# Concealed Carry



## medichopeful (Nov 23, 2009)

Alright, so this came up recently in a separate thread.

Let's say you are dispatched to a patient, and upon arrival you either find that the patient has a weapon and a legal CCW or you find that your patient has a CCW and may or may not have a weapon on them.  What do you do?


----------



## Shishkabob (Nov 23, 2009)

Haldol!


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 23, 2009)

Me, personally, I would not treat them until they either relinquish the weapon to LE, or I verify that they do not have a weapon on them.  The only time I would treat somebody with a weapon would be if they were another public servant (LE, etc).


----------



## Summit (Nov 23, 2009)

If I have no reason to suspect altered mental status, I can treat them.

But the question is, what do we do with their gun? If it is nonemergent, I'll have them lock it up in their car or home. Otherwise, I can't have them with a weapon in an ambulance, especially if they might receive narcs or have altered mental status. You can't bring them in the hospital with a gun either. The facilities are not set up to watch over such a possession.

Putting it in LEO custody might be an option, but depending on the LEO organization, that citizen might have to wait 6 months to get their property back... if ever.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 23, 2009)

Summit, the LEO agency better be handing back property that was legally held regardless of if it's a fire arm or not. If they are confiscating legally carried fire arms, then they are violating the citizens fourth amendment protection against unreasonable seizure. I'd definitely argue that there's a valid argument to seize firearms that are legally carried in cases where EMS where the patient is legally conceal carry, however not returning it (heck, even 6 months) is definitely not reasonable.

Summit, if they can't lock it up or hand it off to someone else (friend, relative, LEO if patient is time sensitive and LEOs aren't on scene yet), hopefully one of the EMTs are familiar and comfortable with guns (these are not the same) and can safety the gun. If that happens, probably the best bet would be to transport the gun in the cab and have police meet you at the hospital to hand over the fire arm. What you absolutely can't do is leave a firearm on scene unattended.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 23, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Me, personally, I would not treat them until they either relinquish the weapon to LE, or I verify that they do not have a weapon on them.  The only time I would treat somebody with a weapon would be if they were another public servant (LE, etc).



What makes a public servant necessarily any more trustworthy or less than a citizen with a conceal carry permit (Ft. Hood anyone? Oklahoma state police? The various "Don't taze me bro" incidents.)? What if the police aren't on scene when you arrive?


----------



## Luno (Nov 23, 2009)

*Correction enroute...*



medichopeful said:


> Me, personally, I would not treat them until they either relinquish the weapon to LE, or I verify that they do not have a weapon on them.  The only time I would treat somebody with a weapon would be if they were another public servant (LE, etc).



Okay, this appears to me to be either a misunderstanding of your role as a provider, or a lack of clarification from your instructors regarding what makes a scene unsafe.  The presence of a weapon does not make anything particularly unsafe, the entirety of the circumstance makes the scene safe or unsafe.  Having treated patients with concealed weapons, the appropriate method of treatment is to leave the weapon secured (in a holster is secured) until you reach the ER doors, your short report to the receiving facility should include that you are transporting a CCW carrier (or whatever 3 letter designator for your state that identifies a concealed weapon licensee), and you would like security to meet you at the door.  Having worked on a commitee to place these guidelines in place at a local hospital, the security staff should arrive with a lock box and some sort of receipt system to secure the weapon for the patient, and provide accountability for it while the patient is in the care of the facility.  This all being said, I believe that this clarification, as well as additional research of your specific area protocols shed better light on this for you.


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 23, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Alright, so this came up recently in a separate thread.
> 
> Let's say you are dispatched to a patient, and upon arrival you either find that the patient has a weapon and a legal CCW or you find that your patient has a CCW and may or may not have a weapon on them.  What do you do?



No weapons allowed at ER's or in my truck! If he's just got it and it can be secured at home or with PD (away from home), good. Find a way to secure any weapon in otherwords. If he's not willing...call PD anyway. A CCW doesn't mean a person has a weapon on their person. Deal with it accordingly when the situation arrises.


----------



## FF-EMT Diver (Nov 23, 2009)

How are you gonna know they're a CCW'er?

What does it matter?

If they have AMS I can understand securing the weapon (but you should do the same even with LEO as if they are injured and are AMS they may react on the training they have recieved...)

I have personally watched a partner secure a wepaon in the most unsafe fashion possible and tuck it into his waistband as securement......That is NOT secured....

If I have reason to believe that person may be a danger or has severly AMS then I will have LEO secure the weapon ( I will not remove it myself unless I am on LEO duty) ( unless it is an immediate threat E.g. they are drawing it)

I carry daily if I am off the truck and do not want my weapon removed by someone who may or may not have a clue about firearms....

Also it will not take LEO 6 mos to return the weapon as it has not been "confiscated".


----------



## FF-EMT Diver (Nov 23, 2009)

Summit said:


> You can't bring them in the hospital with a gun either. The facilities are not set up to watch over such a possession.



In most states it is not "Illegal to carry into a hospital if you have a carry permit/license.....People get the idea from the no gun symbol on the door that it is illegal in most places it isnt, the facility just does not want you there with it.....Now saying that if they ask that you leave or secure your weapon you must or be charged with criminal trespass.


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 23, 2009)

The patient does not board the truck with a weapon.

If at an MVC or on scene with PD, they will secure it.

If in the home in a safe area, the weapon will be left behind or you tell them PD can secure it and they will have to take fill out the paperwork to retreive it along with a lengthy explanations as to why the gun was not secured when asked. 

The gun is not to be left with other person who does not have rightful ownership and/or is in a capable position to carry. PD can again be consulted. If the other person appears to be under the influence of any mind altering drugs or alcohol or there are children present, the gun is turned over to PD.

If the gun is found on the way to the ED, the hospital should be notified and their security will deal with it and/or have an LEO take the weapon. 

If you see the gun on the way to the ED and you have reason to believe it is not a "legal carry", don't draw attention but have your partner notify the ED.  It is always good to have a few special codes or signals worked out with your partner for special situations.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 23, 2009)

Who is checking for permits?  I hope that when you see a gun on a patient you are not spending time to check for the validity of a permit.  Gun on scene (unless it is in the hands of a LEO) makes the scene unsafe because you do not know the reason for the gun being on scene.  When you arrive on scene you have only the information given you upon dispatch and we all know how accurate that always is; so a gun on scene is a gun on scene and therefore the scene needs to be viewed as unsafe until proven otherwise.

However, it is largely a judgement call unless you agency says otherwise.  If the patinet is Conscious, Alert, and Oriented, and you feel unsafe in this situation, request LEOs... or you may procedure as normal if that is your desision; however, I agree that weapons _are not_ permitted in the confined space of an Ambulance.  If the subject is altered, then I would call the situation unsafe and back out.  If the subject is unconscious, I would secure the weapon myself (if I was already on scene and found the weapon during the assessment) and call LEOs.


----------



## spinnakr (Nov 23, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> However, it is largely a judgement call unless you agency says otherwise.  If the patinet is Conscious, Alert, and Oriented, and you feel unsafe in this situation, request LEOs... or you may procedure as normal if that is your decision; however, I agree that weapons _are not_ permitted in the confined space of an Ambulance.  If the subject is altered, then I would call the situation unsafe and back out.  If the subject is unconscious, I would secure the weapon myself and call LEOs.



My thoughts boil down to this:  for me, it isn't going to boil down to a yes or no.  Life seldom does.  This question especially is HIGHLY situation-dependent for me.  If I feel unsafe, if I get a bad vibe or whatever, I'm out of there and back in the truck.  But if the patient is truly a CONCEALED carry permit holder, which is, after all, the subject of the thread, I for one doubt quite seriously that I, as a responder, would know about a potential weapon until I were actually on-scene and interviewing (or examining) the patient.

Again, this is highly situation-dependent.  Being both comfortable and familiar with weapons, if I, for example, found an unsecured weapon on an unresponsive patient, I would make an attempt to secure the weapon.  Hopefully LE would already be on-scene, but if LE isn't around and wouldn't be for a while, it's a critical and unresponsive patient, and the patient is alone... the weapon will quite probably be secured, unloaded, somewhere in the truck, out-of-reach and out-of-sight from anyone but myself and my partner, and I'll notify the ED receiving of the situation.  I'm not going to let my patient die because LE wasn't going to get there quickly enough to secure a weapon for me - ASSUMING I FEEL SAFE AS THE SITUATION UNFOLDS.  That said, you can be damn sure I'll be writing an incident report if there's ever a weapon in my truck.

For me, there is no clear-cut line.  I'll go with what I feel is most appropriate at the time of the call, given the situations as they have been presented to me.


----------



## Summit (Nov 23, 2009)

We are gonna know they are CCW because either they tell us they have a CCW (goes to them probably being unaltered) in which case I don't care until it's time to go to the hospital or we find it on exam (probably altered or suspect) in which case I'd like PD around.



JPINFV said:


> Summit, the LEO agency better be handing back property that was legally held regardless of if it's a fire arm or not. If they are confiscating legally carried fire arms, then they are violating the citizens fourth amendment protection against unreasonable seizure. I'd definitely argue that there's a valid argument to seize firearms that are legally carried in cases where EMS where the patient is legally conceal carry, however not returning it (heck, even 6 months) is definitely not reasonable.



You know, around here, I'd have no worries. But in some cities, the PD has an attitude and they don't like that the state allows CCW at all... or even handgun ownership period and they'll draaaaaaaaaaaaag their feet. This happens all the time with people who have weapons confiscated for an investigation and are never charged or are found innocent.


----------



## rforsythe (Nov 23, 2009)

This is highly subjective.  If the Pt calmly says "hey I have a CCW", they're also likely to volunteer that they're carrying a weapon pretty soon after that.  If able they could secure it, or safely pass it to you - but in that case I'm pretty sure the Pt isn't out to get me.  If they don't tell you, then you aren't likely to know about it right away anyway; by design, CCW holders don't draw attention to the fact that they're carrying.

It really comes down to how you find out, and when.  Anything other than an unaltered Pt bringing it to my attention voluntarily (or an unconscious Pt that can't) raises the suspicion/pucker factor considerably, because then I have to wonder why they hid it and what else might be on them, so if I could get the weapon away from them in a quick, calm, and non-confrontational manner, I'd want to do that.  Since I have to question their intentions at this point, I'm really less concerned about whatever "holding time" they might have to wait to get it back from the cops than my own ability to come home at night.  At that point, it's whatever it takes for the latter to happen.

Any way you shake it, the gun needs to be removed from the Pt's accessibility.  If that means responsibly leaving it on scene in some way, fine; if it's in the truck and you have to get it up front and out of reach, it's not ideal but is your best option IMO (again, provided you do it safely).


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 23, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> What makes a public servant necessarily any more trustworthy or less than a citizen with a conceal carry permit (Ft. Hood anyone? Oklahoma state police? The various "Don't taze me bro" incidents.)? What if the police aren't on scene when you arrive?



Im sorry, but I am going to put more trust in a police officer than I am some random citizen I come into contact with.  That's just the way it goes.  Which of the two has gone through an extensive background check, psychological check, and hiring process to carry a weapon?  I'll tell you that it's not the CCW holder.  So yes, a public servant IS more trustworthy than a citizen with a CCW.  

If the police aren't there, I will judge the scene as I see it.  If I see that the patient has a weapon, I'll hold off until LE arrives.  If I look and don't see an obvious weapon, than I will approach with caution, as everybody should do on every call.  If I see a weapon while I'm close to the patient, I'll have to make the determination then.  If it's on his person, and I don't feel safe, they can wait for treatment.  If it's on their person and I do feel comfortable (not safe.  You should NEVER feel completely safe), I will probably treat the patient until they give me a reason to do otherwise.  If they openly say that they have a weapon on them, I'll ask where it is and make a decision about what to do.  This could be as simple as saying "Okay, thank you for letting me know sir.  Would you mind keeping your hands away from that area?"

It basically comes down to my safety and my partner's.  If I see a weapon while approaching the scene, the patient will probably have to wait a bit.  If PD is on scene, and I discover a weapon while treating the patient, I will have them take it into their possession.  If they admit to having a weapon on them and PD is on scene, I will ask the CCW owner to relinquish the weapon to the PD to ease the flow of treatment.  If I discover that the patient has a weapon and PD is NOT on scene, I'll make the determination about what to do then, as I stated above.  If I do not feel comfortable, or I think something is wrong, I'm not going to let the door hit me or my partner on the way out.

By the way, the only person bringing a weapon into my ambulance (when I work on one) will be a LEO.  If a patient has a weapon on them, they're not entering the patient compartment.


----------



## spisco85 (Nov 23, 2009)

Anyone who is injured and has a weapon needs it to be secured. LEO, military, secret service, scotland yard, mossad, whatever. An injured person is an injured person and with that much training reflexes often come into play more than a civilian and might have a reaction on anything. Always side with your safety and the safety of the patient.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 23, 2009)

spisco85 said:


> Anyone who is injured and has a weapon needs it to be secured. LEO, military, secret service, scotland yard, mossad, whatever. An injured person is an injured person and with that much training reflexes often come into play more than a civilian and might have a reaction on anything. Always side with your safety and the safety of the patient.



Right.  In my scenario of treating a LEO, it would only be for a minor injury.  If it's a major injury, they wouldn't have their duty belt on, and thus they wouldn't have their weapon on them.  I would also check for other concealed weapons on a LEO.  Not saying where on this board, as it's a public place and I don't want everybody knowing where else they can be hidden.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 23, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Not saying where on this board, as it's a public place and I don't want everybody knowing where else they can be hidden.



If an officer could hide a weapon in a place, he will. One of my family friends was a police officer in Texas and my father has a humorous of watching him getting ready to go to work because of the 5-6 guns of various sizes he had on him. The friends opinion was that he needed to be in reach of a fire arm regardless of what position he might end up in during a fight.


----------



## trevor1189 (Nov 23, 2009)

Ok I am not sure if it is a PA Dept of Health thing or our dept policy but no weapons (with the exception of pocket knives) may be transported on the ambulance. This includes tasers, pepper spray, firearms, etc.

Request PD to the scene. If the Pt. does not want to give it up, I am leaving. It's not abandonment, it's the scene is unsafe.

I'm all for concealed carry and right to own a gun, but I don't know everyone and don't want a gun to be distracting me from pt. care.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 23, 2009)

trevor1189 said:


> I don't know everyone and don't want a gun to be distracting me from pt. care.



Perfectly said.


----------



## bunkie (Nov 24, 2009)

You know, I carried concealed and never thought that someone wouldn't treat me because of it. Something to keep in mind. Thanks for the post.


----------



## spinnakr (Nov 24, 2009)

I have another question to pose to everyone then:  what if your unconscious patient had a tag around his neck - just like a med alert - that said he was a CCW permit holder and where his weapon was?  Would that change your decision?

I guess for me what it comes down to is that when my patient is conscious, I expect them to notify me of a weapon on their person, or I may feel unsafe.  If my patient is unresponsive, however, that matter becomes much more complicated.


----------



## Summit (Nov 24, 2009)

spinnakr said:


> I have another question to pose to everyone then:  what if your unconscious patient had a tag around his neck - just like a med alert - that said he was a CCW permit holder and where his weapon was?  Would that change your decision?



What planet do you reside on and may I borrow your spaceship to come visit?


----------



## spinnakr (Nov 24, 2009)

Summit said:


> What planet do you reside on and may I borrow your spaceship to come visit?



I never said anyone DOES it.  I sure as hell wouldn't, and I'll be getting my CCW as soon as I'm legally able.
I just said asked if it would it make a difference.

Hypothetically speaking.
The idea was to emphasize the fact that there isn't any way for an unresponsive patient to say "hey, I'm carrying, it's in an ankle holster on my right leg, and yea, I'll keep my hands away."

You're a little early to borrow the spaceship though, they aren't done building it.  I'll let you know when I launch


----------



## firecoins (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Alright, so this came up recently in a separate thread.
> 
> Let's say you are dispatched to a patient, and upon arrival you either find that the patient has a weapon and a legal CCW or you find that your patient has a CCW and may or may not have a weapon on them.  What do you do?



If you see they have a weapon, it isn't concealed too well if concealed at all.  

Is the patient threatening you? 

Leave the scene until the weapon is secure.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

bunkie said:


> You know, I carried concealed and never thought that someone wouldn't treat me because of it. Something to keep in mind. Thanks for the post.



It is definitely something to think about.

It wouldn't be because of being opposed to CCW, which is something that people need to understand.  Rather, it would be an EMT safety thing.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

spinnakr said:


> I have another question to pose to everyone then:  what if your unconscious patient had a tag around his neck - just like a med alert - that said he was a CCW permit holder and where his weapon was?  Would that change your decision?
> 
> I guess for me what it comes down to is that when my patient is conscious, I expect them to notify me of a weapon on their person, or I may feel unsafe.  If my patient is unresponsive, however, that matter becomes much more complicated.



I would tend to disagree.  With an unresponsive patient, you can more easily gain control of their weapon or have PD do the same.


----------



## Summit (Nov 24, 2009)

spinnakr said:


> You're a little early to borrow the spaceship though, they aren't done building it.  I'll let you know when I launch



But you are saying that I can borrow it when it is done?


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 24, 2009)

Summit said:


> What planet do you reside on and may I borrow your spaceship to come visit?



What?  I have a Tag around my neck that reads:  "My name is _____.  I am an Aquarius that likes long walks on the beach and throwing rocks at rollerbladers.  My shoes are double knotted and I only wear wool socks.  Once in the third grade I built a rocket.  My favorite color is Red and I want to be a mime when I grow up.  I have a 9mm on my rightt hip and a grenade under my left arm.  Oh, and even though you will never need to know this fact, I do have a history of Diabetes and am allergic to penicillin.  But more to the point, I was born on a cold winter day in a hospital that is now closed... hey, once they produced perfection, the Hospital had no other goals to reach.  For a good time call 555-1234."

  What is so odd about that?  Note: only about 50% of what I said there is true... you figure out what half... LOL


----------



## Seaglass (Nov 24, 2009)

What they all said. If LEOs are there, the gun goes to them. If they're not, I'll make it safe and pass it along to hospital security. Oddly enough, I've never actually had this happen. 



bunkie said:


> You know, I carried concealed and never thought that someone wouldn't treat me because of it. Something to keep in mind. Thanks for the post.



Ditto. Never thought about it from the patient's view. If I were mentally stable, had a gun, and EMS responded, I'd probably ask them to have local PD hold it if I couldn't put it somewhere safe myself. Can't imagine PD wouldn't give it back when they're known to advise local residents to get them in the first place... h34r:


----------



## Jon Hus (Nov 24, 2009)

You can tell what part of the country people live in by their responses to this thread.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

*Neglect....*

Wow... I did not read all of the post, but I will comment on the statement:

"Me, personally, I would not treat them until they either relinquish the weapon to LE, or I verify that they do not have a weapon on them. The only time I would treat somebody with a weapon would be if they were another public servant (LE, etc)."

In my state, it is perfectly legal to carry a concealed weapon with a permint, but it is NOT legal or ethical to deny EMS to a patient. I would think that you, your company and your municipailty would have your butt's sued if you denied care because a person was legally carrying a weapon. 

Am I wrong?

I will tell you I fall in the "I carry, but not at work or when vollying for my department or any other time that it is not allowed or makes people/businesses I care about uncomfortable...." so it is not that I am fanatical in either direction. But, I think that failing to provide care when the patient is not breaking any laws is illegal and unethical.


----------



## reaper (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> Wow... I did not read all of the post, but I will comment on the statement:
> 
> "Me, personally, I would not treat them until they either relinquish the weapon to LE, or I verify that they do not have a weapon on them. The only time I would treat somebody with a weapon would be if they were another public servant (LE, etc)."
> 
> ...




You have to realize that most of these comments are from people that have never worked on an ambulance before. They are all hypothetical answers. Real life is a different story.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> It is definitely something to think about.
> 
> It wouldn't be because of being opposed to CCW, which is something that people need to understand.  Rather, it would be an EMT safety thing.



I would think that all states with a CCW permit system would train their staff on how to unload and make secure a handgun. That way when Joe public, who has done nothing wrong but is in need of care will be cared for like every other citizen and his personal belongings will be made secure like his wallet, watch and any other thing he carries.


----------



## Seaglass (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> I would think that all states with a CCW permit system would train their staff on how to unload and make secure a handgun. That way when Joe public, who has done nothing wrong but is in need of care will be cared for like every other citizen and his personal belongings will be made secure like his wallet, watch and any other thing he carries.



So you'd think, but you'd be wrong...


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

Seaglass said:


> So you'd think, but you'd be wrong...



I know. Our department doesn't, I just checked. I guess for me, it would depend on the situation. A gun, in a holster is no threat to me or anyone else. If the patient were home, or had another way of securing the weapon I would give him/her that option, if they were out when the injury/illness happened I would pass the info on to the hospital to deal with but I would not allow the presence of a legally carried firearm prevent me from doing my duty.


----------



## Seaglass (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> I know. Our department doesn't, I just checked.



I really wish they would devote 5 minutes of basic class to securing guns, especially in areas where they're really common. At one of my services, I think they just assume that someone will know what to do, which is probably correct but still seems like an oversight. At another, I could easily see crews with nobody knowing what to do.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

There was an episode of a TV show called "Best Defense" where they did just that. They covered revolvers, semi-striker fired and semi-external hammer pistols. The premise of the show was how to make the gun ready for self defense, but the episode would be just as useful on making the gun safe.

If there were any interest, I could try to do a video or pictorial on how to unload the various types of weapons you may encounter. I have never done anything like that, but I do have one of every "type" of pistol. I am sure this wheel has been invented already though.


----------



## spisco85 (Nov 24, 2009)

Simple way to secure a gun:

1. Do not touch the trigger
2. Remove the source of ammunition
3. Cycle the bolt, watch for round to escape
4. Inspect chamber, verifying there is no round in
5. Secure the source of ammunition
6. Move the gun away from the person


----------



## Seaglass (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> If there were any interest, I could try to do a video or pictorial on how to unload the various types of weapons you may encounter. I have never done anything like that, but I do have one of every "type" of pistol. I am sure this wheel has been invented already though.



I just googled "how to unload a pistol" and found a video for pretty much any type anyone could want. I think I'll have a quiet word with my training officer at the one service where nobody knows about guns. I doubt he'll go for it, but it can't really hurt to suggest.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

spisco85 said:


> Simple way to secure a gun:
> 
> 1. Do not touch the trigger
> 2. Remove the source of ammunition
> ...



PRIOR TO DOING THAT... know the 3 rules.

1 - All guns are loaded, treat them as such.
2 - Do not point the gun at anything or anyone you do not want to destroy.
3 - NEVER PUT YOUR FINGER IN THE TRIGGER GUARD unless you are shooting the gun, and for the purposes of an EMT that would be never.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> I would think that all states with a CCW permit system would train their staff on how to unload and make secure a handgun. That way when Joe public, who has done nothing wrong but is in need of care will be cared for like every other citizen and his personal belongings will be made secure like his wallet, watch and any other thing he carries.



The problem with this is that I wouldn't want someone with a 1 hour class touching fire arms during an emergency. If you have someone on the crew who's familiar, and *comfortable* with fire arms, then sure, secure the fire arm. How ever, I wouldn't want to be around the person who's first time handling a fire arm outside of class was during an emergency, even if the handling is done just to secure the fire arm.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> PRIOR TO DOING THAT... know the 3 rules.
> 
> 1 - All guns are loaded, treat them as such.
> 2 - Do not point the gun at anything or anyone you do not want to destroy.
> 3 - NEVER PUT YOUR FINGER IN THE TRIGGER GUARD unless you are shooting the gun, and for the purposes of an EMT that would be never.



... In addition to point 2...
4. Be sure of your target and what's behind it (yes, you aren't shooting it, but what ever you're point it at is your 'target').


----------



## bunkie (Nov 24, 2009)

Jon Hus said:


> You can tell what part of the country people live in by their responses to this thread.



Really? How so?


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 24, 2009)

Jon Hus said:


> You can tell what part of the country people live in by their responses to this thread.



Ok... without peeking, where do I live?


----------



## Summit (Nov 24, 2009)

FF-EMT Diver said:


> In most states it is not "Illegal to carry into a hospital if you have a carry permit/license.....People get the idea from the no gun symbol on the door that it is illegal in most places it isnt, the facility just does not want you there with it.....Now saying that if they ask that you leave or secure your weapon you must or be charged with criminal trespass.



If you knowingly bring a patient into the hospital with a gun, the hospital is going to do everything they can to get you fired.


----------



## spinnakr (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> I would tend to disagree.  With an unresponsive patient, you can more easily gain control of their weapon or have PD do the same.


That's part of my point.  It becomes more complicated than the simple expectation that the patient notify me of the weapon.  In this case it becomes a question of (assuming LE is NOT on-scene) what to do with the weapon, who to notify, etc etc etc.



Summit said:


> But you are saying that I can borrow it when it is done?


I mean, I don't know about borrow, I wouldn't technically OWN it...  Several million might buy you a trip though...


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

Luno said:


> Okay, this appears to me to be either a misunderstanding of your role as a provider, or a lack of clarification from your instructors regarding what makes a scene unsafe.  The presence of a weapon does not make anything particularly unsafe, the entirety of the circumstance makes the scene safe or unsafe.



YOU HAVE SO MUCH TO LEARN! 

Here @ EMTLIFE.com, we're all about fearing inanimate objects!  I bet if that handgun got in the ambulance, every EMS responder would be possessed by it's demonic power and start killing people wantonly in the streets!


;-)  Sarcasm off, of course.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> Who is checking for permits?  I hope that when you see a gun on a patient you are not spending time to check for the validity of a permit.  Gun on scene (unless it is in the hands of a LEO) makes the scene unsafe because you do not know the reason for the gun being on scene.  When you arrive on scene you have only the information given you upon dispatch and we all know how accurate that always is; so a gun on scene is a gun on scene and therefore the scene needs to be viewed as unsafe until proven otherwise.




Perhaps we could sacrifice virgins to the allmight LEO GOD in the sky, and he could bestow the Magic required to "always be safe with guns" upon us mere mortals? 

Also, you feel that a gun in the *"hands"* of a LEO means it's a safe scene?  If the officers feel a need to have their holsters empty, I feel a need to be hiding somewhere.  Cops with guns waving around doesn't mean it's safe.


God this thread is just going to led to an aneurysm...


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> Wow... I did not read all of the post, but I will comment on the statement:
> 
> "Me, personally, I would not treat them until they either relinquish the weapon to LE, or I verify that they do not have a weapon on them. The only time I would treat somebody with a weapon would be if they were another public servant (LE, etc)."
> 
> ...



No, it's not neglect.  And nowhere did I or anybody else say that they were denying care.  Rather, we are saying that we would delay care until the scene is made safe, or until we feel comfortable.  It's the same principle as a situation with a fire.  If there is a fire on scene, and you decide it's not safe to go in, I don't think you will be charged with anything.  Same here.  If you see a gun on scene, and you don't feel it's safe to go in, I don't know if you would be charged.  I tend to doubt it, but I'm no expert.

And yes, like someone else said, some of these responses are from those who have never worked on an ambulance.  But also, please remember this.  Like all of medicine (and life in general), you can't always follow rules.  I know that in certain circumstances, I will change how I handle it.  But I will only change it if it does not compromise my safety.  I'm sorry, but me and my partner almost always come first.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Im sorry, but I am going to put more trust in a police officer than I am some random citizen I come into contact with.  That's just the way it goes.  Which of the two has gone through an extensive background check, psychological check, and hiring process to carry a weapon?  I'll tell you that it's not the CCW holder.  So yes, a public servant IS more trustworthy than a citizen with a CCW.



OH?  Which group commits more violent crimes, LEO's or CCW' holders?  I'll give you a hint: You're about to have your point discounted.  Find some sources if you'd like, I'll pop back into this absurdity in a little bit and show the DOJ stats.



> By the way, the only person bringing a weapon into my ambulance (when I work on one) will be a LEO.  If a patient has a weapon on them, they're not entering the patient compartment.



Does lead block your X-Ray vision?  Or are you just omnipotent?


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> YOU HAVE SO MUCH TO LEARN!
> 
> Here @ EMTLIFE.com, we're all about fearing inanimate objects!  I bet if that handgun got in the ambulance, every EMS responder would be possessed by it's demonic power and start killing people wantonly in the streets!
> 
> ...



Cut the attitude.  We're having a serious conversation here, which could literally be a matter of life and death.  And yes, although it is technically an inanimate object, it's about one that could actually kill somebody.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

Summit said:


> If you knowingly bring a patient into the hospital with a gun, the hospital is going to do everything they can to get you fired.



I'm not sure about that.  What should you do, toss it out the window?  Leave it on the street?  Wait for a LEO response?  Perhaps I'd, if I did anything, unload, secure, and ask for LEO (*or a family member*) to meet me at the ER and secure the item.  I wouldn't surrender it without a reciept though, signed by the officer.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> OH?  Which group commits more violent crimes, LEO's or CCW' holders?  I'll give you a hint: You're about to have your point discounted.  Find some sources if you'd like, I'll pop back into this absurdity in a little bit and show the DOJ stats.
> 
> 
> 
> Does lead block your X-Ray vision?  Or are you just omnipotent?



It's not even worth it to enter into this conversation with you.


----------



## spinnakr (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> it's about one that could actually kill somebody.


I take issue with this statement.
Any object can be a weapon.  Period.  A spoon can be a weapon.  A fork can kill someone.  A baseball bat is damn good at killing people.  Narcotics, too, can kill someone.  Personally, I don't give a damn if my patient brings a spoon on my squad.  And narcotics?  Usually, they're already there.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Cut the attitude.  We're having a serious conversation here, which could literally be a matter of life and death.  And yes, although it is technically an inanimate object, it's about one that could actually kill somebody.




Lots of inanimate objectivs can ACTUALLY kill somebody.  Most, if not all, require either malice or negligence.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 24, 2009)

The only thing that would concern me more about a CCW permit holder being in possession of a fire arm is someone who isn't trained and competitent (as in not someone who has just taken a single course. Course+experience with fire arms) with fire arms handling the same fire arm because they arrived on an ambulance.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> It's not even worth it to enter into this conversation with you.



Especially not if you're not willing to answer questions, cite information or consider that you might be wrong.  How about you and VentMedic and firecoins all share the same sandbox, and you can help wash each others heads clean when you pull up for air?

CCW holders aren't violent criminals, guns aren't only carried by the allmighty bastions of safety (LEO), and even us mere peasants are allowed to express and act upon our Constitutional rights.  



But sure, find a cop, they're the "only ones in this room" that know how to deal with firearms.

[YOUTUBE]91jcFTbLE8[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

I hope none of the hoplophobes here ever get called to a gun store for treatment.  The LEO's would have to build a new building to "secure" all the deadly murder-sticks lying around


----------



## Summit (Nov 24, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I hope none of the hoplophobes here ever get called to a gun store for treatment.  The LEO's would have to build a new building to "secure" all the deadly murder-sticks lying around



ahhahahhahahahahahhaha


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

spinnakr said:


> I take issue with this statement.
> Any object can be a weapon.  Period.  A spoon can be a weapon.  A fork can kill someone.  A baseball bat is damn good at killing people.  Narcotics, too, can kill someone.  Personally, I don't give a damn if my patient brings a spoon on my squad.  And narcotics?  Usually, they're already there.



Yes, all those things can be used to kill someone.  But in all seriousness, which one is more dangerous, a gun or a spoon?


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 24, 2009)

The gun. Afterall, there is no spoon.


----------



## spinnakr (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Yes, all those things can be used to kill someone.  But in all seriousness, which one is more dangerous, a gun or a spoon?



I would make the argument that both the gun and the spoon are in and of themselves harmless;  it is the person wielding the implement that is potentially dangerous.  If Jason Bourne were coming towards me (peacefully) with a spoon, I would probably be far more wary than if a private citizen were coming towards me (peacefully) with a gun.

Furthermore, I think a baseball bat can be just as nasty as a gun, but we don't go around hollering about them, do we?


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> ... In addition to point 2...
> 4. Be sure of your target and what's behind it (yes, you aren't shooting it, but what ever you're point it at is your 'target').



I left that out because in this instance, we were not talking about shooting and I didn't want to get mistaken for an NRA firearms instructor. 

I have though a) taught many children/adults safe firearms handling in 1 hour and b) seen health care professionals learn skills far more dangerous, with far greater chance of causing harm in 1 hour as well.

Life is dangerous, EMS is extremely dangerous. I live in a very rural area where a) firearms are common and b) LEO's are few and far between. I am sure there are people in urban areas who need to deal with things I have never seen before.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

spinnakr said:


> Furthermore, I think a baseball bat can be just as nasty as a gun, but we don't go around hollering about them, do we?



No, but how many providers allow them into their ambulances or allow a patient to have one in their possession during treatment?


----------



## Achromatic (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> In my state, it is perfectly legal to carry a concealed weapon with a permint, but it is NOT legal or ethical to deny EMS to a patient. I would think that you, your company and your municipailty would have your butt's sued if you denied care because a person was legally carrying a weapon.
> 
> Am I wrong?



Yes you are. You know, in class, "BSI. Scene safe." is a mantra that gets mindlessly droned before your every practical and eval and without thinking of it.

You are told that, in priority order, YOUR safety, your partner's safety, other's safety, the patient's safety, is your concern.

If you do not believe that you as an EMS provider are safe in a given situation whatever that situation may be, you are not going to be legally liable for the results of that.

HOWEVER, you are at the very least obliged to do what you can to make the scene safe - be that 'retreat and call LE', 'request more people', whatever, and, ONCE THE SCENE IS SAFE, then render the appropriate aid.

You may well, and in my opinion, should be able to defend your decisions, whatever they may be (and this goes for everything you do in EMS), that has a material effect upon a person. "The scene was not safe because I spotted a gun on a person with AMS", fine... "The scene was not safe because the man was wearing a pink t-shirt, and a man with a pink t-shirt once attacked me", not so fine.

If you want to talk about using the constitution and the right to bear arms (as you imply in your 'legally carrying' argument), then someone could point to the same constitutional document that says very little about the right to pre-hospital emergent care.

Disclaimer: I have pointedly, though perhaps not successfully, attempted to neutralize my own opinion on the subject in this post, and instead tried to address the claim that it would be "illegal" not to treat a person who is legally carrying a weapon.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

Achromatic said:


> If you do not *believe* that you as an EMS provider are safe in a given situation whatever that situation may be, you are not going to be legally liable for the results of that.



I stand (Or sit as it were...) corrected. I didnt realize it was subjective. It makes sense though. 



Achromatic said:


> HOWEVER, you are at the very least obliged to do what you can to make the scene safe - be that 'retreat and call LE', 'request more people', whatever, and, ONCE THE SCENE IS SAFE, then render the appropriate aid.



Do you agree that if I am comfortable with the patient's mental state, and I am comfortable with them carrying a gun that I can proceed to provide aid as needed? I am beginning to understand that it is very gray and personal comfort has a lot to do with it.



Achromatic said:


> "The scene was not safe because I spotted a gun on a person with AMS", fine...



Agreed. A gun on a person with AMS is a very good reason to call for LEO or other assistance. No argument there.



Achromatic said:


> "If you want to talk about using the constitution and the right to bear arms



As Bartleby the scribner said... "I prefer not"


----------



## Achromatic (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> Do you agree that if I am comfortable with the patient's mental state, and I am comfortable with them carrying a gun that I can proceed to provide aid as needed? I am beginning to understand that it is very gray and personal comfort has a lot to do with it.



Absolutely - though I would also recommend you make your partner aware of the same, so they can make the decision for themselves - though it can be difficult, I think most of us in the same boat would generally like to trust our partner, but be able to make some decisions for ourselves.

But yes, if you believe that you are comfortable with the scene and the situation, and that it is safe to you, to your partner, to others and to the patient, then go ahead and render aid.

One last note may be the 'others' side of thing. Say it's a trauma, as a result of whatever, domestic violence, mugging, familial dispute. Say one of your onlookers is the perpetrator of this. Such a thing, in theory, if your PT notices this, could rapidly change the situation for the worse. I'm not saying "oh dear, anything could possibly go wrong", I'm saying whenever you make such decisions (and it goes beyond issues of CCW) you need to feel comfortable in yourself that you have made a thoughtful, rational and thorough assessment of scene safety. You don't have to factor in such edge cases as "there was an article on the news about some space debris coming through our atmosphere today, so we probably don't want to treat outside", but to use my example above, what's to say the patient didn't get into a fight with someone who attacked his sister/daughter? He's all fine, and being treated by you for lacerations, whatever... all is well. Then he notices in the onlookers said person...

Focus, examine possibilities, examine likelihoods, and then make the decision that feels right to you to cover all aspects of your patient care on scene.


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

Achromatic, agreed. In a situation where it is a trauma, as a result of a crime then LEO needs to be involved. There is a saying in the CCW world... every fight you find yourself in will be a gun fight if you CCW. So, despite the scene if there was a crime, and a CCW was present it needs to be secured.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> No, but how many providers allow them into their ambulances or allow a patient to have one in their possession during treatment?



How many providers show up at a baseball game and refuse to treat until all the Louisville Sluggers are impounded by the police?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> Achromatic, agreed. In a situation where it is a trauma, as a result of a crime then LEO needs to be involved. There is a saying in the CCW world... every fight you find yourself in will be a gun fight if you CCW. So, despite the scene if there was a crime, and a CCW was present it needs to be secured.



What more secure place for my sidearm than in a top quality holster on my right hip


----------



## Summit (Nov 24, 2009)




----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

Summitt. That is awesome.

Best post I have ever seen... :lol:


----------



## mcdonl (Nov 24, 2009)

*A different Perspective...*

Not sure if this is the right thing to do, and if this post gets removed that is ok... but over at another site, a gun related site this same question was asked.. NOT BY ME  and the answers/expectations of the gun carrying public was complety different. I thought it was worth pointing out.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=487843


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

Achromatic said:


> But yes, if you believe that you are comfortable with the scene and the situation, and that it is safe to you, to your partner, to others and to the patient, then go ahead and render aid.



Like you say, it's a completely personal choice.  However, please remember a few things (not picking on you, Achromatic.  This is just a good jumping-off point):
1) The scene is NEVER truly safe
2) The scene can change very quickly
3) Just because it is safe at one point in the call does NOT mean it will be in the next
4) You should NEVER, EVER feel completely safe.  The second you let your guard down, THAT is when something is going to happen
5) IF you feel something just isn't right, get PD there and leave if you think it's necessary.  DON'T try to be a hero

Now, am I saying that you should treat every patient as a hardened criminal or someone who wants to kill you?  Yes, but only to an extent.  Don't outwardly treat them like that, but keep it in the back of your mind that you do NOT know this person, and you have no idea what his intentions may be.

Stay safe out there.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> How many providers show up at a baseball game and refuse to treat until all the Louisville Sluggers are impounded by the police?



You're right.  The scene is never going to be completely safe, and it would be foolish to think that you could make it that way.

But let me clarify: how may providers are going to treat someone holding a baseball bat or with a baseball bat within reach?


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

mcdonl said:


> Summitt. That is awesome.
> 
> Best post I have ever seen... :lol:



Seconded.  That's classic


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

*Sorry for quadruple post*

Ignore.


----------



## mcgrubbs (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Cut the attitude.  We're having a serious conversation here, which could literally be a matter of life and death.  And yes, although it is technically an inanimate object, it's about one that could actually kill somebody.



You sound pretty hardened for just a Basic student.

I'm also a  Basic student, I don't talk a tenth as much as you do on here.


----------



## reaper (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> You sound pretty hardened for just a Basic student.
> 
> I'm also a  Basic student, I don't talk a tenth as much as you do on here.



:beerchug:


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> You sound pretty hardened for just a Basic student.
> 
> I'm also a  Basic student, I don't talk a tenth as much as you do on here.



SNAP!!!  :lol:  Literally, Rolling on the Floor Here.  Imagine how much might be said after finishing a relatively simple class class and getting some actual time in the field under the belt?  OMG...


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> You sound pretty hardened for just a Basic student.
> 
> I'm also a  Basic student, I don't talk a tenth as much as you do on here.



I actually have a bit of a history with him over firearms.  I'm not like that all the time.


----------



## mcgrubbs (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> I actually have a bit of a history with him over firearms.  I'm not like that all the time.





You missed my point.  I wasn't speaking of this thread alone.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> SNAP!!!  :lol:  Literally, Rolling on the Floor Here.  Imagine how much might be said after finishing a relatively simple class class and getting some actual time in the field under the belt?  OMG...



I'm not sure why you have decided to berate me for being a basic student.  This is not a basic vs. paramedic discussion over some medical thing.  I realize that EMT-B is, for lack of a better term, basic first aid.  It barely counts as medicine.  But, as you can see, I'm not just stopping at basic.  But that's an argument for a different thread.  No point in bringing education into this one.

We were having a civil conversation, and somebody decided to get sarcastic.  I responded.  Though I may not have handled it in the perfect way, that's the way life, unfortunately.  I apologize if I offended anyone.

As far as being hardened, I realize that I have no ambulance experience, and that I have a lot to learn.  Hence, part of the reason this thread exists.  As far as going to say that "a gun is a matter of life and death," that doesn't really seem like a horrible statement to make.  If it is, could someone explain why?  Because I just don't see it.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> You missed my point.  I wasn't speaking of this thread alone.



Okay, fair enough.  Can you give me another example so I can look at it?  If there's something horribly wrong with my attitude, I'd like to fix it.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> You missed my point.  I wasn't speaking of this thread alone.



Alright, I looked through a few of my recent posts.  And yes, I apologize, I did come off a little more abrasive than I should have, mostly in the "Reflections on EMT-B Class" thread.

I'll try to work on that.  Thanks for letting me know.

Eric


----------



## mcgrubbs (Nov 24, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> I'm not sure why you have decided to berate me for being a basic student.  This is not a basic vs. paramedic discussion over some medical thing.  I realize that EMT-B is, for lack of a better term, basic first aid.  It barely counts as medicine.  But, as you can see, I'm not just stopping at basic.  But that's an argument for a different thread.  No point in bringing education into this one.
> 
> We were having a civil conversation, and somebody decided to get sarcastic.  I responded.  Though I may not have handled it in the perfect way, that's the way life, unfortunately.  I apologize if I offended anyone.
> 
> As far as being hardened, I realize that I have no ambulance experience, and that I have a lot to learn.  Hence, part of the reason this thread exists.  As far as going to say that "a gun is a matter of life and death," that doesn't really seem like a horrible statement to make.  If it is, could someone explain why?  Because I just don't see it.



First, I was not making fun of your, and my, status as a Basic student.  Nor do I see anyone berating you for it.

Second, I used the term "hardened" in a very tongue-in-cheek way.  I'm surprised you didn't pick up on that.  I wouldn't seriously use such a term in making a point about an individual just being an entry-level student.

Third, you post all over this forum and quite often.  I just don't see how a Basic student, including myself, can honestly have that much to add.  In other words, read much, post little, learn often.  We are Basic students, we genuinely do NOT have much to add.....because we've done nothing.  There's a principle regarding rookies in anything, it's called "Stay In your Lane".

Fourth, about the gun issue.  Guns are generally not a life and death issue.  People mis-using them IS. I rarely find that people with lots of life experience
make such brash statements.  I've carried a gun, or two, daily for years now.   I've seen the good and the bad..and the truly horrific.  They are like almost anything else, Treat them with respect and don't lose your cool.  (Others are almost always watching when you do.)  Also, always treat the person wearing/carrying the gun with respect...often they are doing a job most can't even fathom, and now they need EMS' help.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> I just don't see how a Basic student, including myself, can honestly have that much to add.  In other words, read much, post little, learn often.  We are Basic students, we genuinely do NOT have much to add.....because we've done nothing.  There's a principle regarding rookies in anything, it's called "Stay In your Lane".



I like you...  You're smart...  Pull up a chair... Want a drink?  :beerchug:


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 24, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> First, I was not making fun of your, and my, status as a Basic student.  Nor do I see anyone berating you for it.
> 
> Second, I used the term "hardened" in a very tongue-in-cheek way.  I'm surprised you didn't pick up on that.  I wouldn't seriously use such a term in making a point about an individual just being an entry-level student.
> 
> ...



Okay, I think I see what you mean.

Let me try to respond the best I can.  As far as the post count goes, yes, I do realize that I have a high post count.  But I have also been around here for a while.  Not saying that's a legitimate "excuse," but just take it into consideration.  Also, a lot of the posts I have made have been in conversations, which makes the post count jump.  But yes, I have gotten very involved on this forum, because it is a great place.  Do I cross the line at times?  Without a doubt, but I don't think I'm the only one.  But remember, one of the best ways to learn is to enter the conversation.  

As far as the "hardened" comment goes, I guess I just missed that.  My bad .  And I didn't even notice your training status.  

As far as the guns go, when I talk about a gun being deadly, I do not mean JUST the gun itself.  I'm talking about everything that goes along with it, including the person who's handling it.  And I really don't have any problem with guns.  The point I am trying to make (and sometimes it's hard to get the point across over the internet) is that if there is a gun on scene, and I don't feel safe, I'm doing something.  Whether it be calling LE or not entering until the weapon is secured.  I have absolutely no problem treating a gun owner, but only if I do not feel my life is in imminent danger.  And of course I would treat the patient with respect.  No need to worry about that.  At the end, there, if you're talking about LEOs, go back and re-read my posts.  We're definitely on the same page on that one 

Thanks for the response though.  I'll be mindful of what I post, but I do like to enter into conversations.

No hard feelings on my end.

Eric


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 25, 2009)

*user deleted*


This thread has run it's course, apparently


----------



## wolfwyndd (Nov 25, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Alright, so this came up recently in a separate thread.
> 
> Let's say you are dispatched to a patient, and upon arrival you either find that the patient has a weapon and a legal CCW or you find that your patient has a CCW and may or may not have a weapon on them.  What do you do?



That's a no brainer for us.  Call LE and let them take possession of the weapon.  End of story.  No weapons on the ambulance.  The only exception to that is if we are having a LE officer ride along.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 25, 2009)

wolfwyndd said:


> That's a no brainer for us.  Call LE and let them take possession of the weapon.  End of story.  No weapons on the ambulance.  The only exception to that is if we are having a LE officer ride along.



Again, why don't we all just sacrifice woodland creatures to the GOD of LEO's and be given their mystical powers of firearms safety?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmRN00KbCr8

Maybe you could have a LEO tell you how he's the only one in the ambulance that's qualified to deal with this.... *kaboom*.


"2-7 to dispatch, requesting AMS intercept and another ambulance, officer shot himself in the foot"

*rolls eyes*

I can't believe what a bunch of pansies exist in the EMS field.  We'll handle AIDS infested blood, but an inanimate object chills us to our bones.    I see no need for LEO presence simply because the guy is exercising a right.  

I feel that laws should be passed preventing any entity that receives one cent of taxpayer dollars, or tax breaks, to follow state law regarding CCW's.  A damned shame that the hospital my tax dollars built is allowed to deprive me of my Constitutional rights.  And, of course, it's because of people like firecoins & co that this absurdity happens.  Like I said, I hope none of y'all ever get a call for a coronary at a gun shop, it'll take a month to "clear the scene"


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 25, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Again, why don't we all just sacrifice woodland creatures to the GOD of LEO's and be given their mystical powers of firearms safety?
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmRN00KbCr8
> 
> ...



Yeah, think I'm gonna tell the judge "it's my right", just before he hands down that 2 year sentence for carrying a weapon into a hospital!

 I am a 36 year member of the NRA and as such,  I support gun rights. But, even the NRA believes in public safety and security. CCW is a right for the carrier..not for those who treat and transport that carrier. The gun must be properly secured by PD in most cases. It can also be secured by hospital security until such time as the carrier presents his CCW at discharge.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 25, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> Yeah, think I'm gonna tell the judge "it's my right", just before he hands down that 2 year sentence for carrying a weapon into a hospital!



In my state, that's not a crime.  Which part of "shall not be infringed" applies?



> I am a 36 year member of the NRA and as such,  I support gun rights. But,



How come we get so many people like that?  I mean, do any of you say "I support not murdering babies.... *BUT*.".  Of course not.  A right is a right, caveats need not apply.  Usually the "but" means "but I'll still cowtow to Unconstitutional laws!".



> even the NRA believes in public safety and security. CCW is a right for the carrier..not for those who treat and transport that carrier.


Rights exist for all, not just the upgrade peasants that the government bequeaths them upon.  



> The gun must be properly secured by PD in most cases. It can also be secured by hospital security until such time as the carrier presents his CCW at discharge.



Hah! Hospital security does CCW checks?  My hospital security probably couldn't read the fine print on mine, let alone have any method of determining it's worth.  Whenever someone in "security" asks for my CCW, I always pull out my Utah permit.  Of course, I've got my PA (and FL!) permit, but it seems to me if someones taking it upon their authority to validate my ID, they should be aware of all of the states and their reciprocity agreements.  If they aren't, they should just mind their own damn business


----------



## Luno (Nov 25, 2009)

mcgrubbs said:


> I just don't see how a Basic student, including myself, can honestly have that much to add.  In other words, read much, post little, learn often.  We are Basic students, we genuinely do NOT have much to add.....because we've done nothing.  There's a principle regarding rookies in anything, it's called "Stay In your Lane".



You're gonna go far kid...


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 25, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> In my state, that's not a crime.  Which part of "shall not be infringed" applies?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 Try carrying a weapon in a hospital or school here and Bubba becomes your new best friend for 2 years. Just ask a very stupid partner I once had. I'm pretty sure he's out of jail now ^_^ Tried to warn the fool but oh no...he claimed he had rights! Oh, he did have rights and he did excersise his right. Then a judge excersised his.


----------



## FF-EMT Diver (Nov 25, 2009)

Thatjeffguy.....If you read my posts you'll see where I stand on this but for crying out loud what is your problem??....You are coming off as the playground bully and it's pretty annoying...I have over time frequented this site less and less because of that bullcrap. So how about knock it off and realize that people disagree and there's no need to name call and in general act childish just because they do.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 25, 2009)

FF-EMT Diver said:


> Thatjeffguy.....If you read my posts you'll see where I stand on this but for crying out loud what is your problem??....You are coming off as the playground bully and it's pretty annoying...I have over time frequented this site less and less because of that bullcrap. So how about knock it off and realize that people disagree and there's no need to name call and in general act childish just because they do.



Thank you, sir.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 25, 2009)

FF-EMT Diver said:


> Thatjeffguy.....If you read my posts you'll see where I stand on this but for crying out loud what is your problem??....You are coming off as the playground bully and it's pretty annoying...I have over time frequented this site less and less because of that bullcrap. So how about knock it off and realize that people disagree and there's no need to name call and in general act childish just because they do.



A bully?

I think it's more of a sign that our schools are failing and people are getting dumb.  How many DOZENS of questions have I asked that haven't been answered?  How many posts do I make dealing with someones points, they then ignore it and a week later pop in regurgitating the same old stuff.

It's a bit annoying trying to debate or discuss things with people that have the intellectual capacity of a mentally handicapped gorilla.  No one in particular, FWIW.

Very few people today are intelligent enough, or have been taught to THINK rather than to regurgitate lines, to really take part in a debate.  When I encounter these people, I enjoy calling them out on it.  Perhaps that's an antiquated notion, engaging in debate and being called upon to stand up for your words, but it's a notion I greatly appreciate. 

I will try to be a bit more user friendly.  Thanks for the input.


----------



## medic417 (Nov 25, 2009)

LOL  I remember why I quit coming here.  To many people that know nothing about a subject trying to tell people what and how to do things.


----------



## FF-EMT Diver (Nov 25, 2009)

You wonder why I called you a bully and yet you come back on here spouting "intellectual capacity of a mentally handicapped gorilla"......And that's not childish bully??

I enjoy a good debate as well but I refuse to mindlessly argue and name call because someone has a different point of view than myself....

I dont know why you haven't gotten answers to all your multitude of questions as I do not remeber them, but I could make a quess and that would be if those posts were as obnoxiuos as your last few have been I can totally understand why you were ignored.

You're very welcome for the response back and I dont consider myself "telling you straight" I'm just simply saying at times we'd be better agreeing to disagree rather than posting our feelings over and over, these types of threads wind up getting locked and other members never get a chance to voice their opinion which could raise other valid points and then you or I could comment on that.


----------



## scottyb (Nov 25, 2009)

I think this is an interesting debate. A lot of strong emotional opinions about a very controversial topic.  I, for one, have a very strong opinion of the second amendment and do not fear or questions someone's ability to exercise it. 

That said, I understand that many people feel uncomfortable around firearms.  Mostly, not all the time, I feel this is caused by a lot of misinformation or a lack of exposure/experience with firearms.  But, I respect that opinion and know that if you feel as strongly as I do, there is no budging you from your opinion.  

I state my case in this manner:  I tend to treat guns with the respect deserved.  I would not refuse to treat someone with a pocket knife based completely on the possession, neither will I a gun.  Mental status plays a big role.  I heve felt more uncomfortable in a room with a AMS patient armed with a broom then I did on the one case I had with a firearm being present. 

Granted that was a hunting accident where the patient fell from his tree stand.  But I moved the gun to the side after clearing it. I held the ammo in my pocket.  I did not give it much thought after that.  I just made sure the LEO that was first on scene knew where it was.  I did not feel threatened at anytime, as I will not place myself in that situation.  

I also would not have forced a member of my crew to treat in the face of their lack of comfort.  In the end it falls on your own personal feeling about the situation.  I do not feel that a blanket answer can cover this.  "The scene is safe", in my mind has always been a subjective thing based on ones opinion of the scene.

I understand that my example was a hunting incident, involving a shotgun and not a concealed handgun.  I can honestly say I do not know exactly how I would act in this situation.  Thinking about brings up too many variables that would change my answer.  I look forward to further opinions and justifications on this topic as I would like to see what others think.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 25, 2009)

I say again... you show up on scene and there is a gun... you do not know if it is legal... if there is a proper permit... who is in possession... why the gun is present... what role the weapon played in the situation you are there to deal with... etc...

Until proven otherwise, I am going to keep myself safe and assume that the gun is there because the person holding it just gunned down 7 co-workers, is holding 2 teenage girls in  his basement, and plans to shoot me, rape my partner, inject every narc found in the back of the ambulance, and take my rig for a joy ride through 5 states while wearing my head as a hat.

I know... EXTREME MUCH?  But the point is that it is not my job to verify that the gun is licensed... that there is a proper CWP... that the holder of the gun is also named on the permit (ID check time?)... that despite legally carrying the gun, the holder isn't gonna snap (or has snapped) due to a verity of issues raging from depression to a diabetic issue to other previously unknown mental issues, and will turn the gun on me... that if the patient is unconscious the gun will not fall into the wrong hands or is in the wrong hands... etc...

My job, first and foremost, is to ensure my safety, the safety of my partner, the safety of other responders, the safety bystanders, and ONLY THEN the care of that patient.  I do not care if we are talking about a person carrying a handgun, a pocket knife, a machette, an assault rifle, a baseball bat, a hockey stick, or a cup of chlorine...  if I feel that there is a person with an item on scene that may present a danger to myself, I only have one responsibility... to ensure that I remain safe.  And I AM NOT gonna take the time to ensure that someone carrying a gun is doing so legally...  I feel safe... you get treated... in that order...  and a gun in the back of an ambulance?   

And it would be far more useful if those people that were replying to this thread (pro or against guns) actually had experience in the field and could express their personal opinions respectfully, realizing that no matter how much you scream or act like an azz (if it is acting), opinions will not change when it comes to personal safety.  And even if it is your right to carry, it is a hospital's / school's / ambulance service's / etc. right to say NO GUNS ALLOWED!


----------



## FF-EMT Diver (Nov 25, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> I say again... you show up on scene and there is a gun... you do not know if it is legal... if there is a proper permit... who is in possession... why the gun is present... what role the weapon played in the situation you are there to deal with... etc...
> 
> Until proven otherwise, I am going to keep myself safe and assume that the gun is there because the person holding it just gunned down 7 co-workers, is holding 2 teenage girls in  his basement, and plans to shoot me, rape my partner, inject every narc found in the back of the ambulance, and take my rig for a joy ride through 5 states while wearing my head as a hat.
> 
> ...




Well said mountian and I also had this thought for those of you that would refuse, it is illegal in most states to carry onto Govt property and in saying that the back of the truck is Govt property ( those that aren't private or Hosp based).


----------



## scottyb (Nov 25, 2009)

FF-EMT Diver said:


> Well said mountian and I also had this thought for those of you that would refuse, it is illegal in most states to carry onto Govt property and in saying that the back of the truck is Govt property ( those that aren't private or Hosp based).



During my research I have not found many states that make that blanket statement in their statutes.  True, many allow localities to make local laws and enforce them.  Also, property is not a term I have seen, more usage of bldgs/courthouse/police station, etc.   I have never seen a state statute that list ambulances a gov't property that is off limits, and most are very specific.  I will continue to look though.  My main source is handgunlaw.us, it is a compilation and requires double checking.  Federal property/military bases are the only ones I have seen specifically listed, but it has been a long time since I have done extensive research on laws.  It is hard to make general statements about gun laws throughout the country.  They vary greatly.


----------



## scottyb (Nov 25, 2009)

Hospitals do come up in some states as being off limits as well as correctional facilities. I forgot to add that.


----------



## BLSBoy (Nov 26, 2009)

We wonder why we loose respected and well educated members of this forum.


----------



## wolfwyndd (Nov 26, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> [snippage for brevity]
> I can't believe what a bunch of pansies exist in the EMS field.  We'll handle AIDS infested blood, but an inanimate object chills us to our bones.    I see no need for LEO presence simply because the guy is exercising a right.



You also have the right to remain silent.  It's a shame so many people in this country don't exercise that right.  

Look.  You asked what we would do in a certain situation.  I told you what I would do, and those of MY squad would do.  If I'd have known you were trolling for an argument, I wouldn't have responded.  Our chief is an LEO part time so I'm pretty sure he has a good idea how to handle a firearm.  Most of our squad members are avid hunters and several carry CCW permits. Just because we won't let a patient carry a firearm in our rig doesn't make us pansies.  You have every constitutional right to carry your firearm.  The STATE has every right to tell you WHERE you can, and can't carry it.  Our squadhouse and ambulance are OUR property and WE have the right to say what does, and doesn't happen on our property.  Feel free to file a lawsuit against us saying we infringed upon your right to carry your weapon.  Until such time as a judge rules in your favor, take your CCW permit AND your weapon and get off our property.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 26, 2009)

wolfwyndd said:


> You also have the right to remain silent.  It's a shame so many people in this country don't exercise that right.
> 
> Look.  You asked what we would do in a certain situation.  I told you what I would do, and those of MY squad would do.  If I'd have known you were trolling for an argument, I wouldn't have responded.  Our chief is an LEO part time so I'm pretty sure he has a good idea how to handle a firearm.  Most of our squad members are avid hunters and several carry CCW permits. Just because we won't let a patient carry a firearm in our rig doesn't make us pansies.  You have every constitutional right to carry your firearm.  The STATE has every right to tell you WHERE you can, and can't carry it.  Our squadhouse and ambulance are OUR property and WE have the right to say what does, and doesn't happen on our property.  Feel free to file a lawsuit against us saying we infringed upon your right to carry your weapon.  Until such time as a judge rules in your favor, take your CCW permit AND your weapon and get off our property.



That's completely fine and I agree with what you're saying.  I've got no issue with people making their own decisions.  I do, however, have an issue with a deadly weapon "registered" to my name being given to some hospital security guard for 'safe keeping', with no system of receipt or whatever.


----------



## Achromatic (Nov 26, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I can't believe what a bunch of pansies exist in the EMS field.  We'll handle AIDS infested blood, but an inanimate object chills us to our bones.



That's a fairly ridiculous comparison. I don't know about you, but I don't bathe my unprotected hands in AIDS-infected blood, and I don't know anyone who does.

Perhaps with the _appropriate BODY SUBSTANCE ISOLATION_ techniques in place, we _MINIMIZE THE RISK_ to ourselves from such AIDS-infected blood.

I haven't seen anyone on this thread claim that "no way, not ever, I will never go on a scene where there is a gun present". However, I have seen many people say that they will require "appropriate isolation" techniques to "minimize the risk" - sound familiar?

The AIDS analogy is so far off base it's not funny.


----------



## silver (Nov 26, 2009)

ok AIDS infested blood seriously? Blood cannot be infested with a syndrome.

When you step into government and private property you basically waive those rights, at any point you can be asked to leave...Besides, just because it's a right does not mean it is the correct thing to do in every situation.

When I am putting myself in a vulnerable position, I don't want to be near something so deadly unless it is correctly controlled, (and really a spoon isn't very deadly).


----------



## daedalus (Nov 26, 2009)

Yes, if a patient has an unsecured gun on them because they have a CCW, they have lost the right to emergency medical care from myself. While we live in a nation that supports the rights to ownership of weapons, we also live in a nation of consequences to actions. 

I will not approach a patient who has a gun unless they are PD, or PD has secured the scene.


----------



## medic417 (Nov 26, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Yes, if a patient has an unsecured gun on them because they have a CCW, they have lost the right to emergency medical care from myself. While we live in a nation that supports the rights to ownership of weapons, we also live in a nation of consequences to actions.
> 
> I will not approach a patient who has a gun unless they are PD, or PD has secured the scene.



And you would be sued and you would lose for neglecting a patient w/o valid cause.  Your unjustified fear of firearms does not allow you to decide that a law abiding citizen will not get care.  And what is even funnier now you have made it public that you would willingly neglect patients, I would not want to be you when you get sued.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 26, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Yes, if a patient has an unsecured gun on them because they have a CCW, they have lost the right to emergency medical care from myself. While we live in a nation that supports the rights to ownership of weapons, we also live in a nation of consequences to actions.



Err, what? Someone gives up care as a consequence of exercising their rights? What's next, people involved in protests don't deserve care because their exercising their right to free speech and the provider doesn't agree with the point being made?


----------



## John E (Nov 26, 2009)

*Contrary...*

to what some people have argued, I have no fear whatsoever of inanimate objects, it's the :censored::censored::censored::censored:ing idiots carrying the inanimate objects that concern me. Including those who think that military service entitles them to do whatever they want wherever they want with weapons.


----------



## Achromatic (Nov 26, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Err, what? Someone gives up care as a consequence of exercising their rights? What's next, people involved in protests don't deserve care because their exercising their right to free speech and the provider doesn't agree with the point being made?



First a disclaimer: I absolutely disagree with this, but witness pharmacists and physicians who refuse to give / fill scripts for birth control, "Plan B", RU 486, etc... based on beliefs.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 26, 2009)

Achromatic, an unplanned pregnancy is not an emergency. I'd expect any physician involved with emergency care (surgeon, emergency physician, etc) who refuses care to a patient having an emergency condition (including refusing to assess to rule out emergency care) based on personal belief to be held accountable in the court of public opinion, court of professional ethics, and the court of law. There are reasonable steps that can be taken to secure a weapon of someone who is legally carrying a fire arm.


----------



## Achromatic (Nov 26, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> There are reasonable steps that can be taken to secure a weapon of someone who is legally carrying a fire arm.



Absolutely there are. Previously you called out daedalus for his refusal to treat a PT with an _unsecured_ firearm. I think that's the crux. Most people with this objection have no objection to the presence of firearms, just unsecured firearms.

That unfortunately leads to comments about "pansies" who "better hope they never have a scene in a gun shop or they'll be there for a month securing the scene"... (I'd love to see the gun shop that keeps its weapons and ammo unsecured, so I could point the Dept of Licensing at them to lose their registration...)


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 26, 2009)

Achromatic said:


> Most people with this objection have no objection to the presence of firearms, just unsecured firearms.



Quoted for truth.  I think what's happening between everybody on this thread is a failure to communicate.  I think there may be much more agreement when everybody is on the same page.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 26, 2009)

Achromatic said:


> Absolutely there are. Previously you called out daedalus for his refusal to treat a PT with an _unsecured_ firearm. I think that's the crux. Most people with this objection have no objection to the presence of firearms, just unsecured firearms.
> 
> That unfortunately leads to comments about "pansies" who "better hope they never have a scene in a gun shop or they'll be there for a month securing the scene"... (I'd love to see the gun shop that keeps its weapons and ammo unsecured, so I could point the Dept of Licensing at them to lose their registration...)



Then the question is, "what is an unsecure firearm and what steps can someone who is not trained nor comfortable with firearms do to secure said fire arm. Is a firearm secure as long as it's in the holster of a patient who is legally able to carry it? Not in reach, but still possibly loaded because the crew is unable/willing to secure it (on that note, I'd rather not have providers who are unfamiliar and uncomfortable with firearms attempting to secure firearms.)? How about if the holster can be easily removed with the firearm still inside? 

What I don't think is a valid answer is refusing to treat someone who is legally carrying a fire arm until police arrive (essentially delaying care for several minutes if police aren't already on scene) or leaving the fire arm on scene unless the scene is the patient's house.

As far as gun shops, plenty of gun shops have their long arms 'unsecure' on display in racks on the wall behind the counter during business hours. Now the ammunition isn't anywhere near it, but it isn't "secure" in the strictest sense of the word.


----------



## Akulahawk (Nov 26, 2009)

The phrase "unsecured firearm" needs to be better defined as to WHAT an unsecured firearm is. To some, it is any firearm not in LE/Mil hands. To some, that is a firearm loose in the environment and it's owner is not around.

I have no issues treating someone who is legally armed. I would want the weapon secured in a safe or appropriate lock box, mostly to prevent it from being lost in the shuffle that the patient's belongings go through, or have hospital security panic and call Law Enforcement and have the patient go through the whole rigamarole of getting a legally owned firearm returned to them from Law Enforcement. In California, that is not an easy process, and LE agencies generally loathe to return firearms to their rightful owners. I know a few agencies that loathe the paperwork process... and would be happy to return the weapon, but they're very few in number.

As for ammunition: I've been able to pick up boxes of shotgun shells right off the shelf... That's hardly secure! Most rifle and pistol ammo I've seen is on shelves behind the counter. Not locked, but just behind the counter. Secure? Not really, but it doesn't have to be locked away like the Fort Knox gold either.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 26, 2009)

An unsecured firearm is any firearm that an unauthorized person can pick up and fire.  

A gun shop, a shooting range or a police station are potential scenes.  Usually such places will have weapons secured. Hopefully you will not be there to treat gun related injures in which case securing weapons and the scene in general will be a priority.  Hopefully any injuries will be accidental and not intentional. Either way, you may not be able to distinguish this until later.  

I am comfortable with a weapon at home provided we can lock it up.  This way it won't become a problem if the scene is somehow deceptive with reguards to our safety.  Not everyone is honest.  The patient need not be the bad guy either.


----------



## Akulahawk (Nov 26, 2009)

firecoins said:


> *An unsecured firearm is any firearm that an unauthorized person can pick up and fire.*
> 
> A gun shop, a shooting range or a police station are potential scenes.  Usually such places will have weapons secured. Hopefully you will not be there to treat gun related injures in which case securing weapons and the scene in general will be a priority.  Hopefully any injuries will be accidental and not intentional. Either way, you may not be able to distinguish this until later.
> 
> I am comfortable with a weapon at home provided we can lock it up.  This way it won't become a problem if the scene is somehow deceptive with reguards to our safety.  Not everyone is honest.  The patient need not be the bad guy either.


That's about the best definition I've read so far. As to potential scenes, I'd also add any street, highway, or sidewalk. Any scene where firearms are _known _to be involved would probably already have LE on scene prior to my arrival there. Your next AMI patient could be carrying and just happened to become symptomatic in a parking lot... her weapon isn't the problem, it just happens to be there too. As long as her weapon stays where it's supposed to be, I have no issue with it at all.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 26, 2009)

Akulahawk said:


> her weapon isn't the problem, it just happens to be there too. As long as her weapon stays where it's supposed to be, I have no issue with it at all.



The gun owner is unable to protect her weapon.  She can't prevent its theft and misuse. Hence it needs to be secured by an authorized person, lacking that, the police.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 26, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> What I don't think is a valid answer is refusing to treat someone who is legally carrying a fire arm until police arrive (essentially delaying care for several minutes if police aren't already on scene) or leaving the fire arm on scene unless the scene is the patient's house.



My main point is, essentially, some of the individuals here would let a law abiding citizen exercising their Constitutional right to bear arms lie on the ground and die while waiting for the LEO's to show up.  I just don't see how that makes sense, really.


----------



## daedalus (Nov 26, 2009)

medic417 said:


> And you would be sued and you would lose for neglecting a patient w/o valid cause.  Your unjustified fear of firearms does not allow you to decide that a law abiding citizen will not get care.  And what is even funnier now you have made it public that you would willingly neglect patients, I would not want to be you when you get sued.



Hah! this post has got to be the biggest piece of boloney I have ever read! Really??

If there is a man down on the ground, and I see a gun on his belt, or in a shoulder holster, I am not going near him until PD is on scene. This also happens to be company policy as well. Good luck suing me for following the standards of my profession (scene safety), dude. How do I know if the person with a gun has it legally or is a criminal???


----------



## daedalus (Nov 26, 2009)

> Most people with this objection have no objection to the presence of firearms, just unsecured firearms.





medichopeful said:


> Quoted for truth.  I think what's happening between everybody on this thread is a failure to communicate.  I think there may be much more agreement when everybody is on the same page.



Double quoted for the truth. I have no problem with firearms. I have a problem with losing my life because a prospective patient has an unsecured firearm on his person, when I know nothing about him.


----------



## medic417 (Nov 26, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Hah! this post has got to be the biggest piece of boloney I have ever read! Really??
> 
> If there is a man down on the ground, and I see a gun on his belt, or in a shoulder holster, I am not going near him until PD is on scene. This also happens to be company policy as well. Good luck suing me for following the standards of my profession (scene safety), dude. How do I know if the person with a gun has it legally or is a criminal???



Well are you missing what the entire discussions have been about including your own?  It is knowing that the person has a Concealed Carry Permit.  Your own statement was basically you would not treat the person that was licensed to carry and was carrying.  So again yes you would be sued and lose for neglecting the patient as described in this ridiculous discussion.


----------



## daedalus (Nov 26, 2009)

So does that question come before or after my SAMPLE history?

"Sir, do you have a valid CCW license on your person for that firearm, and can I see it along with a government issued photo ID?"


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 26, 2009)

daedalus said:


> So does that question come before or after my SAMPLE history?
> 
> "Sir, do you have a valid CCW license on your person for that firearm, and can I see it along with a government issued photo ID?"



"P" actually stands for "pistol," so it's built right into SAMPLE.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 27, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> "P" actually stands for "pistol," so it's built right into SAMPLE.


The new and improved version of SAMPLE?

S - Smoking
A - Amphetamines
M - Medications
P - Pistol
L - Liquor
E - Emesis


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 27, 2009)




----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 27, 2009)

*




"I'm not saying you can't own a gun,
I'm not saying you can't carry a gun,
I'm just saying you can't carry a gun on my Ambulance."​-Virgil Earp (Tombstone, 1993)... kinda... ^_^​*


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 27, 2009)

mountain res-q said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Classic B)


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 27, 2009)

Mountain Res-Q said:


> *
> "I'm not saying you can't own a gun,
> I'm not saying you can't carry a gun,
> I'm just saying you can't carry a gun on my Ambulance."​-Virgil Earp (Tombstone, 1993)... kinda... ^_^​*



I'm your huckleberry.


----------



## Mountain Res-Q (Nov 27, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> I'm your huckleberry.



* ^^  FFEMT's back, I think...  ^^*





"From now on I see [a thread about guns], I kill the man [posting it].  So run you cur.  And tell the other curs the law is coming.  You tell 'em I'm coming! And Hell's coming with me you hear! Hell's coming with me!"

*Too Much?  How about...*





"Why [JPINFV], you look like somebody just walked over your grave."

*Or, maybe...*





Go ahead, skin it! Skin that smokewagon and see what happens...  I'm gettin' tired of all your gas, now jerk that pistol and go to work!  I said throw down, [NJN]! 

*WOW... Seriously what is with all the guns and violence in this post... *​


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 27, 2009)

Let's try to keep this on topic.


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 27, 2009)

ffemt8978 said:


> Let's try to keep this on topic.



Awww Geeee.....But it was entertaining. ^_^


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

medic417 said:


> Well are you missing what the entire discussions have been about including your own?  It is knowing that the person has a Concealed Carry Permit.  Your own statement was basically you would not treat the person that was licensed to carry and was carrying.  So again yes you would be sued and lose for neglecting the patient as described in this ridiculous discussion.



^^
What he said..


Also, openly carrying a firearm is legal in a number of states, such as PA and AZ.  I open carry when the weather dictates and if I was refused treatment for that, I'd be quite upset.


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> ^^
> What he said..
> 
> 
> Also, openly carrying a firearm is legal in a number of states, such as PA and AZ.  I open carry when the weather dictates and if I was refused treatment for that, I'd be quite upset.



Better check your right to a safe work place laws before making any threats. <_< If a person fears for his/her safety..the gun may have to be secured. All it takes is to be shot at on duty just once to understand. Ever work Detroit?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> Better check your right to a safe work place laws before making any threats. <_< If a person fears for his/her safety..the gun may have to be secured. All it takes is to be shot at on duty just once to understand. Ever work Detroit?



A person can rationally demonstrate they were fearing their safety ("The guy aimed a loaded sidearm at me") and be covered.  Saying "I saw someone obeying the law and was terrified" probably wouldn't cover it.  And I wouldn't step into Detroit if I had a platoon of Marine infantrymen ;-)  I respect those that have to work in such hell holes.


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> A person can rationally demonstrate they were fearing their safety ("The guy aimed a loaded sidearm at me") and be covered.  Saying "I saw someone obeying the law and was terrified" probably wouldn't cover it.  And I wouldn't step into Detroit if I had a platoon of Marine infantrymen ;-)  I respect those that have to work in such hell holes.



I believe you are mistaken in the work place.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 27, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> I believe you are mistaken in the work place.



I've been wrong before 


Of course,the right to safety laws do have limits.  I couldn't say "I won't work with Achmed because he's probably got a suicide-bomb vest on, that's unsafe!"  But, I'm unaware of any laws specifically.

I've always been more concerned with ethics than laws, _per se_.  If I let someone lie on the ground and die because they chose to obey their laws and carry a sidearm that day, I'd be unable to live with myself.  Obviously, if the scene is truely UNSAFE, I'm outta there like a boner in sweatpants!


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Obviously, if the scene is truely UNSAFE, I'm outta there like a boner in sweatpants!



And on that note... h34r:


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> "I won't work with Achmed because he's probably got a suicide-bomb vest on, that's unsafe!"









...and for the record, he's not Muslim.


----------



## firecoins (Nov 27, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> ^^
> What he said..
> 
> 
> Also, openly carrying a firearm is legal in a number of states, such as PA and AZ.  I open carry when the weather dictates and if I was refused treatment for that, I'd be quite upset.



Scene safety is my #1 priority. My safety comes before that of the patient.  I won't know its legal or your intentions. I am not obligated to risk my life to treat you.  If you and your gun are not a threat and we can establish that pretty quickly, you will get treated pretty quickly.  If we can do this without LEOs, we will.    If not, you will just have to wait 2 minutes for LEOs to come.   So its clearly situational.


----------



## daedalus (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> ^^
> What he said..
> 
> 
> Also, openly carrying a firearm is legal in a number of states, such as PA and AZ.  I open carry when the weather dictates and if I was refused treatment for that, I'd be quite upset.



Sadly, you can be as upset as you want but it will not get you anywhere. You do not get to act however you want and expect others to bend to your will. You may have a right to buy and smoke cigarettes, but if you start smoking them in my ambulance you are now endangering my safety and you will be stopped. Likewise, if you have a gun on your person and your are not an LEO, I will not treat you until the gun is secure. What do I mean by secure? In a lock box in your car/home or with the police department. And like I said before, since it is my company policy not to enter a scene with loose firearms, I will get the backing of my management and medical director.


----------



## scottyb (Nov 28, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Sadly, you can be as upset as you want but it will not get you anywhere. You do not get to act however you want and expect others to bend to your will. You may have a right to buy and smoke cigarettes, but if you start smoking them in my ambulance you are now endangering my safety and you will be stopped. Likewise, if you have a gun on your person and your are not an LEO, I will not treat you until the gun is secure. What do I mean by secure? In a lock box in your car/home or with the police department. And like I said before, since it is my company policy not to enter a scene with loose firearms, I will get the backing of my management and medical director.



I fail to recall where the right to smoke is located in the constitution or any of it's amendments.  You have a company policy and unfortunately you would probably win if brought to court in most states because we are content with losing our rights to make people feel "secure".  I can see that there are more people here that have drank the "guns are bad and dangerous" punch and a dying concealed carry permit holder does not deserve a chance to live until they have their gun taken away.  Unless they are a LEO, cause then they are infallible.


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> A person can rationally demonstrate they were fearing their safety ("The guy aimed a loaded sidearm at me") and be covered.  Saying "I saw someone obeying the law and was terrified" probably wouldn't cover it.  And I wouldn't step into Detroit if I had a platoon of Marine infantrymen ;-)  I respect those that have to work in such hell holes.



LOL...Detroit is only bad sometimes but, the potential is definately present and one must always be on high alert. 

Ecorse is far scarier than the "Big D". More likely to fall through a rotted porch than get shot at in Detroit whereas the few times I've run call in Ecorse, we had an escort to make sure we got out without being high-jacked by drug seekers.


----------



## BLSBoy (Nov 28, 2009)

While I fully support CCW, and carry myself, no weapons in the ambulance. 
Your constitutional rights do not extend to the ambulance, or even outside of it. 
I don't know the pt. I don't know their intentions. Have the same mentality that LEOs have.... Be nice to everyone but have a plan to kill them. In our case, distract, and extract. 

As for those who have the mentality of ZOMG a weapun.... runzzz!!!

Learn tact, lean to make a weapon safe, and learn body language. Still request LEOs, but don't run cause there is a weapon.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Sadly, you can be as upset as you want but it will not get you anywhere. You do not get to act however you want and expect others to bend to your will. You may have a right to buy and smoke cigarettes, but if you start smoking them in my ambulance you are now endangering my safety and you will be stopped. Likewise, if you have a gun on your person and your are not an LEO, I will not treat you until the gun is secure. What do I mean by secure? In a lock box in your car/home or with the police department. And like I said before, since it is my company policy not to enter a scene with loose firearms, I will get the backing of my management and medical director.



K buddy, we're talking about apple sand oranges here.

*HAVING* a gun is analogous to *HAVING* cigarettes.

Comparing *HAVING* a gun with *SMOKING* is not correc.

If someone *HAS* a gun on their person, secured, we're all good.  Same as if they have cigarettes, or a pocket knife.  When that object is misused, problems arise.

How is a holstered sidearm "loose"?

How do you know that the individual with the sidearm isn't a LEO?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> LOL...Detroit is only bad sometimes but, the potential is definately present and one must always be on high alert.


Heh, I'm sorry here and I don't mean to be rude, but are you saying that downtown Detroit, which is second or third in the nation for per capita firearms violence, can only be bad "sometime"?



> Ecorse is far scarier than the "Big D". More likely to fall through a rotted porch than get shot at in Detroit whereas the few times I've run call in Ecorse, we had an escort to make sure we got out without being high-jacked by drug seekers.



And thats why I'd like at least the option to defend myself...


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

BLSBoy said:


> While I fully support CCW, and carry myself, no weapons in the ambulance.
> Your constitutional rights do not extend to the ambulance, or even outside of it.



Are you seriously saying that we have NO Constitutional rights in an ambulance?  Want to clarify that statement?



> I don't know the pt. I don't know their intentions. Have the same mentality that LEOs have.... Be nice to everyone but have a plan to kill them. In our case, distract, and extract.


And how would that kill them?



As for those who have the mentality of ZOMG a weapun.... runzzz!!!

Learn tact, lean to make a weapon safe, and learn body language. Still request LEOs, but don't run cause there is a weapon.[/QUOTE]


----------



## BLSBoy (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Are you seriously saying that we have NO Constitutional rights in an ambulance?  Want to clarify that statement?
> 
> You do NOT have the right to bear arms in all situations.





thatJeffguy said:


> And how would that kill them?


We need to be nice to everyone, but have a plan to distract them (throw jump bag, chair, etc) at them, and escape from the situation.


----------



## rescue99 (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Heh, I'm sorry here and I don't mean to be rude, but are you saying that downtown Detroit, which is second or third in the nation for per capita firearms violence, can only be bad "sometime"?
> 
> 
> 
> And thats why I'd like at least the option to defend myself...



Yes, Detroit is a great city and generally is a decent place to work. Poverty and blight is a bigger risk for EMS workers than violence. Falling through a porch is a part of EMS field training...lol  ^_^

Ecorse is a neighboring suburb of Detroit. NO..you don't have a right to arm yourself...we get enough criminals slingin guns around here as it is. Don't need some urban cowboy shootin his foot off becasue he's half as skilled as the thugs are and half as street smart. At least the thugs usually only kill each other.


----------



## scottyb (Nov 28, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> NO..you don't have a right to arm yourself...



I do have the right to arm myself.  It is called the second amendment.  You saying that, to me, is the same as me telling you don't have a right to your religion or to not have to incriminate yourself.  We could debate the second amendment all day, but in plain English, it says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the *people* to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 28, 2009)

scottyb said:


> but in plain English, it says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the *people* to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."



Oh, please. "The people" as referenced in amendments first, fourth, ninth, and tenth amendments are obviously a different kind of people than what is referenced in the second amendment.

/preemptive sarcastic argument.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 28, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Oh, please. "The people" as referenced in amendments first, fourth, ninth, and tenth amendments are obviously a different kind of people than what is referenced in the second amendment.
> 
> /preemptive sarcastic argument.




Well come on JPINFV, it's not as if the Federal Code specifically mentions what the "militia" is!

Title 10 Subtitle A PART I Chapter 13 § 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. 
(b) The classes of the militia are— 
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and 
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. 


Er.... wait, I guess it does.

Looks like all of us 17+yo men are members of the militia. I'd say that's almost a REQUIREMENT to carry a sidearm!


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 28, 2009)

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the second amendment predates by a large margin that part of USC.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 28, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Looks like all of us 17+yo men are members of the militia. I'd say that's almost a REQUIREMENT to carry a sidearm!



You can't be serious.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 28, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> You can't be serious.



What? Don't believe in conceal carry by law abiding citizens?


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 28, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> What? Don't believe in conceal carry by law abiding citizens?



Where did I say that?  I'm curious.

I was more referring to thatJeffguy's entire attitude.  I'm fine with people carrying concealed weapons, until it affects me.


----------



## scottyb (Nov 29, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> I'm fine with people carrying concealed weapons, until it affects me.



You are assuming it will effect in a negative way, I presume.

There are probably hundreds of examples of a concealed fire arm being used in self defense or defense of other innocent people every month in this country.  You never hear about them because they are considered news worthy.  The news would rather kiss Obama's butt or kick it.  I know there are at least 7 or 8, they are listed every month in my American Rifleman magazine.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 29, 2009)

scottyb said:


> You are assuming it will effect in a negative way, I presume.
> 
> There are probably hundreds of examples of a concealed fire arm being used in self defense or defense of other innocent people every month in this country.  You never hear about them because they are considered news worthy.  The news would rather kiss Obama's butt or kick it.  I know there are at least 7 or 8, they are listed every month in my American Rifleman magazine.



For the sake of this argument, I am.  

I am not arguing against CCW under normal circumstances.  I know that they have, at times, been used for good.  I never said they weren't.

But what people are failing to realize is the fact that just because you have a CCW permit does NOT mean that you are automatically one of the "good guys."  Yes, the majority of the people carrying a weapon are probably good people with no ill intentions.  But think about this: it only takes one who is different to cause some serious problems.  And unfortunately, when EMS responds, they have no way of knowing the true intentions of the patient.

So am I against CCW?  No.  Will I treat someone differently if I know they're carrying a weapon?  Yes, but only to an extent.  If I do not feel safe entering a scene or treating a patient when a gun is present, they will probably have to wait.  But once I make contact after the weapon is secured, they will get the same treatment as everybody else.  It's going to be up to me and my partner about whether we want to enter the scene.  It's not going to be a one-size fits all situation.  But if there is a gun on scene, that has a very high likelihood of making my approach different, if not stopping it at all.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> But what people are failing to realize is the fact that just because you have a CCW permit does NOT mean that you are automatically one of the "good guys." Yes, the majority of the people carrying a weapon are probably good people with no ill intentions.  But think about this: it only takes one who is different to cause some serious problems.  And unfortunately, when EMS responds, they have no way of knowing the true intentions of the patient.



Of course, using that logic, they could stab a pencil into your eye.  Sometimes you've got to strap on the _cajones_ and realize that life, despite Nanny Government's best steps, isn't a big cuddly warm play room with a "RESET" button and infinite lives.  Sometimes you've got to actually take *educated risks*.  Of the gun owners in America, I'd say about three percent of them actually use those firearms to commit  crimes.  Seems pretty statistically safe to me.  Obviously, if they were flying "gang colors" and had baggies of crack dribbling out of their pockets, that'd be another factor to use in the assessment. 



> So am I against CCW?  No.  Will I treat someone differently if I know they're carrying a weapon?  Yes, but only to an extent.  If I do not feel safe entering a scene or treating a patient when a gun is present, they will probably have to wait.  But once I make contact after the weapon is secured, they will get the same treatment as everybody else.  It's going to be up to me and my partner about whether we want to enter the scene.  It's not going to be a one-size fits all situation.  But if there is a gun on scene, that has a very high likelihood of making my approach different, if not stopping it at all.



Let's do a specific situation, then;

It's Sunday morning, 0930, you get a call to a local church for a "fall from unknown height".  You arrive and find an elderly gentleman sitting up, compound tib/fib, but alert/oriented.  When you approach, you notice on his side is a pistol, in a holster.  

Your response?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Where did I say that?  I'm curious.



Are you afflicted with a syndrome that prevents you from actually answering direct questions?



> I was more referring to thatJeffguy's entire attitude.  I'm fine with people carrying concealed weapons, until it affects me.



I wish that cowards could all wear little pink hats so I'd know, if I saw them being mugged, that they'd prefer for my firearm to not "affect" them and I can let their molestation continue.


----------



## daedalus (Nov 29, 2009)

Like Medichopeful said, I also have no problem with private ownership of weapons, and even CCW or open carry if it is legal in the respective area. However, any time I am working in the field, a gun is a dangerous piece of equipment that can be used to kill, and since I do not know the person I am called to treat, I must assume they are not supposed to have the weapon (this is a far safer wager than to assume all people with guns I encounter in the field are licensed to have them and are good guys, would you not agree?) . 

Is is forgotten that convicted felons are not allowed to get a CCW license, and that many will carry anyways? Also, is it possible that somebody with a CCW license will not have the best of intentions? Does the legal right to possess a concealed gun automatically also make what every the carrier does with the weapon legal? No. The carrier can still do illegal things (shoot me or my partner) even though he has a permit. Does a permit automatically mean that the carrier is someone I would trust to carry a gun while I work on him or his family? What happens if the patient has the concealed weapon and has a permit to have it, yet is have a hypoglycemic episode or acute psychosis?

So in the end, it does not matter to me as a prehospital provider is a patient with a gun has a license or not. It does not matter if they are a good guy or a felon. The only things that matter are 1. I do not know them, and, 2. They have a gun. There was an instance at my company where a provider was held at gunpoint by a patient's brother with a legally obtained and owned firearm. The fact that the gunmen obtained the gun legally does not make it any less dangerous, and obviously did not make the man using it any less dangerous. I hope this illustrates my point.

It is just a safer bet to assume I will get hurt, than to go in with blind trust that the patient has the gun because they are lawfully exercising their right to carry it, their mentation is stable, they have good intentions, etc.

Be aware that I support the private ownership of guns fully and will defend the constitutional right to own weapons for future generations should it ever be threatened. I also want to go home safely each night.


----------



## daedalus (Nov 29, 2009)

> It's Sunday morning, 0930, you get a call to a local church for a "fall from unknown height". You arrive and find an elderly gentleman sitting up, compound tib/fib, but alert/oriented. When you approach, you notice on his side is a pistol, in a holster.
> 
> Your response?



A local church? The fact that someone is a church goer does not score them "good guy points" with me. I treat a sunday school teacher and a homeless person with the same amount respect and non-prejudgment. As such, I will assume that they could use the firearm to hurt myself or my partner should they get angry with my care. I will ask this patient to have someone take the firearm and place it away from the scene, and until that happens I will not approach and treat. 

There have been very violent church goers who commit horrible atrocities (such as the recent shooting spree in a church in the midwest where the gunmen was a long time member of the congregation). This is not at all to say church goers are bad people, but it is to say that bad people can be church goers (or a member of about any other group imaginable).

Like I have said, I will always wager that I will be hurt, over blind faith that a stranger is a good person with a valid reason to carry a gun.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 29, 2009)

daedalus said:


> Like Medichopeful said, I also have no problem with private *ownership of automobiles*, and even if *driving* is legal in the respective area. However, any time I am working in the field, an *automobile* is a dangerous piece of equipment that can be used to kill, and since I do not know the person I am called to treat, I must assume they are not supposed to have the automobile (this is a far safer wager than to assume all people with automobiles I encounter in the field are licensed to have them and are good guys, would you not agree?) .
> 
> Is is forgotten that *people with suspended licenses* are not allowed to get a *drivers license, *and that many will *still drive* anyways? Also, is it possible that somebody with a *drivers license* will not have the best of intentions? Does the legal right to possess an *automobile* also make what every the carrier does with the automobile legal? No. The carrier can still do illegal things (*run over* me or my partner) even though he has a permit. Does a permit automatically mean that the *driver* is someone I would trust to *drive an automobile* while I work on him or his family? What happens if the patient *driving* and has a permit to *drive*, yet is have a hypoglycemic episode or acute psychosis?



Do you refuse to approach any automobile until the police secure the automobile? I hate to imagine that if I'm cleaning my parent's guns out in the garage  at my parents house (and, to be honest, it's been years since they've been used and cleaned/oiled, so they really do need to be cleaned) and something happens that a responding crew is going to freak out because there's a shotgun or rifle with a cleaning rod in it in the garage. What's next? Calling police because there's an unsecured knife in the kitchen?


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Do you refuse to approach any automobile until the police secure the automobile? I hate to imagine that if I'm cleaning my parent's guns out in the garage  at my parents house (and, to be honest, it's been years since they've been used and cleaned/oiled, so they really do need to be cleaned) and something happens that a responding crew is going to freak out because there's a shotgun or rifle with a cleaning rod in it in the garage. What's next? Calling police because there's an unsecured knife in the kitchen?




Silly willy!  Cars and guns are both inanimate objects, but guns are inherently evil!  Duh!

;-)


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

Do people realize how stupid it sounds to say, essentially

"I have no problem with private ownership of weapons, or CCW.  But, if you do CCW, I'm going to let your *** bleed to death."


That sounds like "a problem", to me.


----------



## Akulahawk (Nov 29, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Well come on JPINFV, it's not as if the Federal Code specifically mentions what the "militia" is!
> 
> Title 10 Subtitle A PART I Chapter 13 § 311. Militia: composition and classes
> 
> ...


And that above was probably written in the early 1900's... which is the "militia" referred to in the 2nd Amendment some 100+ years prior. 


JPINFV said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the second amendment predates by a large margin that part of USC.


Yep. 

Oh, if you read the _Heller _decision, there's actually a pretty good explanation of the history of the 2nd, how it was constructed, and what each part of it means. And for the lawyers out there, also in _Heller_, it should be noted that the "rational basis" level of scrutiny is off the table. Intermediate or strict scrutiny will be what's applied... but that hasn't yet been established. That's coming, but will take many cases and years to fully define.


----------



## daedalus (Nov 29, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Do you refuse to approach any automobile until the police secure the automobile? I hate to imagine that if I'm cleaning my parent's guns out in the garage  at my parents house (and, to be honest, it's been years since they've been used and cleaned/oiled, so they really do need to be cleaned) and something happens that a responding crew is going to freak out because there's a shotgun or rifle with a cleaning rod in it in the garage. What's next? Calling police because there's an unsecured knife in the kitchen?



I typed up a long winded response comparing why a gun and a kitchen knife are made, owned, and what their purposes where, but I then realized that arguing nitty gritty details is silly. I will not treat a non LEO who has a gun. Period. Replacing words in my post to change its meaning or comparing guns to kitchen utensils will not change my approach. I am happy to have the backing of others in my system, and JP and Jeffguy, if you are willing to do things differently than al the power to you.


----------



## JPINFV (Nov 29, 2009)

Nitty gritty details like cars, knives and guns are both tools that can be dangerous, very dangerous, in the wrong hands? 

Non-LEO? What if it's a security guard that is legally carrying? Armored transport doesn't get any love if there's any emergency medical problems? What about plain closed LEOs?


----------



## Akulahawk (Nov 29, 2009)

daedalus said:


> ... if you have a gun on your person and *your are not an LEO*, I will not treat you until the gun is secure. What do I mean by secure? In a lock box in your car/home or with the police department. And like I said before, since it is my company policy not to enter a scene with loose firearms, I will get the backing of my management and medical director.


Yah. Cops are infallible. A couple of them out here got themselves arrested for brandishing... think about that. Another one even is up on murder charges. 


rescue99 said:


> Yes, Detroit is a great city and generally is a decent place to work. Poverty and blight is a bigger risk for EMS workers than violence. Falling through a porch is a part of EMS field training...lol  ^_^
> 
> Ecorse is a neighboring suburb of Detroit. *NO..you don't have a right to arm yourself*...we get enough criminals slingin guns around here as it is. Don't need some urban cowboy shootin his foot off becasue he's half as skilled as the thugs are and half as street smart. At least the thugs usually only kill each other.


Read the _Heller_ decision. Most states have 2A analogues in their constitutions. Most citizens DO have the right to arm themselves. Michigan is a "Shall Issue" state. If the applicant meets the criteria... the applicant shall be issued a CCW license. 


scottyb said:


> I fail to recall where the right to smoke is located in the constitution or any of it's amendments.  You have a company policy and unfortunately you would probably win if brought to court in most states because we are content with losing our rights to make people feel "secure".  I can see that there are more people here that have drank the "guns are bad and dangerous" punch and a dying* concealed carry permit holder does not deserve a chance to live until they have their gun taken away.  Unless they are a LEO, cause then they are infallible.*


That pretty much sums up the problem. LEO OK, you get care now. Not LEO, you get to wait for care. I can see that becoming a legal problem down the road... think discrimination... especially _after_ 2A incorporation.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Nitty gritty details like cars, knives and guns are both tools that can be dangerous, very dangerous, in the wrong hands?
> 
> Non-LEO? What if it's a security guard that is legally carrying? Armored transport doesn't get any love if there's any emergency medical problems? What about plain closed LEOs?



I think he means to say that the armed peasantry can't be trusted, and thus may "eat cake".


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 29, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> Do people realize how stupid it sounds to say, essentially
> 
> "I have no problem with private ownership of weapons, or CCW.  But, if you do CCW, I'm going to let your *** bleed to death."
> 
> ...



Here's an idea.  How about you actually START your EMT class, learn what it means to be a medical provider, learn what it means to keep yourself safe, and THAN come back into this conversation.  Until then, there is really no point in getting yourself involved.

You come onto this website, which is clearly about the field of pre-hospital medicine, and you tell everybody that they are idiots and wusses.  Well, I have some news for you.  Although you do have the right to free speech, you may want to seriously watch your mouth.

As far as answering your questions, I don't really see the point to be honest.  All you are going to do is ignore them and be extremely immature in your responses.  Go back and look at some of your previous posts.  What good does name calling do?

So seriously consider your attitude, and get it through your mind that EMS is a bit different from the military and law enforcement.  Because as of now, from everything I've seen, and I'm sure others would agree with me, you should not be in this field at all.  All you care about is carrying a gun.  You do NOT care about anything else, such as patient care or the safety and management of a scene.


----------



## BLSBoy (Nov 29, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> So seriously consider your attitude, and get it through your mind that EMS is a bit different from the military and law enforcement.  Because as of now, from everything I've seen, and I'm sure others would agree with me, you should not be in this field at all.  All you care about is carrying a gun.  You do NOT care about anything else, such as patient care or the safety and management of a scene.



Well said.


----------



## medichopeful (Nov 29, 2009)

BLSBoy said:


> Well said.



Thank you.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

medichopeful said:


> Here's an idea.  How about you actually START your EMT class, learn what it means to be a medical provider, learn what it means to keep yourself safe, and THAN come back into this conversation.  Until then, there is really no point in getting yourself involved.



I was working in the medical field ten years ago, as a hall tech in a Level II trauma center.  Sorry I haven't yet taken my 120 hours of basic first aid class that, if my reading skills work well, you also haven't finished.  



> You come onto this website, which is clearly about the field of pre-hospital medicine, and you tell everybody that they are idiots and wusses.


I didn't tell *everyone* that, just the irrational, emotion-driven individuals incapable of rational thought.



> Well, I have some news for you.  Although you do have the right to free speech, you may want to seriously watch your mouth.


That's not "news", that's "advice".



> As far as answering your questions, I don't really see the point to be honest.  All you are going to do is ignore them and be extremely immature in your responses.


So you're saying that you're ignoring my questions because I'd ignore your answers.  That's your idea of a logical debate, yes?  



> Go back and look at some of your previous posts.  What good does name calling do?


You'll note I haven't done that until pages into debates that are, essentially, me trying to discuss something with a monologueing scratched record.



> So seriously consider your attitude, and get it through your mind that EMS is a bit different from the military and law enforcement.


I thought that I've said that exact thing about fifty times.  The discussion comes full circle, we're back to your reading comprehension.  Don't worry Dorothy, the Straw Man will be fine!



> Because as of now, from everything I've seen, and I'm sure others would agree with me, you should not be in this field at all.


I really couldnt' give two drippy :censored::censored::censored::censored:s what you think   I've been accepted into a EMT-b then a EMT-p program already.  You're wanting to be a medic, yes?  Has the dean of your EMT-P school accepted you into the program, based on your merits and interviews, before you've even taken your EMT-b classes?  I didn't quite think so.  I guess I'll trust the Director of Emergency Services at my hospital, also the dean of the school I'll be attending, over that of some internet know-it-all. 



> All you care about is carrying a gun. You do NOT care about anything else, such as patient care or the safety and management of a scene.


  If all I cared about was carrying a gun, I'd be on cloud nine right now, I'm carrying my custom SIG P229 and preparing my .25MOA Rem 700 .30-'06 for hunting tomorrow.  Of course, a few hours ago, I was extricating a 7 year old child from a destroyed car, and before that I was riding BLS with the ALS transport and the medics were discussing the EKG with me and showing me what they were seeing.  You've had many medics do that with you, brain  child?

I'm done discussing this issue with myself, and you looking on.  Meet the ignore list.  I hope you don't end up getting your prejudice *** murdered up in your cesspit of a city up there.  Best of luck.


----------



## VentMedic (Nov 29, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I really couldnt' give two drippy :censored::censored::censored::censored:s what you think  I've been accepted into a EMT-b then a EMT-p program already. You're wanting to be a medic, yes? Has the dean of your EMT-P school accepted you into the program, based on your merits and interviews, before you've even taken your EMT-b classes? I didn't quite think so. I guess I'll trust the Director of Emergency Services at my hospital, also the dean of the school I'll be attending, over that of some internet know-it-all.


 
LOL! The bubba system at its finest. Is the "Dean" of your EMT-P school a hunting partner? 

You have to pass the EMT-B class and exam first. That may not happen. The first time you pull out your gun at scene, you'll be gone.


----------



## BLSBoy (Nov 29, 2009)

thatJeffguy said:


> I really couldnt' give two drippy :censored::censored::censored::censored:s what you think   I've been accepted into a EMT-b then a EMT-p program already.  You're wanting to be a medic, yes?  Has the dean of your EMT-P school accepted you into the program, based on your merits and interviews, before you've even taken your EMT-b classes?  I didn't quite think so.  I guess I'll trust the Director of Emergency Services at my hospital, also the dean of the school I'll be attending, over that of some internet know-it-all.



How bout you stfu and come back when you have graduated and are certified/licensed.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

VentMedic said:


> LOL! The bubba system at its finest. Is the "Dean" of your EMT-P school a hunting partner?



Disagree with your ignorance I may, call you out on your logical fallacies I shall, but insulting your competenc ein the medical field or the Director of Emergency Services at your hospital?  Just the type of emotion based response I'd expect you to sling.  When all else fails, insult!



> You have to pass the EMT-B class and exam first. That may not happen. The first time you pull out your gun at scene, you'll be gone.


Are you daft? Do you think I'd care?   I mean, if I used my gun in accordance with the law and defended myself from a would-be killer, do you think I'd care that I might lose my seventeen dollar an hour job?  Yeah, good job there emotion-thinker, I'd much rather just be dead on the sidewalk, glad that my reanimated spirit can still have my freaking NR certification. 



Try following along here little lady;

In EMS, from what I understand, certain things are treated first.  If a patient has a compound fracture *and* can't breathe, the "can't breathe" is dealt with first.  I'm sure you're aware of that, so you understand that certain variables in outcome are more ideal than others.

So, if I have the choice between losing my job over a valid shoot, or lying on the ground dead... guess which one sounds better to me?

VentMedic, meet the ignore list.


----------



## thatJeffguy (Nov 29, 2009)

BLSBoy said:


> How bout you stfu and come back when you have graduated and are certified/licensed.



I'm sorry, I didn't even notice that you'd taken over the forum.  Any reason your name isn't in red?




Oh, I know why.


This isn't your house.


I can't think of anything more ignorant than to walk into another mans house and start dictating rules.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Nov 29, 2009)

And that's enough of this one.


----------

