Bulletproof Vests for EMS

[brentoli]

Yeah its not working for me on this browser. Ill check it tonight.

[Scaramedic]

First off let me straighten out a few things, I was not using my family as anecdotal evidence. My father joined the WSP in 1946. He retired before vests became an issue. My brother retired after 37 yrs, yes 37! When he started out vests also were not a common thing and when they first came out they were bulky and uncomfortable so he never liked them. I mentioned merely as a lucky thing not as evidence.

Second if you want to wear one go for it. If it helps you in an MVA great. But when it comes to helping you in a shooting situation your forgetting one big issue. The reason most cops survive shootings is they can shoot back and disable the shooter. What are you going to do after your shot?

I've worked in some particularly nasty cities and I have only known one Medic who was actually shot. The bullet bounced off his key carrier on his hip. Maybe we should all wear key keepers instead.

I know several LEO's who were shot, via my family. One was shot by his daughter in his POV, he is a C 3-5 (completely blown away) quad. Another one was wrestling a suspect and the suspect pulled a gun during the scuffle. He fired the weapon and the bullet went between the side panels and entered his abdomen. He survived. One was shot by a suspect going over a fence, bullet went through his foot. And finally a friend of mine with PD who shot himself in the leg pulling his gun while getting out of his vehicle. Oh and this Officer I never met (obviously) who went through Shelton with my father and was a friend of his.

He was shot in the back of the head by a twelve year old if I remember right.

Do vests work yes. Should EMS agencies spend a large portion of their budget on them no. I would rather see the money being spent on a course like Street Survival that has worked so well for LEO's across the country. A course I have been through and found amazing. My point is that more EMS personnel are going to die from poor health, MVA's, and falling from the sky than will ever die from GSW's. So the money would be better spent on making EMS workers think of situational awareness and trips to the gym than Body armor.

P.S. I am still waiting for all this evidence of Medics being shot.

P.S.S. Dust, one of your incidents would have been avoided if the back of the units had a proper restraint system for Medics. Now there is another place the money could be spent.

[Doczilla]

Now if we're talking Dragonskin then one of them would have survived, but how many EMS personnel want to pay for Dragonskin. If they could even get it.

You better know what you're talking about with Dragonskin first.

'zilla

[Scaramedic]

You better know what you're talking about with Dragonskin first.

'zilla

What part? That they lost their NIJ certification?

[AnthonyM83]

What are you going to do after your shot?

I've worked in some particularly nasty cities and I have only known one Medic who was actually shot. The bullet bounced off his key carrier on his hip. Maybe we should all wear key keepers instead.

. . . ..

Do vests work yes. Should EMS agencies spend a large portion of their budget on them no. I would rather see the money being spent on a course like Street Survival that has worked so well for LEO's across the country. A course I have been through and found amazing. My point is that more EMS personnel are going to die from poor health, MVA's, and falling from the sky than will ever die from GSW's. So the money would be better spent on making EMS workers think of situational awareness and trips to the gym than Body armor.

P.S. I am still waiting for all this evidence of Medics being shot.

What I'm sure all medics would be doing after getting shot is running away if they're able to. I don't have enough info on shootings to decide how aggressively the shooters would have followed the medics (trying to shoot them or just get them away from a scene/patient/themselves?).

[spenac]

The stuff at the end of your post was money, though...there are a lot of other things that companies could be looking into, specifically relating to traffic/vehicle safety....

Definitly need major improvements over what is currently out there.

http://www.emtcity.com/phpBB2/link.php?url...mp;feature=user

[web:0d24167ce5]http://www.emtcity.com/phpBB2/link.php?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03R7XjXBWmE&feature=user[/web:0d24167ce5]

[Dustdevil]

P.S. I am still waiting for all this evidence of Medics being shot.

I'm still waiting for all this evidence of medics being sued. I've known only one medic in thirty-five years who was sued, so why should we worry so much about our care and documentation standards? Isn't it a non-issue? Do we just simply not worry about things unless they happen with regularity?

The problem with training is two-fold. First, proactive training, like the Street Survival seminars (which I have attended multiple times) are great, but the effects wear off as people become complacent and fall back into their old habits. For it to work, you have to take it deadly serious. Anybody who is completely convinced that body armour is pointless is obviously not taking the matter seriously.

Second, reactive training like defensive tactics seminars (which are not taught in the Street Survival seminars), give a greater false sense of security than body armour ever could. In reality, very little of value is learned at these things. Thinking you can learn self-defence in a one or two-day seminar makes about as much sense as thinking you can be a paramedic just by taking an ACLS class. Sure, you're going to learn a few moves that will give you some sense of confidence. But if you do not practise them continuously, they will never become second nature. Consequently, you will not be able to react with them appropriately.

If you have a lot of confidence in either of those significantly reducing the risks that we face, then you've never taken either of those courses.

And seriously, are you really suggesting that if a vest cannot stop a .30-06, you may as well not even wear it? What about seat belts? After all, they might trap you in a burning car, so should you not wear them? Sorry, I just don't get this whole "all or nothing" theory of self defence. I mean, since we can't prevent all disease, should we stop any and all attempts to live healthy lives and prevent disease? A smart man hedges his bets by all reasonable means. There is nothing unreasonable about wearing an extra layer of clothing. If I can do it in Texas and Iraq, you can surely do it in the Northwest.

[Mateo_1387]

This thread has really got me to thinking. I have had to leave it, think on it, and then return to it just to do the same process again.

I am all for safety, I want to return home by the end of the day as healthy as when I went to work. So this is how I see it.

The major issue we face as far as danger goes is an ambulance crash. Restraint systems are a must, as well as ambulance design with injury prevention in mind. I agree with wearing a seatbelt, but too many people in the profession do not wear a seat belt. I feel a bullet proof vest should not be used for injury prevention in an accident, a proper restraint system should. The money to buy bullet proof vests I think would be warranted for protection from on scene hazards such as gunshots. On the flip side, I think more emphasis should be placed on vehicle safety than risk of gunshots. But then again the information I am getting from the thread is on deaths from each category, It doesn't say how many paramedics are exposed to each category, or survive from something in the category.

I personally would not want to wear a bullet proof vest unless it was warranted, such as going to a gun shot victim, serving in Iraq, or other such situations.

We cannot be protected from everything, but why not if given the equipment use it for your own safety. We are issued gloves, turnout gear, have seat belts, and other resources (police) at our disposal. So I would say use what is given to use to keep safe.

Edited once because I forgot to use the spellcheck

[Dustdevil]

This thread has really got me to thinking. I have had to leave it, think on it, and then return to it just to do the same process again.

I personally would not want to wear a bullet proof vest unless it was warranted, such as going to a gun shot victim, serving in Iraq, or other such situations.

Not a particularly good comparison. In Iraq, I wear body armour only when leaving the camp, or when the shit starts hitting the fan in camp. In America, I wear body armour at all times on-duty. In Iraq, I am able to predict potentially deteriorating conditions. In America, I am not.

During all your time deliberating on the topic, you really should have gone back to actually read what has been posted. Then you would know that the theory of just putting a vest on when responding to a shooting victim is the stupidest of all theories. Most shootings are the safest scenes you will make. First of all, the scene should have been cleared by LE before you even get there. Second, damn few people ever stick around to greet the cops after they shoot somebody. Third, ask one-hundred percent of all medics (or cops) who have been shot if they were expecting to be shot on that call. One-hundred percent will tell you no. The point? You have ZERO ability to reliably predict which scenes you will or will not be attacked on. That's like saying you should take your blood pressure meds only on days you expect to have a stroke on. It's quite simply idiotic thinking. Do cops only carry their guns to the calls they expect to be shot on? What percentage of cops who are shot are shot at the scene of a previous shooting? I can assure you that it's pretty damn small.

Body armour is kind of like a radar detector. You don't wait until you see the cop to put the thing on. At that point, it serves no purpose, and you're already screwed. Use your head, bro. I know you've got a good one.

And why shouldn't we be utilising body armour to protect ourselves from vehicular accident injuries? What is the downside?

[Mateo_1387]

Not a particularly good comparison. In Iraq, I wear body armour only when leaving the camp, or when the shit starts hitting the fan in camp. In America, I wear body armour at all times on-duty. In Iraq, I am able to predict potentially deteriorating conditions. In America, I am not.

I am curious how you are better able to predict potentially deteriorating conditions in Iraq. What do you do if you are caught on the other side of the compound/base/wherever you are without your vest and conditions deteriorate?

...Most shootings are the safest scenes you will make. First of all, the scene should have been cleared by LE before you even get there. Second, damn few people ever stick around to greet the cops after they shoot somebody. Third, ask one-hundred percent of all medics (or cops) who have been shot if they were expecting to be shot on that call. One-hundred percent will tell you no.

Yea, I see your point, pretty weak argument on my part to use a vest on a shooting.

The point? You have ZERO ability to reliably predict which scenes you will or will not be attacked on. That's like saying you should take your blood pressure meds only on days you expect to have a stroke on. It's quite simply idiotic thinking. Do cops only carry their guns to the calls they expect to be shot on? What percentage of cops who are shot are shot at the scene of a previous shooting? I can assure you that it's pretty damn small.

Again, what makes you more capable of predicting when thing go wrong in Iraq than in the US? I would wager that it is more predictable here than in Iraq. If I go to an area that I know is laced with crime, assaults against police, fire, or EMS than I can predict the chances of getting shot are higher. But then again you are right that I cannot always predict the situation 100% of the time.

Furthermore, Strokes kill over 150,000 per year, with approximately 32000 being hemorrhagic. Guns killing EMS personnel is "10 mostly from homicides" per the study cited by Anthony in a five year period.

I still do not see the emphasis put on the vests when there is a greater chance of being hurt in an accident. If I was provided one, I would be apt to wear it, just because it is provided. Same goes with turnout gear, its for my protection. I will not be all that worried if I am not given a vest.

...Use your head, bro. I know you've got a good one.

Thanks!

And why shouldn't we be utilising body armour to protect ourselves from vehicular accident injuries? What is the downside?

I am sure it would help. I am saying that it should not replace a proper restraint system. Like your post from 2005 where you said the vest protected you from a rubbernecker, I can see it working well. Being an MVA I would think turnoutgear would do that same thing.