Pulse poll

Question of the week: With high fire danger, should Suisun stop fireworks sale?

By From page A11 | July 02, 2014

With the Fourth of July coming on Friday, Suisun City is allowing the sale of Safe and Sane fireworks at three stands – primarily as a fundraiser to support waterfront activities.

But with high fire danger, is that a mistake? Participate in this week’s poll:

Last week’s results:

What should the United States do about the upheaval in Iraq?

Stay out: 67 percent

Aid only: 17 percent

Military action: 16 percent

75 Daily Republic voters


Discussion | 19 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • CD BrooksJune 29, 2014 - 6:44 am

    No, they should not be stopped. I don't recall a recent situation locally where fireworks were the cause of fires?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • just sayin'July 02, 2014 - 1:24 pm

    Today's Paper: FAIRFIELD — A Monday night fire believed caused by illegal fireworks burned about seven acres off Interstate 80 behind Fairfield Chevrolet, Fairfield Fire Department Battalion Chief Matt Luckenbach said. ... It is too easy to buy them in Suisun, bring them to Fairfield and set the hills on fire.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalJuly 02, 2014 - 5:40 pm

    I'm guessing those were not the safe & sane fireworks

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • 2realJune 29, 2014 - 7:05 am

    These fireworks are just sparklers and fountain showers is what they call them. Stationary fireworks, Quite boring if you ask me. So unless the person is lighting them in a field of dead grass, i dont see a problem.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • smwieserJune 29, 2014 - 8:01 am

    Yes, they should stop the sale anytime there is a higher danger of fire. No one should loose their home or belongings just so others can have a few minutes of personal fun. That is just irresponsible behavior. I don't like the fact it scares animals and causes them to end up dead or running loose or in the shelter. No one is so special they need fireworks just for their own entertainment.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalJune 29, 2014 - 8:20 am

    smwieser, you may want to read up a bit more on safe & sane fireworks and how they are regulated. They do not explode. They are not airborn and if used properly present little risk of fire or injury.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • V. SmithJune 29, 2014 - 11:37 am

    The problems are 1) they're often not used properly, and they often do result in injury and 2) once "safe and sane" fireworks (an oxymoron if I ever heard one) are legal, people are more likely to acquire and use illegal ones because they blend more easily into the surrounding noise. Wieser's point about animals being spooked is also a good one -- more animals end up at so-called shelters on the 4th than on any other day, and that results in greater costs to the city or county and therefore to the taxpayer. People who don't enjoy fireworks should have the right to not have to experience them, especially if there's a municipal display where people can go.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • V. SmithJune 29, 2014 - 11:24 am

    When fireworks of any kind are allowed, illegal fireworks are soon to follow. Fireworks are loud, present a fire danger and intrude on the rights of people who choose not to use them. One of the advantages in moving to the area for me was the fact that fireworks are illegal in the city where I live. I think people should have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their living space and not have explosive-type devices go off in their neighborhoods. People who enjoy that type of activity can go to the municipal fireworks displays.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalJune 29, 2014 - 11:29 am

    Again, safe and sane fireworks, when used properly are safe and relatively uninvasive to neighbors. Allowing safe & sane may actually reduce illegal fireworks by giving people a safer option. It would be interesting to hear from the Suisun fire chief it that has been the case.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • V. SmithJune 29, 2014 - 11:44 am

    Have to respectfully disagree, Mr. Practical. Any user of fireworks who deems his use of fireworks as uninvasive is clearly not interested in taking the opinions of others who may not disagree into account. As for safe and sane fireworks being a safer option -- that's the whole point of having a municipal display...to provide a safer option. As Wieser said - a few minutes of fun for some is not a good enough reason for the rest of us to give up the right to not listen to fireworks.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • V. SmithJune 29, 2014 - 11:46 am

    **who may not agree

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalJune 29, 2014 - 12:02 pm

    The municipal displays are much louder and not completely safe either. Saying that not everyone uses safe & sane fireworks properly is a poor argument. If we banned everything that is a risk when not used properly we wouldn't have cars, barbecues, knives, lawnmowers, ect... Suisun has allowed their use of safe & sane for two years. I have not heard of one problem regarding improper use causing fire or harm. As far as the little bit of noise involved, keep your pets inside, lighten up a bit and allow your neighbors to enjoy themselves. It's one night.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • V. SmithJune 29, 2014 - 2:01 pm

    Municipal displays are not safe? Perhaps. Are they safer than private citizens, many of whom imbibe on the 4th, lighting up fireworks, which may or may not be legal? You bet. The argument that we use cars, and they're not entirely safe, is specious at best. Cars have advantages that greatly outweigh the risk. Fireworks are purely recreational. If there were some other benefit, that argument might work, but the truth is, fireworks are a vehicle for having a "good time," and that's not sufficient reason for other people to be forced to be subjected to it. As for the suggestion that I should lighten up - why would I lighten up on a topic that affects my life adversely? You wouldn't in my position. The difference here is that YOU want fireworks and will make the weakest of arguments to defend their existence, regardless of how it affects other people. Re: CB's suggestion that I go to a hotel on the 4th - there is absolutely no reason why I should have to leave my home so people can recreationally use fireworks. That is beyond ridiculous. Just be honest about your position: fireworks enthusiasts want their fun and everyone else can put up or shut up. Nice. Thank goodness democracies don't work that way.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalJune 29, 2014 - 2:12 pm

    Honestly, I don't care about fireworks one way or the other. But I get that a lot of people, one day a year, would like to have some family fun on their own property. I have no problem with that. It's a long tradition, and personally, I find your attitude a bit selfish. Illegal is illegal. I have little tolerance for that and will call local police if I see it happening. The safe & sane are just that. I applaud Suisun for using the sale of safe and sane to fund the municipal event and provide revenue for great non profits such as local Little League and Titan's Youth Football. You said you support the municipal fireworks, but without the sale of safe & sane the event does not happen.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • V. SmithJune 29, 2014 - 3:03 pm

    I support municipal fireworks when they are an alternative to having my neighbors shooting off a variety of legal and illegal fireworks. I'm not familiar with how Suisun is using the revenue stream from the fireworks sold to individuals. It seems to me that there's not one valid reason to have legal fireworks, and when we go through all of them one by one and they're refuted, people fall back on personal attacks, you're selfish, etc.. The point is - there's no valid reason for some people's wish to have a good time should trump my rights as a taxpayer and someone who wants to not have their neighborhood erupt in a mess of fireworks. If there were a valid reason, I'd listen to it. So far I haven't heard one. Just sayin'.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJune 29, 2014 - 3:08 pm

    V. Smith, how about Halloween and little folks seeking treats? Christmas and Carolers?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalJune 29, 2014 - 3:20 pm

    Every reason I gave is valid. To each his own, I guess.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJune 29, 2014 - 2:17 pm

    V. Smith, just thinking of your comfort. You're obviously not getting that at home this time of year...

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJune 29, 2014 - 12:22 pm

    V. Smith, I cannot imagine a scenario where fireworks legal or otherwise would not invade the fourth of July, ever. It is a rite of passage to blow sh*t up and it will never end, count on it. Take off some stress, go to a hotel for one day out of your life. But be prepared for a week! ;)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.