helicopper

More and more court decisions are narrowing the whole obscenity section of disorderly conduct with case law but the statute still stands in NY. It may be dismissed ultimately but perhaps a lesson was learned. If nothing else, the trooper got a good laugh.

Three people? Doesn't say that in the statute. PRICELESS story. Talk about a stupid move.

Or, if you're part of a four person crew, keep your radio off unless/until you need it and just let the officer or crew leader do the talking. Imagine that? Only the person who should be talking is talking?

Don't assume that they're going to the same job as you. It is very possible that the police are going to a crime in progress call while you're going to your fire call or the ambulance to an unrelated emergency elsewhere. If you're talking about passing in a no passing zone, it's just plain stupid. If you're talking about passing in an area where passing is legal and traffic conditions will allow it, what's the difference if it's the plumbers van passing a dump truck or an ambulance passing a fire truck.

Date: 12/23/08 Time: approximately 0800 Location: River Road near Fenway Drive, Bethesda, MD Departments: Numerous Description: A 5 1/2 foot water main ruptured creating a river of rushing frigid water that trapped motorists in their cars. Swift water rescue crews, MD SP Aviation, and FD/PD/EMS involved in numerous rescues. Links: http://wjz.com/local/water.main.break.2.893427.html Writer: Chris192 Video footage of rescues on the above site.

Originally published on March 1, 2004, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security initiated the revision of the document in 2007-2008 to reflect contributions from stakeholders and lessons learned during recent incidents. Released on December 18, 2008, this document represents a collaborative intergovernmental partnership with significant input from the incident management functional disciplines, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector. The NIMS 2008 Rollout package includes the following five documents: 1. NIMS Document; 2. Press Release; 3. What’s New in the NIMS Document; 4. Fact Sheet; and 5. Frequently Asked Questions. Each of these NIMS documents and related information can be found on the new NIMS Resource Center website: www.fema.gov/emergency/nims Note: Though not required, DHS/FEMA strongly encourages personnel to take the revised IS-700 course, which reflects all concepts and principles contained in the new NIMS. For online NIMS training, visit www.training.fema.gov/index.asp. The National Incident Management System (NIMS) released in December 2008 supersedes the March 2004 version of NIMS. The basic purpose, scope and principles of the document remain unchanged. The majority of changes impact the organization and readability of the document while ensuring that it adequately reflects the importance of preparedness. NIMSWhatsNew.pdf NIMS Resource Center online

I can't believe all the resistance to a regulation that's designed to make us all safer? Agree, disagree, sit on the fence - it doesn't change the fact that this is now the law and should help make us all safer. No, it's not a panacea but neither is closing the road. There are problems with closing the road too but that's for a different discussion. There is no single measure that will prevent collisions at a scene. All we can do is our part to influence the factors within our control. The vests may make only a negligible difference for an FF in full turnout gear but for those who don't wear turnout gear (PD, EMS, DOT, DPW, private tow contractors, etc.), this is a huge step in the right direction. How many PD's or tow services are out there in dark blue uniforms / dark blue workpants and jacket? A vest WILL make a difference for them. If you don't like it, don't wear it but you'll have to deal with the fallout if something happens. Want to make things safer on a scene? Properly use flares and cones, position vehicles appropriately, wear your PPE, turn off unnecessary lights on vehicles not involved with traffic control, prohibit responding vehicles from stopping in the opposite lanes of traffic and crossing the road, and use the minimum number of people necessary for the operation required - no need for 30 people on a highway scene. Thanks NY10570 for stating much of the above!

Link to FBI website and full info

Don't misunderstand my question, I'm not against helping the homeless but is/should this program part of FEMA's mandate/mission? Homelessness is (usually) not an emergency and there are many other agencies at all levels of government tasked with working on it. To add this to FEMA's already overloaded plate seems to me like a good but misplaced idea. How about the Department of Health and Human Services, HUD, or even non-governmental partners, etc.? Whaddya all think?

That's another good question - why are there still FEMA trailer parks housing displaced people from Katrina? The emergency is over. Now FEMA is a social services agency, and being criticized for not being a good one, instead of as ALS said investing in training, preparedness or other elements of its true mission. Why weren't these trailers a temporary measure? And why isn't New Orleans or Louisiana doing their part for their residents? I know we probably don't have all the answers to these questions so rant over.

You got it. They have some time to get hired elsewhere and I'm sure that the PBA and probably the PD will help them make connections with jobs that are hiring right now. As long as they're hired within the DCJS timeframe, they won't have to repeat the academy. Good luck to the Yonkers and North Castle victims of this nightmare.

I suggest calling your friend as it is really inappropriate to name the unfortunate victims of this political action in this forum. To all, please refrain from naming victims of layoff unless/until they're publicly reported and even then my personal opinion is that there's nothing to be gained by naming them here. Thanks!

As the question was asked and answered this thread is now closed. If anyone wants to have a discussion about the sharing of information or propriety of posting info on calls on the internet, please start a new generic thread.

Exactly, locker room lawyers talking again. My take was that if I show up as a paramedic and seek no compensation or payment from the patient we're OK. If I were to try to solicit $$$, it would be a no-no. But of course that was some of the riff-raff I used to hang out with. Some of the IRS rules that have been previously discussed here may further muddy the waters since the IRS calls it "compensation" and most volunteers do not. Either way, do it right and there's no problem. Enjoy the snow, again!

And your point by posting this particular quote is what exactly?

Consolidation wouldn't necessarily mean closing every station or eliminating anything in your case. It might mean a single administrative body overseeing multiple areas (former independent Departments) coordinating things like purchasing, training, contracts, etc. This might mean economies of scale and greater leverage with vendors. Eventually it would also mean standard apparatus configurations as they would all be bought under the umbrella of the larger (if mythical) department. Who knows, the possibilities are endless!

Merry Christmas... NOT!

Or any of the other forms of remuneration and/or compensation that volunteers receive for their service. Hmmm....

Is this opinion from DOH or your interpretation? The way it was explained to me, and this was many, many years ago, the expectation of compensation didn't apply to salaries and career EMS personnel were included in the immunity. Thanks!

Article 30 applies to all EMS providers without regard to employment status. If you're an EMT it applies regardless of whether or not you're career, volunteer, private, public. For more information you can visit the DOH website at NYS DOH EMS Bureau website or contact your regional EMS council. I think the EMS crew in the scenario described earlier was remiss in not correcting the immobilization problem prior to transporting. I don't envy their position but to leave something wrong seems worse than correcting it. As for how this affects the FD (non-EMS), I don't think Article 30 applies to them or protects them (my opinion only, not legal interpretation) unless they are certified as EMS providers and even then it is a question if they are EMT or CFR but operating with a department that is not registered as an EMS agency. In my opinion, FD should not be performing the patient removal following extrication; that is the role of EMS and a skill for which they are trained and equipped. As much as I hate to say this as it will undoubtedly start a ridiculous "who's in charge" debate, the highest qualified EMS provider on scene should be responsible for coordinating the extrication in conjunction with the fire officer on scene. This doesn't mean they tell the FD how to cut the car but they should tell the FD which patient needs to come out first or how they should be removed to minimize potential for exacerbation of existing injuries. Finally, remember that this is a CALIFORNIA ruling and carries no weight here in the northeast (until it is used as case law in a similiar case here). Enjoy the snow!

Tom, I think you should take the deep breath... Try spelling it out as what the freak and you'll have no problems.

If you saw the cars, they were damn lucky!!! One car bore a shocking resemblance to another rear-end collision involving a State Police Crown Victoria that had a far worse outcome.

We'll see if that proves to be true or if everyone just blindly re-elects the incumbents yet again. And, just out of curiosity, if the City Council can reject a labor agreement for being too costly does that mean we can reject our tax bills for being too costly as well?

Using logic like that you should run for office - you'd get a lot of votes! We're all going to be in this same boat. Municipalities pleading poverty and fighting against any raises for employees. It's going to be a very difficult time for union members with this economy and political climate.

"All the news that's fit to print", really? This is news?