Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

masterchef81 t1_je0eb31 wrote

Reply to comment by mindhypnotized in NJ takes over Paterson police after crisis worker's shooting by drkgodess

No, they are saying that fire/emt don't want to respond to calls that shouldn't require police, thus armed responders is left as the only option.

5

mindhypnotized t1_je0ggfz wrote

So the firefighters and emts don’t take any calls that don’t require armed escorts from the police? I’m sorry but neither of you are making sense. It seems to me that a lot of fires or medical emergencies do not require someone to show up with a gun and shoot at it. If my grandma is having a stroke and I call for an ambulance, they just won’t show up because the police aren’t needed?

−2

masterchef81 t1_je0io6c wrote

No, sorry for the confusion. As an example...mental health crisis shouldn't require police as the first response. But fire/emt won't respond, so police become the default response.

Personally I don't think fire/emt SHOULD respond to mental health crisis. There is a risk of violence there that they are not trained or paid for. But neither should police, whose training is "eliminate the threat" be the first response.

Either way, EMTs would still respond to your grandma having a stroke because that is clearly within their primary job description.

7

JiubLives t1_je0odd1 wrote

Of course they respond to calls that don't require armed escort, which is why I want them to respond to MORE calls like that (welfare checks, etc.).

The calls you described, they will go to without escorts. If someone, however, calls about a person passed out on a sidewalk or an elderly person missing an appointment, they will NOT respond. If there's a mental health crisis (no weapon), they will NOT respond. That means police are sent, which for many people, is triggering and makes the situation much worse.

3