v85

What kind of training does the Sheriff's Office give? I know you said that most fire police, including myself, would not arrest anyone except in extreme circumstances, but do you get legal updates to make sure you don't accidentally arrest someone or ruin a case for the sheriff or troopers? For example, an obviously intoxicated driver is at the fire police road closure, do you have the authority to tell him to wait for the troopers/sheriff to show up? If so, what have you done, arrested him, made a traffic stop, a detention? Or, you have an 11 year old kid who keeps riding his bike past the fire line and trying to touch the apparatus at a working fire; he has done this multiple times; do you have the ability to tell him he has to wait for a parent or the police to come pick him up? Or, you go with the ambulance to a medical call, the police aren't there for whatever reason. As the patient is being walked to the ambulance(another issue), they say "I think I want to kill myself" and turns to go back into the house, do you have the ability to tell them now that they have to go with the medic crew? Is that considered an arrest? These are just some examples of situations that I feel fire police may find themselves in that aren't all that extreme, yet may not have the training to do, and don't even involve "going hands on"

I think minimum staffing should be 4. Meaning Driver, Officer, 2 FF's. And on the volly departments the 2 FF's refer to interior firefighters, not exteriors, juniors, or anyone else. If the apparatus doesn't have 4, then it should only be counted on scene as a support piece. Meaning if a box calls for 3 engines and 2 ladders, then you need three engines and two ladders PLUS the equipment that could not crew properly

I agree that everyone could use more training. I know of other systems where volunteer fire fighters go through the exact same training as the career firefighters (ie. FFI/FFII/Survival/HAZMAT/EVOC A/O/EVOC Pump Ops) at a minimum I personally think another issue for the fire police specifically is that no one seems to want them. The fire departments usually see them as a place to put firefighters who are too old/unfit/unsafe to do interior firefighting and the police are sometimes afraid of fire police for economic reasons "The town board is going to lay half of us off and replace us with volunteers"

What can it do? Can it take samples, actually plug leaks

I wish someone would talk to the auto manufacturers association and tell them to stop making sound-proof cabins. I don't understand how NHTSA let them get away with that to begin with

I always thought it was Structure Fire: dispatch description Working Fire/Working Structure Fire: Confirmed fire that would take some work (ie, more than a can and charged line) to put out

The politicians who use incidents like this for personal gain IMO should be recalled ASAP. and I would NOT want the US Military in schools. Just too much of a bad precedent constitutionally. Police okay, espeically in high schools, but never the military

I agree, but I don't think that those topics are mutually exclusive. Why can't one both grieve and talk about ways to prevent the next occurance at the same time

To be quite honest, I have to say many of the volunteer emergency services I have come across, I'm not sure if they do check references, or even do more than a cursory check on the application. This seems to be supported by stories of volunteers who have been thrown out of one department for misconduct, only to join a neighboring agency with less stringent standards

I would agree to all of that Also, I would probably say that locking down is effective in most circumstances, but we should try to plan for all circumstances, not just most of them. Even if it is as simple as keeping an object near the door that could be used as a prop or barricade, or if you have interconnecting rooms, moving between them if someone tries to go into one of them.

Also, another issue that I have heard of coming up is, when the fingerprints are run for the arson check, the fingerprint histroy showing serious felony convictions that can not be disclosed because of the use and disseminaton agreements

Once he was trying to break down the door, why not go out the rescue window, if on the first floor, and try to take shelter somewhere outside? I believe Col Grossman wrote an article about how lockdowns can be fluid and moving in a case like that

So do lockdowns really work then? The main reason I was given for locking down is that there might be other shooters outside and that school shooters are looking for easy targets and wouldn't go through the work of breaking down a door. But if that is the case, that is like saying don't evacuate during a structure fire because there might be power lines down or a plane might fall from the sky. With a lockdown you are essentially saying "cower in a corner and pray PD makes it in time"

I was told by the instructors in my fire police class, who were all active duty police officers and supervisors that if a volunteer fire department was to refuse to hire someone on the basis of a conviction other than arson, it is considered illegal discrimnation under the NYS Human Rights Law Here is the law: It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person, agency, bureau, corporation or association, including the state and any political subdivision thereof, to deny any license or employment to any individual by reason of his or her having been convicted of one or more criminal offenses, or by reason of a finding of a lack of “good moral character” which is based upon his or her having been convicted of one or more criminal offenses, when such denial is in violation of the provisions of article twenty-three-A of the correction law. Further, there shall be a rebuttable presumption in favor of excluding from evidence the prior incarceration or conviction of any person, in a case alleging that the employer has been negligent in hiring or retaining an applicant or employee, or supervising a hiring manager, if after learning about an applicant or employee's past criminal conviction history, such employer has evaluated the factors set forth in section seven hundred fifty-two of the correction law, and made a reasonable, good faith determination that such factors militate in favor of hire or retention of that applicant or employee. 16. It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice, unless specifically required or permitted by statute, for any person, agency, bureau, corporation or association, including the state and any political subdivision thereof, to make any inquiry about, whether in any form of application or otherwise, or to act upon adversely to the individual involved, any arrest or criminal accusation of such individual not then pending against that individual which was followed by a termination of that criminal action or proceeding in favor of such individual, as defined in subdivision two of section 160.50 of the criminal procedure law, or by a youthful offender adjudication, as defined in subdivision one of section 720.35 of the criminal procedure law, or by a conviction for a violation sealed pursuant to section 160.55 of the criminal procedure law or by a conviction which is sealed pursuant to section 160.58 of the criminal procedure law, in connection with the licensing, employment or providing of credit or insurance to such individual; provided, further, that no person shall be required to divulge information pertaining to any arrest or criminal accusation of such individual not then pending against that individual which was followed by a termination of that criminal action or proceeding in favor of such individual, as defined in subdivision two of section 160.50 of the criminal procedure law, or by a youthful offender adjudication, as defined in subdivision one of section 720.35 of the criminal procedure law, or by a conviction for a violation sealed pursuant to section 160.55 of the criminal procedure law, or by a conviction which is sealed pursuant to section 160.58 of the criminal procedure law. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to the licensing activities of governmental bodies in relation to the regulation of guns, firearms and other deadly weapons or in relation to an application for employment as a police officer or peace officer as those terms are defined in subdivisions thirty-three and thirty-four of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law; provided further that the provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to an application for employment or membership in any law enforcement agency with respect to any arrest or criminal accusation which was followed by a youthful offender adjudication, as defined in subdivision one of section 720.35 of the criminal procedure law, or by a conviction for a violation sealed pursuant to section 160.55 of the criminal procedure law, or by a conviction which is sealed pursuant to section 160.58 of the criminal procedure law.

The problem is that in NY that the only background check that can be run on volunteer firefigheters is an arson check. Anything else is violating their "human rights" for "discrimination" against criminals

Have they said how he got into a classroom if the building was locked down after he shot the staff members in the office?

Yes, I think it is. But I truly believe that it is rare that someone committs suicide from a single incicent. There may be a trigger, like bullying or a prank, but that is usually just the last straw in a long line of situations

Washingtonville FD does, just heard them paged for that a little bit ago

Our AED's still have a screen to view rythyms, and we still have quite a few people who were EMT-D's or higher who know what they mean

I just added adolescent because it might tell you more about how to deal with the patient. Although the geriatric category is a good idea

If they claim it has to do with HIPAA, they are mistaken. HIPAA has very limited applicability in the dispatch enviornment to begin with, especially when dispatch is by an agency that doesn't bill health insurance, and an age isn't considered identifying information that would be covered anyway. I think it has more to do with the fact that the person's age range is more important than there exact age. Yes it is important to know if you are deailing with an infant, pediatric, young adult, older adult(due to EMD having cut offs at age 35 for a lot of things) or geriatric patient, but does it really matter that it is a 66 year old with chest pains as opposed to a 65 or 67 year old?

I've never heard an automated system giving the age of the patient, mostly the automated ones I have heard were "pre alerts" that just said something like Ambulance 1, Engine 1 respond to XXX Main Street That being said, I don't know of a technical reason why they couldn't give the age of the patient

Probably with the desk officer just hanging up on those people. It's windy out? Yep, sure is *click*

Technology can probably already replace at least some of a dispatcher's job in that the computer already "knows" what box area a call is in, so theoretically some one can develop a program that sends it directly to that station or units computers as soon as the call is entered. Someone can probably also develop a program that automatically does mutual aid and relocations if one station is already out and they get a second call. The issue comes in with units requesting information and on the call taking side, whether you want to sit through a menu.

Why is anyone advocating in favor of laying people off? Shouln't emergency services be sticking together not turning against each other?