General Categories > Carry Issues

Role of EMS/EMT Personnel in Securing Handgun During Emergency

<< < (5/7) > >>

sjwsti:

--- Quote from: NENick on December 01, 2012, 01:41:03 PM --- It seems that same zero tolerance aspect emerges in these LEO discussions as well. You EMTs are telling us the same sort of thing that the Antis do. I'm speaking in generality, and do understand what I’ve accepted with getting the CHP. The law is the law.

--- End quote ---

Its not zero tolerance unless you are being transported. Just like those of us that have had LE contact while carrying, some LEOs have secured weapons, some haven't. EMTs also have this discretion during an initial contact.

As far as Im concerned your weapon is safest on you and in your holster. But once a decision is made that you will need to be transported to an ER that weapon wont be allowed in the squad or the hospital.

It will be returned to you. I haven't heard of a single instance were a firearm wasn't returned to its owner due to an emergency transport to a hospital.

I also agree that vigilance against govt intrusions is necessary. More so now than ever. But we are talking about a very unique circumstance. No CCW holder, Police Officer, Soldier, Secret Service Agent, Navy SEAL..etc will be allowed to be armed while being treated. wallace11bravo has listed a number of valid reasons why that would be dangerous for all involved. Trust me, if we are working really hard to save your life the last thing on your mind is going to be your gun.

- Shawn

greg58:

--- Quote from: CitizenClark on December 01, 2012, 12:27:14 PM ---I shouldn't have to sign anything to be left alone. If you lay your hands on me against my will, you are committing a battery.
--- End quote ---

If you are found injured or ill there are "Implied consent laws" that apply to such a person.
It means that a reasonable person would want to be helped in a time of need. If you are found to be mentally competent the EMS providers will not transport you against your will, they will advise you that you need to seek further treatment or not, to the best of their knowlege. EMS providers are not in the business of hauling folks to the Hospital unnessisarily.
They also are not in the business of trying to disarm lawful citizens, however scene safety is drilled into the heads of EMS folks, and I think the legislature wisely came up with the provission that CHP holders shall inform EMS providers and surrender their weapon while in their care.
This is not some kind of a conspiracy, when I go on a call as a Volunteer FF/EMT I am only wanting to do my bit to help the people in my community.
Also consider that the only reason a person has to sign off a refusal of care is because of the lawsuit frenzied society we live in today.
Greg58

greg58:
I also remember an instance where we transported a LEO to the hospital in uniform, he willingly gave his duty belt and weapons to another officer before we transported him to the ER.
The funny thing is, he was most worried about his AR15 that was his own property, and he wanted it secured back at their station.
Greg58

sjwsti:
I would add that if you attend any civilian TacMed course you will be told that before giving immediate aid, if they patient is armed, disarm them. The specific reasons why should be explained.

(Shameless plug; As gun owners we all have a responsibility to have the training and skills necessary to treat life threatening bleeding, penetrating trauma to the chest....etc. Just so happens I teach one  :D)

Some of you may end up in a situation were you will have to disarm a US citizen for your own safety and the safety of those around you in order to render aid.  :o

My guess is that you will get over violating their liberty. If they survive, they will probably thank you for it later.

- Shawn

unfy:
Just a couple cents.

While there are many medical personel that do end up being somewhere-up-the-line bankrolled by the gov't, last I checked... their paycheck doesn't say US Treasury in the signatory.

Next, practical field medical stuff has always involved disarming the wounded or similarly securing the weapon (even if it's just insisting the weapon remains in the wounded's holster).  If you're weapon's drawn, that just shows you're that much more ready to discharge the weapon.

When it comes to an ambulance trip - you're riding in someone else's vehicle.  Therefore, as CCW, you play by THEIR rules.  Just like walking on someone else's property or riding in their car.  There might be something to be said for being forced to go to a hospital ... and the suspension of carry and bills that follow, but that's a different subject.

Having been carried by an ambulance, there is much practicality to not allowing weapons during transport.  There is ALOT going on constantly during the trip, having the possible distraction of a weapon would not be a good thing.  Also, being a confined space, it would be difficult to manage the situation safely if the transportee snapped.

I dunno, I think it's quite simple...

a) is the threat over with ?
b) am i injured ?
c) will i continue to need my weapon in the immediate future ?
d) can i receive immediate treatment and drive myself to a hospital (doubt they'd like that) ?
e) am i making the situation worse ?
f) barring forced-transport-to-hospital-questions, a business is more than welcome to refuse service to someone and an EMT is more than welcome to not put themselves or their buddies in danger if they aint comfy with the way you're acting.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page