Would/Should you provide medical care to someone you shoot?
- Thread starter OpenCarryYes
- Start date
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
As an off duty paramedic, no there is no case I would stick around to aid the bg...when 911 is called police will go in before EMS...if they get there in time..ok.
Those that talk about shooting to kill, I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. That being said, I don't want to kill another person, ever. But if I want to save a life, taking a life might be the answer, so I will shoot to save life. Every one has their right to their own opinion...I just find it sick to talk about killing another human so easily...
Again...my own opinion...defend your life however you want to justify it
Those that talk about shooting to kill, I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. That being said, I don't want to kill another person, ever. But if I want to save a life, taking a life might be the answer, so I will shoot to save life. Every one has their right to their own opinion...I just find it sick to talk about killing another human so easily...
Again...my own opinion...defend your life however you want to justify it
FloridaBlue
New member
What are the odds that the BG(s) who attack(ed) you are going to render first aid after they have beaten, maimed, caused injury and or harm to you, your family or your loved ones.......I am going to go out on a limb and maybe just maybe say .001% If the BG is down and out and no longer remains any type of threat I'll assess myself first and do my best to provide aid to anyone who may have been caught up in the mix.
aj's 40 cal
New member
i agree with all posts. i will not help someone who has tried to harm or kill me or a member of my family. maybe they should of thought about what could happen before they tried to get what they wanted from me. i think after a few holes with .40 s&w ranger t series they will understand the situation they put THEMSELVES in.
I guess you got your answer to the question. If someone was bad enough to shoot because I was in imminent danger of death or great bodily injury, they are bad enough to let 911 etal take care of them---I might make a "mistake" in my first aid and I certainly would not want to do that.
Phillip Gain
New member
It's not humor. It's not sarcasm. It's real life.
If you are NOT prepared to shoot to kill, when someone has become a threat to your life - then you've pretty much already lost, and might as well sell your firearms since carrying one isn't going to do you a bit of good.
Horkos
New member
Phillip Gain:208053 said:
actually "shooting to kill" or even using that expression within earshot of potential witnesses for the prosecution is likely to place you in the position of having to defend yourself against charges of intent, manslaughter, homicide, etc. You should never present the case that it was your intent to end someones life bad guy or otherwise. Its of much concern to me the general lack of fore thought regarding the legal rammifications of defending yourself in todays politically charged society. If you choose to carry or even use a firearm for home defense. You should be fully aware and accepting that you may face a legal nightmare and even possibly spend time in jail. You should decide, know and be committed to what degree you are willing to go before you accept the responsabilities of carry a firearm. If you are firm in the convictions of your commitments then when the bad stuff goes down your only decision will be where to place the bullet. You won't be distracted by "what ifs".
Your willingness and ability to pull the trigger and STOP the threat is what is required of those desiring to carry. Expressing the desire to "kill" an offender only increases the odds of either civil or legal consequences. The underlying gratification of exacting justice or even revenge is natural. But to remain above reproach means avoiding operating on emotion.
Doc Mustang
New member
A long time back when I was in college and was first exploring the idea of carrying a gun on a regular basis. (I know most folks get more liberal in college, Me? I got more libertarian!) At the time I was applying to medical school and asked a question about the conflict between the hippocratic oath and the use of deadly force.
The conclusion I came to was that the hippocratic oath applies only when I am acting in my role as a physician. I use deadly force as en extension of my human right to life which is of a higher order than my role as physician. I do not give up my right to life simply because I take the hippocratic oath.
Now suppose I have just utilized deadly force to stop a threat. The person upon whom and at whose expense I exercised my right to life, lies wounded some distance away. If I do nothing, he may bleed to death. If I act I may place my life in danger. Their appears to be a moral conflict.
The resolution of this conflict depends upon one thing: My own safety. I have acted to preserve my own life therefore I cannot be expected to endanger my life to render medical care. If the person who has been shot (I cannot call him a victim) is completely incapacitated and is no longer a threat should I place myself in his immediate proximity, then I could reasonably be expected to act. However immediately following a self defense shooting I expect that I am going to be in no condition to accurately assess the threat potential of the situation. Nor am I likely to be in any condition to render competant, compassionate care to my former assailant.
My efforts at rendering aid will be limited to calling 911, as a physician I know that if paramedics can arrive in less than 10min and provide initial stabilization, and if they can transport my former assailant to a trauma center for difinitive treatment within 1 hour his chances of survival are good. Making that effort and being able to articulate those concerns in a statement (after consulting an attorney) should be sufficient.
The conclusion I came to was that the hippocratic oath applies only when I am acting in my role as a physician. I use deadly force as en extension of my human right to life which is of a higher order than my role as physician. I do not give up my right to life simply because I take the hippocratic oath.
Now suppose I have just utilized deadly force to stop a threat. The person upon whom and at whose expense I exercised my right to life, lies wounded some distance away. If I do nothing, he may bleed to death. If I act I may place my life in danger. Their appears to be a moral conflict.
The resolution of this conflict depends upon one thing: My own safety. I have acted to preserve my own life therefore I cannot be expected to endanger my life to render medical care. If the person who has been shot (I cannot call him a victim) is completely incapacitated and is no longer a threat should I place myself in his immediate proximity, then I could reasonably be expected to act. However immediately following a self defense shooting I expect that I am going to be in no condition to accurately assess the threat potential of the situation. Nor am I likely to be in any condition to render competant, compassionate care to my former assailant.
My efforts at rendering aid will be limited to calling 911, as a physician I know that if paramedics can arrive in less than 10min and provide initial stabilization, and if they can transport my former assailant to a trauma center for difinitive treatment within 1 hour his chances of survival are good. Making that effort and being able to articulate those concerns in a statement (after consulting an attorney) should be sufficient.
Nightmare45
NRA LIFE MEMBER
25 Years as a Paramedic helping "BG's is why I am no longer a medic. In the areas I worked a heart attack came due to a knife or bullet hole. Usually from another BG. Criminial = NOT NICE. CALL 911.
I wouldn't be offering anything except a phone call to the police on what happened. If I'm put in a situation where I have to draw and shoot.....my first thing to do after is get out of dodge. I have no clue how many are involved or otherwise. So first aid is not a choice I'm using.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
What harkos said... if I ever draw my gun, the situation will be horrible, just like every situation where guns are drawn. But I will use my gun to save life (my family, my neighbor, or my own)...I train to shoot center mass at least twice...I will not stop shooting until the threat towards life has stopped...
When someone says they will reload and fill the bg up again, or shoot the bg in the head after he has falling, I wish to believe is sarcasm... but sadly on forums these can be very true beliefs. And no that's not real life, even real victims that shot their aggressor will feel remorse, that's being human, being better than the bad guy. We don't have to lower our beliefs to beat the bg's.
Btw, no I will not sell my guns, no I will not stop carrying, no I still don't want to kill someone, yes I will defend what's mine at all costs.
When someone says they will reload and fill the bg up again, or shoot the bg in the head after he has falling, I wish to believe is sarcasm... but sadly on forums these can be very true beliefs. And no that's not real life, even real victims that shot their aggressor will feel remorse, that's being human, being better than the bad guy. We don't have to lower our beliefs to beat the bg's.
Btw, no I will not sell my guns, no I will not stop carrying, no I still don't want to kill someone, yes I will defend what's mine at all costs.
blainenay
New member
Nope
I'll ensure there are no other threats. Then, I'll call 911. Then, I'll call an attorney. I'll give first aid to innocent persons as needed. Then, I'll wait for for cops and medics to show up. If the medics arrive first, they'll likely let the attacker(s) bleed and suffer until the cops have the attacker(s) in chains. I will follow the example of those medics.
I'll ensure there are no other threats. Then, I'll call 911. Then, I'll call an attorney. I'll give first aid to innocent persons as needed. Then, I'll wait for for cops and medics to show up. If the medics arrive first, they'll likely let the attacker(s) bleed and suffer until the cops have the attacker(s) in chains. I will follow the example of those medics.
Daugherty16
New member
Blaine probably said it best. If the EMT's won't render aid until the cuffs are on, i certainly wouldn't. I'd find cover, reload, and call 911. When they show up, holster my weapon, surrender, and except for a brief statement of facts, exercise my 5th amendment right to consult with my attorney.
crabbys44
New member
You certainly are opinionated. For the realists among us, you shoot to stop the threat and if the bg dies, so be it. Stopping the threat doesn't mean the bg isn't going to die or the shooter is not going to put as many rounds center mass as needed to STOP the threat.
How about the pharmacist who shot the bg in the head, left the scene chasing bg # 2, returns, pulls another gun and shoots the first bg 5 more times on the floor? THAT is the difference between shooting to stop and shooting to kill.
BTW What do you call it when two or more rounds center mass doesn't do the job? Is it a "failure to stop" drill or a "failure to kill" drill?
OTOH I keep my .45 stoked w/ 230 gr hollowpoints, 13 of those ought to stop any threat and probably put him in the ground as a bonus.
OpenCarryYes
New member
Some pretty lively comments on this. Thanks for all of the thought that went into some. After discussing it with my wife (the EMT) she indicated that in her EMT training, she was instructed NOT to enter a scene until it is safe. When violence has occurred, it doesn't become safe until the police are there and verify that it is safe.
As far as the state where it is mandatory to render aid, I think that is foolish. It could cause someone to enter the scene before it was safe out of fear of being prosecuted.
For those who want to empty your magazine into the BG to make sure he's dead, sleep tight and sweet dreams. (yes, the sarcasm was intended)
As far as the state where it is mandatory to render aid, I think that is foolish. It could cause someone to enter the scene before it was safe out of fear of being prosecuted.
For those who want to empty your magazine into the BG to make sure he's dead, sleep tight and sweet dreams. (yes, the sarcasm was intended)
As a concealed carrying card holder the thought of having to shoot any individual causes me concern. That being said, if I have to use deadly force to respond to deadly force to protect myself, my family or others who are in danger then I will do so. Shooting to kill an individual is not in my vocabulary, I will shoot to stop the threat. If I happen to kill the bad guy then that is the breaks. I am a good shot, but I am not good enough to shoot a knife, gun or deadly weapon out of the bad guys hands. I am not going to try to shoot him in the arm or leg to stop him. He is probably moving and I might miss and hurt someone else. I was trained to shoot center mass and shoot until you stop any assailants. If during that time I kill the bad guy, then I stopped the threat. If I did not kill the individual, should I render first aid to him? The answer to that is a definite NO. That individual did his best to maim, mutilate or kill me or my family. If I did not kill him, he may be playing possum waiting for me to get close enough for him to try again. First, consider your own protection, are there other assailants, move to cover and concealment, reload your firearm if possible. Second, call 9-1-1, get police and medical help. Third, call an Attorney. If EMS/Paramedics arrive first, you can be sure they will not treat or assist the bad guy until law enforcement arrive and secure the area. When PD arrives, holster your weapon, give a brief statement of the facts, then plead the 5th until you talk with your attorney.
Seeya
New member
Law is unconstitutional:
Police have no responsibility to protect individuals (reference) Police are our servants, they enjoy no special rights. remember they are private citizens authorized thru our elected servants.
