Stop the Bleed (Bleedingcontrol.org)

[Taco]

Yesterday I took a free "Stop the Bleed" course. It went over the basics of using a tourniquet, using hemostatic gauze and pressure, and factors in determining if bleeding is life-threatening.

In the course, there were two potentially sensitive points. First, the course was developed during, and advocated by the Obama administration. I imagine he isn't popular amongst this crowd. Second, the course was developed after a school shooting and there were two slides that mention mass shootings. The instructor quoted a couple statistics about mass shootings that are inflated based on a very broad definition of 'mass'. It was mentioned that vehicles and industrial accidents are far more likely to be the cause of severe bodily injury than firearms. I haven't asked directly, but those points don't add much value to the course and likely may be removed or tailored to a firearms friendly audience.

There is also a separate concern related to the recent sparing between doctors groups and the NRA. I do not know if the bleeding control folks are related in any way to the anti-gun groups. I reached out to my NRA contact for an opinion, but have not heard back. I'm expecting a neutral response.

Despite those few negatives, I feel that attending a course like this would be a great thing for everyone. Even with the firearms owners safety first mindset, anytime firearms are handled there is an enhanced risk of injury- mitigation if those risks are why we build in so many redundant safety layers, however, the risk can never be reduced to 0. Ricochets, catastrophic firearms failures, and even self-defense situations can cause injury.

I feel that having more people educated on how to perform basic bleeding control tasks could be life-saving.

[flcracker]

At the very least, every range bag and daypack should contain QuikClot.

https://quikclot.com/QuikClot

[Odessaman]

A tourniquet is as essential as the gun. When wearing long pants, an elastic ankle carrier is secure and discreet.
The only shorts I own are cargo shorts, which give multiple options.

[trouter3]

Very commendable to want to participate in these scenarios, Maybe save a life, I'm all for the
Process, but then again you have to pick and choose what you're getting into, person we know got involved in a dual auto accident, multiple problems medically with the woman he tried to assist, she sued the crap outa him stating he didn't have the credentials or training to touch her and perform any medical procedure and he Compounded her problems. People don't give a rats ass that your trying to help them, they are just interested in the almighty dollar, so again it's a crap shoot, got to make a snap decision and hope it was correct and weigh like this fella did was it worth the aggravation he got.....you can want to be a good guy and get screwed in the end ...the case is still in the courts ... I've heard of people giving CPR that were sued also ...not a friendly world we reside in is it?

[flcracker]

Florida has had a "Good Samaritan" law since before I first took CPR in high school in 1979.

No jury or judge in this country would reach a verdict against someone for trying to stop a bleedout.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind ... 68.13.html

[trouter3]

Judges don't always follow the laws that are written on the books, depends on interpretation
How they see it, what caused the scenario, mitigating circumstances, look at Stand your ground, recently man protecting himself was convicted of over reacting because he fired multiple shots hitting the perp, and another was convicted for the ammunution he was using, judge said it was over kill, nothing written in stone, I'm in agreement that if try to help someone you should assume no, zero liability, and not have to prove anything ...BUT you get a good liability lawyer they'll eat you alive, be that right or wrong that is the way of the world, if it goes to court bottom line it's going to cost ya ....

[photohause]

I agree, very commendable on your part to educate yourself on this subject. Keeping guns and law-suites aside, I know I could not sit around and watch someone bleed to death from a femoral artery or femoral vein being severed. I have witnessed accidents and reacted to open wounds by apply direct pressure with available fabrics, until qualified personnel arrive. I worked ocean rescue and years later still had pulled people out of the water. Many of us can not pick and choose how we are going to react to certain specific situations that pop up in our lives.

Congratulations Taco.

[Firemedic2000]

Florida has had a "Good Samaritan" law since before I first took CPR in high school in 1979.

No jury or judge in this country would reach a verdict against someone for trying to stop a bleedout.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind ... 68.13.html

Good Samaritan" law is correct . But here's where people get into trouble with the Good Samaritan" law. You as a Good Samaritan under this law can only provide care upto the point that you've been trained.

What this means is. If you've never had training to cryk someone because their airway is blocked from swelling. You can't.

If you've never had certifiable training say to apply a tourniquet and the person loses their leg. You can be sued.

It's like knowing the difference between a tourniquet and a restricting ban. One stops blood flow and the other just slows blood flow.

Plus if you act outside your area of training/knowledge you can be charged with practicing medicine.

So in other words if you do stop and help someone and you do something that saves their live that's great. But if you do something and even though it may save their life, but in doing so. They suffered further injury or whatever they consider injury.

The first question that's going to be asked is weather you had the proper training to do what you did. If not then that's where they will come after you and ask the courts. Did the actions of an untrained person resulted in that loss or damage to that individual.

This is what the attorney is going to ask. If you say no I was never trained to do xyz then he will say you did not act prudently.

I know it sucks. But people have sued others over this. Even when they suffered no harm. This happened to a friend of mine. Judge threw it out because no harm was suffered and his actions actually saved his life. My friend will never stop and help another person again. I never stop. Because of liability.

[trouter3]

Firemedic2000 ....and OP ....exactly what I conveyed in my post, nowadays you must be
Extremely careful what you are getting into regarding the " Good Samarian law" again there are so many variables and so many grey areas and interpretations, so again make absolutely sure you are certified and had proper training or a good liability lawyer will eat you alive forever, nice to be a good guy but make sure you weigh all the variables, I'm sure some people reading our response will say these guys are cold, no conscience, how can you look or walk the other way, u wanna be a hero you best cover your ass, I'm sure I've covered more open wounds with direct pressure and applied a tourniquet to stop bleeding being in a combat situation than most people, but that sure as shit don't certified me for anything other than putting a ban aid on my finger, practical experience doesn't apply here so again act prudently if you have the training and expertise go to it! But otherwise call 911
ASAP ....

[Firemedic2000]

Believe it or not. If I acted off duty as a PARAMEDIC I could be sued. Where as if I was working as a Firefighter Paramedic I was protected by laws.

But not saying I'd not giving just basic cpr or stop bleeding with direct pressure only or quuck clot. But that's it. I'd not give any advanced life care. Unless it was a family member.

I'd not do an IV of give any meds. Not even an asprin. Absolutely no restricting bans to stop or restrict bleeding.