # 6
    Member
    9644 posts
    Buzzing Beekeeper
    • Wedding: September 2012

    Save the baby, by all means, of course.  Then back in for the pet(s) as long as it was reasonably safe to do so.  I would risk my life for another human being, infant or otherwise.  I would not risk my life for an animal, although I’d be sad to lose a pet, especially in such a horrible way.

    Post # 7
    Member
    6360 posts
    Bee Keeper

    Your poll results might get skewed a bit because your OP doesn’t mention that it’s “your pet you love dearly” and “a friend’s baby”.

    Some people will answer your poll having read the prior threads and assuming that info, and, as apparent from at least one comment so far, others will not have read the prior threads, and they will answer based on the assumption that the question is about their own baby and their own pet.

    Post # 8
    Member
    724 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: June 2013

    Neither, I saved the baby and my poochie would be hot on my heels, just like she is any other time I attempt to leave the house. 🙂

    Post # 9
    Member
    11325 posts
    Sugar Beekeeper
    • Wedding: February 2011

    I voted that I would go back in, but I think it is a matter of degrees. Obviously running into a burning building is dangerous and a risk to your life… but not all situations are equal. If I thought there was a good chance I could get in, get the pets, and get out I would even though it is dangerous. But if the whole place is up in flames and there is a very good chance I’d die if I went back in, I would not. 

    I was in a very loosely similar (but not nearly so dangerous) situation a few weeks ago. I was working from home and our CO2 detector went off. I took it down and called the police (which is what the detector says to do) and they told me to get out of the house immediately and not go back in until the fire department cleared it because CO2 can make you pass out somewhat rapidly. My dog was standing right next to me so I took him outside on his leash and tied him up outside, and then I went back in to try to get our cats out. My husband was slightly annoyed at me when I told him because he didn’t think I should put myself at risk to save pets. But I felt like it was a safe risk. Sure it was a risk but the fire department was on its way, I opened the windows on my way back in to get some fresh air, and I only tried for about 5 minutes before giving up and getting out of the house (they were scared from the alarm and hiding too far under the couch for me to grab them). 

    Again, a different situation than a burning building because it is a much much much smaller risk– but I think the analogy is the same. I think most people would weigh how likely injury REALLY is before deciding to go back in.

    Post # 10
    Member
    3668 posts
    Sugar bee
    • Wedding: July 2015

    @joya_aspera:  I was going to say the same thing.

    @CorgiTales:  Were your cats okay?

    I think I’d save the baby and try to go back for my pet.

    Post # 11
    Member
    11325 posts
    Sugar Beekeeper
    • Wedding: February 2011

    @Regina Phalange:  yes they were fine. In the end it was a false alarm (literally lol). The fire department got here and they checked everything out and there was no actual problem… it was a faulty alarm and I had to go buy a new one. 

    Post # 14
    Member
    790 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: November 2012

    CorgiTales (message   February 1, 2011  

    I voted that I would go back in, but I think it is a matter of degrees. Obviously running into a burning building is dangerous and a risk to your life… but not all situations are equal. If I thought there was a good chance I could get in, get the pets, and get out I would even though it is dangerous. But if the whole place is up in flames and there is a very good chance I’d die if I went back in, I would not. 

     

    Same. I wouldn’t leave without the baby. Then if my dogs were still trapped I would do everything reasonable to get them out as it would be unbearable to think of them burning to death. However I wouldn’t let my husband go back in if the situation was so dangerous that I didn’t know if he’d get back out alive, because my husband is more important to me than my dogs. Similarly I would not risk leaving him a widower (and leaving my parents without their only daughter) to go back in if there was clearly a very high fatality risk. 

     

    Post # 15
    Member
    2106 posts
    Buzzing bee
    • Wedding: September 2012

    It wouldn’t even occur to me to save the baby if I were in a real fire. I would be near all animals and as far away from babies as possible. I would grab what is near me. 

    Post # 16
    Member
    790 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: November 2012

    @peachacid:  My goal is to show that people are decent…but apparently people would leave pets to die, so I guess they aren’t.  In the other thread people were accusing those who would save pets of hating children…so I don’t think it matters if it’s a friend’s baby or not.  ANY baby.  ANY pet.  

    Well it’s open to interpretation what “risking your life” means. If the situation is seriously, seriously life-threatening, I don’t think most people would risk leaving their children motherless, their parents childless, their spouse a widow(er), etc., to save a pet. That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t do whatever they could short of sacrificing their own life and it certainly doesn’t mean they’re deficient pet owners. 

    The topic ‘Spinoff of a spinoff: If you had the choice (the fire!)’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors