Marylee Shrider: Fireworks lovers are their own worst enemy
| Friday, Jul 11 2008 08:47 PM
Last Updated Friday, Mar 27 2009 06:15 PM
On a pleasant July 4th back in 1979, my brother-in-law gathered a fistful of sparklers, bound them with duct tape, stuck the wad into the grass and lit it.
Nearly thirty years later, the ensuing explosion— the blinding white flash, the compression of the blast wave against my chest — remains one of the more vivid memories of my young adulthood.
I'm reminded of that explosion every July, when the annual debate over a fireworks ban in Bakersfield roars to life.
I'm generally opposed to bans, believing most to be intrusive government meddling in decisions we're perfectly capable of making on our own. But this Independence Day, it became clear to me why a fireworks ban is inevitable.
In a word: guys.
Guys and their innate and uncontrollable urge to tweak and toy with fireworks. To turn a satisfactory blast into one that shatters windows; to modify a “safe and sane” firework to the degree its detonation will cause small children to shriek and pets to run for cover. Not to mention guys' hankering for fireworks of the illegal variety.
I can hear you guys now. “Well of COURSE we like 'em loud,” you're saying. “The bigger the bang, the better. And those “safe and sane” fireworks? About as thrilling as lighting candles on a birthday cake.”
True. But that relentless tinkering and those illegal fireworks have brought us to the brink of a ban. When it comes to fireworks, we as a community — including those of us gals who applaud the guys' efforts — are our own worst enemy.
Local elected officials have long resisted declaring a ban on fireworks, but flagrant disregard for laws governing their use and the cost to enforce them, may finally force their hand. Maybe it should.
There's no maybe about it, says City Fire Battalion Chief Garth Milam, who, thinks allowing personal fireworks in the city and county is “foolishness.”
“It's lawless behavior and we've winked at it,” Milam says. “This year we had to add about 30 additional staff just to enforce the law and deal with the consequences of the fireworks.”
The city charges fireworks vendors $200 over and above their usual fees to help off set extra costs, but that amount doesn't touch the cost of consequences like the “home lost on Lomita Drive,” several smaller property fires and a number of injuries, Milam says. Alcohol, of course, was a factor in a number of the incidents, including one where a partyer threw a bucket of water on uniformed police officers.
“We even had one person launch a bottle rocket that went right through the window of a neighbor's home, hitting and burning a woman inside,” he says. At the City's Animal Control office, staff saw an increase of 10 to15 lost and frightened animals per day the week of the Fourth, says Resource Management Director David Price.
“This fireworks thing is a problem,” Price says. “Whether this is something the community is willing to sustain in order to keep the practice is the question.”
It's a good question.
The most obvious, cost effective, animal-loving, house-saving answer is, of course, a ban. A ban on personal fireworks in the city and county. A ban that, hopefully, will act as a catalyst for public, professional fireworks shows.
Shows that beat safe-and-lame fireworks any day.
Opinions expressed in this column are those of Marylee Shrider, not The Californian. Her column appears Saturdays. Reach her at mshrider@bakersfield.com or 395-7474.
