Comments on: No Holster in the Drug Box: Arming of EMTs

By: chuck nubern

chuck nubern — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:20:01 +0000

I think this is an excellent article that reflects an excellent point of view from one side of the argument. I however am a supporter of the contrary. Before you scroll on or let your b.p get the best of you, please here me out. I think we are all in agreement that present day public service is not what it use to be. Today we face a more prevelant violent, anti-authority community than ever before. However the vast majority are respectful and complient , but its not this popullation that is the threat. I am on the fence about lethal forms of protection in the fire,ems line of work. I am 100% in favor of non-lethal forms (i.e oc spray , taser ). The reason is simple. Beyond any oath, or creed, to do no harm to the patient; my personal safety is number one! In previous discussions with local officials the argument was raised of waiting toill the scene was safe, and we have all heard this a thousand times. Those situations are not the ones that raise the concern. Its the responses that turn south post arrival of ems or fire that pose the threat. Or the run response that was dispatched innappropriatly and now your in the middle of a potentially violent situation. If personnal safety was clear cut LEO would not have to implement various forms of defense. There would be no need for the ASP,Taser, OC spray, 2 side arms, vest. Yet we respond to the same situations often times ahead of LEO for whatever the reason and are afforded no deffensive measure for the worst case senario other that hand to hand combat! This in it self is the most obsered! The thought and position by most agencies that they would rather their personel be engaged in hand to hand deffensive measure than have the ability to deploy a non-lethal form of deffense is appaling. As for the risk management POV it looks like instituting a policy on the do’s-dont’s to non lethal protection would be much more easily defendable in court, than defending multiple personnel engaged in hand to hand defense with usually one individual. I would like to hear your thoughts on the points made. I think this is something that will be the topic of discussion more and more. In closing , For those rare instances does EMS and Fire personnel deserve the same protection as LEO.

By: digital camera battery

digital camera battery — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:23:35 +0000

Many teams utilize non-LEO paramedics in forward positions (point of entry, vehicle driver) to allow for rapid deployment into the structure on most calls, and will place them into the stack for deployment into large buildings or active shooter scenarios. How would you address these situations?

By: John

John — Mon, 24 May 2010 20:25:13 +0000

Great article! I share your views with respect to carrying both lethal and less-than-lethal weapons. Another concern I have specifically about defensive sprays arises from a personal health issue. I have asthma and in general aerosol sprays are irritating to me so I can only imagine what even an indirect exposure to pepper, or other sprays, would do to me. Additionally, although many people may say the aggressor would get what he deserves, I would be concerned about medical effects of the spray on the patient. Why make my job more complicated by increasing things I may have to treat if the person is allergic to the spray or has an underlying respiratory disease.
Finally, I have seen too many EMS providers who are ready to dial up the testosterone to prove who is in control of the situation. If EMS providers were allowed to carry weapons I would be concerned that they would choose to rely more on those devices rather than using verbal de-escalation techniques to truly gain control over the situation.

By: William

William — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:41:18 +0000

By: William

William — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:39:39 +0000

This is a great article encompassing many of the concerns and legalities. I would like to ask your thoughts on this general topic under specific circumstances. Would your position remain the same for medics deployed with tactical teams into hostil environments? Many teams utilize non-LEO paramedics in forward positions (point of entry, vehicle driver) to allow for rapid deployment into the structure on most calls, and will place them into the stack for deployment into large buildings or active shooter scenarios. How would you address these situations?

By: Star Of Life Law

Star Of Life Law — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:21:20 +0000

Greg, thank you for your comment and question about carrying edged weapons on duty.

Most EMTs and Paramedics that I have seen carrying an edged weapon carry some variant of the tactical folding knife. When asked why they carry it, their first response is along the lines of “for cutting seat belts.” I don’t accept that as an acceptable rationale, as there are specially designed seat belt cutters that are safer to use than an open bladed knife. Further, the standard trauma shear will suffice for all the cutting an EMT or Paramedic likely requires.

If you probe deeper into why they really carry the knife, they will likely respond along some variant of “for protection.” Again, I do not accept this as an acceptable rationale.

From an administrative perspective it is my opinion the potential liability and public relations concerns equal those related to carrying or discharging firearms on duty. The same policy considerations should also apply.

By: Greg Friese

Greg Friese — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 03:44:31 +0000

This post is outstanding. Thank you.

Do you have any thoughts on single blade knives or utility knives carried by EMS personnel. I have yet to encounter a situation where I needed anything more than a trauma shears so have often wondered what the intent of a knife with a 3-5″ blade is.