Officer arrest Firefighter

[redhead]

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/02/16/pkg.cop.arrests.firefighter.kmov
Hmmmm...

Thoughts, since I know we have both sides here?!

[Jeff Rhea]

Poor judgement.

Is the fire truck a safety hazard? Yes. Do we arrest fire fighters on scene? No. They were obviously following their typically myopic protocols.

Better choice: Establish traffic controls behind the fire truck in order to prevent the rear-end collision that is sure to come because of the fire fighter's oblivion to surrounded traffic dangers (high speed approaching traffic and inattentive drivers). Once the scene is secure, explain to the captain the folly in his 'safety' device placement. Ask him to move his truck to prevent other collisions. If he refuses, work to remove the injured from the scene ASAP then release the fire fighters from the scene. Then take it up the chain of command and ask for a resolution meeting. There, point out the problems created by their vehicle placement and the danger they placed the public in by parking in a lane unnecessarily. Also point out that the Captain's job is coordinate emergency services and supervise fire fighters, not participate in patient care. Also point out that despite what local MOU's may say, on the highway he is not the IC.

Sue in Federal Court? For what?

[chppride]

Poor judgement.

Is the fire truck a safety hazard? Yes. Do we arrest fire fighters on scene? No. They were obviously following their typically myopic protocols.

Better choice: Establish traffic controls behind the fire truck in order to prevent the rear-end collision that is sure to come because of the fire fighter's oblivion to surrounded traffic dangers (high speed approaching traffic and inattentive drivers). Once the scene is secure, explain to the captain the folly in his 'safety' device placement. Ask him to move his truck to prevent other collisions. If he refuses, work to remove the injured from the scene ASAP then release the fire fighters from the scene. Then take it up the chain of command and ask for a resolution meeting. There, point out the problems created by their vehicle placement and the danger they placed the public in by parking in a lane unnecessarily. Also point out that the Captain's job is coordinate emergency services and supervise fire fighters, not participate in patient care. Also point out that despite what local MOU's may say, on the highway he is not the IC.

Sue in Federal Court? For what?

Well said. I'm thinking that there might have been some existing tension between the departments, or something, because that is completely inappropriate. That officer not only delayed patient care, he escalated the situation and created a scene, which is very unprofessional. Should've talked to him afterwards, they're both professionals...I hope. And if the officer was so worried about blocking the lanes, he could have gone behind that truck and slowed traffic/direct traffic around it. I've provided patient care on the side of the freeway before as well, and having that truck "protect" me while I'm focusing my attention on my patient is key. You always go home!!!

[bcjack]

Poor judgement.

Is the fire truck a safety hazard? Yes. Do we arrest fire fighters on scene? No. They were obviously following their typically myopic protocols.

Better choice: Establish traffic controls behind the fire truck in order to prevent the rear-end collision that is sure to come because of the fire fighter's oblivion to surrounded traffic dangers (high speed approaching traffic and inattentive drivers). Once the scene is secure, explain to the captain the folly in his 'safety' device placement. Ask him to move his truck to prevent other collisions. If he refuses, work to remove the injured from the scene ASAP then release the fire fighters from the scene. Then take it up the chain of command and ask for a resolution meeting. There, point out the problems created by their vehicle placement and the danger they placed the public in by parking in a lane unnecessarily. Also point out that the Captain's job is coordinate emergency services and supervise fire fighters, not participate in patient care. Also point out that despite what local MOU's may say, on the highway he is not the IC.

Sue in Federal Court? For what?

WRONG!!! Our Tasks are:

Provide a safe scene for our people.
Assess the scene for hazards (fuel, wires...).
Assess the condition of our patients (trapped, how many, what condition).
Provide medical treatment for the patient(s).
Remove the vehicle from the patient(s) (extrication).
Load the patient(s) into the ambulance or helicopter.
Secure the vehicles (disconnect batteries) and get them ready for the tow truck.
Assist the law enforcement personnel with what they need to get the scene cleared ASAP.
OUR PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES ARE SAFETY AND MEDICAL CARE FOR THE PATIENTS.

A properly placed 50,000 pound fire engine is a hell of a lot better tool to stop the drunk driver's car and keep him/her from plowing into the workers at the scene than a 4,000 pound Crown Victoria.

These kind of on-scene tactics need to be worked out ahead of time and it is just not done often enough. We should be talking to each other and be working together for the benefit of our customers and not waste time and money treating each other like s***.

Please define what you consider "typically myopic protocols"

Based on the information available, the Officer was waaaaaay out of line and was an a******.

Visit respondersafety.com for more information on this issue.

[dw]

Then take it up the chain of command and ask for a resolution meeting.

These kind of on scene tactics need to be worked out ahead of time and it is just not done often enough. We should be talking to each other and be working together for the benefit of our customers and not waste time and money treating each other like s***.Exactly! The side of the road is not the place to have any of these discussions. Fire is following their procedures and best practices as are the law enforcement officers on-scene. These issues should never arise because they should be worked out ahead of time at management levels. Everyone in the field should be aware of said agreements and we should all be on the same page.

There are excellent arguments on both sides of blocking lanes. (I have not read the site bcjack mentioned) Congestion creates a more safe environment once people are slowed down, but dangers where traffic is slowing. Free-flowing traffic at speed works to prevent collisions until one person has trouble multitasking between driving and rubbernecking.

There is no single method that works best in all situations.

[bcjack]

An OUTSTANDING example of a well organized and intelligently crafted SOP.

We should have these types of SOP's developed and agreed upon so we don't have this kind of crap happening.

The practice must be working some how, the fire departments in southern Santa Barbara County have been using the "Blocking" technique of parking their engines at FREEWAY crashes for at least 5 years.


http://phoenix.gov/fire/20507a.pdf

[MW]

Those look like local policies and web site information.

Here's a few laws:

CALIFORNIA CODES
VEHICLE CODE

2454. (a) The authority for incident command at the scene of an
on-highway hazardous substance incident is vested in the appropriate
law enforcement agency having primary traffic investigative authority
on the highway where the incident occurs. Responsibility for
incident command at the scene of an on-highway hazardous substance
incident shall continue until all emergency operations at the scene
have been completed and order has been restored.


2800. (a) It is unlawful to willfully fail or refuse to comply with
a lawful order, signal, or direction of a peace officer, as defined
in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of
the Penal Code, when that peace officer is in uniform and is
performing duties pursuant to any of the provisions of this code, or
to refuse to submit to a lawful inspection pursuant to this code.

[MW]

:badgrin::badgrin::badgrin::badgrin::badgrin::badg rin::badgrin:

Okay, all you FF's are pretty jacked up now !!!!

I'm just stirring the sh!!.

Sorry.......................... It's rooted deep inside me.

In the words of a great overtime producer.....

"Can't we all just get along?

[MW]

#16 in the Phoenix thing:

16. Do what the cops say.

[MW]

I'm sorry...................

I trying to stop !!!!

[bcjack]

Those look like local policies and web site information.

Here's a few laws:

CALIFORNIA CODES
VEHICLE CODE

2454. (a) The authority for incident command at the scene of an
on-highway hazardous substance incident is vested in the appropriate
law enforcement agency having primary traffic investigative authority
on the highway where the incident occurs. Responsibility for
incident command at the scene of an on-highway hazardous substance
incident shall continue until all emergency operations at the scene
have been completed and order has been restored.


2800. (a) It is unlawful to willfully fail or refuse to comply with
a lawful order, signal, or direction of a peace officer, as defined
in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of
the Penal Code, when that peace officer is in uniform and is
performing duties pursuant to any of the provisions of this code, or
to refuse to submit to a lawful inspection pursuant to this code.

:think: Nice try!!!

[MW]

??????

battery acid / radiator fluid / airbag dust / hhuuummmmm...

[redhead]

...the officer was fined $18000-......

[bcjack]

??????

battery acid / radiator fluid / airbag dust / hhuuummmmm...

Kind of a stretch isn't that???:think:

[MW]

Not when your having fun !!!!

:lol:

[MW]

...the officer was fined $18000-......


That's it ???

Almost worth it !!!

[bcjack]

...the officer was fined $18000-......

The video would not play that well for some reason. Why did the Officer get fined and who fined him?

[Chippysgt]

To my way of thinking the first consideration would be the safety and life saving procedures for the injured. Along with that is making the scene safe for the emergency personnel and the victims.
I think the firefighters were thinking like that and I think the cop was thinking like that but they were miles apart on the reasoning for their actions.
The cop was off base in my opinion in not backing down and settling the matter later. There was scene management competition when I was on the job and I was hoping it was getting better. This is an incident where a lack of common understanding created a horrible incident.
Having worked for several years in Los Angeles County as a Traffic Officer and a Sergeant, there was nothing that we liked better than one of those humongous blaze yellow fire trucks to help us close a lane so work could get done, lives saved, vehicles towed, evidence collected etc.
I hope they spend some time in the police academy and the fire academy teaching the concept that we have a symbiotic relationship and we work better together than against each other.
I for one have always loved the idea of guys in Turn Outs that were willing to jump in the ditch filled with mud, blood and guts and tend to the wounded. It worked so much better than me jumping in there with my $300 wool uniform and spit shined shoes................

[redhead]

The video would not play that well for some reason. Why did the Officer get fined and who fined him?

http://www.kmov.com/featuredstories/stories/kmov_localnews_080213_firefighterarrested.bd01f42f .html


All the info I have seen on it other then video..

[MW]

Okay...

I'm back in check.

Sorry guys, just having fun !!

[bcjack]

The video would not play still. Looks like my computer is sick.

From what I gathered, it sounded like a civil judgement and not a "fine".:badgrin:

[cal911gal]

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/017052704BE47150862573EE0017432B?OpenDocument



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/381CD87C49EA643F862573EF00177933?OpenDocument

[PublicSafety]

Having worn both uniforms, it's easy to see where the chest beating and the comparison of the size of male anatomy immediately began upon the arrival of the fire engine. The first obvious thing is that the Capt. on the engine is a hard charger, take no poop, first-in, last-out type of guy. Example given by the gorilla swing from the MOVING apparatus upon arrival. The other thing that is blatently obvious is placement of the police vehicle in the number 4 lane. Firefighters will atest to the police cars that always seem to park DIRECTLY in front of a burning building, smack dab in the middle of the IDEAL spot for ladder truck placement, and......you guessed it....... right in front of the closest fire hydrant. The officer could have placed his vehicle on the shoulder, allowing the fire apparatus use of the #4 lane for fire hazards/extrication and the like. I'll take a 60,000lb+ bright red, led impregnated, 11ft tall monster over a crown vic any day and twice on Sunday. The civil suit went for the Fire Captain and the officer must pony up the moolah so there is obviously more than meets the eye. Isn't it so nice to just see the edited video clip of every controversial news story on the planet??

[Fire1]

I understand and like having a truck block traffic when neccessary, but i have even had them go to extreams and have had to tell them to move. one instance where a solo roll over in the #3 lane (of 5) on its roof with all parties out and standing on the shoulder with no injuries (fire later confirmed it). The first engine drove the wrong way up the freeway from the offramp and takes the #3 and 4 lane just before the TC which was ok. Their tiller then parks about 100 feet past the accident scene broadside in the freeway taking all lanes (HOV plus 4 and shoulder). At this point i was wanting to let traffic take the HOV and at least #1 if not #2 as well. Now i can't do anything. I walk up to one of the guys and tell him to move the truck that its in my traffic lanes and its not even providing scene protection (that was being done by the first engine ahead of the scene). He says no and that i need to talk to the captain. I talk to the captain and tell him to move it. He says no that he has to make sure that everyone is ok. I told him i did not need them and that i had canceled 11-41 5 minutes prior to their arrival and that i want my lanes open. We fight about it for a few minutes before they finally move it (an we had a discussion about it afterwards about it being a missunderstanding and that we both have jobs to do, bla bla bla) Whatever. They had no reason to take those lanes and should have moved their truck when i told them to. Negative injury TC when i had canceled them prior to their arrival. That is just bad scene management.

[Jeff Rhea]

BCJack, just remember, you asked:

Myopic: lacking foresight or scope; "a short view of the problem"; "shortsighted policies"; "shortsighted critics derided the plan"; "myopic thinking"

Everything you list is about you, your safety, and patient care: myopic.

Using a prybar to open a hood and destroying the latch and radiator instead of opening the driver's door and pulling the release handle: myopic.

Cutting battery cables on a car that could have otherwise been driven either out of the way or away from the scene: myopic.

The fire captain in this case jumped off of a moving fire truck to personally respond to a patient who already had someone tending to them without regard for proper scene management or coordination with the on scene incident COMMANDER: myopic.

The fire services invented the ICS and are its premier practioners, yet in this incident the fire captain completely ignored ICS protocols in order to get his hands in the blood which is not his role or responsibility: myopic.

The fire captain was so focused on personally tending to one injured person that he began performing the duties of his subordinates instead of command and control functions in support of them: myopic.

Placing a fire truck in a free flowing traffic lane without any warning other than emergency lights and without any regard for the immediate lethal hazard that truck posed to other motorists (potential new patients, if they were not killed): myopic.

Believing that what fire fighters do is the only thing an incident commander should give consideration to: myopic.

Believing patient care is not just the primary concern but the only concern in a critical incident: myopic.


Our safety issue is EVERYBODY on scene and around the scene including drivers approaching the scene and rubber-neckers on the far side of the freeway. Our experience tells us that when you suddenly throw a roadblock into traffic without sufficient warning someone is going to be inattentive or driving only 6 feet off of their hood orniment (myopic) and run into the roadblock even if it is a big red fire truck with flashing lights. When that happens the INCIDENT COMMANDER is the one person who can count on being named personally in the law suit for not properly managing the incident and actively reducing reasonably foreseeable threats to the public. No free passes in court for myosis.

We also have to consider the impact the incident will have on the traffic management within the greater area in order to keep the roadways open and people and commerce flowing because in the final analysis that is what we get paid to do; MANAGE traffic. And that includes balancing patient care, traffic hazards, and collision investigation responsibilities.

Our risk management philosophy is: If it is predictable it is preventable.

While patient care and our safety are primary concerns, they are not our only concerns and certainly not to the exclusion of all else. We are not so focused on one person's injuries that we loose complete sight of the potential hazards we unnecessarily create with our response posture and thereby place others in unnecessary danger.

I could regale you all day long with stories of myopic fire fighters and the number of additional collisions we have had to work and injured we have had to care for because of the myopic SOP's of fire departments and so could every other officer here. They are legion.

For years I rushed to collision scenes with the primary purpose of being able to asses the injuries prior to the arrival of fire fighters and cancel them before they showed up and destroyed my crime scene. We have a nickname for fire fighters, "The evidence erratication team." In addition to increasing the threat to the motoring pubic, fire fighters are myopic in the placement of their vehicles in crime scenes. If the collision is fatal, the crime scene is a homicide scene. It may not be "murder" but manslaughter is still "homicide." Somebody did something that cost someone their very life. It may cost the responsible person(s) years in prison and potentially tens of millions of dollars. It is a big deal even years after the scene is cleared. How many local cops have to process a homicide scene with a fire truck parked in the middle of say the living room? Again, the times we've had to gather evidence from under a fire truck are too numerous to count. Then there all those times well meaning but myopic fire fighters have washed down the homicide scene without coordinating with the incident commander or homicide investigator (usually a lowly traffic cop). I've often asked fire fighters who are kicking evidence (debris) out of the roadway how they would like it if I stopped at an arson scene and started moving stuff around or started dropping incendiary devices for them to sort out? Because that is what it is like for a traffic cop trying to piece together how 1 or 10 people lost their lives while fire fighters are "focused" on the one survivor and destroying the crime scene without any regard for the other duties and responsibilities required to be performed by the agency with primary investigative authority (see below).

If the traffic incident is on a county road or state highway outside an incorporated city or any freeway in this state then the CHP officer, sergeant, or lieutenant is the Incident Commander, period, always. No matter what fire or EMS protocols dictate for IC call signs for you folks, we NEVER EVER give up incident command authority and responsibility.

California Health and Safety Code Section 1798.6 (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), authority for the management of the scene of an emergency shall be vested in the appropriate public safety agency having primary investigative authority. The scene of an emergency shall be managed in a manner designed to
minimize the risk of death or health impairment to the patient and to
other persons who may be exposed to the risks as a result of the
emergency condition, and priority shall be placed upon the interests
of those persons exposed to the more serious and immediate risks to
life and health. Public safety officials shall consult emergency
medical services personnel or other authoritative health care
professionals at the scene in the determination of relevant risks.

So if the guy in the car simply had whiplash or a broken extremity which is not life threatening, then the priority shall be place upon the interests of those persons exposed to the more serious and immediate risks to life and health. In this particular case that would be the poor dope who is about to slam into the back of that fire truck at 60 mph.

On the up side for you guys who put the wet stuff on the red stuff; when you are the incident commander and you want a road closed I close it because you are the IC. However, exactly how the road is closed is still my job and I still do it with due consideration for minimizing the risk to the motoring public, because that is what we are trained and qualified to do.

[82-70 David]

This is staring to get interesting:shock:
Mike

[bcjack]

Jeff:

Thanks for the lessons. Now, what would solve 99% of the stuff you so eloquently threw out there???

COMMUNICATION!!!

If the parties would get off their butts and put their egos away and spend some time working together to get these things worked out together, what would we have???? A much better working relationship, that's what. I can honestly say that we did that here and the ability for the fire folks and the law enforcement folks to understand each others needs has made our working relationship excellent. We understand the "crime scene" stuff and do our best to preserve it, while still attending to the needs of our customers.

As I said in a previous thread, all it takes is someone to make the first move. If the fire folks where you work are really that bad, I would challenge you to take the first step and contact the Department's Training Officer and get something started. We can banter back and forth about who is right and who is wrong, who is good and who is bad; or we can do something about it.

We are all here for the the same reason, to make a bad situation better. We have different tasks and responsibilities, but the end result is still the same.

[LAWNMUSIC]

I love fire trucks. I can only think of 2 times where I asked the engineer to move their rig (one of those times was actually asking them to block additional lanes so we could move vehicles to the shoulder on a particularly wide stretch of freeway). Based on the video, I personally wouldn't have had a problem with where the truck was placed. Looked like traffic was still flowing pretty decently (too fast in my opinion, based on the fact that there is a patrol vehicle in a lane). In addition, the injured party has to be removed from the left side of the vehicle due to his possible back injury, directly into the lane next to an open lane if the fire rig wasn't there.

Maybe it's because I've worked a lot of graveyard shift, or the discussions I've had with my good friend who is a Captain with L.A. County Fire, or the fact that my patrol vehicle was obliterated by a DUI driver the other night as we tried to set up a full freeway closure (no fire on scene yet), but I am with Chippysgt on this one:

"there was nothing that we liked better than one of those humongous blaze yellow fire trucks to help us close a lane so work could get done, lives saved, vehicles towed, evidence collected etc."

[Officer_Grady]

bcjack, I understand the communication bit, talking it over a cup of coffee, but what results is your name dropped if you get stopped, worst yet, stopped because you are drunk. I don't mind blocking two lanes out of four to slow traffic because I'd be screaming in the radio for a traffic break three minutes later, but if I can move the scene off the freeway, onto a slower travelled street, over 98 percent of my hazard is gone. If the person wants to go to the hospital. more power to them. What I don't like is the automatic ride to the hospital because county protocol says MVAs over a certain speed require transport. Those trauma doctors must have a strong lobbyists.

[dw]

bcjack, I understand the communication bit, talking it over a cup of coffee, but what results is your name dropped if you get stopped, worst yet, stopped because you are drunk.What? How did we get onto this? Are you saying you think communication is a bad thing because some firefighter is going to throw you down on a stop?

[Yzeman]

The only thing the video did for me was PROVE, beyond ANY doubt, what I have said for years....ALL firemen secretly want to be Highway Cops! :biggrin:

Just look at'em...all blocking traffic, protecting a T/C scene, putting latex gloves on....it's like they're BEGGING to be Highwaymen!

Maybe some type of firefighter/highwayman Explorer program :think:

[bcjack]

The only thing the video did for me was PROVE, beyond ANY doubt, what I have said for years....ALL firemen secretly want to be Highway Cops! :biggrin:

Just look at'em...all blocking traffic, protecting a T/C scene, putting latex gloves on....it's like they're BEGGING to be Highwaymen!

Maybe some type of firefighter/highwayman Explorer program :think:

Someone already has!!!!!!!!!!


http://www.respondersafety.com/images/header.jpghttp://www.myfirecompanies.com/images/printthis.gif (http://www.respondersafety.com/fullstory.php?59242#) http://www.myfirecompanies.com/images/emailthis.gif (http://www.respondersafety.com/fullstory.php?59242#)WANT TO ESTABLISH A TRAFFIC CONTROL UNIT? FREE MANUAL AVAILABLE HERE Traffic control units commonly called Fire Police in many parts of the country can be an important element of roadway incident scene safety. Volunteer and some career departments rely on "Traffic Control Assistants" to protect responders and the public at accidents, fires or at special events in the community. This down-loadable manual provides information to assist in the establishment and management of these valuable units within a fire or police department.

The Cumberland Valley Volunteer Firemens Association Emergency Responder Safety Institute (ERSI) conducted the work detailed in this manual with grant funding provided by the United States Fire Administration (USFA). The objective of the project was to study of the feasibility of using Fire Corps volunteers as non-emergency Traffic Control Assistants. This project was intended to review the transferability of best practice information developed by the ERSI to the Fire Corps volunteers serving with local emergency organizations. This manual provides an overview of the demonstration project sponsored by ERSI and establishes guidelines for the training and use of volunteers as Traffic Control Assistants.

Download the manual from this page or from the Handouts Section on the Respondersafety.com Home Page.

Click to download related files1. Developing Traffic Control Assistant Training Programs.pdf (http://www.myfirecompanies.com/filelock/1201882057Developing%20Traffic%20Control%20Assista nt%20Training%20Programs.pdf)
Developing Traffic Control Assistant Training Programs
Useful Links
1. USFA Emergency Vechicle Safety Programs (http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/fireservice/research/safety/vehicle.shtm)
http://www.myfirecompanies.com/temp/124163_thumb.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:winPop()
site designed and maintained by
http://www.respondersafety.com/images/fc.com_logo_for_transparenc.gif (http://www.firecompanies.com/)
On the Highway We've Got Your Back - ResponderSafety.com
Contact the Webmaster (webmaster@firecompanies.com) | © 2005-2008 FireCompanies.com (http://www.firecompanies.com/)
Content on this Web site is supplied by the fire department. FireCompanies.com cannot be held responsible for any content, either text, pictures, or any other form of media found on this Web site. Portions of news supplied by FireHouse.com (http://www.firehouse.com/) Check mail (http://www.firecompanies.com/webmail)

[bcjack]

bcjack, I understand the communication bit, talking it over a cup of coffee, but what results is your name dropped if you get stopped, worst yet, stopped because you are drunk. I don't mind blocking two lanes out of four to slow traffic because I'd be screaming in the radio for a traffic break three minutes later, but if I can move the scene off the freeway, onto a slower travelled street, over 98 percent of my hazard is gone. If the person wants to go to the hospital. more power to them. What I don't like is the automatic ride to the hospital because county protocol says MVAs over a certain speed require transport. Those trauma doctors must have a strong lobbyists.

In this case, I am not talking necessarily about "talking it over a cup of coffee". I am talking about a CHP Officer (Sgt. Lt., whomever) providing the firefighters with training as to what is expected of them at a crash. A real dialog (two-way) that allows all of us to get a good picture of each others wants and needs. The CA State Firefighter I Academy curriculum currently teaches us all about the mechanics of crashes (scene assessment, scene safety, extrication, tools, oil, fuel and other spills, EMT...) but it does not address the needs of law enforcement. The Law Enforcement Academy system (POST) does not really address the fire side of the equation either, as far as I can tell. Maybe it is time to get our collective heads together and CHANGE that!!! I have already developed a one-hour PowerPoint presentation for our local Police Explorer Post Academy titled "Police Response to Fire Department Incidents". It starts with "This is a fire engine, this is a fire truck" and ends with general principles of what we (firefighters) are looking for our LE partners to do at various types of calls for service. I would be happy to share this information with anyone interested. (I use a lot of pictures so it is easy for cops to follow along:badgrin:)

Right or wrong, we as first responders do NOT have any control over EMS protocol. That authority comes down to the County from the State, and so we either lobby to get it changed, or go with it.

[Jeff Rhea]

bcjack, I appreciate your response and your position. Don't get me wrong, not all fire fighters are oblivious to other issues related to collision scenes. I've worked with many who are excellent, know the rolls of each agency, work effectively and efficiently, and clear as soon as they can get released on scene. Same same with EMS personnel, I've worked with some great ones who ask from their window if they are needed before they open the door so they can wave off if not needed and had others who have kidnapped people. You are correct, our challenge is communications. And just as soon as I become an Area Commander I will make that coordination happen. However, I've beat this drum without response in several areas of the state so far. But I have hope that one day we will be invited to a fire fighter's training day so we can give a presentation on our perspective of dynamic on-highway incident scenes so fire fighters can see the scene as we see the scene and think more critically about where they place their equipment.

Again, the cop in the video used poor judgement and so did the captain. They both need to be spanked hard for not putting the best interest of the public first.

I've had an officer call and tell me he was about to tow a fire truck from a mountain pass because the Bn Chief refused to move it out of the roadway while they were fighting a wildland fire. "Mmmm, it's a fire right?" "Yeah." "It's causing a safety hazard?" "Yeah, but it's my road!" "No, the Chief is the IC. If he tells you to shut down the highway you shut down the highway. You're not in charge on this one, fire is." We shut down the four line highway to accomodate the fire guys because although it jumped our highway, they were the primary investigative agency for the incident. So it goes.

[G-DAWG]

"Can't we all just get along?"
Well, since it was a fire then FD was the primary investigative agency!!
Someone's ego was hurt so by making up for it...he arrests the fire fighter/chief. Obviously, the FD blocked the roadway for the safety of his/her firefighters so what's the big idea arresting him? Hip Hip Hooray for the Fire Dept!!

[bcjack]

Jeff:

I understand your position and agree there are good ones and bad ones out there. It pains me that you have beat the drum and can't get anyone to listen. Since I am now retired, I think I will take some time to use my connections to see about changing the training curriculums of the Fire and LE Academy programs to address this problem. If it is instructed at the beginning of their careers, when they are "young skulls full of mush" (to quote Rush Limbaugh) maybe we can make our respective jobs easier.

Thank you for what you and all of the CHP Officers do for us.:think:

[sonBPTCHIP]

I know my department gets bi-annual trainings from the chp on expectations at an accident scene. We have worked long and hard on building a relationship with the CHP and local law enforcement and it has paid off. I guess there's no sense beating a dead horse, both parties in the video acted like 4 year olds. Communication is the key, and you can't expect it to start at the top because we all know at that level the bureaucratic bs is so thick air couldn't pass through it.

[OneBurntOutEMT]

That officer was wrong. I'm the last person to stick up for a firefighter but the engineer parked in the perfect spot. Who cares about the flow of traffic? I could really care less if someone's drive home will now take them twice as long because of the limited number of availible lanes open. It's all about scene safety for EVERYONE on scene from the tow truck driver to the officers. I currently work as an EMT and have almost been taken out twice on freeway TC's not to mention a FF was recently hit by a motorist in my area.

[silverman10051]

Bottom line (in my opinion), the officer was out of line and could have handled the situation differently. I agree with a prior post that there must have been some problems between the two agencies prior to this incident. No one wins in this situation. Whats going to happen the next time the two agencies are involved in another emergency situation. Chain of command. Put the monkey on someone elses back.

[G-Man]

That officer was wrong. I'm the last person to stick up for a firefighter but the engineer parked in the perfect spot. Who cares about the flow of traffic? I could really care less if someone's drive home will now take them twice as long because of the limited number of availible lanes open. It's all about scene safety for EVERYONE on scene from the tow truck driver to the officers. I currently work as an EMT and have almost been taken out twice on freeway TC's not to mention a FF was recently hit by a motorist in my area.

Your views will change if you are ever so fortunate as to become a CHP Officer. The traffic was free flowing in that lane and the engine causes more of a hazard. I am assuming there were no cones or flares directing traffic (when I say this and judging by the Officer in the video and judging by the Officer's reaction to the truck, I am probably correct). Just recently a nearby office had a fatal collision when someone rear-ended a parked fire truck. I am not going to comment on the tucks position as I was not there, but I will take a guess that it was parked in a free flowing lane of traffic.

[bcjack]

Your views will change if you are ever so fortunate as to become a CHP Officer. The traffic was free flowing in that lane and the engine causes more of a hazard. I am assuming there were no cones or flares directing traffic (when I say this and judging by the Officer in the video and judging by the Officer's reaction to the truck, I am probably correct). Just recently a nearby office had a fatal collision when someone rear-ended a parked fire truck. I am not going to comment on the tucks position as I was not there, but I will take a guess that it was parked in a free flowing lane of traffic.

You are sure making a lot of ASSUMPTIONS in favor of the Officer and against the Firefighters based on a video that does not provide sufficient information to substantiate your assumptions.

We DO NOT park in a free-flowing traffic lane as you would believe, just to screw up traffic. We do it so EVERYONE working the crash scene can go home at the end of their shift. (everyonegoeshome.com)

As in every profession, there are some bad eggs, but, IMHO, you are out of line to ASSUME that in the above identified fatal accident, the fire engine was parked in the wrong place ("a free-flowing lane of traffic") and as such, was the reason there was a fatality. If we are going to throw out ASSUMPTIONS about the fatal crash you referenced:

Maybe we should ASSUME that the party killed in the crash was prevented from killing the CHP Officers, Firefighters, EMTs, Tow Truck Drivers, CALTRANS Workers or whomever was part of the team that was doing their job at the scene because of the way it was parked.

Maybe we should also ASSUME that the party killed was a .20 deuce that was stopped from killing the innocent team members doing their job at the scene because of the way it was parked.

Or maybe we should ASSUME that the party killed was on his/her cell phone and would have killed one or more of the innocent team members that were doing their job at the scene if the engine had not been parked the way it was.

Or maybe we can ASSUME that the operator the fire engine really did screw up and parked it in the wrong place. If that is the case, did the Incident Commander make any effort to fix the problem???

Or...:hitwall:

I can go on and on and on with ASSUMPTIONS, but since you and I were not there, is it really appropriate for us to be pointing fingers as to what did or did not happen?

Bottom line...We all need to COMMUNICATE and get the job done safely and efficiently. A big part of the COMMUNICATION process should come BEFORE the incidents occur. As I have stated before, someone needs to take the first step to open the lines of COMMUNCATION and iron out the procedural issues ahead of time.:think:

I have done that...Have You????

[PublicSafety]

Here is a short video clip that sums up this thread.....

http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=28013882

[bcjack]

A timely editorial from:

Respondersafety.com.

http://www.respondersafety.com/images/260xvideo.jpg (http://www.respondersafety.com/videorequest.php)


http://www.respondersafety.com/images/editor.gif

I have some serious concerns this month my friends. As Howard Cohen and I work each day to report on the struck-by situations around North America, and sometimes the world, I see some serious problems. More than that my friends, I see the same operational glitches over and over again. Another seeming problem stems, I believe, from the fact that it is our friends in the world of law enforcement who are suffering the overwhelming number of casualties out the there on the highways.

Other problems which surface from time to time bother me quite a bit. One of these conundrums involves the number of incidents you and I have read about or seen where fire personnel have been arrested by law enforcement personnel for fail to obey the demands of the police.

Like you, I have found myself feeling for the firefighter in these situations. I guess after 41 years in the business that is a natural way for me to react. However upon deeper reflection I see another problem at work in these situations. I see these difficulties as arising from the lack of a common game plan for traffic control operations.

If there is no agreed upon, specified way to operate, each agency will puff up its chest, step forward, and act according to THEIR procedures. This is where the problems seem to come in. If a given area has a situation where the police, fire, and EMS units tolerate, rather than support each other, you will have problems.

This is something which I promise to you. Heck, I experienced with repeated frequency during my years in the City of Newark when my troops and I operated on the New Jersey Turnpike, Garden State Parkway, and Interstates 78 and 280. The police automatically presumed they were in control. They also assumed that we in the fire department were more concerned with blocking their roads than anything else.

I cannot speak with any authority about what is in place now. Since I have been retired more than eight years now, I really cannot speak with authority about the way in which operations are now conducted. However, given the personalities of the players, I can only wonder if anything has changed.

A recent court case in Missouri has brought this issue to the fore once again. According to an article in the St. Louis Post Dispatch, Federal court jurors awarded $17,500 on Wednesday to a fire captain who was arrested by a Hazelwood police officer in a dispute over where a fire truck was parked during a 2003 car crash rescue.

Quite simply the police officer and the fire officer had differing views of the manner in which the operation should have been conducted. A number of individuals who were interviewed weighed in on the matter. The fire officer testified that he was concerned for the safety of his personnel. The police officer testified that he felt that the fire truck was creating a hazard and did not add to the safety of the firefighters.

Here is a case which screams out for mediation and coordination between the parties to the equation. In each of the cases I have reviewed over the past few years, the individuals involved in the altercations were most decidedly not on the same sheet of music.

Please note that I am blaming no one here for anything more than failing to communicate with their fellow travelers in the fire and emergency service world. I would urge each of you to work towards a meeting of the minds on how best to operate on the highways and byways of your response district.

We here at Respondersafety.com and the Emergency Response Safety Institute (ERSI) urge you to download our training materials that deal with this issue. We also urge you to build bridges to your fellow emergency workers. We are pleased to offer to you at no charge a kit to help you establish a Traffic Management Committee in your own community.

The kit includes an excellent DVD the Hats of Highway Safety a great kick off for your first meeting. We also believe that you need to bring in the towers and the news media in your effort to create an operational plan that not only works in practice but is understood by the people who will be traveling in your community.

The key here to creating a safer, more cooperative environment is to talk to each other. This is yet another case where I urge you to light the candle of cooperation rather than curse the darkness of individualism. Please consider the safety of your personnel as your primary motivation as you develop your highway safety operation procedures. When we are fighting with each other who is looking out for our responders?

[G-Man]

You are sure making a lot of ASSUMPTIONS in favor of the Officer and against the Firefighters based on a video that does not provide sufficient information to substantiate your assumptions.

We DO NOT park in a free-flowing traffic lane as you would believe, just to screw up traffic. We do it so EVERYONE working the crash scene can go home at the end of their shift. (everyonegoeshome.com)

As in every profession, there are some bad eggs, but, IMHO, you are out of line to ASSUME that in the above identified fatal accident, the fire engine was parked in the wrong place ("a free-flowing lane of traffic") and as such, was the reason there was a fatality. If we are going to throw out ASSUMPTIONS about the fatal crash you referenced:

Maybe we should ASSUME that the party killed in the crash was prevented from killing the CHP Officers, Firefighters, EMTs, Tow Truck Drivers, CALTRANS Workers or whomever was part of the team that was doing their job at the scene because of the way it was parked.

Maybe we should also ASSUME that the party killed was a .20 deuce that was stopped from killing the innocent team members doing their job at the scene because of the way it was parked.

Or maybe we should ASSUME that the party killed was on his/her cell phone and would have killed one or more of the innocent team members that were doing their job at the scene if the engine had not been parked the way it was.

Or maybe we can ASSUME that the operator the fire engine really did screw up and parked it in the wrong place. If that is the case, did the Incident Commander make any effort to fix the problem???

Or...:hitwall:

I can go on and on and on with ASSUMPTIONS, but since you and I were not there, is it really appropriate for us to be pointing fingers as to what did or did not happen?

Bottom line...We all need to COMMUNICATE and get the job done safely and efficiently. A big part of the COMMUNICATION process should come BEFORE the incidents occur. As I have stated before, someone needs to take the first step to open the lines of COMMUNCATION and iron out the procedural issues ahead of time.:think:

I have done that...Have You????

All of your points are correct, I should not have assumed as I did. This is why I only make judgments based on facts. One can only speculate without seeing it first hand right? Thats why it is an assumption, and not an accusatory statement. I for one like having the fire trucks boxing me in. That is not to say that them being there doesn't create a bigger hazard. I want to know a .20 deuce isn't gonna take me and the fire department out. Will cones stop a moving vehicle, no, but at least if you have them there it might (there I go assuming again, silly me:biggrin:) prevent a later lawsuit. And I am confident that a family member will sue EVERYONE even though their son/daughter/husband/wife/etc. was drunk at the time.

I am deeply sorry if I made an offending statement without realizing it. The internet does not allow for lengthy conversations and as you can probably (assumption:biggrin:) tell, I don't like to marathon post.

[Officer_Grady]

after looking at the video again, the officer was already blocking the slow lane when the collision was on the shoulder. Yes, extrication is necessary, but taking a second lane is the question. I wasn't there and not knowing what occurred with these two prior, I'm not going there. I had something like this happen to me before. The FD guy in the passenger seat said he needed two lanes blocked for the jaws. They never jawed the car at all. About five years later, this kid was wearing a FD shirt, ask him was he a FD? His uncle was, hear the name and sign here please, press hard, four copies.

[bcjack]

after looking at the video again, the officer was already blocking the slow lane when the collision was on the shoulder. Yes, extrication is necessary, but taking a second lane is the question. I wasn't there and not knowing what occurred with these two prior, I'm not going there. I had something like this happen to me before. The FD guy in the passenger seat said he needed two lanes blocked for the jaws. They never jawed the car at all. About five years later, this kid was wearing a FD shirt, ask him was he a FD? His uncle was, hear the name and sign here please, press hard, four copies.

Why did the nephew get the "sign here, press hard, four copies" "punishment" for what his uncle did FIVE years before???:think:

[13965]

I agree...develop your SOP. There is no need to argue at the scene. :doh:

One thing that the Firefighters should consider...what happens to the fire truck when it gets rearended by a car, SUV, truck tractor...no more fire truck to respond to the next house fire... it's put out of service. The next station will need to cover their own and yours...not to mention the cost of repair and/or replacement. :think:

[bcjack]

I agree...develop your SOP. There is no need to argue at the scene. :doh:

One thing that the Firefighters should consider...what happens to the fire truck when it gets rearended by a car, SUV, truck tractor...no more fire truck to respond to the next house fire... it's put out of service. The next station will need to cover their own and yours...not to mention the cost of repair and/or replacement. :think:

Good point...A new engine now costs about $700,000 to $1,000,000, give or take a few thousand.:shock:

Given that, I still would not lose one second of sleep if the engine was totaled, if is saved the lives of the workers at the scene. We do have "spares" back at the fire house.:biggrin:

I'm sure most communities would also pursue cost recovery for some of the cost of the loss.

[MW]

Check out this cool shirt?

http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL500/3540048/7281394/133616817.jpg

[bcjack]

Check out this cool shirt?

http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL500/3540048/7281394/133616817.jpg

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

[G-Man]

Check out this cool shirt?

http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL500/3540048/7281394/133616817.jpg

I'll take two.

[bcjack]

View this video...PERFECT placement of the engine!!!!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0ZwvC4jwQMk&feature=related

[HIPCHIP]

My opinion, for what it's worth. Here in Cali, the officer is in charge of the scene. What the officer says, goes! We have the responsibility for the scene, and if someone crashes into the back of the BRT (Big Red Truck), we could be held liable. The video also doesn't show what's happening behind the accident, so there could be other circumstances we are not aware of.

Should the officer have arrested the chief at the scene, probably not. I'd call for a supervisor and let them work it out on scene and then later at the office.

I knew a lot of officers who didn't like firemen for various reasons. Me, I've always felt firemen were brothers. They respond to the same things we do, they've helped me subdue violent drunks, they've helped me pull cars out of the road, they've even invited me to dinner and allowed me to use their station as a rest stop and report writing location.

Bottom line is, it seems like everyone kind of goofed on this incident. Two wrongs don't make a right, just a bigger wrong.

:cool:

[Officer_Grady]

the position of the engine should not have been 10 oclock, but two oclock, so the operator can see the fire officer and hoseman for any hand signals or instructions and the pump panel at the same time. Also, 10 oclock exposes the operator to traffic. For traffic moving as slow as it was, this is where only one lane should be blocked. Two only if traffic is at freeway speeds to slow everyone, but slowing traffic is the CHP's job, not the FD. The real question is why is the motor officer there before the engine?

[Jeff Rhea]

It appears the #3 and #4 were being blocked up stream by officers. I'm not quite sure what the motor in the foreground was doing though.

[bcjack]

the position of the engine should not have been 10 oclock, but two oclock, so the operator can see the fire officer and hoseman for any hand signals or instructions and the pump panel at the same time. Also, 10 oclock exposes the operator to traffic. For traffic moving as slow as it was, this is where only one lane should be blocked. Two only if traffic is at freeway speeds to slow everyone, but slowing traffic is the CHP's job, not the FD. The real question is why is the motor officer there before the engine?

I agree. The pump panel is directly in the path of traffic and the engine should have been facing the other way. The pump operator has a radio so that is not an issue.

The motor officer was doing the right thing there. Staying upwind and out of the way...:tape:

[bcjack]

New training program coming...


http://www.myfirecompanies.com/filelock/1205761651TIM_Workshop_Instructor_Notes[1].pdf