| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/21/2007 02:40:09 PM · #26 |
| I think that story is irresponsible journalism and news reporting. We have a scant story with incomplete details and it has people up in arms! I'm sorry this story wasn't fully investigated before being reported. It does not happen often enough, but timeliness ought to take a back seat to correctness and completeness. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 02:52:17 PM · #27 |
This is a terrible tragedy but this excerpt got me to thinking that they did not actually stand and watch him drown, he had already been submerged for some time when they arrived.
Quote
Assistant Chief Constable Dave Thompson, of Greater Manchester Police, said by the time the PCSOs arrived, the youngster had been submerged in the large lake for some time.
Unquote
|
|
|
|
09/21/2007 03:17:38 PM · #28 |
Im with Frisca - there is very little detail and it seems quite 1 sided. And it serves as a prime demonstration of todays media and its effect on the public: half assed story gets posted, people freak out, innocent people are made into victims, and the retraction and correction will be printed on page 95 in pt2 font below an ad for canned hams.
I feel bad for the guys, yeah they have to live with the fact that they weren't able to help and the kid died, but now they also have to live with every monday morning super hero criticizing them and holding them responsible. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 03:24:49 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
They sat on their asses, did nothing and watched two children die. That's simply inhuman. |
One child actually. The sister was saved.
R. |
Not through any action on their part. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 04:28:26 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by frisca:
I think that story is irresponsible journalism and news reporting. We have a scant story with incomplete details and it has people up in arms! I'm sorry this story wasn't fully investigated before being reported. It does not happen often enough, but timeliness ought to take a back seat to correctness and completeness. |
Sky News, I'm afraid. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 07:23:00 PM · #31 |
| The article is too vague to pass judgement on anyone, yes it is tragic the boy died, but there is no timeframe or enough facts to blame........ |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:51:27 PM · #32 |
I'm not advocating for or against the officers, BUT how many of you have actually tried to save someone drowning? There is actually a technique to it that if done wrong can kill both the rescuer and the original victim. I've heard of numerous stories where one person was in trouble in water and the rescuer died trying to save them.
Water rescues are not as easy as some think. Case in point...
Hero dad died trying to save drowning kids
They went in one after another.
First the 8-year-old girl slipped into the swirling pool. Then an 11-year-old friend reached down to help. Then her 13-year old brother struggled to save them both. And finally her father went under four times to find them all and never surfaced again.
"It's just unreal," said a stunned Georgia Dukes-Watson, whose brother, Myron Dukes, died trying to save his two children and their friend. "All of them gone. It's just unreal."
Dukes and his two children, Lauren and Christopher, and their friend Juanitrice Deadmon all drowned in a 9-foot pool of water near the bottom of a decorative fountain in the Fort Worth Water Gardens in Texas on Wednesday evening.
That's three people that died trying to save one girl. I'm not saying I wouldn't have tried either, but if you are not trained in rescues you should THINK before committing yourself. The following three items should be considered, and not in the order that they are presented.
* Can you save the person?
* Can you save the person without hurting yourself?
* Can you save the person without KILLING yourself?
The first thing I was taught when I became an Firefighter/EMT was that my life was more important than any victims. If I were to get hurt/killed trying to save someones life I would be adding to the problem, not being part of the solution.
I've been in several situations where I refused to commit myself, or my partner, until I thought it was safe to actually do the work I was trained for. Then of course there are times where I've done things that were unsafe, but the risks were calculated and I thought they were in my favor.
With the information in the article I reserve my judgment for now. I do not reserve my judgement to those that say they should have jumped in to save the boy without due regard to their own safety. Sometimes it's harder to do the "safe" thing than to jump without thinking.
We should try to get more facts before jumping to conclusions.
Edit: grammar
Message edited by author 2007-09-21 21:52:28. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 10:19:14 PM · #33 |
Here are a couple of links....
//www.life-safer.com/PDF/mnemonics_1214.pdf
Most drownings occur in unguarded waters and frequently the would-be-rescuer is a “Good Samaritan” or a lone police officer or fireman who is often first to arrive on scene. Most of these “First-Responders” are not properly equipped to attempt a water-entry-rescue. Many are not
physically conditioned for the demands they will face. There are few exceptions, as the loss of life among “First-Responders” has shown over the years.
//www.wateroperations.com/wateroperations/survival.htm
Drowning is a common problem in today's world. Anyone, even lifeguards, can drown. Oddly, we seem as a society to not truly understand the anyone-can-drown concept. In fact, we burden many of our public safety personnel with the misconstrued concept of what a hero is. The hero concept is dangerously based on whether or not a person was foolish enough to attempt a water related, or other type of, rescue, recklessly endangering his or her own life, and possibly the lives of others.
Would-be heroes all too often drown themselves trying to perform a rescue beyond their personal or team capability. A person drowns while trying to save someone else. He or she dies trying to be a foolish hero. Remember, dead is forever. But the media and eulogy will both remember him as a great person, a hero.
Heroes do not recklessly endanger their own lives or the lives of others. Even with the minimum necessary training, equipment and personnel resources an in-water rescue something can still go wrong and a rescuer can be killed. Without these three necessities, the probability of disaster is very high, and not only is the life of the would-be rescuer endangered, but so are the lives of the victim(s) and other rescuers, who now must also save the would-be rescuer.
There are several lawsuits taking place around the world today against public safety personnel, that truly try the concept of rescuer and hero. Perhaps there are times when we ask, expect, too much from our local public safety agencies, police, fire, EMS, and Coast Guard. These lawsuits are taken against personnel who made the safe decision not to go in the water, because they did not have the minimum necessary training, equipment, or personnel resources, and because doing so would recklessly endanger their own lives.
Let us review a past case history that took place in New York to better understand similar situations elsewhere in the United States. A male individual physically resists arrest and flees. He finds himself at the water's edge of the Hudson River. Police request him to stop. The Individual proceeds to enter the water. Upon suddenly finding himself in water where he can no longer stand up, he yells "I can't swim, please help!"
Question:
Does the non-water rescue trained, non-lifeguard, police officer, without any training in restraining a perpetrator in the water, have a responsibility to endanger his own life to enter the water and perhaps find himself suddenly in a full in-water attack situation? The answer is a resounding "No."
In fact, do any police officers, fire fighters, or even lifeguards, have a responsibility to endanger their personal safety in this situation? Again, the answer is a definite "No." Any lifeguard will tell you that even a six year-old panicked child can drown an adult would-be rescuer. And even the best, award winning lifeguards are not trained to approach or rescue a possible alert, aggressive attacker. They are trained to save weak, non-alert, or aggressive, panicked drowning victims whose only goal is to save themselves, not escape prosecution or purposefully injure anyone who approaches.
In the New York case the perpetrator did lure the police to one area and then proceeded to swim to another point, climb out of the water, and escape. He also nearly drowned a police dog, who also was not trained or prepared for a water operation.
When a woman, who claimed to witness the event from her porch over 1,000 feet from the incident, was interviewed she was very hostile towards the police, stating that they tried to drown the man by chasing him into the water, and then they did not attempt to rescue him when he was supposedly drowning and calling for help. She had absolutely no concern for the officers who did not have personal flotation devices, cold water exposure suits, any water rescue training, or any rescue equipment, let alone self-defense training for handling a violent criminal in the water.
As one of our lead trainers, patrolman Ken Balfrey, pointed out during a Lifeguard Systems staff discussion of this problem, suppose the perpetrator had Navy Seal or Ranger training, as once happened in his district. Such a person is trained to drown people, and even a well trained lifeguard would stand little chance against such a person. Such a perpetrator may even have training in pulling personnel out of an inflatable boat to drown them.
What if the perpetrator had a knife or a gun, both of which will work in the water? How is the law enforcement, fire, EMS or other rescue personnel to know whether or not the perpetrator is faking drowning or is really drowning?
If a perpetrator ends up drowning a would-be rescuer during a rescue attempt, will the perpetrator be charged with first degree murder, or will the defense lawyers get him off by saying it was an accident and the officer should not have gone in without the minimum necessary equipment or training? Perhaps the police department would even be sued for endangering the life of the perpetrator for chasing him into the water. This sounds like an atrocity but it has happened and is happening.
Let's do whatever it takes to make sure none of this happens. Every law enforcement, fire, EMS and other public safety agency should have clearly written standard operation procedures/guidelines for these types of incidents stating that such personnel will not go in the water, or on the ice, after a conscious perpetrator under any circumstances, or unless the personnel have the proper rescue and in-water defense/restraint training, equipment and personnel resources.
And very importantly, the public and public service officers should be taught not to ask, or expect, public service personnel to recklessly endanger their lives.
|
|
|
|
09/21/2007 11:05:40 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
They sat on their asses, did nothing and watched two children die. That's simply inhuman. |
One child actually. The sister was saved.
R. |
Not through any action on their part. |
... and who gets to decide what actions have to be undertaken in this type of scenario? You? The general public? Uncle Milton?
I much prefer the comments made by Frisca in this regard... we truly have very little information on which to base our comments.
Ray |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:34:16 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
They sat on their asses, did nothing and watched two children die. That's simply inhuman. |
One child actually. The sister was saved.
R. |
Not through any action on their part. |
... and who gets to decide what actions have to be undertaken in this type of scenario? You? The general public? Uncle Milton?
I much prefer the comments made by Frisca in this regard... we truly have very little information on which to base our comments.
Ray |
I guess it'd be easier just to watch people die and take some pictures of their final moments for the old scrapbook, eh? |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:36:07 AM · #36 |
| Spaz, just curious... have you ever been in this kind of situation yourself? |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:47:37 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I guess it'd be easier just to watch people die and take some pictures of their final moments for the old scrapbook, eh? |
Bear in mind that Sky news is a Murdoch enterprise, and tabloid-style reporting oriented. The report is sensationalist and designed to evoke a reaction of disgust in its readers.
The PCSOs are not much more than civilians given a uniform and little training, intended to create a visible police presence at low cost. In other words, they should not be viewed as having any more capability in these terms than anyone else.
By the time the PCSOs arrived, the boy was submerged and missing (details are more fully related in this story).
Details are still not altogether clear - but in terms of having to go swimming and diving in a dangerous site (a flooded mineshaft) to find a boy whom it may well have appeared had already drowned, then I can understand the PCSOs' reluctance. Bear in mind that the fishermen were no better trained and they rescued the girl (who was on top of her brother, submerging him) using their rods as poles, not by diving into the depths.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2007 05:46:24 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
They sat on their asses, did nothing and watched two children die. That's simply inhuman. |
One child actually. The sister was saved.
R. |
Not through any action on their part. |
... and who gets to decide what actions have to be undertaken in this type of scenario? You? The general public? Uncle Milton?
I much prefer the comments made by Frisca in this regard... we truly have very little information on which to base our comments.
Ray |
I guess it'd be easier just to watch people die and take some pictures of their final moments for the old scrapbook, eh? |
Well Spazmo, I don't know about you but I have seen people die, and there was not one goddam thing anyone could do about it.
You really ought to take into consideration the fact that all we have here are snippets of information... and I for one am not prepared to cast aspersions on individuals without the facts.
You can rush to judgement if you so desire, but such is not my style.
Ray
Message edited by author 2007-09-22 17:48:11. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 05:51:20 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
They sat on their asses, did nothing and watched two children die. That's simply inhuman. |
One child actually. The sister was saved.
R. |
Not through any action on their part. |
... and who gets to decide what actions have to be undertaken in this type of scenario? You? The general public? Uncle Milton?
I much prefer the comments made by Frisca in this regard... we truly have very little information on which to base our comments.
Ray |
I guess it'd be easier just to watch people die and take some pictures of their final moments for the old scrapbook, eh? |
Well Spazmo, I don't know about you but I have seen people die, and there was not one goddam thing anyone could do about it.
You really ought to take into consideration the fact that all we have here are snippets of information... and I for one am not prepared to cast aspersions on individuals without the facts.
You can rush to judgement if you so desire, but such is not my style.
Ray |
Yeah, if there's nothing to be done, there's nothing to be done. That doesn't mean sit on yer ass and do nothing to help.
Maybe they were looking for someone laying on the ground to tase. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 07:23:24 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...Maybe they were looking for someone laying on the ground to tase. |
Gratuitous, sanctimonious and totally devoid of any relevance to the discussion at hand... but then when one has no valid argument, baseless accusations can fill the void.
Ray |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 07:30:27 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Spaz, just curious... have you ever been in this kind of situation yourself? |
Well? |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 08:58:22 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...Maybe they were looking for someone laying on the ground to tase. |
Gratuitous, sanctimonious and totally devoid of any relevance to the discussion at hand... but then when one has no valid argument, baseless accusations can fill the void.
Ray |
They were police officers of some sort. Since they did nothing to save the kids and it seems that tasing people is some kind of entertainment for the police these days, it's a logical possibility. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 09:00:35 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Spaz, just curious... have you ever been in this kind of situation yourself? |
Well? |
Yes. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:24:17 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...Maybe they were looking for someone laying on the ground to tase. |
Gratuitous, sanctimonious and totally devoid of any relevance to the discussion at hand... but then when one has no valid argument, baseless accusations can fill the void.
Ray |
They were police officers of some sort. Since they did nothing to save the kids and it seems that tasing people is some kind of entertainment for the police these days, it's a logical possibility. |
I do hope you never get accused of a crime, or fail to meet the expectations of others in a similar scenario... lest you end up having to face a jury of your PEERS. Now that truly would be poetic justice. :O)
Ray
Message edited by author 2007-09-22 22:27:32. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 10:50:25 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
...Maybe they were looking for someone laying on the ground to tase. |
Gratuitous, sanctimonious and totally devoid of any relevance to the discussion at hand... but then when one has no valid argument, baseless accusations can fill the void.
Ray |
They were police officers of some sort. Since they did nothing to save the kids and it seems that tasing people is some kind of entertainment for the police these days, it's a logical possibility. |
I do hope you never get accused of a crime, or fail to meet the expectations of others in a similar scenario... lest you end up having to face a jury of your PEERS. Now that truly would be poetic justice. :O)
Ray |
Actually, based on info outside the original story they actually called the emergency personnel needed for the rescue. It just happened that the boy had gone under before they arrived.
Also, if you've never had any training in rescuing a drowning person I would suggest you call someone that has. It is very common that the rescuer drowns along with the victim (even those that are trained). The victim is having a rush of adrenalin and will seem much stronger than possible.
|
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:35:54 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I do hope you never get accused of a crime, or fail to meet the expectations of others in a similar scenario... lest you end up having to face a jury of your PEERS. Now that truly would be poetic justice. :O)
Ray |
Come on man, where are they going to find enough spazmos to fill a jury? Let's keep this thread grounded in reality. |
|
|
|
09/22/2007 11:54:37 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I do hope you never get accused of a crime, or fail to meet the expectations of others in a similar scenario... lest you end up having to face a jury of your PEERS. Now that truly would be poetic justice. :O)
Ray |
Come on man, where are they going to find enough spazmos to fill a jury? Let's keep this thread grounded in reality. |
Too funny.... hehehehehe :O) Now Spaz is gonna be angry with you.
Ray |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 05:05:25 PM · #48 |
| This thread took a crazy turn. It went from just me saying that these guys did nothing wrong on the first page with everoyne telling me Im nuts, to everyone saying these guys did nothing wrong, with everyone telling spaz hes nuts. |
|
|
|
09/23/2007 05:46:41 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
This thread took a crazy turn. It went from just me saying that these guys did nothing wrong on the first page with everoyne telling me Im nuts, to everyone saying these guys did nothing wrong, with everyone telling spaz hes nuts. |
Unfortunately this is the world we live in. We often complain about the media sensationalizing stories yet we gleefully consume it, nurture it and practice it ourselves every chance we get.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2007 07:56:01 PM · #50 |
You know, I watched this thread with interest, and I debated telling the following story. I am unsure weather I will ad to this thread yet or not, there is a bit of my heart involved.
This year I mourned the passing of a father, and last year celebrated the birth of a second grandson, I have 30 Xmass cards in a box, along with a invitation to a wedding. I have letters about the birth of a son and a daughter then a few years later a not so expected second girl. I have pictures. I have a friend for life.
As a 45 year old would I jump into a cold Idaho river again knowing what I know now. I don’t know..
|
|
