helicopper

No, you have to comply with the policies of the site as established by the owner. Within those parameters, you can post anything you want. Keep it positive/constructive!!!

Tom, I respectfully disagree. Bashing is not tolerated on this site and every effort is made to remove offensive posts. On the other hand, we've had some pretty intelligent and reasonable discussions about a variety of issues affecting the emergency services community and that's why most of us (at least me anyway) stick around. IF this site did tolerate agency/individual bashing, I would no longer be a member. Agency specific references have usually been posted after an article in a newspaper or other venue has "aired it", such as the offensive conditions in firehouses in a certain local municipality. Constructive criticism is not bashing and those narrow minded individuals who think differently need to wake up and update their calendars! Airing dirty laundry implies discussing things that are not in the public domain. Training, tactics, apparatus, response modes, are all in the public domain. Discussing them is important and has its value. Just as anyone has the right to post their opinions here - you have the right to not log in and read them!

I'd have to agree that user created screennames are the way to go. People create unique identities or relate themselves to things that are important to them this way and I don't think compelling people to use their names will have any benefit to this site.

I think Seth has made a good faith effort to, at the very least, limit the amount of bashing (individual or agency) on this forum. Posts are promptly deleted when they're inappropriate and members who continue to abuse the privilege are ultimately removed from the membership so discussions can remain positive and interesting. Now that he's increased the "staff", more people have their eyes peeled for abuses of this quasi-anonymous forum to further prevent bashing or similiar conduct and it is simply not tolerated (much to the chagrin of the bashers!). As for the original question in this thread, I think there is a tremendous sensitivity to criticism in the emergency services and people are reluctant to see their agencies criticized, constructively or otherwise. Many Commissioners/Chiefs feel that their agency is above review, a very misguided perspective. Despite the composition of your agency, if you provide a public service and do so with tax dollars or donations, you are bound by many laws and regulations to publish annual reports, financial statements, etc. That agencies choose not to out of ignorance or design is a separate issue. There is nothing that an agency (paid, volunteer, or otherwise) can do if someone logs onto this site from the comfort of their own home and on their own computer. UNLESS, the person identifies themself as a member of the agency, uses department logos (etc.), or accesses the site from a department owned computer or while on company/department time. They may try and members may bow to the threat of punishment but the Constitutional right to free speech would undoubtedly be upheld if ever presented to a court of law. I wish more Commissioners/Chiefs/Elected Officials came out of their shells and did read sites like this and others that try to improve the working conditions of the emergency services workforce!

Chinese food, huh? MSG toxicity!!!

Thank you for highlighting this point! This is the reason the drinking age was raised. Sure, it is true that some teens will drink regardless of the drinking age, some even with parental consent (or at least indifference), but many will not. I'm amazed to see that so many people think the drinking age should be lowered. As noted above, the incidence of fatal accidents was reduced dramatically by increasing the drinking age. There are alot of other reasons to maintain the drinking age at 21: date rape/acquaintance rape, hazing deaths/injuries, etc. That's not such a bad idea. They've already instituted the graduated licensing program in NY to try to reduce the incidence of accidents caused by immaturity and inexperience. Someone mentioned being able to rent a car before age 21 - most of the big companies won't rent to you until you're 25. If they do let you rent, you pay big time! The same with insurance. Why? Because at that age and with that amount of experience you're more of a liability! As for the age of consent, even though you may be able to marry at an earlier age in some states, you probably still need parental consent (in most states)! As for all these comparisons about becoming a soldier, a paramedic, or a firefighter at 18 versus being able to drink. There's a HUGE difference! To be a soldier/paramedic/FF, you have to receive significant training and are supervised (at least to some extent). So, the corollary is flawed because there's no training involved to tip a few back or know when to STOP tipping a few back! As for police officers - you can't become a PO until age 21 in NYS so that one doesn't work either. And I know of no teaching positions in HS that don't require a BS (or higher) so the odds of a <21 year old with that degree are pretty slim.

I would venture to guess that this is because there are far more drivers aged 21 and older than under age 21.

Sloppy appearances and poor attitudes are not products of EMT/medic schools - they're from the lack of discipline at the agency. If you allow people to walk around with unlaced boots, untucked shirts, etc. that's the image they're going to present. If line officers, supervisors, or whatever mechanism exists in the organization went out and told these responders that their attire is inappropriate or conduct was not professional, it would either be fixed or the failure to change would give them cause to remove the person from the agency. VAC's don't have captains just to wear shiny collar brass. They're the operations supervisors! Don't say "we need this EMT or that driver" either - bad apples are bad apples. Get rid of them and replace them!

Frankly, if that many people failed a civil service exam for EMT or paramedic I think it would be a great service to the industry! If a person can't pass a basic test focused on the job and certification that they already hold they don't deserve the job! It also serves to reinforce the point you made about the quality of EMS professionals varying greatly due to the vastly different training programs out there. I also think your estimate is off - way off - but since you are spitballing with 50%, I won't spitball back. EMS definitely needs a change and maybe a county or regional approach would be better than the patchwork nonsense we've had for the past 30 years. It is time for EMS to be recognized for what it is and treated that way! Considering you bailed out to go to one of the other emergency services, that is civil service, does provide better pay, benefits, and incentives (like a 20 year retirement), you of all people should be more supportive of this effort and not simply bashing it because it would be laborious.

Date: 02/22/08 Time: 2010 Location: IFO 64 Locust Hill Avenue Frequency: 453.275 Units Operating: Numerous 4th Precinct, Housing, DD, and other units, ESU Trucks 2, 3, 4, 400, 410, 900 Description Of Incident: Shots Fired, 1 victim transported by taxi to St. Johns. Crime scene established, witnesses being interviewed, one suspect being detained for show-up. At least one round entered an apartment window on the block. Victim not likely. Writer: Chris192

What's unclear from the article is whether or not they responded at all. It sounds as though they may not have searched at all because they thought it was someone gathering firewood. Regardless, a tragic mistake for sure!

There have been many threads citing legislation that states that "the fire chief is in charge at emergency scenes" or words to that effect. I have asked in those threads for citations to that law but to date have still not received any link or direction to it. I am asking for anyone with a link/reference/citation to post it here. Please don't post anecdotal "I heard from my instructor this" or "My chief said that" - we've all heard that before. I'm looking for the actual legislation that states anything to this effect. Local, state, NY or elsewhere is fine. Someone posted about similiar legislation in CT and if you can find it, I'd appreciate a copy of that too! Thanks in advance. Chris

bump... Again, if any of our members from other states would like to chime in with the statutes on the books in their states, please do! I guess there is no specific law in NY granting anyone exclusive control of anything other than their own resources.

I think it's a great tribute for those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

I'm sure we all have opinions both about the use of escorts for campaigning politicians and the politicians themselves but let's focus on the point of this thread: the tragic and senseless line of duty death of a police officer. A couple of posts popped up with political sentiments/statements that almost immediately caused a reaction and generated responses. That's not what we're all about. All those posts have been deleted and the original posts edited (removing the political sentiment) so we can remain focused on the tragedy and convey our condolences to the DPD and larger law enforcement community. As has previously been discussed, this forum is not for politics - there are plenty of sites for that. RIP, Senior Corporal Victor Lozada Tirado!

Thanks Truck 4! I don't know where you find the time to research and post all the IA's you do but it's great reading! Keep up the great work!

Thanks for weighing in - you nailed it! Best post in the thread (no offense ALS)!!!

I don't disagree that 1/4 million dollars for two administrators of an 18 member department is a highly questionable expense. I'm interesting in seeing what changes this will bring to the Village. It is definitely a political move!

JetBlue is flying Airbus 320's out of Westchester, not just RJ's. Weather at Westchester is always a concern. Sandwiched between the Sound and Rye Lake they get more than their share of fog and poor visibility.

Whichever is CHEAPER ($$$$$$$$$$)! I used to be loyal to JetBlue... the fares were great, the legroom is better, and the DirecTV was cool and I didn't care for airline food anyway. However, in comparing fares for this summer, JetBlue is as expensive as most of the big ol' airlines (depending of course on your destination!). If you live in northern Westchester or points north of there, I'd also recommend Stewart. They have just as many flights to Florida now (JetBlue and AirTran) and their parking situation is MUCH, MUCH better than Westchester's. The terminal is also far less crowded. Enjoy your trip!

Thanks for that dose of reality! It's amazing how the perspective has shifted away from the actual text of the protocol to "we have to do it to CYA". I know that I was brainwashed to believe that you had to err on the side of immobilizing but the review of the actual protocol has enlightened me. Thanks STAT!

120 may seem like a lot but it really isn't. Plenty of tickets for speeds more than 100 MPH are written on the parkways in Westchester County and they're not nearly as user friendly as the DC beltways (traffic notwithstanding).

You took the words right out of my fingertips! Sounds like the new attorney general has an ax to grind with cops, too. Five indictments of cops in two years sounds like a lot to me. Not to say that the cop is right or shouldn't be charged with something but the motorcyclist has to bear some responsibility!

Very well said! The issue of non-medical personnel in leadership roles is a significant one. Would the fire service ever dream of electing me chief? Of course not (and rightfully so)! When the conflict between certified and non-certified arises with regard to patient care, the EMT can/should refer the officer to the NYS DOH Bureau of EMS for clarification. The certified member of the crew is responsible for patient care decisions. If you're a certified agency, there may be some other operational issues that the DOH can assist you with but for other stuff, the boss is the boss - regardless of what they are qualified in! Protocol, and Part 800 compliance is not common sense. Running an EMS agency is not common sense either!

Moose, I completely understand your position and am not against having a handful of those "just want to help people types" in an organization but what happens when the majority shifts - say from 10% non-EMT to 60% non-EMT and you can't cover calls? That's the scenario that I'm more concerned about. What happens when non-EMT's become the line officers in an organization and start directing the certified members' actions? There have been threads about this before - who is in charge of patient care yada yada. These scenarios are unfortunately quite common and put the EMT in the position of having to risk their certification or challenge a line officer who has no clue about patient care. I've never understood why an agency would allow a member to run for an officer position without having at least an EMT certification but that's just me! As for the earlier post about people not being able to lift their share anymore - if that's how your agency operates, so be it. But the job description of an EMT issued by the DOH Bureau of EMS does describe certain lifting requirements. Don't get me wrong, if you can run with a crew of three all the better! I just don't agree with agencies sitting in quarters with a driver and an EMT toning out for an "attendant". That's just ridiculous!