Firefighters Run Over Patient

[aussiephil]

Fire asses, huh? Funny that you haven't said jack about the AMR crew that "didn't notice" that traffic had stopped in front of them, then turned into the oncoming lane, and then hit that guy's car, killing them. Running over the homeless man was negligent sure, but it wasn't intentional, in that they didn't see him and then purposefully run him over. The AMR crew failed to scan the road ahead of them, which suggests in strong likelihood that the driver was distracted, perhaps talking/texting on the phone, maybe eating or drinking, or playing with the radio. The driver killed that man. The driver was also criminally charged as well. I don't see you jumping all over THAT story, calling for their jobs, their heads, whatever. Give it up already you hypocrite.

http://www.emtcity.com/index.php/topic/16667-news-feed-man-dies-in-collision-with-florida-ambulance-jemscom/

I know you've seen this, as it's been on the main page when you've been online, don't feign ignorance by saying that you haven't seen this thread.

I hadnt read it. That isnt ignorance, but, now i will look & comment on their ineptitude also.

The simple fact that these morons did not look is probably a good indication that they would have the same accident as the AMR morons through a lack of proper understanding of time & the patient, as well as having a total disregard for the general public & other road users.

[Just Plain Ruff]

I hadnt read it. That isnt ignorance, but, now i will look & comment on their ineptitude also.

The simple fact that these morons did not look is probably a good indication that they would have the same accident as the AMR morons through a lack of proper understanding of time & the patient, as well as having a total disregard for the general public & other road users.

Phil, I still think you are overreacting and being to harsh on these guys. I know your opinions will not change but I respect your opinion but I think you are wrong in my opinion.

This accident could have happened to any of us. You are making some assumptions that I don't think exist. I could be wrong but unfortunately your assumptions and mine are worlds apart I think. (at least an ocean apart).

I do respect this healthy debate though.

[aussiephil]

I do respect this healthy debate though.

Well said mate

[Flasurfbum]

I do respect this healthy debate though.

Healthy debate?

I have seen it degrading to namecalling.

Phil obviously has a complex about him, and is hell bent on going after these guys, even though they were cleared.

He has yet to prove one shred of one iota of evidence that suggests that this incident had any bearing on their treatments that they give to patients.

Further, his claims that they were all gung ho to get to this call is unsubstantiated.

While everyone has a right to an opinion, his is flat out unproven, and boarder line per se defamation, whereas the AMR crew that 46 referred to (and that incident took place 30-45 min from the original incident we are referring to), failed to use due regard while responding, and their failure to do so killed a man.

There is a HUGE difference between a drunk attempting suicide (as corroborated by bystanders and friends of the victim), and going headlong into traffic without using due regard.

[Just Plain Ruff]

Healthy debate?

I have seen it degrading to namecalling.

Phil obviously has a complex about him, and is hell bent on going after these guys, even though they were cleared.

He has yet to prove one shred of one iota of evidence that suggests that this incident had any bearing on their treatments that they give to patients.

Further, his claims that they were all gung ho to get to this call is unsubstantiated.

While everyone has a right to an opinion, his is flat out unproven, and boarder line per se defamation, whereas the AMR crew that 46 referred to (and that incident took place 30-45 min from the original incident we are referring to), failed to use due regard while responding, and their failure to do so killed a man.

There is a HUGE difference between a drunk attempting suicide (as corroborated by bystanders and friends of the victim), and going headlong into traffic without using due regard.

I disagree Flasurfbum, healthy debate on this forum is when one user does not resort to calling another an idiot.

Sure he called the people in question names but he has not resorted to namecalling to the users here.

As for the claims of gung ho ness I have disputed that with him and he sees my side and I see his side, although my side of the issue is right and he is wrong but hey, he's gonna learn sometime that I am always right.

just kidding phil

It has been ahealthy debate so far in my opinion based on the history of debates onthis forum.

[Flasurfbum]

I disagree Flasurfbum, healthy debate on this forum is when one user does not resort to calling another an idiot.

Sure he called the people in question names but he has not resorted to namecalling to the users here.

It has been ahealthy debate so far in my opinion based on the history of debates onthis forum.

Agreed, but when you call other parties names....

I hadnt read it. That isnt ignorance, but, now i will look & comment on their ineptitude also.

The simple fact that these morons did not look is probably a good indication that they would have the same accident as the AMR morons through a lack of proper understanding of time & the patient, as well as having a total disregard for the general public & other road users.

Don't get me wrong, I love a good debate.

But to name call the parties involved, especially after being cleared, is just wrong.

And I remember some of the debates from a few years back.

[aussiephil]

Agreed, but when you call other parties names....

Don't get me wrong, I love a good debate.

But to name call the parties involved, especially after being cleared, is just wrong.

And I remember some of the debates from a few years back.

If you actually read my concerns you will see that, in this particular case, they extended beyong the simple moronic act they committed & I questioned what other things they would fail at as well. Simple things like drug doses, you know, medicating someone who doesnt want to die at that point, choices made on the road because they got an adrenaline rush that can effect the lives of so many.

Carlessness begins somewhere & we need to make examples of people to show the rest that we need to be ever vigilante about our profession.

Ruff & I disagree, but so what, we have opposing views in a debate, but we agree to disagree & will still have a beer at the end of the day. We are not here to gouge each others eyes out.

[Richard B the EMT]

Just an observation from my experiences: Things can happen in the field, not just leaving the garage bay.

While working for an IFT service, we brought home a patient, into a city housing project, in the middle of a summer day. Nothing to do with my Caddylance being in the middle of the complex, it was just folks getting out of hot apartments in large numbers.

I had a bad feeling about the crowd we were about to drive through, to get back to the street, so I told my partner I was going to walk alongside the ambulance, as an additional set of eyes as he drove out.

I'm glad I did. Some 8 year old, just as my partner decided to gun the engine to get to 5 miles an hour from 3, grabbed the door handle, and got dragged roughly 10 feet, before my yells alerted my partner to stop!

With the exception of being in crashes, and near crashes, that was perhaps the most frightening moment I have had in over 35 years on the ambulances.

[brentoli]

It has been ahealthy debate so far in my opinion based on the history of debates onthis forum.

I nominate this for the "EMTcity Understatement of 2009"

I came in on the tail end of this and would have to agree is was very civil, realitive to the surroundings. It seems like every debate here ends with everyone agreeing to disagree, until they don't agree again. Not many will admit it, but even the staunchest defenders of a position leave these debates learning something.