Should EMS/Fire be armed?

[DrParasite]

Yes that would be POST. Where you lean weapons, basic tactics, laws, penal codes, defensive driving, de-escalation tactics, etc. To be a cop.

Could something similar be created for EMS? an abridged course that incudes weapons, basic tactics, and de-escalation tactics, but not penal codes and a lot of the legal stuff that involve enforcing the law?

Using California's POST training as an example as an example (found at https://post.ca.gov/regular-basic-course-training-specifications), training involves two relevant domains, Domain 35 which is Firearms/Chemical Agents for 72 hours, and Domain 20 use for force/de-escalation, which is 16 hours. That's 86 out of the 581 minimum hours required for POST certification, not including testing.

The rest of the training involved other domains that would be more relevant to LEO operations, not firearms use. Wouldn't that allow the EMS providers to be "adequately training" as officers in those two domains?

 

[Summit]

What is the motivation for agencies to send their people to that? Liability?

 

[CCCSD]

Could something similar be created for EMS? an abridged course that incudes weapons, basic tactics, and de-escalation tactics, but not penal codes and a lot of the legal stuff that involve enforcing the law?

Using California's POST training as an example as an example (found at https://post.ca.gov/regular-basic-course-training-specifications), training involves two relevant domains, Domain 35 which is Firearms/Chemical Agents for 72 hours, and Domain 20 use for force/de-escalation, which is 16 hours. That's 86 out of the 581 minimum hours required for POST certification, not including testing.

The rest of the training involved other domains that would be more relevant to LEO operations, not firearms use. Wouldn't that allow the EMS providers to be "adequately training" as officers in those two domains?

POST will not certify that. Under what authority are your EMS providers going to CCW?

 

[DrParasite]

What is the motivation for agencies to send their people to that? Liability?

Liability is the primary reason... sending people for the proper training reduces liability greatly, because they receive formal training in firearms and firearms-related topics. Some agencies do permit their providers to be armed, and some states (at in least Virginia) have codified this permission in the law, while others turn a blind eye to it (don't ask, don't tell). I'm curious if lawsuits can be brought by EMS providers who are victims of violence against their agency, because the agency failed to provide them with all the tools needed to defend themselves against an attacker. Not a lawyer, just an idea.

POST will not certify that. Under what authority are your EMS providers going to CCW?

of course not, nor would I expect POST to, as POST is the Peace Officer’s Standards and Training, which is not what EMS providers are.

the comment that was made was that EMS providers don't have the proper training; this solves that issue, as if an EMS provider meets the same firearm related training as those who complete the POST course (IE, law enforcement officers), wouldn't that be acceptable?

As for whose authority,.... if an EMS provider has a CCW (meeting state licensure requirements), has the proper training in firearms as law enforcement (meeting POST requirements, for agency approval), whose additional authority do you need?

 

[johnrsemt]

Luke_31: it is not fun to be in the back of an ambulance when an idiot officer pepper sprays a combative patient.
I was in the back at the scene when the unconscious patient (2 FF, medic {Me}, EMT and 2 officers) woke up and became combative. 3rd officer pulled up, opened the back door, and pepper sprayed everyone. I climbed out after a couple of minutes and yelled at him that his LT was going to have him writing tickets to penguins for that: about the time he gave up trying to figure out what I meant his LT climbed out of the back and started yelling at him, and trying not to laugh about my comment....Took us almost a week to decon the truck, and we threw away most of the supplies. The PD paid for them, which shocked me.

 

[CCCSD]

A whole week to clean up some OC. Wow. So that’s about what, two months for some puke..?

 

[Tigger]

As for whose authority,.... if an EMS provider has a CCW (meeting state licensure requirements), has the proper training in firearms as law enforcement (meeting POST requirements, for agency approval), whose additional authority do you need?

How does that work for all the places that prohibit firearms on the premises except for law enforcement?

 

[luke_31]

Luke_31: it is not fun to be in the back of an ambulance when an idiot officer pepper sprays a combative patient.
I was in the back at the scene when the unconscious patient (2 FF, medic {Me}, EMT and 2 officers) woke up and became combative. 3rd officer pulled up, opened the back door, and pepper sprayed everyone. I climbed out after a couple of minutes and yelled at him that his LT was going to have him writing tickets to penguins for that: about the time he gave up trying to figure out what I meant his LT climbed out of the back and started yelling at him, and trying not to laugh about my comment....Took us almost a week to decon the truck, and we threw away most of the supplies. The PD paid for them, which shocked me.

Sounds like a not so fun experience. Guess he should have taken half a second to see what was going on and maybe think through the process

 

[DrParasite]

How does that work for all the places that prohibit firearms on the premises except for law enforcement?

There are a few ways to think about this:
1) If it's simply a business request, if it's concealed no one should know you have a firearm. and if you need to draw it, than there better be a really good reason. Also, you deal with the consequences, but if they don't know, they don't know. If I'm not mistaken, the only thing they can do is ask you to leave, in which case, follow their directions and leave, documenting as such.

I'm not saying this is ideal, just an option.

2) if it's a legal prohibition, with a legal exception for on duty law enforcement officers, than the legislation would need to modify the law to include LEOs and on duty emergency personnel.

There are places that ban all people from carrying firearms, including on-duty law enforcement officers, with an exception for those who are performing their job functions ( I want to say it was an NC Twp LEO went to the DMV to renew his POV registration, while on duty, was asked by security to disarm due to their no fire arms policy, the officer said no, County deputies were called, and the officer was given a trespassing citation, but I might be incorrect)

3) if it's a secure facility (psych facility, jail, etc), that has lock boxes that all personnel (including LEOs) are required to secure their weapons, than secure your firearms, just like everyone else does

 

[Summit]

1) If it's simply a business request, if it's concealed no one should know you have a firearm. and if you need to draw it, than there better be a really good reason. Also, you deal with the consequences, but if they don't know, they don't know. If I'm not mistaken, the only thing they can do is ask you to leave, in which case, follow their directions and leave, documenting as such.

A business with a posted sign has ALREADY asked you to leave if you are carrying. If you are just going to ignore that, it is tantamount to trespass. I'm pro 2A, but I'm also pro private property rights. Don't minimize the rights of the property holder. 2A protects your from government rules, but your individual rights end where they violate another's individual rights. Willfully violating their property rights because they might not notice is no different than trespassing across someone's pasture under the idea that you aren't hurtin nothin if nobody sees you.

 

[DrParasite]

A business with a posted sign has ALREADY asked you to leave if you are carrying. If you are just going to ignore that, it is tantamount to trespass. I'm pro 2A, but I'm also pro private property rights. Don't minimize the rights of the property holder. 2A protects your from government rules, but your individual rights end where they violate another's individual rights. Willfully violating their property rights because they might not notice is no different than trespassing across someone's pasture under the idea that you aren't hurtin nothin if nobody sees you.

100% correct. and I agree, which is why I clearly said "I'm not saying this is ideal, just an option." I could have said "This isn't a great idea, but it's an option" if that would make you feel better.

The situation could be treated like an on duty law enforcement officer performing their duties. I'm not a lawyer, but it could likely fall under the same exception they have. IDK, that's an above my paygrade discussion.

 

[Tigger]

100% correct. and I agree, which is why I clearly said "I'm not saying this is ideal, just an option." I could have said "This isn't a great idea, but it's an option" if that would make you feel better.

The situation could be treated like an on duty law enforcement officer performing their duties. I'm not a lawyer, but it could likely fall under the same exception they have. IDK, that's an above my paygrade discussion.

Willfully breaking laws while on duty is not an option. I mean I guess by the definition of the word it is, but seems a bit absurd.

 

[Carlos Danger]

Personally I’m all for absolutism in property rights, but that just isn’t how things work in our society. Property rights are limited in all sorts of ways; there are many examples. Look at public accommodation laws, for instance. Why would we accept that a private business owner can be forced to perform services that violate their own religious or moral convictions - even when the services requested are clearly intended as harassment - yet give them the choice to disallow law abiding citizens from discreetly possessing legally owned firearms while patronizing said business? It is well accepted that a business that is open to the public isn’t the same thing as a private residence, with respect to all sorts of things.

If we otherwise accepted the idea that EMS professionals may choose to be armed after demonstrating appropriate competence, it seems that this issue would be solvable.

 

[Phillyrube]

I was working part time as a medic while I was a cop. Carried most of that time, no one knew, never needed it.
Just insurance

 

[Summit]

The situation could be treated like an on duty law enforcement officer performing their duties. I'm not a lawyer, but it could likely fall under the same exception they have.

LEO are issued a duty weapon. It is part of their duty to be armed and capable of deadly force.

The vast vast vast majority of EMS has absolutely no duty to carry a gun even if their employer decides it is allowable.

This entire discussion is about wants and desires, not duties and needs.

 

[DrParasite]

This entire discussion is about wants and desires, not duties and needs.

you don't NEED to carry a weapon... no one is forcing you do so. EMS providers have a DUTY to go home at the end of every shift; why shouldn't they be able to use all tools they are legally permitted to us to ensure that happens?

99.99% of providers (and cops) will never need to fire their weapon in self defense.... but that 0.01% of the time... and yes, examples have been provided previously where EMS providers did draw their CCW to defend themselves, so you can't say it would never happen.

 

[DrParasite]

A business with a posted sign has ALREADY asked you to leave if you are carrying. If you are just going to ignore that, it is tantamount to trespass.

Is that really how the law works? If I put a sign on my business's door that says no White people allowed, does that mean I have have any white people who enter my establishment charged with trespassing? What if I say no gays? if two men walk into my store, and are holding hands, can I call PD to have them physically removed from the premises, and criminally charged? You don't even need to ask them to leave, the cops will simply physical remove them from the store because you have a sign on the door? Can someone with a LEO background confirm?

I'm not a cop nor a lawyer, so I don't know the answer to that, but that sounds sketchy at best... at worst, it sounds like you are completely incorrect, and making up a claim that has little legal basis. Didn't Starbucks get in trouble for calling the cops on two people who hadn't purchased anything and refused to leave when asked by the manager?

Starbucks manager told 911 of 2 men 'refusing to make a purchase or leave' before their arrests

The police release 911 call that initiated the controversial arrest of two African-American men at a downtown Philadelphia Starcks.

abcnews.go.com

How did that go for the regional manager, and the manager, who were enforcing the sign, and the police department, who were enforcing the business's rights?

 

[CCCSD]

Is that really how the law works? If I put a sign on my business's door that says no White people allowed, does that mean I have have any white people who enter my establishment charged with trespassing? What if I say no gays? if two men walk into my store, and are holding hands, can I call PD to have them physically removed from the premises, and criminally charged? You don't even need to ask them to leave, the cops will simply physical remove them from the store because you have a sign on the door? Can someone with a LEO background confirm?

I'm not a cop nor a lawyer, so I don't know the answer to that, but that sounds sketchy at best... at worst, it sounds like you are completely incorrect, and making up a claim that has little legal basis. Didn't Starbucks get in trouble for calling the cops on two people who hadn't purchased anything and refused to leave when asked by the manager?

Starbucks manager told 911 of 2 men 'refusing to make a purchase or leave' before their arrests

The police release 911 call that initiated the controversial arrest of two African-American men at a downtown Philadelphia Starcks.

abcnews.go.com

How did that go for the regional manager, and the manager, who were enforcing the sign, and the police department, who were enforcing the business's rights?

Yep. No guns means no guns. Enforceable by Law.
The courts have upheld that.

Your “argument “ using whites/gays is childish as it doesn’t apply but you are using it to create racial tension and visceral responses.

 

[DrParasite]

Yep. No guns means no guns. Enforceable by Law.
The courts have upheld that.

Your “argument “ using whites/gays is childish as it doesn’t apply but you are using it to create racial tension and visceral responses.

please cite the court case that said that you don't need to verbally ask someone to leave before they can be charged with trespassing, from a public business that is open to the public.

Not saying you're wrong, but if the court did uphold that, I'd be interested in reading the decision.

 

[ffemt8978]

please cite the court case that said that you don't need to verbally ask someone to leave before they can be charged with trespassing, from a public business that is open to the public.

Not saying you're wrong, but if the court did uphold that, I'd be interested in reading the decision.

New York state just passed a law that said business owners have to post a sign saying firearms are allowed on the premises, with the presumption being no sign equals not allowed. That's already facing a lawsuit though.