Guest guest Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 it boils down to providing cost effective EMS to the Citizens we are paid to provide service for. You don't get to choose the laws you have to obey, you just have to obey them. If you don't like the speed limit being 65, do you get to just do what you want and drive as fast as you want? If you get stopped by DPS, do you get to ignore his warnings? If you get beligerent with the officer, are you going to jail? Matt > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 it boils down to providing cost effective EMS to the Citizens we are paid to provide service for. You don't get to choose the laws you have to obey, you just have to obey them. If you don't like the speed limit being 65, do you get to just do what you want and drive as fast as you want? If you get stopped by DPS, do you get to ignore his warnings? If you get beligerent with the officer, are you going to jail? Matt > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 it boils down to providing cost effective EMS to the Citizens we are paid to provide service for. You don't get to choose the laws you have to obey, you just have to obey them. If you don't like the speed limit being 65, do you get to just do what you want and drive as fast as you want? If you get stopped by DPS, do you get to ignore his warnings? If you get beligerent with the officer, are you going to jail? Matt > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 > TEXAS CITY — Ambulance driver Ricky picked up an elderly > patient at Mainland Medical Center on Friday and took her home to > Ashton Parke Care Center. > > An hour later, the 22-year-old nursing student was in handcuffs. > > , an emergency medical technician for Windsor EMS, was charged > with violating Texas City's controversial ambulance provider > ordinance. What about ' partner? No mention here... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 > TEXAS CITY — Ambulance driver Ricky picked up an elderly > patient at Mainland Medical Center on Friday and took her home to > Ashton Parke Care Center. > > An hour later, the 22-year-old nursing student was in handcuffs. > > , an emergency medical technician for Windsor EMS, was charged > with violating Texas City's controversial ambulance provider > ordinance. What about ' partner? No mention here... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 > TEXAS CITY — Ambulance driver Ricky picked up an elderly > patient at Mainland Medical Center on Friday and took her home to > Ashton Parke Care Center. > > An hour later, the 22-year-old nursing student was in handcuffs. > > , an emergency medical technician for Windsor EMS, was charged > with violating Texas City's controversial ambulance provider > ordinance. What about ' partner? No mention here... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Group This thread about the arrest of a Windsor EMS medic has resurfaced. While a very interesting subject it more of a law enforcement discussion than a discussion about EMS. The orginal post that has started the latest round of messages did ask people with questions to email him off list and that is a good idea. Thanks Mod 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Regardless of how we feel about ambulance franchise ordinances in general or this case, can we all agree that this may not be the forum to solve these issues? In other words, since these two cases have the potential to result in litigation, I'm sure neither side wants to try their case on a Yahoo Group (which may or may not be populated by a bunch of Yahoos!). This is especially true considering that some of the communications on here might even be evidence depending on the nature of the litigation. Let's let the legal system work through these cases and hopefully, when a conclusion is reached, we can all discuss the outcomes. Until then, we're probably just engaging in mental self-gratification (didn't want to say a term that might offend some of the thin-skinned...). -Wes Ogilvie In a message dated 1/29/2006 10:09:08 AM Central Standard Time, mparker@... writes: The fire marshall is a Texas Peace Officer. The EMT was in violation of the ordinance by operating the ambulance inside the city without a permit. Much the same as if you get a ticket in Houston for violating the same or similar ordinance. The warning was a judgement call on the FM, just as if you get a warning for a speeding ticket. When the EMT became beligerent he changed the situation. The FM is not required to give a warning, she is required to enforce the ordinance. He chose to take it from a warning to being put in jail, at his employers request. The warning was on official Fire Marshall Notice form, not a blank piece of paper.. > > > > > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Regardless of how we feel about ambulance franchise ordinances in general or this case, can we all agree that this may not be the forum to solve these issues? In other words, since these two cases have the potential to result in litigation, I'm sure neither side wants to try their case on a Yahoo Group (which may or may not be populated by a bunch of Yahoos!). This is especially true considering that some of the communications on here might even be evidence depending on the nature of the litigation. Let's let the legal system work through these cases and hopefully, when a conclusion is reached, we can all discuss the outcomes. Until then, we're probably just engaging in mental self-gratification (didn't want to say a term that might offend some of the thin-skinned...). -Wes Ogilvie In a message dated 1/29/2006 10:09:08 AM Central Standard Time, mparker@... writes: The fire marshall is a Texas Peace Officer. The EMT was in violation of the ordinance by operating the ambulance inside the city without a permit. Much the same as if you get a ticket in Houston for violating the same or similar ordinance. The warning was a judgement call on the FM, just as if you get a warning for a speeding ticket. When the EMT became beligerent he changed the situation. The FM is not required to give a warning, she is required to enforce the ordinance. He chose to take it from a warning to being put in jail, at his employers request. The warning was on official Fire Marshall Notice form, not a blank piece of paper.. > > > > > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Regardless of how we feel about ambulance franchise ordinances in general or this case, can we all agree that this may not be the forum to solve these issues? In other words, since these two cases have the potential to result in litigation, I'm sure neither side wants to try their case on a Yahoo Group (which may or may not be populated by a bunch of Yahoos!). This is especially true considering that some of the communications on here might even be evidence depending on the nature of the litigation. Let's let the legal system work through these cases and hopefully, when a conclusion is reached, we can all discuss the outcomes. Until then, we're probably just engaging in mental self-gratification (didn't want to say a term that might offend some of the thin-skinned...). -Wes Ogilvie In a message dated 1/29/2006 10:09:08 AM Central Standard Time, mparker@... writes: The fire marshall is a Texas Peace Officer. The EMT was in violation of the ordinance by operating the ambulance inside the city without a permit. Much the same as if you get a ticket in Houston for violating the same or similar ordinance. The warning was a judgement call on the FM, just as if you get a warning for a speeding ticket. When the EMT became beligerent he changed the situation. The FM is not required to give a warning, she is required to enforce the ordinance. He chose to take it from a warning to being put in jail, at his employers request. The warning was on official Fire Marshall Notice form, not a blank piece of paper.. > > > > > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 In most cases you have to get REALLY belligerent with a DPS officer before you are going to go to jail. He does not want to take 2 or 3 hours out of his day to haul some jerk to the county jail for a speeding ticket. Believe me; it is not worth his time. He can write a TON more tickets on the street. I don’t want to be the first car he encounters after he deals with a belligerent driver though. The same should hold true for the officers that are tasked with enforcement of city EMS ordinances. Why are they jacking with the field medics? There is absolutely no reason to. There are ways to enforce the ordinance without causing a field medic to choose between company loyalty and unreasonable demands from some enforcement officer that has nothing better to do. All this is doing is causing bad press for EMS (like we need any more). Thank goodness the services in my area respect their boundaries and when there is an encroachment, they are PROFESSIONAL enough to deal with it and keep their dirty laundry out of the mass media. There is NO way I would arrest a medic from a box for failing to sign a ticket, warning or otherwise. Mike had a good point about the warning; this could be a HUGE mistake on the part of the officer. The lawyers are drooling in that area now, and it brings a whole new meaning to the term “Ambulance Chaser”. As previously stated, there is no statutory requirement for an officer to obtain a signature. Just hand them the citation, and make good field notes as to what happened. Better yet, sent a citation to the company directly and leave the bottom feeding EMT out of the whole political cage-match. My thoughts, Tater P.S. Get some official citations printed for this ordinance!!!! mpmedics wrote: If you get stopped by DPS, do you get to ignore his warnings? If you get beligerent with the officer, are you going to jail? Matt > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 In most cases you have to get REALLY belligerent with a DPS officer before you are going to go to jail. He does not want to take 2 or 3 hours out of his day to haul some jerk to the county jail for a speeding ticket. Believe me; it is not worth his time. He can write a TON more tickets on the street. I don’t want to be the first car he encounters after he deals with a belligerent driver though. The same should hold true for the officers that are tasked with enforcement of city EMS ordinances. Why are they jacking with the field medics? There is absolutely no reason to. There are ways to enforce the ordinance without causing a field medic to choose between company loyalty and unreasonable demands from some enforcement officer that has nothing better to do. All this is doing is causing bad press for EMS (like we need any more). Thank goodness the services in my area respect their boundaries and when there is an encroachment, they are PROFESSIONAL enough to deal with it and keep their dirty laundry out of the mass media. There is NO way I would arrest a medic from a box for failing to sign a ticket, warning or otherwise. Mike had a good point about the warning; this could be a HUGE mistake on the part of the officer. The lawyers are drooling in that area now, and it brings a whole new meaning to the term “Ambulance Chaser”. As previously stated, there is no statutory requirement for an officer to obtain a signature. Just hand them the citation, and make good field notes as to what happened. Better yet, sent a citation to the company directly and leave the bottom feeding EMT out of the whole political cage-match. My thoughts, Tater P.S. Get some official citations printed for this ordinance!!!! mpmedics wrote: If you get stopped by DPS, do you get to ignore his warnings? If you get beligerent with the officer, are you going to jail? Matt > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 In most cases you have to get REALLY belligerent with a DPS officer before you are going to go to jail. He does not want to take 2 or 3 hours out of his day to haul some jerk to the county jail for a speeding ticket. Believe me; it is not worth his time. He can write a TON more tickets on the street. I don’t want to be the first car he encounters after he deals with a belligerent driver though. The same should hold true for the officers that are tasked with enforcement of city EMS ordinances. Why are they jacking with the field medics? There is absolutely no reason to. There are ways to enforce the ordinance without causing a field medic to choose between company loyalty and unreasonable demands from some enforcement officer that has nothing better to do. All this is doing is causing bad press for EMS (like we need any more). Thank goodness the services in my area respect their boundaries and when there is an encroachment, they are PROFESSIONAL enough to deal with it and keep their dirty laundry out of the mass media. There is NO way I would arrest a medic from a box for failing to sign a ticket, warning or otherwise. Mike had a good point about the warning; this could be a HUGE mistake on the part of the officer. The lawyers are drooling in that area now, and it brings a whole new meaning to the term “Ambulance Chaser”. As previously stated, there is no statutory requirement for an officer to obtain a signature. Just hand them the citation, and make good field notes as to what happened. Better yet, sent a citation to the company directly and leave the bottom feeding EMT out of the whole political cage-match. My thoughts, Tater P.S. Get some official citations printed for this ordinance!!!! mpmedics wrote: If you get stopped by DPS, do you get to ignore his warnings? If you get beligerent with the officer, are you going to jail? Matt > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 AMBULANCE DRIVER!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!?!!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!??!?!? Mike wrote: > TEXAS CITY — Ambulance driver Ricky picked up an elderly > patient at Mainland Medical Center on Friday and took her home to > Ashton Parke Care Center. > > An hour later, the 22-year-old nursing student was in handcuffs. > > , an emergency medical technician for Windsor EMS, was charged > with violating Texas City's controversial ambulance provider > ordinance. What about ' partner? No mention here... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 AMBULANCE DRIVER!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!?!!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!??!?!? Mike wrote: > TEXAS CITY — Ambulance driver Ricky picked up an elderly > patient at Mainland Medical Center on Friday and took her home to > Ashton Parke Care Center. > > An hour later, the 22-year-old nursing student was in handcuffs. > > , an emergency medical technician for Windsor EMS, was charged > with violating Texas City's controversial ambulance provider > ordinance. What about ' partner? No mention here... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 AMBULANCE DRIVER!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!??!?!!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!??!?!? Mike wrote: > TEXAS CITY — Ambulance driver Ricky picked up an elderly > patient at Mainland Medical Center on Friday and took her home to > Ashton Parke Care Center. > > An hour later, the 22-year-old nursing student was in handcuffs. > > , an emergency medical technician for Windsor EMS, was charged > with violating Texas City's controversial ambulance provider > ordinance. What about ' partner? No mention here... Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Ahhh. Now we finally seem to agree Mike. Sal --- Mike wrote: > On 1/28/06, mpmedics > wrote: > > Windsor EMS had received 4 warnings prior to this > incident. > > I personnaly was on scene, requesting the EMT to > sign a document > > which was only a warning. The signature purly > said, " Copy Received > > by:_______________ " and he was advised by his > employer not to sign > > the document. > > I spent over an hour and a half trying to get the > EMT to > > sign the document but if you commit a crime, and > fail to cooperate > > with law enforcement, you must suffer the > consequences. > > So here's an interesting question: if law > enforcement was only > attempting to issue a warning (for which no > signature can be required > because a warning isn't a promise to do any > particular thing, like > signing a citation is a promise to appear)... what > was the medic > actually arrested for? If for Violation of City > Ordinance, one could > posit that the VCO arrest was in fact retailatory > for refusing to sign > the warning... and could further posit that a person > acting in the > capacity of EMS Director was using undue influence > or even official > oppression to get the medic to sign a document that > shouldn't require > a signature, then arresting the medic for a crime > for which a warning > was going to be given in the first place. > > Right or wrong, were I the employee of Windsor EMS > I'd be hiring a > good attorney to go after the company for putting me > in that situation > and providing a false approval number, and after > Texas City PD, EMS, > Fire, etc. for their actions as law enforcement and > in their official > positions. > > If you're going to give a warning, give a warning. > > If you're going to give a citation, give a citation. > > If you're going to make an arrest, make an arrest. > > If you want the deep pockets, cite the company... > not the individual > medics. Why on earth these folks are even BOTHERING > to go after the > individual medics I have no idea... although if I > *WERE* going to go > after the medics, I'd do it with the clear and plain > intent of > arresting BOTH of them so that I could impound the > ambulance secondary > to arrest. But that's just me... > > Mike > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Ahhh. Now we finally seem to agree Mike. Sal --- Mike wrote: > On 1/28/06, mpmedics > wrote: > > Windsor EMS had received 4 warnings prior to this > incident. > > I personnaly was on scene, requesting the EMT to > sign a document > > which was only a warning. The signature purly > said, " Copy Received > > by:_______________ " and he was advised by his > employer not to sign > > the document. > > I spent over an hour and a half trying to get the > EMT to > > sign the document but if you commit a crime, and > fail to cooperate > > with law enforcement, you must suffer the > consequences. > > So here's an interesting question: if law > enforcement was only > attempting to issue a warning (for which no > signature can be required > because a warning isn't a promise to do any > particular thing, like > signing a citation is a promise to appear)... what > was the medic > actually arrested for? If for Violation of City > Ordinance, one could > posit that the VCO arrest was in fact retailatory > for refusing to sign > the warning... and could further posit that a person > acting in the > capacity of EMS Director was using undue influence > or even official > oppression to get the medic to sign a document that > shouldn't require > a signature, then arresting the medic for a crime > for which a warning > was going to be given in the first place. > > Right or wrong, were I the employee of Windsor EMS > I'd be hiring a > good attorney to go after the company for putting me > in that situation > and providing a false approval number, and after > Texas City PD, EMS, > Fire, etc. for their actions as law enforcement and > in their official > positions. > > If you're going to give a warning, give a warning. > > If you're going to give a citation, give a citation. > > If you're going to make an arrest, make an arrest. > > If you want the deep pockets, cite the company... > not the individual > medics. Why on earth these folks are even BOTHERING > to go after the > individual medics I have no idea... although if I > *WERE* going to go > after the medics, I'd do it with the clear and plain > intent of > arresting BOTH of them so that I could impound the > ambulance secondary > to arrest. But that's just me... > > Mike > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Ahhh. Now we finally seem to agree Mike. Sal --- Mike wrote: > On 1/28/06, mpmedics > wrote: > > Windsor EMS had received 4 warnings prior to this > incident. > > I personnaly was on scene, requesting the EMT to > sign a document > > which was only a warning. The signature purly > said, " Copy Received > > by:_______________ " and he was advised by his > employer not to sign > > the document. > > I spent over an hour and a half trying to get the > EMT to > > sign the document but if you commit a crime, and > fail to cooperate > > with law enforcement, you must suffer the > consequences. > > So here's an interesting question: if law > enforcement was only > attempting to issue a warning (for which no > signature can be required > because a warning isn't a promise to do any > particular thing, like > signing a citation is a promise to appear)... what > was the medic > actually arrested for? If for Violation of City > Ordinance, one could > posit that the VCO arrest was in fact retailatory > for refusing to sign > the warning... and could further posit that a person > acting in the > capacity of EMS Director was using undue influence > or even official > oppression to get the medic to sign a document that > shouldn't require > a signature, then arresting the medic for a crime > for which a warning > was going to be given in the first place. > > Right or wrong, were I the employee of Windsor EMS > I'd be hiring a > good attorney to go after the company for putting me > in that situation > and providing a false approval number, and after > Texas City PD, EMS, > Fire, etc. for their actions as law enforcement and > in their official > positions. > > If you're going to give a warning, give a warning. > > If you're going to give a citation, give a citation. > > If you're going to make an arrest, make an arrest. > > If you want the deep pockets, cite the company... > not the individual > medics. Why on earth these folks are even BOTHERING > to go after the > individual medics I have no idea... although if I > *WERE* going to go > after the medics, I'd do it with the clear and plain > intent of > arresting BOTH of them so that I could impound the > ambulance secondary > to arrest. But that's just me... > > Mike > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 23 yrs ago, EMS was in FW I was there from the begining to the end when the " authority " came into effect and even some time after that. I dont remember anything like this. > > > Date: 2006/01/30 Mon AM 08:33:17 CST > To: < > > Subject: Re: Here We Go Again > > 23 years ago when I worked in Ft. Worth, the same type of thing went on > -except I can't remember anyone ever going to the hoosgow for it...... > seems that in 23 years things might change for the better. Wonder if > this is one of the reasons our allied health peers have a hard time in > recognizing us as a profession. > > -MH > > >>> mparker@... 1/29/2006 10:05 am >>> > The fire marshall is a Texas Peace Officer. The EMT was in > violation of the ordinance by operating the ambulance inside the > city without a permit. Much the same as if you get a ticket in > Houston for violating the same or similar ordinance. The warning > was a judgement call on the FM, just as if you get a warning for a > speeding ticket. When the EMT became beligerent he changed the > situation. The FM is not required to give a warning, she is > required to enforce the ordinance. He chose to take it from a > warning to being put in jail, at his employers request. The warning > was on official Fire Marshall Notice form, not a blank piece of > paper.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's all boils down to MONEY > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.