General Categories > Laws and Legislation
Duty to act after using weapon
bullit:
--- Quote from: A-FIXER on March 17, 2013, 12:33:49 PM ---And of the oath, you took does it not conflict with this sentence?
--- End quote ---
A-Fixer....there is nothing in the Hippocratic Oath about sacrificing my life to save someone else's with respect to their attempt to harm me or other innocents. Outside of that it is a moral/ethics issue. No legal standing per se.
Shawn .... you've been around the EMT/P community forever...can you provide some insight into the "Duty to Act" idea? Again, never seen some legal obligation. Yes, may cost you you're job, but life is a little more precious.
cckyle:
What does a good Samaritan act have to do with a self defense situation? I thought this had to do with when one acts to help and has good intent, if they do something wrong accidentally they can't be sued. Am I missing something there?
As far as rendering aid I think it would depend on the situation, but in most situations it's not going to be safe to render aid. For instance I personally would not try to put a tourniquet on someone who is still conscious and has a knife or gun near them that just tried to kill me. Besides that depending on the situation what could one really do? I don't carry a tourniquet, quick clot, or IV fluids with me around town. I suppose one could do CPR if the BD was unconscious in some situations, but that's not going to do a whole lot of good if you just put a 45 cal through their heart. As far as I understand EMT/Paramedics can't just go into a situation where a gun or knife has been used until the scene has been cleared and determined to be safe by LEO.
I think there is some confusion with the whole shoot to kill, when to shoot thing. I have heard a person say that they were told in there class to "shoot to kill." I think there is a difference here between the law and what happens in court when things are portraits certain ways. I think the shoot to kill thing comes in when people hear others say, "I would just shoot the BD in the leg so I wouldn't kill him/her." If you shot someone in the leg just to injure them, that may look bad in court, since you should only draw your weapon when lethal force is immediately necessary. To me you would only draw your weapon when lethal force is immediately necessary, and that means stopping the threat as quickly and efficiently as possible to save your life. The way to do that is to aim for the "kill zone." Now I think this could depend on the situation as well, but when you have a gun pointed at you or a person with a knife in arms reach and trying to kill you, you don't "shoot them in the arm so they don't get hurt bad." You aim or attempt to aim where you are most likely to stop the threat immediately, which isn't the extremities or bowels. If you happen to fire three shots and only one hits the BD and it hits him/her in the leg and he/she is no longer trying and able to kill you then of course you would not point the barrel at their head and execute him/her.
sjwsti:
As a medical professional, If your are on the clock and receiving pay for your service, you have a duty to respond to emergencies and provide appropriate rescue and care. The rescue and care you provide has to be in accordance with your training.
In Nebraska if I am off the clock I have no legal duty to render medical aid. This is true in most states but not all. For example, here is a statute from Rhode Island:
Rhode Island Code - § 11-56-1
"TITLE 11
Criminal Offenses
CHAPTER 11-56
Duty to Render Assistance
SECTION 11-56-1
§ 11-56-1 Duty to assist. – Any person at the scene of an emergency who knows that another person is exposed to, or has suffered, grave physical harm shall, to the extent that he or she can do so without danger or peril to himself or herself or to others, give reasonable assistance to the exposed person. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a petty misdemeanor and shall be subject to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six (6) months, or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or both."
http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/statute...56/11-56-1.HTM
To put this into the context of this discussion, in Rhode Island you are only required to render aid if you can do so "without danger or peril to himself or herself or to others". So even in states that require a person to render aid, in the case of a self defense shooting, stabbing, whatever, it appears that you would not face any legal consequences for not helping.
The "Good Samaritan Law" only applies to rendering medical assistance.
Nebraska Good Samaritan Laws
25-21,186
Emergency care at scene of emergency; persons relieved of civil
liability, when.
No person who renders emergency care at the
scene of an accident or other emergency gratuitously, shall be
held liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or
omission by such person in rendering the emergency care or as a
result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for
medical treatment or care for the injured person.
(Source: Laws 1961, c. 110, § 1, p. 349; Laws 1971, LB 458, § 1; R.S.1943, (1979), § 25-1152.)
There is separate language regarding professional medical providers.
Out-of-hospital emergency care provider; liability within scope
of practice.
No act of commission or omission of any
out-of-hospital emergency care provider while rendering emergency
medical care within the limits of his or her certification or
status as a trainee to a person who is deemed by the provider to
be in immediate danger of injury or loss of life shall impose any
liability on any other person, and this section shall not relieve
the out-of-hospital emergency care provider from personal liability, if any.(Source: Laws 1997, LB 138, § 25.)
- Shawn
bullit:
Thanks Shawn..... I was aware of your last quoted Law and of course the Good Samaritan laws. That being said, you nailed it when referring to the "without danger" to oneself.
--- Quote from: sjwsti on March 18, 2013, 08:29:55 AM ---As a medical professional, If your are on the clock and receiving pay for your service, you have a duty to respond to emergencies and provide appropriate rescue and care. The rescue and care you provide has to be in accordance with your training.
--- End quote ---
This may be a little questionable in NEBRASKA law in regards to being prosecuted. That is just MY OPINION as a non-lawyer. I've never seen an equivalent to the Rhode Island law you sourced.
A-FIXER:
--- Quote from: daleemt on March 17, 2013, 11:22:39 AM --- I worry about what others who were at the scene might interpit as life saving effort's, as trying to kill the person by hand.
--- End quote ---
Then you have answered the question yourself, that you choose not to assist.
--- Quote ---A-Fixer....there is nothing in the Hippocratic Oath about sacrificing my life to save someone else's with respect to their attempt to harm me or other innocents. Outside of that it is a moral/ethics issue. No legal standing per se.
--- End quote ---
and I said
--- Quote ---As I understand this Good Sanitarian is in the course of needing medical attention, and would exempt one who assisted another from any wrong doing. I am not a medical law lawyer but one who stated a clause.
--- End quote ---
would exempt one who assisted another but again
I never said you life would be in danger, you did so be it then as you see it. Most attacker choose prey that are unprotected and easy targets, and as I stated from my original post it is a moral and ethical view.
As many have stated in the views on this particular example good enough for them and that I would do things one way and they do another.
It brings up yet another then is it no wonder that there are those who have take a title and oath to up hold the constitution but will think differently and actually strip those freedoms ..... obama to kill americans via drones, but per jay carney says yea he has the power but he know best and with great thought to do whats best for the country , and fienstien who want to prohibit over 2,000 + guns but saying is not prohibiting the 2nd amen but excluding a certain guns but where is the shall not infringe? They will get this done maybe not by a black president but a white republican -/- Conservative because this is the way they think and operate. It is no small wonder that fienstien 20 yrs ago help create the FEMA language and each year resubmits when it is time to change wordings in early 1990s she add to fema '' all hazards'' and was defined as civil uprising where through all preceding presidents yea even the republican one to have complete and overriding authority over the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. Hows that for American Pie?
We each will define all things differently that is exactly how this country is on the verge of disappearing all together.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version