CCW as "first aid/CPR" in response to criminal activity

[Untamed1972]

In thinking about the recent shooting in AZ and the usual deluge of crap from the anti's that always follows I had a though.

What I would love to start seeing after these situations is more support for the public from the CLEOs and the LE community advocating for citizens rights to personal protection. I would like to hear them start putting into the minds of the citizenry that NO ONE is able to respond faster to an active lethal situation then they person who is already standing right there.

So what I am refering to is essentially "first aid/CPR" for response to criminal activity. Fire/EMS agencies are supporters and proponents of avg. people having first aid/CPR training, because they realized that in life threatening medical situations early/immediate intervention insures the best chance of survival for the patient. I have to take CPR/first aid (now now AED training) every 2 years at my job. The classes are usually taught by off-duty paramedics.

You dont see them speaking out against CPR training to help ensure their income stream / political clout do you? Do they put most of their effort towards trying to end heart disease? No, they accept that people WILL have heart attacks or medical emergencies so their efforts are best put towards helping people to know how to deal with them when they happen, not lulling people into a false sense of security.

So why should not LE be doing the same thing when it comes to CCW for immediate response to life threatening situations? Stop trying to present the image that they can make crime go away. Give it to the people straight, crime has and will always exist and bad things are going to happen, and while trying to do what can be done to reduce crime, the best thing they can do as "public safety professionals" to ensure the best chance of survival for the citizenry is help and encourage them to be prepared.

It gives you something to think about doesn't it?

[TheRossRocket]

I never thought of it like that but that raises an amazing point.

[Bill Carson]

The view is that cpr/first aid saves lives and guns take lives, even if taking a life is needed to save a life.

[Will Goes Boing]

Comparing CPR to CCW.... is like comparing apples to oranges.

[choprzrul]

From what I've personally seen from LEO's (and having been to a neighborhood watch meeting or two), the training was as follows: don't carry any weapons (guns, knives, bats, or even pepper spray), observe the situation, and call 911. That's the medical equivalent of "leave the person who's not breathing and bleeding alone, call 911, and don't you dare attempt CPR or putting pressure on the bleeding".

Kinda like a fireman telling you "don't try and use your fire extinguisher or garden hose, just monitor the fire and give us a ring. That's our fire and don't you dare try putting it out."

.

[erik_26]

I love the thought of that!

The problem I see is taking the law into your own hands. It would be hard to show restraint in the heat of the moment. Say you are able to disable the suspect would you have the ability to stop there? Or would you take it to the next level and become the juror/judge & executioner?

Not everyone has the same mental capacity to do what you are asking.

Just like CPR. Not everyone that receives the training will be able to execute it. But the hospitals say better bruised then dead, right? The thought is do what you can because it is better than nothing. It would be hard to mess up CPR or First Aid unless you try to perform a tracheotomy or apply a tourniquet.

I couldn't even begin to imagine the liability. You hit someone that was innocent..... $$$$$ and possible jail for you.

Society is now geared on people passing on responsibility and evading liability.

The only way I could even consider this option you promote was if it was like the army reserves. Two weeks a year and one weekend a month of training. Then becoming some sort of volunteer deputy. It would take a considerable amount of ongoing training before I would feel comfortable.

Don’t get me wrong. I totally see what you are saying. I love the idea. Maybe someone smarter than I could prove it feasible.

[Untamed1972]

I think you're missing my points:

I was not advocating people "appoint themselves COPs" or anything like that. The training is required as part of getting your CCW already. That training covers the moral and legal implications of use of force. I'm not talking about "chasing down bad guys". But should something happen right next to you or TO YOU, then you're better prepared to do something about it are you not?

I also was not advocating primarily that people CCW to "intervein in crimes" on behalf of others. CCW is primarily about protecting/defending yourself. But in a situation like in AZ in a crowd, your defending of yourself (if done properly) has the added benefit of protecting everyone else around you.

Who was it that ended the shooting in AZ? It wasn't the LEOs, it was the people who were right there when it happened. The LE community needs to start reminding people that they can't be everywhere at once, and that sometimes immediate action is what is needed. Even in the age of cellphones, unless a unit happens to be around the corner at best you're looking at several minutes in response time even for the most critical situations, and that's just not ever gonna be good enough when the SHTF.

LE needs to start reminding the populace AND the legislators that crime has always existed and always will, just like medical emergencies will always occur. So rather then pretending like LE and the legislature are just one COP or one law short of eliminating crime, why dont they, and we insist that they get real and start doing things will actually protect the citizenry rather then things that make for good campaign slogans and budget hearings.

[rockman]

I think you're missing my points:

I was not advocating people "appoint themselves COPs" or anything like that. The training is required as part of getting your CCW already. That training covers the moral and legal implications of use of force. I'm not talking about "chasing down bad guys". But should something happen right next to you or TO YOU, then you're better prepared to do something about it are you not?

I also was not advocating primarily that people CCW to "intervein in crimes" on behalf of others. CCW is primarily about protecting/defending yourself. But in a situation like in AZ in a crowd, your defending of yourself (if done properly) has the added benefit of protecting everyone else around you.

Who was it that ended the shooting in AZ? It wasn't the LEOs, it was the people who were right there when it happened. The LE community needs to start reminding people that they can't be everywhere at once, and that sometimes immediate action is what is needed. Even in the age of cellphones, unless a unit happens to be around the corner at best you're looking at several minutes in response time even for the most critical situations, and that's just not ever gonna be good enough when the SHTF.

LE needs to start reminding the populace AND the legislators that crime has always existed and always will, just like medical emergencies will always occur. So rather then pretending like LE and the legislature are just one COP or one law short of eliminating crime, why dont they, and we insist that they get real and start doing things will actually protect the citizenry rather then things that make for good campaign slogans and budget hearings.

I agree

[razorx]

It has always bothered me the assumed connection between being a CCW holder and "obligation" to protect others, charging in to save the day and all that romanticism whatnot.

The OPs idea has good merit, just do not connect it to CCW, create a separate function and license.

[Untamed1972]

It has always bothered me the assumed connection between being a CCW holder and "obligation" to protect others, charging in to save the day and all that romanticism whatnot.

The OPs idea has good merit, just do not connect it to CCW, create a separate function and license.

There is already is a seperate function/license.....it's called becoming a Police Officer. What you're saying is like saying "if you want to perform CPR become a doctor." You dont hafta be a doctor or a COP to save a life. You just hafta be prepared and be willing.

Again I am not advocating for "charging in to save the day and all that romanticism". I am advocating for people to be able to defend THEMSELVES when the immediate need arises, which just so happens to have the side benefit in some extreme and rare circumstances of protecting others around you. But again...that is just a minor side benefit, not the intended purpose.

It's sad though that our society has degraded to the point that doing something to help/save/protect another innocent person is looked so poorly upon. What is that about? How can any society expect to survive when that is the prevailent attitude? Just makes me sad beyond words.

And just cuz a person is CPR certified doesn't mean they are required to help someone, just like having a CCW doesn't mean you're required to defend yourself or anyone else....it doesn't even mean you're required to carry a gun.

My point in this is wanting to see a shift in the public response to these kinds of incidents from the LE community and point out a glaring difference in ideology between the 2 different branches of public safety professions in our country.

[Untamed1972]

It has always bothered me the assumed connection between being a CCW holder and "obligation" to protect others, charging in to save the day and all that romanticism whatnot.

The OPs idea has good merit, just do not connect it to CCW, create a separate function and license.

So you would rather a person just hide out and wait many, many minutes or more till LE arrives while the person continues to slughter innocent people when there was someone readily at hand who could have stopped the rampage when it first started?

Is my moral compass so far out of whack that I would not be able to live myself knowing I had the ability to do something and consciously chose not to?

[erik_26]

I think you're missing my points:

I was not advocating people "appoint themselves COPs" or anything like that. The training is required as part of getting your CCW already. That training covers the moral and legal implications of use of force. I'm not talking about "chasing down bad guys". But should something happen right next to you or TO YOU, then you're better prepared to do something about it are you not?

I also was not advocating primarily that people CCW to "intervein in crimes" on behalf of others. CCW is primarily about protecting/defending yourself. But in a situation like in AZ in a crowd, your defending of yourself (if done properly) has the added benefit of protecting everyone else around you.

Who was it that ended the shooting in AZ? It wasn't the LEOs, it was the people who were right there when it happened. The LE community needs to start reminding people that they can't be everywhere at once, and that sometimes immediate action is what is needed. Even in the age of cellphones, unless a unit happens to be around the corner at best you're looking at several minutes in response time even for the most critical situations, and that's just not ever gonna be good enough when the SHTF.

LE needs to start reminding the populace AND the legislators that crime has always existed and always will, just like medical emergencies will always occur. So rather then pretending like LE and the legislature are just one COP or one law short of eliminating crime, why dont they, and we insist that they get real and start doing things will actually protect the citizenry rather then things that make for good campaign slogans and budget hearings.

[Untamed1972]

I still think you're trying to imply that I am advocating for something that I am not. You only have so much space in the title line so I chose a simple title that would capture people's attention.

My point in using the first aid example is how the EMS culture encourages and even trains people to act IF THEY SO CHOSE, and yet the LE culture does exactly opposite KNOWING that tey cannot possible deliver on the promises of protection that they essentially are offering.

Part of the first aid and even combat/high risk first responder training I had is how to perform first aid on yourself.....essentially being your won first responder. Is that not essentially what a person with a CCW is doing when they use their weapon in their own defense?

My point is people think because you wanna carry a gun that you're a wannabe COP.

To me that's like saying because you took first aid/CPR that you're a wannabe doctor/medic.

Or because you have smoke detectors and a fire extinguisher in your house you're a wannabe firefighter.

So again a big part of my point is pointing out the disparity of support, encouragement and training for the public from the various branches of "public safety professionals".

But you know what, if some SHTF at a grocery store when my elderly mother was there shopping, or she was attacked, there is part of me that would like to believe there would be someone there, and old school man if you will, that would step up and be the sheepdog to that wolf. Our society needs more of those kinda of people. It can't survive without them, because without them....the badguys win.

As the quote goes "The only thing nessecary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

[razorx]

So you would rather a person just hide out and wait many, many minutes or more till LE arrives while the person continues to slughter innocent people when there was someone readily at hand who could have stopped the rampage when it first started?

Is my moral compass so far out of whack that I would not be able to live myself knowing I had the ability to do something and consciously chose not to?

Nothing in what I wrote assumes that. I allow for the fact that just because someone has a CCW, does not necessarily mean that there is an obligation to use the weapon in defense of someone else. Ultimately, if there is a social blame to be laid at someone's feet, it is whomever is being shot at that does not have a CCW or who has responsibility for that person's safety.

While I would hope that those who are able come to the aid of their fellow man, I don't see a CCW as conferring some sort of protector of society mantle. No one should get a CCW if that is their primary attitude, it can setup a wrong mental frame of reference for interpreting confrontational situations with a resultant poor decision for action.

I think there is room for something in between a CCW and Peace Officer "license", which may be applicable with an associated legal defense fund and possibly protective statutes(probably required).

[SanPedroShooter]

I've had a similar thoughts after hearing a guy on the radio go on and on about earth quake preparednes. How about "crime preparednes" or something similar? The problem is "guns r bad"... While the guy was telling everyone that they should be prepared for three to five days without police, fire, ems etc.. i thought, i cant believe his kit dosent include a handgun or small rifle and ammuntion...
Advocating armed citizenry is rarely done by government. I heard the sheriff of joesphine? county OR, tell people that because the area jails were closing down and they were cutting patrols, they should arm themselves.
Can you imagine Mr. lapd, our pal "chuckles" charile beck telling people to arm themselves?? There could be a alien zombie invasion and they would still be doing buybacks. Instead of brainnnns, it would be gunnnnss....