Ambulance Driver Files A Day in the Life | Kelly Grayson
For you EMS types, co-host Chris Cebollero and I revisit a hot topic in EMS, namely, whether ambulance crews should be allowed to carry concealed (or unconcealed) firearms. The topic always generates a great deal of heated debate from both sides, and it was brought back into the public’s eye with the recent thwarted mass-shooting at Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital near Philadelphia.
The shooter (whose name I refuse to ever mention) shot and killed a mental health caseworker and barged into the hospital, and was engaged and wounded several times by Dr. Lee Silverman, who was carrying a concealed handgun in contravention of the hospital’s “no guns” policy. It takes no great leap of logic to say that Dr. Silverman’s actions likely thwarted a mass shooting, yet there has been much speculation that he might face disciplinary action for carrying a firearm on hospital grounds.
I think this case proves two things:
- “Gun-free zones” are in reality “victim disarmament zones.” They do nothing at all to deter someone bent on murder.
- The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. PERIOD.
Of course, being billed as the Ted Nugent of EMS*, it fell upon me to debate the pro-armed side. I’ve weighed in on this subject before, and through some weird twist of logic and misinterpreted statements, I’ve become known as that guy who thinks it’s a dandy idea for EMTs to go strapped.
So let me make my position perfectly clear: I DON’T think it’s a good idea that EMTs carry firearms on duty. That’s my PERSONAL opinion.
That stems entirely from the fact that most of the people opining on the issue in favor of EMS personnel going armed are making the same mistake as the anti-gun side: they’re arguing from emotion, not reason. I don’t think they’ve really, rationally considered the fundamental difference between the caregiver mindset and the combat mindset necessary to defend one’s life with deadly force. I don’t think they’ve considered what taking a life will do to them, emotionally.
I have devoted a great deal of thought to that question, and I’m not sure I can answer it even for myself.
But… (and you knew there was a but coming)…
I may not feel strongly enough about the issue to go lobbying legislators even in my own state, because I just don’t think it’s a priority in EMS. We’ve got bigger, more pressing issues to address.
But if it was legal? I got no problem with it. And I’ll gladly work alongside an EMT who is armed, for one simple reason: If I can’t trust him to use his head, be rational, polite and safe, he’s not going to be on my friggin’ truck in the first place, even armed only with a set of trauma shears. I find it deliciously ironic that so many EMS managers refuse to trust their medics to use their judgement and common sense when it comes to the one-in-a-million chance of lawful armed self-defense, yet trust them implicitly with dangerous tools they use every day, like drug boxes and laryngoscopes.
And that’s why I reject the whole “blood in the streets” argument about arming EMTs. It’s the same blood in the streets argument that gets used everywhere firearms laws are loosened, and it never comes to pass. Concealed carry permit holders are no more going to start shooting patients in the back of ambulances than they are likely to shoot each other in bars, or public buildings, or sports arenas, or churches. Which is to say, not at all.
That’s because that particular segment of society is just about the safest, most law-abiding demographic there is. And ultimately, that’s the demographic of EMS providers who would choose to exercise a legal right to carry on-duty.
But hey, that’s my opinion. I’d like to hear yours.
Go listen to the podcast, and weigh in.
*I certainly hope I’m less incendiary than Ted Nugent. I kinda like Uncle Ted, and think he’s a smart, articulate advocate for the Second Amendment, but he does step on his dick a lot.
