That depends on the fire service.
The FDNY fight fires aggressively.
I know of other fire services where the number 1 priority is firefighter heath and safety, ie above that of the potential victims of fires. They still like to run marathons in their fire kit and play on the hero rep at every opportunity though.
The FDNY fight fires aggressively. I know of other fire services where the number 1 priority is firefighter heath and safety, ie above that of the potential victims of fires.
Those two things are not mutually exclusive. Saying "we make aggressive interior attacks and perform primary search" is fine, but you don't do that when you see signs of imminent structural collapse on arrival. All firefighters take risk, but it's a calculated risk. Now granted, the line is somewhat subjective and different departments do have different policies but still... I don't know of any department that preaches the idea that you display no judgment at all, and wantonly waste your life.
If all the firemen die, who will fight fires in the future?
If you're in a town of 3,000 people, there are a very limited number of potential firemen you can have. If they die rescuing someone, dozens of others die because there is no one else to rescue them.
That medal is specifically for people who go above and beyond the call of duty, meaning their act of heroism was not simply the job they signed up for.
At least both of those are examples of people saving lives. To be analogous with the parent commenter's tragedy claim, if need to claim to be a hero for something like complimenting someone's socks.
The way word "hero" is used, it pretty much excludes paid professionals by definition. You could argue that society doesn't need heroes but trained experts instead, but that's an orthogonal discussion.
