[red 928]

When I see things like this I get angry and frustrated because
I believe most of these fires could be prevented.

I am convinced that the majority of these wild fires
are the result of arson,
started by a very small group of serial arsonists.
Like a handful of them.
If you go back 10 or 15 years and map out the locations
there are obvious patterns.
Not only in north and south cali but also in the PNW and rockies.
We have seen swarms of fires in certain areas
and not in others that are just as vulnerable.
On a map it looks to me like Thousand oaks, malibu,
pacific palisades and alta dena are close to each other
And all have burned recently. Some many times.
I recall reading a story saying there was a swarm of fires in a neighboring county
over the past decade but they caught a guy and those fires stopped.

I can think of no other crime that is more heinous or
deserving of capital punishment than this.
But these monsters are rarely caught so they
continue the carnage.
They watch the sensationalistic news coverage
telling the population that the winds are coming and of the
red flag warnings and their urges grow uncontrollably. the itch grows.

The ENTIRE population of these areas should be hammering
on their governments to implement comprehensive monitoring,
surveillance, and prevention in vulnerable areas.
If they can deploy every available firefighter and LEO AFTER
the fire gets out of control, why can't they do the same to
PREVENT it from starting?
Facial recognition cameras, license plate readers,
neighborhood watch-type of volunteer groups, whatever it takes.
How about an FBI task force with the sole responsibility
of taking these sicko idiots out?
That would be cheaper and easier than what it costs if the
fires are not prevented.
They would only have to jail a few of them to make a huge difference.

Out of sight out of mind,
a week from now the governments will be back squabbling
how to squander resources and not preventing
this type of catastrophe.

Now this next part might hurt some feelings.
We could wait to discuss this until well after the effects
have faded but that's part of the problem.
So, I'll tread lightly on the responsibility of
building or buying houses in areas with really high fire danger ratings,
or the fact that homes in these dangerous areas COULD be built
to be made more fire-resistant but are not.
But if I were inclined to buy a multi-million dollar home in one of these areas
I think I would be able to afford spark arresters on attic ventilation,
stucco and cement boards siding with no exposed wood facia or trim,
Fire proof shutters on windows, no flammable vegetation,
home fogging sprinkler systems with self-contained water supply (pool or tank), etc.
I could design a home that would not burn when exposed to wild fire.
Why don't they?
Because insurance is cheaper.

If allowed, the insurance companies would solve this by jacking
up the rates in high danger areas enough to curb the spread
of houses into the dangerous hills, but government regulations
interfere with the free market balance.
So insurance companies bail and the burden is spread to all homeowners.

Then there's the illegal homeless encampments that are ignored.
Too many fires start in these encampments.
bulldozers are not hard to get, I'd solve that problem in a week.

Bad decisions have consequences.
Decades of bad decisions have compounded the dangers and
hard, tough and courageous decisions will be necessary
to correct them.
Continuing to do what has been done will only make it worse.