JPINFV

Is it even possible to whine about a company if you don't mention the name of that company? His question is valid, especially if the style of interview was new to him.

I see what you did there...

My tongue was planted firmly in my cheek with that post.

I can see the utility of this if the company is small (6 crews=12 people). This isn't your standard 9-5 job where you can sit in your cubicle/office and stay away from the people who annoy you. You have to be able to get along with the people who you will essentially be living with when on duty. I can see where there is a valid concern that one provider would ruin the kumbaya of the company. Similarly, no one wants to be that one guy (you know whom I'm talking about, just about every service has one) who no one wants to work with. I don't view having a social and experience component as being mutually exclusive. I also don't get why they wouldn't ask for those things, even if they were optional. Better question. If you wouldn't fit in with them, would you want to work there anyways? Are there other services that you can apply to? I'm not familiar enough with privacy laws to say if it's a violation or not. Similarly, I can see why you would want to avoid companies that hire, in whole or in part, based on cliques. I don't see why, though, that would be an automatic disqualifies. I could argue that hiring based on the majority view of a good EMT (B, P, between) on this board, that it would be cliquish as well.

Well, of course side loaders have worked so well for the squmpers. http://www.emtcity.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4429

I think you're misunderstanding the term. First responders are the people who first respond to an emergency. In general, the term encompasses EMS, fire, and police personnel and is different from the training level of "[Medical] First Responder."

It's pretty clear when you read the text actually. Essentially they took the box and rotated it 90 degrees. There's now a sliding door on both sides of the box though which the patient is loaded. This is in contrast to the traditional design where the patient is loaded through the rear doors. By configuring it this way, it is safer since the attendants will always be facing either forward or backwards relative to the ambulance, not to the side such as on the squad bench. They are claiming that this "opens" up more storage room in the rear of the ambulance.

Well, JEMS posted a picture of the accident from a different view. Looks like the driver is gonna have some splain'ing to do after all.

It looks like she has a head ache.

http://www.jems.com/Images/SJC%20Industrie...cm16-130110.pdf Interesting article I came across today about a concept ambulance featuring side loading instead of the traditional read loading. While it looks like a good idea, the one problem that I haven't really been able to rectify myself is the increased footprint for loading/unloading operations, especially at hospitals.

Cool. I wasn't sure if the flag was due to location or ethnic origin (I've seen some posters use it for the second reason). At least New Zealanders seem to know the difference between a paramedic and another level of provider.

celticcare, are you in Iowa by any chance?

I'm sorry, were you saying something? I kinda of zoned out...

I'm sure that the 4 year undergrad Barry U students are willing to admit the 4 month basic students to the cool kids club (I'm looking at you, you "I graduated from UCLA, UCLA's EMT-B program" people).

No, it's because of the stupidity of requiring a court order for initial assessment and treatment of patients with acute psychiatric disorders. If a person is considered an imminent threat you detain first and worry about the courts until you have a handle on what you are dealing with. Maybe psych holds are one thing that Kalifornia does right (initial hold is 72 hours and doesn't require a judge. This automatically forfeits a patient's right to own a gun for the next 5 years with a single appeal to appease due process).

I'd say that everyone knew he was weird, strange, or even mildly unstable prior to the event, but not quite an asshole.

I'm tempted to say "no," but considering the bail outs that for-profit companies get in other industries, there's a strong chance that I might be wrong. If a company can provide a service for a profit, then it shouldn't be the governments job to make sure that a company can meet equipment requirements. On the other hand, I've always wondered why there aren't more non-profit 911 agencies. There are plenty of "non-profit" hospitals out there that are running in the black. note: profit v non-profit has more to do with how profits are used instead of running in the black vs running at a loss.

The funny thing was that this wasn't an issue when Charles Whitman took to the tower at UT Austin.

The biggest difference is that one is a high school and one is a college. While I support teachers who choose to have a gun (provided it's in a locked case and the students are unaware of it's presence), I can't really support high school students in this day and age carrying fire arms to school. There was a time in the near past (my father has stories) when that was acceptable, but it isn't really today.

So victims should be able to set state and national policy now? They're opinions are important, but so are the opinions of every other stake holder in this discussion, including gun owners.

The class room shooting was the one that took ~10 minutes per Wikipedia. I don't think he was a good enough of a shot to kill 30 people (33-2 from the dorm - himself) in 60 seconds. These were class rooms, not lecture halls. The time between the dorm room and the class room shootings was several hours.

The same way every incident with multiple people is handled. Every one gets detained until the stories can be worked out. Police can't just shoot someone because they have a gun (albeit it makes it more likely), so if you have someone who may be a gunman, he gets a pair of matching metal bracelets until the immediate situation is contained.

It doesn't take that long to spring into action. The main VT attack lasted 10 minutes, which would be plenty of time for 1 armed student to end/attempt to end the attack. The alternative, though, is fish in a barrel. In reply to your last message: What are the students supposed to do? Charge a gunman with pencils, pens, and text books? Call 911 and pray?

Will it be a deterrent? Probably not. Will it end a rampage sooner? Hopefully yes.

I believe it would slow it down. There's going to be nothing stopping the people who are hell bent on killing people at the cost of their own life (i.e. VT), but if other people had guns then these incidents would be shorter in duration.