# Self Defense for EMS



## medic8613 (Dec 25, 2007)

Should EMS providers be allowed to carry some sort of weapon if properly trained to do so? Why or why not?

I'm not talking pocket knives and maglites. OC spray, collapsible batons, tasers, firearms, swords, hand grenades, etc.


----------



## kiwimedic (Dec 25, 2007)

Oh yes please!! 

If the Police get a vest and lots of toys then we EMS providers whould get something, we deal with nutters and people who are high too!  

I'd be happy with a stab resistant vest and either OC spray or a ASP baton.  I would perfer OC spray because it a) works better and b) you can be further away from the guy.

Your Maglite with D-Cell batteries works equally well as a club when it has to.  The cops dont always appreciate that, and if memory serves, one of our Paramedics got in warm water for smacking a guy with his a while ago.  He didn't get done or anything but it shows we do have a need for them.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 25, 2007)

You may want to take a read through this rather lengthy thread...

Some Sobering Stats


----------



## JJR512 (Dec 25, 2007)

I am not sure how I feel about weapons, even self defense weapons. A weapon can always be taken away from you and used against you or others with you. Pepper spray or mace sprayed in an ambulance can affect everyone.

However, I will suggest this: If you insist on having something like that, keep it concealed (unless it is illegal to do so in your jurisdiction). For one thing, it presents a negative image. For another thing, a bad guy can't try to take it from you if he/she doesn't know you have it.


----------



## firetender (Dec 25, 2007)

In some of the tougher neighborhoods I worked in, it was essential to my own safety that I be known as "NOTACOP". Not only did that allow me to move more fluidly amongst everyone, but it made it clear that in no way was I a potential threat. At times, I was the one to intercede with the cops to offset violence. 

Now, I've had partners who carried derringers with them, and my experience was those that did had a tendency to let others know about it. Why this is I cannot say, but I can also say that word gets out and when that happens you lose the confidence of a significant part of the people you serve -- small, but significant because if you're viewed as the enemy, that puts a Bull's Eye on your butt.

I do believe, however, that ALL Medics should be trained in self-defense, including tips on the use of available materials in the ambulance as weapons to disable an attacker. But just the presence of an intentional weapon tweaks the Medic's psyche to put some of his/her attention, at least, on anticipation of violence which, as we know, can breed more violence.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Dec 25, 2007)

Want to see a medic go to jail, allow them to carry a weapon or strike a patient. 

First, read DT4EMS posts, and take courses similar to his for defensive response of *to safely removing yourself* from a dangerous situation. 

* We have NO legal * authority to carry or to use such devices. We are health care providers, not LEO. 

Yes, there are times we have to attempt to defend ourselves. Many of the situation could have been prevented by scene overview, making sure there are no weapons on the patient. 

Clubbing, striking a patient (especially a known psychiatric) is a felony in most states. One would have to definite prove that the patient was using equal or greater force to validate a weapon. The best defense is a good offense. 

R/r 911


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 25, 2007)

Ridryder911 said:


> We have NO legal authority to carry or to use such devices. We are health care providers, not LEO.



Ummm...check the Constitution of the United States of America. We do have not just the authority, but the right to carry a legally licensed weapon. Nearly all states issue concealed carry permits. Maybe not just to anyone, but it is most likely possible for certain people to have such a permit. And if people are trained on when they can and cannot use a weapon, the legal implications of striking a patient in self defense could be lessened.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 25, 2007)

Most EMS providers I am familiar with will not allow you to carry a fire arm on duty.  Too much liability.  So 2nd amendment rights are moot if you choose to ride on an ambulance. Outside, If your willing to go through the legal rollercoaster on gun ownership, your on your own.   

Safe scenes can become unsafe very quickly.  A gun isn't going to help in many situations.  Either its overkill, will end up being used against you or you will be overconfident and enter a scene you shouldn't have to begin with.  Cops go through hell when they were clearly in the right to use their service weapon.  We will catch twice the hell with and lack the legal support system cops get with the PBA. 

The solution is too seriously study a martial art that teaches legit self defense. I mean legit in the way that many "karate" places teach cardio kickboxing/aeobics which is no good. I mean a martial art that teaches realistc self defense combined with some sports martial arts to keep in good shape.  BJJ and a legit Krav Maga teacher comes to mind.


----------



## Jon (Dec 25, 2007)

If someone on the crew is carrying a concealed weapon... and is licensed/trained in its' use (probably LEO's) then I don't have a big problem with it being carried... but CONCEALED means CONCEALED. I shouldn't know about it... and the Patient shouldn't know about it. It needs to be hidden so that a patient can't see it... for EVERYONE's safety. The only reason that firearm would be presented would be if someone was shooting at my partner (and hopefully if someone was shooting at me, too). At that point, I'd have no problem with it.

I've got a big problem with "I'm a super EMT. I want a gun" (Or Tazer, or OC spray). I do find the "I am NOT THE POLICE" bit to be a big chunk of my descalation techniques. I know that I'll loose a lot of this the day that I start carrying visible weapons for work.


----------



## Hastings (Dec 26, 2007)

To be honest, a weapon shouldn't be necessary if you are following all the guidelines a trained paramedic / EMT should in regards to scene safety. 

An EMS provider should never find themself in a situation where self-defense is necessary in the first place, and if they do, they made a mistake. Thankfully, law enforcement works very closely with EMS.


----------



## Summit (Dec 26, 2007)

paging DT4EMS


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 26, 2007)

Hastings said:


> To be honest, a weapon shouldn't be necessary if you are following all the guidelines a trained paramedic / EMT should in regards to scene safety.
> 
> An EMS provider should never find themself in a situation where self-defense is necessary in the first place, and if they do, they made a mistake. Thankfully, law enforcement works very closely with EMS.



Have you ever had a "safe" scene go sour on you?  What about those areas where law enforcement is 30-45 minutes away?  We shouldn't be entering a scene unless it's safe, but not every scene stays safe.  In addition, most law enforcement will NOT transport in the back of an ambulance to assist with a violent patient.  They may or may not follow the ambulance, but there could be a couple of minutes that you're on your own with a violent patient.  What do you do then?

I'm not saying EMS should be armed, but I am truly distressed that you appear to have an unrealistic view scene safety.  It's attitudes like that that get EMS workers hurt.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 26, 2007)

Hastings said:


> To be honest, a weapon shouldn't be necessary if you are following all the guidelines a trained paramedic / EMT should in regards to scene safety.
> 
> An EMS provider should never find themself in a situation where self-defense is necessary in the first place, and if they do, they made a mistake. Thankfully, law enforcement works very closely with EMS.



In a perfect world, where every arrest is a save, and we get to eat lunch in peace, yes, a scene will always be safe if we do the right things. The bad news is that this is the real world, and even if we do everything right, things can still go bad.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 26, 2007)

Jon said:


> I've got a big problem with "I'm a super EMT. I want a gun" (Or Tazer, or OC spray).[/QUOTE]
> 
> I'm not talking about being "super medics" and going places we shouldn't, or attempting things we have no business doing. I mean having the ability to quickly and effectively defend ourselves if necessary. And a weapon should be concealed so a patient can't know that it is being carried...thats up there with hide the sharp stuff from the psych patient, and leave the leatherman in the front seat while transporting someone from jail.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 26, 2007)

medic8613 said:


> I'm not talking about being "super medics" and going places we shouldn't, or attempting things we have no business doing. I mean having the ability to quickly and effectively defend ourselves if necessary. And a weapon should be concealed so a patient can't know that it is being carried...thats up there with hide the sharp stuff from the psych patient, and leave the leatherman in the front seat while transporting someone from jail.



the second you fire a weapon in self defense, no matter how much in the right you think you are, your EMS career is over.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Dec 26, 2007)

Want to loose a career.. taze, strike, hit, pepper spray, a patient. 

Guaranteed new career builder, you will need one after they personally sue you. There is no mention in any curriculum in use of protective devices, or protection, other than using approved defense courses such as DT4EMS offers to remove one self safely from the scene or to have a plan to either to physically restrain or chemically restrain. 

Even if it is an officer off duty, if the company does not have a policy or bond that person, their actions is upon their own. 

Do we need to learn protective ways.... Yes. Do we need more than that.. NO! Remember, we only need to protect ourselves from injury or basically remove ourselves within arms danger. We are not there to enforce combat, protect our equipment, etc. Just enough to get away from danger only. 

Let's be realistic. Weapons are prohibited from health care providers .. period, unless that service is from an Law Enforcement Agency. I know of no EMS providers that have education and training in weapons, or even interaction of violent patients, other than for safe removal of the medic.


R/r 911


----------



## Flight-LP (Dec 26, 2007)

ffemt8978 said:


> Have you ever had a "safe" scene go sour on you?  What about those areas where law enforcement is 30-45 minutes away?  We shouldn't be entering a scene unless it's safe, but not every scene stays safe.  In addition, most law enforcement will NOT transport in the back of an ambulance to assist with a violent patient.



I actually have one simple rule when it comes to a potentially violent patient. Give me one implication that you will attempt to harm me or any member of my crew and you go with PD. Simple as that. If I am on an air unit and I must for some reason transport you, you will be RSI'd and placed on the vent. Problem solved. In case of contingency, appropriate pharmacological interventions are ready and waiting should you have an acute change of heart. If there is an immediate threat to life, meaning not that he/she is thinking about harming you, but you are actually getting your *** whipped, then and only then may you use the minimum amount of force necessary to neutralize the threat. Proper securing techniques, always having an out, and having your monitor nearby (preferrably a ZOll M series, very effective) can help reduce your likelyhood of harm.

Other pearls of wisdom..........

Your own gun will do one of two things, either get you killed, or get you fired (and subsequently incarcerated, sued, etc......) There is no need to carry one and one needs to realize that 2nd ammendment rights do not apply to many forms of privatization. Not to mention that most hospitals will allow a weapon on their premises, licensed or not. And guess what, they have every right to dictate so!

Remember that the emergency is theirs, not yours, so don't go and make it yours by playing hero. Staging is your friend! 

Keep it safe this holiday season!


----------



## DT4EMS (Dec 26, 2007)

Hastings said:


> To be honest, a weapon shouldn't be necessary if you are following all the guidelines a trained paramedic / EMT should in regards to scene safety.
> 
> An EMS provider should never find themself in a situation where self-defense is necessary in the first place, and if they do, they made a mistake. Thankfully, law enforcement works very closely with EMS.



I wish that were true. According to the last study by the NAEMT, 52% of INJURIES to the EMS provider came from assaults. My question is this........ If medics didn't enter unsafe scenes..........then are they being assaulted on "safe" ones?

My goal has never changed......... it is to prevent one assault from taking place (either to the provider or the patient). Anyone with any experience on the street knows things can turn south pretty quick. Early recognition and diffusion can work if used early.


----------



## DT4EMS (Dec 26, 2007)

I have told the sotry before on how my ambulance was car-jacked while it was loaded with a patient. I was in the back and down the road we went.... being a full-time police officr and a part-time medic I always had a gun with me. 

That day I didn't have it with me. During the course of the kidnapping (3 counts) and the felony assault that took place as I slammed the ambulance in park ( reaching through the opening) I would have been justified in shooting the suspect. INstead it was hands on and everything turned out OK.

I fear the headlines would have read "Paramedic shoots man in ambulance" and that is all people would remember reading. Since that day, I never carried a gun concealed on an ambulance. I also "suggested" against it in every lecture/seminar I gave.

Now, do I feel EMS should have some "tool" for extricating themselves if things go south........ Yes, Yes, Yes. But that "tool" would need to be based on the need of that person and their ability to show proficiency in it's use and legal documentation of that use.

I still think the majority of time needs to be spent on recognition of body language, verbal skills and actual empty hand ESCAPE moves. MMA type fighting is not the goal in EMS. Remember self-defense would be boring to watch on TV. If one person keeps his/her hands up and backs away the crowd would boo. Keep that in mind while you train


----------



## certguy (Dec 26, 2007)

I was on calls where I had to defend myself and / or my partner . My and my partner's safety are first and formost . I have a martial arts background . I have a first degree black belt in AAM - KA - JUTSU . If you are interested in martial arts , study an ecletric art that uses both soft and hard styles , you'll have more options to work with ( joint locks , take downs , and pressure points in addition to good old fashioned thrash and bash ) I used to carry a streamlite ( less bulky than the mag )  , a kubaton , a minimaglite ( can be used the same way ) , and a folding Kershaw knife as last ditch ( never had to use it thank god ) The best defense is good size - up skills and situation awarness , though at times you can get caught by surprize .


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 26, 2007)

certguy said:


> I was on calls where I had to defend myself and / or my partner . My and my partner's safety are first and formost . I have a martial arts background . I have a first degree black belt in AAM - KA - JUTSU . If you are interested in martial arts , study an ecletric art that uses both soft and hard styles , you'll have more options to work with ( joint locks , take downs , and pressure points in addition to good old fashioned thrash and bash ) I used to carry a streamlite ( less bulky than the mag )  , a kubaton , a minimaglite ( can be used the same way ) , and a folding Kershaw knife as last ditch ( never had to use it thank god ) The best defense is good size - up skills and situation awarness , though at times you can get caught by surprize .



It seems that when I said "firearms", people zeroed in on this, and knew that I was joking about swords and hand grenades. What about "less-lethal" weapons such as batons, "stun guns", Tasers, defense sprays (OC, etc.), and other small less-lethal weapons. Martial arts is large step towards making the job safer, but I have seen some very small EMTs and medics.

The training (at least I got) in EMT class and medic school for keeping the scene safe without police on scene was inadequate. It was 10 minutes, and they said "always keep an exit open, here is some basic body language to read, stand to the side of the door, look up the stairwell, and good luck...oh, and don't expect your service to pay for kevlar." And that was it. Martial arts is a great idea, but how many services would pay for their staff to get trained? I know none of the ones I have been at would dream if it. Self defense/martial arts classes can be quite expensive on an EMT's salary.


----------



## Katie (Dec 26, 2007)

certguy said:


> I was on calls where I had to defend myself and / or my partner . My and my partner's safety are first and formost . I have a martial arts background . I have a first degree black belt in AAM - KA - JUTSU . If you are interested in martial arts , study an ecletric art that uses both soft and hard styles , you'll have more options to work with ( joint locks , take downs , and pressure points in addition to good old fashioned thrash and bash ) I used to carry a streamlite ( less bulky than the mag )  , a kubaton , a minimaglite ( can be used the same way ) , and a folding Kershaw knife as last ditch ( never had to use it thank god ) The best defense is good size - up skills and situation awarness , though at times you can get caught by surprize .



Martial arts is an excellent idea.  I also have a martial arts background, and if nothing else it can help give peace of mind.  Getting both the hard and soft styles is also a must to being balanced.



			
				medic8613 said:
			
		

> Martial arts is a great idea, but how many services would pay for their staff to get trained? I know none of the ones I have been at would dream if it. Self defense/martial arts classes can be quite expensive on an EMT's salary.



It might be worth looking into to see if there are instructors in the area that would be willing to teach the people at the company as a volunteer or for a reduced price.  We did a similar thing at my school where several of us volunteered to give lessons to groups.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 26, 2007)

medic8613 said:


> It seems that when I said "firearms", people zeroed in on this, and knew that I was joking about swords and hand grenades. What about "less-lethal" weapons such as batons, "stun guns", Tasers, defense sprays (OC, etc.), and other small less-lethal weapons. Martial arts is large step towards making the job safer, but I have seen some very small EMTs and medics.
> 
> The training (at least I got) in EMT class and medic school for keeping the scene safe without police on scene was inadequate. It was 10 minutes, and they said "always keep an exit open, here is some basic body language to read, stand to the side of the door, look up the stairwell, and good luck...oh, and don't expect your service to pay for kevlar." And that was it. Martial arts is a great idea, but how many services would pay for their staff to get trained? I know none of the ones I have been at would dream if it. Self defense/martial arts classes can be quite expensive on an EMT's salary.



You should pay for martial arts.  It is something that keeps you physically fit for life.  Something worth investing in.  Brazilian Juijitsu is designed for smaller people to defeat larger people.  

Guns are great. Shoot the combative diabetic.  That won't get you arrested and charged with attempted murder.

Batons are just as bad as guns. There is nothing worse than a videotape of EMTs/Medics beating their patients into a pulp.  Rodney King comes to mind.  What was that tape of a Chicago medic beating a homless man. Add a baton on to that.  Even if it legit self defense, it will not look like that. 

Pepper spray will work against you and your partner as well.  Try spraying that stuff in a small space.  Gets everyone. No just the person your aiming for.  

Look at all the publicity tazers have been getting in Canada.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 26, 2007)

firecoins said:


> You should pay for martial arts.  It is something that keeps you physically fit for life.



If they pay us to attend an in-service on billing procedure, when we have a billing department, and we have nothing to do with billing ever, they should put up at least some money for useful training, like self defense.

(by we, I mean myself and those employed by the people who employ me, not EMS in general)


----------



## firecoins (Dec 26, 2007)

medic8613 said:


> If they pay us to attend an in-service on billing procedure, when we have a billing department, and we have nothing to do with billing ever, they should put up at least some money for useful training, like self defense.
> 
> (by we, I mean myself and those employed by the people who employ me, not EMS in general)



true enough.


----------



## Hastings (Dec 26, 2007)

ffemt8978 said:


> Have you ever had a "safe" scene go sour on you?  What about those areas where law enforcement is 30-45 minutes away?  We shouldn't be entering a scene unless it's safe, but not every scene stays safe.  In addition, most law enforcement will NOT transport in the back of an ambulance to assist with a violent patient.  They may or may not follow the ambulance, but there could be a couple of minutes that you're on your own with a violent patient.  What do you do then?
> 
> I'm not saying EMS should be armed, but I am truly distressed that you appear to have an unrealistic view scene safety.  It's attitudes like that that get EMS workers hurt.



Though, I do have to remember that location is to be taken into account. I'm lucky here, as every service in the area has a fire engine dispatched on every EMS call, and the police on every scene that could potentially be dangerous. And they always arrive before EMS. So I'm lucky in that manner.


----------



## certguy (Dec 27, 2007)

I had a friend who was nearly killed by a pcp'er in the back of her rig . He grabbed her by the throat so hard that it displaced 3 of her cervical vertabrae and two years down the road she went out on permanent disability due to severe headaches . Her partner wouldn't pull over and help her . He left her on her own till they got to the hospital . I had a major problem with that . I was the dispatcher on duty that night and told him repeatedly to pull over , let me know where they were , and I'd get help to them . The fact that he refused caused a lot of hard feelings . Him and I had words later .

A couple years later , I was faced with almost the same situation . Our pt. was turned over to us by FD , was in full c - spine ( assult pt. ) , we were loaded and about to go when I felt the weight shift in the rig , heard the pt. laughing , and looked in my mirror to see my 180 lb. partner flying into the ceiling of the rig like a rag doll ! Dianna's call was on my mind , but I called for help , got back there and helped my partner . We both got hurt , but we both went home that night . I tried pressure points and joint locks , neither worked and the fight was on . Did I do what was needed to protect us ? ABSOLUTELY ! 

A major rule of EMS safety ; NEVER LEAVE YOUR PARTNER HANGING , YOU'VE GOT HIS/HER BACK , THEY'VE GOT YOURS . 

Though the public expects us to be nice to the gorilla that's trying to tear our heads off , that's not always an option . 

EMS personnel should have at least basic self defense training . The potential for a call to become dangerous to a crew is always there even in a hospital setting . All personnel should be prepared . If your employer won't pay for training , ( mine didn't ) do it yourself . 

Consider it an investment in your future . In addition to self defense , martial arts training is good conditioning and good for stress relief . Don't worry about size , with good training and technique , it's irrelevant . 

THE BIGGER THEY ARE , THE HARDER THEY HIT THE FLOOR ! Trust me , I know . OUCH !


----------



## DT4EMS (Dec 27, 2007)

certguy said:


> Though the public expects us to be nice to the gorilla that's trying to tear our heads off , that's not always an option .
> 
> EMS personnel should have at least basic self defense training . The potential for a call to become dangerous to a crew is always there even in a hospital setting . All personnel should be prepared . If your employer won't pay for training , ( mine didn't ) do it yourself .



That is what I have said for years. Did you know in most basic police academy courses, the recruit is trained to the first responder level? The recruit is also given a min. of 40 hours of defensive tactics. 

I have always found those numbers ironic and have tried many different ways to get the basic ems training changed. Escape training(force on force) is very different than training for fight. I have also said for years..... "training for self-defense is easy, training to fight is hard". 

Regardless of what class, seminar or book you use to train.... without regular practice it is useless.


----------



## certguy (Dec 27, 2007)

Let me clear something up . My last post wasn't as dark as it seems . My partner was hurt and cornered by the jump seat otherwise , if we could've backed out and let him go , we would've . The option wasn't there . When I tried pressure points , the guy smiled at me , when I got him in a wrist lock that would have any normal person screaming and complying , he laughed and caught me with a left - handed punch that knocked me the length of the bench seat and nearly knocked me out .   There was one cop a block away doing paperwork , and I sent a passerby to get him , then he joined the fray . Amazingly , by the time the calvary got there , my partner was able to talk the guy down and agree to be transported . This is the only time I've even heard of talking a pcp'er down , let alone seeing it happen , so we transported with a cop in the back , and a small army following us . I can't speak for my partner , but I was scared for my life , this guy had no pain threshold at all . This is a classic example of a call rapidly going south when you least expect it , but working as a team , we got through it without any serious injuries to us or the pt. . Had it come down to him or us , I believe I would've done what I had to and faced the consequences .


----------



## BossyCow (Dec 27, 2007)

Our protocols do not allow any weapons to be transported in our rigs.  Period.  LEO's  if on scene must search all pt's for weapons prior to transport and I even had an ER nurse refuse admittance to a pt with a history of assault on her staff until she had spoken personally to the officer and was convinced that the patient had been thorougly searched. 

First of all, a gun has no place in the back of a rig. Have any of you ever had a gun go off in a vehicle?  Set aside the ricochet factor and just think of the noise.  A friend of mine accidently shot his car door while I was in the passenger seat during my mis-spent youth.  I couldn't hear well for several days.  As far as a baton, or a taser, I see incredible potential for mis-use and accidents.  There is not a lot of room in the back of our rigs to use one effectively.  I can't imagine trying to struggle to find and use a weapon of any kind in cramped quarters like that. 

On scenes, if a patient is volatile, EMS has no business in there without LEO's present. Part of initial size up should be scene safety.  We are well within our rights to refuse to treat a violent patient. Let the guys with the badges and guns be the heavies.  The idea of causing bodily harm to a pt. in order to treat them is ludicrous. Self defense is avoiding being hurt not winning the fight.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 27, 2007)

BossyCow said:


> Have any of you ever had a gun go off in a vehicle?  Set aside the ricochet factor and just think of the noise.



The noise? Really? I would trade the ability to hear well for a couple of days for my life any day. I don't think noise is a major issue here. The LEOs don't seem to mind. Never seen a cop put in ear plugs before opening fire...


----------



## thowle (Dec 27, 2007)

I agree with what most people are saying about not needing to carry a weapon... we are NOT the police, and if we are responding to a dangerous situation, or a situation that has the potential to turn threatening then we need to request the police, and wait for them.

However, having a specified assigned bullet-proof, and stab-resistant vest that we can/shall wear would be a great idea, so that just in-case we do get ourselves into a situation, we have armor to protect ourselves.

Leave the weapons to the police, and let them handle the situations that arise.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 27, 2007)

thowle said:


> I agree with what most people are saying about not needing to carry a weapon... we are NOT the police, and if we are responding to a dangerous situation, or a situation that has the potential to turn threatening then we need to request the police, and wait for them.
> 
> However, having a specified assigned bullet-proof, and stab-resistant vest that we can/shall wear would be a great idea, so that just in-case we do get ourselves into a situation, we have armor to protect ourselves.
> 
> Leave the weapons to the police, and let them handle the situations that arise.



Nobody said we have to or should be or act like the police, and every situation we go into has the potential to turn violent or dangerous. The police can only be around on calls where we foresee violence or the nature of the call is violent to begin with. I have been on calls where no police were available to assist us because they had better things to do. I know for a fact that 2 police vehicles were parked outside a coffee shop. We passed them roughly 2 minutes before we called for assistance.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 27, 2007)

I would like to comment on a few things here. Without identifying the poster (because I don't want to go back and read all over again) there are 2 points that were made. 1.) Weapons should not be carried because they could be used against you. Well, thats why they are carried; to use so you can protect yourself from those who might "use them against you." Not a good reason as far as I can see. 2.) You shouldn't need to defend yourself because that's what the cops are for. Well, hopefully you will never be assaulted or injured by a mutant patient, but if that day comes and PD is not standing between you and him, what then? Don't put your safety in the hands of others. be pro active and learn to protect yourself. If the Department won't pay for training, it's of little consequence when you're career and maybe life are threatened. 
You guys and gals see way too much on the job to be naive about being perceived as less of a threat because you're not the police.


----------



## VentMedic (Dec 27, 2007)

No! to weapons carried by EMTs and Paramedics on an ambulance unless they are the medical members that are part of a SWAT team. 

Owning a gun, knowing when to shoot a gun and how, why or where takes as much if not more skill and practice than some of the medical things we do.  Who is going to monitor your competency, either shooting or psychological?  There is no "fit to carry" eval for a citizen's concealed weapons permit.  A concealed weapons permit only shows you have attended a class and shot off a few "satisfactory" rounds a range.  My mother and her condo pals (ages 80+) got their weapons permit many years ago in Miami.  

There are going to be many EMTs and Paramedics who will want to carry a weapon that should not be allowed to touch one.  In fact, most EMTs and Paramedics I know who insist on the right to carry weapons are just the sort of EMTs and Paramedics who shouldn't. They cannot communicate effectively. Many are hotheaded and perceive every patient encounter is an adversarial relationship.

If you are carrying a weapon and must do a prison or jail call, an observant inmate will see you leave your weapon at the security box. That will put you and the guard escorting you in great danger in your truck. You will be an easy mark for even an inexperienced criminal.  It doesn't have to be an experienced prison inmate, any street wise teenager or suicidal person could probably figure out where your weapon is concealed by your body language and make a grab for it. 

You need situational awareness, verbal de-escalation skills, and a sense of when to get out. Remember the Three R's - Retreat, Radio and Reassess.  It doesn't hurt to know a few defensive moves that DT4EMS mentions in his videos to make that retreat easier.   Anything else such as the short range sprays or tasers may make you look like the aggressor.

Any yes, working in Miami, I've had my share of violent patients.  My partner would give the distress signal to dispatch on his portable while opening up the back door offering an exit to the "patient".  While the patient was momentarily distracted, I could hopefully scramble out another exit.  Of course we also were aware of common  items that could be used as "weapons" in the ambulance as a last resort and be easier to defend their use in court if needed.  Most of the time we would just notify the police that we would like them to be nearby.  Our dispatchers were also great for getting PD involved on any call that sounded like it could go bad.


----------



## Nocturnatrix (Dec 27, 2007)

*bvm as a weapon*

I was taught in my emt class that a bvm could be used to block attacks and be used as a weapon so that if they were taken to court on it they can state that they were trying to ventilate the patient.... i don't believe this but many people have been taught this.


----------



## Hastings (Dec 27, 2007)

Nocturnatrix said:


> I was taught in my emt class that a bvm could be used to block attacks and be used as a weapon so that if they were taken to court on it they can state that they were trying to ventilate the patient.... i don't believe this but many people have been taught this.



Something I'm surprised hasn't come up yet is that ALS DOES have "weapons". In fact, many that will pacify the most violent of patients almost instantly.

Drugs.

The medics around here carry plenty of drugs that can be legally used to either paralyze or sedate a violent patient.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 27, 2007)

Hastings said:


> The medics around here carry plenty of drugs that can be legally used to either paralyze or sedate a violent patient.



Provided you have a safe way to administer the drugs...but what do you do if you don't?


----------



## certguy (Dec 28, 2007)

Hi Bossy , 
   I'm with you that guns , tasers , pepper spray , etc. has no place on a rig , however , for many years now , there's been a need for better defensive training for EMS personnel . As I've shown in my previous posts , you can't always see the danger in your initial size up , and the fact is that if something does go wrong , it takes time to get the calvary to you . I don't think there's an EMT or Medic out there who will intentionally hurt a pt. to treat them , but if that pt. comes at you with the intent to hurt or kill you , is this still a pt. , or an immenent threat that for the safety of you and your crew , must be dealt with if you can't simply evac out of the area ? Sometimes folks lose sight of the fact that the pt. isn't always an innocent , compliant party and the very person you're trying to help may turn on you . Our job description doesn't say punching bag , pin cushion , or target . Just as the pt. deserves the best medical care , those of us who care for them deserve to come home safely .


----------



## Hastings (Dec 28, 2007)

ffemt8978 said:


> Provided you have a safe way to administer the drugs...but what do you do if you don't?



We're not talking about drugs that require a slow IV push. They're sedatives that can be pushed quickly IM.

I'm not discounting the need for general knowledge of physical pinning methods. I've certainly been trained those. Drugs are simply the long term self-defense solution that can be used following those methods so that harmful weapons and/or long term physical restraint is not necessary.

Look, you should never be in a large proximity situation that you can't get out of. I think the situations that have been discussed here are all situations in which the patient has become violent while in close proximity to the paramedic. And in that case, I believe the only appropriate and realistic method of restraining the patient is an initial physical response, followed by an injection of a sedative. I just don't see any realistic alternatives to physical restrain and chemicals in regards to self-defense "weapons".


----------



## Ridryder911 (Dec 28, 2007)

Hastings said:


> We're not talking about drugs that require a slow IV push. They're sedatives that can be pushed quickly IM.



Your kidding right? IM medications usually take at the least 30 minutes to an hour for circulation. That is why I chuckle when I see immediate results on television shows. Paralytics can be administered <30 seconds, especially in a violent situation, IV form. 

Again, I think we are loosing site of the objective of violent patients, is to remove one self away from the patient and not even engage in behavior with them. 

R/r 911


----------



## firecoins (Dec 28, 2007)

Hastings said:


> We're not talking about drugs that require a slow IV push. They're sedatives that can be pushed quickly IM.




You want to get away from a violent patient.  You dont want to charge him with open needle in the hopes you get an opportunity to give him an IM.  What if you end up missing and giving yourself the IM?  When I was a kid and afraid of needles, I moved while a nurse was giving me a shot and she got herself. Imagine a violent patient.  


Self defense includeds not just protecting yourself and partner but also the ability to avoid legal repurcussions.  Using a weapon on a patient or some other agressor carries alot of legal baggage with it and I don't just mean a lawsuit.  You better be prepared to sit in a jail cell. I can't tell you how many EMT's think carry a knife foe self defense.  They are going to stab a violent patient.  That is going to look real nice in front of a jury.  EMT stabs (shoots, tazers, pepper srays) patient.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 28, 2007)

What I'm hearing is that fear of liability is the reason for putting your safety in the hands of others. I don't know if conventional defensive tools are the answer, or even practical, but I do know that there are many misconceptions expressed here about defense of yourself or others in your care. A patient suffering excited delirium doesn't are that you are the "good guys" and not cops. A drug abuser is an opportunist who would slit your throat and steal your rig because it's a means to an end. There seems to be a dangerous mindset here, with some, that says the danger will be reduced if you just play fair. Weapons don't have to be firearms. They can be tools, instruments or even just having a plan. Is this an overly simple concept and am I missing something?


----------



## firecoins (Dec 28, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> What I'm hearing is that fear of liability is the reason for putting your safety in the hands of others. I don't know if conventional defensive tools are the answer, or even practical, but I do know that there are many misconceptions expressed here about defense of yourself or others in your care. A patient suffering excited delirium doesn't are that you are the "good guys" and not cops. A drug abuser is an opportunist who would slit your throat and steal your rig because it's a means to an end. There seems to be a dangerous mindset here, with some, that says the danger will be reduced if you just play fair. Weapons don't have to be firearms. They can be tools, instruments or even just having a plan. Is this an overly simple concept and am I missing something?



Its not simply liability.  Its criminal liability. You have to explain how beating a hypoglycemic combative patient with an O2 tank was necessary for your safety.  We aren't simply civilians.  The media and overzealous prosecuters may take aim at our "self defense"  Police officers have a legal support system that we lack.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 28, 2007)

So, do you think that you couldn't explain how you had to fight for your life from an attack by a crazed (regardless of why he is crazed) attacker? Self defense is not a priviledge only afforded to civilians. However, you are right that you must be able to articulate your justification. And frankly, if the fear of getting into trouble keeps you from protecting yourself, maybe dealing with unstable patients is a bad career choice. 

I'm not arguing your reasoning, I'm just trying to understand the thought process. Try to forget for a moment that I am a cop and that you have issues with law enforcement, when you reply.

Just as an aside to this, EMS has the same legal support system that police and firefighters have. Don't believe for a second that the media or prosecutors have a soft spot for police who use force.


----------



## certguy (Dec 28, 2007)

This is a sad sign of the times , we have some wanting to carry weapons , some saying we have to be politically correct and be nice when we're in danger , and others more concerned about legal ramifications if we do protect ourselves . What do we teach the rookies coming in , keeping in mind you don't always know you're walking into a danger zone ? They're going to be so confused it could cost them an injury or worse . 

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE ! YOU HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF EVEN IN EMS ! THOUGH A PT. MAY BE MENTALLY ALTERED , THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAT ON US !

We 're talking a lot about scene safety , but I'm amazed at the niavity of some of you who should know better . Let's all get on the same page here .


----------



## firecoins (Dec 28, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> Just as an aside to this, EMS has the same legal support system that police and firefighters have. Don't believe for a second that the media or prosecutors have a soft spot for police who use force.



No we do *Not* have the legal support system cops have.  This has nothing to do with prosecutors having a soft spot for any such group either.  Police officer have a very strong union in the PBA.  The PBA hires lawyers for their cops who use their weapons in the line of duty.  We do not have a union who does any such thing.  Unless your employer gets behind your actions, your on your own.  Your employer may choose to distance themselves from your actions.  Any action you take in your defense must be justified. Prosecutors are going to ask why you couldn't get away and call for more help.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 28, 2007)

firecoins said:


> No we do *Not* have the legal support system cops have.  This has nothing to do with prosecutors having a soft spot for any such group either.  Police officer have a very strong union in the PBA.  The PBA hires lawyers for their cops who use their weapons in the line of duty.  We do not have a union who does any such thing.  Unless your employer gets behind your actions, your on your own.  Your employer may choose to distance themselves from your actions.  Any action you take in your defense must be justified. Prosecutors are going to ask why you couldn't get away and call for more help.



Guess you chose the wrong career. Be careful out there.

As I said, don't be afraid to protect yourself. Who protects you when you screw up a patient? You're not a Good Samaritan.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 28, 2007)

firecoins said:


> Its not simply liability.  Its criminal liability. You have to explain how beating a hypoglycemic combative patient with an O2 tank was necessary for your safety.  We aren't simply civilians.  The media and overzealous prosecuters may take aim at our "self defense"  Police officers have a legal support system that we lack.



A person's motive for assaulting someone without provocation is irrelevant. Who cares if they are hypoglycemic or just a nut job looking for a fight. Sorry, but I will leave checking blood sugar on someone trying to kill me to someone else who doesn't care if they get injured or killed. Everyone (and I do mean everyone) has a right to defend themselves if attacked whether they are providing medical care or pumping gas for a living. 

We are more at risk of assault than most other professions, and should not have to worry about the legal ramifications when someone is coming at us with the intent to hurt us. If you stop to debate the legal consequences of your actions, you will end up in the back of an ambulance, but this time the tube is headed towards your mouth.

Maybe many of the people here haven't been assaulted before and don't know what people think about as someone comes at them. "Will I go to jail for defending myself?" isn't one of the things you (should) think about.

I read and hear a lot about how ambulances are going to be painted differently to increase visibility, fancy new seatbelts that let you move and treat patients while secured, and other such safety measures, but nothing is being done to cut down on injuries due to assault beyond instructing people to request police and leave the scene fast.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 28, 2007)

medic8613 said:


> We are more at risk of assault than most other professions, and should not have to worry about the legal ramifications when someone is coming at us with the intent to hurt us. If you stop to debate the legal consequences of your actions, you will end up in the back of an ambulance, but this time the tube is headed towards your mouth.
> .



If you have enough time to contemplate what you would do if you get assaulted, than you have enough time to consider the legal consequenses of those actions. Since your posting on the topic, you have enough time.  If you succesful in defending yourself and you end in jail. You will definately have time to reflect on the lack of planning you put into it.

Your ability to defend yourself must include what happens after you do so.  You must be able to demonstrate your life was in danger or risk going to prison.  Successful self defense not only saves your life but keeps you out of legal trouble.  

Currently in the state of New York, your ability as a normal citizen to defend your self is limited.  Your only able to use as much force that would stop the attack.  Since this highly open to interpretation, you could easily find yourself in hotwater. You probably need to check the exact wording of the law in your state and nearby states you find yourself in.


----------



## medic8613 (Dec 28, 2007)

firecoins said:


> If you have enough time to contemplate what you would do if you get assaulted, than you have enough time to consider the legal consequenses of those actions. Since your posting on the topic, you have enough time.  If you succesful in defending yourself and you end in jail. You will definately have time to reflect on the lack of planning you put into it.



I'M NOT BEING ASSAULTED AT THIS MOMENT. If people won't defend themselves because of the legal consequences, they should then focus their thought on how nice their department funeral will be. Will they use the same truck you work in every day to carry the casket, or will it be the one from station 3 thats kept around in case a truck breaks down?  Does your department have mourning bands lying around, or will they have to order them? I hope so. 

If I was being attacked at this moment I would be reaching for my knife and maglite, not debating whether it would be justified to defend myself. I would rather be alive and defending myself in court than in the back of my ambulance being driven to the cemetery. What people don't seem to understand is that self defense is 100% legal. The words "Emergency Medical Services" on your bade offers you no protection from dangerous people.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 28, 2007)

medic8613 said:


> I'M NOT BEING ASSAULTED AT THIS MOMENT. If people won't defend themselves because of the legal consequences, they should then focus their thought on how nice their department funeral will be. Will they use the same truck you work in every day to carry the casket, or will it be the one from station 3 thats kept around in case a truck breaks down?  Does your department have mourning bands lying around, or will they have to order them? I hope so.
> 
> If I was being attacked at this moment I would be reaching for my knife and maglite, not debating whether it would be justified to defend myself. I would rather be alive and defending myself in court than in the back of my ambulance being driven to the cemetery. What people don't seem to understand is that self defense is 100% legal. The words "Emergency Medical Services" on your bade offers you no protection from dangerous people.



Its called planning ahead.  That is what your doing even in your posts.  Already in your post your reaching for knife or a mag flash light.  It is illegal in the state of New York to use excessive force in self defense. How do you define excessive force?  Knifing an unarmed assailant to death might fall into that category.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 28, 2007)

Here is link to an article to a man who fired a gun in self defense. He found a man burglarizing his home. The burglar was in his son's room so he shot the burglar.  He legally bought his gun but had not successfully registered it in NY.  So he was arrested and served jail time.  

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Sep-05-Tue-2006/opinion/9342433.html

the state of New York has a duty to retreat law.  It requires you to retreat from a violent situation.  If you pull out a knife or a mag light and use it, you violate this law.  Florida and 14 other states have done away with that law and given you the right to stand your ground. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/us/07shoot.html

Self defense is far from 100% legal. READ UP!!!  So you won't find your self behind bars.


----------



## DT4EMS (Dec 28, 2007)

OK......... A guy breaks into your house, slips on your kitchen floor sues and WINS......... it doesn't make it right, but it happens.

Now, self-defense is accepted in EMS, it just isn't implemented as much because people are fearful of the fallout "if" they do use it.

Now, I have personally talked to numerous EMS folks (during my 12 plus years of teaching DT4EMS) who had been assualted while on the job. When you talk to a guy who had his back broken, or a female medic stabbed multiple times ,both without warning, you begin to wonder when things will change.

I have tried to spread the word the best I can. Awareness is the key. If you are aware the potential for violence is there, on every call, you act a little differrent.

Train AHEAD of time. Do physical and mental role playing. In our "Six steps of self-defense" Step #1 Is not being on an unsafe scene. The next 5 steps are trying to get you to Step #1.

Again, assault in EMS accounted for 52% of injuries. MORE than back injuries or exposure to infectious diseases!!!!!!!!!!!! Still very, very few agencies train.

Firecoins, you are correct, documentation and legal actions prior, during and after the incident are important. That is what the "4" battle areas we train for........ the battle of the mind, the battle on the street, the battle of the courtroom and the battle of the media! If you are not prepared for all four, your training is lacking.

Folks, do a little research. It does happen. EMS providers have been shot, stabbed and beaten with all types of weapons. Not being on an unsafe scene is the best. But what happens when the "safe scene" goes unsafe? Have you practiced how to get out? 

Have you rehearsed verbal skills so you and your partner are on the same page? 

Have you talked with your partner about a "Code word or phrase" so they know to lock it up (brakes) so you can jump out?

I say it again......................

It's not important to you........ until it's important to you. 

With the utmost respect,

Kip


----------



## JJR512 (Dec 28, 2007)

Anyone who is concerned about the legal trouble he/she will be in after _anything_ happens while performing his/her duties as an EMS provider should consider getting personal liability insurance. One company that specializes in liability insurance for healthcare workers, and has been mentioned here several times in the past, is HPSO (http://www.hpso.com/). Remember--as has been pointed out--your employer's or organization's insurance is primarily interested in protecting your employer or organization, _not you_, as they would like you to think. Insurance plans from HPSO run only $100-150 per year.

An HPSO policy will cover you if you are assaulted while providing EMS. It will protect you in claims of personal injury made against you. It will provide legal representation for you. There is so much more, you should really check out their policy descriptions.


----------



## TheDoll (Dec 28, 2007)

i have been interested in learning a martial art that would help me with self defense tactics as an ems provider. i was wondering if some of you would post which form(s) of martial art you would suggest and why. also, please be specific. if you post an abbreviation, i will probably not know what you are talking about. ftr, i'm not tiny. i'm 5'9" and fairly strong, but not huge or anything.


----------



## BBFDMedic28 (Dec 28, 2007)

You people underestimate the power of an O2 bottle!


----------



## certguy (Dec 29, 2007)

GUYS , UNLESS TIMES HAVE RADICALLY CHANGED , IN MY EXPERIENCE , THE COPS ARE USUALLY ON OUR SIDE . WITH PROPER DOCUMENTATION  , THE BAD GUY WILL BE HARD PRESSED TO SHOW WHY YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE DEFENDED YOURSELF WHEN HE ATTACKED YOU . THIS SAID , GET OVER YOUR HANGUPS OR IT'LL GET YOU HURT OR WORSE . 

Folks working in SOCAL may remember the Mission Bay Hospital shooting that occurred about 1989 . A guy went off the deep end after losing his dad to open heart surgery , walked into the ER and started shooting , killing 1 RN , wounding the DR and 2 EMT's . There but by the grace of god I was in that ER exactly 24 hours before dropping off a pt. and probably would've been shot too if he would've came in 1 day earlier . I didn't know that RN well , but I do remember she was a sweetheart and a great RN . I think I would've done my best to protect the others ( and myself ) , not stand there indecisively at the thought of being sued . I had a wife and son to come home to . ( still do )

Doll ,

  The best martial art I can recommend for EMS is an art that is eclectic , that is , doesn't follow just one discipline . That is what I belted in , a style called AAm - KA - JUTSU . I know they have a school in Iowa , but I don't know about your area . Many schools now teach mixed martial arts disciplines . They combine soft and hard styles . Soft styles are ones that use your opponents energy against them ( judo , jujitsu , aikido , etc. ) . Hard styles are force on force striking arts ( karate , kung fu , etc. ) Combine the 2 and you have a provider with a knowledge of pressure points , takedowns , pain compliance , grappling and groundfighting ,  and rolls and falls as well as good , old - fashioned thrash -n- bash punches and kicks if all else fails . This is the kind of training that will give you many more options in how to handle aggressive pts. safely . It's worked well for me . I used to teach until a knee replacement from a work comp injury ( bus driving , not EMS ) sidelined me . I loved it ! Here are some tips to finding a good school ; 1. Reputable instructors only . If they give you a story you can't check out , shy away . 2. Do your homework , look for the type of style you want and sit in on a couple classes first as a visitor . Watch how the instructor interacts with the students . 3. Shy away from contracts . Some schools will try to trap a student into contracts lasting 6 - 12 months . Opt for monthly payments , that way if you don't like it , you're not out extra money . Hope this helps . 

                           God Bless . 

                                Craig


----------



## certguy (Dec 29, 2007)

Let me clear up something that may confuse some of you . pressure points for self defense are different than for bleeding cotrol . Anywhere 2 or more nerves meet is a pressure point . Apply pressure and you get pain that can be used to get a combative pt. to comply w/o causing damage . Striking these points can produce a TEMPORARY dead arm or dead leg sensation . These are considered brother - in - law techniques . Most families have one , the bone head brother in law who gets drunk and causes a problem . If you kick his butt , it may cause problems with the rest of the family sooooooo , you use these techniques to persuade him it's time to go . With most people these work well , but with a druggie , they may not . Easy sites to use are in the arms , legs , collar bones , under the nose , and behind the ears . I recommend you learn first how to use them though . These are nice guy techniques . Next step up are joint locks , with the intent of causing enough pain to make them comply w/o damage , but these have the potential to cause damage if done improperly . Again , learn from an instructor if you want to add these to your arsenal . Both are considered pain compliance techniques . For Ems , shy away from grappling only schools . These are fine for one on one situations , but if there's more than one bad guy , you're in big trouble . If you tie up with one , the others will be thumping on you in the meantime . There are ways to deal with multiple attacker situations , but the best is to NOT BE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE , though sometimes it's not an option .


----------



## eggshen (Dec 29, 2007)

As far as pressure points go they have their place but are not the be all end all to sort out a scuffle in or out of the ambulance. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. I have a great article regarding this and will try to find the link.

Anyway, while we're at it do any of your agencies have (for lack of a better phrase) a use of force policy?

Egg


----------



## eggshen (Dec 29, 2007)

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/motivation.html

Here you go. If you have time you should cruise this site for a bit, it's pretty big but a lot of fun. 

Our dpt provides a PPCT-Violent Patient Management course (mandatory actually). I have had more than one chance to use it and it seems OK, better than nothing at least. Of course I'll tell everyone right now that pain compliance is a waste of time on any type of sympathomimetic OD.

Egg


----------



## firecoins (Dec 29, 2007)

eggshen said:


> http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/motivation.html
> 
> Here you go. If you have time you should cruise this site for a bit, it's pretty big but a lot of fun.
> 
> ...




I knew someone would post that guys site. Hes pretty good.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 29, 2007)

pressure points work on pain compliance.  If your altered mental status patient can no feel pain, won't do much good.  I am sure you will find certain situations that they will be useful but not always.  

joint locks are good if you are willing to take them to their real expected end, breaking the joint.  If you train in BJJ or similair arts you hold the joint lock until your partner taps out due to pain.  If you opponent can't feel pain, you may have to actually break the limb.  Of course, there may be legal consequences to doing that but if you can get out enough to "retreat" and call for more help, I am sure it can be justified.  Same with punching and kicking of any sort.


----------



## TheDoll (Dec 29, 2007)

thank you certguy and eggshen for the info! i will check those things out!


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 29, 2007)

firecoins said:


> pressure points work on pain compliance.  If your altered mental status patient can no feel pain, won't do much good.  I am sure you will find certain situations that they will be useful but not always.
> 
> joint locks are good if you are willing to take them to their real expected end, breaking the joint.  If you train in BJJ or similair arts you hold the joint lock until your partner taps out due to pain.  If you opponent can't feel pain, you may have to actually break the limb.  Of course, there may be legal consequences to doing that but if you can get out enough to "retreat" and call for more help, I am sure it can be justified.  Same with punching and kicking of any sort.



I'm stilling wondering why you're in a business where you will very likely be assaulted at some point in your career. You really do seem to worry more about facing a legal challenge than saving your skin. Either you ar every naive or extremely paranoid about self defense. If that is the case, nothing anyone here says will matter to you. Next time you are threatened with violence, just take the beating and hope the bad guy gets tired before he kills you. At least you won't get in trouble.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 29, 2007)

TheDoll said:


> thank you certguy and eggshen for the info! i will check those things out!



While you are checking things out, go to dt4ems.net. It was custom made for your profession and actually takes the liability question into account, as well as practical options. I won't discount martial arts training, but from my experience, few people take the time and have the discpline to stay with it long enough for it to make you proficient.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 29, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> While you are checking things out, go to dt4ems.net. It was custom made for your profession and actually takes the liability question into account, as well as practical options. I won't discount martial arts training, but from my experience, few people take the time and have the discpline to stay with it long enough for it to make you proficient.



I agree with you.

There are several aspects of EMS providers using force against patients that are different from martial arts training, and Kip has addressed the most of them.

Legal - By teaching when the use of force is necessary, how to use the minimal force required to escape (more on this later), how to document and justify your actions to minimize your liability.

Medical - DT4EMS was developed under the guidance of a doctor with an eye towards minimizing the chance of seriously injuring a patient.  How many other programs, including martial arts, can say this?

Technique - DT4EMS focuses on using the minimal force necessary to escape the situation.  This is different from the law enforcement courses similar to PPCT where the focus is on gaining control of the subject.  In addition, DT4EMS takes into consideration and teaches techniques using equipment that is available to EMS providers - such as using trauma shears as a weapon.

Mental - By being more aware of your situation, you can reduce the chances that you end up in an unsafe situation.  Things like where you sit in the back of the ambulance in relation to your patient can greatly reduce your chance of being attacked/injured, and will at least buy you more time to escape.

(end shameless sales pitch)


----------



## firecoins (Dec 29, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> I'm stilling wondering why you're in a business where you will very likely be assaulted at some point in your career. You really do seem to worry more about facing a legal challenge than saving your skin. Either you ar every naive or extremely paranoid about self defense. If that is the case, nothing anyone here says will matter to you. Next time you are threatened with violence, just take the beating and hope the bad guy gets tired before he kills you. At least you won't get in trouble.



I am not in that business.  Nor did I start the topic.

Various people have stated they are bring guns and knives on an ambulance to shoot and stab anyone who assaults them.  That seems more paranoid to me.  It seems very short sighted to me at best.  If you are worried about being assaulted, you need to be prepared with not only defending yourself but the results of that. Especially if you think your going to shoot or stab someone in what you perceive to be a life threatening situation.


----------



## certguy (Dec 30, 2007)

Hi Egg ,
  There's nothing out there that's the ultimate technique out there to defend yourself with especially where drugs are involved . Against a pcp'er , the cops even have a hard time with guns , let alone empty handed for example . That's why I reccomend that folks who want to learn martial arts get a well rounded education . This gives you many more options to handle a situation with less force . In most cases , pressure points or joint locks work well and are justifiable . ( pt.'s out of control and you're using the least amount of force necessary ) If the situation escalates and you do have to get nasty , you can show a progression from least amount of force to what was necessary to handle the situation . 

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT I'VE USED

1. Try to talk the person down .
2. Back out and wait for LEO if possible . If you back out , do it together , don't split your crew . 
3. Use the least amount of force necessary to control the situation . Use your head , if a weapon's involved , time to get nasty if you can't get away . 
4. Once an attacker's down and no longer a threat BACK OFF , don't continue unless you're using pain compliance to hold till help arrives . 
5. DOCUMENT , DOCUMENT , DOCUMENT , including any witness statements . 
6. Take a deep breath , RTB for uniform change , thank God for getting you and your partner through it okay .


----------



## TheDoll (Dec 30, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> While you are checking things out, go to dt4ems.net. It was custom made for your profession and actually takes the liability question into account, as well as practical options. I won't discount martial arts training, but from my experience, few people take the time and have the discpline to stay with it long enough for it to make you proficient.


you're absolutely right as far as checking out the dt4ems. i meant to mention that i was also looking through that, but upon rereading my posts, i realize i failed to do so! sorry!


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 30, 2007)

firecoins said:


> I am not in that business.  Nor did I start the topic..


 

I must have misunderstood you then. I thought you were an EMT. You seem to have a cursery knowledge of PPCT and joint manipulation, however, you seem to be think that medics should not defend themselves, lest they be held criminally liable. However, directing readers to Marc McYoung's website (no nonesense self defense) seems perfectly logical to you. If you believe in his philosophy, which is very accurate incidentally, you would agree that self protection is your own responsibility.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 30, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> I must have misunderstood you then. I thought you were an EMT. You seem to have a cursery knowledge of PPCT and joint manipulation, however, you seem to be think that medics should not defend themselves, lest they be held criminally liable. However, directing readers to Marc McYoung's website (no nonesense self defense) seems perfectly logical to you. If you believe in his philosophy, which is very accurate incidentally, you would agree that self protection is your own responsibility.



Have you read his philosophy?  I don't think you have.  You haven't understood it. He very much addresses legal problem that are inherient to self defense. He addresses prevention. You seem to think, "oh Ill just stab a paitent and everyone will see my way"  I don't think so.  

I have no problem with unarmed self defense but the second you bring a gun or knife to this situation, your career in EMS is over.  So many EMTs walking around with "rescue" knives which never seem to be used for just that. They seem to have the ulterior purpose of being for stabbing a violent patient. 

Carrying a weapon is a huge responsibility that gets way overlooked.  I think you will find EMTs/medic walking into scenes they would have never gone onto without such weapons. Than using the weapons and having prosecutors show that the EMT/medic should have never been there to begin with.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 30, 2007)

Let's get past guns and knives for a minute. What other weapons would be acceptable for medics to have? Let's also assume that adequate training in the legal, moral and ethical decisions to protect yourself, and perhaps your patients, has been conducted.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 30, 2007)

jmaccauley said:


> Let's get past guns and knives for a minute. What other weapons would be acceptable for medics to have? Let's also assume that adequate training in the legal, moral and ethical decisions to protect yourself, and perhaps your patients, has been conducted.



Weapons?  Nothing designed as a weapon is acceptable.  If one's life is truly in danger and I do mean truly, anything around them.  O2 tanks, mag lights etc but their use is only acceptable to the point that you, your partner and possibly patient are able to escape from the dangerous individual.  Than you must call for help.  Any violent behavior done in self defense, armed or unarmed, done in excess of being able to escape can present a problem.    

The goal is first not get into such a situation. If not possible than escape from a situation prior to violence being necessary. If that is not possible, to use a minimal amout of violence to either escape and call for help. After the use of any violence, you must be able to demonstrate you had no other options.


----------



## Emt /b/ (Dec 30, 2007)

firecoins said:


> I have no problem with unarmed self defense but the second you bring a gun or knife to this situation, your career in EMS is over.



My career in EMS would also be over if I got killed.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 30, 2007)

This is actually becoming a silly discussion but I'm willing to carry it a little further. I'm not sure where you got your law degree (maybe in EMT class or the internet)but I'll explain about the laws of self defense that apply in most other jurisdictions.

The Supreme Court (you know those guys who monday morning quarterback everything we do) have clearly given public safety officials the right to defend themselves. As a matter of fact, when police departments tried to restrict the use of force to "minimal", this analogy was brought up: How much water does it take to put out a fire? The obvious answer is - as much as it takes. Isn't that what self defense is? Somehow we got into carrying guns and knives and basically just shooting our way out of danger. Nothing said by anyone here suggested that. If, however, you work in a violent area and are accustomed to dangerous scenes that you may have no control over, you might feel differently. Even working in a relatively quiet area you can be suddenly and violently attacked. Certainly there will be liability involved in any response, but it is easier to articulate your self defense choice if you survive the attack.


----------



## firecoins (Dec 30, 2007)

I am sorry you think studying the legal implications are "silly". I got my "law degree" from having read the NYS law. I already posted 2 articles which articulate the difference betwen the law in 15 states and the other 35. NYS had a "duty to retreat" requirement.  In FLorida you can "stand your ground"  Hence what a Florida and NY EMTs can do for self defense may in fact be different.  

If your worried about your safety and willing to think out which weapons or marital arts you will use in case your attacked, than you should further investigate the law surrounding such defense so that you are fully prepared beforehand.  There is no sense in the "Id rather get tried by 12 than carried by 6" self defense theory when you can easily avoid either all together. Walk away alive, unscathed physically or legally and have no problems with your employer.      

Deescalation, recognition of dangerous scenes well far an above what is taught in EMT class, more training in dealing with EDPs, addicts other potentially violent patients.  There are whole bunch of things that we should be trained in to prevent being assaulted.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Dec 30, 2007)

firecoins said:


> I am sorry you think studying the legal implications are "silly". I got my "law degree" from having read the NYS law. I already posted 2 articles which articulate the difference betwen the law in 15 states and the other 35. NYS had a "duty to retreat" requirement.  In FLorida you can "stand your ground"  Hence what a Florida and NY EMTs can do for self defense may in fact be different.


  Duty to Retreat laws state that you must retreat if possible, not in every situation.  How do you retreat from the back of a moving ambulance when you have a violent patient intent on attacking you?  You can't, at least for the first few minutes.



> If your worried about your safety and willing to think out which weapons or marital arts you will use in case your attacked, than you should further investigate the law surrounding such defense so that you are fully prepared beforehand.  There is no sense in the "Id rather get tried by 12 than carried by 6" self defense theory when you can easily avoid either all together. Walk away alive, unscathed physically or legally and have no problems with your employer.


Walking away is not always possible.  Your statement about the 12 vs. 6 shows that you think you will always be able to talk your way out of every situation.  That is not realistic, and it is irresponsible to think it is always possible.  Yes, you should always try verbal descalation techniques first and non-force options first but sometimes it comes down to making a decision of whether or not you want to live through the encounter.  Whose life is more important, yours or your attackers?



> Deescalation, recognition of dangerous scenes well far an above what is taught in EMT class, more training in dealing with EDPs, addicts other potentially violent patients.  There are whole bunch of things that we should be trained in to prevent being assaulted.


I agree with this statement with the caveat that we should also be trained in what to do when these techniques fail.  Having worked in a hospital with a pysch ward, I can tell you that verbal techniques don't always work.  I've seen a shrink get punched in the nose and choked by a patient.  Ironically, this doctor believed as you do that every patient could be talked down and was more concerned about the liability of defending himself.  Fortunately for him, the security department was realistic enough to realize that force was needed.  Once we got the patient off of the doctor, he realized that sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 31, 2007)

firecoins said:


> Weapons?  Nothing designed as a weapon is acceptable.  If one's life is truly in danger and I do mean truly, anything around them.  O2 tanks, mag lights etc but their use is only acceptable to the point that you, your partner and possibly patient are able to escape from the dangerous individual.  Than you must call for help.  Any violent behavior done in self defense, armed or unarmed, done in excess of being able to escape can present a problem.
> 
> The goal is first not get into such a situation. If not possible than escape from a situation prior to violence being necessary. If that is not possible, to use a minimal amout of violence to either escape and call for help. After the use of any violence, you must be able to demonstrate you had no other options.



O.K., so no weapons are acceptable in your opinion. As I suggested, training in the legal, moral and ethical obligations to both your patient and even your attacker should be mandatory. I also agree that there are legal consequences that we may face for our decisions. I also believe that most public service employees will prevail when the totality of the circumstances are addressed. As for the so-called "duty to retreat" laws you referred to, they apply to deadly force issues, not merely self defense. How do you retreat from an attacker who has a death grip on your throat? The articles that you have researched did not address the ability and right to defend yourself or others from serious harm or death. Most states recognize that right. If your employer states that you will not carry a weapon on duty, that is his right. You can obey or change jobs. Those who say that a utility knife may be put into action as a defensive tool if needed are not necessarily wrong. True, they will have to justify their actions as would anyone else. My point is that they have not turned their safety over to others and instead have made it their responsibility. Being aware of your legal responsibilities to report and justify your actions is of course a given, but necessarily a barrier.


----------



## jmaccauley (Dec 31, 2007)

firecoins said:


> Deescalation, recognition of dangerous scenes well far an above what is taught in EMT class, more training in dealing with EDPs, addicts other potentially violent patients.  There are whole bunch of things that we should be trained in to prevent being assaulted.


I'm sure these are things that are taught at any responsible EMT training facility. Self defense certainly involves having increased awareness. Unfortunately, there are times when you either didn't read the signs correctly or had no choice but to be there. Every call has the potential of turning violent and every person should have the ability to protect themselves. Staging until the PD makes your scene safe is only the beginning. I have been on calls where the medics refused to treat EDP's who were restrained, but insisted on having an officer ride to the hospital with them for security. You can't always have it both ways. I have been in depositions involving use of force issues  (as both an expert witness as well as a defendant) and have been asked if anything different could have prevented the incident. Of course, thats what Monday morning quarterbacks do. Fortunately, you are expected to act under the immediate circumstances and not with what you later learn. That is a Supreme Court decision. Making self defense more restrictive is, of course, a knee jerk reaction to lawsuits. Civil vs. Criminal.


----------



## certguy (Jan 1, 2008)

Duty to retreat ?????? Now let me get this right , my partner's trapped in the back of the rig by a violent pcp'er we got from FD thinking we were safe and I'm supposed to retreat and leave him on his own till help arrives ?????? If so , I wouldn't want to be partnered with you on a bet ! I did not and will not ever leave a partner in danger because of legal or civil worries  PERIOD ! Seems to me you're more concerned with political correctness if the scene goes south than protecting yourself and your partner . You're also obviously not reading the other posts or you'd realize the fact that you don't always know when a scene will go south on you , and PD will not always be there . Can you honestly look a partner's spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend in the eye and tell them you didn't fight back because you were worried about being sued ? Yes , in 8 years in the field , I did carry a knife for last ditch defense but it never was used for such , despite being in some pretty bad situations that we didn't and couldn't know were coming . A combination of God's grace , relying on my partner , martial arts training , and luck got us through without major injury to us or our pts , but push comes to shove ,  I'd rather live to tell the tale , than die in consideration of that poor bad guy .


----------



## eggshen (Jan 2, 2008)

So am I to assume that no one has a "use of force" type policy?

Egg


----------



## firecoins (Jan 3, 2008)

certguy said:


> Duty to retreat ?????? Now let me get this right , my partner's trapped in the back of the rig by a violent pcp'er we got from FD thinking we were safe and I'm supposed to retreat and leave him on his own till help arrives ?????? If so , I wouldn't want to be partnered with you on a bet ! I did not and will not ever leave a partner in danger because of legal or civil worries  PERIOD ! Seems to me you're more concerned with political correctness if the scene goes south than protecting yourself and your partner . You're also obviously not reading the other posts or you'd realize the fact that you don't always know when a scene will go south on you , and PD will not always be there . Can you honestly look a partner's spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend in the eye and tell them you didn't fight back because you were worried about being sued ? Yes , in 8 years in the field , I did carry a knife for last ditch defense but it never was used for such , despite being in some pretty bad situations that we didn't and couldn't know were coming . A combination of God's grace , relying on my partner , martial arts training , and luck got us through without major injury to us or our pts , but push comes to shove ,  I'd rather live to tell the tale , than die in consideration of that poor bad guy .




I don't understand why this is a difficult concept to understand.Maybe I haven't explained it. It has *nothing* to do with leaving someone else in danger.  

You only use enough force to "allow" yourself to escape.  You can use any amount of force that is justifiable. If your in the back of a moving rig, more force would be justified than on scene for the very reason that you can't simply jump out.


----------



## jmaccauley (Jan 3, 2008)

firecoins said:


> I don't understand why this is a difficult concept to understand.Maybe I haven't explained it. It has *nothing* to do with leaving someone else in danger.
> 
> You only use enough force to "allow" yourself to escape.  You can use any amount of force that is justifiable. If your in the back of a moving rig, more force would be justified than on scene for the very reason that you can't simply jump out.



It's not that you haven't persistantly pointed out your concerns about force and self protection. We also aren't naive about potential liability issues. Most of us are just a little more concerned with physically surviving and less concerned with possible negative perceptions. I still wonder how you can determine how much force is "minimal?"


----------



## DT4EMS (Jan 3, 2008)

eggshen said:


> So am I to assume that no one has a "use of force" type policy?
> 
> Egg



I have only talked to a couple of people over the years who have a "policy". Remember most agencies want to try and deny the problem exists.

Ask a group of EMS folks what is "reasonable" when it comes to a level of force and more often than not the O2 bottle comes up. That alone proves most folks don't talk about "reasonable" the same way others do.


----------



## certguy (Jan 3, 2008)

certguy said:


> Hi Egg ,
> There's nothing out there that's the ultimate technique out there to defend yourself with especially where drugs are involved . Against a pcp'er , the cops even have a hard time with guns , let alone empty handed for example . That's why I reccomend that folks who want to learn martial arts get a well rounded education . This gives you many more options to handle a situation with less force . In most cases , pressure points or joint locks work well and are justifiable . ( pt.'s out of control and you're using the least amount of force necessary ) If the situation escalates and you do have to get nasty , you can show a progression from least amount of force to what was necessary to handle the situation .
> 
> RULES OF ENGAGEMENT I'VE USED
> ...




These rules of engagement are what I went by as our company , as DT4EMS pointed out , didn't have a policy . This worked well for me and showed progression from talking the pt. down , to backing out if possible ,  to whatever force was necessary . Maybe I was lucky , but I never had to face the dreaded " L " word . Seems to me if you take a step - by - step approach ,and document well showing the progression , this should cover you legally . Hats off to DT4EMS for tackling this problem . It's about time someone did . My concern is for the newbys . There's so much controversy about this , when the need arises , they may become indecisive and get hurt in the process . Policies , procedures , training and drills are needed . 


                           Craig


----------



## jmaccauley (Jan 3, 2008)

The only problem I have is with the "least amount of force necessary" step. It may only be symantics but if you start low and see if it works, you are gambling with your safety. You may be thinking that something might work and get him away from me. Then you discover that it was ineffective so you escalate your response. You won't get many chances to find "the minimal amount needed. I would suggest going above what you think is "minimal" and as you suggested, be prepared to justify it. 

In law enforcement, we have followed a force continuum for years. Recently though, many departments began to go away from that "trial and error" method to using any of their training and tools based on the totality of the circumstances. That simply means based on your training, experience, tools available and perception of the threat you face. This is much easier to defend than having written guidelines that may have to be abandoned under stress.


----------



## ryahic (Jan 3, 2008)

in most training for our field and experince we see on the street...your senses should tell you not to got into the scene. if it sounds remotely vague, get police in there first. where i work we stage for alot of events until police secure the scene - you can`t help anybody if your hurt. why would i carry a weapon if i have police to do it for me. plus do you know how much paperwork police fill out for drawing a weapon....we have enough as is LOL


----------



## eggshen (Jan 4, 2008)

Shame

Egg


----------



## 15F (Jan 10, 2008)

I agree. A weapon takes away from the task at hand and makes you seem like something your not. Cause it is ironic that someone carrying a weapon is helping people. Just seperate things.

Firefighters don't get weapons or batons or junk. They are just buff as hell. 

Best solution: martial arts. Your body is a weapon that can be trained. If you can fit it in you schedule, it is healthy and will help in many ways.


----------



## jmaccauley (Jan 10, 2008)

15F said:


> I agree. A weapon takes away from the task at hand and makes you seem like something your not. Cause it is ironic that someone carrying a weapon is helping people. Just seperate things.
> 
> Firefighters don't get weapons or batons or junk. They are just buff as hell.
> 
> Best solution: martial arts. Your body is a weapon that can be trained. If you can fit it in you schedule, it is healthy and will help in many ways.



If you think a firefighter doesn't carry weapons, you've never seen the equipment he/she has at their disposal.


----------



## jmaccauley (Jan 10, 2008)

By the way, do you think that you cannot help people if you are carrying a weapon?


----------



## Jon (Jan 23, 2008)

jmaccauley said:


> If you think a firefighter doesn't carry weapons, you've never seen the equipment he/she has at their disposal.


Yep. If I ever REALLY, REALLY, REALLY need a weapon, I can grab the 
Halligan tool from the outside compartment... that would REALLY hurt.


----------



## CFRBryan347768 (Apr 2, 2008)

*Think*

you do have weapons(not that i think they are necessary) scapal in the baby deliver kit(hah for got the real name) and for super buffs that have a big mag lite, those work as billy clubs and we also have cravats(triangular bandages) tie em up!


----------



## uscgk9 (Apr 2, 2008)

This incident happened here a few months ago after 911 told us that Law Enforcement was not needed to secure the scene. Most of the time LEO is dispatched ahead of us and we stage until they clear the scene. It is not uncommon for 25-30 minutes to go by before a LEO can get on scene. Many nights our entire county is covered by only one deputy. Normal highway travel from north to south is approx 1 hour. Here is what happened....


INCIDENT SUMMARY
On February 4, 2008 at approximately 5:30 p.m. Oak Hall Rescue was paged out to a psychiatric call. 

Two Accomack County Fire Medics (referred throughout as Fire Medic 1 / Fire Medic 2) responded in Unit 201 ambulance. The Fire Medics were told by the 911 Center that the Sheriff’s Office had been notified. 

As they arrived on scene, the patient was outside of his residence and walking toward the ambulance. The EMS crew exited their vehicle and engaged the patient in conversation regarding the patient’s immediate needs and treatment. 

Fire Medic 1 began to set-up for a blood pressure reading and at that same time the patient rushed forward and struck the Fire Medic I on the left side of the head with a closed fist. The initial blow caused a laceration above the Fire Medic’s left eye. 

Fire Medic 2 then ran to an adjacent residence and called the 911 Center indicating an immediate need for law enforcement to respond. Fire Medic 1 dazed from the first impact was unable to defend himself and subsequently received several more blows to his head from the patient (now referred to as assailant).

Fire Medic I attempted to back away from the assailant and move toward his vehicle. During his retreat, Fire Medic 1 tripped over a rope that had been strung between two posts. Fire Medic I fell to the ground on his back and the assailant immediately took a position on top of Fire Medic 1 and continued to strike Fire Medic 1 about the head. Fire Medic 1 freed himself from the assailant by kicking the assailant off of him and sought refuge in EMS unit. 

Once inside the vehicle, Fire Medic I secured the vehicle and prevented the assailant from entering the vehicle. The assailant then used an EMS bag left on scene to repeatedly strike the driver’s side window in an attempt to gain entry. 

Fire Medic 2, while in an adjacent residence, placed 2 separate calls to the 911 Center requesting immediate law enforcement assistance. While in the residence, Fire Medic 2 explained what had just taken place involving the assailant and Fire Medic 1. 

While gaining access to this residence, Fire Medic 2 explained to the male occupant what was transpiring. The male occupant then exited the home with a firearm to lend assistance to Fire Medic I. 

Upon his return, the resident notified Fire Medic 2 that Fire Medic 1 was locked in the EMS vehicle and the assailant had entered his home. Fire Medic 2 then received a call from a friend who is also a Virginia State Police (VSP) Trooper. Fire Medic 2 apprised the trooper of the current situation. The trooper notified VSP dispatch to send any available trooper to respond to the scene. Fire units from NASA Wallops Flight Facility responded after monitoring the request for assistance.


----------



## certguy (Apr 3, 2008)

you never , never , never , leave your partner in danger even to call for help . if you retreat , you do so as a team . If my partner left me to get the crap kicked out of me , I would have a major issue with him/her after the call , and you can bet I wouldn't work with them again .


----------



## Jon (Apr 3, 2008)

It all depends on the situation. I might well leave my partner to call for help... because if I can't handle the threat with what I have on my person, then the MOST helpful thing I can do is get someone who can help.... by getting on the radio and screaming for help.

Rule #1 is YOUR safety. If you die a hero, trying to protect your partner, you still die. This doesn't mean that you leave your partner, either. What I'm saying is that you should use "common" sense (which we know isn't really common at all) and not try to take on, for example, an armed subject, unless you are trained in such and feel you can do it safely.


BTW.... I like the part about the resident leaving the house with a firearm to "assist" the medic.


----------



## jmaccauley (Apr 3, 2008)

Jon said:


> It all depends on the situation. I might well leave my partner to call for help... because if I can't handle the threat with what I have on my person, then the MOST helpful thing I can do is get someone who can help.... by getting on the radio and screaming for help.
> 
> Rule #1 is YOUR safety. If you die a hero, trying to protect your partner, you still die. This doesn't mean that you leave your partner, either. What I'm saying is that you should use "common" sense (which we know isn't really common at all) and not try to take on, for example, an armed subject, unless you are trained in such and feel you can do it safely.
> 
> ...


Jon brings us back to the original point of this threat. Are there still folks who think that self defense training (with or without weapons) is unnecessary? Of course, preparing for what you might be getting into is natural for EMT's and medics. Why is there so much resistance to learning one additional life saving skill? Of course, not expecting the unexpected at a psych call is a little naive, but I understand that with manpower shortages, you make do with what you got. So, why not get more?


----------



## stupie680 (Jul 16, 2008)

Depending on your area you should always get a bullet proof vest and carrying a small oc spray cnat hurt. Just make sure your are careful when you use it.


----------



## WuLabsWuTecH (Jul 16, 2008)

i'm ok with bulletproof vest, but I think its ok for EMTs who work in those situations to have something for self defense if necessary.  I think in our area they are known as tactical EMS.

And i agree with being known as NOT A COP.  Its the same theory that some humaitarian groups will not even wear bulletproof vests.  If you don't want us here, you can harass us and we will leave, but if you shoot us we will die, so just let us leave and live!


----------



## Jon (Jul 16, 2008)

Umm.. time out. The vest isn't "bullet proof"... it's bullet resistant.


----------



## TEK 679 (Jul 31, 2008)

*Enough is Enough*

Shoot me already Jesus What a waste of time:excl:


----------



## ILemt (Aug 1, 2008)

I have had to defend myself and my partner on several occasions.
Then again, I have had PD dump folks on me many times... 
(Once I had 5 handcuffed patients in my rig at one time, i have many occasions when I have 2 or more on board) PD follows, and I have a cuff key in my wallet... talking tough usually works with that scenario, but I digress.

Ive had battle royale's on board with a pt my partner and 4 cops at once 
Ive had a patient try and rape my medic
Ive been attacked
Ive been shot at (outside the rig)
Ive had patients try and stab me.
---

I don't wear kevlar because i cant afford it.
I don't have a baton, pepper spray, taser, or a gun.
I work at a service where many of us carry a handcuff key because PD NEVER rides with us, and frequently forces us to take cuffed patients.
I have knocked a patient cold and given him a concussion in the process.
I have kicked a patient in the face and broken his nose.
I have restrained many patients with soft lines and gauze rolls, and threatened more.

Did I enjoy doing any of this crap?  No !
But I can honestly say that each time Ive ever done any of this, I was acting in defense of my patient, my partner, or myself.

As for weapons (gun, spray, baton etc), I say NO. 
I have a minimag, but don't consider that a weapon.
In a pinch I can use the D cylinder and my metal clipboard, even the AED/defib unit.
But my three best weapons are my common sense, my partner, and our radio.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 2, 2008)

TEK 679 said:


> Shoot me already Jesus What a waste of time:excl:



What is a waste of time?  Your post, this thread, or the concept of defending yourself?


----------



## MedicAngel (Aug 2, 2008)

While I personally haven't ever feared for my life in the back of a rig, I have had my paramedic and partner have a woman begin to go south on a call while I was the driver. Seeing legs begin to flay in the mirror I began to pull over when my partner called out she was okay, to step on it and get us to the hospital.  I kept a good eye on her and kept asking how are things, are you okay, etc. If she had said at anytime she couldn't handle the woman, who thankfully was a small person, I would of had my partners back and been on the radio asking for help. 

I have also been on calls where several people in our squad had a concealed gun. Did I like it? Sure didn't. Did we have words about that? Sure did. One of the people was a cop for his day job and thought that gave him the right to carry anytime he wanted, the other felt she had the right because she had a concealed weapons permit. My humble opinion is it gives the wing nut just one more chance to make a grab at or puts us all in a more dangerous situation should they realize you are carrying and I don't want my life or anyone else's to be put in jeapardy because you HAVE to carry a weapon and look or feel like you want to be Billy Bad Boy.


----------



## mikeylikesit (Aug 3, 2008)

if you can't preform your job comfortably, without worrying about the patient taking you out, then it is very hard to preform your job well. i think if you are mentally and physically prepared for whatever situation may arise, then you will be much better off.


----------



## para82frame (Aug 8, 2008)

I am shocked how many of you would just let a patient attack you and not be prepared to keep yourself alive. being in the moral right and dead is still dead. some of you need to take a step back and look at you and your partners safety. If you value the life of a druggie wacked out of there mind on PCP over your own then all I can say is I hope your funeral is as nice as you hoped.


----------



## BossyCow (Aug 8, 2008)

para82frame said:


> I am shocked how many of you would just let a patient attack you and not be prepared to keep yourself alive. being in the moral right and dead is still dead. some of you need to take a step back and look at you and your partners safety. If you value the life of a druggie wacked out of there mind on PCP over your own then all I can say is I hope your funeral is as nice as you hoped.




Who says they are going to 'just let a patient attack' and 'not be prepared to keep yourself alive'?  I think most of us rely on our ability to avoid an attack or diffuse a potentially violent patient with our brains instead of arming ourselves and seeing each patient as a potential killer. 

It's not a matter of valuing a pts life (even the unsavory one you describe) over my own. I choose not to fear my patients. I behave carefully, weighing the risk vs gain on every call. In my opinion, carrying a weapon gives me too easy option instead of finding a non-violent solution to the problem.


----------



## DT4EMS (Aug 8, 2008)

BossyCow said:


> Who says they are going to 'just let a patient attack' and 'not be prepared to keep yourself alive'?  I think most of us rely on our ability to avoid an attack or diffuse a potentially violent patient with our brains instead of arming ourselves and seeing each patient as a potential killer.
> 
> It's not a matter of valuing a pts life (even the unsavory one you describe) over my own. I choose not to fear my patients. I behave carefully, weighing the risk vs gain on every call. In my opinion, carrying a weapon gives me too easy option instead of finding a non-violent solution to the problem.



Recognition, avoidance, and preparation for "in-case" is the best course for sure. I am still not a fan of arming EMS. A lot of EMS assaults can be prevented by slowing down or backing up when things are looking sour.

There are still way too many actual physical assaults that do take place in EMS though. Actually a security guard was just killed in Springfield. He was in police custody and kicked  the guard in the back of the head. The guard died 4 days later.

It happened in the ER.


----------



## TheAfterAffect (Aug 8, 2008)

I guess its a perk for me that im a nice Sized guy, and Ex Football Player/Wrestler.  


Plus you know, as has been stated the "Better be Good" Stick helps in any scenario where you'd have to worry about anything. As my partner has told me numerous times, If anything goes down and more manpower is needed, tell him, Hell pull over and come in back and give me a hand. Hes another big guy, all in all Ive been in many hazardous areas with nothing other then my EMS Uniform and essential items. 

Ive never worried about carrying a weapon, or drivebys, or any of that when Im in these areas. Hell ive worked in CAMDEN (One of the former Murder Capitals of the USA) on calls and never even worried about anything happening. Why? because if you let it get to you, your gonna get messed up in the end.


----------



## SouthsideEMT (Aug 8, 2008)

well the company i work for offers jujitsu free of charge every friday for about 3 hours. a good way to stay in shape and we learn self defense. now if the pt has a firearm, then its time to be smart and wait for the sheriffs to show up. maybe some should invest in self defense classes. just a thought


----------



## emt19723 (Aug 12, 2008)

no...having weapons is a bad thing. get yourself some good self-defense classes and find an aggressive behavior management class.


----------



## ulrik (Aug 12, 2008)

i am going to start to take yoga and taijitsu classes along with one of my friends is going to teach me some mma.


----------



## motownems (Aug 12, 2008)

Ulrik: If you its available I would recommend learning/familiarizing yourself with a traditional system (Judo, Aikido) rather than just jumping straight into MMA.  This is because I found a lot of MMA instructors seem neglectful in teaching their students how to fall correctly; or about the spiritual side of martial arts.  
Also in general take anything “self defense” moves with a grain of salt, nothing is in the real world is a cut and dry as it is when you are practicing on the mat.   And remember there is only one mind set when it comes to self defence: I Will Make It Home.


----------



## ulrik (Aug 12, 2008)

ok, thank you very much.


----------



## fma08 (Aug 12, 2008)

Self-Defense.... I like to go with the Haldol, Benedryl, Versed combo myself...<_<

But as stated before, (up here at least), there's a reason we wear a different color shirt than LEO's. Medical personnel we are, they are the force users. 

Several sayings that work wonders:

Always know WHEN to get out of Dodge

Always know HOW to get out of Dodge

NEVER go into Dodge without the sheriff. 


Now that said, I feel 100% opposite for those that are in the Tactical EMS position such as SWAT medics. They don't always get the luxury of scene safety. (those of you in tactical EMS, correct me if I am wrong)


----------



## BossyCow (Aug 13, 2008)

fma08 said:


> Self-Defense.... I like to go with the Haldol, Benedryl, Versed combo myself...<_<



For yourself or others?


----------



## Lone Star (Sep 28, 2009)

After sitting here and reading every post in this thread, (yes, all 12 pages so far); I've got a few things to say!



jmaccauley said:


> What I'm hearing is that fear of liability is the reason for putting your safety in the hands of others. I don't know if conventional defensive tools are the answer, or even practical, but I do know that there are many misconceptions expressed here about defense of yourself or others in your care. A patient suffering excited delirium doesn't are that you are the "good guys" and not cops. A drug abuser is an opportunist who would slit your throat and steal your rig because it's a means to an end. There seems to be a dangerous mindset here, with some, that says the danger will be reduced if you just play fair. Weapons don't have to be firearms. They can be tools, instruments or even just having a plan. Is this an overly simple concept and am I missing something?



Not every patient you get is going to be some 'drug seeking, murdering thug'!

Not every drug abuser wants to kill you.  I hate to say it, but you're not 'that important' to them!



certguy said:


> This is a sad sign of the times , we have some wanting to carry weapons , some saying we have to be politically correct and be nice when we're in danger , and others more concerned about legal ramifications if we do protect ourselves . What do we teach the rookies coming in , keeping in mind you don't always know you're walking into a danger zone ? They're going to be so confused it could cost them an injury or worse .
> 
> WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE ! YOU HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF EVEN IN EMS ! THOUGH A PT. MAY BE MENTALLY ALTERED , THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAT ON US !
> 
> We 're talking a lot about scene safety , but I'm amazed at the niavity of some of you who should know better . Let's all get on the same page here .



First off, shouting isn't going to make your point any clearer.  Neither is repetition/regurgitation of the same thing over and over.

I've worked in some of the worst areas of Metro Detroit.  I've never been attacked by some drug abuser, never been 'ambulancejacked' or otherwise beaten senseless by a psych patient.  And above all this, I've never worn kevlar or carried a firearm.

Oh yes, don't get me wrong...I HAVE had those 'really big guys' that could squish me like a bug without even trying!  I had one guy who was about 6'8"/350 lbs and REALLY pissed off when we got there.  Simply taking the time to talk to this guy and trying to find out what had him all fired up really helped to calm him down.  His biggest 'problem' at the time is that he felt no one was listening to him.

I've seen the ever popular "D tank" and "E tank" theory mentioned several times.  Guess what?  You crack the coconut of a patient with a clipboard or a oxygen cylinder, and you can pretty well kiss your career goodbye; right along with your freedom, because you're going to jail!

We're not in EMS to "kick *** and take names", nor are we here to be Barney Badass!

Most of the proponents of carrying firearms, knives, batons, etc have relied on the age old "what if....." to justify their positions.  Most of those "what if..." situations are only played out on television (and rarely there), or you will never find yourself in that position.  Rather than drive yourself 'batty' trying to plan for an eventuality that may never materialize, focus on patient care, scene sizeup and getting the resources you need to keep you safe on scene mobilized!

And for the record I AM a card carrying member of the NRA, and I DO possess a concealed pistol license!


----------



## rollingcode (Oct 8, 2009)

I work compton a lot, and I always keep a 4 inch knife on me, and in the event all hell breaking loose, use your D tank.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 25, 2009)

firecoins said:


> the second you fire a weapon in self defense, no matter how much in the right you think you are, your EMS career is over.



The second you die, your career is over.  

I can always find another career.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 25, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> The second you die, your career is over.
> 
> I can always find another career.




A few things I've noticed here, especially from the anti-self defense crowd.  Having a sidearm doesn't mean that it's Option 1, it's just another tool in your wide box of tools.  The notion that an other wise rational and sane individual would, upon possessing "an item", turn into the sort of deranged lunatic that would shoot a hostile drunk or a combative dementia patient is absurd.  The use of a firearm, or any deadly weapon, is the *final* option, utilized when (and each state is slightly different in this) you are engaged in combat with a severe disparity of force.  A little old lady slapping your hand away when you go to check her breathing?  Probably a "NO SHOOT" situation.  A drunk that's just committed vehicular homicide and is up for his third strike that pulls a knife on you and starts slashing?  Certainly a candidate for consideration of the judicial use of a firearm.  Simply having "an item" doesn't mean it's your first plan of action.

Also, their is no statute that I'm aware of that would open you to prosecution for an otherwise justifiable shooting simply because of your career choice.  We're discussing "law" and "company policy".  If someone initiates force against me, to a degree that I feel my life is in danger, my only goal is to stop that threat.  If I've followed applicable state laws, I won't be prosecuted.  Perhaps I'll lose my job, perhaps I won't.  In a number of situations like this, being the "good guy" and coming out alive after a justifiable shoot is sometimes enough to sweep the issue under the rug.  Maybe it's not and maybe I'd lose my position.  Well, I'd have lost my position if I were killed, so what's the difference?

While I do hold issue with that idea I do agree with a lot of the thoughts I'm seeing expressed here.  A concealed firearm should be CONCEALED well, in a decent IWB holster that prevents printing and allows the user to maintain control of the firearm even when in "odd" situations.  The liability from a small sidearm slipping free of it's ankle holster and discharging, or being lost in the shuffle and picked up by someone, would be staggering and would be placed on the individual that didn't properly secure their carry piece.  If I'm carrying, odds are no one will ever know unless I'm compelled to use it and, if this were to happen, I'd like to think that everyone involved (minus the decedent criminal) would be happy that someone had the wherewithal to bring an end to the life-threatening behavior. 

Our local PD teaches a basic self defense program based on the Mondanock "system" including the use of the Kubaton.  I'd highly recommend all EMS personnel taking a class such as this and carrying a Kubaton after learning it's proper use.  It's all about escalation of force, a Kubaton can subdue, through pain compliance, an unruly drunk or a hostile at close quarters.  A mini-Maglite can be used as a Kubaton and it wouldn't even beg the question as to the reason you're carrying the object.


----------



## Brandon O (Oct 25, 2009)

Some food for thought is that you will probably never be legally held to a higher standard than a civilian when it comes to defending yourself. That is, you are entitled to the same use of force as anyone else if you reasonably feel yourself in jeopardy.

However, the fact that you won't be arrested for battery doesn't mean that you won't lose your job or even your cert for violating one policy or another. Or be sued in civil tort. These are more or less separate spheres.

I have a little website that runs through the important stuff as far as the legalities on self defense go in the US; it's not specific to EMS but might be a beneficial read for most. Check out http://useofforce.us/


----------



## zaboomafoozarg (Oct 26, 2009)

If you need self defense, the scene is not safe! :excl:


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 26, 2009)

zaboomafoozarg said:


> If you need self defense, the scene is not safe! :excl:



While I've not the experience to speak on EMS-related safety I have spent large amounts of time in remote wilderness areas and crowded cities and I've learned that no place is worthy of having self-defense left behind.  Violent crimes occur in churches, schools, malls, at private houses for holiday gatherings, in bars, in restaurants, on well lit streets, in dark smelly alley's.  

I'm not saying that I find the probability high that an EMS responder will be put in a situation where deadly force is the best option but I do find the probability to be higher than "zero".  Thus I feel I should allow each individual the right to deal with this risk in a manner they feel appropriate.  Of course, if they injure someone through negligence, be it with their hands, an O2 bottle, a sidearm or a fire axe, they'll have to pay the price.  I don't know any civilian that carries a sidearm that truly wishes to bring about the nightmare, financially, psychologically and legally, that comes with even a totally justifiable defensive shooting.


----------



## dragonjbynight (Oct 26, 2009)

zaboomafoozarg said:


> If you need self defense, the scene is not safe! :excl:



....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRJGhCtUyzQ  quick example.

Self defense is never a waste of time. In someones signature (sorry, can't remember who) it states the scene is never safe. Ask any RN who has spent some time at there job, the nicest patient can become combative with little to no warning. Ever deal with a patient with DT's? I have seen one come out of surgery and punch a nurse in the face. It can be the same for an emt on a rig or at a scene. LEO's can't be everywhere at once. 

Knowing how to defend yourself, when to use it, and how to react is a necessary tool for any responder. With that being said, I pose this question:

Should CPI certification be required of all medical responders? 

Most if not all hospitals have to have their security trained in this manner to be able to attempt to diffuse a situation or to use physical intervention if necessary. The holds and restraints taught in this program are specifically designed to cause no harm to patients.


----------



## firecoins (Oct 26, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> The second you die, your career is over.
> 
> I can always find another career.



I am still alive without the gun.  Good luck with the other career.


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 26, 2009)

Just reading some of the pro-gun posts here it is easy to determine the level of maturity either by age or mentality.  Those that also trying to rationalize their need for a weapon have posted with similar arguments and passion in other places about why they so desperately need a light bar and other accessories for their tricked out POV.   Actually, those with the pro-gun arguments are exactly the ones I would NOT want to see possess a gun for any reason and especially not on an ambulance or while coming into contact with the public or their partner.


----------



## mcdonl (Oct 26, 2009)

*A time and a place...*



> Just reading some of the pro-gun posts here it is easy to determine the level of maturity either by age or mentality. Those that also trying to rationalize their need for a weapon have posted with similar arguments and passion in other places about why they so desperately need a light bar and other accessories for their tricked out POV. Actually, those with the pro-gun arguments are exactly the ones I would NOT want to see possess a gun for any reason and especially not on an ambulance or while coming into contact with the public or their partner.



I am very pro gun, pro second amendment and pro hunting... but I do not do *any *of that at work. Not in my day job, and not in my volunteer service.

Actually, the last few weeks have shed the light on a couple of tricky CCW situations. 1st, in regards to EMS/FD... 1st rule of EMS... make sure the scene is safe before rendering service, and first rule of fire fighting... NO FREELANCING... CCW in this particular industry seems to cause *ME* an internal struggle.... if I enter a scene where I need to get into a gun fight to save my life, then I have probably entered a scene before I should, and wouldn't I also be free lancing as it is not my job to secure the scene therefore I am stepping way out of my role?

I do not buy into the having my gun end up in the wrong hands, or any of that uneducated anti garbage, I am well trained in weapons retention, self defense and shoot competitively but I do feel as though it lends itself to a lot of confusion. (PS... not a whacker h34r:, I shoot IDPA in jeans, a t-shirt and a normal jacket... no mall ninja here... just like the shooting sports....)

Also, as a permit holder I understand and accept the legal fallout that may result in the use of lethal force to protect myself, but I am not the chief, nor a selectman so I have no right putting that burden on my town or my department. :excl:

The other situation, it is a "little" off topic, but related. Recently our community has lost LEO coverage for a good part of the evening, and have had many vehicle break ins and vandleism... including the fire station near my house. So, I have started a neighborhood watch. Again, I have carried for many years because this is America, and you may not like it but too bad... it is my right... but again, here I am in a situation where I am far more likely to need to defend myself (Neighborhood watch this time.... not EMS scene....) and the CCW adds confusion. If I am going to the corner store to get milk, and an armed robbery breaks out and my life is in danger, I can defend myself... not a big deal (Yeah... figuratively speaking.....) but if I am out on a neighborhood patrol, I am all of a sudden Charles Bronson (Only better looking....) and out looking to "off some punk"... so, when I do my evening cruise of the neighborhood I leave my CCW at home.

Oh the irony...


----------



## firecoins (Oct 26, 2009)

I am pro 2nd amendment.  I think we all have the right bear arms. http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=family+guy+bear+arms&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f#

I don't think guns belong on EMS personnel. Off duty its your own choice.


----------



## EMSLaw (Oct 26, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> first rule of fire fighting... NO FREELANCING...



I'm not a FF, so bear with me here... What does that mean?  I doubt anyone is cruising around in their PO fire apparatus, just waiting for a structure fire to pop up?


----------



## firecoins (Oct 26, 2009)

EMSLaw said:


> I'm not a FF, so bear with me here... What does that mean?  I doubt anyone is cruising around in their PO fire apparatus, just waiting for a structure fire to pop up?


You mean I shouldn't go around in my own ladder truck looking for structure fires?


----------



## EMSLaw (Oct 26, 2009)

firecoins said:


> You mean I shouldn't go around in my own ladder truck looking for structure fires?



At least then you'd have something to put all your spare light bars, sirens, and air horns on, and a place to keep your jump bag.


----------



## mcdonl (Oct 26, 2009)

*I will take a shot at it  (Pun Intended....)*

I am in no way shape or form qualified to answer anyones question about FF, but my understanding of Freelancing is doing something out the expected SOG/SOP's.... like taking safety into your own hands at a scene.

Make sense? Am I understanding that correctly?


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 26, 2009)

dragonjbynight said:


> In someones signature (sorry, can't remember who) it states the scene is never safe.



*Raises hand*


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

firecoins said:


> I am pro 2nd amendment.  I think we all have the right bear arms. http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=family+guy+bear+arms&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f#
> 
> I don't think guns belong on EMS personnel. Off duty its your own choice.



You think because we're working a job, we aren't allowed to protect ourselves?  Especially a job that brings with in inherent risks? 

Do you understand the Constitution is a list of our *inalienable* rights?  Do you understand that agreeing with "shall not be infringed *.*", then turning the "." into a "... except!" flies in the face of the notion of Republican government?  Do you understand that a "right" isn't something bequeathed to us mere mortals by the gods of the electorate?  I, somehow, don't feel you do. 

Do you feel that prayer belongs on EMS personnel?  How about religious artifacts, under a piece of clothing?  If so, perhaps you can cite where the Constitution makes separate allowances for the First and Second Amendment.

Better yet; if you're "on duty" and a cop asks to search you, do you still have the right to say no?  

The Constitution isn't multiple choice, it's all or nothing.


----------



## firecoins (Oct 27, 2009)

> Do you understand the Constitution is a list of our *inalienable* rights?  Do you understand that agreeing with "shall not be infringed *.*", then turning the "." into a "... except!" flies in the face of the notion of Republican government?  Do you understand that a "right" isn't something bequeathed to us mere mortals by the gods of the electorate?  I, somehow, don't feel you do. Do you feel that prayer belongs on EMS personnel?  How about religious artifacts, under a piece of clothing?  If so, perhaps you can cite where the Constitution makes separate allowances for the First and Second Amendment.


Your working a job.  Your employer has the right to not employ you or not. Carrying a gun puts your employer at much higher legal risk.  They will not employ you if you carry a gun.  You can exorcise your rights somewhere else.   

Your employer sets the uniform. If your religious articles and gun are against theu uniform policy, good luck job hunting.  



> Better yet; if you're "on duty" and a cop asks to search you, do you still have the right to say no?


Again you fail understand that your eplyer is free to not employ you.  Your employer can randomly drug test you.  If you disagree, you will be job hunting.  



> The Constitution isn't multiple choice, it's all or nothing.


You clearly do not understand that it appllies to your employer as well.  They do not need you to put them in danger of legal liability because you want to exercvise your rights on their time.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

firecoins said:


> Your working a job.  Your employer has the right to not employ you or not. Carrying a gun puts your employer at much higher legal risk.  They will not employ you if you carry a gun.  You can exorcise your rights somewhere else.


So, they'll *guarantee* my safety?  If they can't *guarantee* my safety, how can they regulate what I carry to do the task myself?

When I go to a jail, I'm not upset that I've got to check my firearm. I'm surrounded by armed guards that are required to provide protection.  When I'm in the middle of no-where, I've got no protection other than that which I provide myself.



> Your employer sets the uniform. If your religious articles and gun are against theu uniform policy, good luck job hunting.


If I were religious, I'd wear my religious article concealed by my clothing and they'd never need to know it was there.  I feel the same about a sidearm.  



> Again you fail understand that your eplyer is free to not employ you.  Your employer can randomly drug test you.  If you disagree, you will be job hunting.


I completely understand that, thanks for the clarification.  I'm just not that concerned about it frankly.  In the immediate future I'll most likely be hired as a armorer for a police department and I'll be a sworn and deputized LEO.  Even if that does not happen, I'll still wear my "religious articles" and such under my clothes and no one will even know they exist.



> You clearly do not understand that it appllies to your employer as well.  They do not need you to put them in danger of legal liability because you want to exercvise your rights on their time.


My "alive liability" matters more to me than a job or the legal liability of my employer.  As I said, if I make a choice and lose my job, that's not that big of an issue to me.  However, if I make a choice and end up dead or injured severely, that *is* a bit of an issue to me.

Are you basing your theory that "EMT's with guns will be frequently shooting patients" on something, perhaps some past anecdotal evidence you could cite, or are we just playing the "all guns r bad" song on a scratched record?


Let me ask you what you'd do if a drunk woke up in your ambulance, pulled a knife and started swinging.  Would you, in a situation where seconds matter, wait minutes for law enforcement to show up, or would you "do something" with "whatever was at hand" to save your life?  I'd pick the "do something" option and I'd prefer that "whatever was at hand" would be a highly effective instrument that would allow me to put an end to the threat to my life without putting my life in danger. 

Sure, martial arts are fine, but why should a 90lb female EMT have to dedicate years of her life studying to defend herself effectively against a 350lb muscle-bound drunk with a weapon when she could instead take a two day class with a sidearm and be prepared to deal with the issue?

*edit*

While we're dealing with scenarios;

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...ury_suspect_inept_but_serious_terror_plotter/



> They plotted to shoot shoppers and *emergency responders* at a suburban mall, but scrapped the plan because they could not get their hands on automatic weapons, according to the FBI.



Terrorist attacks are honestly at the bottom of my "threat matrix" living out here, but it's entirely plausible that they could happen.  If they happen and if the terrorists are specifically attacking emergency responders, why can't I bring the most useful tool along with me?


----------



## ZVNEMT (Oct 27, 2009)

*i admit i havent read the whole post... or even most of it, but heres my 2 cents*

I myself am all about owning and carrying firearms, on my own time. but consider this, when is it reasonable to shoot someone? only when they are using equally lethal force against you. another thing to consider, it is not uncommon for someone to be assaulted by more than one person... it could just be one guy threatening to shoot you... or it could be a whole gang of arms punkass kids. then it becomes a question of how many can you bring down with you. or maybe they require EMTs to carry firearms/tasers... the cops have alot of issues with misuse, lots of dumb cops... guess what... there's lots of dumb medics too. maybe alot of mentally unstable medics. only a matter of time until a medic goes postal in the station.

I feel relatively safe on my rig w/o a weapon, both my partner and I are pretty tough guys w/ martial arts experience. I'm sure we can handle crazies and crackheads.


----------



## mcdonl (Oct 27, 2009)

*For further reading pleasure...*

If anyone is considering carrying a CCW, I would recommend reading In the Gravest Extremes by Mas Ayoob. (Spelling may be off....)


----------



## ZVNEMT (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> While we're dealing with scenarios;
> 
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...ury_suspect_inept_but_serious_terror_plotter/
> 
> ...



do you think a sidearm will help much against terrorists with AK-47s? they'll probably have the benefit of cover, where you won't. regardless, i don; think the police would let you get in until the scene is secure, or maybe send you with an escort. you are not a cop, you're there for your Pt, not to hunt terrorists. lets say you are armed and for whatever reason you go in, knowing there are people who might try to kill you, will you recognize them right away, tell them apart from a civilian? 

I'm tired of these gun-totting hero fantasies... it's not going to workout the way you imagine it. a gun doesn't give you any special power over evil.

armed or not, if i hear gunshots on scene, i'm not going out of the way to find out where they're coming from.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

ZVNEMT said:


> I myself am all about owning and carrying firearms, on my own time. but consider this, when is it reasonable to shoot someone? only when they are using equally lethal force against you.


When they present a threat to your life, you are able to use lethal force.  Thus, a grandmother being attacked by a musuclar thug is able to use lethal force due to the *disparity of force*, the same thing that allows an individual to use lethal force against a numerically superior attacker/s.



> another thing to consider, it is not uncommon for someone to be assaulted by more than one person... it could just be one guy threatening to shoot you... or it could be a whole gang of arms punkass kids.


A gang of unarmed individuals presents the same *disparity of force* that I mentioned above.  If five thugs try to jump me, I don't feel "honor bound" to fight them with my hands. 



> then it becomes a question of how many can you bring down with you. or maybe they require EMTs to carry firearms/tasers... the cops have alot of issues with misuse, lots of dumb cops... guess what... there's lots of dumb medics too. maybe alot of mentally unstable medics. only a matter of time until a medic goes postal in the station.


So you feel that a mentally unstable person would go on a shooting spree, intentionally killing numerous innocent people, but wouldn't *dare* violate a protocol that prohibits weapons?  If the individual in question is going to follow rules and laws, that's great, we've already got well-thought out laws such as "Don't shoot innocent people".  If they aren't obeying that one, odds are good they won't obey "Don't carry a gun".  

Also, do you truely feel that their are hordes of people out there wanting to commit multiple shootings but, due to laws against carrying the weapon, they aren't doing so?  I find that improbable.





> I feel relatively safe on my rig w/o a weapon, both my partner and I are pretty tough guys w/ martial arts experience. I'm sure we can handle crazies and crackheads.



And what if your "partner" was a 25 year old female that barely weighs 100lbs?  What if she has a family and kids and, instead of spending hours learning martial arts, she just wants to spend an hour learning how to properly handle a firearm?  What if the "crazy" has a knife?  

Do you realize that two "tough" guys with marital arts training can be taken down? 

If you're recognizing the fact that threats exist and listing the methodology by which you've prepared to defend against said threats, why would you limit the ability of another person to prepare for said threat differently?  Do you feel that you're likely to start randomly choking someone when you're on scene, or that you'll drop some slightly combative patient to the ground and break their arm ?  If you don't feel that way, do you feel that a person carrying a sidearm is likely to misuse their defensive preparation?



ZVNEMT said:


> do you think a sidearm will help much against terrorists with AK-47s?


I think it'll help a bit more than aiming my finger at them and saying "pew! pew!". I think it'll help more than marital arts, I think it'll help more than a kubaton.  Do you think that a  terrorist getting shot will know that the round was fired by an EMT and thus, be ineffective?



> probably have the benefit of cover, where you won't.


Just to clarify your position; if you were under fire from AK-47 wielding terrorists firing from cover, you'd *turn down* a weapon?  I mean, come on, you seriously don't think you'd have even a .01% better chance of survival if you had a sidearm?  I train a few times a week using force on force, airsoft, live ammo and various defensive tactics.  I wouldn't *prefer* to face down some terrorist with a sidearm, but if I was pinned down and he came around to unload in the back of the ambulance, I'd be pleased to have 16 125g JHP's in which to change his mind.  



> regardless, i don; think the police would let you get in until the scene is secure, or maybe send you with an escort.


If cops prevent crime, why does it still happen?  If the mere presence of a uniformed officer is enough to stop a criminal, why are prisons so dangerous?  I'm not talking specifically about "on-scene" stuff, either.  People do crazy, violent stuff to other people.  I could be using the ATM to get some cash for a coffee and have some dirtbag pull a knife on me.  Nothing about a uniform, any uniform, is a magical talisman that protects you from crime.  No where on earth is a place devoid of criminals.



> you are not a cop, you're there for your Pt, not to hunt terrorists.


Somehow you're consistently confusing the purpose of a sidearm with the purpose of a long rifle.  I don't carry a sidearm so I can go hunt bad guys, I don't carry it so I can walk down the dangerous streets at night.  I carry it to *defend* myself from someone who has *initiated an assault on me*.  Sure I'm there to help my patient, but lying on the floor with a stab wound, or defensive wounds from a knife won't help anyone least of all the person I care about most; me.



> lets say you are armed and for whatever reason you go in, knowing there are people who might try to kill you, will you recognize them right away, tell them apart from a civilian?



People seem to think that since a sidearm isn't a magical talisman, it's worthless to carry one.  If anything I'm more cautious when I carry my sidearm because I know the liability that will come if I use it.  I'm not saying that carrying guarantees your safety, I'm not saying that the outcome will always be roses, but I am saying that it gives SOME boost to my defensive posture and I'm happy to use it.  PPE doesn't give 100% protection, but you still wear it, right?   It'd be like saying since some patients don't respond to defibrillation it's not worth doing ever.  Sure, my sidearm might not save me.  Sure, I might still get shot by the bad guy hiding behind cover.  However, I'd prefer to be given the freedom to take that risk in order to raise my defensive posture even one percent. 

You seem to also think that since we aren't cops, we don't get attacked.  Do you think that cops are mugged more frequently than the average citizen?  Do you think muggers look at a cop and say "Oh boy! He's got a sidearm, a baton and the training to use them! This is the guy I'm going to mug!".  Of course not.  I don't understand why you feel that cops SHOULD carry sidearms, despite the fact they are infrequently targeted for crime, but those of us that are more freuquently selected by criminals shouldn't be able to carry.



> I'm tired of these gun-totting hero fantasies... it's not going to workout the way you imagine it. a gun doesn't give you any special power over evil.


Nor does it provide the "instant-defeat" characteristic imagined by the hoplophobes.  If a gun isn't useful as a weapon, you shouldn't have any problem with me carrying it, right?  The basic issue that you have with it seems to be it's inherent lethality.  That's the reason that I carry it.



> armed or not, if i hear gunshots on scene, i'm not going out of the way to find out where they're coming from.


That's exactly how I feel.  Unless I were somehow called back to active duty, which is about a 0.00% chance, I can't see myself in a situation where I'd go looking for trouble.  That said, I also recognize that people exist in this world that come with trouble, looking for good people.  The media doesn't cover the times where a armed individual protects themselves, so we don't hear about it much.  Compare the Virginia Tech shooting with the shooting at Appalachian State University.  Sure, I might still die even though I've got a sidearm, that sort of defeatist attitude doesn't have a place in my mindset, however.  I'd rather die with a gun in my hands than curled up in a ball begging for my life.


----------



## ZVNEMT (Oct 27, 2009)

now you seem to be confused with what i am saying.

the gang of individuals that i mentioned ARE armed... 1 gun vs. many guns.... your gun will not affect the outcome that much.

I work with quite a few people that i believe should never be permitted to so much as look at a gun.

yes... i realize that "tough guys" can be taken down, so can someone with a gun. in a scuffle you might never get to touch your precious firearm, even cops get shot with their own weapon.

I'm not really saying that we shouldn't carry, I just don't think it will do us a whole lot of good. Sure it might be handy if you're at the ATM/party store/whatever and one or two guys bust in, but seriously, I think people get the idea that if they carry a firearm they will be invincible, or they will go about looking for a reason to use it. 

heres something else to think about, is it legal for civilians to have a gun in hospitals (where you're sure to go), banks, restaurants/bars, airports, malls, etc... places where you could potentially respond to? you'd have to disarm, unload, and leave it on the ambulance, which you can't do either because it wouldn't be secure. This is why i don't carry in public, but firearms are readily available at my house.

this is a fun game of hypotheticals.... shall we continue?


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 27, 2009)

ZVNEMT said:


> heres something else to think about, is it legal for civilians to have a gun in hospitals (where you're sure to go), banks, restaurants/bars, airports, malls, etc... places where you could potentially respond to? you'd have to disarm, unload, and leave it on the ambulance, which you can't do either because it wouldn't be secure. This is why i don't carry in public, but firearms are readily available at my house.


 
Our hospital Security and LEOs will remove your weapon when it is found while going through the metal detectors at the ED entrance. They will determine if you have a legal concealed carry permit and if your employer allows weapons to be carried while on duty. At this time there are no EMS employers in the area that permit their employees to carry. If your concealed weapon permit is not in order, you will be arrested. Your employer will be notified that you were carrying so they can then determine your future with them. The state may also be notified since a firearm was involved in a disciplinary action.


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> If I were religious, I'd wear my religious article concealed by my clothing and they'd never need to know it was there.  I feel the same about a sidearm.



A religious emblem is a little bit different than a firearm.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 27, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> A religious emblem is a little bit different than a firearm.



Not in my religion.


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Sure, martial arts are fine, but why should a 90lb female EMT have to dedicate years of her life studying to defend herself effectively against a 350lb muscle-bound drunk with a weapon when she could instead take a two day class with a sidearm and be prepared to deal with the issue?



If you think you should be allowed to carry a firearm on duty with only 2 DAYS of training, there's something seriously wrong.  What can you possibly learn in 2 days that you would be able to implement in a stressful situation?  How long do police officers train with their fire arms?


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 27, 2009)

ffemt8978 said:


> Not in my religion.



Are you from Texas?


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> What if she has a family and kids and, instead of spending hours learning martial arts, she just wants to spend an hour learning how to properly handle a firearm?



Now it's down to an hour?  With the amount of training you are advocating for, the person with the firearm is more dangerous than one without it.  And consider a situation (which you suggested) that would be inside the patient compartment; would you really want someone with 2 days or 1 hour of training to be in such a small area with a firearm?

I, personally, am against EMTs carrying firearms.  We are medical providers, not police officers.  Once the word gets out that EMTs are carrying weapons, what do you think the public's reaction will be?  Do you think they would be willing to tell us what is wrong with them, especially if what caused their problem was illegal?  Or do you think they would look at us as cops?

If, however, an EMT is going to carry allowed (and is allowed by both law and their employer), they should be required to go through some sort of a police academy directed only at training with firearms.  Otherwise, they are a HUGE liability.  Would you want somebody with a firearm in an enclosed space with a violent patient?  If they didn't have training in retention and use of firearms in close quarters, the consequences would be huge.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

ZVNEMT said:


> the gang of individuals that i mentioned ARE armed... 1 gun vs. many guns.... your gun will not affect the outcome that much.


Frankly, I doubt that.  Look at the security cameras from shootings, rarely does the perp (especially a gang member) assume a proper shooting position, focus on the front sight and execute a proper trigger squeeze.  A few homeboys blasting off caps towards one individual that's moving and shooting properly won't have a chance, other than luck.

Also, I don't care if YOU think it'll affect the outcome or not!  You seem to think that whenever you post a scenario in which a sidearm will not, in your opinion, help out that your theory is somehow correct, yet whenever a pro-RKAB'er posts a scenario it's always some commando-Rambo-wanna be "gun toting hero fantasty".  That cuts both ways, ya know.  Neither hypothetical is the exact representation of what *will* happen in a gunfight.  I'd rather hedge my bets.  My training, I feel it's safe to say, is light years above that of the lay person.  Besides my military experience, I've taken a number of shooting classes and I shoot competitively. 





> I work with quite a few people that i believe should never be permitted to so much as look at a gun.


Please list the certifications, classes or military/LEO experience you've acquired in order to make that call.



> yes... i realize that "tough guys" can be taken down, so can someone with a gun. in a scuffle you might never get to touch your precious firearm, even cops get shot with their own weapon.


So, you realize that both systems have their weaknesses, but you want to deprive me of my chosen method and keep yours?  Sorry Charlie, that doesn't quite cut it  



> Sure it might be handy if you're at the ATM/party store/whatever and one or two guys bust in, but seriously, I think people get the idea that if they carry a firearm they will be invincible, or they will go about looking for a reason to use it.


What gives you that idea?  If it's a post from this thread, I must have missed it and I'd appreciate the re-posting of it.  If you've some statistics on this, I'd be happy to see them.  I know, for a fact, that in my home state, police officers commit more violent crimes than LTCF holders do.  As a matter of fact, LTCF holders are quite a safe bunch statistically speaking.  So either we are magically invincible and we just don't want to share that information with you, or sidearms do play a role in personal survival.



> heres something else to think about, is it legal for civilians to have a gun in hospitals (where you're sure to go), banks, restaurants/bars, airports, malls, etc... places where you could potentially respond to?


Yes to every single answer, in my home state, minus the *secure area* of airports.



> you'd have to disarm, unload, and leave it on the ambulance, which you can't do either because it wouldn't be secure.


To be factually correct, an unloaded firearm in a locked vehicle is, in my opinion "secure".  If I were ever in this highly unlikely scenario, I'd probably pull aside a LEO, advice them of the situation and ask if I could put my unloaded weapon in their trunk.




> this is a fun game of hypotheticals.... shall we continue?


Honestly, I'd rather not.  You see, I've posited a number of hypothetical situations and you just don't answer them.  Did you not see my question about the light weight woman being attacked by a larger assailent, or did it not fit your "gun-owners all have a hero fantasy" model and you just choose to ignore it?

Since you enjoy the game, I'll repost it;

You feel that yourself and your partner are, due to being "tough guys" and having martial arts experience are able to deal with whatever violent confrontation you might come against.  You must also recognize that not every person is as buff and well trained as you and Jean-Claude, so why don't you recognize that they've taken alternative methods to ensure their safety?  Why is it appropriate for you and your partner to take YOUR precautions with you, but inappropriate for a 90lb female to take hers?  What do you recommend of those that aren't weight-lifting black belts?  Just suck it up and take a beating, instead of carrying a pound of protection secured in their waistband?  




VentMedic said:


> Our hospital Security and LEOs will remove your weapon when it is found while going through the metal detectors at the ED entrance. They will determine if you have a legal concealed carry permit and if your employer allows weapons to be carried while on duty.


You've got LEO's stationed at your hospital?  Well, then, I suppose I wouldn't carry.  If your area of operations is so dangerous that you've got private and professional security at every entrance, including the ambulance entrance, wouldn't you feel that carrying a sidearm might be appropriate?  Do the LEO's come out on rides with you and ensure your safey? Why not? If a patient inside the hospital could become violent, so much a risk that they've got to have magnemometors and sworn LEO's guarding the entrance, what magic talisman negates this threat in the field?  Have you LEO's and security on-scene, wanding every patient before loading them into your ambulance?  If the answer is no, then you've got to concede that you're at a higher risk in the ambulance than you are inside the hospital that feels the need to have metal detectors!




medichopeful said:


> If you think you should be allowed to carry a firearm on duty with only 2 DAYS of training, there's something seriously wrong.  What can you possibly learn in 2 days that you would be able to implement in a stressful situation?  How long do police officers train with their fire arms?



I'm sorry if I've misstated my position.  I feel *any person* should be able to carry with exactly zero minutes of "offical training", zero days, zero hours, zero minutes.  I'm not asking your permission, I'm not asking the king to sign off on it, I'm exercising a well-protected right listed in both the Federal Constitution and my state's Constitution.

Also, I'm assuming you've taken two days of firearms training to be able to speak of the efficicay of such a program.  Have you?  If so, at which school?  To be plainly honest, two days worth of training is really a great start.  Half a day on drawing from concealment, half a day on retention, a full day on marksmanship and every second devoted to safety.  

We're talking about *defensive use of a firearm* here, not long range rifle shooting!  If an assailant is five feet away from you, all you need to know how to do is pull the trigger and not have the weapon aimed at yourself!  



> Now it's down to an hour? With the amount of training you are advocating for, the person with the firearm is more dangerous than one without it. And consider a situation (which you suggested) that would be inside the patient compartment; would you really want someone with 2 days or 1 hour of training to be in such a small area with a firearm?


???

I'm totally lost here.  Do you have friends that own firearms?  Go to the range with one of them some day and try this exercise; position ONE target two feet away, draw, fire.  I bet you hit the target pretty frequently, right?  Close proximity to the target doesn't INCREASE the likelihood of a negligent discharge or a "miss", it DECREASES the odds.  Try at ten feet, the maximum distance in the ambulances we take.  I bet you hit a soccer ball each and every time, right?  Yup... that's what I thought.



> I, personally, am against EMTs carrying firearms. We are medical providers, not police officers. Once the word gets out that EMTs are carrying weapons, what do you think the public's reaction will be? Do you think they would be willing to tell us what is wrong with them, especially if what caused their problem was illegal? Or do you think they would look at us as cops?


Fantasy-land scenarios.  Do you think the average criminal keeps apprised of current changes to EMS policy?  I'll check our e-mail tree, but I don't see "CRACK DEALERS" listed as a group.  And the public would probably deal with me the same they do when I CCW now, with sheer ignorance of the fact.  

Obviously you dislike firearms, an irrational fear of an inanimate, immoral object, and that gives you myopia.  What about the people that know we're carrying and decide NOT to attack one, or to amublance-jack you?  I mean, do you think that knowing someone is carrying a weapon *increases* the odds of being attacked?  Not too many criminals out there go for armed victims.  

You'll note that states that have begun issuing permits or licenses experienced a drop in violent crime.  That's because, even if you specifically aren't carrying, someone out there does love their family enough TO carry and the criminals can't tell the difference.  I bet if they announced on TV that EMS were carrying, assaults would drop.   Of course, if you've something to disprove this (read "something" as "facts" and not "emotions"), I'm happy to consider it!



> If, however, an EMT is going to carry allowed (and is allowed by both law and their employer), they should be required to go through some sort of a police academy directed only at training with firearms. Otherwise, they are a HUGE liability. Would you want somebody with a firearm in an enclosed space with a violent patient? If they didn't have training in retention and use of firearms in close quarters, the consequences would be huge.


I've got no problem with that.  While I disagree with mandatory training for issue of a permit, I don't have a problem with the training _per se_.  I've shoveled thousands of dollars out of my own wallet to increase my proficiency with a weapon.


----------



## karaya (Oct 27, 2009)

Yawn.  This is still going on?


----------



## firecoins (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> So, they'll *guarantee* my safety?  If they can't *guarantee* my safety, how can they regulate what I carry to do the task myself?


Your employer does not guarantee your safety. No where in any employment contract is it guaranteed.  They can regulate what you carry very easily, they hired you. They sign your paycheck.  They pay the insurance premiums that will be paying out when you shoot someone.  You can easily bankrupt a private company or volunteer organization. 



> When I go to a jail, I'm not upset that I've got to check my firearm. I'm surrounded by armed guards that are required to provide protection.  When I'm in the middle of no-where, I've got no protection other than that which I provide myself.


you obviously have not been to prison if you think your safe in there.  This is the clearest evidence you have not thought this through.  



> If I were religious, I'd wear my religious article concealed by my clothing and they'd never need to know it was there.  I feel the same about a sidearm.


concealed or not, an ambulance is no place for a gun.  




> My "alive liability" matters more to me than a job or the legal liability of my employer.


 If you need a gun for this, than you will find better employment outside of EMS.  I don't need a gun and do just fine.  



> Are you basing your theory that "EMT's with guns will be frequently shooting patients" on something, perhaps some past anecdotal evidence you could cite, or are we just playing the "all guns r bad" song on a scratched record?


The problem is uniformed EMS shooting anyone. I can take a look at cop shootings and see I don't want that.  Cops do get charged with crimes.  Cops make mistakes in their shootings.  So will EMS if they carry weapons.  This is not something I want.  No matter how well trained you claim to be, these mistakes WILL happen.

I know a cop who accidentally shot himself on duty. Every gun owner is sure it won't happen to him. So was he.    

I know cops who shot a man whom they thought was armed.  He wasn't.  The man was minority. Cops were charged with crimes, were cleared and are no longer cops. Try working as an EMT/Medic in such a neighborhood afterwards.  Now imagine if an EMT/Medic did the shooting.   



> Let me ask you what you'd do if a drunk woke up in your ambulance, pulled a knife and started swinging.  Would you, in a situation where seconds matter, wait minutes for law enforcement to show up, or would you "do something"


 In such a situation you would already be stabbed before you got to your a gun. Its only a matter of seconds in a close quarters situation.  Its been proven.  


And for terrorists attacks.  As someone who lives in NYC, I can not see how having a hand gun would have helped on 9/11 or back in 1993.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

firecoins said:


> Your employer does not guarantee your safety. No where in any employment contract is it guaranteed.  They can regulate what you carry very easily, they hired you. They sign your paycheck.  They pay the insurance premiums that will be paying out when you shoot someone.  You can easily bankrupt a private company or volunteer organization.


If they don't guarantee my safety, why do they impinge upon my right to protect it.  Why aren't you jumping all over the people that have said they'd use a O2 tank to the cranium to deal with a situation?  Lethal force is lethal force.  If I shoot someone, my insurance won't have to pay a damn thing.  Insurance isn't some magical demon that always is against you.  If LEO determines it's a "good shoot", the family can't sue simply because I was being paid to be employed somewhere.  Now, of course, if I negligently shoot someone, I'd be in jail, station would be sued, etc.  But, if I negligently bonked someone on the head with O2 bottle, or wrapped my arm around someones neck for a rear naked and killed them, I'd be equally in trouble.  

How can you have a different opinion about "firearms" and other lethal force options?



> you obviously have not been to prison if you think your safe in there.


You're correct, I haven't!  A building staffed with prison guards, searched daily and with limited items around for improvised weapon construction isn't safe, but an ambulance is?  I fail to see the logic, no offense.



> concealed or not, an ambulance is no place for a gun.


That's just a statement, it's backed up with nothing.  Should cops be required to disarm before entering?  If a patient has a gun, should we just toss it out on the street corner?  I'd amend your statement to say that an ambulance is no place for violent crime, but violent crime happens despite laws prohibiting it, despite signs, despite the Golden Rule.  Until violent crime vanishes, or we install the magic talisman that prevents it, I'd prefer to carry something that allows me to deal with it.



> The problem is uniformed EMS shooting anyone. I can take alook at cop shootings and see I don't want that.


You'd rather be dead?



> I know a cop who accidentally shot himself on duty. Every gun owner is sure it won't happen to him. So was he.


Incorrect.  The cop *negligently* shot himself on duty.  Accidents don't exist.  Was the cop's weapon holstered?  Was his finger on the trigger?  Was he aiming the weapon in a safe direction?  Obviously not to at least one of those.  His actions dictated the outcome.  If the gun spontaneously went off, in it's holster, without trigger activiation, I take that statement back.  Of course, we both know that didn't happen.



> I know cops who shot a man whom they thought was armed.  He wasn't.  The man was minority. Cops were charged with crimes, were cleared and are no longer cops. Try working as an EMT/Medic in such a neighborhood afterwards.  Now imagine if an EMT/Medic did the shooting.


Geez buddy, you know a cop who negligently popped himself *AND* cops who shot an unarmed man?  Where do you live, Mogadishu?  I've done HOURS of training with LEO's and I've met exactly ONE officer that's ever dropped a hammer in a situation.  You should carry a gun just to protect yourself from the negligent cops you've got surrounding you! 

And, again, simply because you can posit a scenario in which a firearm can be a detriment doesn't mean that you've covered every scenario.  Do you know any cops that used their weapon and didn't shoot themselves, an innocent person or another cop?  I mean, do cops in your area ever actually HIT the bad guy, or is it just all shooting themselves and innocent black kids?



> In such a situation you would already be stabbed before you pulled a gun.


Defeatist attidude.  Do you wear a seat belt?  Eat healthy?  Look both ways before crossing the street?  Stop at stop signs?  Why do you bother! Your seat belt could hold you in a postion that gets you suffocated, you could have a history of heart problems, a speeding motorist could smash you anyway...  of *course* bad things *can* happen!  But that's not a reason to ignore the fact that sometimes the outcome isn't bad, right?

Also, if I were stabbed, I'd still like to have the ability to draw my gun and end the threat.



> And for terrorists attacks.  As someone who lives in NYC, I can not see how having a hand gun would have helped on 9/11 or back in 1993.



Oh?  A pilot with a gun wouldn't have changed anything?  What about the attack in the Marine barracks in Beirut where the Marines weren't issued ammunition?  What about the school shooting I alluded to, any reason that didn't deserve a comment?  I'll repost it as I'm sure you just accidentally missed it, rather than intentionally obfuscated it;

Virginia Tech shooting V Appalachian State University shooting.

Notice a little difference there?


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> You've got LEO's stationed at your hospital? Well, then, I suppose I wouldn't carry. If your area of operations is so dangerous that you've got private and professional security at every entrance, including the ambulance entrance, wouldn't you feel that carrying a sidearm might be appropriate? Do the LEO's come out on rides with you and ensure your safey? Why not? If a patient inside the hospital could become violent, so much a risk that they've got to have magnemometors and sworn LEO's guarding the entrance, what magic talisman negates this threat in the field? Have you LEO's and security on-scene, wanding every patient before loading them into your ambulance? If the answer is no, then you've got to concede that you're at a higher risk in the ambulance than you are inside the hospital that feels the need to have metal detectors!


 
I've had LEOs and the National Guard protecting me during various situations over the past 30 years. 

Unless you have actually been in these type of situations, you will never know how ridiculous some sound here with their macho gun carrying crap. I have counted bullet holes in my truck but have never felt the need to stick around and shoot it out with those carrying weapons. Had I also been carrying a gun and perceived as a threat, things may not have gone so well for me on many occasions. The fact that I came into places of violence as a caregiver and not one who was out to put a notch on a gun butt gave me an edge to either provide care or get out of harm's way.

The issues with carrying guns were hashed out very well among the various departments during the peak of violence in my area and the arguments against carrying were more logical than those carrying. 

As far as carrying a weapon while on duty in the hospital, in no way do I want to be concerned about my weapon while working with kids and babies or anybody in the ED. Yes, we have taken weapons off many kids but that doesn't mean they have to see their caregiver carrying while trying to preach nonviolence to a 10 y/o gang member wannabe. 

If you have not read the news articles of violence inside the hospitals then you have led a sheltered life. There are even forums for hospital security that discuss the many aspects of the dangers. Having another 3000 employees at any given time in a hospital would seriously complicate their job. 

I would bet most here that are talking tough about weapons only know about gangs and all the rough stuff from TV and in their shoot 'em up fantasies of being the hero. 

Carrying a gun is not for those who have no professional training and a job that mandates you to maintain that training. 

If you want to carry a gun and a stethoscope, find a Public Safety Officer job that will allow you to do both. Many have not perfected the basic skills required of just being an EMT and now some want to add another "skill".


----------



## firecoins (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> If they don't guarantee my safety, why do they impinge upon my right to protect it. Why aren't you jumping all over the people that have said they'd use a O2 tank to the cranium to deal with a situation?  Lethal force is lethal force.


 How many accidentally O2 cranial cracks occur?  How many innocent bystanders have been hit by an O2 bottle?  How many EMTs accidentally crack their own skulls with o2 bottles?  Lot less damage with o2 bottles seems to occur.  



> If I shoot someone, my insurance won't have to pay a damn thing.  Insurance isn't some magical demon that always is against you.  If LEO determines it's a "good shoot", the family can't sue simply because I was being paid to be employed somewhere.


 Everything you just said is wrong.  Ask an insurance agent how many legit self defense situations they paid out on.  Of course, than there are the accidental shootings.

2 EMTs get called to an EDP.  As soon as they enter the apartment, the psych patient locks them in.  He has they key.  The psych goes for a gun ans was ready to kill them.  The male EMT tackles him and hits the psych over the head several times.  The female EMT calls for help.  Their employer had to pay the EDP several hundred thousand.    



> Now, of course, if I negligently shoot someone, I'd be in jail, station would be sued, etc.  But, if I negligently bonked someone on the head with O2 bottle, or wrapped my arm around someones neck for a rear naked and killed them, I'd be equally in trouble.


Maybe you shouldn;t go bonking people over the head with o2 bottles either.  




> How can you have a different opinion about "firearms" and other lethal force options?


How many bullets do you carry?  How many o2 bottles you have?  What are the stats on broken craniums with o2 bottles?  




> You're correct, I haven't!  A building staffed with prison guards, searched daily and with limited items around for improvised weapon construction isn't safe, but an ambulance is?  I fail to see the logic, no offense.


You need a different profession than EMS.  



> That's just a statement, it's backed up with nothing.  Should cops be required to disarm before entering?  If a patient has a gun, should we just toss it out on the street corner?  I'd amend your statement to say that an ambulance is no place for violent crime, but violent crime happens despite laws prohibiting it, despite signs, despite the Golden Rule.  Until violent crime vanishes, or we install the magic talisman that prevents it, I'd prefer to carry something that allows me to deal with it.


As I said, a drunk with aknife will be faster than your going for a gun.  Hence your gun is worthless. 



> You'd rather be dead?


I clearly keep myself safe without a gun.  You clearly can't.  



> Incorrect.  The cop *negligently* shot himself on duty.  Accidents don't exist.  Was the cop's weapon holstered?  Was his finger on the trigger?  Was he aiming the weapon in a safe direction?  Obviously not to at least one of those.  His actions dictated the outcome.  If the gun spontaneously went off, in it's holster, without trigger activiation, I take that statement back.  Of course, we both know that didn't happen.


we know that any EMT who carries a concealed weapon won;t accidentally discharge it.  




> Geez buddy, you know a cop who negligently popped himself *AND* cops who shot an unarmed man?  Where do you live, Mogadishu?  I've done HOURS of training with LEO's and I've met exactly ONE officer that's ever dropped a hammer in a situation.  You should carry a gun just to protect yourself from the negligent cops you've got surrounding you!


you haven't heard of NY have you?  There are negligent cops where you live. Now we need to worry about armed EMTs too. 



> Notice a little difference there?


The big difference is that all the people you mentioned were not EMTs in an ambulance.

Cops are constantly working on forms of non lethal force. It would be a good idea to learn about them.


----------



## firecoins (Oct 27, 2009)

Sean Bell Incident
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bell_shooting_incident

Amado Diallo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

These 2 shootings have made life tougher for EMS working in those areas.  Distrust of cops has spread to EMS and firefighters.  It has put our safety in jeapordy.  EMS carrying guns will just make it worse.


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I'm sorry if I've misstated my position.  I feel *any person* should be able to carry with exactly zero minutes of "offical training", zero days, zero hours, zero minutes.  I'm not asking your permission, I'm not asking the king to sign off on it, I'm exercising a well-protected right listed in both the Federal Constitution and my state's Constitution.



That, sir, is a very dangerous statement to make.  You would seriously be okay with somebody who has NO training carrying a deadly weapon out in public?  Do you not see anything wrong with this?



> Also, I'm assuming you've taken two days of firearms training to be able to speak of the efficicay of such a program.  Have you?  If so, at which school?  To be plainly honest, two days worth of training is really a great start.  Half a day on drawing from concealment, half a day on retention, a full day on marksmanship and every second devoted to safety.



I have never taken any _official_ firearms class, but I have done some shooting.  Yes, I will agree with you that 2 days of firearm training is a good start.  But there is the key word: "start."  In your previous post (unless I misread it), you stated that you would be perfectly fine with an EMT carrying a firearm after 2 days of training.  But here is the problem: 2 days is just not enough to properly train a public servant in the use of a firearm.  A regular civilian?  _Maybe_, but I would like to see more.



> We're talking about *defensive use of a firearm* here, not long range rifle shooting!  If an assailant is five feet away from you, all you need to know how to do is pull the trigger and not have the weapon aimed at yourself!



This is where I am seeing the biggest problem.  You state that all you need to do is be able to pull the trigger and not have the weapon aimed at yourself, correct?  How many other public, armed agencies do you know of that have this same mentality?

You stated earlier that 2 days of training is enough for an EMT to be able to carry a firearm.  While this may give them the basics, it teaches them NOTHING!  How long do police officers train on their weapons?  How about the military?  I can tell you it's longer than a few days.  Do you know one of the reasons why?  Stress.  Have you ever been in an incredibly stressful situation?  What is one of the first things that goes?  Your fine motor skills.  I can vouch for this, as I have done Bill Kipp's "FAST Defense Class (look it up)."  What happens to your aim when your fine motor skills diminish?  It goes straight to hell.  Just take the example of police officers.  How long is their training?  More than 2 days.  Do you know what their accuracy is in stressful situations?  "prior research consistently indicates that police officers who use
deadly force miss their intended targets far more often than they hit them (Geller&Karales, 1981a, 1981b; Geller&Scott, 1992; Matulia, 1985). Hit rates vary notably across police agencies but rarely exceed 50% (Geller & Scott, 1992). Matulia (1985) stated that although Hollywood often portrays police officers as sharp shooters, “in reality many police officers have a difficult time meeting departmental qualification standards at the firing range, let alone during a combat situation” (p. 69)."  (http://pqx.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/9/3/303.pdf)




> Do you have friends that own firearms?  Go to the range with one of them some day and try this exercise; position ONE target two feet away, draw, fire.  I bet you hit the target pretty frequently, right?  Close proximity to the target doesn't INCREASE the likelihood of a negligent discharge or a "miss", it DECREASES the odds.  Try at ten feet, the maximum distance in the ambulances we take.  I bet you hit a soccer ball each and every time, right?  Yup... that's what I thought.



Yep, I bet that in this situation, I would be able to hit the target nearly every time.  But once again, you're forgetting something: stress.  The question is not whether somebody can hit a target.  The question is whether somebody can hit a target when it counts.  And with 2 days of training, I'd be willing to say that they can't  



> Fantasy-land scenarios.  Do you think the average criminal keeps apprised of current changes to EMS policy?  I'll check our e-mail tree, but I don't see "CRACK DEALERS" listed as a group.  And the public would probably deal with me the same they do when I CCW now, with sheer ignorance of the fact.



Of course they don't.  But think about this: how fast does news travel about the police?  Or anything in the public eye?  It would not take long for the public to figure out that EMS workers were carrying deadly weapons.  I promise.



> Obviously you dislike firearms, an irrational fear of an inanimate, immoral object, and that gives you myopia.  What about the people that know we're carrying and decide NOT to attack one, or to amublance-jack you?  I mean, do you think that knowing someone is carrying a weapon *increases* the odds of being attacked?  Not too many criminals out there go for armed victims.



Just curious, where in this thread did I state that I did not like (or was afraid of) firearms?  If you can point it out, I'll be happy to correct it.  As far as I know, I did not say ANYWHERE that I was afraid of firearms.  I like firearms.  But they have their place.  As far as I'm concerned, that place is not in the healthcare field.  You can read my responses, but I would prefer that you did not put words in my mouth.  



> You'll note that states that have begun issuing permits or licenses experienced a drop in violent crime.  That's because, even if you specifically aren't carrying, someone out there does love their family enough TO carry and the criminals can't tell the difference.  I bet if they announced on TV that EMS were carrying, assaults would drop.   Of course, if you've something to disprove this (read "something" as "facts" and not "emotions"), I'm happy to consider it!



Yes, assaults may drop.  But you know what else may drop?  The public's trust.


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 27, 2009)

This is a decent video that should give some a view on why LEOs spend many, many hours training for situations involving weapons. 

*If I Only Had a Gun*

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=7310933


----------



## medichopeful (Oct 27, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> This is a decent video that should give some a view on why LEOs spend many, many hours training for situations involving weapons.
> 
> *If I Only Had a Gun*
> 
> http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=7310933



I actually remember watching that.  Very interesting news story.


----------



## firecoins (Oct 27, 2009)

Baltimore Cop is in a little bit of hot water.
http://www.wbaltv.com/news/21430106/detail.html


----------



## ZVNEMT (Oct 27, 2009)

whatever... let rambo have his gun. maybe you'll be right and save the day... kill the terrrorists that the police can't handle, save grandma from a musclebound thug, and rescue your 90lbs female partner from a crazed crackhead.

Please don't live in the same city as me.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> I've had LEOs and the National Guard protecting me during various situations over the past 30 years.


The same LEO's that shoot themselves and unarmed minorities?  If it's all the same, I'll protect myself thank you.



> Unless you have actually been in these type of situations, you will never know how ridiculous some sound here with their macho gun carrying crap. I have counted bullet holes in my truck but have never felt the need to stick around and shoot it out with those carrying weapons.


I'm totally at a loss for where you see that.  I've asked others this same question, are their threads that I'm not seeing with Rambo's to-be just itching to shoot someone?  If so, I'd like to see them so that I can add those in the balance when forming an opinion.  You'll notice the topic here isn't "EMT's as Vigilante Justice", it's *self-defense*.  Anything that you bring up that isn't related to self defense is off-topic and not apropos for the discussion.

To clarify; At no time should a lay person go TOWARDS the sound of gunfire.  I wouldn't do it and I'd hope that no person carrying a sidearm for defense would do it.  Any position I have is based on the assumption of self-defense as stated in various statutes across the country, including in my state.  

To further clarify;
Chasing someone down to shoot them - BAD
Using force on someone where you've no option to retreat - NOT BAD.

Do you now understand that it's not my position that EMT's go out seeking confrontation with their sidearms?



> As far as carrying a weapon while on duty in the hospital, in no way do I want to be concerned about my weapon while working with kids and babies or anybody in the ED. Yes, we have taken weapons off many kids but that doesn't mean they have to see their caregiver carrying while trying to preach nonviolence to a 10 y/o gang member wannabe.


Carrying a sidearm doesn't mean you're a violent person.  Cops teach DARE classes around here, do they teach them in NY as well?  Good guys carry guns, ya know.  And again, concealed means concealed.



> Having another 3000 employees at any given time in a hospital would seriously complicate their job.


How many school shootings are you familiar with?  Mall shootings?  Post office shootings?  Pretty good number of them, right?  How many shootings have you heard of at gun stores?  Shooting ranges?  Thought so.  Any reason for that, ya think?

I'm sure, also, that those states that decided to issue CCW's experienced a sharp increase in violent crime once they began their licensure system.  Care to comment on that?  Of course, they didn't experience that.  On the flip side, those cities with strict gun control, like Detroit, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, are *RIFE* with gun violence.  Any thoughts on that?  Frankly, the "more guns equals more violent crime" theory is completely debunked, across the board.  Show me where that isn't the case and I assure you you'll be seeing the exception, rather than the rule.



> Carrying a gun is not for those who have no professional training and a job that mandates you to maintain that training.


Oh?  Where is that written in the Constitution?  Right after "shall not be infringed"?  And weren't you the guy that's seen cop shoot themselves and unarmed minorities?  Training doesn't solve every problem, ya know.



firecoins said:


> Everything you just said is wrong.  Ask an insurance agent how many legit self defense situations they paid out on.  Of course, than there are the accidental shootings.


I just asked my insurance agent, he said *zero*.  Perhaps you could post a source that shows this?  Googling "justifiable homicide insurance" doesn't give any appropriate hits, maybe my Goog-Fu is weak tonight?



> 2 EMTs get called to an EDP.  As soon as they enter the apartment, the psych patient locks them in.  He has they key.  The psych goes for a gun ans was ready to kill them.  The male EMT tackles him and hits the psych over the head several times.  The female EMT calls for help.  Their employer had to pay the EDP several hundred thousand.


Is that just some scenario that you've envisioned?  The patient committed one felony, unlawful detainment/imprisonment, and was reaching for a gun.  I think that this story came out of the south end of a north bound male bovine, but I could be wrong.  You've, of course, got some source for this?  And, lets say that it's true (which again, very doubtful) so what?  If you were this EMT, would you be happier if you got shot?  As you're lying there, locked in some nutcases house with your lungs collapsing, you could say "Thank god my department won't be sued!  I'll sure miss my wife and kids, but my department won't get a lawsuit! Praise Jesus".  No thanks.  Safe to me means I go home at night.  Do you seriously think that you'd NOT defend yourself because you're worried SOMEONE ELSE might get sued?! 



> You need a different profession than EMS.


Yea, thanks for the opinion.  I'll take that under consideration.  If you're ever in my squad, please tell me so I'll know not to get shifts with the coward that would rather get killed by a nutcase than defend themself.  I think that all gun-haters should be required to wear pink shirts.  That way, if I see you getting mugged or assaulted, I'll know you'd never dare me interfere and save your life, I'll just walk on by and listen to you thanking the Insurance Gods for saving them a payout.



> As I said, a drunk with aknife will be faster than your going for a gun.  Hence your gun is worthless.


Source, please?  My bullets, all handloads, fly 1380fps.  I don't think some drunk with a knife is going to be moving at twice the speed of sound, perhaps you've got evidence to the contrary?  I find it so amusing how you're sitting here, armchair quarterbacking some imaginary scenario.  If a knife is so deadly, wouldn't that be THE REASON that I'd carry a more effective weapon?  Is every knife-wound immediatly fatal or incapacitating?  



> I clearly keep myself safe without a gun.  You clearly can't.


You haven't *yet* been killed.  You just can't stop with the insults, can you?  Well, if I wasn't able to articulate my position clearly and logically, I'd probably insult people as well.  I just hope that your cowardice doesn't end up getting your entire family killed.



> you haven't heard of NY have you?  There are negligent cops where you live. Now we need to worry about armed EMTs too.


"Worried"?  You live in a fantasy land, friend.  I don't "worry" about people carrying guns.  I worry about violent criminals.  I carry a gun to DEAL with violent criminals.  Also, are you trying to say that NYC is a violent place to live?  But.... aren't concealed weapons, and all sidearms, banned there?  Bu.. buh... but... how can there be crime when guns are banned!  



> Cops are constantly working on forms of non lethal force. It would be a good idea to learn about them.


They're also constantly working on "Plan B".  Since you approve of *less than* lethal methods, I'll assume you're OK with EMT's carrying Tasers?  Right?



medichopeful said:


> You would seriously be okay with somebody who has NO training carrying a deadly weapon out in public?  Do you not see anything wrong with this?


"Shall not be infringed".  How much training does the law mandate?  How much training do you need before you're given permission to preach religion "out in public"?  Don't cops, who have tons of training, still ND and shoot people?  Training isn't some magical panacea, ya know.  I'd *prefer* that individuals that choose to carry a weapon be trained in the use thereof, but I'm not going to prevent them from doing so.  What about some young single woman in the city that can't afford an expensive firearms class?  I guess she's OK to just get raped to death, right?  We all know the second she picked up a gun she'd turn into a stark raving mad lunatic and go on a shooting spree :wacko:  :wacko:



> I have never taken any _official_ firearms class, but I have done some shooting.  Yes, I will agree with you that 2 days of firearm training is a good start.  In your previous post (unless I misread it), you stated that you would be perfectly fine with an EMT carrying a firearm after 2 days of training.


Zero days.  I'd be content if a guy I was riding with had no formal training, but had been to the range before.  I'd encourage him to get more training, but I wouldn't feel that he'd just flip a gasket and start randomly shooting people.  Only cops do that ;-)



> You state that all you need to do is be able to pull the trigger and not have the weapon aimed at yourself, correct?  How many other public, armed agencies do you know of that have this same mentality?


I was just kidding.  Actually, I was boiling the issue down pretty far to caricture.  I wouldn't want someone randomly pulling the trigger, but at two feet, it's hard to miss.  One hand up next to your ear so you don't shoot yourself, aim at bad guy, pull trigger and then, as the shampoo bottle says, "Repeat as necessary".



> Yep, I bet that in this situation, I would be able to hit the target nearly every time.  But once again, you're forgetting something: stress.  The question is not whether somebody can hit a target.  The question is whether somebody can hit a target when it counts.  And with 2 days of training, I'd be willing to say that they can't


So only IDPA Five-gun Masters are allowed to carry a sidearm to defend themselves?  That must be what "shall not be infringed" means, right?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 27, 2009)

ZVNEMT said:


> whatever... let rambo have his gun. maybe you'll be right and save the day... kill the terrrorists that the police can't handle, save grandma from a musclebound thug, and rescue your 90lbs female partner from a crazed crackhead.
> 
> Please don't live in the same city as me.




Are you serious?  Don't come to *DETROIT* and carry a sidearm, lawfully and with years of training?  My god, man do you READ!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Detroit

I mean, when Wiki has an entry on your cities CRIME RATES.... it MIGHT be a key that you aren't living in utopia, ya know?

Almost 48 murders per 100,000 people?  Seriously?  What percentage of those do you feel are carried out by CCW holding individuals packing heat? 

I've heard it all... some guy from the Murder Capital of the USA telling me that I shouldn't come to his city, with my clear criminal history, military experience, years of firearms safety training, because I'll bring with me some inherent danger.  hah! Well, obviously your position isn't rooted in ration or you wouldnt' dare to make such an absurd comment.

GUNS R TEH BADZ NDA KILL PPLZ.  Whatever lets ya sleep at night, buddy.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Oct 27, 2009)

Thread reopened.  If I have to close it again, some people are getting a vacation.


----------



## guardian528 (Oct 28, 2009)

> Well, if I wasn't able to articulate my position clearly and logically, I'd probably insult people as well.



pretty sure you've already gotten to that point



> Thought so. Any reason for that, ya think?
> 
> I'm sure, also, that those states that decided to issue CCW's experienced a sharp increase in violent crime once they began their licensure system. Care to comment on that?
> 
> ...



now, i've only looked at the last page of this thread, so i can only imagine how well you've articulated yourself on the previous 16 pages, perhaps you didn't even have to insult anyone. For the record, being a :censored::censored::censored::censored: doesn't help your argument. in fact, it usually leads people to discredit it even more.


----------



## ZVNEMT (Oct 29, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Are you serious?  Don't come to *DETROIT* and carry a sidearm, lawfully and with years of training?  My god, man do you READ!?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Detroit
> 
> ...



been in and around detroit for quite a while now, never once have i needed a gun. and you seem to not understand that I'm PRO-GUN, i just doubt the usefullness on an ambulance as well as concerned with the weilder to use said gun responsibly. 

however, I don't care. I'm sure you're just trolling for an arguement and the mods would lock this thread, and ban the topic from ever being brought up if they were smart. this is as bad as debating abortion...


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 29, 2009)

ZVNEMT said:


> been in and around detroit for quite a while now, never once have i needed a gun. and you seem to not understand that I'm PRO-GUN, i just doubt the usefullness on an ambulance as well as concerned with the weilder to use said gun responsibly.


You're pro "shall not be infringed", except when you want to infringe upon the RKBA?  Gotcha.


----------



## mcdonl (Oct 29, 2009)

*Night and Day - In my opinion*

I have been to many SD with a gun classes, read even more books... I take personal self defense very seriously. That being said.... Does anyone know the #1 rule that is preached to the civilian who carries a gun for self defense?

"AVOIDANCE" - Do not put yourself in situations where you are likley to need a firearm. Then based on this having already taken place, you are taught things like how to recognize when a bag duy is "interviewing" you, how to move tacticly for cover, etc.... How to retreat. Using the gunis the last resort.

When I put on that FD/EMS hat and turn that radio on, everything I have learned about SD is turned upside down. What do we do? We head straight for the emergency, disaster, situation that is likley to be volatile. We are legaly bound NOT to retreat.

Using a gun for self defense and the training that you get is a world away from being involved in EMS. The type of training, and the folks who understand how to use a weapon in our field (LEO's).... in my opinion... should be the only ones who carry at an emergency scene as a matter of procedure.

If you want more information, go to www.thehighroad.org and read the legal, or Tactics and Situations section and you will see where I am coming from. No where in there are you going to see anyone advise that you go anywhere near an emergency situation with your handgun.


----------



## VentMedic (Oct 29, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> If you want more information, go to www.thehighroad.org and read the legal, or Tactics and Situations section and you will see where I am coming from. No where in there are you going to see anyone advise that you go anywhere near an emergency situation with your handgun.


 
I posted this a while ago when this was being discussed.

http://www.emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=14850

Even the Fire Rescue Paramedics who do work SWAT do not carry a gun while on duty with Fire Rescue and not SWAT. You must know you job and know what others in Law Enforcement are also doing. Your gun at scene changes everything including your role and how you are perceived or received by the patient, the neighborhood and the LEOs. I would rather put my faith in knowing the areas I am working in and allowing those with tactical training to secure the scene before I would ever trust some Rambo partner to protect me with his gun. 

I will state again that those like thatJeffguy who only quote the headlines from the media have probably never been in a situation to where any direct danger was ever directed at them. 

From reading thatJeffguy's posts it also seems he has some issues with Law Enforcement. 

Here's an example of that where he is babbling about something he is totally clueless about. A one man army taking on a crowd in a riot with his gun...real smart. 



> Originally Posted by *VentMedic*
> 
> 
> _I've had LEOs and the National Guard protecting me during various situations over the past 30 years._


 


thatJeffguy said:


> The same LEO's that shoot themselves and unarmed minorities? If it's all the same, I'll protect myself thank you.


 
The fact that you believe you know more with your conceal weapon cert than the LEOs makes you a threat to anyone who might be your partner, the patient, the general public and the LEOs.  You try to say this isn't about vigilante justice for EMTs and it probably isn't.  With you, the issues are far beyond that and much more dangerous.


----------



## ZVNEMT (Oct 29, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> You're pro "shall not be infringed", except when you want to infringe upon the RKBA?  Gotcha.



as far as i recall, never once did i say you can't, only that i believe you shouldn't. there's a big difference.


----------



## mcdonl (Oct 29, 2009)

*A couple of threads from THR....*

I figured I would share these... they are from a little different perspective but this debate seems as endless as which is the best caliber, volly vs paid or any other countless arguments.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=109086&highlight=EMT+CCW

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthrea...hreadid=106417


----------



## thatJeffguy (Oct 30, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> I posted this a while ago when this was being discussed.
> 
> http://www.emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=14850
> 
> Even the Fire Rescue Paramedics who do work SWAT do not carry a gun while on duty with Fire Rescue and not SWAT. You must know you job and know what others in Law Enforcement are also doing. Your gun at scene changes everything including your role and how you are perceived or received by the patient, the neighborhood and the LEOs. I would rather put my faith in knowing the areas I am working in and allowing those with tactical training to secure the scene before I would ever trust some Rambo partner to protect me with his gun.



Are you familiar with the term "Straw man argument"?  It's when you create the argument for the other side and argue against that.

For example, you keep postulating that those individuals that are concerned with self defense will be instigating combat, fulfilling the roles of LEO or out being "rambo".  Despite my having asked, you've not sourced *one* person on here that has said anything like that.  The title of the thread should be a dead giveaway, we're talking about "DEFENSE" here, not going out and partaking in vigliantism, not arresting bad guys, *DEFENSE*.  Perhaps you can argue the actual issues brought up by those with different opinions, rather than engaging in straw-man-isms.



> I will state again that those like thatJeffguy who only quote the headlines from the media have probably never been in a situation to where any direct danger was ever directed at them.


  I'll just say "you're wrong".  I couldn't care less what you think.  Again, why don't you focus on the actual argument instead of attacking the person with whom you're engaged in discussion.   



> From reading thatJeffguy's posts it also seems he has some issues with Law Enforcement.


Oh?  The post where I said I was about to be hired as an armorer for a local PD, and sworn as a officer?  Was it that post?



> Here's an example of that where he is babbling about something he is totally clueless about. A one man army taking on a crowd in a riot with his gun...real smart.


You're intentionally obfuscating the issue.  YOU'RE the one that said you've seen cops shoot themselves and unarmed people, not me.  I'm very pro- law enforcement, I just realize that rarely do cops STOP a crime, more frequently they show up, take some statements and investigate the crime.  As much as I appreciate their efforts, I'd rather not be laying on a slab while they investigate my attack.



> The fact that you believe you know more with your conceal weapon cert than the LEOs makes you a threat to anyone who might be your partner, the patient, the general public and the LEOs.  You try to say this isn't about vigilante justice for EMTs and it probably isn't.  With you, the issues are far beyond that and much more dangerous.



You're just being rude.  I'm sorry you aren't able to engage in discussion without bringing up straw man arguments or insulting me.  Clearly, you've no legs on which to stand.  

You've not demonstrated that normal, rational people, once carrying  firearms, engage in mass murder.

You've not demonstrated that LEO's are on-scene all the time to stop crimes.

You've intentionally mischaracterized my position numerous times and argued against that false position, rather than my real position.

You reply only piecemeal to my posts, ignoring the questions I ask and instead adding more off-topic commentary.

I've really got nothing more to say.  I've *clearly* laid out my position, at least five times, that carrying a weapon is for *DEFENSE* (notice the topic title), that I don't feel anyone other than LEO's should move TOWARDS the dangerous scene and that I don't believe individuals should act in any manner other than purely defensive, and even then as a LAST OPTION, with a sidearm.  You're either unwilling to understand that or you lack the capacity to understand what I'm saying.  Either way, I'm quite done dealing with you until you acknowledge that my position isn't what you're saying it is.  I can't do any more than spell it out, plainly and clearly, as I've done about five times thus far.  Keep on arguing against EMS acting as vigilantes and you'll keep on being the fool.  No one has stated that we should act as such, who are you possibly directing your questions towards?


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 19, 2009)

Now, I'm just a former EMS First Responder with a volunteer fire department; our SOP states clearly that, if the dispatch indicates even a possibility of violence, we will stage in the area until PD arrives on scene and verifies that the scene is secure. Our local ambulance providers do the same. This can vary from a person with a known firearm in the house to an overdose.

 Our FD policy is that, any member who carries a concealed firearm, which I am licensed to do, must leave it in his or her vehicle when responding to an emergency situation. This occurred because, several years ago, we had a member show up on the scene of a fire with a handgun under his turnout coat. I know of several of our members who do, indeed, carry handguns in their POV's, but that's where they stay.

I think it all comes back to that old song, "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread."


----------



## firecoins (Nov 19, 2009)

Now if someone wishes to carry on their own time, thats wonderfull.  However, I will not have partner carrying while on a shift with me. I will not get in the ambulance. We will not be available to take calls. 

Now just about every non LEO based EMS agency does not allow EMS providers to carry. THAT IS THEIR RIGHT!!!!  If this difficult for you, don' let the door hit you in the behind. 

issues not covered by those in support of EMS providers carrying guns.  

1.  Hitting innocent bystanders including friendly fire of other emergency responders.  Yeah you may miss your target and hit me, a cop, a FF, pther people on scene.   Bullets have gone through the person it was aimed at and hit innocent people. 

2. Community response. Police shootings have riled up the community.  EMS shooting will be different how?  Oh you'll be alive, probably suspended or worse and the rest of us now have to deal with a hostile community.  

3. You see it in the moment as self defense.  Are you sure everyone else will? It may be demonstrated that you were never really in danger you thought you were. At least not enough to warrent pulling a gun. Now you must defend.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 19, 2009)

The point still seems to be lost here, but I'm already engaged so I'll give one more attempt.



firecoins said:


> Now if someone wishes to carry on their own time, thats wonderfull.  However, I will not have partner carrying while on a shift with me. I will not get in the ambulance. We will not be available to take calls.



An irrational fear of items is abnormal.  I'll not deal with that.



> issues not covered by those in support of EMS providers carrying guns.



That's funny, since I've covered all of these.  Perhaps the problem exists specifically with comprehension?



> 1.  Hitting innocent bystanders including friendly fire of other emergency responders.  Yeah you may miss your target and hit me, a cop, a FF, pther people on scene.   Bullets have gone through the person it was aimed at and hit innocent people.



You're focusing on one possible, and quite negative, out come without evaluating the entire situation.  I assume you're discussing a scenario in which a EMS responder was lawfully carrying a gun, encountered a situation where it was appropriate to draw and fire according to local laws and, when acting in self-defense with their firearm, mistakenly hits a bystander or perforates the target, thus hitting another person.  I just want to spell that out as the chronology is important.

We're not talking about some EMS responder going CFCP here, they're using their weapon in a VALID SELF DEFENSE shooting.  That means that someone ALREADY has drawn a gun, or a deadly weapon, and is acting to injure innocent bystanders, EMS, FF, etc.  If an armed EMS responder deals with the situation and mistakenly shoots an innocent bystander, is that somehow worse than the original assailant shooting them?  What if the assailant manages to kill a dozen people where the EMS responder could have terminated the threat after the first shots were fired?  To sum it up, you're not looking at the fact that a lawful shooting did take place and that the shooting most assuredly did stop innocents from being injured.  Would you rather the lunatic killed everyone present?  The law covers this issue in what's known as the "Felony-Murder Rule", stipulating that the individual that was committing the felony would be responsible for all of the deaths that occur as a result of his felony.  

Just an invalid argument.  I guess you'd rather be dead than have the bad guy killed and perhaps some negative side effects.



> 2. Community response. Police shootings have riled up the community.  EMS shooting will be different how?  Oh you'll be alive, probably suspended or worse and the rest of us now have to deal with a hostile community.


So what?  Any community possessive of the vileness required to hate the first responder for defending himself from a local denizen is a worthless lot of pathetic losers.  They should be outraged that some dirtbag tried to kill an EMT but, of course, that's not quite how things work in some parts of town, mainly, downtown.



> 3. You see it in the moment as self defense.  Are you sure everyone else will? It may be demonstrated that you were never really in danger you thought you were. At least not enough to warrent pulling a gun. Now you must defend.


The same scenario applies with a knife, hands, a ice pick or a gun.  Doesn't make those ITEMS evil, it makes the action wrong.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 19, 2009)

Michael Sykes said:


> This occurred because, several years ago, we had a member show up on the scene of a fire with a handgun under his turnout coat.



How was this breach of protocol detected?


----------



## firecoins (Nov 20, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> The point still seems to be lost here, but I'm already engaged so I'll give one more attempt.


You haven't dealt once. I have read your posts and comprehended them.  I see your off the insults.




> An irrational fear of items is abnormal.  I'll not deal with that.


Rational fear of people who need to carry guns when they shouldn't very scary.  I am scared of you.  I would ask the police to remove you from scenes.   





> That's funny, since I've covered all of these.  Perhaps the problem exists specifically with comprehension?


Yeah no insults in your posts but you accuse others.  Nice.  




> You're focusing on one possible, and quite negative, out come without evaluating the entire situation.


 No I am evaluating realty.  This happens.  People get shot who are not trhe target. I understand your unable to deal with that, which is the point. Manslaughter charges may be pending.  



> assume you're discussing a scenario in which a EMS responder was lawfully carrying a gun, encountered a situation where it was appropriate to draw and fire according to local laws and, when acting in self-defense with their firearm, mistakenly hits a bystander or perforates the target, thus hitting another person.  I just want to spell that out as the chronology is important.


You have it made it clear that you rather tried by twelve, than carried by 6. I am not too sure your interested in local laws.  

A legit self defense situation can only call for use of lethal force.  At least, thasts what I am getting from you.  

Your employer who has made rules against carrying a gun is infringing on your rights. So these rules are an issue.  



> So what?  Any community possessive of the vileness required to hate the first responder for defending himself from a local denizen is a worthless lot of pathetic losers.  They should be outraged that some dirtbag tried to kill an EMT but, of course, that's not quite how things work in some parts of town, mainly, downtown.


Ill put you in a cop uniform in Oakland.  Well talk.  Lets Newark, NJ, Camden, NJ. New York, NY, Yonkers, NY, Camden, NJ, Boston, MA, Washington D.C. Oakland, CA, Detroit, MI etc etc etc.  

The same scenario applies with a knife, hands, a ice pick or a gun.  Doesn't make those ITEMS evil, it makes the action wrong.[/QUOTE]


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 20, 2009)

firecoins said:


> Rational fear of people who need to carry guns when they shouldn't very scary.  I am scared of you.  I would ask the police to remove you from scenes.


I'd appreciate it if you could post a time "when you should" and "when you should not" carry guns.  

In a school?  Like Virginia Tech?

In a mall?

At a McDonalds?

On a secure military base, waiting for your evaluation before you ship to Iraq?

Oh, wait.  Shootings have happened at all of those places.  Perhaps you could define, specifically, what makes it a "should" or "should not" carry situation.  Are you familiar with the shooting at Luby's in Killeen Texas?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby's_massacre

I mean... who would ever need to bring their EVIL-ITEM into a nice family restaurant?  I'm glad the laws were in place to protect people from guns back in 1991.

Don't you find it funny how you'd ask "the guys with guns" to remove "a non threatening person with a gun" because of, you guessed it, the gun?  Why don't you feel threatened when cops are walking around armed?  You don't need me to cite the various times where cops committed violent crimes or engaged in depraved negligence that led to the death of an innocent, do you?  Do you find their shield to possess magical powers?




> No I am evaluating realty.  This happens.  People get shot who are not trhe target. I understand your unable to deal with that, which is the point. Manslaughter charges may be pending.


You aren't evaulating anything, you're regurgitating your thoughts without reading my post.  For example, did you read what I wrote about the "felony murder" rule?  If during the process of my self-defense against an individual that initiated a felony, someone dies, *the individual that initiated the felony is charged with the murder*.  Felony-Murder laws *specifically state* that an individual shooting to defend himself against an aggressor, if the shooting is justified _per se_ are *NOT* to bear culpability if an innocent is harmed.  



> You have it made it clear that you rather tried by twelve, than carried by 6. I am not too sure your interested in local laws.


Once again, you are the epitome of ignorant.  I live in Pennsylvania, I'd like to see these "laws" that I'm not interested in.   I possess a LTCF meaning I'm licensed to carry a loaded sidearm, concealed, on my person.  My state is an open carry state, meaning I can carry a loaded sidearm visible on my person.  We've very few restrictions on where we may possess our sidearms and neither "ambulance" nor "walking around in public" are prohibited.  

Now, on the other hand, I'd certainly be in violation of *company policy*, meaning the *private company for whom I worked* would be able to initiate disciplinary actions. 

And yes, I'd rather at least have a chance to  convince twelve rational people of my innocence than *be freaking dead!*  Are you kidding?  Of course I'd prefer that!  I realize that for the younger generation, the entire notion of "taking responsibility for your actions" is anathema.  However, that's the code by which I live.  I'm completely responsible for my own actions and I take responsibility for the results of the actions.  If I shoot someone and, god forbid, it turns out they weren't attacking me, then I'd be punished.  But, I don't think that would happen and I find it much more likely, based on statistics and studies, that I'll use my sidearm properly and defend myself.  



> A legit self defense situation can only call for use of lethal force.  At least, thasts what I am getting from you.


How did you get that?  For your improbable scenario, we're past the question of "is this force appropriate", we're talking about misses, overpenetration and the wounding or killing of non-combatants.  Let me ask you this.... you said, when you introduced this post



> I have read your posts and comprehended them





Yet on page 13 of this discussion I *specifically* talked about escalation of force.  I *specifically* said that I didn't think EVERY self-defense situation was a SHOOT! situation.  I *specifically* said that EMS should consider taking forms of martial arts designed specifically to ensure compliance and end the threat.  

So, what makes you make statements like that, then ask a question I've fully answered?  I don't mean to be rude, but your constant typographical and grammatical errors, your lack of ability to engage in debate and your glaring problem of forgetting critical facts might indicate you aren't prepared for jobs where people are trusting you with their lives. Whatever, though.



> Your employer who has made rules against carrying a gun is infringing on your rights. So these rules are an issue.



I suppose I'd lose my job.  Of course, you've brought this issue up to me before way back on, IIRC, page 15.  You talked about the number of lawsuits that have been paid out to the "victims" of a justifiable shooting.  Of course, again, when I asked for any sort of citation that this has happened in reality, you vanished from the discussion.  If I violate an employers rule, I'd be fired.  But, as I said in *yet another post you haven't bothered responding to yet*, I'd rather find another job than try to find another "life", know what I'm saying? 



> Ill put you in a cop uniform in Oakland.  Well talk.  Lets Newark, NJ, Camden, NJ. New York, NY, Yonkers, NY, Camden, NJ, Boston, MA, Washington D.C. Oakland, CA, Detroit, MI etc etc etc.


So, wait, now even the guys who are on scene to protect us aren't capable of protecting themselves?!  And thats the reason I *shouldn't* carry?!

Also, just because such facts amuse me, Newark, Camden, NYC, Yonkers, Boston, Washington D.C  and Oakland, all of those horribly violent cities..... have *strict* gun control and have banned the carrying of handguns.  Any idea why the cities you cited as being so violent don't allow guns?  Weird, hm?  Also, you mentioned Camden twice.  Do you not proof your posts?


----------



## rescuepoppy (Nov 20, 2009)

I have tried to stay out of this post but have a few questions to  interject. I have possesed my concealed carry permit for several years and my idea of gun control is to put every round you fire in the score zone. I have pondered over the thoughts of where would I carry a concealed weapon so that it would not be observed or reachable by someon else, but still be able to reach it in time to defend myself against someone that has already pulled their own weapon. In the heat of the moment would I be able to hit what I was intending to hit? If I was injured by an assailants weapon would I be able to accuratly return fire even in the confines of an ambulance? Am I willing to take anothers life in order to protect property if that is what a person is after? 
    This is no to mention the chance you would be taking that you could hit your partner or a by stander. Also take into account that on the event of gun fire breaking out that the patient may have friends near by who could also become involved in a fire fight. I feel that by bringing my own weapon in to play that I have eliminated the possibility that I could back out of a situation. I have in fact escalated the event to a situation where there is a good possibility that somebody may lose their life.
    Granted I do not live in an area of high crime and violence. I do how ever live in an area where most homes I go int have at least one if not multiple fire arms in them. And a good portion of people have a fire arm on thier person or in thir vehicle. My thoughts are that a fire arm has no place in the hands of an EMS crew while they are performing thier jobs.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 20, 2009)

*MAybe a little off topic... but....*



> but still be able to reach it in time to defend myself against someone that has already pulled their own weapon.



Not much of a chance of this happening, an uphill battle at best but probably a losing battle. I would suggest anyone who carries read In the Gravest of Extremes. Great book, a must read for the CCW holder.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 20, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> The point still seems to be lost here, but I'm already engaged so I'll give one more attempt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess I'm fortunate to live in a community where PD hasn't got much else to do than to chase the FD and EMS. They're usually there when we get there, and have evaluated the scene.

I do advocate an EMT pr Paramedic carrying a Glock in the passenger compartment of an ambulance; an errant shot could ricochet all over the place, even taking the driver out. Then what happens?

I think a compromise could be reached here; an EMT carrying pepper spray for outside-of-ambulance only, or something of that nature. If you've got a combative patient in the back who poses a threat to the treater, you haven't got him strapped down tight enough. The driver could always pull over and push enough Demerol to make him happy again.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 20, 2009)

Sorry; my fingers worked faster than my mind. I DO NOT advocate a provider carrying a Glock in the passenger compartment of an ambulance. Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 20, 2009)

another few responses...

"guns don't kill people... people kill people"

"if throwing a rock could kill a person, so could a gun.... so are we gonna outlaw rocks now too?"

"if guns kill people.... then spoons make michael moore fat"


my point here... its all about WHO has the gun and ARE they using it properly?

Sure... there are tons of police out there who use theirs for the wrong reasons, but what about the majority who use it correctly? my point stands that if EMS is in a metro area, or an area with high gang violence or other issues which could do bodily harm to the members in EMS... they should have the option to be armed and wear kevlar. If i was working in some dangerous parts of LA... or worse... Oakland... I'd want a gun.... period.... esp on night shifts.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 20, 2009)

Michael Sykes said:


> I guess I'm fortunate to live in a community where PD hasn't got much else to do than to chase the FD and EMS. They're usually there when we get there, and have evaluated the scene.


Oh?  Like small towns in Texas?  Like a military base?  What about some junkie deciding to kill you for the morphine you might be carrying?



> I do advocate an EMT pr Paramedic carrying a Glock in the passenger compartment of an ambulance; an errant shot could ricochet all over the place, even taking the driver out. Then what happens?


Everyone seems to think that devising some fantasy-land scenario in which something goes "bad" is the means for justifying their position, yet no one here has thought "Gosh, I bet it'd be pretty bad if some degenerate scumsucker rips my throat open while I'm trying to defend myself with my shears or a 6x6 gauze".  I mean, isn't "ME DYING" a pretty bad plausible scenario when it comes to self-defense?  

But we're all so innundated with nanny-statism that we cant' accept that, yes, some actions have  (turn your eyes little ones) *consequences* and we've got to have (again, young children out of the room!) *personal responsibility* *GASP* for our own actions!


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 20, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> another few responses...
> 
> "guns don't kill people... people kill people"
> 
> ...



Oh, you!  Oakland has the even *more* restrictive laws about firearms than the hoplophobes on this website want levied against EMS responders!  How could that *POSSIBLY* be a dangerous city?  I bet it's a shining beacon of glory and peace much like other unarmed cities, like New York, Camden, Washington DC, Baltimore, Los Angeles. Ya know, all those places where violent  crime was "solved" by preventing law abiding citizens from carrying guns!

;-)  Good post, nice to see I'm not the only one here that's more concerned with the trivialities (such as "not being dead") rather than "the community might not like it", or whatever hogwash is being uttered today ;-)


----------



## triemal04 (Nov 20, 2009)

Couldn't resist...and suprised nobody posted it yet.  

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-pbso-awards-20091113,0,4059843.story


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 20, 2009)

triemal04 said:


> Couldn't resist...and suprised nobody posted it yet.
> 
> http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-pbso-awards-20091113,0,4059843.story




GOOD FOR HIM!!!! more people taking the initiative to take out the bad guys. Everyone played their part well and therefore a police officer was saved!


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 20, 2009)

Michael Sykes said:


> I guess I'm fortunate to live in a community where PD hasn't got much else to do than to chase the FD and EMS. They're usually there when we get there, and have evaluated the scene.



Irregardless, make sure you re-evaluate it for yourself.  They could have missed something.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 20, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Oh, you!  Oakland has the even *more* restrictive laws about firearms than the hoplophobes on this website want levied against EMS responders!  How could that *POSSIBLY* be a dangerous city?  I bet it's a shining beacon of glory and peace much like other unarmed cities, like New York, Camden, Washington DC, Baltimore, Los Angeles. Ya know, all those places where violent  crime was "solved" by preventing law abiding citizens from carrying guns!
> 
> ;-)  Good post, nice to see I'm not the only one here that's more concerned with the trivialities (such as "not being dead") rather than "the community might not like it", or whatever hogwash is being uttered today ;-)



if these cities just had the Jeff guy walking around, it would be safe.


----------



## ZVNEMT (Nov 21, 2009)

what is the point in arguing this point further? No one is going to change how Jeff feels, and he's entitled to feel that way. Jeff isn't going to change how anyone else feels, who are also entitled to their opinion.

If you can find a company that permits you to carry... you go ahead and do it. it seems less that you're defending your thoughts, and more pushing an agenda for EMS personnel to be issued firearms.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 21, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Irregardless, make sure you re-evaluate it for yourself.  They could have missed something.



We Do. We have a safety officer at every scene we work.


----------



## mycrofft (Nov 21, 2009)

*Breaking my boycott of these threads:*

1. Nice to hear some reasonable voices, often seems we need self defense more on EMTLIFE than the streets.
2. I would refuse transport by a gun-toting EMT. Nothing against guns _qua_ guns, but I would do the same if she or he showed up with a canned goods stamper from Walmart or a small bird in a cage. "WTF?" and "Nope, send the other team".


----------



## ZVNEMT (Nov 21, 2009)

mycrofft said:


> 1. Nice to hear some reasonable voices, often seems we need self defense more on EMTLIFE than the streets.
> 2. I would refuse transport by a gun-toting EMT. Nothing against guns _qua_ guns, but I would do the same if she or he showed up with a canned goods stamper from Walmart or a small bird in a cage. "WTF?" and "Nope, send the other team".



... and i thought a highly trained attack canary was a great idea....


----------



## guardian528 (Nov 21, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Irregardless, make sure you re-evaluate it for yourself.  They could have missed something.



irregardless isn't a word. i only say this because i came across the extremely intellectual(pun intended) article on cracked.com

http://www.cracked.com/article_15664_9-words-that-dont-mean-what-you-think.html

WARNING: foul language

or you could use wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless



oh, and btw, tasers FTW


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 21, 2009)

mycrofft said:


> 2. I would refuse transport by a gun-toting EMT. Nothing against guns _qua_ guns, but I would do the same if she or he showed up with a canned goods stamper from Walmart or a small bird in a cage. "WTF?" and "Nope, send the other team".


Would you refuse to be pulled from a burning  car by a LEO?

When you deal with people every day, do you ask them for an inventory of their inanimate objects so you may see if they offend you?  I've got some pretty ugly socks I wear when I run calls and such, perhaps I should update them so no one refuses my care!

If you refused because someone was carrying, and that someone was me, I'd smile, have you  sign, and leave.  No skin off my back if you want to lie in a ditch and die because of your irrational fear of inanimate objects.  I find it funny that you'd not want to be around a gun, but you'd be loaded into the back of the most dangerous "item" in existence, a motor vehicle.  Oh well, to each their own


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 21, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Would you refuse to be pulled from a burning  car by a LEO?
> 
> When you deal with people every day, do you ask them for an inventory of their inanimate objects so you may see if they offend you?  I've got some pretty ugly socks I wear when I run calls and such, perhaps I should update them so no one refuses my care!
> 
> If you refused because someone was carrying, and that someone was me, I'd smile, have you  sign, and leave.  No skin off my back if you want to lie in a ditch and die because of your irrational fear of inanimate objects.  I find it funny that you'd not want to be around a gun, but you'd be loaded into the back of the most dangerous "item" in existence, a motor vehicle.  Oh well, to each their own




lol.... i agree with that second paragraph A LOT.

and to resolve the idea that a gun being visible would reduce a pt wanting transport.... 3 words.... concealed weapon licence. problem solved!!!!


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 21, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> and to resolve the idea that a gun being visible would reduce a pt wanting transport.... 3 words.... concealed weapon licence. problem solved!!!!


 
Of what use is the gun if it is not readily available?  By the time you are confronted and then fumble around to get it out of concealment, I doubt if you will be the winner.  Didn't they teach you that in your conceal weapon class?


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 21, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Would you refuse to be pulled from a burning car by a LEO?


 
I see you don't know the difference between an EMT and an LEO. Is this why you confuse who should be carrying a gun and trying to play the cop role? 



thatJeffguy said:


> When you deal with people every day, do you ask them for an inventory of their inanimate objects so you may see if they offend you? I've got some pretty ugly socks I wear when I run calls and such, perhaps I should update them so no one refuses my care!


 
We do know who is carrying a weapon at least when they enter through the hospital doors. If I have a suspicion about someone carrying at scene, that is what the LEO is for. However, I will not be so stupid as to allow an EMT(P) partner to carry a gun onto an ambulance and will be more than happy to have the LEO remove it from him and escort him off the ambulance since it is a direct violation of company policy. 



thatJeffguy said:


> If you refused because someone was carrying, and that someone was me, I'd smile, have you sign, and leave. No skin off my back if you want to lie in a ditch and die because of your irrational fear of inanimate objects. I find it funny that you'd not want to be around a gun, but you'd be loaded into the back of the most dangerous "item" in existence, a motor vehicle. Oh well, to each their own


 
Yes a motor vehicle is dangerous and getting into one with an EMT carrying a gun makes you a real idiot. That doubles the possibility of dying in that ambulance.


----------



## mycrofft (Nov 21, 2009)

*And, that, ladies and gents, is why I'm resuming my boycott.*

Irregardless of the oral arguments (Hi Vent!). 

I'm a sheriff dept employee, retired USAF and Air GUard, qualified with M16 and M9, grew up around firearms. You're kicking the wrong shins, sonny.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 21, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> Of what use is the gun if it is not readily available?  By the time you are confronted and then fumble around to get it out of concealment, I doubt if you will be the winner.  Didn't they teach you that in your conceal weapon class?



You doubt?  Oh well VentMedic, do tell us!

How many gunfights have you been in?  How many have you witnessed, first hand?  How many tours in Iraq?  Shifts on a SWAT team?


Why, zero you say?

Well, the four years I spent in the Marine Corps taught me just a teensy bit about war-making.  The firearms instructors that I've sought out for private tutelage, such as Clint Smith and James Yeager, have been on SWAT teams, police chiefs, and Yeager has done a few tours in Iraq and A-Stan as a trainer.  Both have been in handgun fights, both have been shot at and returned fire.  The combined census is that you should be able to draw from a concealed carry position and dump three rounds into a soccer ball, at 7m, within two seconds.  

But perhaps you'd care to enlighten us as to what classes you've attended, and the theory that they've shown?

Also, once again, you're back at the "It might not work" clause.  That's like saying that a defib might not work, or that gauze might not stop the bleeding, so why even bother.  If it doesn't work, then at least I get shot trying to protect myself rather than duct-taped and on my knees somewhere.

I'm not an EMT yet, so you'll note I don't go into EMT threads and try to criticize or infuse my views.  How much experience do you have with pistolcraft?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 21, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> I see you don't know the difference between an EMT and an LEO. Is this why you confuse who should be carrying a gun and trying to play the cop role?


I'm just wondering why "Person X with a gun" is OK but "Person Y with a gun" is so horrible that someone would refuse their treatment.  I'm also curious as to how they'd even know.  Of course, I've given you multiple LENGTHY replies in this thread, and then you just toodle-ooo off, don't bother answering, then pop in without answering the questions.  



> Yes a motor vehicle is dangerous and getting into one with an EMT carrying a gun makes you a real idiot. That doubles the possibility of dying in that ambulance.




Doubles?  I'm sure you've got some well-sourced, peer reviewed source for that statistic, right?  You surely didn't just extract that from your own posterior, did you?  Oh, you did?  Well, don't let things like "facts" and "reality" slow down your emotional response. 

Just so you can ignore my posts completely,
http://www.emtlife.com/showpost.php?p=188805&postcount=171
those are the *other* questions I asked you earlier, that you've completely ignored.


----------



## nomofica (Nov 21, 2009)

Instead of carrying weapons, why not just learn something like Jui-jitsu/Brazilian Jui-jitsu or even Krav Maga?


----------



## firecoins (Nov 21, 2009)

nomofica said:


> Instead of carrying weapons, why not just learn something like Jui-jitsu/Brazilian Jui-jitsu or even Krav Maga?



I think we have a winner.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 21, 2009)

I like how shooting innocent people by accident is glossed over as no biggie. 

I have worked in NYC, Newark, East Orange and other areas where OD and EMS are distrusted in certain neighborhood . Carrying a gun won't help.


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 21, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> Of what use is the gun if it is not readily available?  By the time you are confronted and then fumble around to get it out of concealment, I doubt if you will be the winner.  Didn't they teach you that in your conceal weapon class?



lets see.... 5.11 makes a shirt (a duty shirt nonetheless) that has a concealed front pocket that is hidden by velcro.... designed for LEO... so if the ankle holster is too awkward for you... how bout a shirt that conceals the gun and.... wait for it!!!! holds the gun like uncercover cops, CIA, FBI, and secret service... they're also the small of the back holster where you can conceal it if your waering a jacket at night!...

Do you really think that gun/LEO clothing companies wouldnt make an easy access concealed weapon holster? That's where they make A LOT of they're money!

Or better yet... lets just se it up like LEO cruisers and put a shotgun/AR in a locked gun rack? better idea? non concealed and ready to use?


----------



## Shamrock (Nov 26, 2009)

Here's a vote for Krav Maga.

I originally took it up as a more interesting form of Cardio. Turned out to be extremely informative. I have never been interested in Martial Arts before and I still was able to quickly grasp the concepts. Very realistic real life methods to quickly disarm situations.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 26, 2009)

guardian528 said:


> irregardless isn't a word. i only say this because i came across the extremely intellectual(pun intended) article on cracked.com
> 
> http://www.cracked.com/article_15664_9-words-that-dont-mean-what-you-think.html
> 
> ...



Thanks for calling me out on that one.  

Irregardless (B)) of what the article says about the word, the English language is evolving.  So though it may not be an official word, it is in common usage, so it may be made official sometime soon.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 26, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I'm not an EMT yet, so you'll note I don't go into EMT threads and try to criticize or infuse my views.  How much experience do you have with pistolcraft?



Just curious, what is it that you're doing right now, exactly?  Because you seem to be in an EMS thread, infusing your views.  Unless I read your posts wrong.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 26, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Just curious, what is it that you're doing right now, exactly?  Because you seem to be in an EMS thread, infusing your views.  Unless I read your posts wrong.



I've grown up around handguns, and have a CCW permit. I can tell you this: If you're already looking at someone with a gun pointed at you, it's too damn late to be pulling YOURS!


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 26, 2009)

Michael Sykes said:


> I've grown up around handguns, and have a CCW permit. I can tell you this: If you're already looking at someone with a gun pointed at you, it's too damn late to be pulling YOURS!



which is why..... you have a partner..... because dual wielding guns is hard to do and impractical. 

In agreement to the statement, above... generally speaking... if a gun is pointed at you... its probably too late. But, there are times where you having your gun out beforehand isn't a bad thing. for instance... just like Highway patrol ALWAYS has their hand on their gun when approaching a vehicle.... EMS should ALWAYS be thinking... what if the scene isn't safe and what should I do in case i get put in a position that i can't get out of. Being armed _can_ solve some of the problems.... but others require law enforcement.

So.. ya gotta keep options open!


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 26, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> .
> 
> In agreement to the statement, above... generally speaking... if a gun is pointed at you... its probably too late. *But, there are times where you having your gun out beforehand isn't a bad thing. for instance... just like Highway patrol ALWAYS has their hand on their gun when approaching a vehicle....* EMS should ALWAYS be thinking... what if the scene isn't safe and what should I do in case i get put in a position that i can't get out of. Being armed _can_ solve some of the problems.... but others require law enforcement.
> 
> So.. ya gotta keep options open!


 
So now you are acting like a Highway Patrol officer? 

If you believe the scene is UNSAFE to where you must approach with a gun drawn you should be following your protocol for an UNSAFE scene and not pretending do be a cop.

It is also very difficult to identify yourself as a medical person when you have your gun drawn. How are your going to identify yourself? If the LEOs identify themselves, it is now known they are armed. Are you going to announce you have a weapon and what your intent is? If you fail to identify yourself and someone shoots you because you have a gun, they may have that right in their own defense especially with the way many EMTs are dressed with their shirts or T-shirts hanging out of their pants. Also, you are now viewed as the aggressor by the other person and will also be viewed that way in a court of law. Again, this will be especially true since YOU approached a scene YOU already considered to be UNSAFE with your weapon ready. 

If you want to be a cop, apply to a law enforcement agency or find a Public Safety agency that will allow you to do both. However, there are probably some on this forum that didn't make it past the entry exams to be a Police Officer and now believe they can live out their fantasies by wearing a uniform, driving real fast with the L&S and a hand on their gun. 

EMS attracts some questionable whackers as it is. Imagine if EMS also started attracting all the "I wanna carry a gun" cop wannabes now. A concealed weapon permit is not difficult to get and an EMT cert is only a 110 hours. That's a lot easier than the police academy especially if they flunked that attempt. LEO candidates must pass a psychological exam. EMTs may just have to show up with a cert. EMTs sometimes don't even have a background check done in a few states and it is possible no one will check after they get their initial certification again to see what crimes they commited once certified. California has been a safe haven for EMTs with criminal pasts. States don't check people with concealed gun permits to see if they are "maintaining their skills" of handling a gun. Some EMS agencies don't even check to see if their EMTs are maintaining their EMT-B or P skills.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 26, 2009)

Michael Sykes said:


> I've grown up around handguns, and have a CCW permit. I can tell you this: If you're already looking at someone with a gun pointed at you, it's too damn late to be pulling YOURS!



I completely agree.  If the gun is pointed towards you, you are in some serious trouble.

I am fine with people doing CCW, but not when they are acting as a medical professional.  It would just put the "oh look, more cops!" thought into the heads of the public.  I know if I wasn't getting involved in this field, and I had an EMT respond with a gun, I would have a serious problem.  And I'm a major supporter of law enforcement.

But the thing is, like I said, if EMTs start carrying guns, they're going to be looked on as cops.  And do you think people trust cops all that much?  Unfortunately now.  Do you think people will tell an EMT what really happened if they know that the person may be carrying a gun?  Remember, they may make the association.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 26, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> which is why..... you have a partner..... because dual wielding guns is hard to do and impractical.
> 
> In agreement to the statement, above... generally speaking... if a gun is pointed at you... its probably too late. But, there are times where you having your gun out beforehand isn't a bad thing. for instance... just like Highway patrol ALWAYS has their hand on their gun when approaching a vehicle.... EMS should ALWAYS be thinking... what if the scene isn't safe and what should I do in case i get put in a position that i can't get out of. Being armed _can_ solve some of the problems.... but others require law enforcement.
> 
> So.. ya gotta keep options open!



Yeah, but it's kind of hard to do even a basic pt assessment if you've got one hand on your gun.


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 27, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> So now you are acting like a Highway Patrol officer?
> 
> If you believe the scene is UNSAFE to where you must approach with a gun drawn you should be following your protocol for an UNSAFE scene and not pretending do be a cop.
> 
> ...



Look... I'm not Suggesting that EVERY SINGLE EMT/MEDIC has to carry a firearm... concealed or not...

What I am suggesting is that in a neighborhood that is dangerous/high crime rate/ metropolis...  PD isn't going to be there with you on every call.... and having the option (based on company policy) to carry a CCW for your own safety should be allowed. I'm sure you'd have to find a partner who is ok with you having a gun... and I'm sure the company want you to do a psych test.

Remember.... there is a constitutional ammendment fo the right to bear arms. If you don't feel safe... you have the right to personal safety!

Thats all


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> Look... I'm not Suggesting that EVERY SINGLE EMT/MEDIC has to carry a firearm... concealed or not...
> 
> What I am suggesting is that in a neighborhood that is dangerous/high crime rate/ metropolis...  PD isn't going to be there with you on every call.... and having the option (based on company policy) to carry a CCW for your own safety should be allowed. I'm sure you'd have to find a partner who is ok with you having a gun... and I'm sure the company want you to do a psych test.
> 
> ...



I think that the problem here, DV_EMT, is that some people, mainly the "I'm scared of inanimate objects" crowd, feels that all gun owners are out to be Wyatt Earp and off some bad guys.  That is patently false.  Statistically speaking, a LEO is more likely to commit a violent crime than a holder of a CCW/LTCH. Regardless, it's imperative to the point that you and I agree on that we try to educate the hoplophobes that we don't want to carry a gun to "stop crime", _per se_, we want to be able to obey *the law* when we're at work.  I'm not going to rush into a bad scene thinking that my gun will solve the problems, but if I'm IN a bad location where my life is at stake, I'd prefer to be allowed my Constitutional, and thus God-given right, to defend myself.

Of course, as we see here, we get some people that possess such irrational fears that they'd refuse to treat someone simply because they were exercising their Constitutional rights.  I hope that happens in PA one day and some EMT's lose a few million dollars of their personal fortune (hah) and set a good precedent.  

I just don't see the critical thinking necessary to have a fast-paced,life-or-death job displayed in some of the posters here, no offense and I'm not singling anyone out.

Let's say you come to a scene where an individual is down, severe laceration upper leg, arterial blood spurting out, and you notice he's got a sidearm on his hip, openly being carried.  Let's also postulate that you're in a state where open carry is permitted.  Essentially, a severely injured person is lying there with an inanimate object on their hip, obeying the law.

You've only got a certain number of options here;

1) You could call the scene "unsafe" and let the guy bleed out while waiting for a LEO to respond, which could take some time.  Essentially, you're allowing someone to die because they've decided to exercise their Constitutional rights.  They've committed no crime, they're breaking no laws, they're threatening no one, yet you're withholding critical medical care simply because a long list of "possible" actions could cause someone to be injured.   

2)  Attempt to "secure" the weapon yourself, or ask the patient to do so.  If you don't know how to secure the weapon, if you aren't familiar with the mechanics of that specific weapon or the rules of firearm safety, you probably shouldn't be doing this.  Even if you ARE weapons-savvy, you've got to understand that a "gun in a holster" is more secure than "a gun being removed and having it's mechanics operated".  What are you going to do when you go to clear the guys gun and negligently discharge it?  Say "oops"?  Is it a better option to have the guy try to secure his own weapon as he's bleeding out? Nope.

3)  Realize that this is a free country, and a free state, and that individuals have different opinions of self-defense.  Since you've got no evidence that the individual is breaking the law, and since we know that the most secure place for a firearm is in the holster of a trained individual (read: the owner), you decide to approach, begin treatment, notify LEO, make sure you and your partner are both keeping an eye on the sidearm and constantly appraising the situation.

Of the three scenarios, my uneducated opinion is number 3.  YMMV, of course.  I just hope when you let some guy bleed out because he decided to obey the law that morning, you've got a fantastic lawyer somewhere.  I also hope you don't live in an area that allows hunting of animals, as any hunter involved in a negligent shooting would die before you'd provide care.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I think that the problem here, DV_EMT, is that some people, mainly the "I'm scared of inanimate objects" crowd, feels that all gun owners are out to be Wyatt Earp and off some bad guys.  That is patently false.  Statistically speaking, a LEO is more likely to commit a violent crime than a holder of a CCW/LTCH. Regardless, it's imperative to the point that you and I agree on that we try to educate the hoplophobes that we don't want to carry a gun to "stop crime", _per se_, we want to be able to obey *the law* when we're at work.  I'm not going to rush into a bad scene thinking that my gun will solve the problems, but if I'm IN a bad location where my life is at stake, I'd prefer to be allowed my Constitutional, and thus God-given right, to defend myself.
> 
> Of course, as we see here, we get some people that possess such irrational fears that they'd refuse to treat someone simply because they were exercising their Constitutional rights.  I hope that happens in PA one day and some EMT's lose a few million dollars of their personal fortune (hah) and set a good precedent.
> 
> ...



My question to you, based on the scenario above, where the pt is down, arterial blood spurting from a leg wound-How do you suggest a pt with a pistol in a holster secure the gun any more safely than to turn it over to you? Many holsters are "snap flap" whereby the entire holster can be snapped off the belt. You might feel the back of the holster and, if so equipped, ask the pt if you can remove it. If he refuses, have your partner secure his arms, and remove it anyway. He sure isn't going to kick you if he's bleeding that bad.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

Michael Sykes said:


> My question to you, based on the scenario above, where the pt is down, arterial blood spurting from a leg wound-How do you suggest a pt with a pistol in a holster secure the gun any more safely than to turn it over to you?


I wouldn't.  A sidearm in a holster is secure.  Cops have their weapons "secured" on their persons, I find that acceptable.  Now obviously, a gun lying around would be a different scenario. 



> Many holsters are "snap flap" whereby the entire holster can be snapped off the belt. You might feel the back of the holster and, if so equipped, ask the pt if you can remove it. If he refuses, have your partner secure his arms, and remove it anyway. He sure isn't going to kick you if he's bleeding that bad.



I would never remove a firearm from someone against their will unless they'd initiated force against me.  My personal opinion, and it's just that, is that I'd begin treatment and mention to the guy that I'm a big fan of firearms and that, while I don't specifically care that he's armed, it would make things go much smoother at the ER if his weapon was removed from his person and unloaded.    Agreed about the holster, though.  I suppose if we were at a juncture where the patient was "stable" and ready for transport, yet still had the firearm on his belt and I knew I'd lose my job if he rolled into the ER with the gun, I'd probably have to call LEO and let them deal with it.  I'd feel quite bad about this, of course, since LEO aren't always known to be respectful of the property of others.  If the guy was balls-out dying if he wasn't on the ambulance, I'd ask permission to remove the gun, drop the mag, lock back the slide, put it all in a biohazard bag, tie it off and put it in an external compartment of the ambulance, locked.  Once we got to the hospital, I'd let the docs know.  I'd rather lose my job than let someone die, I can always find another job, but I've got to look myself in the face every morning no matter what.

Hope that clarifies it some!


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I wouldn't.  A sidearm in a holster is secure.  Cops have their weapons "secured" on their persons, I find that acceptable.  Now obviously, a gun lying around would be a different scenario.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just my opinion, but a siedarm in a holster is NOT secure if the pt has a free arm. No firearm is secure as long as it is in custody of the pt. I'm not in favor of forcibly removing it, either, but force is better than death, especially if it were mine. Always try "BS'ing" it away from him before using force. Remember, a 98-pound weakling on PCP can be as strong as an ox.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Statistically speaking, a LEO is more likely to commit a violent crime than a holder of a CCW/LTCH.


Show me a source for that statistic. I find this "statisitic" to be ridiculous. People with CCWs are not required to have as much training as LEOs.



> 3)  Realize that this is a free country, and a free state, and that individuals have different opinions of self-defense.


 Yes those in non free countries all have the same opinion. Why does EMS need to carry?  

Nothing you have said to this point demonstates why *Emergency MEDICAL Services* need firearms.  My IFT job puts me in Newark, NJ, East orange, NJ, and NY, NY amoung other places with gang violence.  I don't need a gun.

A gun in a holster is not a secure place inside the back of ambulance.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Statistically speaking, a LEO is more likely to commit a violent crime than a holder of a CCW/LTCH.





thatJeffguy said:


> I'd feel quite bad about this, of course, since LEO aren't always known to be respectful of the property of others.



you don't like cops very much do you?


----------



## firecoins (Nov 27, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> What I am suggesting is that in a neighborhood that is dangerous/high crime rate/ metropolis...  PD isn't going to be there with you on every call.... and having the option (based on company policy) to carry a CCW for your own safety should be allowed. I'm sure you'd have to find a partner who is ok with you having a gun... and I'm sure the company want you to do a psych test.


which bad neighborhood do you work in?  If the scene isn't safe...don't enter it!!! Wait for the cops.  If it takes 20 minutes, wait 20 minutes.  



> Remember.... there is a constitutional ammendment fo the right to bear arms. If you don't feel safe... you have the right to personal safety!
> 
> Thats all


If your employer does not allow guns at work, they have the right to keep you off the truck.  That may be the safest place for you and the gun.


----------



## Michael Sykes (Nov 27, 2009)

firecoins said:


> which bad neighborhood do you work in?  If the scene isn't safe...don't enter it!!! Wait for the cops.  If it takes 20 minutes, wait 20 minutes.
> 
> 
> If your employer does not allow guns at work, they have the right to keep you off the truck.  That may be the safest place for you and the gun.



AMEN! What's next; beating the pt senseless with a nightstick and cuffing them before working them?

IF YOU DON'T FEEL SAFE, BACK OUT!


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

firecoins said:


> you don't like cops very much do you?



I like cops very much.  I do, however, recognize that a few bad apples get in the bunch.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

firecoins said:


> My IFT job puts me in Newark, NJ, East orange, NJ, and NY, NY amoung other places with gang violence.  I don't need a gun.



That's like saying that since an ambulance goes fast, we don't need seatbelts.


----------



## DV_EMT (Nov 27, 2009)

To firecoins and the rest... I'll summarize my points

-2nd ammendment - we have the right to bear arms. Whether it be EMS, LEO, or a cook of some diner in the ghetto... we all are given that right if we feel unsafe.

- Liability - if the company you work for doesn't allow a firearm... then so be it. BUT.... If I know that I'm working in a dangerous environment... for prolonged periods of time... with LEO not showing up to every call... I'm going to be talking to my employer about making some arrangements to make me feel safer when I work (be it kevlar, hazmat suit, a gun, or swim trunks).

- Justified shot - If the PT or people in the scene are aggressive or combative. I have the right to tell them to calm down. I have the right to draw my firearm If I'm in danger. I have the right to shoot for self defense. It's the law... the PT may sue, but I know that my actions are just and that the witnesses (ie my partner) know that I did the appropriate thing based on the development of the scene.

Fight or flight mentality... IN EMS yes... it should be flight first.... then fight... but its just that.... if we NEED to fight... then why not fight with the right tools. I'm not saying that everyone here needs a fully stocked rig with C4, Colt M4 assualt rifles, trip mines or anything of the above.... but a simple pistol wouldn't hurt anyone except for the aggressor.... who would probably be treated after he'd been shot.

anyhow... lets contine the banter shall we?? B)


----------



## firecoins (Nov 27, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> -2nd ammendment - we have the right to bear arms. Whether it be EMS, LEO, or a cook of some diner in the ghetto... we all are given that right if we feel unsafe.


Your employment does not permit a gun.  Hence your 2nd amendment right is irrelevant as long as you work for that employer.  

-





> Liability - if the company you work for doesn't allow a firearm... then so be it. BUT.... If I know that I'm working in a dangerous environment... for prolonged periods of time... with LEO not showing up to every call... I'm going to be talking to my employer about making some arrangements to make me feel safer when I work (be it kevlar, hazmat suit, a gun, or swim trunks).


Whatever it is, you employer does not allow guns. Hence you will not have a gun.  

-





> Justified shot - If the PT or people in the scene are aggressive or combative. I have the right to tell them to calm down. I have the right to draw my firearm If I'm in danger. I have the right to shoot for self defense. It's the law... the PT may sue, but I know that my actions are just and that the witnesses (ie my partner) know that I did the appropriate thing based on the development of the scene.


Many states require you "retreat" i.e. leave the scene before self defense can be used as a defense.  Unless your back is against the wall and you can not escape, you will not be justified.  Your protocols require you wait for PD to enter or RENTER such a scene.  If can prove shooting is the ONLY choice it MIGHT be justified.  I think having the gun will embolden you to enter scenes you should not have or stay on scene longer than you should have.  You will end up finding yourself caught up some technicality because you didn't leave a scene you could have.  



> Fight or flight mentality... IN EMS yes... it should be flight first.... then fight... but its just that.... if we NEED to fight... then why not fight with the right tools. I'm not saying that everyone here needs a fully stocked rig with C4, Colt M4 assualt rifles, trip mines or anything of the above.... but a simple pistol wouldn't hurt anyone except for the aggressor.... who would probably be treated after he'd been shot.


Do you see EMS as a SWAT team?  Maybe we should drive a tank.  We can get armored cars as ambulances with turrets.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> That's like saying that since an ambulance goes fast, we don't need seatbelts.



How is it like saying an ambulance goes fast, we don't need seatbelts? 

Guns have no place in EMS and you have presented no reason why they should be there.

Did you say before you were NOT an EMT yet?


----------



## firecoins (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I like cops very much.  I do, however, recognize that a few bad apples get in the bunch.



Yes.  All the people with CCW permits and there isn't a bad apple n the bunch.  You haven't presented any statisitcs that there are more bad apple cops than bad apple CCW permit holders.


----------



## DT4EMS (Nov 28, 2009)

It is always interesting to see how this debate goes. For the past 13 years self-defense for EMS is what I have studied........

The "D" tank always comes up as does I will just carry a gun...........

First question......... "at what point are you justified in using the "D" tank?" Yes, there is a time when it would be justified.

Next....... Officers carry guns daily...... most officers know a gun fight occurs in less than 12 feet...... officer do a TON of training on weapon retention. Most departments have Level III security holsters to help keep control of a weapon. I have seen very few "concealed carry" holsters have very good retention.

Those of you that say it is good/ok to carry a weapon in EMS........ what kind of holster do you keep it in? Do you train in retention?

What is the chances of you being in a situation where deadly force is justified?

What type of attacks injure EMS providers the most?

I am all for people being able to carry concealed. I am all for EMS standing up for themselves when it comes to being assaulted.

This is my passion.........


----------



## DT4EMS (Nov 28, 2009)

DT4EMS said:


> It is always interesting to see how this debate goes. For the past 13 years self-defense for EMS is what I have studied........
> 
> The "D" tank always comes up as does I will just carry a gun...........
> 
> ...



One more point........ most states that have concealed carry ALSO have restrictions on where you can carry.


Those of you that are carrying concealed.......... What do you do with your weapon if you are called to a scene clearly posted "No concealed firearms allowed?"


----------



## firecoins (Nov 28, 2009)

I respond to prisons.  You think I will be allowed in with a gun?  If the CO can't carry a gun, I can't.


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 28, 2009)

Who should be carrying on the ambulance in very public situations? The concealed carry is meant for your personal safety in personal situations and not while engaging in "for hire" situations. Once it becomes known that you are being allowed to carry "on the EMS job" your responsibilities change and you may be held to a higher standard in the eyes of the law. You are no longer in your own vehicle or house but are now on the job entering the homes of other lawbiding citizens. LEOs make that very clear. As a citizen, I also have A RIGHT to know if you have brought weapon into my house for the safety of myself and my children especially if I know the ONLY training you have is a concealed weapon's class and you may have very awkwardly concealed your weapon with a less than adequate holster. Is the person responding an EMT or some wannabe cop that like toting a gun because he didn't make it as a cop? Some rescues will also make your weapon very vulnerable when your hands are supporting the patient or equipment. Thus, this is one reason why LEOs do not allow both of their hands and their attention to be distracted at a medical call. YOU may now be the one putting us in danger. 

Will those who carry do all the "bad neighborhood" calls? While there are statistics for crime rates in certain areas, it could also be considered racial profiling by the ambulance companies to allow EMTs in just "those" types of neighborhoods to carry. Also, those that mean those who don't choose to carry will get the "nice" neighborhoods? But, any LEO will tell you it is the neighborhoods where you least expect to get shot that will get you killed and it is usually due to a surprised home owner that didn't call EMS or PD or a domestic. For the "bad" neighborhoods, you should already have a plan A, B and C as options. 

I personally would not want to take a gun into an elementary or high school. Even wiry high schoolers with violence on their minds can easily get your gun. As well, when on ANY scene, all it takes is one person to spot your gun be it the patient or a bystander when they are not expecting a gun to be present and you get "GUN!!" screamed out into the crowd. I can almost guarantee you the scene will NOT go well for you after that. 

Now, should employers raise their hiring standards and do more thorough background checks on those that want to carry a gun? Should the employers put this in their brochure or ads so the public will know those entering their homes, places of business, schools and churches that those responding for medical situations will be armed? Again, what someone does as a private citizen and what someone does on the job for hire and as a representative of that company are two very different situations. 

It takes only a 4 hour class to get a concealed carry permit in some states. NC requires 8 hours. I know that might seem like a college degree to some but it is not enough to training for you to be considering the use of deadly force on the job.

Every state is different and no one should be considering carrying a weapon on the job without consulting the rules of their state and their employer. Your employer has every right to know you are carrying a weapon while on the job in his vehicle and place of business. *If you do not have the guts to take this issue up legally with your employer then you do not have what it takes to even consider carrying a gun. If you do not see the need for more training beyond the bare minimum "hours of training" for a permit, you do not need to be carrying a gun on the job. *


----------



## reaper (Nov 28, 2009)

Ok, I am all for gun rights and have carried all my life. On the job is not the place for them. I have worked very bad cities, Like Miami.( which Vent can tell you how it gets) I have had times, when I wish I had a gun, but always found a way around the situation at hand. All it takes is a cool head and some logical thinking.

Like I said, Personal carry is fine. But, on the job is just not needed!


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 28, 2009)

reaper said:


> Ok, I am all for gun rights and have carried all my life. On the job is not the place for them. I have worked very bad cities, Like Miami.( which Vent can tell you how it gets) I have had times, when I wish I had a gun, but always found a way around the situation at hand. All it takes is a cool head and some logical thinking.
> 
> Like I said, Personal carry is fine. But, on the job is just not needed!


 
Usually those that don't live or work in "bad" cities are the ones who believe they need a gun.  They only know what they have seen on TV.

I also bet some here who want to carry or are carrying are also wearing their iPODs, texting and oblivious to the world (either on or off duty). Even as a "novice" thief, I could probably pick their pockets and remove their weapon even if someone was trying to warn them since few can hear anything while being distracted.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> Who should be carrying on the ambulance in very public situations? The concealed carry is meant for your personal safety in personal situations and not while engaging in "for hire" situations.



Is that caveat listed before or after "Shall not be infringed"?  Does nine bucks an hour mean that it's OK if I get shot or killed?  The USMC paid a bit more than that, with benefits, and they actually kinda encouraged us to be armed when we were "on the clock".  Obviously, apples/oranges.




> Once it becomes known that you are being allowed to carry "on the EMS job" your responsibilities change and you may be held to a higher standard in the eyes of the law. You are no longer in your own vehicle or house but are now on the job entering the homes of other lawbiding citizens.


If they are law abiding, and I'm law abiding, then no one would even know that I had a gun.  If they weren't law abiding, and tried to kill me, I can't see my partner being terribly upset that I violated some company policy and saved our lives.  If carrying a gun on an ambulance is such a horrific accident waiting to happen, why hasn't legislation been introduced to prevent it? 



> Is the person responding an EMT or some wannabe cop that like toting a gun because he didn't make it as a cop?



I feel that you don't know many gun owners.  I also feel that you're entire debate is based on straw man arguments you've created that are quite improbable.  If I wanted to be a "cop", I'd be one.  Frankly, that job doesn't interest me much other than as an armorer or perhaps a tactical medic.  I've had my fill of being a paid gun  

However, we don't live in Russia, civilians are allowed to carry firearms in this nation.  As a matter of fact, their are more CCW's than LEO's in states where CCW is "allowed".



> Will those who carry do all the "bad neighborhood" calls? While there are statistics for crime rates in certain areas, it could also be considered racial profiling by the ambulance companies to allow EMTs in just "those" types of neighborhoods to carry.


How does "racism" come into this equation?  



> Also, those that mean those who don't choose to carry will get the "nice" neighborhoods? But, any LEO will tell you it is the neighborhoods where you least expect to get shot that will get you killed and it is usually due to a surprised home owner that didn't call EMS or PD or a domestic. For the "bad" neighborhoods, you should already have a plan A, B and C as options.


I've always got a few plans.  I prefer that some company policy doesn't counter the law and my natural rights when making those plans.  

I've also come up with a highly effective way to ensure that I'm carrying my gun when danger arises.  I carry all the time.  I carry when I'm at my bank, I carry when I'm at the corner store in the ghetto, I carry at Wal-Mart, I carry at Tiffany's, I carry at formal dinners, I carry at McDonalds.  I'm an equal opportunity realist because I understand criminals are also equal opportunity.



> I personally would not want to take a gun into an elementary or high school. Even wiry high schoolers with violence on their minds can easily get your gun.



???

Once again, you've taken the most dramatic extreme possibility, removed any trace of accounting for PROBABILTY, and set up a straw man argument.  If these high school kids are all about stealing guns to kill people, why do the schools have law officers?



> As well, when on ANY scene, all it takes is one person to spot your gun be it the patient or a bystander when they are not expecting a gun to be present and you get "GUN!!" screamed out into the crowd. I can almost guarantee you the scene will NOT go well for you after that.


You must live in a horrific neighborhood.  If someone said "GUN" on the scene around here, we'd all look around, see that the inanimate object, like every other inanimate object, was either "safe" or "causing danger".  I don't understand the mentality that you seem to have, in which the mere presence of a gun inspires high school students to attempt to steal it to kill classmates, or panic to run wild in the streets.  It seems a very paranoid existence.



> Now, should employers raise their hiring standards and do more thorough background checks on those that want to carry a gun? Should the employers put this in their brochure or ads so the public will know those entering their homes, places of business, schools and churches that those responding for medical situations will be armed? Again, what someone does as a private citizen and what someone does on the job for hire and as a representative of that company are two very different situations.


How about the company does what all major retailers do?  "We adhere to state and federal laws regarding firearms".  I mean, whats so bad about using the law as your guidelines?  



> It takes only a 4 hour class to get a concealed carry permit in some states. NC requires 8 hours. I know that might seem like a college degree to some but it is not enough to training for you to be considering the use of deadly force on the job.


Oh?  And how many hours have you taken?  Of course, I asked this question before, in the same post where I called out your absurd straw man arguments that you've used _ad nauseum_, and you ignored that post.  As I'm sure you'll ignore this one.



> Every state is different and no one should be considering carrying a weapon on the job without consulting the rules of their state and their employer.



Carrying on an ambulance, in a hospital, in a bar, in a church, are all legal here.  I suppose one issue, if we were called to a Federal Building, such as a post office, we'd be prohibited from carrying within.



> If you do not have the guts to take this issue up legally with your employer then you do not have what it takes to even consider carrying a gun.


I love how well you, a lady that doesn't carry a gun, understands the nuances of firearms training and tactics.  Again, where have you trained?  How many firearms do you own?  How long did you spend in the military?   

Let me guess... "nowhere, none and none".  Right?  Clearly, you're a qualified expert in this field.



> If you do not see the need for more training beyond the bare minimum "hours of training" for a permit, you do not need to be carrying a gun on the job.



I spent four years in the military and I've taken about 12 (IIRC) classes relating to firearms usage.  Am  I "qualified" enough to obey the law and the Constitution?


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I love how well you, a lady that doesn't carry a gun, understands the nuances of firearms training and tactics.  Again, where have you trained?  How many firearms do you own?  How long did you spend in the military?



Alright, I'll turn this question around on you.  As far as I know, you haven't spent nearly as much time as Vent in the healthcare field or on an ambulance.  So how do you understand the issues of weapons in the field of healthcare as well as Vent does?  How much medical training do you have?  How much field experience?  How much time have you spent on an ambulance?


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 28, 2009)

> Originally Posted by *thatJeffguy*
> 
> 
> _I love how well you, a lady that doesn't carry a gun, understands the nuances of firearms training and tactics. Again, where have you trained? How many firearms do you own? How long did you spend in the military? _


 


medichopeful said:


> Alright, I'll turn this question around on you. As far as I know, you haven't spent nearly as much time as Vent in the health care field or on an ambulance. So how do you understand the issues of weapons in the field of health care as well as Vent does? How much medical training do you have? How much field experience? How much time have you spent on an ambulance?


 
If he had read any of my posts or reaper's he would know I do have a concealed weapon permit and have had one for many years, probably longer than he has been alive. From what his posts indicate, he is not really in any aspect of EMS and is probably just trolling this forum as he has others. He does not seem to know the difference between the military "hours of training" for carrying a gun and that of a concealed weapons permit. He writes more like a frustrated wannabe cop than anyone who had any interest in helping people medically. Although he states he doesn't want to be a cop, which is probably too boring since they don't draw their weapon that often, but instead wants to be a SWAT or tactical medic. 



> Once again, you've taken the most dramatic extreme possibility, removed any trace of accounting for PROBABILTY, and set up a straw man argument. If these high school kids are all about stealing guns to kill people, why do the schools have law officers?


 
Are you really that clueless about the age of the gang members?  Yes, some schools even at the elementary level have LEOs.   This is not a "probability" but a reality and if you had any medical experience you would know this especially in the cities but even small towns are not immune to violence in the schools.  The last thing I want to do is promote gun carrying as cool in the school. I would rather be seen as an example for being a medical professional. 



> How about the company does what all major retailers do? *"We adhere to state and federal laws regarding firearms".* I mean, whats so bad about using the law as your guidelines?


 
The conceal weapon laws in the majority of states allow employers to clearly state if they want weapons on their employees and place of business. If you can not respect the law, you are no better than the ones you want to shoot. It is because fanatics like you that we must be very cautious about who we allow to carry a gun and who we should allow to wear an EMT patch. 



> I've had my fill of being a paid gun


 
That also includes being a volunteer EMT. The volunteers have enough problems without some gun toting over zealous cowboy wearing their uniform.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> If he had read any of my posts or reaper's he would know I do have a concealed weapon permit and have had one for many years, probably longer than he has been alive. From what his posts indicate, he is not really in any aspect of EMS and is probably just trolling this forum as he has others.


Clearly, you've read none of my posts.  Perhaps posts number "one" or "two" might be of assistance in clarification.  To answer the question, I am awaiting the beginning of my EMT-b classes, then going to my EMT-p classes.  My father is a surgeon and I've worked in the OR for two years, plus helping my fathers friends (pathologists) in the morgue since I was about five years old.  Obviously, none of this qualifies me to speak about EMS and, if you'll note, I don't.  



> He does not seem to know the difference between the military "hours of training" for carrying a gun and that of a concealed weapons permit.


Sweety, each state is different.  In my home state of PA, I had to have a grand total of 0h, 0m and 0s training to carry a sidearm.  Also, my state doesn't issue a "permit", it issues a "license".



> He writes more like a frustrated wannabe cop than anyone who had any interest in helping people medically.


And, of course, if I hopped into every medical thread I'd be a whacker wanna-be.  I couldn't really care less what you think of me, but I do think that your assessment is a bit off here.  Why would I be a "wannabe" cop?  Had I wanted to go around shooting people, I'd have reenlisted in the military.

Of course, you just aren't able to grasp the concept that carrying a weapon is a *natural right*.  Anyone who, in your mind, wants to carry a weapon somehow must seem themselves as a vigilante.  I'm very confused that you, allegedly, have a CCW yet you frequently post as to how a gun is ineffective for self-defense because you can't access it quickly enough.  Don't let logical inconsistencies interfere with your non-stop run of straw men arguments though!!



> Although he states he doesn't want to be a cop, which is probably too boring since they don't draw their weapon that often, but instead wants to be a SWAT or tactical medic.


You've probably done the worst assessment of an individual that's ever taken place.  I'm sorry if my aspirations don't meet with your approval.  I'm going to lock myself in the closet and cry now because some ignorant chick on the internet doesn't like what I wanna do.   



> Are you really that clueless about the age of the gang members?  Yes, some schools even at the elementary level have LEOs.   This is not a "probability" but a reality and if you had any medical experience you would know this especially in the cities but even small towns are not immune to violence in the schools.


Once again, the entire notion of "This area is VERY DANGEROUS, we'd better make sure we're unarmed" just doesn't make sense.  I'm sure that your vast knowledge and experience has led you to at least *one* incident of a high schooler grabbing a lawfully carried sidearm and shooting someone, right?  Right?  Echo?  Crickets chirping?  Thought so.  While we're talking about schools and shootings, check out that shooting at Appalachian State University.  Some whacko went nuts with a gun and before the LEO's could show up to deal with it, some armed students took matters into their own hands and put the guy down.  Why didn't those students go bat-:censored::censored::censored::censored: insane with THEIR gun and go on a killing spree like everyone else that touches a gun?



> The last thing I want to do is promote gun carrying as cool in the school. I would rather be seen as an example for being a medical professional.


You're just not quite getting the concept of "Concealed" are you, darling?  And if these kids are already so violent and ready to go on a killing spree, wouldn't it be a bit better to actually be armed?



> The conceal weapon laws in the majority of states allow employers to clearly state if they want weapons on their employees and place of business.


Oh?  Could you please show me the text of these laws?  Most states don't specifically state about employers, they simply state if you're told to not have a weapon on that private property, you must leave or face trespassing charges.  I'm sure you got your law degree right after you were awarded your Five-Gun Master trophy though, right sweety?



> can not respect the law, you are no better than the ones you want to shoot.


The law?  You mean, "shall not be infringed"?  I respect that every day.

Of course, if I carried on an ambulance, in a school or in the hospital, I'd be breaking no law.  So once again, where did you get your law degree?



> It is because fanatics like you that we must be very cautious about who we allow to carry a gun and who we should allow to wear an EMT patch.


I doubt your ability to read English.  What is "Fanatic" about what I've said? The only thing fanatic I've seen here is your affinity for ignorance, presuppositions and straw man arguments.



> That also includes being a volunteer EMT. The volunteers have enough problems without some gun toting over zealous cowboy wearing their uniform.


"over zealous"?  


Any reason you didn't answer any of *my* questions?  It's ok darling, not everyone has a mind capable of critical thought.  If I were painting myself into the idiot corner, I wouldn't answer questions anyway.  Thanks for playing though, back to work now.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Alright, I'll turn this question around on you.  As far as I know, you haven't spent nearly as much time as Vent in the healthcare field or on an ambulance.


Most likely correct.



> So how do you understand the issues of weapons in the field of healthcare as well as Vent does?  How much medical training do you have?  How much field experience?  How much time have you spent on an ambulance?



I don't see how any of this is appropriate to the discussion.  My lack of medical training is why I don't pop into the medical threads and opine.  We're talking about firearms, though, not medicine.  I guarantee I've put more time on the range and in classwork than Vent has, I guarantee I've been in bad situations involving flying bullets more than she has and I'll guarantee I've read more of the concealed carry laws than she has.  Thus, medicine; she deals with.  Firearms; I'll throw in my opinion on.

But, whatever.  This discussion is going nowhere.  The prerequisite for a fear of inanimate objectis is a lack of ability to think critically and rationally.  That's the same reason that none of the hoplophobes here ever answer any of my questions; you just want to continue your "gunz r teh badz n kill ppl" monologue with no ability to understand the other side or address specific points.  If I want to deal with the mentally disabled, I'd get into that field.  

“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity” - Sigmund Freud

Maybe the hoplophobes here can get some help with their sexual and emotional maturity issues?  I couldn't care less.  Unless people answer the questions that I've asked of them, my continual presence here accomplishes nothing.  Revel in your ignorance, but do it alone.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Any reason you didn't answer any of *my* questions?  It's ok darling, not everyone has a mind capable of critical thought.  If I were painting myself into the idiot corner, I wouldn't answer questions anyway.  Thanks for playing though, back to work now.



careful.  You have not presented any intelligent rational arguments for EMS carrying guns. I have had my problems with Vent but she has shown a million times the ability of critical thought than yourself.

I do IFts in Newark and other NJ gang infested towns delivering people home to projects with drugs and gangs. No PD present.  I don't need a gun


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

firecoins said:


> careful.  You have not presented any intelligent rational arguments for EMS carrying guns. I have had my problems with Vent but she has shown a million times the ability of critical thought than yourself.




Oh? Shes gone through and answered the questions that I've asked in relation to her posts?  Need I go through, as I've already done with you, and show the posts she's not responded to?  

Also, flipping a comment back around was great in third grade.  However, when I respond, point by point, to each comment made, every comment in every post, clearly I'm not lacking "critical thinking skills".  You might disagree, but you can at least see that I respond to *all* questions that come up, rather than glossing overthem.

As I said, it's OK though.  I understand not everyone has the capacity for debate, discussion or critical thought.  I suppose our schools are to blame, somewhat, though some here seem to have done well.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

firecoins said:


> I do IFts in Newark and other NJ gang infested towns delivering people home to projects with drugs and gangs. No PD present.  I don't need a gun



So, let me make sure I understand your point here;

Newark NJ, ranked the 22nd most dangerous city in America, in gang and drug infested neighborhoods, is the place you DONT need a gun?  Where WOULD you justify carrying a gun, then?  

Again, ignorance and apathy.  A shame that people in NJ have to rely on such idiocy.

Of course, if we all were able to look at trends here, we'd see one.... area's where concealed carry is permitted has LESS Crime.  So, if ambulances permitted CCW, then, statistically, wouldn't they experience less crime?  Oh! I'm sorry for that hoplophobes, reason and ration have no place in this emotionally charged monologue of yours!


----------



## reaper (Nov 28, 2009)

Well since you are wanting to read CWP laws, Here you go:

SECTION 23-31-220. Right to allow or permit concealed weapons upon premises; signs. 

Nothing contained in this article shall in any way be construed to limit, diminish, or otherwise infringe upon: 

(1) the right of a public or private employer to prohibit a person who is licensed under this article from carrying a concealable weapon upon the premises of the business or work place or while using any machinery, vehicle, or equipment owned or operated by the business; 

(2) the right of a private property owner or person in legal possession or control to allow or prohibit the carrying of a concealable weapon upon his premises. 

The posting by the employer, owner, or person in legal possession or control of a sign stating “No Concealable Weapons Allowed” shall constitute notice to a person holding a permit issued pursuant to this article that the employer, owner, or person in legal possession or control requests that concealable weapons not be brought upon the premises or into the work place. A person who brings a concealable weapon onto the premises or work place in violation of the provisions of this paragraph may be charged with a violation of Section 16-11-620. In addition to the penalties provided in Section 16-11-620, a person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this paragraph must have his permit revoked for a period of one year. The prohibition contained in this section does not apply to persons specified in Section 16-23-20, item (1).


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Oh? Shes gone through and answered the questions that I've asked in relation to her posts? Need I go through, as I've already done with you, and show the posts she's not responded to?
> 
> Also, flipping a comment back around was great in third grade. However, when I respond, point by point, to each comment made, every comment in every post, clearly I'm not lacking "critical thinking skills". You might disagree, but you can at least see that I respond to *all* questions that come up, rather than glossing overthem.
> 
> As I said, it's OK though. I understand not everyone has the capacity for debate, discussion or critical thought. I suppose our schools are to blame, somewhat, though some here seem to have done well.


 
Most of your questions were just too ridiculous to waste time on.  I do not see what  military experience has to do with whether an EMT should carry a weapon.  We are not talking about joining the Army.

*I am a Paramedic* and consider myself to be a *MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL*.  I am not on the job to take a life but rather to save one.  As a *Paramedic* I am in partnership with others in Public Safety including FFs and LEOs to work as a team to provide scene safety for other EMS providers, the patient and the public.   

I do not want to promote my image as a *Medical Professional* as one who totes a gun while telling future gang members about the dangers of weapons.  I do not want to be seen as the aggressor when I am there to help someone who is ill or injured. However with a gun in one's hand that might be difficult to do.   I want no one to be conflicted about the job I am there to do.  I also do not want to become a target because of the gun.  If you openly brag about your gun to others with the same statements you have made on this forum, you may put *REAL EMTs* in danger.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 28, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> Most of your questions were just too ridiculous to waste time on.  I do not see what  military experience has to do with whether an EMT should carry a weapon.  We are not talking about joining the Army.
> 
> *I am a Paramedic* and consider myself to be a *MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL*.  I am not on the job to take a life but rather to save one.  As a *Paramedic* I am in partnership with others in Public Safety including FFs and LEOs to work as a team to provide scene safety for other EMS providers, the patient and the public.
> 
> I do not want to promote my image as a *Medical Professional* as one who totes a gun while telling future gang members about the dangers of weapons.  I do not want to be seen as the aggressor when I am there to help someone who is ill or injured. However with a gun in one's hand that might be difficult to do.   I want no one to be conflicted about the job I am there to do.  I also do not want to become a target because of the gun.  If you openly brag about your gun to others with the same statements you have made on this forum, you may put *REAL EMTs* in danger.



Case closed.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> As I said, it's OK though.  I understand not everyone has the capacity for debate, discussion or critical thought.  I suppose our schools are to blame, somewhat, though some here seem to have done well.



You lack any ability to present an argument of intelligence. *YOU* are at fault for that.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Newark NJ, ranked the 22nd most dangerous city in America, in gang and drug infested neighborhoods, is the place you DONT need a gun?  Where WOULD you justify carrying a gun, then?


 I do not justify having a gun.  Thats the point!  I don't need one to keep safe!  I have learned how to deal with dangerous situations without need to get into a shootout!



> Again, ignorance and apathy.  A shame that people in NJ have to rely on such idiocy.


You have never been to New Jersey have you?  



> Of course, if we all were able to look at trends here, we'd see one.... area's where concealed carry is permitted has LESS Crime.


This does not in any way indicates EMS should or should not have guns in any capacity. Newark's crime rate has little to do with concealed weapons but many factors.  



> So, if ambulances permitted CCW, then, statistically, wouldn't they experience less crime?


I have never been on an ambulance with a crime statisitic or a gun.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 28, 2009)

Well, I'd say it's time for this thread to take a 24 hour nap.


----------

