Some sobering stats.......

[MMiz]

Jon,

Good point. One of my EMT instructors worked as a LEO/Medic for as a county cop. He would respond with ALS gear in his Tahoe, remove his gun and lock it in the trunk, then respond to the call.

Interesting idea you brought up.

 

[Jon]

Originally posted by MMiz@Aug 15 2005, 09:21 AM
Jon,

Good point. One of my EMT instructors worked as a LEO/Medic for as a county cop. He would respond with ALS gear in his Tahoe, remove his gun and lock it in the trunk, then respond to the call.

Interesting idea you brought up.

Yeah... that was a big hold-up on the plan... becuase the Twp. would pay the cop to work, but he couldn't work as a cop... he could be a backoup and assisting officer, probably... but when he was playing medic, he couldn't also play cop.

Also, the township was reluctant to send officers to medic school and pay them the cop pay to go to school for a year, fulltime.. apparently they have 1 medic on the force now...

One of the PD's big arguments goign FOR them is that they already send an officer to EVERY EMS call anyway... and they are already EMT's who will QRS if the local squad isn't there yet.

And then there was the "gun" question..... State says no member of an EMS org. shall carry a weapon, unless a LEO functioning as a LEO (my squad has 2 cops / EMT's who run with us.... without that clause, they would be breaking the law when "playing cop" and riding in with a prisoner).

When the issue came up, I thought about it... I wouldn't have a problem if the cop was armed and in my rig, and functiong as an ALS provider.. in fact, would have less of a problem..... Remember... spitting or hitting the medic/cop would be assault on an officer... causing every cop to come down on the crazy psycho OD.... :lol:

Also... in relation to LEO / EMS...... an old partner of mine had a cousin... volunteer EMT and EMS officer in Rural Northern New York, alo a Local Officer / Deputy.... off duty, responds in personal vehicle, but ALWAYS carries (usually conceled)... My friend is visiting and goes along for the ride... they beat PD in (becase closest car is 20 min away )... for some violent crime.... I think Assult with head injury or similar.... Punch line... He knocks, and has hiis pistol out (Violent crime, no PD on scene but him) is asked "is it the cops, or the ambulance???" "YES" is the reply..

Again... in some communities this is comon, or at least not unherd of...

Finally... look at Maryland State olice Aviation... they are MD's only Medevac units.... all are civilian Pilot and Officer / Medic.... officer carries in shoulder rig OVER flightsuit... and walks around ShockDrama with gun... it is common and accepted..

Jon

PS---- I didn't get to totally finish the earlier post.....

 

[Luno]

Jon, very well put, to box EMS into one certain set, is dangerous. There are very few absolutes in life, while there are good principles, very few things should be taken absolutely. Only two that I can think of, death and taxes. Anyway, very well put, I saw something about Maryland SP on tv last night, I don't know why I totally blanked that one. :unsure:

 

[rescuecpt]

I bumped into a friend at the ER the other day. A county cop, who was on duty as a cop, but assisted a local ambulance as their ALS provider. He came into the hospital in full police uniform, with his gun holstered on his hip, performing ALS interventions. The PD allows this, and the Corps that ride within that jurisdiction all allow it as well. It works very well not only for them, but most importantly for their patients. (PS - it's a big county-wide department, one officer here or there on a rig isn't going to detract significantly from policing duties.)

 

[asysin2leads]

Originally posted by Luno@Aug 15 2005, 03:52 AM

The reason I use terms like "gun nut" and "half cocked" is because I have my doubts about anyone who uses action movie slogans to justify carrying a concealed weapon on board an ambulance.

Okay, you are entirely entitled to your doubts, my state certifications and licenses speak for themselves. Not only in EMS. Your assumption of "action movie slogans" is weak at best, these are things that are out of your lane, but I would be more than happy to attempt to explain them to you. The only purpose of a firearm in a protective situation is to stop the threat. If you cannot stomach that, then by all means, don't bring one. A simple point that was poorly assumed to mean something else.

Yet you decide that YOU are qualified, not anybody else who has a say in the matter, to decide that its really safe to carry one, and that to me is the height of arrogance.

Actually I am qualified by multiple states law enforcement testing criteria, including the Department of State (current), and the US Navy (current). So again, you assume, on very little information, which in my opinion is the height of ignorance.

What BOTHERS me is the thought of you getting partnered up with some easily impressionable young EMT and feeding him your nonsense, and then subsequently reading about his and your untimely demise.

Well, I may disagree with your opinion, but I guess everyone's got a right to one.

The fact that you cannot recognize that carrying a concealed weapon onboard an ambulance is dangerous, let alone ILLEGAL, says a lot.

The fact that you assume that everywhere it is illegal, brings me back to a previous point, about your assumptions. In this state it is not.

The fact that you cannot recognize that carrying a concealed weapon onboard an ambulance is dangerous, let alone ILLEGAL, says a lot.

While you continue to portray that carrying a concealed weapon aboard an ambulance is dangerous, you have yet to provide proof.

The use of deadly physical force is a last resort. It is not to be used as a means of coercion, or a means to intimidate, or any other reason than to kill a person who presents an imminent and complete risk to life.

I would suggest that you review what a force continuum is, and where it fits in, deadly force is not the last resort, it is a response to a threat. And as you aren't a LEO, I would like to draw your attention to "proning" a subject, at gunpoint, it is done as a means of coercion, and expressly to intimidate someone.

Again, I remit to you that if it is "part of the job", then your employer and local certifying agency shouldn't have a problem with your views, right?

Had you read my previous postings in their entirety, you would have recognized the error of this, and now? No, it is just part of my job.

Well, first off, your US Navy certification has no bearing in the civilian world. If Army medics have to work BLS when they come out even though they can perform surgical procedures in the field while in the military, what you can do there and what you can do here is apple and oranges. You can have certifications from EVERY law enforcement agency in the world, they only apply if you are working in their jurisdiction, not as a civilian working a 911 response ambulance. As someone who is as trained as you are, you should know that.
Secondly, maybe I'm just kind of naive and an idealist here, but I'd think that the use of deadly force IS in fact a last resort, simply because, I can't think of what else you can do AFTER you KILL them. I mean, what are you gonna do? The guy is shot and killed! Are you going to like go Kaiser Soze and go after their family and burn their shops and stuff? I think putting a bullet through someone's skull is pretty much the LAST RESORT.
In response to your "proning" a subject, actually, the officer has his gun out and ready because he believes the situation has the potential to place him or the public in imminent danger and is ready to respond to that threat. Maybe your various law enforcement training was different, but from what I understand from various people I know in the New York City Police Department, an officers weapon is NOT supposed to be used as a means of coercion. To bring it to a close, I ask you this, yes or no, DOES YOUR EMPLOYER AND YOUR STATE CERTIFIYING AGENCY KNOW OF YOUR INTENTIONS AND ACTIONS WHILE ON DUTY WORKING EMS? Because if you say, yes, yes they do, they have evaluated me and believe I am qualified and capable to carry a firearm while on duty, fine, I'll shut up, arguements is over. Until then, you are acting in violation of the rules and regulations of Emergency Medical Services, and that makes you wrong, it is NOT a part of your job, it is your own personal arrogance in pistol form.

 

[rescuecpt]

Originally posted by asysin2leads@Aug 15 2005, 03:50 PM
Until then, you are acting in violation of the rules and regulations of Emergency Medical Services

Ooh, I was never given a copy of this. Can you show me these rules and regulations?

Thanks so much.

 

[asysin2leads]

I found this when reading up about concealed firearms. In response to your statement "You haven't demonstrated why carrying an ankle holster on an ambulance is dangerous", I found this. This is from http://www.oregonconcealedcarry.com a concealed firearm website in your neck of the woods. This is a person (I believe a law enforcement officer) talking about why he doesn't like ankle holsters.

"I’ve never worn one, but gave it some thought for a while.
One time on a warrant arrest the arrestee resisted and ended up being grounded by one of the other officers. This officer ended up bent over the arrestee, with his feet planted by the arrestee’s head.
As I approached I noticed the officer’s left pants leg had ridden up, exposing his ankle holster and the S&W .38 snubbie within.
The ankle holster/gun was closer to the arrestee’s hands then it was to the officer’s. It made me very uncomfortable."

Now, I can easily imagine being in a similar situation in EMS. This is why, besides the obvious, that CARRYING A GUN ON AN AMBULANCE IS A BAD IDEA, wearing an ankle holster puts yourself, your patients, and your partner, in jeopardy.

 

[rescuecpt]

Originally posted by asysin2leads+Aug 15 2005, 03:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (asysin2leads @ Aug 15 2005, 03:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I’ve never worn one...[/b]

Sounds like a good source of experience on the subject.

<!--QuoteBegin-asysin2leads@Aug 15 2005, 03:59 PM
One time.... The ankle holster/gun was closer to the arrestee’s hands then it was to the officer’s.[/quote]

I wonder how many times an arrestee's hands are closer to an officer's hip holster than the officer's own hands. I'd bet a lot.

 

[asysin2leads]

Originally posted by rescuecpt+Aug 15 2005, 03:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (rescuecpt @ Aug 15 2005, 03:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-asysin2leads@Aug 15 2005, 03:50 PM
Until then, you are acting in violation of the rules and regulations of Emergency Medical Services

Ooh, I was never given a copy of this. Can you show me these rules and regulations?

Thanks so much. [/b][/quote]
Usually they are in the form of the state's requirements for licensing of an ambulance service, your company or municipalities operating guide, and the Department of Transportation's requirements for EMS. Yeah, I know, there are actually rules out there, weird, huh?

 

[Luno]

Well, first off, your US Navy certification has no bearing in the civilian world.

Actually, it does, my certification is as a civilian, the tac team that operate with is a civilian team on contract with the US Navy, this is another case of the height of... again.

The ankle holster/gun was closer to the arrestee’s hands then it was to the officer’s. It made me very uncomfortable."

I would say that this is one police officer's opinion, there are police officers that think pot should be legal, does that make it so? Absolutely not, this was an impression of what could possibly happen, I will grant you that ankle holsters have come a long way, and were at one time very unreliable.

Secondly, maybe I'm just kind of naive and an idealist here, but I'd think that the use of deadly force IS in fact a last resort, simply because, I can't think of what else you can do AFTER you KILL them. I mean, what are you gonna do? The guy is shot and killed!

You said I don't intimidate you, which is a good thing, but I will be honest, you scare the hell out of me. Shot does not equal dead. A situation is fluid and treated as such. If you have to shoot someone, god forbid, the first thing you do is initiate care. I know I'm not the only one to realize this truth. Shot is not dead, you don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stop a threat, when the threat is stopped, you resume what you were doing, initiating care.

DOES YOUR EMPLOYER AND YOUR STATE CERTIFIYING AGENCY KNOW OF YOUR INTENTIONS AND ACTIONS WHILE ON DUTY WORKING EMS?

Employer knew? Absolutely. Certifying Agency knew? I don't know, but our medical director which is our liason to the agency knew. But I'm gonna step out on a ledge here, and say that I could bring God down here personally, have an 11th commandment written, and it still wouldn't shut you up. Not that it's a bad thing, because everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if you continue to hold that opinion, I would recommend you find some solid facts to back up your opinion. Not some quote from some legitimate "gun nut" website. Every arguement that you have presented has had the wind knocked out of it, but I don't want to change your opinion, just present why your opinion is wrong for me.

In response to your "proning" a subject, actually, the officer has his gun out and ready because he believes the situation has the potential to place him or the public in imminent danger and is ready to respond to that threat. Maybe your various law enforcement training was different, but from what I understand from various people I know in the New York City Police Department, an officers weapon is NOT supposed to be used as a means of coercion.

I only have this response to this understanding, show me the team that does an entry without drawn weapons. If this is the case, why when a violent subject is cuffed, are they still covered? This isn't a last resort by any means. By your logic, as soon as a weapon is produced, the trigger should be pulled, in LE tactics, that is unacceptable. I will grant that self-defense is a different scenario, however.

 

[asysin2leads]

Even if your tactical team, working under contract allows you to carry while you are in performance of your duties as a member of that team, that does not give you the right to carry while you are working normal, everyday, run of the mill EMS. To be truly able to carry a firearm, and use it if necessary, outside of the normal private citizen arena, you must have the consent and backing of your agency. Maybe I'm kinda messed up, and got the facts wrong. If you only work as a tactical member of this response team, and that is your role in EMS, then fine, carry all the guns you want, have a bazooka and a few claymore mines for all I care, WHEN YOU'RE WORKING WITH THEM. Just because I am trained to perform a chest decompression when working with my agency, doesn't mean I can go about and do it everywhere. I am granted that ability by the licensure and certifications that apply only when I am working in that context. The same goes for you and carrying a weapon.
It's a different story when you work 911 EMS. Your previous post said that you work normal 911 EMS and carry when you do. I say, nuh uh, you can't do that, you are not acting as a security guard, or a law enforcement officer, or a member of the tactical team, you are acting as an EMS provider and as such the rules and liability covering you are different.
Secondly, you said "The use of deadly force is not the last resort." Then I said "Yeah well, when you kill someone, its pretty much the last thing you can do." Then you said shooting someone isn't using deadly force if you only wound them. From what I know, you never, ever, point a gun and shoot someone unless you intend to KILL THEM. Guns are made to KILL.
As for the 11th Commandment thing, actually, no, I said that if your field supervisor at your 911 response agency, the state certifying board, and your medical director all said "We don't mind him packing a gun while our asses are on the line if he shoots someone." Just tell me you sat down with all of those people, and they all gave you the ok, while you're working, on duty, doing normal, non-tactical 911 response EMS, and I'll be done. The fact you hem and haw around the issue of being allowed to carry one, plus the fact you need to carry it concealed, says to me you are doing it on the down low.
Just because an entry team does a sweep with their weapons drawn doesn't mean they are using their weapons as a means of coercion. They are doing it in case they need to SHOOT AND KILL SOMEONE. I used that quote because you said "show me how ankle holsters can be dangerous", so I said "Okay, well here is how they can be dangerous, this guys seems to have some experience with them, he thinks they're dangerous, and he's allowed to carry one."

 

[Luno]

I said that if your field supervisor at your 911 response agency, the state certifying board, and your medical director all said "We don't mind him packing a gun while our asses are on the line if he shoots someone." Just tell me you sat down with all of those people, and they all gave you the ok, while you're working, on duty, doing normal, non-tactical 911 response EMS, and I'll be done.

I thought that I answered this already, but incase there is some sort of confusion, the medical director, and the employer were both informed, and had no objections given the threat level at the time. You are done.

 

[Jon]

WOW!!!!

 

[DT4EMS]

I am glad to see this thead has sparked a great debate. I started it with the hopes of continuing the recognition that the threat exists.

Now with the actual numbers from the NAEMT being released it is obvious that I was not inflating numbers.

I didn't realize the thread would turn into into a debate as to carrying a firearm or not. For several years I did, I don't anymore. I still know a bunch of folks that do (they are all police officer/EMT/Medic).

All of this still boils down to training. If you decide to carry a weapon, no matter what.........including your "seat belt cutting knife", you have to have some sort of liability conscious training that works in the field.

Just like the lady that is suing after she wrecked her car, we can be sued for anything.

Remember that there are things described as "Environmental Weapons" as well as Improvised Weapons that exist all around us. I have heard way more medics say they would hit someone on the head with an O2 bottle way more than I have ever head them say they would shoot or stab someone.

Let me say this DEADLY FORCE IS DEADLY FORCE!
It is the perception of those that SEE it or it's after math you have to worry about.

Hitting someone in the head with an O2 Bottle is deadly force, stabbing, shooting, clubbing in the head with a baton is all deadly force. But GUESS WHAT>.........Putting your knee on the throat of a DRUNK uncooperative PATIENT is deadly force.

Don't tell me it doesn't happen, because in a week period, there were two medics at a particular service that did it. It was a service that (at the time) didn't believe their people needed to be trained in self-defense.

The problem was in NOT TRAINING their people they reverted to "Caveman" like skills to handle a situation they were not trained for. Now, if the patient (not an attacker) would have been remotely smart, he would be much richer right now.

There will always be diffreent views on this issue because of locations and the "public" that a person gets to deal with.

I was able to work in a very wealthy area for a while, and self-defense was never thought of. We an so much of the "Weak and Dizzy" C/P, SOB stuff, we never ran the shootings, stabbings etc.

Then I went to work in an area with a reputation for serious trauma action. Let me tell you 20 miles made all the difference in the world. I was made fun of because of the large reflective star of life on the back of my jumpsuit. They told me I would be the easiest to shoot. I immediately took it off.

When you would be working on someone and get told you were next........it changes your perspective on people. Being shot at while standing outside of the base...... Finding weapon after weapon on patients while moving down the road etc.

I simply believe that every person that gets into this field should be taught threat recognition skills, prevention techniques and real-world escape tactics. It is as important as BSI! There are some places that do give great courses, but it isn't a standard that everyone should get it, it shoud be!

When we educate people they won't confuse an uncooperative patient for someone that is attacking them. They will also learn how to back out and let law enforcement handle things instead of trying to restrain someone they can't.

 

[asysin2leads]

Originally posted by Luno@Aug 15 2005, 05:46 PM

I said that if your field supervisor at your 911 response agency, the state certifying board, and your medical director all said "We don't mind him packing a gun while our asses are on the line if he shoots someone." Just tell me you sat down with all of those people, and they all gave you the ok, while you're working, on duty, doing normal, non-tactical 911 response EMS, and I'll be done.

I thought that I answered this already, but incase there is some sort of confusion, the medical director, and the employer were both informed, and had no objections given the threat level at the time. You are done.

The threat level? Okay, so now you are the one man crusade against terrorism, huh? Well, ok, maybe you can update us with a "sitrep" from the front? :lol: Boy you're really doing a lot to dispell the "weekend warrior wannabe" crack I made before.

Well, if your medical director really wants to take on the civil liability of having the providers under his care walk around cleaning up the streets, all right, that's an interesting way to perform emergency medicine. Remind me never to bring anyone of my faily memebrs near him. I still think probably the state licensure of the ambulance you work on and your certifying agency might have something to say about it, but since you kinda just keep it hidden from them, we'll never know will we?

DT4EMS, I fully agree with you about people being well trained and able to defend themselves in any situation, trained in methods that would leave them free of legal repercussions. What I am NOT in favor of is yahoos running around talking tough about "carrying on duty". This is the post that REALLY let me know who I was talking too.

BEGIN QUOTE
>Let me also state that I don't advocate carrying a weapon on a rig, but if you do, >there are many things that need to be taken into consideration.

>1. Can I do this safely?
A. Safely carrying a concealed weapon? Is that an oxymoron or what?

>2. Will this negatively affect my ability to do my job?
A. Studies have shown that participating in a shootout tends to negatively effect the ability to perform prehospital care.

>3. If you doing it without "approval" (which we were not) what will happen if you are found out?
A. And while you're at it, what else are you willing to do without "approval"? Rob a patient? Selling drugs out of the back of the ambulance? Because, heck, once you decide to do a couple of things with out "approval", I say go the whole route.
>4. Can you take another human's life?
A. Can you justify working in a profession who's sole purpose is to preserve human life while walking around with the means and motive to take anothers?

>These are all questions that you need to answer before you decide whether or >not you are going to carry.
Yeah, and you might want to you know, get a permit, check into the local laws and liabilities, check with your employer, that petty stuff that comes second to the warrior bushido bravado that you must wrestle with WHEN YOU DECIDE TO CARRY
DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNN

>After you answer all of those, and if you still decide to carry, you have to answer >the following.

Inability to answer the following will result in having your gun taken away and not given back until you really want to take it seriously. We mean it this time!

>1. Can I do this safely?
A. Sure, the safety is on. What could go wrong?
>2. Is this going to be effective, and in what circumstances will this be effective, if >any?
A. Shooting people effectively kills them. Pretty sure of that.
>3. If I get into a physical altercation, will it "fall out?" If so, why? If not, why?
A. Please make sure you safely shoot at people. Dangerously shooting at people is dangerous.
>4. Do I take enough risk that this will make a difference?
A. Every time you take a seat in an ambulance you are taking a certain amount of risk. Despit what Luno, the NRA, or Charlton Heston might tell you, strapping a handcannon to your leg does in fact greatly increase that risk.

>Now skipping ahead, past all the threat assessment, weapon and calibre size BS, >everyday, you put a weapon on, you need to ask yourself.

>8. Why am I doing this?
A. I'm guessing it has to do with an inability to date during high school.


Anyway, my question is this. If you really are the one man kung fu SWAT team trained by the US Navy and whatever else, how come you waste your time playing in EMS? Huh? You could be doing so much more! Go become a cop! You can even play with shotguns and automatic weapons then! That sounds more up your alley! Or how about joining the Marines? Leave this petty saving grandma stuff to others. Go joined the armed forces or law enforcement, you'll get in less trouble. And by the way, as for the 'coercion' debate, you realize it is in fact a crime to use a firearm to coerce others, right?

 

[rescuecpt]

I searched all of the NYS law governing ambulance and ambulance service certification in NY (ie, the laws the State and County require my ambulance to follow, including Part 800 and Article 30 of DOH laws) using the following three words: gun, weapon, and firearm with no hits on any of those words... in other words, they're not mentioned at all. I guess the State f'd up on that one, huh.

 

[asysin2leads]

Yeah, well, then it must be ok to do. Go... get a gun. Tote it with you. Just make me a video tape when the state comes to do a part 800 on you and find you carrying a piece. I could use a laugh.

 

[ffemt8978]

Originally posted by asysin2leads@Aug 15 2005, 11:56 PM
Yeah, well, then it must be ok to do. Go... get a gun. Tote it with you. Just make me a video tape when the state comes to do a part 800 on you and find you carrying a piece. I could use a laugh.

Legally it is provided that you comply with your state's laws about carrying weapons.

Remember, government agencies only have the powers that are specifically granted to them by law. Just because it may be a bad idea does not mean that they can interfere or create a rule that violates the law. If your ems certification agency has a rule against carrying firearms, there has to be some legal basis for them to make that rule. I'm not saying that there needs to be a specific law banning firearms on ambulances for them to make that rule, but they are not allowed to make arbitrary rules that violate your civil rights or legal protections.

A good example of this is the recent story of the PA FF that was suspended for not shaving his beard. The department had a rule against facial hair (founded in what they thought was a very good reason), but the courts ruled it violated his civil rights therefore, the rule is no longer valid.

 

[Jon]

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.

Ok, Folks. That is the second Amendment.

In spite of extensive recent discussion and much legislative action with respect to regulation of the purchase, possession, and transportation of firearms, as well as proposals to substantially curtail ownership of firearms, there is no definitive resolution by the courts of just what right the Second Amendment protects. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, are an ''individual rights'' thesis whereby individuals are protected in ownership, possession, and transportation, and a ''states' rights'' thesis whereby it is said the purpose of the clause is to protect the States in their authority to maintain formal, organized militia units.1 Whatever the Amendment may mean, it is a bar only to federal action, not extending to state2 or private3 restraints. The Supreme Court has given effect to the dependent clause of the Amendment in the only case in which it has tested a congressional enactment against the constitutional prohibition, seeming to affirm individual protection but only in the context of the maintenance of a militia or other such public force.

Source: FindLaw.com - Clicky

Ok..... the jury is still out, 200 years later, on what we can and can't do under this.

I think that one of these days, someoen will get the ACLU to start contending that the, um, urban youth who deal in illigal controlled substances, in, groups, are in fact a militia, and have the right to carry AK's and Tec-9's.....

Somehow political correctness can go WAYYYY TOO FAR...

Jon

 

[rescuecpt]

Originally posted by asysin2leads@Aug 16 2005, 01:56 AM
Yeah, well, then it must be ok to do. Go... get a gun. Tote it with you. Just make me a video tape when the state comes to do a part 800 on you and find you carrying a piece. I could use a laugh.

Nah. I have the permit, but I don't carry. Don't want to.

The last Part 800 I went through the state inspector didn't pat me down. I was quite disappointed. LOL.