From JEMS; Man pulls gun on EMTs...

[ArmedBear]

I am required by law to enter neighborhoods I wouldn't otherwise go near.

Bingo.

 

[TAB]

I am required by law to enter neighborhoods I wouldn't otherwise go near.

so are mail men and garbage men...Same with pretty much any other goverment service. What about them?( granted if you mess with a mail man your skrewed, but thats old laws when the PO actually transported payrolls... )

 

[ArmedBear]

Garbage men aren't called to a specific place by someone unknown at any time, day or night. You can't sit in your house one late Friday night after doing a lot of meth and think, "Hmmmm... I think I'll shoot somebody!" then call for the garbage man. Nobody robs the garbage man at work, since they can get all the garbage they want for free just by driving around ahead of the truck.

There is a difference. I'm not saying one person is more valuable than another; I'm saying that there is a legitimate reason to try to add some extra deterrence to a crime that actually does happen.

 

[TAB]

Ok lets replace garbage man with sewer or water district employees... you call them up, by law they have to come.

 

[ArmedBear]

Not knowing how the law is written, I suspect that, at least in some jurisdictions, sewer or water district employees may be considered to be emergency personnel under those circumstances.

And what about Search and Rescue, etc.? I don't know. However, I think it's legitimate to consider calling emergency responders into an ambush as a crime above and beyond regular criminal assault -- which should be punished harshly anyway.

 

[TAB]

What about calling non goverment employees for the purpose of commiting a crime. Say the pizza guy, a contractor?

what I'm getting at here is what the guy does for a living should not matter.

FWIW worth, one average, more people were injured/killed building your town then will ever be hurt defending it.

 

[ArmedBear]

True enough.

And far more people will be killed delivering the building materials than doing the building.

However, I'm not sure how that's related to the question of laws that enhance criminal penalties for assaulting emergency responders.

 

[divemedic]

The pizza guy, the water guy, and the garbage man do not go to jail if they refuse to go into a neighborhood. I do. It is called a duty to act. During the LA riots, those people did not enter the areas that were rioting. Cops, firefighters, and EMS did, and were required to.

 

[BlackBearME]

Interfering with the job - yes, I can buy that argument.

Assaulting, however.....It's still kind of fuzzy. I'm not seeing how it's any more grievous to assault one particular type of person, but not another. In my mind it borders on class distinction/better citizens.

As for certain people being required to enter certain areas: this is perfectly understandable. It is, however, the choice of those people to do so. After all, we're not in "The Giver" and no one made these people choose these jobs.

I'm not trying to troll, and I'm not trying to get a rise out of people. (Honestly.) I have a great respect for emergency personnel, and I hope once I get a regular work schedule I can become an EMT. I just fail to see how it's any worse to assault an LEO, for instance, or an EMT than anyone else. I'm not recommending we bring the level of punishment for those offenders down, but perhaps bring the level of punishment up for assaulting anyone else. No matter the uniform, assaulting a person is assaulting a person.

ETA:

I'm not saying one person is more valuable than another; I'm saying that there is a legitimate reason to try to add some extra deterrence to a crime that actually does happen.

I failed to see this before I posted (didn't make it all the way through the post, apparently) and when you put it that way it does make more sense. It makes a lot more sense than the "I'm required by law to go where I wouldn't otherwise go." Which may be true, but you were not required to be subject to that law. This argument, however, I can understand.

But back OT: If this guy has that many arrests and such, I'm thinking he shouldn't have had a gun anyway. Isn't this what gun control is supposed to prevent? C'mon, write your congresspersons and call the Brady Campaign; let's throw more gun laws at it. That'll solve it for sure.

 

[BADUNAME16]

When I worked EMS, I carried a knife and a big 'ol Maglite.
I probably could have been fired for the knife, as my employer (AMR)
has a strict "no weapons" policy.
But I took my chances. I definitely got into some hairy situations (if you're familiar with Tampa--here's two words: College Hill)
but never had to use a weapon, especially since TPD was usually on-scene.

I don't think EMS workers should carry guns, at least not openly, as policy.
Law enforcement and Fire/EMS should work together, but let's not blur the lines between the two.

 

[Len S]

A few thoughts. First ff's, medics, and police were given so called special status because the life and death nature of the job and it is thought that a person who messes with one of the above would have less of a problem than others messing with other people. I have been a medic since we used bretillium(sp) as the last line in V-fib, that would be 18 yrs for the youngsters here. They do not even make that stuff anymore. 2nd. I really do not know the EMS laws in Florida but I know that if I refused to "treat"and transport anyone I would be looking at www.doyouwantfrieswiththat.com for a new job. That is called abandonment in IL. I have transported many of happy smiling baby who's parents thought he had a fever. 3rd I think a medic carrying is not that great of a idea. First we are noncombatants,bangers and others know we are not going to shoot at them. By the nature of the job we are in very close proximity to people that may or may not be in their right mind. We have a hands on job and we cant really cuff our patients. Kneeling down to start a IV or intubate will leave our firearm unprotected as both hands will be busy as will our partner. There is no way to control the firearm. No if some of you are a combination of Bruce Lee, Chuck Norris, and Rambo go for it. I have had 4 different classes that included weapons retention. I have been is some crappy situations as a medic. In those situations where a firearm would have been nice there was no way, once I started working on the patient, that I could have protected my sidearm. Just my .02



Len

 

[LWGN]

My first thought on reading this was to question why EMS would refuse to transport in the first place, especially if the father of the child was insistent and upset. Let the MD at the ED tell Daddy that Snookums is fine. EMTs and Paramedics don't actually have the final authority to diagnose - err on the side of caution, and radio ahead that the family is upset. Don't escalate a situation that could turn dangerous. If Daddy is truly delusional, perhaps it is best if he and his child go to the hospital anyway, where it will be easier to Baker Act him.

Not provoking trouble when you don't have to is rule #1 of self-defense, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[hotpig]

3 When I go into a burning building, what do I do with my weapon?

I wear FD issued Glock under my bunker gear.