Canadian Mounties taser 82 year old in hospital bed while connected to oxygen.

[SlickSnake]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: bignateyk
I bet it makes the "Dont taze me bro" guy feel like a giant gaping pussy.

What revolting imagery. Well played.

It was most likely a plastic butter knife off his dinner tray he used to slice open his giant gaping bun.

The pussy was the mountie who didn't want to get butter on his fancy Dudly Do Right dinner jacket.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: sandorski
You a DR now? You can't say his dude would have died or that other dude wouldn't have died. Fact is, many have died. Another fact is that too many times Tazers were used when they were unnecessary.

No, I'm not a doctor. I am, however, Taser qualified, and fully capable of determining when one should be deployed.

Care to share your direct experience and qualifications?

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: sandorski
You a DR now? You can't say his dude would have died or that other dude wouldn't have died. Fact is, many have died. Another fact is that too many times Tazers were used when they were unnecessary.

No, I'm not a doctor. I am, however, Taser qualified, and fully capable of determining when one should be deployed.

Care to share your direct experience and qualifications?

Saying you're "taser qualified" is a qualification? I'm an omnipotent deity and I say you have no idea what you're talking about. Unless you can match those qualifications we have nothing more to talk about.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Tranq darts depress respiration and heart rate. Want to do that to a 82 year old man who has breathing and heart problems?

And what do you think tazers do? They don't exactly tickle you into submission.

Edit: apparantly my sarcasm was lost on you, I'm not being completely serious in here, hence the

Yeah, Meter is broken. Should be studying for finals, but browsing ATOT

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: sandorski
You a DR now? You can't say his dude would have died or that other dude wouldn't have died. Fact is, many have died. Another fact is that too many times Tazers were used when they were unnecessary.

No, I'm not a doctor. I am, however, Taser qualified, and fully capable of determining when one should be deployed.

Care to share your direct experience and qualifications?

Saying you're "taser qualified" is a qualification? I'm an omnipotent deity and I say you have no idea what you're talking about. Unless you can match those qualifications we have nothing more to talk about.

See, you're lying. I'm not. And I wasn't talking to you, either.

But hell, this is the internet..so who cares, right?

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: JLee

See, you're lying. I'm not.

How could you possibly know that? If he actually was an omnipotent deity surely he could easily hide his amazing capabilities from a mere mortal such as you, if he wished to.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: JLee

See, you're lying. I'm not.

How could you possibly know that? If he actually was an omnipotent deity surely he could easily hide his amazing capabilities from a mere mortal such as you, if he wished to.

That's true.

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: JLee

See, you're lying. I'm not.

How could you possibly know that? If he actually was an omnipotent deity surely he could easily hide his amazing capabilities from a mere mortal such as you, if he wished to.

That's true.

Correct. Tread lightly mortal. Piss me off and I'll turn you into Richard Simmons.

 

[Dessert Tears]

Originally posted by: JLee, cut down for emphasis

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: JLee
So I suppose the fact that both suspect and officer injuries have gone down since Tasers were adopted is irrelevant. I still say that if they're as dangerous as some proclaim, this dude would've died.

I don't think tasers are some horrible invention, and I think they serve a purpose. But trying to argue that because of this one case they are definitively non-lethal is just naive. A data set of *one* doesn't really have any statistical weight. There are too many variables. Maybe the cops in this case used a particularly weak stun gun. Maybe the battery was low. Maybe the guy just got lucky. Maybe the hospital bed grounded him and saved his life. Who knows?

I did not say they're definitively non-lethal - and how is this a "single freak ocurrance"!? Do you have any idea how many times Tasers are deployed and don't make the news?

By the way- we have much more than a data set of one. How many officers have been killed during Taser qualification? Answer that, and get back to me.

Chiropteran, thank you for your reasonable discussion. My position (which may or may not match JLee's) is that individual incidents present anecdotal evidence, no more or less. This incident may be more compelling since the patient survived without injury despite having a few significant risk factors. As JLee points out, there are many Taser deployments that never make the news, and I believe that nearly all Taser-associated deaths receive some media coverage. A raw count of deaths has less statistical meaning than deaths per deployments. A 2007 study led by Bozeman examined almost 1000 cases where Tasers were used, finding only 3 cases where injury required hospitalization, and 2 deaths, which were found to be unrelated to the Taser use upon autopsy.

Originally posted by: sandorski
Fact is, many have died. Another fact is that too many times Tazers were used when they were unnecessary.

Please provide a number of deaths and link to source.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Flatscan

Originally posted by: JLee, cut down for emphasis

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: JLee
So I suppose the fact that both suspect and officer injuries have gone down since Tasers were adopted is irrelevant. I still say that if they're as dangerous as some proclaim, this dude would've died.

I don't think tasers are some horrible invention, and I think they serve a purpose. But trying to argue that because of this one case they are definitively non-lethal is just naive. A data set of *one* doesn't really have any statistical weight. There are too many variables. Maybe the cops in this case used a particularly weak stun gun. Maybe the battery was low. Maybe the guy just got lucky. Maybe the hospital bed grounded him and saved his life. Who knows?

I did not say they're definitively non-lethal - and how is this a "single freak ocurrance"!? Do you have any idea how many times Tasers are deployed and don't make the news?

By the way- we have much more than a data set of one. How many officers have been killed during Taser qualification? Answer that, and get back to me.

Chiropteran, thank you for your reasonable discussion. My position (which may or may not match JLee's) is that individual incidents present anecdotal evidence, no more or less. This incident may be more compelling since the patient survived without injury despite having a few significant risk factors. As JLee points out, there are many Taser deployments that never make the news, and I believe that nearly all Taser-associated deaths receive some media coverage. A raw count of deaths has less statistical meaning than deaths per deployments. A 2007 study led by Bozeman examined almost 1000 cases where Tasers were used, finding only 3 cases where injury required hospitalization, and 2 deaths, which were found to be unrelated to the Taser use upon autopsy.

Originally posted by: sandorski
Fact is, many have died. Another fact is that too many times Tazers were used when they were unnecessary.

Please provide a number of deaths and link to source.

You haven't heard about the Deaths??

 

[Jessica69]

Originally posted by: Flatscan
[
[*]Sedatives administered intravenously take time to become effective. Furthermore, the IV port is on the patient's body, typically in the arm. Medical staff do not normally stick syringes into IV bags.[/list]One may reasonably assume that the hospital staff had cause not to attempt either method.

In all actuality, if the patient was hooked up to an IV, the staff could have very easily administered a sedative via IV without getting too close to the patient......you do realize IV lines have multiple injection ports along the tubing, right? So one does not have to inject directly at the patient's IV plug to administer IV meds, which is rarely done anyway.

Typically, either the med (such as an antibiotic) is *gasp* added to a mini-bag of IV fluid, a staple on nursing units for administering IV meds, and then piggybacked into the IV line and opened up, or the med is direct injected into the IV line below the main IV fluid bag but above the connection to the patient....and uses the influx of IV fluid to get the med into the patient.

And staff does indeed stick syringes into IV bags all the time....adding vitamins, KCL, and any other myriad of IV additives to the main IV fluids......ever notice there's a needle port on IV bags? Every wonder why?

When correcting someone, at least know what the hell you're talking about..........

 

[Dessert Tears]

Originally posted by: Jessica69

Originally posted by: Flatscan
[*]Sedatives administered intravenously take time to become effective. Furthermore, the IV port is on the patient's body, typically in the arm. Medical staff do not normally stick syringes into IV bags.[/list]One may reasonably assume that the hospital staff had cause not to attempt either method.

In all actuality, if the patient was hooked up to an IV, the staff could have very easily administered a sedative via IV without getting too close to the patient......you do realize IV lines have multiple injection ports along the tubing, right? So one does not have to inject directly at the patient's IV plug to administer IV meds, which is rarely done anyway.

Typically, either the med (such as an antibiotic) is *gasp* added to a mini-bag of IV fluid, a staple on nursing units for administering IV meds, and then piggybacked into the IV line and opened up, or the med is direct injected into the IV line below the main IV fluid bag but above the connection to the patient....and uses the influx of IV fluid to get the med into the patient.

And staff does indeed stick syringes into IV bags all the time....adding vitamins, KCL, and any other myriad of IV additives to the main IV fluids......ever notice there's a needle port on IV bags? Every wonder why?

When correcting someone, at least know what the hell you're talking about..........

Thanks for your post: you're absolutely correct. I checked with my source, and I had misunderstood our brief discussion, and was incorrect in the section that you quoted. When I wrote "Medical staff do not normally stick syringes into IV bags", I meant like in the movies, where the villain injects "enough sedative to kill a horse" into the IV bag of his sleeping victim.

As someone who has familiarity with IV equipment, and I assume general knowledge of/experience with patient care, do you believe that sedation or another medical intervention should have been attempted? Do you have any insights into why all medical measures either were not attempted or failed?

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: Jessica69

Originally posted by: Flatscan
[
[*]Sedatives administered intravenously take time to become effective. Furthermore, the IV port is on the patient's body, typically in the arm. Medical staff do not normally stick syringes into IV bags.[/list]One may reasonably assume that the hospital staff had cause not to attempt either method.

In all actuality, if the patient was hooked up to an IV, the staff could have very easily administered a sedative via IV without getting too close to the patient......you do realize IV lines have multiple injection ports along the tubing, right? So one does not have to inject directly at the patient's IV plug to administer IV meds, which is rarely done anyway.

Typically, either the med (such as an antibiotic) is *gasp* added to a mini-bag of IV fluid, a staple on nursing units for administering IV meds, and then piggybacked into the IV line and opened up, or the med is direct injected into the IV line below the main IV fluid bag but above the connection to the patient....and uses the influx of IV fluid to get the med into the patient.

And staff does indeed stick syringes into IV bags all the time....adding vitamins, KCL, and any other myriad of IV additives to the main IV fluids......ever notice there's a needle port on IV bags? Every wonder why?

When correcting someone, at least know what the hell you're talking about..........

They have multiple injection areas... which are all in close proximity to the wearer. Iv Lines aren't exactly 20 feet long. And if this guy saw you with a syringe, whats stopping him from attacking you?

 

[conehead433]

I don't care how old the SOB was, you pull a knife you're lucky to be alive. How the heck could he have a knife in his hospital bed. He's lucky they didn't shoot him.

 

[james1701]

Not to defend or aurgue tazer use, but one thing to think about. If he recently had heart surgery, he was probably taking antiarythmic medication or could have had a pacemaker installed. With this being the case, the tazer was much less dangerous to use on him than some joe blow walking down the street.
And what kind of hospital is this, do they not have their own security in house? Not even a couple of orderlies that can man hadle him? This brings back one of my most funny storys from work. I was walking back to our office down stairs on night and had to pass through 4S. Its an open heart surgery recover floor. From half way across the hospital, I kept hearing a banging sound. Well when I got to the intersection in the hallway, I saw a crowd gathered around a patients door. I walked over to see what the problem was, and a poor old fella had gone out of his mind from either the drugs or lack of sleep. He had one leg, and had tore out his foley catheter when he was getting out of bed. He had a quad cain crutch taking home run shots at the window with it. I was screeming he wanted out of here. He did not know he was on the 4th floor of the building, but he was planning to go out the window to escpape. So being the 6'4 big guy I am, I step over the puddles of blood, from where he ripped out the cathater from his penis, and just put on hand on his should and grabbed the crutch with the other. I kindly in a deep stern voice told him it was time to go back to bed. He looked down at my feet, and slowly looked up to my face, and just muttered ok. The poor guy, hopped on the the one leg he had, through all the blood and made it back in bed with no more injurys than a bleeding pecker. That was even better than the time a med student was going to use a defibulator on a person that died in a shower, and all of us doing cpr on a wet floor, and he wanted to shock the woman.
Back to the topic on hand. More than likely if he had pnemonia, his oxygen levels were low, and he did not know what was going on. Thats why he gets confused, either that, or he is a CO2 retainer and they had his O2 on too high, and he was getting Co2 narcosis. Either way, it could have been handled better.

 

[jlee]

Either way, it could have been handled better.

How, exactly? Nobody was hurt. Everybody wins.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: james1701
Not to defend or aurgue tazer use, but one thing to think about. If he recently had heart surgery, he was probably taking antiarythmic medication or could have had a pacemaker installed. With this being the case, the tazer was much less dangerous to use on him than some joe blow walking down the street.
And what kind of hospital is this, do they not have their own security in house? Not even a couple of orderlies that can man hadle him? This brings back one of my most funny storys from work. I was walking back to our office down stairs on night and had to pass through 4S. Its an open heart surgery recover floor. From half way across the hospital, I kept hearing a banging sound. Well when I got to the intersection in the hallway, I saw a crowd gathered around a patients door. I walked over to see what the problem was, and a poor old fella had gone out of his mind from either the drugs or lack of sleep. He had one leg, and had tore out his foley catheter when he was getting out of bed. He had a quad cain crutch taking home run shots at the window with it. I was screeming he wanted out of here. He did not know he was on the 4th floor of the building, but he was planning to go out the window to escpape. So being the 6'4 big guy I am, I step over the puddles of blood, from where he ripped out the cathater from his penis, and just put on hand on his should and grabbed the crutch with the other. I kindly in a deep stern voice told him it was time to go back to bed. He looked down at my feet, and slowly looked up to my face, and just muttered ok. The poor guy, hopped on the the one leg he had, through all the blood and made it back in bed with no more injurys than a bleeding pecker. That was even better than the time a med student was going to use a defibulator on a person that died in a shower, and all of us doing cpr on a wet floor, and he wanted to shock the woman.
Back to the topic on hand. More than likely if he had pnemonia, his oxygen levels were low, and he did not know what was going on. Thats why he gets confused, either that, or he is a CO2 retainer and they had his O2 on too high, and he was getting Co2 narcosis. Either way, it could have been handled better.

You made my eyes bleed.

 

[james1701]

Originally posted by: JLee

Either way, it could have been handled better.

How, exactly? Nobody was hurt. Everybody wins.

They guys was laying in bed at some point. And he was conected to the wall with O2, and IV's. All they had to do was wait him out. He was not going anywhere, if he tried, he would have fallen from being conected to everything.
And JD50, sorry for your eyes, next time I will try to use smaller words.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: james1701

Originally posted by: JLee

Either way, it could have been handled better.

How, exactly? Nobody was hurt. Everybody wins.

They guys was laying in bed at some point. And he was conected to the wall with O2, and IV's. All they had to do was wait him out. He was not going anywhere, if he tried, he would have fallen from being conected to everything.
And JD50, sorry for your eyes, next time I will try to use smaller words.

Unless he was threatening himself, which is entirely possible.

Oh, and next time, just use paragraphs and proper spelling. Words aren't the problem.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: james1701

Originally posted by: JLee

Either way, it could have been handled better.

How, exactly? Nobody was hurt. Everybody wins.

They guys was laying in bed at some point. And he was conected to the wall with O2, and IV's. All they had to do was wait him out. He was not going anywhere, if he tried, he would have fallen from being conected to everything.
And JD50, sorry for your eyes, next time I will try to use smaller words.

It's called paragraphs. I believe that was taught in 1st grade English class.

 

[purepolly]

They guys was laying in bed at some point. And he was conected to the wall with O2, and IV's. All they had to do was wait him out. He was not going anywhere, if he tried, he would have fallen from being conected to everything.


LOL get a clue... the 6 feet of plastic IV tubing connected to a pump or an O2 line connected to a wall will not in any way restrain a pt. Both are very easy to pull out.

You didn't read the article very carefully. Keywords you should have picked up on "former prison guard" "delusional" "suffering from pneumonia following heart bypass surgery."

I care for geriatric veterans in an acute care setting daily. Don't underestimate how dangerous this work setting can be. The top three areas for violence in hospital settings are the ER, psyche and geriatric floors.

 

[purepolly]

Editor's Note

Risky business
As workplace violence rises, nurses and facilities must put safety first
Beth Ulrich, Ed.D., RN, South Central Editor
August 6, 2001



How dangerous is your work environment? In a recent NurseWeek.com poll, nearly 60 percent of the respondents said that they had been victims of violence in the workplace.

As the nursing shortage worsens and more emphasis is placed on recruitment and retention, health care organizations are looking for ways to make both nursing and their facilities more attractive. Nurses rarely ask how safe a facility is and organizations rarely see safety as a drawing card. Both are making a big mistake.

Workplace violence, like road rage, has steadily increased. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration says that more assaults occur in the health care and social services industries than in any other. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health estimates that every day more than 9,000 health care workers are injured or attacked, verbally or physically, on the job.

Employers have a moral and a legal obligation to provide safe work environments. Beyond that, safe work environments save money. Programs that effectively respond to unsafe situations and workplace violence decrease sick leave and turnover, as well as maintaining productivity.

Few employers would consciously want an unsafe environment and few employees would consciously choose to work in one, so why does the violence persist?

* Denial. Even when we hear stories about violence at another facility, it's often difficult to think about it happening at our place. It took an emergency room shooting in Southern California several years ago for many facilities there to beef up security and safety in their ERs.
* Patients first. Our efforts to protect the patients sometimes put our staffs at risk. As an example, none of us want to use excessive physical restraints on patients, but how many nurses have been injured while waiting for a restraint order or while restraining a patient? How do we better balance the safety and needs of the patients with the safety of the staff?
* Training (or lack thereof). How many orientation programs provide detailed information on preventing workplace violence? How many facilities require annual education and training on violence prevention? The Texas Mental Health Code requires initial and annual training on prevention and management of aggressive behaviors for mental health care. Although the program is designed to teach staff how to better work with consumers of mental health and mental retardation services, the techniques can be used with consumers, patients, family members and co-workers.
* Less hassle. Sometimes, things that can increase safety create hassles. Wearing ID badges and having to swipe through locked doors are hassles, but they also control access. Propping doors open may save time, but also may allow people into the facility or unit who shouldn't be there.
* Short staffing. Fewer staff, especially on evening and night shifts, increases the potential for violence. It's easier to get hurt and more difficult to get out of a violent situation when you're alone and there's no other staff within shouting distance.

What do we do? Organizations need to objectively review the potential for violence in their work environments, then act on the results.

In 1998, OSHA published guidelines for preventing workplace violence for health care and social service workers (www.osha-slc.gov/SLTC/workplaceviolence/guideline.html). Although these guidelines are not mandatory, they provide a good template for analyzing the work environment, developing measures to prevent workplace violence, providing for post-incident responses that help the staff and prevent recurrences, and creating effective training and education programs.

As nurses, it behooves us to investigate the incidence and potential of workplace violence at the organizations we work in or those we are considering working in. We also have an obligation to make our managers and administrators aware when we see potential for increased violence.

Universal precautions for workplace violence should be implemented across the board, just as we have implemented universal precautions for infection control. We know the conditions in which violence can more easily occur, just as we know where infections can thrive. Like infections, it's easier to prevent violence than to deal with the aftermath.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: bignateyk
An 82 year old dude with heart and breathing problems lived through getting tazed 3 times? I think that ends the debate about lethality.

that wasn't the debate though...were you joking or retarded?

The main debate is while many people can take a blast or more from a taser, a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed. The second half of this is the police are not using due diligience to use the weapon but rather just deploying it's force thinking it's harmless.

A taser should only be used in situations were other methods were exhausted and the level of force needed is equivalent to when one would use their nightstick/baton, but prior to having to shoot to kill.

Too many cops are freaking slobs today though and cannot defend themselves much at all without weapons.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: bignateyk
An 82 year old dude with heart and breathing problems lived through getting tazed 3 times? I think that ends the debate about lethality.

that wasn't the debate though...were you joking or retarded?

The main debate is while many people can take a blast or more from a taser, a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed. The second half of this is the police are not using due diligience to use the weapon but rather just deploying it's force thinking it's harmless.

A taser should only be used in situations were other methods were exhausted and the level of force needed is equivalent to when one would use their nightstick/baton, but prior to having to shoot to kill.

Too many cops are freaking slobs today though and cannot defend themselves much at all without weapons.

"a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed."

Do you have ANYTHING to back that statement up? Besides the very rare circumstances where someone has actually been killed specifically by a taser?

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: bignateyk
An 82 year old dude with heart and breathing problems lived through getting tazed 3 times? I think that ends the debate about lethality.

that wasn't the debate though...were you joking or retarded?

The main debate is while many people can take a blast or more from a taser, a decent amount of the population are sensititive to it and can be killed. The second half of this is the police are not using due diligience to use the weapon but rather just deploying it's force thinking it's harmless.

A taser should only be used in situations were other methods were exhausted and the level of force needed is equivalent to when one would use their nightstick/baton, but prior to having to shoot to kill.

Too many cops are freaking slobs today though and cannot defend themselves much at all without weapons.

Should have given the old guy the old one two?