Another terminology war we've lost

[O2HeN2]

"First responders"

Dammit, they're "Second responders". After all, who supplies "FIRST aid"? Does your "First Aid Kit" sit next to your bleeding friend until the ambulance arrives? No!

Your first aid kit is used by the first responder -- the person at the scene, AKA you, until the second responders arrive.

You as first responder use your fire extinguisher until the second responders arrive.

And you as first responder use your gun until the second responders arrive.

Referring to the police, fire and medics as "First responders" only plays into the narrative of 'You don't need guns, that's what the "first responder's" job is!'.

OK, been meaning to get that off my chest for some time, and hearing it [mis]used on the news last night several times finally fired me up.

O2

[merl]

Not so much. There are professional first responders and everyone else who can also respond if they choose. The others not being pros doesn't diminish their efforts or necessity.

[O2HeN2]

I don't care how professional you are, you ain't there first. I (as in citizen-at-the-injury/fire/crime) am.

O2

[Sharpienads]

Eh, I understand what you're saying, however I don't believe that has anything to do with guns. I would still consider fire, police, ems, etc first responders regardless of what people at the scene of an incident did. I don't really think one has anything to do with the other. Agree to disagree, I guess.

But to the bigger point, I do think we (meaning people with at least half a brain) are outnumbered by them (people who either choose not to or are just incapable of thinking for themselves) are losing a terminology war.

[akumadiavolo]

But you are not "responding" to it because you are not being called to the scene from elsewhere. You may be the first to react because you are there, but you are not "responding" as the word is used in this case.

[sniper7]

What if two people are there first giving aid, do the pros become third responders?

[Monky]

But you are not "responding" to it because you are not being called to the scene from elsewhere. You may be the first to react because you are there, but you are not "responding" as the word is used in this case.

Well someone beat me to it..

On the rant scale.. pretty weak 02.. Kind of sound like a kid who didn't get a trophy..

[hurley842002]

Just go look at the NIMS definition of "first responder", and see for yourself. Since every agency at the local, state, and federal level all follow NIMS guidelines (as far as I know), I think it's a pretty safe definition.

[kidicarus13]

Just go look at the NIMS definition of "first responder", and see for yourself.

Since most people don't have access to a NIMS manual:

First Responders—First responders include public safety professionals and trained volunteers who respond to and provide services at emergencies where additional skills and resources may be needed to bring the incident to a safe conclusion. First responders, often the first trained personnel to arrive on scene, usually arrive with standard issue protective and tactical equipment, which may not be adequate for intervention. First responders often provide first detailed scene information to managing authorities and other responding agencies. As the incident evolves, first responders may assist with establishment of structured incident command. They may continue to participate in incident stabilization and mitigation under the direction and supervision of highly trained specialists.

[KevDen2005]

"First responders"

Dammit, they're "Second responders". After all, who supplies "FIRST aid"? Does your "First Aid Kit" sit next to your bleeding friend until the ambulance arrives? No!

Your first aid kit is used by the first responder -- the person at the scene, AKA you, until the second responders arrive.

You as first responder use your fire extinguisher until the second responders arrive.

And you as first responder use your gun until the second responders arrive.

Referring to the police, fire and medics as "First responders" only plays into the narrative of 'You don't need guns, that's what the "first responder's" job is!'.

OK, been meaning to get that off my chest for some time, and hearing it [mis]used on the news last night several times finally fired me up.

O2

Dude, go get a beer. If this is bothering you then you need to take a break.

[Irving]

Ummm, what are they when there isn't a friend on scene, like most times?

[Graves]

Somebody's in pursuit of a new custom user title...

[Ridge]

I just had to pick on the stupidest thread to click on first after getting back from my vacation...

[Madeinhb]

I just had to pick on the stupidest thread to click on first after getting back from my vacation...

Hahaha what a welcome back present

[Ah Pook]

Dude, go get a beer. If this is bothering you then you need to take a break.
Or two.


First responders, often the first trained personnel to arrive on scene

[Bailey Guns]

I'm totally down with being outraged...but not about this.

[ZERO THEORY]

If we're going to play semantics, I would suggest that if you're already there, you are a participant, victim, or witness. Responder implies that they are responding to a request or order to investigate.

[hurley842002]

I'm totally down with being outraged...but not about this.

Agree, this borderlines being all twisted up over a professional sporting event..

[KevDen2005]

If we're going to play semantics, I would suggest that if you're already there, you are a participant, victim, or witness. Responder implies that they are responding to a request or order to investigate.

I don't like this game anymore

[Monky]

I don't like this game anymore

I'd imagine the OP doesn't either


Sent by a free-range electronic weasel, with no sense of personal space.

[Irving]

In this case, I would say that merl is the first responder.

[merl]

<- not a professional

[cmailliard]

Uh, yeah what everyone else has said.

First Responders are those that are called to respond (usually through 911) to someone else's emergency.

Boston Bombing - those that helped (the guy in the cowboy hat) were simply bystanders trying to do the right thing. Some did, some did not. There is a difference between a bystander and responder. Speaking from the medical side, responders are required to maintain a certification or license as part of their job, bystanders are not. Responders also face increased liability for doing the wrong thing (even when off duty), bystanders usually do not. There is a Duty to Act for responders, bystanders there is no duty to act.

There is generally a common response for responders, we generally know what the other guy is thinking, we usually do things pretty close to the same way. Bystanders can fuck things up, seen it plenty of times. But they can also do the right thing. Can responders fuck things up? Yes for sure, but there is usually accountability associated with this.

[davsel]

If we're going to play semantics, I would suggest that if you're already there, you are a participant, victim, or witness. Responder implies that they are responding to a request or order to investigate.
I'll add:
If you are there with a gun, you are a suspect.

[thvigil11]

I resent the implication of the OP that "First Responders" is an effort to remove personal responsibility, degrading the citizenry into subjugation and creating reliance on the powers that be. We are the ones that come and pick up the pieces when personal responsibility fails. Most of my fellow First Responders are the biggest supporters of personal responsibility and action. If people took more care in their everyday lives, practiced safety, good citizenry, kept a watchful eye and were just better human beings, then the number of calls for First Responders would be cut in half (conservative estimate). I can't tell you of the number of calls where, when all is said and done, had the people involved just shown better judgement and personal responsibility, the entire incident could have been avoided. But of course, its always easy to monday morning quarterback.

That's where the rub is for us First Responders. Of a thousand calls I respond to, 999 of them go pretty well. When you rely on a good combination of training, experience and good ol fashion common sense, most of the decisions you make work out. Sometimes a decision made is not always the best, and sometimes its outright terrible, but by the roll of the dice, you don't get burned. Hopefully through good AAR, a First Responder is able to look at the decisions made during the past and analyze how to improve in the future. Its that one in a thousand incident where a bad call combines with bad circumstance that ends in the whole situation blowing up. Its this incident that makes the news, youtube and countless forums to be dissected and those involved to be criticised for all their gaps in judgement or adherance to policy.

For those of us who have been involved in a firefight, shown up on a fully involved residence with occupants trapped, responded to an MVA with multiple casualties and/ or fatalities, or been faced with a victim trapped in a piece of machinery who's gonna bleed out as soon as you extract him, then you know that sometimes its just a series of bad options. You just hope you choose the least bad option available to you. It's when you're back at the station when your head starts to flood with all the different things you could have done, wondering who's gonna rip you up for what you decided and whether or not its worth it to continue in this line of work. But thats what it is. Every time. Its a roll of the dice. If you can weigh the dice with a little training and experience, then you do it. But it comes down to being in a bad spot at a bad time. Call it Murphy, call it unique fire behavior, call it a catch 22. Those boys from Granite Mountain had been in that same spot a hundred times before, (been there myself). Bad comms, a little too close to the fire, rapid weather changes, IC unsure of your position. It happens on every wildland I've ever been a part of. But that day, the fates called in their ticket. We mourn and we try to learn from it. In the end, its part of the job though. Assuming risk.

So to the OP, use of "First Responders" is part of some liberal agenda to subjugate humanity. We are the jack booted thugs, huh? I know there are some shitheads in our ranks. Every field has them, its just that ours tend to get all the publicity. Are we to judged by the actions of a few? Sound familiar, gun owners?

Here's the thing OP, (and anyone sharing his opinion) I applaud your use of a first aid kit, fire extiguisher and firearm for self defense. Good on you, please follow it with good training and practice in order to increase your odds when the die is cast. But I'm still gonna show up when I'm called to. I am going to do my damndest to help anyone that I can, even at the risk of my own ass. And I will do this regardless of what your bumpersticker says, who you vote for, what church you go to, what color you are, what your sex is, or any other means civilization has come up with to divide us up. In the end, I will have to answer for what I have done, good or bad. I am not in this for glory, or recognition. I do this because I wanted to help my fellow humans. As for what you want to call me, I DON"T GIVE A FLYING FUCK. What I won't stand for, is the implication that the First Responder community is part of some greater conspiracy to rob people of their basic freedoms.


Not sorry for the rant.

[Irving]

I give it a 6/10.

[O2HeN2]

As for what you want to call me, I DON"T GIVE A FLYING FUCK. What I won't stand for, is the implication that the First Responder community is part of some greater conspiracy to rob people of their basic freedoms.
Wow, a 9 out of 10 for lack of comprehension. Your "community" has nothing to do with it. It's the media, but thanks for playing.

I have nothing but respect for the vast majority (not all) of the second responder community (glad you don't mind what I call you). The fact that you took that as an attack on you and "your community" just boggles my mind.

I'm in the minority, if not alone here. That's alright. Remember this discussion next time you hear "You don't need a gun, that's what first responders are for..."

O2

[vossman]

I think the term "hero" has lost its true meaning.

[thvigil11]

Wow, a 9 out of 10 for lack of comprehension. Your "community" has nothing to do with it. It's the media, but thanks for playing.

I have nothing but respect for the vast majority (not all) of the second responder community (glad you don't mind what I call you). The fact that you took that as an attack on you and "your community" just boggles my mind.

I'm in the minority, if not alone here. That's alright. Remember this discussion next time you hear "You don't need a gun, that's what first responders are for..."

O2

I said what I felt needed to be said. In your previous posts, you did not specify that you were upset with the media only. You did make a big deal to set yourself up as a true first responder and take the stance of

"I don't care how professional you are, you ain't there first. I (as in citizen-at-the-injury/fire/crime) am."

To me that sounded a little hostile towards the first responder community. (by the way, I feel the first responder "community" is ours, yours and mine.) But perhaps I misread you, if so then I am truly sorry. Again I applaud you as a fellow human being for taking responsibility on yourself to aid and assist others in a time of need. Again I want to encourage you and others to advance yourself in training and practice of those skills. Proper training in first aid is available through a variety of sources. Be glad to help connect anyone who is interested. Too often, people nowadays are more likely to stand by and watch the show, instead of helping out. Most often they are more concerned with making sure they get pictures and video to show their friends the blood and gore. At least half of my calls involve people who are not able to assist themselves. Quite often, I am the first person to arrive who is able to assist. Its good to know and good to see when folks step in to help. My only concern when others have been active on the scene before me is what have they done to ease or possibly exasperate the situation. Once again, I want to stress that proper training, both to civilian and emergency personel, is critical in helping increasing the odds of making the right choices.

I'm glad to hear that your beef is not with first responders, but the media instead. Again I want to apologize if I misjudged you or insulted you. Perhaps I allowed myself to get a little emotional about the subject, but it is my life's work after all. If anything, I want my message here to be this. Having the balls to step up to the plate when things are bad is the first step. Proper training, education, and practice, regardless of one's job title, is critical to the outcome of that step.

Peace to you 02HeN2, [Beer]

[O2HeN2]

And I owe you an apology for not being clearer.

O2

[thvigil11]

And I owe you an apology for not being clearer.

O2

Thanks but not necessary my friend. It's all good. Down with the media.

[Sharpienads]

Or for todays generation, taking a selfie on their iphone next to the casualty, uploading it to facebook, posting "Oh em gee, this guy totally had a heart attack, somebody call the doctors or something? I'm by the chex. SHARE THIS LETS SEE IF WE CAN GET 1,000,000 likes and maybe this guy will LIVE!!!!".................................................. ............... Welcome to the new first responder.

That's awesome and sad at the same time. [ROFL1]

[CO Hugh]

The only reason we have the word is so now we can be guilted into having boondoggles, and oogles of money to first responders, which is just crony capitalism.