Should EMS be armed

Should EMS be armed

  • Yes

    Votes: 52 35.4%

  • No

    Votes: 95 64.6%
  • Total voters
    147
  • Poll closed .
BLSBoy said:
How bout actually caring for the kids in the first place, instead of treating them like the accidental tax breaks they are treated as?:glare:
Click to expand...
The same thing about caring also applies to those rich workaholic parents who send there kids to stringent private schools, hire expensive tutors, and organize play dates with other emotionally neglected kids. take some time to do something spontaneous with your kid to show you care. kids need parents they can touch and talk to not some snobs who shell out money for high priced education and fancy toys. also tel the kid you love him/her once in awhile and actually mean it.
 
scottyb said:
I am not sure I totally agree with that. I am not talking about your opinion, but your reasoning. People still trust police officers, at least, that is the majority opinion as I know it. I think in areas where it is warranted due to response times and or police support, the population would probably at least understand it if not fully support it, as long as they are given the facts.
Click to expand...
In many settings people trust police officers. but in the many large urban settings there is a greater number of cops which means there are also bigger number of dirty cops which give all cops a bad name and that is what creates that distrust. I'm not saying that distrust doesn't get out of hand but its still an issue to be dealt with. but I digress. we don't need to be armed if we trust our gut enough to call for police backup before we walk on scene if something doesn't look right. also the image of gun or any other weapon on someone's belt can be rather intimidating and can add to patient's anxieties and case them to be less trusting and open and that can get in the way of patient care.
 
The city I work in requires us paramedics to wear bullet proof vests. Even practicum students are required to wear them and are at a cost of approx. $700, reimbursed upon hiring by the city. I personally think that we should carry some sort of self defence tool. I am a small person and have no physical means to protect myself from a drunk drugged overweight pt. Whether it be a pistol, taser, night stick, etc. I personally feel that it is warranted especially working in a city where bullet proof vests are REQUIRED; there must be a reason for this.
 
im at war with myself. on one hand i think that ems personnel should be given bullet resistant vests, where on the other hand it would most likely cause someones head to swell and make them wanna be a hero. but i deffinatly dont think we should be given guns. thats just asking for trouble. we have LEOs for a reason. let them do their job.
 
April992 said:
The city I work in requires us paramedics to wear bullet proof vests. Even practicum students are required to wear them and are at a cost of approx. $700, reimbursed upon hiring by the city. I personally think that we should carry some sort of self defence tool. I am a small person and have no physical means to protect myself from a drunk drugged overweight pt. Whether it be a pistol, taser, night stick, etc. I personally feel that it is warranted especially working in a city where bullet proof vests are REQUIRED; there must be a reason for this.
Click to expand...

EMS armed with sidearms in Canada. It will never happen since the current conservative government is a minority government. If they tried to reduce our firearms laws then the liberals and NDP will bring down the govt. If that were to happen then the liberals will probably our next govt. I hope that never happen since I'm a card carrying conservative.
 
I do not want to see it mandatory but I see nothing wrong with those educated, trained, and licensed to carry to carry concealed firearm. No one would ever know who or if anyone was carrying. But at least if some one chose to carry they would have another self defense option.
 
No EMTs should not be armed. Atleast not with guns.

Arming somone is a lot of work. You need to buy the tool. Then provide adequate training for said tool. Not to mention liability issues. If you use excessive force on somone, if someone takes it from you and hurts someone else. There's a lot to think about in regards to this question.

I do think that some form of self defense training is needed. I've been training for almost 5 and a half years. I agree that it could get hairy with patients and family members or whoever, but to hand out weapons is absurd.
 
well...

im a strong believer in the right to bear arms. I believe that we should be allowed to carry them, but only given the circumstances that we're working in a dangerous or crime filled area.

but thats just me
 
DV_EMT said:
well...

im a strong believer in the right to bear arms. I believe that we should be allowed to carry them, but only given the circumstances that we're working in a dangerous or crime filled area.

but thats just me
Click to expand...

So you are saying anywhere in the world today? There is no safe place. Many drug rings have moved operations to small farm and ranch areas as the podunk deputy is to dumb or ill equiped to deal with them.
 
Each person is responsible for protecting his / her self, you should not expect someone else to protect you. You should take the required training to use a hand gun, practice with it, keep up with your area laws and hand gun skills just as you keep training and updating your EMS skills.
LEO'S can not be with you 100% of the time.
How many calls for gun shots have you guys answered that the LEO'S prevented? If LEO'S could prevent violence we would have a lot less calls. I am sure if they could prevent all violence they would do so, but the simple fact is they can not. The best they can do after the incident is call EMS to take care of the person that has been stabbed, shot or beaten, take pictures and gather information so they can find and prosecute the person responsible for committing the crime.
But if you do not want to train and maintain the skills needed and required to carry a hand gun, then please do not do so you would only endanger yourself and others.

Yes EMS should get proper and ongoing training with hand guns and learn to protect yourself.

Just my opinion….
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EMT1 said:
Each person is responsible for protecting his / her self, you should not expect someone else to protect you. You should take the required training to use a hand gun, practice with it, keep up with your area laws and hand gun skills just as you keep training and updating your EMS skills.
LEO'S can not be with you 100% of the time.
How many calls for gun shots have you guys answered that the LEO'S prevented? If LEO'S could prevent violence we would have a lot less calls. I am sure if they could prevent all violence they would do so, but the simple fact is they can not. The best they can do after the incident is call EMS to take care of the person that has been stabbed, shot or beaten, take pictures and gather information so they can find and prosecute the person responsible for committing the crime.
But if you do not want to train and maintain the skills needed and required to carry a hand gun, then please do not do so you would only endanger yourself and others.

Yes EMS should get proper and ongoing training with hand guns and learn to protect yourself.

Just my opinion….
Click to expand...

I would much rather see a weapon other then a gun. There are plenty of tools out there that you can use to inflict damage. A gun isn't the end all be all weapon. Its not like on TV where you get shot once and your dead. I'm sure many of the seasoned EMTs can back me on this, but getting shot once doesn't usually kill a person. It takes repeated shots to vital areas.
 
Hopeless Romantic said:
I would much rather see a weapon other then a gun. There are plenty of tools out there that you can use to inflict damage. A gun isn't the end all be all weapon. Its not like on TV where you get shot once and your dead. I'm sure many of the seasoned EMTs can back me on this, but getting shot once doesn't usually kill a person. It takes repeated shots to vital areas.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you said. I was not implying to kill anyone just that you have the option to protect your self if you choose to do so, by any means you choose. There is no such thing as one shot one kill that is not the debate. The debate is whether EMS should be allowed to carry fire arms to protect themselves.
 
johnnyreb132 said:
I voted yes because I believe in Second Amendment rights and I don't want to be a hyprocite. For my entire life I've been around guns and understand the proper use and safety techniques. However, some people should never be allowed to use a gun and all need to learn about how to use one.


  1. Why not have one .38 on an ambulance, locked away and concealed, by which only one EMT, who has been specifically and sufficiently educated and trained, can access in the event of a worst case scenario?
  2. Every EMT has a low power airsoft pistol (but then whats the point?)
  3. Stockpile Red Ryder BB Guns in a cabinet
  4. Or the best option which is to just give EMTs a non-lethal weapon (ex. tasers)
Click to expand...

If the gun is locked in a cabinet, and only one person has access to it, what the hell is the point? Hey mister.... hang on dont shoot me yet until my partner goes back to the truck and gets the gun out of the locked cabinet...
 
medic417 said:
No such thing exists. People die from tazers. Less lethal would be best statement to use here. Problem is you may need more than 1 shot and also tazers do not stop all attackers.
Click to expand...


Do a little more research. There has NEVER been a death where the Tazer was documented as the direct cause of death.

I think you may be referring to death due to excited delerium. If you write to the Tazer corporation they will be happy to send you a copy of the Tazer comendium that was comiled strictly by unbiased outsources. You may also search the us circuit courts for the hundreds of cases where the Tazer corporation has been named as the direct cause of someones death. To this day there have been NO convictions.
 
firemedic7982 said:
Do a little more research. There has NEVER been a death where the Tazer was documented as the direct cause of death.

I think you may be referring to death due to excited delerium. If you write to the Tazer corporation they will be happy to send you a copy of the Tazer comendium that was comiled strictly by unbiased outsources. You may also search the us circuit courts for the hundreds of cases where the Tazer corporation has been named as the direct cause of someones death. To this day there have been NO convictions.
Click to expand...

The fact that the tazer aggravated the individuals pre existing condition still means it caused death. That would be like me claiming that a gun never killed a person because in fact in only expedited the shock that eventually would have killed them any way. The facts are that people have died after being tazed that would not have died otherwise at that moment.
 
you sure about that one?

So that same person that died after being Tazed wouldnt have died from the same cause; excited delerium, if he would have fought with 5 cops, and had the snot beat out of him?

I think you are misguided. Im not personally attacking you, and I dont want this to turn into a pissing match, but I think your information is wrong.

The Tazer does not kill people. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a Tazer to kill you! Look at the dynamics of how it works, it cannot kill you.

If someone dies after being tazed, they did NOT die from being tazed. They died from excited delerium, which is precipitated by a lot of things. Therefore the Tazer did NOT kill them.

Ive been tazed MANY times. I have been Tazed many times will attatched to a 12 lead EKG before, after, and while being Tazed. Other than the fact that its not all that comfortable to be tazed, it cannot kill you!
 
firemedic7982 said:
you sure about that one?

So that same person that died after being Tazed wouldnt have died from the same cause; excited delerium, if he would have fought with 5 cops, and had the snot beat out of him?

I think you are misguided. Im not personally attacking you, and I dont want this to turn into a pissing match, but I think your information is wrong.

The Tazer does not kill people. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a Tazer to kill you! Look at the dynamics of how it works, it cannot kill you.

If someone dies after being tazed, they did NOT die from being tazed. They died from excited delirium, which is precipitated by a lot of things. Therefore the Tazer did NOT kill them.

Ive been tazed MANY times. I have been Tazed many times will attatched to a 12 lead EKG before, after, and while being Tazed. Other than the fact that its not all that comfortable to be tazed, it cannot kill you!
Click to expand...

Thus you made my point, the actions of the tazer caused the persons death. They would not have died at that moment had they not been tazed. The tazer triggered the excited delirium or aggravated other pre existing so it killed them, no matter what spin you put on it.
 
Ok. You are correct. Yes If they had not been Tazed at that particular second, they MAY not have died right then.
 
firemedic7982 said:
Ok. You are correct. Yes If they had not been Tazed at that particular second, they MAY not have died right then.
Click to expand...

LOL. I mean come on I could claim guns and bullets never killed anyone and you could not argue based on what you presented. Shock is what killed them not the gun/bullet:rolleyes:. I mean the person would have died anyway at some point, the bullet just expedited it.:P Surely you are not trying to claim that if left alone they would have died in a few minutes anyway? No the result of being tazed led to and contributed to their death just like the bullet does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top