Rendering aid to the bad guy you just shot

Dueling Discussions
61

For a long time I was just happy to put rounds down range in paper and steel. I never thought for one minute I would ever, EVER, need to carry a trauma kit in my car! Let alone a sidearm, 24/7.
And I’m a Brooklyn boy, we know about life and death!

I used to be a happy go lucky guy. I used to sleep with the windows open, the doors were always unlocked and company ( friends ) were always free to come and go, no fear! ( I should clarify, lived in Hawaii )
And even if there was fear, at least back in my day, when they said “your wallet “OR” your life”, they meant it, we had a choice!
Today it’s, your wallet, your life, your kin and even, to some degree, your life style! Worse, they want to use my thoughts and words against me. I’m on the other side of the hill now, and it ain’t greener!

Now reaching the pre-elderly portion of my life, makes me even more aware that I may become a target! I was always the hunter, never the prey!

7 Likes
62

I have had to make that mind shift these last couple of years. Now I am more armed then ever because I know I cannot trust my body. :roll_eyes:

5 Likes
63

It depends if they are still trying to kill or hurt me the answer would be no. But if they surrendered and no longer posed a threat I would help.

3 Likes
64

There is a reason LE handcuffs an assailant before rendering aid. Do you carry handcuffs?
If not, then he or she is still a threat.

7 Likes
65

I think LEOs often don’t risk rendering aid until the criminal is handcuffed and they have a partner or other backup to secure the scene and cover the criminal while they are rendering aid.

7 Likes
66

They generally don’t render aid , unless they deem it necessary
But when the do render aid they do a good job
But they usually cede to a higher medical authority firemen cede to paramedics
Medics to trauma nurses
And nurses to the head of the dept

4 Likes
67

I am a retired cop, so I may think differently than some of you. Here are my thoughts. Rendering aid to yourself if you are hit is first priority. Rendering aid to innocent civilans is second and rendering aid to the shooter is third if that is the situation. I am seeing in my minds as an active shooter situation here.

Now, if in an instance where you must use force to protect yourself or another, and there are no more casualties other than the shooter (think when you stopped and armed robbery of yourself or other) then i would render aid to the suspect. Obviously if you DO get in a shooting situation, your split second decision will be scrutinaized in court for perhaps years. Rendering aid to him/her to most juries shows that you NEVER wanted to hurt anyone but did so in self defence. To the point that after shooting him (for yours or someone else’s protection) you tried to save them.

In this situation you WILL be pissed, but in the end rendering aid if it is possible will benefit you in the upcoming legal nightmare you are now in. Keep your powder dry people!

Scott

9 Likes
68

Sorry, I’m going to have to throw a flag on that play. Devils advocate. Plenty of lawyers.
First of all I’m in no position nor of the medical persuasion to assist the person that tried to kill me. I’m under NO obligation, at least in my state.
Furthermore, this almost guarantees a civil suit if the attacker dies.

Directly from Kevin USCCA “move to a position of tactical advantage, call 911”

5 Likes
69

NOTE: He says you have no MORAL obligation. I am talking only criminal liability! Doing so will certainly help you. Now if i knew there were three people involved in trying to hurt me and I ony put one down things would change. THEN, I would do what you suggest! Everything is fluid, so we must react to what the situation presents.

5 Likes
70

Down does not mean out. Not being a threat when I am at distance, does not mean not a threat within arms-length. I would not risk my life trying to help someone that I had to shoot. Police have a duty to aid, regular citizens do not.

I strongly don’t believe my not aiding a downed perp will reflect poorly on me - I am not an EMT, so I can’t be thought to be a “bad” person as I don’t have the skills to aid. I also don’t always have any first aid supplies at hand. You have training from being a LEO. Likely that you would be judged differently, similarly for anyone else with certified training.

4 Likes
71

I agree. I would, but if someone not trained did not help, I would understand. Yes, I am a retired cop, but I guess it has been ingrained in me.

5 Likes
72

The trouble I see with a common person like me trying to render aid is the same reason they say not to try and remove the victims of a car crash.

It sets me up for culpability for any injury or death.

Yes I understand the oxymoron of that, I just shot them, causing the injury.

But if I try to fix that after the fact and they still die?

Would I be responsible like I would in the case of moving a car crash victim?

Imho better to shoot to stop the threat, then leave it to the professionals if they’re going to survive.

4 Likes
73

I get it!

3 Likes
74

In Utah we have the "Good Samaritan " law

78B-4-501. Good Samaritan Law.

(1) As used in this section:

(a) “Child” means an individual of such an age that a reasonable person would perceive the individual as unable to open the door of a locked motor vehicle, but in any case younger than 18 years of age.

(b) “Emergency” means an unexpected occurrence involving injury, threat of injury, or illness to a person or the public, including motor vehicle accidents, disasters, actual or threatened discharges, removal or disposal of hazardous materials, and other accidents or events of a similar nature.

(c) “Emergency care” includes actual assistance or advice offered to avoid, mitigate, or attempt to mitigate the effects of an emergency.

(d) “First responder” means a state or local:

(i) law enforcement officer, as defined in Section 53-13-103;

(ii) firefighter, as defined in Section 34A-3-113; or

(iii) emergency medical service provider, as defined in Section 26B-4-101.

(e) “Motor vehicle” means the same as that term is defined in Section 41-1a-102.

(2) A person who renders emergency care at or near the scene of, or during, an emergency, gratuitously and in good faith, is not liable for any civil damages or penalties as a result of any act or omission by the person rendering the emergency care, unless the person is grossly negligent or caused the emergency.

(3) (a) A person who gratuitously, and in good faith, assists a governmental agency or political subdivision in an activity described in Subsections (3)(a)(i) through (iii) is not liable for any civil damages or penalties as a result of any act or omission, unless the person rendering assistance is grossly negligent in:

(i) implementing measures to control the causes of epidemic and communicable diseases and other conditions significantly affecting the public health, or necessary to protect the public health as set out in Title 26A, Chapter 1, Local Health Departments;

(ii) investigating and controlling suspected bioterrorism and disease as set out in Title 26B, Chapter 7, Part 3, Treatment, Isolation, and Quarantine Procedures for Communicable Diseases; and

(iii) responding to a national, state, or local emergency, a public health emergency as defined in Section 26B-7-301, or a declaration by the president of the United States or other federal official requesting public health-related activities.

(b) The immunity in this Subsection (3) is in addition to any immunity or protection in state or federal law that may apply.

(4) (a) A person who uses reasonable force to enter a locked and unattended motor vehicle to remove a confined child is not liable for damages in a civil action if all of the following apply:

(i) the person has a good faith belief that the confined child is in imminent danger of suffering physical injury or death unless the confined child is removed from the motor vehicle;

(ii) the person determines that the motor vehicle is locked and there is no reasonable manner in which the person can remove the confined child from the motor vehicle;

(iii) before entering the motor vehicle, the person notifies a first responder of the confined child;

(iv) the person does not use more force than is necessary under the circumstances to enter the motor vehicle and remove the confined child from the vehicle; and

(v) the person remains with the child until a first responder arrives at the motor vehicle.

(b) A person is not immune from civil liability under this Subsection (4) if the person fails to abide by any of the provisions of Subsection (4)(a) or commits any unnecessary or malicious damage to the motor vehicle.

4 Likes
75

Unless the threat is actually not down and you end up being injured or killed by them, or have to further injure/kill them to save yourself after you close.

Unless there is another attacker and you only thought they he (or she) was the only one but then their friend/whatever appeared and you were blindsided.

Certainly is a very strong word here

3 Likes
76

I may have said this earlier in this thread but I would have to be 100% certain the threat is over before I would consider rendering aid.

Not only may the threat from the injured criminal not actually be over but he may have friends nearby as well. I suspect many EMTs and LEOs would not render aid until the scene is completely secured and they and any bystanders are completely safe. This would usually mean having backup arrive.

If I was 100% sure the threat was over and preferably had someone else to cover the attacker and the scene in case I was wrong then I would likely help. Though I would be concerned that my attempts to assist could be viewed as tampering with evidence by a prosecutor if the criminal ended up not surviving.

2 Likes
77

Many States have similar protections. Though they won’t necessarily keep you from facing civil actions and expenses from ambulance chasing lawyers who might try to prove your actions were negligent.

2 Likes
78

In my experience, the presence of gore, a body on the ground and a chaotic scene creates a type of “tunnel vision” where otherwise competent individuals seize up and are unaware of their surroundings. I’ve been to scenes where there’s a shooting and the cops are clustered around the body just looking at it rather than rendering aid, looking around or talking with potential witnesses.

3 Likes
79

Well, you would certainly need to access the situation prior to helping them. I mean if there is another threat there, he is on his own!

2 Likes
80

It would be very nice if you could be completely certain there was no other threat. If that were true, nothing would have happened in the first place because I wouldn’t have even been there to get attacked in the first place. Knowing there is no other threat, that just seems like a high bar to me.

Just sayin’, knowing there is no other threat is a pretty high bar

2 Likes