Questions you want answered (P&C Edition)

Pages

Sometimes I just have quick questions I'd like to get some feedback on but I feel like I just can't put in the Everything Else forum and they're not really worth a thread of their own here. So here's one to get started with:

I recently saw a former friend of mine passing around one of those online petitions and they wrote a passionate little personal endorsement for it before sending it around. The purpose was to get a law passed that would allow paramedics and firefighters to carry firearms.

My question is... why? In what situation am I going to need a paramedic to start a shootout with armed villains? The argument was that they were first responders and could be in hostile situations, but isn't that what the police are for? It just made me realize what a gun obsessed culture we live in where we even want our EMTs to be armed with deadly force.

Wasn't there a story that circulated around the web a few years about some dude whose house caught on fire and his solution was to just shoot at it?

Kehama wrote:

The purpose was to get a law passed that would allow paramedics and firefighters to carry firearms.

My question is... why? In what situation am I going to need a paramedic to start a shootout with armed villains?

Probably someone saw a story on the news about gangs in the ghetto shooting at paramedics or firemen. Remember after Katrina when those reports were rampant? I don't remember hearing if any of those reports were ever confirmed, but those early reports get treated by some members of the public as fact (particularly when the alleged shooters are black).

Oooh. Water bullets. I've seen them in video games. Those would be great for firefighters. But yeah... I'm kinda' coming up blank on why they should have guns. It's not like the paramedics are navy corpsmen running around in the middle of a firefight. They usually show up after all of the violence has ended.

Have you ever talked to any paramedics and asked them if they've ever been assaulted while on duty?

You might be surprised how many of them say "oh yeah, loads of times".

Paramedics sometimes have to deal with people who suddenly decide they're going to resist violently. Maybe they don't want to go in the ambulance, maybe they're having a bad trip, maybe they got hurt doing something illegal. I'm not saying a gun is the best solution to the problem, but being an EMT is not always a terribly safe job.

When was the last time an online petition actually changed anything is the question I want answered!

LeapingGnome wrote:

When was the last time an online petition actually changed anything is the question I want answered! :)

Well they did dim the colors in Diablo III and are planning on changing the ending to Mass Effect III. But for "real" stuff? Ya got me there.

Jonman wrote:

Have you ever talked to any paramedics and asked them if they've ever been assaulted while on duty?

You might be surprised how many of them say "oh yeah, loads of times".

My wife was a nurse in the ICU for a time in a rough part of town and most of her patients were being de-toxed so they could either go to jail or be moved to the psych ward. From her stories 80% of her patients were completely bonkers from all of the drugs/alcohol flowing through their systems so they were combative, physically and verbally abusive and regularly had to be wrestled to the ground by half the staff. She would get kicked, punched, spit on. I just can't imagine her trying to wrestle a guy back onto the bed and then deciding this guy was just too dangerous and pulling a pistol out to put him down.

I'm not arguing that being a first responder can't be dangerous but again, I don't see shooting someone with a gun as the answer. If they're worried about them being physically assaulted then feel free to give them a taser (which they would still need training for) or give them specific training (if they don't already) on how to handle these situations so that they can withdraw from the situation and get the police in there who are the guys we actually designate as being the carriers of lethal force.

It just seems like overkill, no pun intended, to have multiple agencies armed with lethal force when their job descriptions have nothing to do with putting a bullet between another person's eyes.

LobsterMobster wrote:

I'm not saying a gun is the best solution to the problem, but being an EMT is not always a terribly safe job.

It is why they, like police and firefighters, are considered heroes. My understanding is that most EMT companies have a policy of the EMTs not providing service unless they feel it is safe enough to do so, so sometimes a person has to suffer while the EMTs wait for a cop to arrive. Of course, all of the EMTs I know would not sit and wait while someone was in pain.

Kehama wrote:
Jonman wrote:

Have you ever talked to any paramedics and asked them if they've ever been assaulted while on duty?

You might be surprised how many of them say "oh yeah, loads of times".

My wife was a nurse in the ICU for a time in a rough part of town and most of her patients were being de-toxed so they could either go to jail or be moved to the psych ward. From her stories 80% of her patients were completely bonkers from all of the drugs/alcohol flowing through their systems so they were combative, physically and verbally abusive and regularly had to be wrestled to the ground by half the staff. She would get kicked, punched, spit on. I just can't imagine her trying to wrestle a guy back onto the bed and then deciding this guy was just too dangerous and pulling a pistol out to put him down.

I'm not arguing that being a first responder can't be dangerous but again, I don't see shooting someone with a gun as the answer. If they're worried about them being physically assaulted then feel free to give them a taser (which they would still need training for) or give them specific training (if they don't already) on how to handle these situations so that they can withdraw from the situation and get the police in there who are the guys we actually designate as being the carriers of lethal force.

It just seems like overkill, no pun intended, to have multiple agencies armed with lethal force when their job descriptions have nothing to do with putting a bullet between another person's eyes.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, but I'm a commie liberal euro-wussie. Personally, I find the belief that having a gun protects you from harm is ludicrous, but it seems to be a non-uncommonly held view among Americans, and I can see that if you held that belief *and* were in a profession where you're regularly in harms way (e.g. EMT), that it would seem reasonable for you to be armed.

Kehama wrote:

It just seems like overkill, no pun intended, to have multiple agencies armed with lethal force when their job descriptions have nothing to do with putting a bullet between another person's eyes.

Agree. Hospital workers have security guards and/or cops and it's their job to be the ones keeping things safe. And the EMTs and firefighters have cops. If there's any perceived danger the cops, who are the first responders we give guns just for that reason, would already be on scene.

Either way, it's not like there's a nationwide epidemic of EMTs, firefighters, and nurses getting injured or shot that demands that they be armed.

OG_slinger wrote:

Either way, it's not like there's a nationwide epidemic of EMTs, firefighters, and nurses getting injured or shot that demands that they be armed.

Again, I think that there IS a national epidemic of EMTs and nurses getting injured. You're right that most of them aren't demanding to be armed, though.

As Kehama pointed out, it's an occupational hazard. Talk to any ER nurse and they'll have tens of stories of crazy-ass stuff that's gone down at work. Arming them doesn't seem like the right solution, but equally, neither does allowing them to get repeatedly assaulted for the twin crimes of doing their job, and trying to help people.

Jonman wrote:

Again, I think that there IS a national epidemic of EMTs and nurses getting injured. You're right that most of them aren't demanding to be armed, though.

As Kehama pointed out, it's an occupational hazard. Talk to any ER nurse and they'll have tens of stories of crazy-ass stuff that's gone down at work. Arming them doesn't seem like the right solution, but equally, neither does allowing them to get repeatedly assaulted for the twin crimes of doing their job, and trying to help people.

I did a little quick research and found that while being an EMT is bloody dangerous (like six times the national average for on-the-job injuries), the vast majority of their injuries aren't violence related. It's much more likely to be something mundane, such as hurting their back trying to lift something/someone or getting into traffic accidents (21 and 30 times the national average respectively).

While they have a non-fatal assault rate that is sky high, 22 times the national average, it rates a distant fourth in the top reasons they get injured (overexertion, traffic accident, slip/fall, and then assault).

It would seem that if Kehama's friend was really concerned with their safety, he'd start an online petition to give EMTs back braces and extra driving lessons instead of pushing to have them pack heat.

Jonman wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

Either way, it's not like there's a nationwide epidemic of EMTs, firefighters, and nurses getting injured or shot that demands that they be armed.

Again, I think that there IS a national epidemic of EMTs and nurses getting injured. You're right that most of them aren't demanding to be armed, though.

As Kehama pointed out, it's an occupational hazard. Talk to any ER nurse and they'll have tens of stories of crazy-ass stuff that's gone down at work. Arming them doesn't seem like the right solution, but equally, neither does allowing them to get repeatedly assaulted for the twin crimes of doing their job, and trying to help people.

I wonder if the issue here is whether there has been a recent spike in such violence, or if there has been a recent realization that there's an occupational hazard that has been there all along.

When I think of non-police getting injured, the first thing I think about are social workers--their entire job can consist of the kind of cases that I've heard cops say are the most dangerous of all: domestic calls.

Maybe tasers? Tasers can have nasty side effects, up to and including death, but there'd be medical professionals immediately on hand.

Malor wrote:

Maybe tasers? Tasers can have nasty side effects, up to and including death, but there'd be medical professionals immediately on hand.

if they used the defib machine, would they unlock an achievement?

OG_slinger wrote:

While they have a non-fatal assault rate that is sky high, 22 times the national average, it rates a distant fourth in the top reasons they get injured (overexertion, traffic accident, slip/fall, and then assault).

I work in insurance and whenever I see someone with an injury claim whose occupation is anything in the prison system, doesn't matter if it's an actual guard or just a clerk, I can be pretty sure that if I run a check I'm going to see at least a dozen prior worker's comp claims for minor injuries that required weeks, if not months, off work. One woman I recall, in particular, had been on paid leave for 38 of the last 42 months due to 6 different worker's comp claims for minor injuries.

Seriously, most of the worker's comp claims I see for prison employees are generally things like "slammed finger in drawer", "strained back lifting supplies", "slip and fall" etc. You just don't see lots of "assaulted by inmate" or "shived with a rusty spoon" claims. It seems to be the general belief among my co-workers that the frequency of injury claims in any given job is directly proportional to how shi**y the job is. If you don't want to be there and you've got good worker's comp benefits then why not take the time? If I were to slam my finger in a drawer here at work I can't imagine taking off a month to recover.

While I know that being an EMT is physically demanding I also find myself wondering if you're going to see higher rates of injury claims just because it's a stressful and fairly crappy job that a lot of people are going to dread going back to.

Thinking about first responders, I saw this in the news today:

Miami police have warned of a potent new mind-altering drug called "Cloud Nine," after a snarling homeless man threatened to eat two officers a week after a grisly face-gnawing attack. The ecstasy-like drug is part of a new line of over-the-counter "bath salts" implicated in an attack last week in which a growling naked man chewed off most of a homeless man's face before being shot dead by police.

..In the latest incident, police took Brandon De Leon into custody after he entered a restaurant shouting obscenities and initially resisted arrest. On the way to the station he slammed his head against the plexiglass barrier in the patrol car, shouting to the officers: "I'm going to eat you!" Later, the 21-year-old growled and grunted like an animal, and tried to bite an officer's hand, police said, prompting them to fit him with a bite mask and leg restraints...

Omigod, this Cloud Nine stuff sounds like the devil. Then we get to the end of the article:

In addition to the Cloud Nine, police also believe De Leon finished off a bottle of rum and was working on a beverage called Four Loko, which combines alcohol and caffeine. He tested positive for marijuana, Xanax and alcohol.

If I'm a paramedic and I see this sort of thing, sorry, my radio is off and I'm on a break.

Tase that bro.

Funkenpants wrote:

In addition to the Cloud Nine, police also believe De Leon finished off a bottle of rum and was working on a beverage called Four Loko, which combines alcohol and caffeine. He tested positive for marijuana, Xanax and alcohol.

Them munchies'll get you every time.

"Policeman's Hand - it's organic, nutritious, and delicious!"

Jonman wrote:
Funkenpants wrote:

In addition to the Cloud Nine, police also believe De Leon finished off a bottle of rum and was working on a beverage called Four Loko, which combines alcohol and caffeine. He tested positive for marijuana, Xanax and alcohol.

Them munchies'll get you every time.

"Policeman's Hand - it's organic, nutritious, and delicious!"

Do you smell bacon, Garth?

Unless that guy found a stash of increasingly rare and jealously guarded vintage Four Loko, this journalist should maybe use google once or twice before writing stuff about drugs. Hasn't had caffiene in it for over a year now.

Since I keep reading all these stories about "bath salts" being responsible for absolutely nutso behavior in people and how it's perfectly legal to buy the stuff, how long do you think it will be before groups start pressing to ban this stuff and crack down on it? If they haven't already.

Kehama wrote:

Since I keep reading all these stories about "bath salts" being responsible for absolutely nutso behavior in people and how it's perfectly legal to buy the stuff, how long do you think it will be before groups start pressing to ban this stuff and crack down on it? If they haven't already.

Already, in Canada:

Health Minister Leona Agluk-kaq said Tuesday that MDPV, a key ingredient in bath salts, will be added to Canada's Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in the same category as heroin and cocaine. It is expected to become officially illegal in the fall.

The Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse issued a nation-wide drug alert last week concerning bath salts.

Kehama wrote:

Since I keep reading all these stories about "bath salts" being responsible for absolutely nutso behavior in people and how it's perfectly legal to buy the stuff, how long do you think it will be before groups start pressing to ban this stuff and crack down on it? If they haven't already.

I can't find links currently, but I've read a few places that the race to ban bath salts will just be a ridiculous law-race that's always a couple steps behind. These synthetic chemical compounds are so easy to manipulate -- add a molecule here, change the structure there -- that they can skirt any law written for them. And lawmakers have trouble making more sweeping legislation because they get into fights about what substances are bad and which ones are not.

I do wish whoever names these drugs hadn't decided "bath salts" was going to stick. Took me forever to figure out people weren't actually smoking/snorting the stuff in my bathroom.

The hell are bath salts?

ClockworkHouse wrote:

The hell are bath salts?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methyle...

I've prosecuted loads of cases where paramedics and firemen have been assaulted, frequently by the moron that they are trying to help.

spider_j wrote:

I've prosecuted loads of cases where paramedics and firemen have been assaulted, frequently by the moron that they are trying to help.

Now, if only they could have shot those guys ... .

spider_j wrote:

I've prosecuted loads of cases where paramedics and firemen have been assaulted, frequently by the moron that they are trying to help.

My wife gets the same treatment working as an ER nurse. It takes a special kind of person to work any of those jobs and put up with the people. I'd be fired within a week.

Pages