Dinosaur

Here are the NYS guidelines for trauma centers from the NYS DOH website. traumastds7085.pdf

I don't see the option anymore...

Just curious, not to hijack the thread but, why aren't you happy with ordering people to shelter in place during the manhunt in Boston?

We're talking about the marathon bombing? That's completely different than Ferguson. Boston was an act of terrorism. Ferguson is rioting and looting by criminals. There's no comparison.

LOSAP's are great for the guys who would be 30 or 40 year members anyway but do nothing to recruit and retain people.

When journalists are in between the police and the rioters they're bound to be exposed to some tear gas. With my own interest in the subject and family in law enforcement, I watched a lot of the video from Ferguson and can only offer the following... We have to protect our employees - and the police are our employees. This means when they're being shot at we have to give them armored vehicles and vests/helmets and support their use of them. I guess we have to debate at what point a demonstrator becomes a rioter because if someone was walking toward me swinging a Do Not Enter sign like an axe I would point a rifle at him too. If this were a peaceful candlelight vigil I would agree that pointing a rifle at them was extreme but there was no way of knowing who in those violent crowds was armed and we will never know if the presence of those rifles actually prevented more violence or shootings. Not sure what you mean about Boston either. Was there an incident up there too?

NYS just hosted a seminar on this very topic up in Albany a few months ago and there's a lot of legal issues before anyone can start doing anything like this. Guys from OFPC said that they had two of them and had to put them on the shelf because of federal regulations. There were tons of agencies up there including a bunch from Westchester and the Hudson Valley. Maybe one of them can post more details.

Good thing this isn't a military surplus truck or they'd be getting beat up in the press for having it.

If rifles weren't included in this program, would they still be complaining? Don't forget, Michael Frey was executed by a man with a rifle and the responding cops had nothing heavier than handguns to deal with it until Yonkers and NYC showed up. And that was right next door to Tuckahoe in Eastchester.

That would be a bad bad decision. How exactly does an uniformed electorate make a decision like that? Considering the quality of our elected officials, I'm not sure letting them determine the level of police or fire protection is a sound idea.

1. Overkill? Really? Let's be serious now, if it weren't for OSHA's 2 in 2 out rule, we would still have some departments operating with NOBODY standing around outside (including the IC). Two people isn't enough to perform the rescue of a down firefighter so what are we saying, we don't need to have a contigency for that? Two people isn't enough to perform many tasks on the fireground for very long so we are going to wind up with a lot of unfit people after a bottle change or two. 2. It was written into the respiratory protection standard and has been interpreted to include structural firefighting. See: https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=22711 3. On the subject of the right number of people, we still have no consensus on what that number is (see below) but I think we can all agree that if we are talking about fighting a fire with just four people (and are even debating their required qualifications (interior vs. exterior) we are completely missing the point. I don't care if it's a career department with inadequate staffing or a volunteer department that can't get the numbers to respond, we are setting people up for failure. And since our mantra is often "failure is not an option" what the hell are we doing? Even the international association of city managers cites minimum numbers but we still bicker and argue about it. from: http://www.fireengineering.com/articles/print/volume-162/issue-8/features/fire-department-staffing-a-need-not-a-want.html The bottom line is we still don't respond with enough FF initially and we don't stage reserve FF effectively for the duration, for contingencies or relief. Why is that?

The problem is it is generally enforced retroactively - after something bad happens. You can get away with it until someone gets hurt, or worse, and then they will be under the microscope. At issue isn't the interpretation but rather the underlying purpose of the regulation, which as I recall was to insure someone was there to rescue the crew if something happens in an IDLH environment. Saying that two exterior FF is enough for the two out is a trap. If something happens to the crew in the IDLH, the exterior crew either has to rescue them in violation of the regulation or not rescue them and leave them to their fate. I believe there are OSHA interpretations (really the only ones that count) that say the IC or pump operator can count toward the two out (if they're qualified) but think about that practically. A mayday is transmitted and the IC abandons command to become part of the rescue crew. Who will know what's going on or where the mayday is coming from? Who will know how many people are operating and where? There are so many problems with that strategy it isn't funny. Likewise the pump operator. He abandons his post and goes to rescue the crew only to find that more water is needed or another line needs to be charged by another crew. Bad plan! The underlying problem is no standard for FF (outside of the career service) - at least in NYS - and no compliance with NFPA 1710 or 1720 to make sure enough qualified FF are on the scene.

Is road conditions and traffic in the protocol for deciding on whether or not to use a helicopter? My EMT expired years ago but since when do you mess with a traction splint on someone unstable enough to require a helicopter? If they gave an ETA of 12 minutes they could have been more than half way to the medical center by then. There's no extrication time and most ALS could be done en route so why the delay?

WHY?

A blanket response policy for "all" calls at a park or anywhere else is overkill. This wasn't a hiker lost on a trail. They stated they were in the parking lot, not a lot of confusion there. Is it really necessary to send three fire departments, two EMS units, and two PD's to a medical emergency at a known location? Wow!

How do EMS/PD treat EDP's that's disgusting?

If you get a 95 on your next exam and a veteran gets an 85, you'll still be five points ahead and ranked higher on the promotional list. Does that make the vet more deserving of the promotion than you? THIS is the beauty of his service for our country. You can sit here and have opposite opinions and you're not imprisoned for it or dragged out and beaten or executed. THAT's what he served for! I'm not really clear on your point but they only have to pick one of the top three candidates. They don't have to give a reason or "qualify" that decision. This is a political decision. It really has nothing to do with civil service and if they really wanted to clear it up, they would have to go 1-2-3-4-5 and couldn't skip anyone.

And so it begins... Some have been predicting this for a while now. Including right here on EMTBravo.

Guys, I agree that veterans are special and they have already made sacrifices for this country but he did receive veterans credit on the test and that helped him be ranked number 1 for Sleepy Hollow. Had it not been for those points, he may not have been in the top 3 and this would all be moot. Like it or not, politics, personalities, and other subjective factors play into the hiring process. It is not merely an exam score. He's number 11 countywide which probably means he's received several canvas letters or will receive them before the next academy class. There are no legal grounds for anything here. The law is pretty clear - hire one of the top 3 candidates - and it has been tested on numerous occasions so his attempt to sue would just be a waste of his money.

The boards of many little communities are the final say in personnel matters. The chief may be able to recommend but the final say is the villages. Yes, that is pathetic!

Is there a provision in the LAW that gives veteran's hiring preference? This is clearly just BS small town politics as usual.

So? People get passed over in job selection all the time. They can take 1 out of the top 3.

I think most would agree that if you're sticking your body parts into the melee you're too close and we've all seen those videos lately. If you are close enough to reach out and touch the cop, you're close enough for him to be worried about someone reaching out and trying to take his gun.

Times are changing? How? The abuse of mutual aid by many fire departments has been going on for decades. It's not always the same department(s) but it's always the same song. I've heard mutual aid for rubbish fires to warehouse fires in both volunteer and paid departments. The bottom line is we keep ignoring the fact that only a couple of departments in the STATE comply with NFPA standards for minimum response and we allow people to believe that there is no problem when we are dangerously close to a major shortage of qualified firefighters in the region.

A few of us old retired types are having a few adult beverages last night when the topic turned to this incident. Two retired NYPD friends said that this was NOT a carotid neck hold. In NY that has been designated deadly physical force and couldn't have been used unless deadly physical force was authorized. They went on to say that that is a two arm technique and wasn't what you see in that video and nobody in NYPD trains on it. They said headlocks were the only way to get some people under control and if they ban them there will be big problems. Now don't kill the messenger. I'm only sharing some expert opinion from some boys in blue!