lightsandsirens5
Forum Deputy Chief
- 3,970
- 19
- 38
Well, even when proven otherwise, they are treated the same.
Firearms for EMS
- Thread starter fortsmithman
- Start date
Well, even when proven otherwise, they are treated the same.
JPINFV
Gadfly
- 12,681
- 197
- 63
Not really. I have no problem cleaning my unloaded shotgun. I have a big problem cleaning it when it's loaded.
Cup of Joe
Forum Captain
- 273
- 1
- 0
1.) Why would you go into what could possibly be a dangerous situation without law enforcement or even a property owner who called 911? I might have a different mindset because I'm from the city, but I wouldn't just run into an area where I could be attacked by a bear, and not be able to at least see the ambulance. If I couldn't see the ambulance, then I'm not going in without police.
2.) Of course not. If it did, we'd all really be screwed. But the second amendment does allow the right to citizens to arm themselves. Didn't say I was for or against it. If you want a gun, you have the right to get one, according to the Constitution (following local, state, and federal regulations)
P.S., I have been outside the city and stayed in areas like this. So I'm not completely oblivious. Also, everyone has a different opinion on whether EMTs should carry guns, and I think it really can't be justified. My opinion.
And this has nothing to do with my point or to support the thread, not trying to be an ***, but have any EMTs or Paramedics actually been attacked in that area? Just wondering...
BoondockMedic
Forum Ride Along
- 4
- 0
- 0
Probably creates more problems than it solves
While in some cases it might certainly be useful, the majority of the time a weapon carried in the truck will just be a burden. It *must* be secured at all times, and more heavily protected from theft than even your drug boxes. Stolen/missing meds can get you fired, firearms can be used against you or others.
In the event carrying was authorized by your agency, I can't imagine many states have liability laws protecting EMS personnel for weapons-related issues - those statutes are usually written solely for law enforcement personnel. What, precisely, are the ramifications for you if you discharge the weapon at an animal and something goes radically wrong? Did you wound the dangerous animal or kill it? If wounded, are you going to now track it down and finish it off? Because while you're doing that, you're not doing EMS.
Any call at which you deployed the weapon would mean that you must also keep physical control of the weapon at all times, so you can't lay it aside to perform CPR, essentially taking you out of your designated role.
Weapon training and regular qualification would probably also be required, by your insurance carrier if not your agency.
I know this sounds like hand-wringing, but I have a background as a municipal police officer ( years ago before my current situation ), and you *must* give some thought to these kinds of scenarios if you carry a weapon on duty. Personally I would not do so as an EMS provider (rural volunteer), your situation may vary.
While in some cases it might certainly be useful, the majority of the time a weapon carried in the truck will just be a burden. It *must* be secured at all times, and more heavily protected from theft than even your drug boxes. Stolen/missing meds can get you fired, firearms can be used against you or others.
In the event carrying was authorized by your agency, I can't imagine many states have liability laws protecting EMS personnel for weapons-related issues - those statutes are usually written solely for law enforcement personnel. What, precisely, are the ramifications for you if you discharge the weapon at an animal and something goes radically wrong? Did you wound the dangerous animal or kill it? If wounded, are you going to now track it down and finish it off? Because while you're doing that, you're not doing EMS.
Any call at which you deployed the weapon would mean that you must also keep physical control of the weapon at all times, so you can't lay it aside to perform CPR, essentially taking you out of your designated role.
Weapon training and regular qualification would probably also be required, by your insurance carrier if not your agency.
I know this sounds like hand-wringing, but I have a background as a municipal police officer ( years ago before my current situation ), and you *must* give some thought to these kinds of scenarios if you carry a weapon on duty. Personally I would not do so as an EMS provider (rural volunteer), your situation may vary.
JPINFV
Gadfly
- 12,681
- 197
- 63
So basically, anything wilderness wise you wouldn't enter without the police? Have you ever been camping... without the police?
That right, as it currently stands, is a very limited right that has finally gotten teeth (caselaw) is the past couple years (District of Columbia v Heller for federal land, 2008. McDonald v Chicago, incorporated against the states, 2010). Basically, you've had the "right" to own a gun for defensive purposes in your house for a little over a year. Additionally, SCOTUS was very careful to limit the scope of that ruling to private property only. So the second amendment is fairly week in reality.
Additionally, I'm really not concerned about the people who would own and carry firearms under the second amendment. I'm much more concerned about those who would carry without regard to what the law says period.
So you have stayed in areas when not working as an EMT that you would refuse to enter sans law enforcement as an EMT? Isn't this just a little cognitive dissonance?
bstone
Forum Deputy Chief
- 2,066
- 1
- 0
If you're licensed to carry a gun and your service provides law enforcement approved training and you have the real risk of running into a dangerous animal then YES you should have someone be able to make the scene safe and secure. If you're in the brush and there is the chance an animal will attack (or it already has, which is why you are there) then the scene is NOT safe. Many places this rural do not have LE available, so if the EMS providers can make the scene safe then go for it.
For those who say that an EMT with a lawful weapon makes the scene unsafe, well, let's just agree to disagree.
For those who say that an EMT with a lawful weapon makes the scene unsafe, well, let's just agree to disagree.
guttruck
Forum Crew Member
- 66
- 0
- 0
IMO if you think it's going to hit the fan ..............stage and call a LEO
Aidey
Community Leader Emeritus
- 4,800
- 11
- 38
I have a friend who lives in Alaska. Up there they call bear spray "seasoning".
FIREARMS in EMS
I think this issue would only be applicable to our Canadian EMS friend who initiated this post and has not respnded to one post to date. (excreatment stirring?) That said I can't think of any rural areas in the US where this would even be an issue. That NW area sure is pretty country though as is alot of Alberta and BC as well. Too bad US medics can't go & work there it's nice. Heck, I'd be willin to give revenue canada a little slice of my pay to be able to go work some gigs around there places. Anyway, nuff said. Thanks
I think this issue would only be applicable to our Canadian EMS friend who initiated this post and has not respnded to one post to date. (excreatment stirring?) That said I can't think of any rural areas in the US where this would even be an issue. That NW area sure is pretty country though as is alot of Alberta and BC as well. Too bad US medics can't go & work there it's nice. Heck, I'd be willin to give revenue canada a little slice of my pay to be able to go work some gigs around there places. Anyway, nuff said. Thanks
OP
OP
fortsmithman
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,335
- 5
- 38
With my service we run a crew of 3 minimum. Sometimes 4. So if we were to have the option of a firearm then one could handle the firearm while the remaining two or three treat the pt.
Cup of Joe
Forum Captain
- 273
- 1
- 0
Been camping for weeks without a gun. Had no issues. Still alive. Everything I've said about going into the wilderness without calling police was never my stance on the thread topic. I'm simply providing an alternative solution to arming EMTs. Do I think at times it could be a waste of police resources? absolutely. Do I think rural areas should arm EMS crews with guns? no.
If the OP is SO concerned for his safety that he believes he NEEDS a gun, then talk to your supervisor or whoever is in charge, and voice your concerns. The internet is only going to start debates that lead to nowhere.
Edit: Saw the OP's post on crew sizes: I could see that if you had 3 or 4 people you could have one person on the crew who has received additional training who would be in charge of making sure the scene is safe. But I still can think of ways where things can go wrong. Honestly, I'm not from your area and don't know how much of a threat these animals are to people in your area. My city mentality says "more guns = more problems."
Last edited by a moderator:
Sasha
Forum Chief
- 7,667
- 11
- 0
Cant you just scare the bear? Dont you just make yourself bigger?
Sent from LuLu using Tapatalk
bstone
Forum Deputy Chief
- 2,066
- 1
- 0
Sasha, you can try. Then the bear will eat you.
Cup of Joe
Forum Captain
- 273
- 1
- 0
Aidey
Community Leader Emeritus
- 4,800
- 11
- 38
Did we give Alaska back to Russia and I missed the memo?
Sasha
Forum Chief
- 7,667
- 11
- 0
OP
OP
fortsmithman
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,335
- 5
- 38
With my service we would keep the rifle locked up at our base. Since when not on a call both our ambulances are kept at the base. The rifle would only be unlocked and loaded if we had a call out in a bush area and could not get an RCMP escort, where the wildlife that would kill are at. Most people in the northern part of Canada do take a firearm with them when going out on the land. I believe it's the same in Alaska.
OP
OP
fortsmithman
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,335
- 5
- 38
Dinner time.