Councilman wants EMS to run through gunfire
- Thread starter Squad-6
- Start date
Oh, where do I start. So full of FAIL.
Contradicts what's been beat into our head for years; "Scene Safety." You can't help anyone if you're on the floor unconscious and/or dying. Also a common practice all over the US. No need to buck the system. Good luck finding anyone or any other company that'll do what he wants.
One word about sums it up. Moron.
Contradicts what's been beat into our head for years; "Scene Safety." You can't help anyone if you're on the floor unconscious and/or dying. Also a common practice all over the US. No need to buck the system. Good luck finding anyone or any other company that'll do what he wants.
One word about sums it up. Moron.
unbelievable. This guy is out of control. Maybe someone should let him run into a gun fight and see if he likes dodging bullets, im sure his opinion will change.
Good for him - it's time somebody stated the obvious. Life comes with risk, sometimes you've got to cowboy up and do the right thing, and if that isn't for you, find something more suitable for an occupation, like appliance sales. And it isn't an EMT thing: cops, firefighters, Coast Guard, AF PJs, high angle rescue types, should have known when they signed up that there isn't any guarantee that you won't get hurt or killed. It comes with the territory, and if someone doesn't like the territory, they need to move.
The public pays us to lay it on the line for them. It isn't heroics, or stupidity, it's our job.
How many EMTs are killed by gunmen at the scene of a crime every year? How many are killed in traffic accidents going to or coming from a call?
The public pays us to lay it on the line for them. It isn't heroics, or stupidity, it's our job.
How many EMTs are killed by gunmen at the scene of a crime every year? How many are killed in traffic accidents going to or coming from a call?
Stendec said:
:roll: Really? Scene safety is taught to us so that the cavalry can come in and do their jobs. If we get attacked after police arrive and are on scene with them then so be it - that is a risk i knew about when i signed on. I did NOT sign on to go running into an unsecured area with the only thing to defend me being a few splints and a set of trauma shears.
I have been assaulted by a "patient" before. It was inevitable, the police were standing right next to me and there was nothing they (or anyone, for that matter) could have done to prevent it. While unpleasant, that is a reality that I am ready to face.
Stendec said:
There are calculated risks, and there are...well, stupid risks. Running into a dangerous situation, knowing it's dangerous and that you have minimal, if any, tools to protect yourself doesn't strike me as a calculated risk.
The police have those fancy bullet launchers (sometimes even with real bullets! :lol: ) and electricity blasters (TASERs), but I can honestly say that I don't know of any EMS providers who carry lethal (or non-lethal) weapons as a part of their duties (OK, one, but he works for USSS and is more LE than EMS). Some, I'm not sure how many, do issue body armor. Or, at least, have in the past (perhaps when budgets were fatter?).
Bottom line, when it comes down to it, if need be, your job (as police) is to stop the threat, which, as you know, may mean putting one (or more) holes into a body that didn't have them earlier that day. EMS' job is to patch that hole as best they can and haul ass to definitive care (e.g., a hospital), where said bad guy can be fixed (let's not get into the finances of it) and spend time on the inside looking out. And, ideally, learn that what he/she did to get into this mess is both ill advised and frowned upon.
I agree that sometimes, it seems that EMS stages at the drop of the hat. But if it means that they're safe and able to concentrate on patient care and not as much on scene safety (due to having PD there to ensure their safety), then I'm for it. Of course, the obvious drawback is that the police on the scene are unavailable for other calls.
You do make a very valid point about the number of EMS providers slain due to gunfire, but one has to wonder if a part of it is because of the demand that they stage for safety purposes?
Perhaps the politician in question has Connie Cinos as a constituent. They seem to be cut from a similar thread.
Doug said:
Be as "safe" as you want, you're the one who has to sleep at night with the results of your actions, or lack thereof. Maybe rescue swimmers should stay out of the water. Maybe SAR pilots should wait for perfect visibility. Maybe mountain rescue teams should wait for ideal weather Maybe surfboat crews should wait for calmer seas. Everybody can excuse inaction due to "safety."
Our "safety" is highly over-rated. We aren't paid to be "safe" - look at Columbine and Mumbai. "Safety" is illusory in our line of work. We can control risk, but we will never be able to eliminate it. And we have to have the guts to accept it.
If I have to leave cover, loop a drag strap around a victim and tug them back to the "staging area" for treatment because the medics wont go with me, fine. I'd rather suffer a bullet wound than suffer with the knowledge that someone bled out because my main priority was my "safety." I'll take get croaked doing that rather than get offed in a crash, which is far more likely.
And it isn't a cop/medic thing - I'm not a water rescue tech, so I should "stage" at poolside while some kid swirls the drain? I'm not a FF, so at a car fire I shouldn't grab my Walmart fire extinguisher and try to get the occupants out? It'd be "safer" for me to back off out of the blast radius and wait for the firetrucks, right? Then I could tell them exactly how long it took for the screaming to stop.
Fortes fortuna adiuvat
Right not running through gunfire is controling a risk. How much worse do we make an incident when we get hurt? You contradict yourself. You talk about controling risk in the same post in which you condone running through gunfire. I'm glad I don't work with you, you sound like a liability on a scene.Stendec said:
I'm not one of those people that will say "I'll take a bullet because its my job as an emt" because it's not my job. A risk? Perhaps, but not what I'm paid to do. I also wont say that wouldnt run into a "dangerous" scene to save a life because it's one of these things that you cant predict. It's an instinct and a knee jerk impulse when the time comes...and you better believe that I'm thinking about myself first. I want to go home after my shift,minus the bullet holes.
But, I don't think it should EVER be expected from an emt/paramedic, or made a sop by a company. You would expect to find a few of us that would do it in the time of need, but there are more that wouldn't.
But, I don't think it should EVER be expected from an emt/paramedic, or made a sop by a company. You would expect to find a few of us that would do it in the time of need, but there are more that wouldn't.
Sounds more like the description of a Tactical Medic....someone who is armed, has body armour, and has extensive SWAT training. Your run of the mill EMT can't be expected to run into shootouts.
Stendec,
Your taxpayers are not going to be sympathetic if you get injured or killed on the job if you took risks to put yourself in danger. It's your responsibility to keep yourself safe so you won't be an additional burden on other public officials. Taking a bullet puts you out of commission and at a great cost to taxpayers. You're no good to the public and a burden to our public finances if you put safety on the back burner. You should never have a guilty conscience because you had no part in creating the emergency situation.
Your taxpayers are not going to be sympathetic if you get injured or killed on the job if you took risks to put yourself in danger. It's your responsibility to keep yourself safe so you won't be an additional burden on other public officials. Taking a bullet puts you out of commission and at a great cost to taxpayers. You're no good to the public and a burden to our public finances if you put safety on the back burner. You should never have a guilty conscience because you had no part in creating the emergency situation.
Personally, I just don't want to run code 3 to back up fire/rescue with the mentally off 78 year old female at the nursing home. I mean.... come on guys.... really =)! That one is for you Doug MD!!!!
Maybe the good councilman should ride along on EMS calls. That way, they can use HIS stupid ass as a shield if there is gunfire.................
Mick (firewolf) said:
I will.
Allow me to have something to shoot back with and I'll run into any scene you want. I'll bet my left nut you wouldn't run into a gunfight without your gun strapped to your duty belt. There isn't a special place in heaven for dead heros.
Are there risks for my job? Absolutely. Any time I wander into a burning house is a risk. However, I've been trained to asses and mitigate the risks the best I can. If I'm sounding a floor as I'm searching a house and find it in a condtion that is unsafe to cross, I find another route. If you're on the other side well... sorry 'bout that. I'll try and find another way to you, but I'm not going to put my fellow co-workers in a position where they have to rescue me AND you.
stendec said:
Uhhhhh... not that many - because we stage - like we're supposed to.
stendec said:
Too many, unfortunately.
I fully undestand the risks that my job poses. I also paid very close attention during my training how to minimize those risks. You can't fight a fire with a gun. You don't have a gunfight with fire hose. A gun and/or a vest is not a tool of my trade. They're yours. Its your job to make the scene safe so I can do mine.
John is right. You sound like a huge liability on the scene.
BTW... go ahead and try to put out that car fire with your .99 Walmart special. The chances of a car blowing up is about 0.000000000000001. The biggest blast you'll see is when the tires go. Let me know how that works out for ya. I'll bet you'll still be around to tell me when the screaming stopped.
It's not rocket science councilman
Fire or full of smoke? EMS Stages for FD
Gunfire or full of violence? EMS Stages for PD
This is the kind of official who thinks all public safety workers are the same.
Shootout & PD has a backlog? Well just send an Engine Company they can deal with it.
Fire or full of smoke? EMS Stages for FD
Gunfire or full of violence? EMS Stages for PD
This is the kind of official who thinks all public safety workers are the same.
Shootout & PD has a backlog? Well just send an Engine Company they can deal with it.
JohnMarcson said:
How will you even know? You won't be at the "scene," but up the road somewhere "staging." Apparently even a couple cops here didn't get the memo: we go to the sound of the guns. Violent problems aren't solved except by a swift, dynamic response. My "problem" might be an active shooter. "Your" problem might be a VT student or Ft Hood soldier bleeding out from an arterial hit. If you want to wait until everyone is flex-cuffed and sorted into good guy piles and bad guy piles, YOU have to answer to YOUR community why you chose not to act.
I'm going to step over that bleeder and keep hunting the shooter because that's my job - to stop the threat before it does more damage. You need to step up and treat that bleeder, because that's YOUR job, and no, we probably dont have someone we can leave behind to babysit you, so if you want to change protocols, how about writing one that says that if you are under fire you can grab and go, instead of spending 10 minutes adjusting the straps on a back board.
Times haven't changed, but training and doctrine has. Try to keep up, cause it will be a fast ride.
Again, exactly how many EMTs have been murdered at a crime scene in the last couple decades? All this "scene safety" stuff had to have been motivated by something, or was it just another knee-jerk over-reaction to statistically isolated incidents? Mil medics have been doing field treatment under fire in conditions that are a skosh worse than your average housing project dry-by since time immemorial.
We are here to serve the public, and that might just result in us getting hurt or killed. If you can't handle that, try the auditor's office.
If you ever send this Engine Company to a shootout w/o LE when dispatch hears me go on scene it is going to mean I am ordering a sammich at the diner across the street.
Maybe I should practice being able to weild my axe in self defense & deflect bullets with the head.
Maybe I should practice being able to weild my axe in self defense & deflect bullets with the head.
You're summing up nearly every incident as an active shooter type incident... kick in doors, get in there, kick ass and take names. Well, in reality, most are not. Slow down, process the scene, plan, and react. Jumping in with guns blazing (not taken literally) is unsafe and full of liability. We're not saying 'don't act', we're saying be smart about it.
We all knew when we signed up for this, the jobs are proportionately more dangerous than most. But, there's knowing there's risks and taking them when you can do so as safely as possible, and there's stupid risks. Kamakaize is sloppy, and tombstone courage will only get you that, 6 feet under a tombstone, if not sued before then.
Sending unarmed medics into a possibly armed scene is just asnine. Someone posted this in the 'quotes' thread. Pretty much sums it up.
We all knew when we signed up for this, the jobs are proportionately more dangerous than most. But, there's knowing there's risks and taking them when you can do so as safely as possible, and there's stupid risks. Kamakaize is sloppy, and tombstone courage will only get you that, 6 feet under a tombstone, if not sued before then.
Sending unarmed medics into a possibly armed scene is just asnine. Someone posted this in the 'quotes' thread. Pretty much sums it up.
Squad-6 said:
Every agency I know of around here (again, Baltimore/Washington) sends a suppression piece (usually, but not always, an engine company) on critical calls, such as shootings, stabbings, etc. More than likely, you'll find them staging with the EMS units. Case in point, the Discovery active shooter in Silver Spring, MD (a little different because it was expected to be an MCI).
There is a blurring of the roles (PD and EMS), and that is tactical medicine. Obviously, different agencies do things differently. Some PDs have sworn POs working in a medical role as a supplemental role (in addition to their primary role on the team); others have non-sworn personnel staging at the command post, or in an area with rapid access to the hot zone.
While it's no longer around (or so I'm told), CONTOMS appears to be the standard (or so I gather).
While it's no longer around (or so I'm told), CONTOMS appears to be the standard (or so I gather).
And once again, exactly how many medics or firefighters have been murdered at incident scenes, measured against the number of runs to incident scenes made? Is it possible? Sure, and every situation is different. Is it likely? No. Have community members suffered due to lack of EMS (and police) response being slow due to "safety" and "staging" and "planning?" Yes, Columbine being the example that serves as the lessons learned flashpoint for the way we response to critical incidents today. Not that many cops are killed at those "dangerous" calls - we get killed in ambushes and at domestics and traffic stops.
And if "active shooters" aren't the issue, what are the medics worried about? They never seem to hesitate when it comes to contaminating a crime scene, but again, that comes with the territory and as an investigator I understand that protection of life takes precedence over protection of evidence and that incident integrity isn't a priority. I don't think you could be a medic and NOT got into a scene in which weapons are present. Kitchen knives, bottles of drain cleaner, hot irons, if someone wants to hurt you, and you aren't ready for that, you need to do some soul searching as to your choice of profession. And violence is unpredictable.
Running straight in to get to a vic is dumb, for a cop or medic. Dynamic movement from one piece of cover to another to get to a vic is smart. Either be willing to learn and do it, or find a less challenging job.
The best "plan" is for the responder to be smarter, faster and stronger than the bad guy. Ultimately, no matter how many sand tables, white boards, green beacons, satellite uplinks or LCD monitors are involved, it always boils down to a guy or girl who will kit up, go in and do what needs to be done.
And if "active shooters" aren't the issue, what are the medics worried about? They never seem to hesitate when it comes to contaminating a crime scene, but again, that comes with the territory and as an investigator I understand that protection of life takes precedence over protection of evidence and that incident integrity isn't a priority. I don't think you could be a medic and NOT got into a scene in which weapons are present. Kitchen knives, bottles of drain cleaner, hot irons, if someone wants to hurt you, and you aren't ready for that, you need to do some soul searching as to your choice of profession. And violence is unpredictable.
Running straight in to get to a vic is dumb, for a cop or medic. Dynamic movement from one piece of cover to another to get to a vic is smart. Either be willing to learn and do it, or find a less challenging job.
The best "plan" is for the responder to be smarter, faster and stronger than the bad guy. Ultimately, no matter how many sand tables, white boards, green beacons, satellite uplinks or LCD monitors are involved, it always boils down to a guy or girl who will kit up, go in and do what needs to be done.
If the EMS providers' mentality is to move towards entering a potentially environment, there is a long and expensive road ahead, between training and new equipment.
Regarding contaminating a crime scene, I'm not any sort of expert in crime scenes, but neither are most of us in the fire service or EMS. As such, it seems it would be wise for FDs and EMS to get together with the police and have some training on how to preserve a crime scene.
Regarding contaminating a crime scene, I'm not any sort of expert in crime scenes, but neither are most of us in the fire service or EMS. As such, it seems it would be wise for FDs and EMS to get together with the police and have some training on how to preserve a crime scene.
EMS are not trained to be Army medics or Navy corpsmen. On the other hand, in the DC area police officers are given training to provide at least basic care for trauma patients. I have no problem with EMS/fire staging around the corner for a violent call. They do not have the means or training to protect themselves from an ongoing threat. It is my job to make the scene safe or get victims out.
Think about the North Hollywood bank robbery... several officers were wounded and laying there while they orchestrated a plan to rescue them. Our SWAT team has tactical medics for this specific task, because it is beyond the scope of duties for an EMS worker.
Until we are ready to arm them, give them ballistic armor, train them to use protective instruments and deadly force, I have no problems with them staging. But seriously guys.... the 75 year old "violent" female??? Really???
Think about the North Hollywood bank robbery... several officers were wounded and laying there while they orchestrated a plan to rescue them. Our SWAT team has tactical medics for this specific task, because it is beyond the scope of duties for an EMS worker.
Until we are ready to arm them, give them ballistic armor, train them to use protective instruments and deadly force, I have no problems with them staging. But seriously guys.... the 75 year old "violent" female??? Really???
mcpd2025 said:
I'm convinced that some CAD call types prompt PD response and EMS staging (e.g., alerted level of cx, as well as the obvious shooting/stabbing).
Also, isn't first offender...er, responder... part of the MD PO certification? I've heard some...interesting...stories about PGPD and their con ed for PO recert.
mcpd2025 said:
Sticky side down...air goes in and out, blood goes 'round and 'round. Most any variation of this is a bad thing.
I may get injured or killed on a call from an unexpected threat but my crew and I are not going to just disregard it for a patient until LE clears the scene. I am not trained in "Dynamic movement from one piece of cover to another". Yes, I am here to serve the public however, like others said, I do no good to my crew, the public, the patient and the company becoming a patient myself. I can live with myself knowing a patient died because the threat was still on scene and was not safe to bring the patient out. Chances are I am smarter than the shooter on scene but it doesn't take rocket surgery to pull the trigger. The victim will be much happier if I can get to them as soon as LE clears the threat as apposed to my getting shot then having to call in 2 additional crews for me and the original victim. I will not go into a hostile situation with victims on the ground and not have anything to defend myself, crew and the victim. The only thing most medics carry is a pocket knife but that doesn't do much good at a gun fight.
Well, if it comes down to movie quotes, here's one for you:
"A man's got to know his limitations"
You do know who said that, and in what context?
I suppose having a strong, solid idea of what you can't or won't do has some purpose, I guess. Maybe in the future there will be epic tales told of great deeds done in the staging area. Or maybe not.
Stendec said:
Wow, I have always thought you were out on the edge but now I realize your the definition of that new guy at the station that wants to run into a fully involved abandon building to try and save the drapes. Are you even on a department? With an attitude like that you would never last around here.
If I were you I would look at getting help. You have a sever case of hero complex that is taking you down a bad road. A statement like that makes me think you would set a fire just to put it out. Or shoot someone just to then go and try to save their life. Scary stuff, thank god I dont work with you, and sorry for those unfortunate enough to have to.
Stendec said:
The one major point you are missing is that all the folks you talk about (SAR, PJs, USCG, etc) TRAIN EXTENSIVELY in their specialties. What the Councilman is mandating is that AMR place untrained people into situations they are not prepared to address. Untrained/unequipped personnel entering an unsecured scene where deadly force has been used is poor logical decision making.
The mentality you are proposing is one that many in law enforcement proclaim to have: willing to take a risk for a questionable reward. In the realm of tactical medicine, it has been recently addressed by Dr. Matthew Sztajnkrycer (www.forcesciencenews.com/visuals/Rescue ... _picts.pdf). When I teach tactical medicine courses within the Border Patrol, a huge part of my training is making sound tactical decisions versus going on emotion. Some of the best times I've had has been as the 'bad guy' role player with skilled/experience agents or BORTAC operators. I can usually take out one or two 'good guys' in a tactical medical scenario when their emotions to 'save' the downed person (typically an officer) takes over. The downside is getting hit with flashbangs and taken down hard by a big BORTACer sucks.
In 27 years of Emergency Services (EMS, SAR, structural fire, wildland fire and HazMat) and 20 years of law enforcement I've made those split second decisions to take a risk that I was either ill prepared or equipped to handle. At the time the benefit seemed to outweigh the risk, but afterwards I always looked at it as a dumb@$$ move. My reflection has usually not been as much my personal safety as it has been the safety of others. I DON'T want to have other people risking their life to save me from my stupid decision.
Personally, I think the Councilman's issue is not with the actions of AMR as much as it is a desire to re-negotiate their contract with the city. I'd start looking for ulterior motives....
Stendec said:
Here is what might happen when you make that decision (two of the four agents who have drowned in the last 10 years):
http://odmp.org/officer/17067-border-pa ... aul-epling
http://odmp.org/officer/18881-border-pa ... -goldstein
We run a 6 hour water survival course in our Border Patrol Basic Academy (including use of force scenario with a bad guy in the water).
Stendec,
If a nuke went off in your town, and a bad guy was in the blast zone, would you go in and try and catch him? (lets say that this is hiroshima style, and for some reason the guy is still alive). And yes, this is exactly the same thing as you want EMTs to do.
If a nuke went off in your town, and a bad guy was in the blast zone, would you go in and try and catch him? (lets say that this is hiroshima style, and for some reason the guy is still alive). And yes, this is exactly the same thing as you want EMTs to do.
surf_kat said:
Failure to train is a whole different issue. If an agency has employees who through the course of their normal work come into contact with certain hazards, the agency has an obligation to train them appropriately. The video blurb doesn't put any context into this particular situation, but if an EMS agency has an average of X number of medics responding to Y number of domestic violence cases, the agency has a legal obligation to provide the appropriate level of training. If medics won't respond to the projects without the cops there to hold their hand, that's a problem.
The mentality that you are following is the I-must-get-home-at-any-cost mentality, an outgrowth of the Newhall Massacre and the "officer survival" movement of the 70's, which eventually served to neuter American LE to the point of inaction. It isn't a matter of emotions versus tactics; it's duty versus emotions. Sure, I don't want to get hurt or killed, but I accepted that possibility when I signed on, which was 26 years ago. We aren't talking about getting shot over a traffic ticket, we are talking about *our* collective duty to accept risk for the public we serve. We face danger, so they don't have to, for which they pay us, and we swear an oath to do. If a medic isn't willing to take that risk, maybe they need to stick to nursing home transfers.
Stendec said:
You just invalidated your entire argument based on that statement. Suffice to say, the majority of the argument stems from the fact that this moron wants EMT's and Medic's to run head first into a violence in progress without police first securing the scene. If you're a cop and you're there, guess what? You're in the process of securing the scene. If the vic is doing that poorly and you wanna run interference, be my guest. Ultimately, if that shooter is still there and he puts a couple of slugs in you, I won't be able to shoot back. Likewise, you want me or one of my crew to run in there and he tags one of us, who is going to help us...you?
That's how you want it, with a little risk? Go talk to the Nassau County Police Dept who still runs their own buses...who if I recall correctly are still obligated to follow Nassau MedCom protocol for scene safety...even though they are part of the police department.
My taxes pay your salary too, so I want your salary to pay for YOU protecting MY scene. Also, no one's taxes pay me. So, the patient is not paying me until I start treating him. So, no one's taxes making me do anything. Now, if you want to give me a vest and a gun, and train me in Tactical Medicine and protection from active shooters, then by all means I will do it. Oh by the way, LEOs get a higher salary than my EMT salary, so pay me more too please. And as a firefighter too (volunteer, so no one pays me to do a darn thing) I do take risks, plenty of them, but I don't run towards guys with guns, unless it's my family or crew he's aiming at.
Also, please answer my question Stendec. You will find it on p.3
Also, please answer my question Stendec. You will find it on p.3
Well i guess i will just throw my two cents in here being that I have worked in the EMS field prior to going into law enforcement. I dont, and never will, expect a medic or fireman to go into a scene where a law enforcement presence is needed to secure the scene prior to their arrival. If i have been dispatched along with the fire department there is a reason for it, i don't need a overzealous fireman or medic to get on the scene first and compound my, or their, problems. they don't get paid to confront shooters or guys who have beat their wives to a pulp, just like i don't get paid to run into house fires with a hose or start IV lines, i would call it operating outside the scope of your training. stendec you are right, we have a responsibility to provide a service to the communities in which we serve, however i also have a responsibility to come home to my wife and son which trumps everything else, period. even in law enforcement, if i am off and un-armed (which would never happen) and observed a crime, we are taught not to get involved unless absolutely necessary and be a good witness. i am not john wayne and i am not indestructable, i am going to do my job as safely as i can and go home to my family and i expect others to do the same.
It all comes down to the fact that, if they have a gun I am sure as hell not bringing a knife to the fight, they will win everytime. Give me training and a way to defend myself and I will not hesitate but that is outside my scope of practice and equipment. If EMT's were supposed to stop armed people they would call them cops, o wait we already have those who have training and fire power to handle the situation.
You keep arguing about how few EMT/FF are killed by shooter, where I come from that means we are doing it right. How many people actually die because there care was delayed due to scene safety? My guess is none, its just to rare of an incident.
You keep arguing about how few EMT/FF are killed by shooter, where I come from that means we are doing it right. How many people actually die because there care was delayed due to scene safety? My guess is none, its just to rare of an incident.