Should the government get out of the socialized police and firefighting business?

I have read a lot of analogies in this debate and have a new one too.

can you imagine if the fire dept was privatized and your house is on fire. if you have fire ins (different than home owners like health ins is different than life ins) an agent comes out to give approval for the fire co to come. if you don't have fire ins the just don't come or if the proof you have ins is burnt in the fire they can only sprinkle a little water on it till they know if your covered. and if you had a fire before even a small one you can't get coverage.

and yes fire dept is paid by local home owner taxes, however the health issue is too huge to be handled by each state individually. and if each state has it's own rules what about portability ?

You certainly do. Hire all the bodyguards and security firms you want. And the police and firefighters aren't lazy govt. employees. That honor goes to the men and women in Washington.

so true, dont forget about the thousands of Federal Firefighters out there also known as wildland firefighters, paid for and employed by the federal govt. shoiuld we fire all of them because this isnt a socialist country. Let all those people with homes and families living in those areas burn huh?

I'm typing this reeeeeeal sloooooow for ya:

Firefighters and police are administered locally, not by the Feds.

Anything starting to penetrate through the fog?

And socialized retirement business (Social Security), and socialized education business, and socialized road-paving business, etc.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmbNm...

.

Some arguments are too insane to be taken seriously, this is one of them.