Self Defense for EMS

[thatJeffguy]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[ZVNEMT]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[VentMedic]

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

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

 

[medichopeful]

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

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

 

[ffemt8978]

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

Not in my religion.

 

[medichopeful]

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

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

 

[medichopeful]

Not in my religion.

Are you from Texas?

 

[medichopeful]

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

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

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

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

 

[thatJeffguy]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

???

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[karaya]

Yawn. This is still going on?

 

[firecoins]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

 

[thatJeffguy]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You'd rather be dead?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Virginia Tech shooting V Appalachian State University shooting.

Notice a little difference there?

 

[VentMedic]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[firecoins]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You need a different profession than EMS.

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

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

You'd rather be dead?

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

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

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

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

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

Notice a little difference there?

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

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

 

[firecoins]

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

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

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

 

[medichopeful]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[VentMedic]

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

If I Only Had a Gun

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

 

[medichopeful]

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

If I Only Had a Gun

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

I actually remember watching that. Very interesting news story.

 

[firecoins]

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

 

[ZVNEMT]

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

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