Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Yes, it is true. Now that brings up an interesting question. If EMS asks the officer to arrest so that treatment can be forced, and the officer refuses, and the patient does not receive needed treatment and sues EMS for failing to treat and transport, can the EMS service then turn around and sue the police officer for dereliction of duty, gross negligence, and malice in refusing to take the patient into custody? In that case the police would be sued for failing to arrest a person. Any of the other lawyers or legal groupies have an idea about that? GG In a message dated 3/31/2004 8:44:29 PM Central Standard Time, bbledsoe@... writes: True Medicolegal Any basis to this rumor: Peace officers are reluctant to arrest/detain/take in custody persons whom the EMS think should go to the hospital, but who refuse, because if the peace officer arrests, etc, then the officer's county, city, etc, has to pay the ambulance and associated bills? Bob in McGregor LP Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? -Wes Ogilvie Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Any basis to this rumor: Peace officers are reluctant to arrest/detain/take in custody persons whom the EMS think should go to the hospital, but who refuse, because if the peace officer arrests, etc., then the officer's county, city, etc, has to pay the ambulance and associated bills? Bob in McGregor LP -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, and usually they have to remain with the " detainee " also. And they HATE that. Not to mention the whole " you can't have your gun in the back of my ambulance " and " you can't have him handcuffed in the back of my ambulance " thing. With the cops I know, I don't think they're really concerned with who has to pay for it, although it is their department, county, etc., it doesn't come out of their check. They just don't like it having to stay with their prisoner and do all the paperwork. Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? -Wes Ogilvie -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes, even when they have one, they won't. (See my last posting) A can remember a few years back I caught a call for a toxic ingestion. The sheriff's office was called concurrently due to the nature of the chief complaint. On scene I found a conscious, alert and oriented pt who was refusing transport (there were multiple witnesses to what she'd done prior to my arrival) . S. O. was refusing to arrest the pt. As I was in the process of arguing my case, the pt found a bottle of pills she'd hidden and downed a mouthful of them. I just looked at the S. O. and asked, " NOW are you going to arrest her?! " It was a big mess and one that didn't need to happen if the S.O> would've just done his job in the first place. Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 In a message dated 3/31/2004 10:24:10 PM Central Standard Time, estes1208@... writes: The officer needs to have enough probable cause to make the arrest...If the patient is being seen for psychiatric problems and is a danger to themselves the officer can fill out an emergency detention order and they can be transported by EMS or the officer....The issue about the gun in the back of the ambulance...I have been in EMS for 12 years and I am a police officer..I would always let them in the back of my ambulance with there gun. They are trained professional...Thats is like telling a medic that he cant go into a scene with anything. When I am at work as a police officer I have my duty weapon with me...If the ambulance doesn't want my duty weapon in the back of the truck then I don't go with them....I am just giving my opinion on the subject... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I had always been told it was against TDH rules & regs to have a firearm in the back of an ambulance. Gene, is this true, or just some policy that certain entities subscribe to in order to protect their employees? Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 , Good stuff! Thanks. It would never occur to me to ask a police officer to give up his/her weapon to go in the rig with me when I wanted them there to begin with. DUH! What a ridiculous rule. Now, I do not allow patients to be handcuffed to my stretcher, but they may be handcuffed to the LSB. We use plastic restraints preferably because they can be easily cut if there's a fire or accident. NO patient should ever be handcuffed to your stretcher. GG In a message dated 3/31/2004 10:23:52 PM Central Standard Time, estes1208@... writes: The officer needs to have enough probable cause to make the arrest...If the patient is being seen for psychiatric problems and is a danger to themselves the officer can fill out a emergency detention order and they can be transported by EMS or the officer....The issue about the gun in the back of the ambulance...I have been in EMS for 12 years and I am a police officer..I would always let them in the back of my ambulance with there gun. They are trained professional...Thats is like telling a medic that he cant go into a scene with anything. When I am at work as a police officer I have my duty weapon with me...If the ambulance doesn't want my duty weapon in the back of the truck then I don't go with them....I am just giving my opinion on the subject... athan Estes EMT-P Police Officer > [Original Message] > > To: < > > Date: 3/31/2004 10:11:41 PM > Subject: Re: Medicolegal > > Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? > > -Wes Ogilvie > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sometimes, even when they have one, they won't. (See my last posting) A can > remember a few years back I caught a call for a toxic ingestion. The sheriff's > office was called concurrently due to the nature of the chief complaint. On > scene I found a conscious, alert and oriented pt who was refusing transport > (there were multiple witnesses to what she'd done prior to my arrival) . S. O. was > refusing to arrest the pt. As I was in the process of arguing my case, the pt > found a bottle of pills she'd hidden and downed a mouthful of them. I just > looked at the S. O. and asked, " NOW are you going to arrest her?! " It was a big > mess and one that didn't need to happen if the S.O> would've just done his job > in the first place. > > Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 True Medicolegal Any basis to this rumor: Peace officers are reluctant to arrest/detain/take in custody persons whom the EMS think should go to the hospital, but who refuse, because if the peace officer arrests, etc, then the officer's county, city, etc, has to pay the ambulance and associated bills? Bob in McGregor LP Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Untrue. To my knowledge the only time EMS bills PD is when calls originate at the jail. Some services opt to no bill the city as a courtesy if they have the 911 contract. Most services I have seen bill the pt. I know where I work if the pt did not call ems and someone else did and the pt refuses they do not bill. How can you bill PD if you asked them to come onto your scene? If any service has done that it must have been a last ditch effort. But how do you get PD to arrest a pt in the first place for refusing treatment. TALK ABOUT KIDNAPPING. Different though if PD sections them. But for that to happen they must be a danger to self or others. I have threatened to call PD when someone needs to go just to scare them. BUT I MEAN REALLY NEED TO GO. No family at home or to stay with the pt. Medicolegal Any basis to this rumor: Peace officers are reluctant to arrest/detain/take in custody persons whom the EMS think should go to the hospital, but who refuse, because if the peace officer arrests, etc, then the officer's county, city, etc, has to pay the ambulance and associated bills? Bob in McGregor LP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 The officer needs to have enough probable cause to make the arrest...If the patient is being seen for psychiatric problems and is a danger to themselves the officer can fill out a emergency detention order and they can be transported by EMS or the officer....The issue about the gun in the back of the ambulance...I have been in EMS for 12 years and I am a police officer..I would always let them in the back of my ambulance with there gun. They are trained professional...Thats is like telling a medic that he cant go into a scene with anything. When I am at work as a police officer I have my duty weapon with me...If the ambulance doesn't want my duty weapon in the back of the truck then I don't go with them....I am just giving my opinion on the subject... athan Estes EMT-P Police Officer > [Original Message] > > To: < > > Date: 3/31/2004 10:11:41 PM > Subject: Re: Medicolegal > > Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? > > -Wes Ogilvie > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sometimes, even when they have one, they won't. (See my last posting) A can > remember a few years back I caught a call for a toxic ingestion. The sheriff's > office was called concurrently due to the nature of the chief complaint. On > scene I found a conscious, alert and oriented pt who was refusing transport > (there were multiple witnesses to what she'd done prior to my arrival) . S. O. was > refusing to arrest the pt. As I was in the process of arguing my case, the pt > found a bottle of pills she'd hidden and downed a mouthful of them. I just > looked at the S. O. and asked, " NOW are you going to arrest her?! " It was a big > mess and one that didn't need to happen if the S.O> would've just done his job > in the first place. > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 If you're referring to a situation where the patients presents an immediate threat to themself or others: There's the emergency committal order signed by a judge route, and then there's " emergency detention " directly by the cops. In those situations, when we've attempted to gain consent but the cops had to intervene, we bill the patient, same as we would if the cops hadn't been needed- although technically the transport was done " on their directive " , and perhaps their department COULD be billed, that seems to me a very bad practice for EMS. BUT I'm guessing you're referring to a situation where a person might avoid arrest and prosecution just because they have injuries. That should never happen. Depending on the charges they face, the patient could/ should be arrested and transported with police on board the unit. Most jails will not allow inmates booked in if they have injuries. Once in police custody, the department gets stuck with the bills. In some circumstances, the police can gather their information and get a warrant to arrest them later. I've had many officer-assisted consents " either you're going with them or you're going with me " If those patients only realized, they could withdraw their consent during transport and walk free from the ambulance- they're not in my custody. I've also seen inmates released on PR bonds when we pick them up from the jail- an obvious attempt to avoid the medical bills. If we pick them up from the jail, the jail's going to pay the bill. In other words- yes, there is basis for the rumor. RM We charge the county a flat rate of $250 for transport of inmates. > Any basis to this rumor: Peace officers are reluctant to > arrest/detain/take in custody persons whom the EMS think should go to > the hospital, but who refuse, because if the peace officer arrests, > etc, then the officer's county, city, etc, has to pay the ambulance > and associated bills? > > Bob in McGregor > LP Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Same at some jails, when we see a patient in the jail, or if the prisoner makes a Doctor's office visit, and the results are that they will require any type of long term care, they will release them first. Had one go so far as to go back to the jail from the Dr's office, immediately released him from custody, and dispatched us to the jail to get him as soon as he got outside, so that we could transport him 45 miles to another hospital. Mike Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? -Wes Ogilvie ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- Sometimes, even when they have one, they won't. (See my last posting) A can remember a few years back I caught a call for a toxic ingestion. The sheriff's office was called concurrently due to the nature of the chief complaint. On scene I found a conscious, alert and oriented pt who was refusing transport (there were multiple witnesses to what she'd done prior to my arrival) . S. O. was refusing to arrest the pt. As I was in the process of arguing my case, the pt found a bottle of pills she'd hidden and downed a mouthful of them. I just looked at the S. O. and asked, " NOW are you going to arrest her?! " It was a big mess and one that didn't need to happen if the S.O> would've just done his job in the first place. Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 Wow! Yikes! Thanks for all your input at such an atrocious time of night! What are you doing up? Bob in McGregor LP Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 I know that Texas Law states that I can carry my firearm anywhere but on the grounds of a jail or prison. That is obvious....I know that when I worked for Rural Metro and before I had my peace officer license I had my CHL. TDH said that they did not care but you had to follow your local p and p's. The area that gets you with a CHL is that you cant carry it into a hospital so it wouldnt do you any good. I still currently work for Rural Metro and there policy is that I cant carry my gun while I am working for them ....If I am a police officer and I am working as a police officer I dont follow under the guidelines set by TDH..... > [Original Message] > > To: < > > Date: 3/31/2004 11:48:42 PM > Subject: Re: Medicolegal > > In a message dated 3/31/2004 10:24:10 PM Central Standard Time, > estes1208@... writes: > The officer needs to have enough probable cause to make the arrest...If the > patient is being seen for psychiatric problems and is a danger to > themselves the officer can fill out an emergency detention order and they > can be transported by EMS or the officer....The issue about the gun in the > back of the ambulance...I have been in EMS for 12 years and I am a police > officer..I would always let them in the back of my ambulance with there > gun. They are trained professional...Thats is like telling a medic that he > cant go into a scene with anything. When I am at work as a police officer > I have my duty weapon with me...If the ambulance doesn't want my duty > weapon in the back of the truck then I don't go with them....I am just > giving my opinion on the subject... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I had always been told it was against TDH rules & regs to have a firearm in > the back of an ambulance. > > Gene, is this true, or just some policy that certain entities subscribe to in > order to protect their employees? > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2004 Report Posted March 31, 2004 The way I see it is that any person who has a willingness to harm themselves or others is not acting appropriate and therefore NOT competent to make informed medical decisions at that time (even if they are A+Ox4). LOC does not directly relate to competency. Witnessed suicide attempt goes to the hospital. Witnessed suicidal ideation goes to the hospital or psych facility. Depressed but competent (not in the down side of manic-depression), you have the choice, but I'm pushing for transport. There are more intricacies involved, but my eyes and fingers fail me.. Need sleep. Mike Re: Medicolegal Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? -Wes Ogilvie -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes, even when they have one, they won't. (See my last posting) A can remember a few years back I caught a call for a toxic ingestion. The sheriff's office was called concurrently due to the nature of the chief complaint. On scene I found a conscious, alert and oriented pt who was refusing transport (there were multiple witnesses to what she'd done prior to my arrival) . S. O. was refusing to arrest the pt. As I was in the process of arguing my case, the pt found a bottle of pills she'd hidden and downed a mouthful of them. I just looked at the S. O. and asked, " NOW are you going to arrest her?! " It was a big mess and one that didn't need to happen if the S.O> would've just done his job in the first place. Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 It is against TDH rules to have a firearm in the back of an ambulance only if the person is not a law enforcement officer, or detention officer in the active commission of their duties. I do not allow jailers or guards (detention officers) in the back with a gun, but do allow police officers in the back with a gun. The reason being that most of the detention officers I have run in to have flimsy, unsecure holsters, and have received minimal weapons training, and training in weapon retention, etc. LE on the other hand has a high focus on use of force (escalating use of force), weapon retention, and I don't know any self respecting officer now days who does not wear a retention hoslter of some level. It's a safety issue for all. Also, I have taken legal concealed weapons off of patients during the care process (I prefer to leave them with LE at the scene, or at home if possible & always " search " for them during my exam), unloaded them, and placed them in a locked compartment of the ambulance during transport. I then turn it over to hospital security or LE at the receiving facility for safe keeping. CB Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 I know that most P & P's prohibit weapons being posessed by their employees on duty. TDH will follow those P & P's usually. The CHL issue has arisen in the past with employees who had CHL's being allowed to carry on duty, or employees who were peace officers (being carried by an agency) being allowed to carry on duty. TDH's general stance was that they didn't care if that happened, but strongly discouraged it. My general feeling is this. If you are on duty as a cop, YOU ARE A COP. If you are on duty as a medic, YOU ARE A MEDIC. You shouldn't be fulfilling both roles at once. I think issues gets clouded when you try to focus on both. Wear one hat at a time. That's my personal feeling. CB Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 I agree! Back in the 60s I ran across a small department that installed rings in the floor and cage ofo squad cars to attach prisoners to. Great control, but in an accident, that's very bad! =Steve= wegandy1938@... wrote: >, > >Good stuff! Thanks. > >It would never occur to me to ask a police officer to give up his/her weapon >to go in the rig with me when I wanted them there to begin with. DUH! What a >ridiculous rule. > >Now, I do not allow patients to be handcuffed to my stretcher, but they may >be handcuffed to the LSB. We use plastic restraints preferably because they >can be easily cut if there's a fire or accident. NO patient should ever be >handcuffed to your stretcher. > >GG > >In a message dated 3/31/2004 10:23:52 PM Central Standard Time, >estes1208@... writes: >The officer needs to have enough probable cause to make the arrest...If the >patient is being seen for psychiatric problems and is a danger to >themselves the officer can fill out a emergency detention order and they >can be transported by EMS or the officer....The issue about the gun in the >back of the ambulance...I have been in EMS for 12 years and I am a police >officer..I would always let them in the back of my ambulance with there >gun. They are trained professional...Thats is like telling a medic that he >cant go into a scene with anything. When I am at work as a police officer >I have my duty weapon with me...If the ambulance doesn't want my duty >weapon in the back of the truck then I don't go with them....I am just >giving my opinion on the subject... > >athan Estes EMT-P >Police Officer > > > > >>[Original Message] >> >>To: < > >>Date: 3/31/2004 10:11:41 PM >>Subject: Re: Medicolegal >> >>Wouldn't the officer need a REASON to arrest? >> >>-Wes Ogilvie >> >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>Sometimes, even when they have one, they won't. (See my last posting) A >> >> >can > > >>remember a few years back I caught a call for a toxic ingestion. The >> >> >sheriff's > > >>office was called concurrently due to the nature of the chief complaint. >> >> >On > > >>scene I found a conscious, alert and oriented pt who was refusing >> >> >transport > > >>(there were multiple witnesses to what she'd done prior to my arrival) . >> >> >S. O. was > > >>refusing to arrest the pt. As I was in the process of arguing my case, >> >> >the pt > > >>found a bottle of pills she'd hidden and downed a mouthful of them. I >> >> >just > > >>looked at the S. O. and asked, " NOW are you going to arrest her?! " It was >> >> >a big > > >>mess and one that didn't need to happen if the S.O> would've just done >> >> >his job > > >>in the first place. >> >> >> >> > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 TDH does not prohibit weapons on the ambulance- they strongly recommened that providers adopt a policy on crewmembers carrying weapons, and that they carefully consider the potential for liability. A provider agency may choose to allow the lawful carrying of weapons- either employees with CHL or LE license. If a provider allows weapons, they are liable for whatever may happen. Our TDH program specialist recommended that we adopt a comprehensive weapons policy- to include knives, pepper spray- all weapons. > In a message dated 3/31/2004 10:24:10 PM Central Standard Time, > estes1208@e... writes: > The officer needs to have enough probable cause to make the arrest...If the > patient is being seen for psychiatric problems and is a danger to > themselves the officer can fill out an emergency detention order and they > can be transported by EMS or the officer....The issue about the gun in the > back of the ambulance...I have been in EMS for 12 years and I am a police > officer..I would always let them in the back of my ambulance with there > gun. They are trained professional...Thats is like telling a medic that he > cant go into a scene with anything. When I am at work as a police officer > I have my duty weapon with me...If the ambulance doesn't want my duty > weapon in the back of the truck then I don't go with them....I am just > giving my opinion on the subject... > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- > > I had always been told it was against TDH rules & regs to have a firearm in > the back of an ambulance. > > Gene, is this true, or just some policy that certain entities subscribe to in > order to protect their employees? > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 I agree. I have no place on my belt for a firearm. OTOH, if I'm a cop on duty, that's a part of my required paraphernalia. No policeperson is going to give up her/his weapon just to get into my ambulance for the purpose of guarding/accompaning a prisoner. And I don't think TDH has anything to say about that at all. For the public safety departments who are triple trained, such as s, TX, DFW Airport, Highland Park and University Park in Dallas, et cetera, I view their personnel as always on duty three ways. Therefore weapons are a part of their duty uniform. GG In a message dated 4/1/2004 8:23:30 AM Central Standard Time, cwblum@... writes: I know that most P & P's prohibit weapons being posessed by their employees on duty. TDH will follow those P & P's usually. The CHL issue has arisen in the past with employees who had CHL's being allowed to carry on duty, or employees who were peace officers (being carried by an agency) being allowed to carry on duty. TDH's general stance was that they didn't care if that happened, but strongly discouraged it. My general feeling is this. If you are on duty as a cop, YOU ARE A COP. If you are on duty as a medic, YOU ARE A MEDIC. You shouldn't be fulfilling both roles at once. I think issues gets clouded when you try to focus on both. Wear one hat at a time. That's my personal feeling. CB Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 I totally forgot about the combined services. The one exception to the rule is if you are a part of a combined department as Gene mentioned. In those combined departments, you are frequently a cop, a medic, and a firefighter. That is the only place that one has exercising multiple duties at one job place. Otherwise, if you are a cop and a medic, be a medic at your medic job, be a cop and your cop job. I, being from a LE background myself, find it tempting at times to go into " cop mode " , and have to restrain myself. It's just second nature, but it does cloud your judgement trying to wear two hats at once, so to speak. I have no desire to have a gun in my ambulance, unless it belongs to a cop riding in it, it's a correctional officer riding in the front, or a weapon I have secured off of a patient. There was much talk a few years ago about arming EMS crews for personal protection. I use to support the idea, but after much thought, have come to the conclusion that it would be a bad idea. One of the reasons being that alot of people would resort to using their weapon, instead of their brain (as a means of self defense), when they were confronted with a threatening situation. If you need a gun, get the f*ck out of where you are, or don't go in at all. If in doubt, err on the side of safety. I know that of all of the calls that I have been on, when I could have quite legitimately have needed a gun for self defense, I have never needed as a result of using my brain. Another thing that was taught to me in my LE career was, you don't want to have to THINK about having to use your gun. It has to be REFLEX, an extension of your body, or you are going to be dead by the time that you THINK about using it. If you are in a position like that as a Medic, you are better off not having that as a REFLEX reaction. Get my drift? I know the original post wasn't about this, and I have drifted off a little bit, but they go hand in hand. Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 And just to ride on ' coat-tail -- Re: Medicolegal I totally forgot about the combined services. The one exception to the rule is if you are a part of a combined department as Gene mentioned. In those combined departments, you are frequently a cop, a medic, and a firefighter. That is the only place that one has exercising multiple duties at one job place. Otherwise, if you are a cop and a medic, be a medic at your medic job, be a cop and your cop job. I, being from a LE background myself, find it tempting at times to go into " cop mode " , and have to restrain myself. It's just second nature, but it does cloud your judgement trying to wear two hats at once, so to speak. I have no desire to have a gun in my ambulance, unless it belongs to a cop riding in it, it's a correctional officer riding in the front, or a weapon I have secured off of a patient. There was much talk a few years ago about arming EMS crews for personal protection. I use to support the idea, but after much thought, have come to the conclusion that it would be a bad idea. One of the reasons being that alot of people would resort to using their weapon, instead of their brain (as a means of self defense), when they were confronted with a threatening situation. If you need a gun, get the f*ck out of where you are, or don't go in at all. If in doubt, err on the side of safety. I know that of all of the calls that I have been on, when I could have quite legitimately have needed a gun for self defense, I have never needed as a result of using my brain. Another thing that was taught to me in my LE career was, you don't want to have to THINK about having to use your gun. It has to be REFLEX, an extension of your body, or you are going to be dead by the time that you THINK about using it. If you are in a position like that as a Medic, you are better off not having that as a REFLEX reaction. Get my drift? I know the original post wasn't about this, and I have drifted off a little bit, but they go hand in hand. Quote
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2004 Report Posted April 1, 2004 And just to ride on ' coat-tails, carrying one also sets you up to be a target... Mack -- Re: Medicolegal I totally forgot about the combined services. The one exception to the rule is if you are a part of a combined department as Gene mentioned. In those combined departments, you are frequently a cop, a medic, and a firefighter. That is the only place that one has exercising multiple duties at one job place. Otherwise, if you are a cop and a medic, be a medic at your medic job, be a cop and your cop job. I, being from a LE background myself, find it tempting at times to go into " cop mode " , and have to restrain myself. It's just second nature, but it does cloud your judgement trying to wear two hats at once, so to speak. I have no desire to have a gun in my ambulance, unless it belongs to a cop riding in it, it's a correctional officer riding in the front, or a weapon I have secured off of a patient. There was much talk a few years ago about arming EMS crews for personal protection. I use to support the idea, but after much thought, have come to the conclusion that it would be a bad idea. One of the reasons being that alot of people would resort to using their weapon, instead of their brain (as a means of self defense), when they were confronted with a threatening situation. If you need a gun, get the f*ck out of where you are, or don't go in at all. If in doubt, err on the side of safety. I know that of all of the calls that I have been on, when I could have quite legitimately have needed a gun for self defense, I have never needed as a result of using my brain. Another thing that was taught to me in my LE career was, you don't want to have to THINK about having to use your gun. It has to be REFLEX, an extension of your body, or you are going to be dead by the time that you THINK about using it. If you are in a position like that as a Medic, you are better off not having that as a REFLEX reaction. Get my drift? I know the original post wasn't about this, and I have drifted off a little bit, but they go hand in hand. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.