Rendering aid to someone you just shot (moved from Legal)

Not me.
God forbid, if I ever have to use a firearm in a defensive situation, I'm getting as far away from the perp as possible and calling 911.
I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to carry special equipment/first aid supplies just in case I have to shoot someone.

No way. I'm not an expert, but as far as I'm concerned I'm not obligated to provide aid to anyone, much less an attacker. Arkansas Paul has it right -- if I'm in a situation that I have to defend myself with lethal force, I'm not gonna stick around any longer than I have to. I'm going to retreat to a safe spot and call 911.

M1key said:

Do we have a moral or legal obligation to do so? Inquiring minds want to know.

Click to expand...

I figure my moral obligation is to take reasonable measures not to leave a widow and orphans. Immediately following a defensive shooting that's best accomplished with distance and hard cover.

If there were some circumstance that provided reasonable safety while rendering aid, I certainly would do so. I can't imagine a likely situation, but it's not impossible.

I consider my med gear to be for me and my family. I am not a licensed medical provider, and while I have some training, I am not prepared to treat someone who may have infectious diseases or other blood borne pathogens. Let's say the attacker has Hep C from sharing needles. No way do I want to risk exposure to that.

Rendering medical aid generally requires 2 hands which means either putting your gun down or holstering it. Which puts you in the precarious position of being within arms reach of someone who just tried to kill you while unarmed, or while you are occupied and he may be able to reach your weapon. If you're alone and have no one to cover the bad guy while you render aid, you can find yourself in a bad spot very quickly.

Also there is no guarantee that your shots actually forced your adversary down (from a mechanical perspective). Lots of people get shot and fall to the ground, and then get back up and run away. What if the attacker realizes that he isn't quite as hurt as he initially thought he was? What if it happens while you're rendering aid and he wants to continue the fight?

Lots of potential negatives to rendering aid to an attacker, especially if you're alone. I have also not heard of anyone who was not a licensed provider get sued for failure to treat someone.

Maybe if you feel compassionate enough, and the attacker is conscious, throw him a TQ from cover?

Maybe Frank will come along with a legal opinion on rendering first aid to a wounded assailant.

In the meanwhile, I will offer medical advice: "If you don't try anything, you won't get shot again."

Some agencies' (a few that I know of in my state) policies do require the officer(s) to provide medical assistance to a subject they have shot if EMS hasn't arrived, and, IF in the officer's judgement, it is safe to do so.

As for a private citizen, one suspects that is is up to the individual -- personally, if I have shot someone inside my home, verified there are no additional suspects inside (have good security camera coverage) and it is safe to approach the suspect (assuming another family member is home and could provide cover), I would at least apply a dressing to the wound(s) and attempt to stop further blood loss ... after 911 has been notified and EMS is on the way (the deputies and the fire medics are typically at least 15 - 20 minutes away from my semi-rural dwelling).

It is my moral obligation to provide at least basic first aid (I do have combat medical training) and prevent loss of life if possible, to anyone, no matter the circumstances. As far as a legal obligation, if I'm off-duty, I can't speak to that ...

Our state does have a "Good Samaritan" law to protect those who do attempt live-saving measures. And certainly, it could speak to the righteousness of a shooting and one's good intentions if one performed medical aid subsequent to having to use lethal force.

But eventually, after every shooting, one is judged in the court of public opinion. See the Tulsa PD case (Crutcher shooting) after the officers stood around while the subject bled out.

Aside from the dangers of approaching someone who was a real threat moments before, if you're NOT a medical professional - doctor, nurse, EMT, whatever - I'll mention three words that should give you pause: blood borne pathogens. If you try to help the assailant that you just shot, you're going to expose yourself to EVERYTHING he's carrying from hepatitis to HIV. Are you trained in and equipped for infection prevention?

And how would you answer the question "And with no training, WHY did you think you were competent to treat the person you'd just shot? Were you trying to help him, or trying to finish him off?"

No . . . not being a medical professional I'm not going to approach a stranger I or a family member have just shot, I'm going to back off and call the professionals at 911.

The guidance given to CG Auxiliary members by active-duty Coast Guard hospital corpsmen: unless you are under orders to act as EMS, call 911 first.

So then ask yourself: if I have no basic first aid training, why don't I have any training? Y'all talk so much about firearms training, medical training is more vital and certainly much more chance of being used.

If you're carrying a firearm to defend self and family, you should at least have some basic first aid training, certainly how to use universal precautions (nitrile gloves should be a part of every first-aid kit) against blood-borne pathogens, CPR, splinting orthopedic injuries (sprains/strains/fractures) and field dressing common types of wounds, to include gunshot wounds.

OddJob: Good Samaritan laws, as previously noted.

But you all just do as little or as much as your personal ethics require.

For the attacker?
Hard "nope".
I can't really see how putting myself within arms reach of a bad guy is a good idea.
I *might* toss the dude a bandage and wish him luck.

For a bystander IDK?
If I have gloves and preferably a mask
Will certainly tell them to apply pressure and where. Will provide supplies if I have them.

family, friend or myself?
100% for sure.

By law where I live, if I shoot someone, it because I felt imminent harm, including the possibility of death, was about to happen to me or my loved ones. I am not wasting my time trying top save the perp's sorry butt. The only thing I need to take away from that incident would be more practice so the next one isn't merely wounded.

An ambulance chaser civil liability attorney can claim that the fact that you got close enough to render first aid to someone who you claim was a threat of imminent death or greivous bodily harm is proof that you were not really in jeopardy of life or limb and in fact you rendered aid out of guilt for unjustifiably shooting my client, isn't so Mr. Death Wish vigilante? Answer the question!

In how many cop shootings have the police shoot and cuffed a suspect and let them bleed out til emergency services responded? I collected several newspaper accounts on the Las Vegas Costco shooting when that was a celebrated cause. I believe the policy was to keep a distance and provide cover to the EM techs when they arrived to render aid. Because getting close enough to render aid puts you back in jeopardy.

Odd Job said:

Old Dog, if I shoot somebody and he is down and not a threat to me, and I go over to him and choke him out, do you think I can get away with it by quoting good Samaritan laws?

Click to expand...

If you're going to go to all that trouble to murder the guy why not just shoot him again?

If you had to shoot him there is a possibility that you might need to shoot him again.

Retreat, secure, be the first on the phone to 911.

Not to mention the danger from blood borne pathogens (prior to retiring I needed to take an annual class on this risk, and as a result I am going to avoid the blood, saliva, urine, etc. of any stranger, and especially one who has just tried to kill me.)

M1key said:

I just ordered some of the new Israeli bandages to stop bleeding (from say a gunshot wound) which prompted this discussion with the wife. Curious what the "legal eagles" here have to say about the legal ramifications if one does or does not make an attempt to save the life of someone you just shot in self defense.

I just wonder how many gun owners consider this in a defensive shooting?

M

Click to expand...

Sad to say but IMHO, you're leaving yourself open to a whole lotta hurt (e.g. medical malpractice) even if it is the Christian thing to do. I myself would call 911 and leave it to the professionals.

SharpDog, medical malpractice would only apply if the person providing care was a medical professional, AND was found to have incorrectly treated someone. As mentioned before, Good Samaritan laws prevent regular Joe's from legal liability if they attempted to provide life-saving treatment. That being said, as you can read in my initial reply, I agree with you that calling 911 and leaving treatment to the professionals is the best way to go in this specific instance.

Of course the answer is no.

All of the reasons mentioned already are why.

Seems like this would be common sense...

I have mixed feelings on the moral grounds of rendering first aid. But the risks of a subject making a benign recovery, even if temporary, are enough that I would be inclined to stay a few steps away from them.

Several posts refer to "retreating to a safe distance" without stating how far that is. I would not be too far away though. If my attacker(s) dropped a weapon(s) of any kind, I am going to make sure it is exactly where it fell when the police arrive, and I am not letting anyone else put hands on it/them.