# Actual experience providing field civilian medical care under fire?



## mycrofft (Jun 13, 2012)

OK, everyone wants to carry a firearm. Got it.:glare:

Anyone here have true personal anecdotes wherein they actually needed and had firearms to allow them to perform civilian medical care and transport before the hospital? How was having a firearm necessary? Did you have to shoot anyone?

Note: NO armchair tacticians, no fantasies, no second-hand stories. YOUR experience.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 13, 2012)

I don't get the point of this.
In the previous thread, I don't think we really had any people who carried on-duty other than law enforcement. 
So, how are we going to get replies from people who carried on duty AND had to use them for patient care? (Especially since the ones who might carry still probably wouldn't have pulled their weapons out just to treat the patient...seems like making the situation worse)

The restrictions on the question itself make it unlikely to get many (if any) answers....


----------



## mct601 (Jun 13, 2012)

Call up some of the members of Gretna Police EMS in New Orleans. The EMS is a division of the PD. Talk about some medics that don't have to "take no :censored::censored::censored::censored:".


----------



## firecoins (Jun 13, 2012)

This is just stupid. 

Either your treating a pt or your in a firefight. Your not doing both.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 13, 2012)

I think he means engaging in a firefight to get to or recover a patient or to secure the scene so he could safely treat the patient.


----------



## Handsome Robb (Jun 14, 2012)

I feel like you're trying to prove a point that has been already pretty widely accepted.

There's a few TEMS guys on here but they aren't very active.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 14, 2012)

firecoins said:


> This is just stupid.
> 
> Either your treating a pt or your in a firefight. Your not doing both.




Zackly.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 14, 2012)

mct601 said:


> Call up some of the members of Gretna Police EMS in New Orleans. The EMS is a division of the PD. Talk about some medics that don't have to "take no :censored::censored::censored::censored:".



That represents New Orleans law enforcement and EMS in a very positive light.:rofl:


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 14, 2012)

If this is in relation to the thread about allowing civilian EMS to carry firearms, I don't think it's the best question to disprove or support the idea. A civilian medic wouldn't be carrying or using his firearm to get to a patient. 

He would be using it for times he's held at gunpoint, shot at, stabbed, had his patient shot, battered in aggressive manner, chased with knives, or otherwise witness to an immediate threat of great bodily harm / death. I'm sure you'd get a number of these stories.

If on the other hand, the question is in relation to needing a firearm when a civilian is doing TEMS, the providers I know who carry them, do so for protection of self and team, not to actively gain access to a patient (as a civilian).


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 14, 2012)

Anthony M83, the choir is attentive. I'm not replying to a particular thread, just the recurrent EMTLIFE "black hole" about "going about armed" on the job as a caregiver.

And, we are not seeing replies about how they had to shoot their way in or display a sidearm or knife to avoid being assaulted pouring in........

nuff NOT said.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 14, 2012)

I don't think not getting a reply about first hand experience of it being needed means it's not. Does this forum even have 1% of working EMTs in the US on it and does the military/tactical thread even get 1% of this forums users viewing it?

If you want stories call up Oakland FD, I'm sure they'll have a few.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 14, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> Anthony M83, the choir is attentive. I'm not replying to a particular thread, just the recurrent EMTLIFE "black hole" about "going about armed" on the job as a caregiver.
> 
> And, we are not seeing replies about how they had to shoot their way in or display a sidearm or knife to avoid being assaulted pouring in........
> 
> nuff NOT said.



Ah, that's different. The original question was how asking for people who had ALREADY used their firearms (so that reduced the people who can reply to pretty much zero)...and not for protection, but to actually gain access to a patient (if there are some who carry, I doubt they'd use their gun just for that reason).

Does that make sense? It's like asking "How many of you have had to perform a c-section in the field, for elective purposes?" Well, first no one is performing them, so you reduce your replies to almost zero...but then on top of that, you're putting the "elective purposes" restriction, so even the few in the country who have won't be able to reply.


If you're asking about stories where a gun COULD have potentially been used for DEFENSE, then that's TOTALLY different. I could list you several personal and many more of people from my station...but that just turns into war stories :/


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 15, 2012)

People  who are wanting to tell us about the guns they carry and _*coulda*_ used in self defense would be like the heroes of The Big Bang Theory bragging how they _*coulda*_ dated Heidi Klumm.

I'm not asking the world, I'm asking the people on this forum if any of them have actually had occasion to need to use the threat of weapon force to get to, treat or transport a patient in the civilian world.

The point is this; as with the great peanut allergy and latex allergy alarums, where are the piles of bodies? Why aren't we reading about yet another citizen/EMT faces down a festering gang mob to rescue their MVA victim and stop their bleeding under fire at Hollywood and Vine, or on Times Square, Piccadilly Circus, or the Ginza?

It's a fantasy.

In an earlier thread some of us actually went online and looked for studies about murders of EMS workers by patients or bystanders, and the finding was very, very, very few. You are much more likely to be killed by your partner's driving than by homicidal or psychotic/paranoid/angry others.


----------



## Tigger (Jun 15, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> People  who are wanting to tell us about the guns they carry and _*coulda*_ used in self defense would be like the heroes of The Big Bang Theory bragging how they _*coulda*_ dated Heidi Klumm.
> 
> I'm not asking the world, I'm asking the people on this forum if any of them have actually had occasion to need to use the threat of weapon force to get to, treat or transport a patient in the civilian world.
> 
> ...



I agree with you completely about the last part.

That said, there are many better ways to make this point than to start threads like this. If you know the answer to a question, why bother asking it? Educate with your knowledge instead.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 15, 2012)

> Of the 114 deaths, 67 were from ground transportation accidents; 19 from air ambulance crashes; 13 from heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascular problems; 10 from homicides, most of them shootings; and five from other causes, such as needlesticks, electrocution and drowning.


http://www.emsedsem.org/Prior Articles/EMS_Fatalities from JEMS.pdf

3 thoughts on this: 
1: I don't think anyone would claim it's common, but it is about 9% of EMT deaths, and I don't think anyone would consider that to be acceptable.
2: Going by the number of firearm deaths vs injuries in the US in 2009 according to the CDC, there were about 3 firearm injuries for every 1 firearm death in cases of assault, so realistically we can assume that yearly theres at least 40 EMTs nation wide who are vicitims of life threatening assault.
finally: just cause something isn't in the news doesnt mean its not happening, it just means it wouldn't sell. Anyone remember news coverage about when 500 munitions classified as WMDs were recovered from Iraq? Exactly...

Anyway I don't think that means EMTs should carry fire arms, I'd bet my bottom dollar there would be more injuries from negligence than lives saved from carrying; I do however think it means they should have better access to police escorts.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 15, 2012)

Tigger, thanks, I appreciate your opinion. I just can't resist poking the bear once in a while. I'm sort of staying away from commenting *IN* the gun posts because it overrides my beta blockers, and they just keep talking about what they'd carry if they could. And they have the right to equal entertainment on the website, so instead I post sarcastic and ridiculing threads they are free to ignore, or join in.
Yeah, it is sort of obnoxious and sarcastic and short tempered and grumpy, just like I get around armchair commandos.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 15, 2012)

airbornetochairborne, yeah!


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 17, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> I'm not asking the world, I'm asking the people on this forum if any of them have actually had occasion to need to use the threat of weapon force to get to, treat or transport a patient in the civilian world.


That's a different question than originally asked (you asked for stories where they needed AND used firearms...but since hardly anyone has firearms, how could they use them?).

ALSO, just because someone has a firearm, does NOT mean they're going to use them simply to gain access to a patient. People who do carry in EMS tend to do it for SELF-DEFENSE....not to do some entry into a scene. Come on, now.




			
				mycrofft said:
			
		

> The point is this; as with the great peanut allergy and latex allergy alarums, where are the piles of bodies? Why aren't we reading about yet another citizen/EMT faces down a festering gang mob to rescue their MVA victim and stop their bleeding under fire at Hollywood and Vine, or on Times Square, Piccadilly Circus, or the Ginza?



Uh, because we stage out when there's a mob...EVEN the providers who do carry guns (on the down low) STILL stage out. Gun-carrying does NOT equal using it to get to patients. People who carry do it for PROTECTION...not to rush a mob!




			
				mycrofft said:
			
		

> In an earlier thread some of us actually went online and looked for studies about murders of EMS workers by patients or bystanders, and the finding was very, very, very few.


For every murder, there are cases of great bodily harm done. For every case of great bodily harm, there are almost endless cases of Near Tragedies.

Why aren't they in the news? No one reports it. We don't even report it. Assaults on healthcare providers are under reported (there was an article on that somewhere).


I am NOT advocated the carrying of firearms for EMS.
BUT yes I have definitely been in situations where I could have used a gun on a mob to gain access to the patient because the scene became uncontrolled after we were on-scene. The cops were in active fights, so couldn't help out. A FEW times, too. Not an isolated event. That's just ME personally...times that by however many other providers have also had that happen. BUT I wouldn't have used a firearm EVEN IF I had one with me.

So, there you go.


*And if you want to add stories of EMT injury and near-misses, there are plenty more. But we don't even report it to our supervisors for a lot of near-miss homicides on us...much less get police reports and media attention. *


----------



## AlphaButch (Jun 17, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> OK, everyone wants to carry a firearm. Got it.:glare:
> 
> Anyone here have true personal anecdotes wherein they actually needed and had firearms to allow them to perform civilian medical care and transport before the hospital? How was having a firearm necessary? Did you have to shoot anyone?
> 
> Note: NO armchair tacticians, no fantasies, no second-hand stories. YOUR experience.



Civilian world - I've needed a firearm to allow EMS to gain entry or during the extrication of a patient from a mob situation - however I was not acting in the role of EMS at the time. Necessary? I didn't have to unholster it,  but made it clear that it was one of my options. 

As an EMS provider, I've never had need of a firearm, despite many scenarios where many other providers would have felt it necessary. I actually think that if I had a firearm during those calls, things would have escalated to something more dangerous. Not having a firearm made us less like "police" and less of a threat to the natives. Most of these incidents occurred in very crowded and small areas (nightclubs, etc) with illegal activity occurring and bringing in a firearm would have just caused more problems.

We stage to allow PD to secure things. We also train in defensive EMS techniques. I've had much more need for a crowbar than a firearm to gain access to a patient.

On a TEMS team, the situation is different. We gain access first, then extricate if possible, then we step out of PD mode and into EMS mode.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 17, 2012)

Well, here's the place to report it then. I've raised this question in another form before in a poll, some folks said they carried and had used their personal weapons to stop a crime, but no emails or comments were forthcoming.

Firing into a mob isn't something  armed law enforcement do either. It isn't like the lynch mob scenes in westerns. AND all hell will rain down on you after the fact, even if they don't turn on you, take your weapon and stow it somewhere unlikely.

I worked alongside law enforcement for nearly a quarter century, I worked for two EMS bosses who were reserve deputies ( in rural Nebraska and Arizona, where they had actual LE duties). Never heard of an instance.

The feeling that having a sidearm would make it possible or easier to do the job is exactly what most firearms trainers are trying to drum out of you. The gun is the last resort. And as for having and using a knife...

And my questions are not mutually exclusive.

I am still not receiving communications from anyone, either email or otherwise, saying they personally have had to use force or threat of force (openly carrying) to execute their duties.

I'll take the rest of my answers on the air, as they say.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 17, 2012)

That's one thing people forget, and those who are truly for the legal ability to carry and own keep pushing at: a firearm is a last resort. Even for the military in times of war with the least restrictive ROE/EOF policies that holds true (although that last resort is immediately utilized when facing an armed enemy). The whole "oh you can use it whenever" bs is the stereotype that anti-gun advocates claim, and it's as incorrect as stating that spoons make people fat. 

Anyway civilian side I've worked in some bad areas, and the phrase "I'm not a cop, I'm a paramedic (since a lot of idiots don't know what an EMT is, all they know is it's 3 letters) has defused every bad situation outside of the rig. I wouldn't want to use a firearm inside a moving rig anyway, it would either go through the side and injure someone else or ricochet and hit me or the driver. If you want protection, a taser would be much more effective and safe.


----------



## EpiEMS (Jun 17, 2012)

airborne2chairborne said:


> Anyway civilian side I've worked in some bad areas, and the phrase "I'm not a cop, I'm a paramedic (since a lot of idiots don't know what an EMT is, all they know is it's 3 letters) has defused every bad situation outside of the rig.



Boom, right on the money. Whether it's with young adults who are worried about calling because their friend OD'ed, or people who might get a little too, ah, physical, saying that you're here to help has worked for me.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jun 17, 2012)

EpiEMS said:


> Boom, right on the money. Whether it's with young adults who are worried about calling because their friend OD'ed, or people who might get a little too, ah, physical, saying that you're here to help has worked for me.



Around here we have to say, "Soy un medico de los bomberos." or we shorten it to "Soy un medico."


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 17, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> The feeling that having a sidearm would make it possible or easier to do the job is exactly what most firearms trainers are trying to drum out of you.


But that's almost a moot point, because the vast majority of those few few EMS workers who would like to carry guns on-duty (and the ones who actually do it without telling anyone) don't have that mentality. So, no need to drum it out. The weapons aren't to facilitate your duties...they're for when the crap hits the fan and patient care is the last thing on your mind, often.



> I am still not receiving communications from anyone, either email or otherwise, saying they personally have had to use force or threat of force (openly carrying) to execute their duties.


 Duh...pretty much no one carries in order to execute their EMS duties...it's for DEFENSE. It's NOT for execution of duties.


----------



## Tigger (Jun 18, 2012)

AnthonyM83 said:


> For every murder, there are cases of great bodily harm done. For every case of great bodily harm, there are almost endless cases of Near Tragedies.
> 
> Why aren't they in the news? No one reports it. We don't even report it. Assaults on healthcare providers are under reported (there was an article on that somewhere).
> 
> ...



For what it's worth I don't think anyone, regardless of who they are, would find it to be a good choice to point a gun at an angry mob. Sounds like a good way to get shot to me, others' mileage may vary.

As for the last part about not reporting it, report it! Seriously there is no reason not to report a "near-homicide," it would be ridiculous not to. If there are no statistics we are going to struggle to solve this problem, and make no mistake, it is an issue. Why not get a police report taken? How could it hurt?

I guess I could use some enlightenment here, why are so many EMS providers so loathe to report assaults on themselves? We don't see the police letting anyone get away with it, why should do we? Yes, sometimes the patient suffers from some sort of illness that causes them to an assault a provider, but when a bystander throws a punch at you for not doing a good job on scene, that needs to be reported.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 18, 2012)

Tigger said:


> I guess I could use some enlightenment here, why are so many EMS providers so loathe to report assaults on themselves? We don't see the police letting anyone get away with it, why should do we? Yes, sometimes the patient suffers from some sort of illness that causes them to an assault a provider, but when a bystander throws a punch at you for not doing a good job on scene, that needs to be reported.



Good question. I guess often times it tends to happen more in the really really busy areas. So, 1) the providers are worn out already and would rather just get back to station to sleep, 2) in those same areas, it happens so often, it's not considered that big of a deal...sometimes almost seen like a right of passage, 3) a lot of them are psych patients, 4) arrest usually means court, which means kinks in your personal schedule. And honestly, the overall feeling that a lot of them are going to just get "lost in the system".  

And I'm sure there's always a feeling of "getting trouble" from management (why wasn't he restrained, why didn't you ask for more help, why were you that close to him.

I don't have the best answers for you. And certainly can't defend the mentality...just trying to convey it...


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jun 18, 2012)

DT4EMS pointed it out in another thread.  Our mentality in EMS is that we have combative "patients", not combative attackers.  We look for ways to NOT hold our patients responsible for assaulting us.


----------



## DrParasite (Jun 18, 2012)

Tigger said:


> I guess I could use some enlightenment here, why are so many EMS providers so loathe to report assaults on themselves? We don't see the police letting anyone get away with it, why should do we? Yes, sometimes the patient suffers from some sort of illness that causes them to an assault a provider, but when a bystander throws a punch at you for not doing a good job on scene, that needs to be reported.


because all too often, nothing will get done.

a coworker of mine got her *** beat.  like serious injuries.  and EDP went from calm to 100% psycho in the back of the truck during a transport.  Supervisor said she couldn't file charges against her attacker, or if she did, her employer wouldn't back her.  kinda causes you to lose that warm and fuzzy feeling.  Spoke to a cop about it, he told me filling charges are often a waste of time, as they will either be thrown out by the judge (because it was during a medical emergency or they are edps), or the person already has a record, so assault on an EMS person added on won't phase them at all.

As for the original topic, i think it's a poor question.  very few people who are armed in EMS have used their weapons to aid someone else.  similarly, very few police officers have used their weapons to aid someone else.  many cops go their entire careers without ever drawing their firearm, let alone discharging it.  doesn't mean the cops should give up carrying their guns.  I know I would rather carry a firearm with me for my entire life and never use it, instead of never carry a firewarm and find myself in a life threatening situation  where I would need to defend myself, and find myself completely unarmed. 

how many lives have kevlar vests saved among EMS workers?  I don't know.  were any EMS workers not injured because they were wearing vests?  I don't know.

a former coworker of mine told me a story from his past, one that i think is relevant to this topic.  He was on the ambulance in a not so nice city, and was dispatched to a bar that was well known for having, lets say, less than law abiding clientele.  He pulled up, and had a local police officer right behind him.  Now the officer is 5 ft nothing, maybe 130 lbs, not all that intimidating, especially considering the clientele are almost all over 200 lbs.  She tells the crew not to enter until she gets something out of the truck of her car.  And she comes back with a 12 gauge shotgun on her shoulder.  When asked by the EMS crew as to why, her response was quite simple: "I am going to go in first, and this is just to remind everyone to behave."  They entered, got their patient and had no issues.

Would they have been accosted if she didn't have the shotgun? don't know.   nor do I know how many altercations were avoided because one person had a (big) gun, and the other decided not to have an altercation because of said (big) gun.

btw, I don't carry a gun with me on duty or off duty.  I don't own any firearms.  but I do enjoy target shooting when I do go, and am a pretty good shot.  And I am friends with cops, many who carry off duty 24/7, some who have even pulled their guns while off duty when they found themselves in the middle of crimes in progress.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 18, 2012)

The only flaw here is that a the sample is so small. I'm encouraged by the lively conversation.


----------



## DPM (Jun 18, 2012)

Perhaps the scope of the question could be expanded... 

As a civilian EMS provider, has anyone used or felt they needed to use a firearm while on duty. And I use the term 'use' lightly. To me this doesn't just mean discharging it, but every step of escalation as well.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 18, 2012)

I purposely wanted only real life incidents. Half the users under thirty and male (and a considerable number of females) feel they want or need lethal force,  we have established that.
As I note earlier, like the rampant latex and peanut allergy notices, "where are the piles of bodies"? Where are the actual incidents?


----------



## Tigger (Jun 18, 2012)

DrParasite said:


> because all too often, nothing will get done.
> 
> a coworker of mine got her *** beat.  like serious injuries.  and EDP went from calm to 100% psycho in the back of the truck during a transport.  Supervisor said she couldn't file charges against her attacker, or if she did, her employer wouldn't back her.  kinda causes you to lose that warm and fuzzy feeling.  Spoke to a cop about it, he told me filling charges are often a waste of time, as they will either be thrown out by the judge (because it was during a medical emergency or they are edps), or the person already has a record, so assault on an EMS person added on won't phase them at all.
> to defend myself, and find myself completely unarmed.



This I can understand completely. It is not likely that anything regarding a patient experiencing some sort of mental health crisis will result in anything brought down through the legal system.

I'm thinking more about bystanders and family members that are not suffering from anything besides grief or hysteria and assault a provider. These incidents also go unreported, even though something certainly could be done with them.


----------



## AlphaButch (Jun 19, 2012)

No private EMS company I've ever worked for would pay me while I was in court on an assault case, of which 95% would be thrown out due to the patient's instability or "instability" during a medical crisis.- Hence, not only would it normally be a waste of time to press charges, it would also cost me money (since I could be working). Should these things be reported, I feel like they should, if anything just for some solid demographics.


----------



## Handsome Robb (Jun 19, 2012)

Maybe it's different here but if we are assaulted or battered while on duty we are encouraged to report it and generally most PD officers are more than happy to help us make it happen. We actually had an instance the other night where my partner and I weren't going to report it but PD witnessed it and they said "It's up to you but as of now he's only going for a disturbing the peace as it stands...an assault on an HCP carries a hefty sentence that this guy deserves seeing as he pulled it on both of you." "Alright you sold me, where do I sign?" That's a single case but the guy had it coming. Don't kick my partner in the head and spit blood at me.

As for being paid while in court for assault charges while on duty I can't say for certain but they seem to be pretty good about compensating us for time outside of our standard shifts so I'd assume they do but I'd have to ask.


----------



## Luno (Jun 19, 2012)

Unfortunately, for the posting, most people who do have to carry firearms in conjunction with their duty aren't dumb enough to post that information on a public forum.  The otherside is that those events are best kept on a need to know basis, due simply to legality... just sayin... -luno


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 19, 2012)

NVRob, yeah, I got a guy three more months in prison for trying to knowingly smear me with his hep C blood.

Luno, I'm always skeptical about how many employers would actually know they have a certain employee in the forum.

I was thinking last night. I hope this thread has not hurt of angered anyone who was injured by a patient or other on the job or in the line of duty.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 19, 2012)

I'm sure as long as you don't post any identifying specifics you can't get in trouble legally with your work or privacy agencies. Like I can post "I had a patient from a vehicle collision I had to C spine", because it doesn't identify any person or specific even. On the other hand if I said the accident was on the 69 freeway near the whiskey ave exit at about 8  then there would be an issue.

Kinda just thought of this, most EMTs actually do carry weapons than can be used for self defense. I carried a metal clip board and I can garuantee that would ruin someone's day. Also there's trauma sheers, and I don't know about anyone else but I'd have no problem shoving them through an assailants throat, ribcage, abdomen, whatever if my life was on the line.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 19, 2012)

1. Objects not intended as weapons are hard to characterize as lethal weapons unless the wielder has experience and training. They are also usually harder to hurt or kill people with, versus say a KBar knife or unmounting an E cylinder and braining someone with it.
2. I do not know that most people would actually wade in and defend themselves in many instances where the assailant is right there on them and it requires hand to hand or hand powered weapons. But this is getting into the armchair tactician world again.

I know if someone went back and pieced together my posts and comments they could have a very good idea where I worked, where I live, etc. I just make sure the principles mentioned are dead, or I really don't care anymore.


----------



## systemet (Jun 19, 2012)

To me, a handgun would be about as useful as an umbrella, or a unicorn, working as a paramedic.  Scratch that, I'd rather walk around wearing a half dozen hand grenades, and wait and see how long it took for someone to pull a pin out.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 19, 2012)

wasn't so much pointing that out for a "well what if..." armchair tactician thing, more just pointing out that EMTs are not totally defenseless out there and they don't need to carry a gun/knife/etc to have tools at their disposal (which a gun and a knife are, a tool) to protect themselves.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 19, 2012)

*My safety tools*


----------



## Luno (Jun 20, 2012)

*Well fine then....*



mycrofft said:


>



Here's my safety tools...   Sorry, couldn't help it, it's just the armchair tactician in me...


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 20, 2012)

Depends upon the location I guess. Either way the pt is not getting care.

(As I explained to my wife why the police officer had to shoot the bad guy five times, "Honey, sometimes you just have to empty the magazine").


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 20, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> The only flaw here is that a the sample is so small. I'm encouraged by the lively conversation.



MYCROFT - I disagree. The flaw is that I don't think most people know exactly what you're asking.

You also in effect created a Red Herring (kind of). *You originally asked for examples about a situation that hardly anyone was claiming to exist . . . aka people wanting to use firearms to get to or extract a patient. *




			
				Luno said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, for the posting, most people who do have to carry firearms in conjunction with their duty aren't dumb enough to post that information on a public forum.


I would change that to: Unfortunately, for the posting, most people who do carry firearms in EMS aren't dumb enough to use them to get to a patient.





mycrofft said:


> 1. Objects not intended as weapons are hard to characterize as lethal weapons unless the wielder has experience and training. They are also usually harder to hurt or kill people with, versus say a KBar knife or unmounting an E cylinder and braining someone with it.


 It's all in how you use them. You can EASILY get yourself an Assault with Deadly Weapon charge here by attacking someone with a pen, a bat, a brick, an oxygen cylinder, scissors/shears. No special use or modification needed...just does it have the potential to kill you?


----------



## Luno (Jun 20, 2012)

AnthonyM83 said:


> MYCROFT - I disagree. The flaw is that I don't think most people know exactly what you're asking.
> 
> You also in effect created a Red Herring (kind of). *You originally asked for examples about a situation that hardly anyone was claiming to exist . . . aka people wanting to use firearms to get to or extract a patient. *
> 
> ...




You're allowed your opinion, but until you spend significant time as a medic with a gun, whether remote/non-permissive, pmc, military, or tac-med, please refrain from the armchair quarterback role...


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 20, 2012)

I am appreciating all input. Discussing how to make a better thread is a metasubject I think about time and again (I just can't seem to enact it always).

Not intended as a red herring, but if it (using threat or violence of weapons) sidetracked the subject, then guilty as charged.
===============================================
My intent is/was to invite any communication from any folks with firsthand experience in a civilian non-war setting where having purpose-made weapons, notably firearms but including knives, made their job treating then transporting patients possible. My secondary intent was/is to winnow off the folks who say they would feel safer with a firearm or knife, or read somewhere about it  being done or planned for.

 The forum is a harmless place to vent off about how cool it would be to pintle-mount a MaDeuce on the roof of the ambulance or wear a holster, but after reading such gushings over the years it gets sort of cumulative.

By the way, I have still not received any PM or emailed messages about such incidents.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 21, 2012)

expand it to military I got a list for ya, lol.

To throw in a viewpoint which may be a motivating factor behind the whole "i want a gun i want a gun!!!" thing:
a firearm is like a safety blanket. In some ways more so to those of us whove trained with them and used them professionally and in other ways to those who haven't. Even going from military experience it acts more as a deterrent than anything else, opposed to someone who's new to firearms thinking "im invincible with this!" or "I HAVE THE POWER!!!" or even "thunder, thunder, THUNDER!". It's like hugging a teddy bear. It's also a bit like riding "safe seat" in a humvee. True its not over the gas tank and on the opposite side as most IEDs, but if something punches through that armor then the air between you and that isnt going to do jack :censored::censored::censored::censored: and neither does your distance from the gas tank if the whole thing goes up in flames. But it makes you feel safer for whatever reason. Again, this isn't a reason to carry them, but perhaps just an understanding of whatever drive to.


----------



## AnthonyM83 (Jun 21, 2012)

Luno said:


> You're allowed your opinion, but until you spend significant time as a medic with a gun, whether remote/non-permissive, pmc, military, or tac-med, please refrain from the armchair quarterback role...



The original question asked about *civilian* situations. It would be EXTREMELY rare to locate situations in which use of a firearm by a civilian (non-military, non-police) was the best choice to gain access to a patient. I'm sure there are exceptions. 

The reason MyCraft isn't getting replies is more likely that those civilians who do carry firearms realize it's not generally a good idea to use their gun to gain access to patients AND that they followed through with it. They probably wait for law enforcement as if they weren't carrying a gun. Even solo police officers who respond to our shooting scenes often wait for additional officers before facing a mob to give us access to the patient. 

The civilian EMS gun carriers _instead_ usually carry for *self-defense*, not specifically for patient care.


----------



## DPM (Jun 21, 2012)

Luno said:


> You're allowed your opinion, but until you spend significant time as a medic with a gun, whether remote/non-permissive, pmc, military, or tac-med, please refrain from the armchair quarterback role...



I've got plenty, am I allowed an opinion?


----------



## Luno (Jun 21, 2012)

DPM said:


> I've got plenty, am I allowed an opinion?


Rugby doesn't count...   But seriously, there are far too many arm chair tacticians that opine and whine about availability of weapons without having the experience to back them up.  Whether unreasonable fear of assault, liability, or weapons, these opinions bear very little relevance, especially from those who haven't carried a weapon for work.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 21, 2012)

I received one PM citing some harrowing incidents which I think *would* have benefited from having armed LE "riding shotgn". 
Maybe the paradigm needs to shift in some area from FD to LE??


----------



## EpiEMS (Jun 24, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> I received one PM citing some harrowing incidents which I think *would* have benefited from having armed LE "riding shotgn".
> Maybe the paradigm needs to shift in some area from FD to LE??



My system has PD respond to each and every call - it's technically a PD based system, but operates more like 3rd service (other than having PD at every call). It's great - not only do they get there first to start immediate life saving measures, but I know the scene is almost certainly safe every darn time.


----------



## DPM (Jun 24, 2012)

The answer to this EMS safety problem should be PD based. That's one of the reasons we have Law Enforcement types in the first place. If the scene isn't safe, let the cops make it safe. Likewise, a gun isn't going to be much good in the back of the box if things do start going sideways. 

Apart from Police based or military EMS, do any other developed countries routinely arm their medics?


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 27, 2012)

from my understanding Israel does. Granted it is a country that constantly hit with terrorist attacks so it's a bit different than here.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 28, 2012)

Israel has almost universal military service also, no? So people are hopefully trained in use of lethal force.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 28, 2012)

its a conscript military, meaning everyone has to serve. there are a few exceptions in the cases of disabilities obviously. however there are a couple civil service jobs you can choose to do instead of military service, and I believe EMS is 1 of them.


----------



## DPM (Jun 29, 2012)

As interesting as debating the ins and outs of the Magen David Adom, it is a system and a situation that is entirely detached from the US... so it isn't really relevant to the question at hand.


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 29, 2012)

It might be an interesting comparison if we had a comparable social and political situation, thank heaven we don't.

Switzerland used to have universal military service, don't know if they still do, but again their ambulance services don't "go about armed" as the phrase goes.

And religious beliefs is another exemption, I believe? Or if you are of Palestinian/Arab/Persian etc  extraction?


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 29, 2012)

I've seen people compare UK and US EMS a lot on here, it's completely detached too. But yes it is a totally different situation. There are some places in the US where the cops also act as BLS (aside for transport) if that counts?


----------



## mycrofft (Jun 29, 2012)

First rescue units in the modern sense were NYC police dept., basic first aid, long before EMS was devised.


----------



## airborne2chairborne (Jun 29, 2012)

more meant small town where there is no real local EMS or if there is it's just 2 ambulances


----------



## RocketMedic (Jun 29, 2012)

Just because a service is small doesn't mean that it's not real, Airborne. I'd even reckon that those EMS providers are often more on-point than their big-city counterparts.


----------



## EpiEMS (Jul 1, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> It might be an interesting comparison if we had a comparable social and political situation, thank heaven we don't.
> And religious beliefs is another exemption, I believe? Or if you are of Palestinian/Arab/Persian etc  extraction?



Men have to serve 3 years, women serve 2. The term of service is extended for pilots and officers, as well as special operations. Lots of the jobs are non-combatant, naturally (tooth-to-tail ratio, and all that jazz). Theoretically, all Jewish Israelis have to serve. Most of the very religious do not. There are lots of exemptions, too. Other than Jewish Israelis, Druze and Circassian Israeli men have to serve (not Druze or Circassian women). Bedouins often serve. Israeli Arabs are not mandated to serve.

Even if everybody had some military training, I wouldn't want anybody other than professionals --:censored:LE, MPs, folks who have served in combat units, say -- carrying a gun on any ambulance I'm in...


----------



## Uclabruin103 (Jul 7, 2012)

mycrofft said:


> First rescue units in the modern sense were NYC police dept., basic first aid, long before EMS was devised.



Just transported a pt that was nypd back when they were drivers on ambulances. They said they despised it. Lifting and carrying without any training. Good times.


----------

