Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Guns in the hospitals

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Duelist View Post
    In the nineties, I worked my last two years of college in a state mental hospital as a CNA. They paid 2x minimum wage, had full time shift work, and medical benefits, and I had a new baby.

    I got punched, kicked, spat upon, feces thrown at me, screaming naked people threatening to sex me to death, got to clean up blood from self-harm situations, cut down attempted suicides, got my knee smashed with a chair - that guy apologized after he got stabilized.

    It's mental health care. Most of them, when they need to get shot, need Haldol or something, more than a JHP.

    Our facility security was sworn peace officers who had all graduated from the state academy, but carried no firearms. County deputies backed them up as needed. Our guys carried OC, batons, etc. I carried a pair of standard police cuffs I got from my dad (retired cop), and they got used from time to time.

    A lot of our staff were in college. One guy, my age, two months from graduation and with a new baby, got punched in the face one night. Crushed his cheekbone and the orbital around his eye. Eye wasn't exactly in his face, more like on it, when they wheeled him out. He never came back - they gave him some kind of pension.

    Dangerous work. I left there after graduation and joined the Army. Day-to-day, I felt like the Army was safer.
    If you read this article and disregard all the anti-LE rhetorical bullshit, the data roughly shows that one in four people who are killed by the police (not made contact with, I'll get to that below) have some sign of mental illness.

    The real number or statistical figure is probably a little closer to 30-40%, at least that is what I get from personal experience. Of them, having to use force against a mentally ill person is almost always the last possible resort.

    I've had run ins with so many intellectually deficient people its really mind blowing, then again, the bigger the AO the higher chances you will get involved with someone like this. Drug and alcohol abuse just expound this, unfortunately, and add to the very real issue of using force on these types of people.
    VDMSR.com
    Chief Developer for V Development Group
    Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.

  2. #22
    THE THIRST MUTILATOR Nephrology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    West
    Quote Originally Posted by voodoo_man View Post
    If you read this article and disregard all the anti-LE rhetorical bullshit, the data roughly shows that one in four people who are killed by the police (not made contact with, I'll get to that below) have some sign of mental illness.

    The real number or statistical figure is probably a little closer to 30-40%, at least that is what I get from personal experience. Of them, having to use force against a mentally ill person is almost always the last possible resort.

    I've had run ins with so many intellectually deficient people its really mind blowing, then again, the bigger the AO the higher chances you will get involved with someone like this. Drug and alcohol abuse just expound this, unfortunately, and add to the very real issue of using force on these types of people.
    It is a little bit different in an inpatient mental health facility where there patients have been (presumably) searched and had had all weapons/potential weapons removed and are supposedly housed in an environment free of potential weapons. In this case, much like most jails/prisons, it is safer to keep guns out of the equation as they are more likely than not unnecessary and, if anything, only a further potential weapon for a patient to acquire.

    In the ED, however, things are a little different. Not as easy to contain people problems, even with metal detectors. Especially for true visitors...

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Nephrology View Post
    It is a little bit different in an inpatient mental health facility where there patients have been (presumably) searched and had had all weapons/potential weapons removed and are supposedly housed in an environment free of potential weapons. In this case, much like most jails/prisons, it is safer to keep guns out of the equation as they are more likely than not unnecessary and, if anything, only a further potential weapon for a patient to acquire.

    In the ED, however, things are a little different. Not as easy to contain people problems, even with metal detectors. Especially for true visitors...
    I have had the occasion to transport EDP's to facilities and was told "lock it up" when I walked in. I told them they can take the guy off my hands here or I can leave him here but there is no way I am disarming in that place. 99.99% understand though once in a while I get the "those are the rules!" As if their rules apply to me.

    I do agree, however, there may be logical thought to the concept of keeping firearms out of a secured facility where everyone is searched and presumably regulated with enough staff. Otherwise, in a standard ER or "come as you please" hospital, I would caution on the side of lethal force.
    VDMSR.com
    Chief Developer for V Development Group
    Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.

  4. #24
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    The Keystone State
    Duelist, the_ure - welcome to pf and thanks for some great words.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Columbus Ohio Area
    Quote Originally Posted by Hambo View Post
    If you believe that, you need to make the field trip I suggested. My wife has been a nurse for nearly thirty years, and the best hospital she worked in had its own sworn PD. They addressed hospital specific issues, not courthouse or airport security. There was one OIS that I know of that probably prevented greater violence.
    #1: I'm a paramedic. Well aware of what hospitals are like.

    #2: Sworn PD is different than your average armed security. Management might actually listen to their suggestions about how to secure a facility. They might actually have experience that informs their security setup.

    #3: We should also recognize that some people are referencing different things when they say "hospital". To the cops here: the cops usually/most likely mean Emergency Room or Emergency Department. This might be <5% of the total hospital. Security situation on both sides (bad guys and good guys) is entirely different than the rest of the facility. Also, a community hospital is entirely different than a level 1 trauma center. Not only in care provided and clientele, but also in surrounding civilian populations. Community hospitals are out in the country with small populations who generally have lower crime rates, and level 1 trauma centers are generally in terrible neighborhoods surrounded by ghettos where people like to shoot and stab each other.

    I think we're agreeing with the endgame: hospitals need to be safe and secure facilities. I would like to see it be done effectively. I'm not advocating to "throw the baby out with the bathwater", I'm just saying that it needs to be more than flash and show.

    For example: most emergency departments utilize a method of security that we would call "access control", where people who wish to enter the department are searched for weapons and screened for demeanor/potential threat, and then there is a secondary layer of security that we can call "uniformed response". A situation arises, a person in uniform responds. Access control only actually works when you control all access, meaning, there should be screening and active rather than passive monitoring at all access points: not just the front door, but also the doors that connect to other departments or sections of the hospital, the doors that open to ambulance arrival, elevators that might go to other floors, etc...Most hospitals utilize a passive response to access control, like keycard access or a keypad. The facility, or portion of a facility is not actually secure, it just appears to be. Any two-bit crook can simply wait for one of the controlled entry points to open and then walk through. Additionally, many of the chemical restraints available will do WAY more to subdue a crazy person than a uniformed response. Not because the uniformed person isn't trained, but simply because they don't either have the tools to restrain the mentally ill person that will work, or the tools to counteract the drugs in someone's system that are giving them a crazy amount of strength.

    Point: there are people who carry stuff right through security every day, people who sneak past security, management who don't provide the training or tools to people to do their job adequately. I'm not against hospital security. I'm just wishing that "secure" means "secure". Until it does, I do not wish to have my right to survive stolen away from me by people who are putting on a show that they are protecting me, but cannot adequately accomplish that task, and limit my ability to protect myself, which forces me into an area of more risk, rather than less.

  6. #26
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Louisiana
    Hospitals with an emergency room need police officers (armed is a given) and not security. Security guards do not have the training, are paid less than police officers, and lack arrest powers. Police with training regarding working in a medical / hospital environment is the best answer.

    There is a hospital in LA that has university police. When hospital administers talked about replacing the police with armed security, many in the medical staff said they would go to another medical job if that happened.

  7. #27
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Armed security is like any other product.....it's supplied to the customers specifications.

    The problem isn't armed security vs sworn PD. The problem is what the hospital is willing to pay for. Some of the best force pro in America is provided via contract security. You guys are being very narrow in who you think represents the contract security field, most likely as a means of supporting your argument.
    Last edited by TGS; 02-15-2016 at 04:06 PM.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by WOLFIE View Post
    Hospitals with an emergency room need police officers (armed is a given) and not security. Security guards do not have the training, are paid less than police officers, and lack arrest powers. Police with training regarding working in a medical / hospital environment is the best answer.

    There is a hospital in LA that has university police. When hospital administers talked about replacing the police with armed security, many in the medical staff said they would go to another medical job if that happened.
    Hospitals need both. Police can't enforce house rules and security can't enforce the law. I know a lot of officers that do it, but an officer that enforces house rules is asking to get jammed up in a bad way.

  9. #29
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    Armed security is like any other product.....it's supplied to the customers specifications.

    The problem isn't armed security vs sworn PD. The problem is what the hospital is willing to pay for. Some of the best force pro in America is provided via contract security. You guys are being very narrow in who you think represents the contract security field, most likely as a means of supporting your argument.
    Regarding hospital security, if you can choose between police or a very good security company and the cost is comparible, why not choose police? Is there an advantage in employing a security officer over a police officer? You are right about what the hospital is willing to pay for. I will admit that my view on security was narrow; i am ignorant when it comes to security companies and their training.

  10. #30
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by WOLFIE View Post
    Regarding hospital security, if you can choose between police or a very good security company and the cost is comparible, why not choose police? Is there an advantage in employing a security officer over a police officer? You are right about what the hospital is willing to pay for. I will admit that my view on security was narrow; i am ignorant when it comes to security companies and their training.
    The cost isn't going to be comparable in many cases, which is the point. For a given task, condition and standard, contractors will usually be cheaper.

    Contractors don't have pensions or expensive benefit packages. Contractors are easily hired and fired. Contractors can have training packages tailored to the mission at hand instead of a standard police academy which includes all kinds of training that has nothing to do with site security.

    Yeah, if you're talking Top Flight Security vs a police department, I'd take the police department any fucking day of the week. No brainer. Most hospitals choose Top Flight because it's 1) cheap, 2) reduces liability by saying they had taken reasonable measures, and 3) if there is an increased need for armed security, they can tap into local police. With the exception of state run facilities like the psych prisons and UMD Newark, that's how it works in NJ, at least. They call and get a multi-jurisdiction response from departments as needed.

    It's all about what the hospital wants to pay for.
    Last edited by TGS; 02-16-2016 at 09:17 PM.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •