Dangerous Driving

[xtreme 0]

I don't know if this has been posted before but I think it is a good idea to view again and see what not to do when you drive any kind of emergency apparatus. The driver of this rig should have his driving privileges suspended in my opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLZowhZSyYQ...ature=rec-HM-r2

[Guest]

While I can't say for sure what department this is, I can say that I know where this is. The traffic in this situation, at that time, as can be seen in the video, is absolutely terrible. There is hardly anywhere for anyone to pull off too, and code 1, it can take up to an hour to drive the distance you just saw in that video. I definitely don't agree with bombing it down the suicide lane, but everything else seems alright to me. It is the apparatus driver's responsibility to get to the scene, and safely, and the driver accomplishes that.

edit: Also, the caption is wrong, it states this is the second due engine to this auto fire. Only one engine is dispatched to wrecks/auto fires, so this wasn't a case of trying to beat anyone in.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Slayer61

[WAS967 97]

The driver of this rig should have his driving privileges suspended in my opinion.

Thankfully it's not up to you. I don't see an exceptional problem with the response in this video. If you are saying "OMG HE'S FLYING MACH3 DOWN THE TURN LANES" then you can thank the illusion of photography for that in all likelihood. Just like the camera adds 10 pounds, it easily adds 20 MPH. As the recent PCVAC video demonstrates things look FAR faster on video than they are. It's also the same psychological phenomenon that causes people to say "The EMS vehicle was FLYING to the call" when passed only to find out they were only going 40-50 MPH.

[gpdexplorer 46]

edit: Also, the caption is wrong, it states this is the second due engine to this auto fire. Only one engine is dispatched to wrecks/auto fires, so this wasn't a case of trying to beat anyone in.

In my department, we roll more then one engine to car fires. 2 Engines and Utility on all NYS Thruway calls (car fires, MVA's, etc.), 3 Engines on car fire calls inside the village. We also dual respond with another department on a certain area of the Thruway who also rolls with 2 Engines for car fires/MVA's.

[unklecletus 0]

Hey GPD I drive 78 that way......lol

[helicopper 1,050]

Sorry but I gotta disagree if you think that driving on the opposite side of a divided highway AT oncoming traffic - splitting lanes in the wrong direction - is an acceptable response. It was a response to a car fire, right? So what warrants the risk of driving head-on at people when you have absolutely no idea (or control over) what they're going to do. If anyone of those people in the left lane did what they're actually supposed to do and pulled to the right to yield to the emergency vehicle, they would have crossed right in front of it. Not smart!

My personal opinion, that's not driving with due regard and I'm not aware of any EVOC course that teaches it as an acceptable tactic.

Ironically I happened to be at a car fire on a divided highway just yesterday and none of the responders (police or fire) drove on the wrong side. In fact, traffic was so bad that additional apparatus had to be special called to respond because one of the initial responding pieces got stuck in traffic enroute. PD was also delayed responding by the traffic but again I ask - so what? The fire burned until FD could put it out and the charred remains sat there until PD could facilitate its removal.

Nothing is worth killing or being killed over!!!! SLOW DOWN!!!! The life you save may be your own.

[Patch6713 18]

Also, they were responding to a car fire. No matter how long it took the FD to get there, especially when there is that much smoke showing, the car is totaled. No matter if it burns out on its own or the FD puts it out, the insurance company is going to write a check to the owner to buy a new one.

[x129K 1,393]

I had seen that and was pretty amazed....

I would certainly have words with the driver, as well as the "videographer"...and most likely would put my foot up the officer's a**..

[Guest alsfirefighter]

While I can't say for sure what department this is, I can say that I know where this is. The traffic in this situation, at that time, as can be seen in the video, is absolutely terrible. There is hardly anywhere for anyone to pull off too, and code 1, it can take up to an hour to drive the distance you just saw in that video. I definitely don't agree with bombing it down the suicide lane, but everything else seems alright to me. It is the apparatus driver's responsibility to get to the scene, and safely, and the driver accomplishes that.

edit: Also, the caption is wrong, it states this is the second due engine to this auto fire. Only one engine is dispatched to wrecks/auto fires, so this wasn't a case of trying to beat anyone in.

You first say you have no idea what department that is and then at the end you say that only one engine is dispatched to accidents/car fires. Which one is it? You don't know the department? Or you do know they only send one? I know many agencies that send 2 engines to car fires and particularly in cases where they deal with traffic like that in the video.

Sorry gang..but I can't say I find that justifiable by any means for driving like that particularly if your second due. Further info in discussion from other colleagues of mine is it was also understood that the first due engine arrived on scene. My or no one else's life is worth a vehicle on fire. We all know the bigger the vehicle the higher appearance of speed. However, WAS we know each other and you're going to try to tell me the camera added that illusion. I can't totally buy that.

[robert benz 344]

just look at the responses on both youtube and here and for the most part if you disagree with the way the apparatus responded you are wrong. as stated it was a car fire and it looks like an apparatus is already on the scene when the featured rig arrives. I dont agree with the way the vehicle was driven, 1 because of the nature of the call (car fire) no mention of trapped occupants, 2nd dont video tape it and play it for the world to see. but again sometimes the tone / attitude / is ingrained so deep that it is considered normal anyway/ anyhow / anycost

[helicopper 1,050]

Another point - I can't help but believe that the presence of the camera and the driver's knowledge that the response was being recorded added to the hype and increased the level of "hot-dogging". So I'll restate my position that unoffical cameras have no business in emergency vehicles during emergency responses and we should have policies governing their use if we allow them.

Doesn't matter if we know what department it was or what stretch of highway it was - it was stupid and dangerous. How many apparatus accidents have we been hearing about lately? How many more do we have to hear about because this nonsense is tolerated and tacitly approved by complacent officers?

[Guest]

You first say you have no idea what department that is and then at the end you say that only one engine is dispatched to accidents/car fires. Which one is it? You don't know the department? Or you do know they only send one? I know many agencies that send 2 engines to car fires and particularly in cases where they deal with traffic like that in the video.

Sorry gang..but I can't say I find that justifiable by any means for driving like that particularly if your second due. Further info in discussion from other colleagues of mine is it was also understood that the first due engine arrived on scene. My or no one else's life is worth a vehicle on fire. We all know the bigger the vehicle the higher appearance of speed. However, WAS we know each other and you're going to try to tell me the camera added that illusion. I can't totally buy that.

It is Prince George's County Fire/EMS dept, that is Route 1 north from Hollywood Road to just past the Beltway. Only one engine is sent on auto fires, I have never heard of more than one being sent unless its a confirmed multiple car fire in a parking lot. The other rig already on scene is almost definitely a truck or a squad, seeing as how there isn't any water being put on it and no one is outside. I misspoke when I said that I didn't know what 'dept' that is, as I could not figure out from the video what 'Company' it is from.

[abaduck 123]

Guys, on a point of order, I'd need to look again to be sure, but I'm pretty certain I read that this response was not to a *car fire* but to an MVA *with fire*. Which puts a slightly different complexion on the notion of 'stepping it up'.

No comment on the actual driving as I don't drive apparatus and haven't got my EVOC yet.

[gpdexplorer 46]

Hey GPD I drive 78 that way......lol

No, I don't think so Skip. You're a d*mn good driver.

[PEMO3 523]

I have to agree. Balls to the wall response does no one any good if you never make it to the scene. Confirmed pin job, structure fire with trapped residents, etc, it does not matter, you rap up you just tie up resources to save your butt and the butt of those you hit in the process not to mention the resources you were bringing never make it to the job anyway. I must admit that they do seem to move over better when they can see you coming through the windshield instead of the mirror but it just is not worth the risk. Due caution is the word you will hear in every EVOC course you ever take. Never push your limits, drive within them.

[FFFORD 27]

the law allows us to disobey laws of the road as long as we drive with DUE regard for other drivers. i particularly don't see much wrong with his driving as no one got hurt and he did not cause any accidents. it's impossible to judge the speed from the video, i don't think he was going as fast as you think. i have driven apparatus on the wrong side of the road with on coming traffic just as he did, i drove safely and did not cause any accidents or injuries. don't be so harsh to judge if you were not there

i agree with all other statements about driving safely, if you don't get there, you are no help. but getting there safe is what this driver did!!!

[helicopper 1,050]

the law allows us to disobey laws of the road as long as we drive with DUE regard for other drivers. i particularly don't see much wrong with his driving as no one got hurt and he did not cause any accidents. it's impossible to judge the speed from the video, i don't think he was going as fast as you think. i have driven apparatus on the wrong side of the road with on coming traffic just as he did, i drove safely and did not cause any accidents or injuries. don't be so harsh to judge if you were not there

i agree with all other statements about driving safely, if you don't get there, you are no help. but getting there safe is what this driver did!!!

Wrong side of the road or wrong side of a divided highway? There is a difference. At least with a double yellow line you can get back to the correct side when things don't go as intended.

The judgment that this driving was or was not appropriate/legal may not be limited to "not causing an accident". People can be charged with reckless driving for conduct that "endangers users of the public highway" (NYS VTL Section 1212). I'm not suggesting that this incident was reckless but we have to remember that we can be held accountable for conduct without any accidents or injuries in our wake.

The opposing lanes of traffic could be closed prior to using them for travel in the "wrong" direction. If the argument is that there was nobody on the scene who could do that and if the risk/benefit assessment (oh wait, do drivers have to do them too?) warrants such a response, then at least drive with the divider on the side of the apparatus instead of splitting lanes. This way you only have hazards on one side of the vehicle instead of both!

You think this is harsh? Wait until the lawyers realize that fire and EMS can be sued just as easily as PD!

Just because the law grants us permission doesn't make it right (or safe)!

[RWC130 594]

New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law

§ 114-b. Emergency operation.

The operation, or parking, of an authorized emergency vehicle,

when such vehicle is engaged in transporting a sick or injured person, transporting prisoners,

delivering blood or blood products in a situation involving an imminent health risk, pursuing an

actual or suspected violator of the law, or responding to, or working or assisting at the scene of

an accident, disaster, police call, alarm of fire, actual or potential release of hazardous materials

or other emergency. Emergency operation shall not include returning from such service.

§ 1104. Authorized emergency vehicles.

A The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when involved in an emergency operation, may exercise

the privileges set forth in this section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

B The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:

1. Stop, stand or park irrespective of the provisions of this title;

2. Proceed past a steady red signal, a flashing red signal or a stop

sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation;

3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he does not endanger life or property;

4. Disregard regulations governing directions of movement or turning in specified directions.

C Except for an authorized emergency vehicle operated as a police

vehicle or bicycle, the exemptions herein granted to an authorized

emergency vehicle shall apply only when audible signals are sounded from

any said vehicle while in motion by bell, horn, siren, electronic device

or exhaust whistle as may be reasonably necessary, and when the vehicle

is equipped with at least one lighted lamp so that from any direction,

under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of five hundred feet

from such vehicle, at least one red light will be displayed and visible.

D An authorized emergency vehicle operated as a police, sheriff or

deputy sheriff vehicle may exceed the maximum speed limits for the

purpose of calibrating such vehicles' speedometer. Notwithstanding any

other law, rule or regulation to the contrary, a police, sheriff or

deputy sheriff bicycle operated as an authorized emergency vehicle shall

not be prohibited from using any sidewalk, highway, street or roadway

during an emergency operation.

E The foregoing provisions shall not relieve the driver of an

authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for

the safety of all persons, nor shall such provisions protect the driver

from the consequences of his reckless disregard for the safety of others.

F Notwithstanding any other law, rule or regulation to the contrary,

an ambulance operated in the course of an emergency shall not be

prohibited from using any highway, street or roadway; provided, however,

that an authority having jurisdiction over any such highway, street or

roadway may specifically prohibit travel thereon by ambulances if such

authority shall deem such travel to be extremely hazardous and would

endanger patients being transported thereby.

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/vehicle-and...01104_1104.html

Now, let's read this one again.

E The foregoing provisions shall not relieve the driver of an

authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for

the safety of all persons, nor shall such provisions protect the driver

from the consequences of his reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Words that come up a lot "Due Regard" and "Safe Operation"

SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER:

- Is the Apparatus Operator exercising Due Regard?

- Is the Apparatus Operator Operating the Vehicle Safely?

- Is the Apparatus Operator's actions Reasonable?

- What type of call is it?

- Can you as the Apparatus Operator justify your actions?

Yes, it appears by letters of the law driving up the wrong side of a road, or highway is "Authorized"

but is it necessary? PD, FD, EMS should have Department SOP's/SOG's covering this.

RISK vs BENEFIT

- Would I take that Risk for a Car Fire? No Way!

- Would I take that Risk for a Automatic Fire Alarm? No Way!

- Would I take that Risk for a House Fire w/ People Trapped? Yes, I would.

- Would I take that Risk for a 10-13, Firefighter Trapped, etc? Yes, I would.

NOTE: I am not defending or supporting his actions.

We all have to make judgement calls sometimes and

as a result have to be responsible for those actions.

I am sure ANY Police Officer, Firefighter, EMT, or Paramedic

responding to a call for a Child Not Breathing or a 10-13 in that type of

traffic MAY have responded in a similar manor.

Car Fire?

Just my TWO cents.

ARRIVE ALIVE

BE SAFE!!!

[AFS1970 504]

Not to take anything away from the discussion, but I have seen a longer version of this video that oddly enough was not titled Dangerous Driving. In it you see more of the scene that they are pulling up on, including another Engine with a line stretched to the car fire. Now I do not know what rig the video is from, but I know that in most districts in Stamford a car fire gets an Engine and a Truck. When I joined Belltown our SOP was to send 2 Engines to such fires. I can not imagine that we are the only places that send multiple units to these calls.

[cman473 56]

Watch the video again....this engine IS second due, at the end pause the video...you can see the 1st due unit already on scene.