There have been several, excellent blogs posted recently on timely topics, but I just can’t seem to get past the whole “firefighter as arsonist” issue. It simply blows my mind as to how anyone in such a strong position of public trust could intentionally set a fire.

There have been a couple of recent arson cases that provoked me into delving further into the reasons firefighters set fires.

So, I went on an Internet search for some fresh information and I found a very compelling white paper written by the Forensic Psychology Practice LTD of the Willows Clinic in Great Britain.

However; the report was written in 1999! But, I was taken by its timeless relevance and its precision in breaking down the behavior of fire-setting.

After reading the report, my concern is this: do firefighters start setting fires AFTER they become firefighters OR had they set fires while growing up and continued their propensity, using the cover of firefighter to quell suspicions?

After all, less than 5% of the arsonists are ever caught and convicted, which might explain why the study of arson is a growing science.

Here’s a famous example of one who was never caught: David Berkowitz. The “Son of Sam” serial killer who was caught in 1977 and charged with the murder of Stacy Moskowitz claimed to have set over 2,000 fires in New York City. He told investigators that, as a kid, he wanted to be a FIREFIGHTER! Doesn’t that just about knock your socks off?

Here’s my dilemma…I always thought that firefighters who set fires were “different” than your typical arsonist. But, after I read this report, I have changed my mind.

More often than not, a firefighter arsonist will say that they set fires “out of boredom”. In other words, they wanted more excitement. A few will say that they wanted to be “heroes”, fewer still will say they did it for money and a very few will say that they did it for self-gratification.

Interestingly, arsonists who are not firefighters will tell you the same thing!

And in ALL cases, arson was used to solve a problem-real or perceived.

A lot has been made of the lack of intelligence of arsonists. Their average IQ is below 70.

Really?

Then why can’t people with college degrees and years of investigative experience catch them or better yet, screen them out of fire departments?

Remember the guy who terrorized the Pacific Northwest, armed with nothing more than a BIC lighter? His name was Paul Keller and it wasn’t the cops who caught him; his dad turned him in! Paul might still be setting fires were it not for dear old Dad.

I am of the opinion that many arsonists are smarter than their IQ score would indicate, but were “under-achievers”. Let’s be honest; the more you do a task, the better you should get at it; right?

The report recognizes three components, easily remembered by “ABC”-Antecedent (trigger), Behavior and Consequence. When analyzing a firefighter arsonist for instance, “boredom” would be the antecedent (trigger); setting the fire would be the behavior and responding to and fighting the fire would be the consequence. Be careful not to confuse it with “end result”. We all know what the end result can be, but you have to remember that the arsonist doesn’t care about the consequences that are outside of his locus of control.

Again; in ALL arson cases, arson is the resolution to a problem; also called “the only viable option theory”. With this approach, arson is a “highly effective means of changing hard-to-tolerate circumstances or conditions”. Is boredom hard to tolerate? In the mind of the arsonist, not going to fires is hard to take. He believes that there is only one way to fix it. So, yes; boredom may trigger fire-setting in firefighters where fires are not an every day occurrence.

So, when an arsonist sets a fire, they are only concerned with resolving THEIR problem without regard for the ensuing problems that it may cause their victims.

Though they may say that they are remorseful, science says that they are not. With this in mind, no empathy or sympathy should be shown to the arsonist. They will only be remorseful for getting caught!

In closing, I would submit to readers that you must use an assessment tool for selecting prospective members or for members that may be suspected of setting fires. Simply conducting a criminal background check might reveal an arson charge, if it was committed as an adult, but remember; juvenile records are sealed. Even then, the charge might not be arson, but is cleverly disguised as criminal mischief, property damage or vandalism. The fact that fire was involved will be buried somewhere deep into the report.

Fire-setting has its highest frequency in the 10-25 year-old age group. For many of you, that would encompass your explorer’s group. So, even your candidates for explorer should be screened.

You should no apologies for your due diligence, but think about your department’s image should one of your own sets fires.

Apologies won’t be nearly enough to the people that you have sworn to protect from the ravages of fire.

Make sure that you have conducted a full background history on your people. Watch and listen to them. Are they displaying behavior that indicates pleasure that there is a fire? Do they display anti-social behavior? You need to be vigilant and be prepared to contact professionals if you sense a problem.

At least think about it.

TCSS.

This article is protected by copyright under The Adventures of Jake and Vinnie© umbrella. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the expressed permission of Art Goodrich aka ChiefReason.