# Man killed by firefighter driving truck after drinking and using drugs



## LucidResq (Apr 2, 2008)

"Jury awards $1.769 million to daughter of man killed in collision with a fire truck"

I'll sum it up: In 2000 a police dept. mechanic was killed when a Kansas City fire truck struck his personal vehicle at a high speed. The firefighter driving had partied heavily until 4 am just prior to his shift and had drank heavily in addition to using both ecstasy and marijuana. When the accident happened, he was driving against a red light in the oncoming lane of traffic. 

The man killed was 21 years old, and his daughter is 5.


----------



## el Murpharino (Apr 2, 2008)

What an absolute shame not only by the driver of the truck, but by the entire fire dept. for trying to cover the incident up.  That whole dept. needs to be overhauled from the top down.  They should charge the entire group of people involved with trying to cover it up with obstruction of justice.  There is no room for that B.S..


----------



## Ops Paramedic (Apr 3, 2008)

It might  sound stupid (and not siding with anyone), but i am glad that the girl got money to help look after her, its not her fault. El posted that it might be a cover up, be it as it may, the money will come from insurance at least. 

As for the dad: (i'd rather not say he got what he...)


----------



## Jon (Apr 3, 2008)

I'm not sure how many of you followed the double Boston LODD last year, and the fact that one FF had a blood alcohol level 3x the legal limit for operating vehicles, while the other FF had traces of pot and cocaine in his blood?

How about apparatus accidents and FF's acting "stupid" when they are returning from parades/housings and are not sober? There have been a couple of incidents on Long Island in the last year or two that come to mind as well.


As an industry, we do WAY too much stupid stuff... and when we do it at work, we might not JUST kill ourselves, but our crews as well.


----------



## LucidResq (Apr 3, 2008)

What needs to be done? How about frequent random drug tests?


----------



## Ops Paramedic (Apr 3, 2008)

Its highly unlikely to happen this side, as a lot of the times, the ones who will be enforcing any form disciplinary action, are the ones performing these hidious acts...


----------



## CFRBryan347768 (Apr 3, 2008)

LucidResq said:


> What needs to be done? How about frequent random drug tests?



i think if frequent random drug tests were to occur, their whole station should be out of service, if you cant trust them not to drugs why trust them to save lives?


----------



## LucidResq (Apr 3, 2008)

CFRBryan347768 said:


> i think if frequent random drug tests were to occur, their whole station should be out of service, if you cant trust them not to drugs why trust them to save lives?



Although I'm sure that 99% of firefighters are totally clean, there clearly have been incidents in which a firefighter's drug/alcohol use has led to serious bodily harm, property damage, and even death as in the incident this thread is about. 

I don't think is some sort of epidemic, but the grave consequences of the rare tragedies that have occurred do warrant some discussion. This is not a widespread problem, but it is a very serious problem. 

Let's face it, firefighters work in situations where one mistake could cost countless lives. Is it wrong to want to assure that they are stone-cold sober?  Unfortunately, like any other industry, the public service field has some bad seeds. The stakes are much higher, however. 

Personally, I would gladly submit to a drug test if I worked in the field. It would comfort me to know that my company is taking measures to assure that the people I work with are competent, especially when a situation could arise in which my life or the lives of my loved ones depended on their decision-making and ability to function.


----------



## firecoins (Apr 4, 2008)

LucidResq said:


> Although I'm sure that 99% of firefighters are totally clean



That seems a little* high*.


----------



## paramedix (Apr 4, 2008)

When I was a student with a certain fire station in my area, it was nothing new to have at least one fire fighter smelling like alcohol on shift. 

It is a shame that the people who are suppose to know better are committing these offenses. Hereby I include medics...

It is not worth someones life to act in such a way.

All the best for the family involved...


----------



## CFRBryan347768 (Apr 4, 2008)

firecoins said:


> That seems a little* high*.



hahah do ya mean certain departments lol:wacko:B)


----------



## VentMedic (Apr 4, 2008)

> Originally Posted by LucidResq
> Although I'm sure that 99% of firefighters are totally clean





firecoins said:


> That seems a little* high*.



One can argue, as many unions have, that perscription meds are legal.  So, the person can just abuse them and not worry about drug tests if they have a doctor's note.  There is a fine line between therapeutic and abuse.  What defines impaired?  

The other issue is a lack of definitive protocol written that defines impaired or substance abuse in a way that lawyers and unions can not depute it as violation of rights.    

Ex. Does you department have a policy recommending how long a person should stop drinking before going to work.  Some services do state 8 or 12 hours just like for the airline pilots. 

Are the drug testing results quanitative or just Pos/Neg.   One can argue that many things can give lead to a false positive.    Drunk drivers have done that for years.


----------



## skyemt (Apr 4, 2008)

LucidResq said:


> What needs to be done? How about frequent random drug tests?





LucidResq said:


> Although I'm sure that 99% of firefighters are totally clean



i am a bit confused as you your point of view...

do you think it is a problem warranting "frequent random drug tests",

or do you not think it is an issue really, if "99%" are clean...

can you clarify which direction you are going here?


----------



## Jon (Apr 5, 2008)

skyemt said:


> i am a bit confused as you your point of view...
> 
> do you think it is a problem warranting "frequent random drug tests",
> 
> ...


I think BOTH are correct, Sky.

I am subject to infrequent, but mandatory random drug testing by multiple employers. As such, I don't use or abuse illegal drugs... not that I see a need to anyway... but the fact that I could lose my job is MORE than enough reason to stay away from drugs for me.

Additionally, the knowledge that my co-workers are subject to the same restrictions and therefore they don't usually do drugs either is a good thing.

I know many of my coworkers have the same thought process... we are happy to work somewhere where there are drug tests, because we are less likely to have a co-worker who does something stupid because they are using mind-altering substances.


----------



## LucidResq (Apr 5, 2008)

skyemt said:


> i am a bit confused as you your point of view...
> 
> do you think it is a problem warranting "frequent random drug tests",
> 
> ...



Because of the position they're in, the inherent dangers of the job, and the great responsibility, the 1% (or however many there are) that use drugs should absolutely be discovered... hopefully before another tragedy such as this occurs. Although it's not a large percentage or a widespread problem, it is such a serious problem that it should be addressed even when it is occurring rarely.


----------



## certguy (Apr 5, 2008)

The thought of people who come to a life saving job drunk or stoned turns my stomach . Random drug / alcohol testing is required for the transportation industry . ( I have no problem with going through it to keep everyone involved safe ) If it's not already in place it should be required along with a rehab program for those who voluntarily turn themselves in to look for help for all private and public EMS , FD , and LE services . There are too many lives at stake to allow this kind of stuff to continue .


----------



## LE-EMT (Apr 16, 2008)

we as professionals in the public service field are held to a higher standard whether we like it or not..... So lets effing act it.  It also bothers me that people in the profession choose to use.   The drugs used in all these stories have been alcohol and some form of illegal narcotic and marijuana..... these are not prescription meds.... What is the problem with these people.  of all people in the world you would think that fire/ems/leo would know the effects of mind altering drugs and the ramifications that are associated with them.  I will never understand how anyone who claims to work for the people can go home and put something into their system that we in the profession fight against.  
As for frequent drug tests I say hell yes,  if your service/department can afford it do it monthly.  I personally am tested every 3 months.  

alcohol..... I will be the first to admit I like to have a drink or 20 on my days off  but as soon as I take my first sip of Guinness my keys go in the drawer.   No level of intoxication is a safe level to drive.  Those who respond to the after math should know that of all people.  You would think that after scraping someone off the pavement that would give you a new outlook....  apparently not in some cases.  

Lets think people its not just your reputation your effing up.


----------

