Perfect example of being so right, yet soooo... wrong!
Being jejune and operating out of context allows one to make a "perfect" logical point and to self-righteously take the moral high ground, yet still make the impression of being completely irresponsible in a manner that could destroy the forest and the property of everyone around, and create a huge costly fire-fightinng effort.
The context that is ignored is that great effort, expense and organization have been evolved to prevent damage to property by fire. If the system is imperfect and bureaucratic, as I'm sure it is, why not develop something more capable, proper, efficient and give your neighbors a comforting feeling that you would never take risks with fire that would ever place their property in danger? If the system in place is state-run and statutorily mandated, then why not create something that answers all the concerns about lighting up the woods, rather than just thumb your nose at those involved in protecting property?
The context includes, roughly, that the system of permitting, identifies the location of known fires - fire wardens in the fire towers managed by the state Department of Forests watch all day for plumes of smoke; they spot a plume and report it to the Hanover 911 dispatch center; Hanover looks at the database of permit locations, and if it's not a known fire, call out the fire departments nearby. The volunteers, in this case, have taken on the duty of protection of property in their role as firefighters. They likely have some discretion at the scene, but given that Barskey and Kanning apparently didn't even have a bucket of water nearby for dousing any embers that could be wind-blown into the surrounding area, the actions of firefighters is to be expected.
The more intelligent approach would be to become cognizant of "the system" in place, become superior in your exhibiting precautions regarding spread of fire, and surely, not acting immaturely by expecting no consequences, including the consequence of embroiling libertarians in an internal squabble that dissipates energies that could be directed at real challenges to our freedoms.
