Content That tntrn Likes

tntrn 19,288 Views

I am happily retired after 35 years of Labor and Delivery nursing. My passions now are two wonderful grandchildren, quilting on my HQ 16, sewing, and going where life takes me with my husband of 28 years. I am primarily conservative with moderate views on a couple social issues.

Sorted By Last Like Given (Max 500)
  • May 4

    What I believe was the primary difference, is that in the 80's we had TEAM LEADING. Each RN worked side by side with their CNA to take care of their patients. The CNA did all vitals, and prepared the set up for meals, and did all the bathing. The RN did everything else, including helping with q 2 hr turns. I quit hospital nursing in 1990 and went into Home Infusion, but then in 99, went back to the hospital setting working the Baylor plan.. Oh MY how things changed in 9 years. ICU was 3 patients each, and Telemetry was 7-8. NO CNA, no help... The RN did all VS, all meals, All baths, and also all physical care including turns and then passing all meds, and hanging, attending to all Infusions... It was called primary care...and there literally wasn't a day I spent there when I didn't fear for my license. Crazy times.

  • Dec 5 '15

    Quote from selectallthatapply
    Following this logic, we shouldn't have any laws because criminals will "do bad things" anyway.
    Things aren't made illegal to make problems disappear. Things are illegal so we can punish people.
    You really didn't read what I wrote, did you. Guns are illegal here in Puerto Rico. They are illegal to such an extent that it is practically impossible for anyone outside of law enforcement to handle one. And yet mysteriously, the criminals still have them. And when mass shooting occur (and they do regularly), the citizens duck for cover, helpless to do anything until the police arrive. Just because our mass shootings don't fit your narrative or hit the cover of the New York Times does not mean they do not exist.

    Take a word of advice from someone who is living in your liberal fantasy utopia. We have everything your type constantly pushes for: high gun control, endless government regulation of everything, punitive taxes (11.5% sales tax, 65% state income tax on highest earners) one years' mandated maternity or paternity leave, heck even gender neutral bathrooms. Walmart is suing our government because their shiny new "multinational company" tax means they pay an effective 93.7% corporate income tax. We also have $73 billion in debt spread between 3.6 million people, over twelve years of economic contraction, population loss, and a staggering 39% EMPLOYMENT rate. Plus 4 times the national average of gun violence. Your liberal theories sound so nice on paper, but they never work in the real world. But you're always so sure that they will work this time if you get your guy in the White House.

    Gun control = criminals have guns. Period.

  • Dec 5 '15

    The other night I triaged a young man who had his arm blown clean off with a 50mm round. For reference, that is an anti-aircraft weapon of war. That is African warlord type weaponry.

    I live on an Island - an Island - with gun control regulations that far surpass those of California. So tightly controlled are guns here that it is, for all intents and purposes, illegal to have a gun unless you work private security or are a police officer. We are an island, so it is not possible to go one state over and buy a gun easily. There is no hunting culture. All of the typical excuses for why gun control doesn't work simply don't apply here. Yet we have a gun murder rate more than 4 times the national average. Just check the FBI statistics.

    Bad people will get guns no matter what you do. Just a few months ago one of my favorite restaurants was the scene of a mass shooting where 12 people were shot and 4 died, at 4 o'clock on a Sunday afternoon. All that gun control does is to leave you, the citizen, unarmed as we are, putting bars on every window and door, and ducking every time a firework goes off.

    Those of you who are constantly agitating for "common-sense gun control" will be sorely disappointed with the results, and will never cease pushing for more "common sense" regulations till only the criminals have guns. And then you will know what it is to rearrange your schedule to keep from being caught out after dark.

    Stop playing politics with such an important question. You have a right to defend your life.

  • Dec 5 '15

    I am an LPN in Home Hospice. I have been a CC permit holder since I was 21, over 27 years ago.

    I have a concealed firearm at all times; in hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, personal care homes, and in private residences. I carry to Church, in stores, in banks - basically everywhere except the rare occasions when I'm in a government building. Very few people besides myself and my wife have ever discovered that fact.

    I served in the US Army, and was briefly a police officer, so I have been well trained and stay in practice.

    I'll just say this: I'll never be a helpless victim - ever. I might lose a job if I'm caught carrying, might even face prosecution. So what. I'm a (mostly) law-abiding, caring person that would never harm another person without justification and extreme provocation. It is my RIGHT to defend myself and my family. I will do so regardless of the preferences of other people. I am legally empowered to carry a concealed firearm and will do that as well, again, regardless of the wishes of others.

    I'm a nurse, and proud of that fact. That does not mean there is some moral imperative that I be defenseless in the face of lunatics.

  • Dec 5 '15

    Maybe it comes in blue?

  • Dec 5 '15

    This whole event really struck home for me.

    I was standing at one of the ICU nursing stations at Loma Linda when a staff member ran through telling everyone to prepare to receive mass casualties, there was an active shooter up the street, approx 20 casualties.

    The initial reports that were received was that it was some kind of a healthcare related facility. Everyone immediately became worried considering Loma Linda is by far the largest and most high profile facility in the area.

    Later on a everyone was notified of a bomb threat, which really freaked everyone out because we knew they had found explosives with he terrorists. People were locked down for hours.

    When drove back to the hotel I found that the hotel was being barricaded. My hotel was on Waterman less than a block South of the attack. You know the news conferences you saw on TV and all the reporters? They were reporting from the lawn in front of the hotel. The SB police Sargent who was doing to hourly updates? She was in the lobby and conference room the police got (almost ran her over in the parking lot when she walked out between some cars while she was texting)

    I left the hospital and pulled over when I saw the road blocks on Waterman and the 10 fwy. I was parked across from a church and watched about 15 police cars scream past into the church parking lot and an army of policy carrying super movie scary AR-15s run and secure the church. I was not sure if the suspects were shooting up the church so I decided it might be best to move along.

    Tried to approach from the hotel from the North when as I was driving through a residential neighborhood I saw a bunch of kids running with their parents across the street. Look to my right and hundreds of kids are outside of the school herded on the lawn and parents are frantically grabbing their kids. Then I heard on the radio that a suspicious person fitting the description was seen hiding in the bushes by the school. Great.

    I find that the road is blocked from the North so I go around and end up at a shopping center North of the freeway but just South of the hotel. I am eating at a Five Guys when I see police roll up into the shopping center and block it off. Then I hear that there is in active shooter in the shopping center. Great. Can't even enjoy my fries. It was later cleared but then an old Vietnam vet comes in asking to borrow my phone, his service is not working. I let him and he leaves a message for his wife. He tells me...with tears in his eyes...that his wife is stuck in a building they are clearing across the street by the hotel and he cannot get a hold of her and they won't let him in to pull her out. He sat there for 20 minutes holding back his tears until she came in. One of the most heart wrenching things I ever saw. You could feel his pain and anxiety.

    I drive through some parking lots (and maybe over a median or two in the rental) and get to the hotel.

    Sitting in the hotel watching the sharp shooter on the roof who is about 30 yards from me eat sunflower seeds. Then the world goes crazy as the helicopters and Homeland Security airplane go ripping past along with 20-30-maybe 40? police cars with 2 armored vehicles. Pop, pop, popopopopop, pop. About a mile away they get into the second gunfight. I can actually see the neighborhood from the top floor of the hotel I was in, couldn't see the suspects though due to the houses blocking my line of sight.

    Just flew out today.

    What I can tell you is that there was no one to protect anyone at the hospital or hotel until after the shooting began. The terrorists literally had to drive by the hotel to get to the office building and you can clearly see the hospital just South of the freeway.

    I do carry a firearm when I am home in Arizona but generally do not carry conceal when I am traveling. I am reconsidering that.

  • Dec 5 '15

    #1 You wouldn't shoot at the attacker unless you had a good shot............common sense

    #2 Know your target and what is beyond it at all times

    #3 You could take a defensive position and let the attacker come to you, they would never even know where the shot came from before they hit the ground.

    #4 A 40 cal or a 45 center mass shot with body armor on would still knock the attacker flat on their back, knock the wind out of them and probably break ribs.

    A little common sense would go a long way in this scenario. I dont even have a CCW because it is against the law to carry a gun anywhere I would want to carry one anyways. If it was made legal to CC at work and by the nursing board then I would definately get my CCW.

  • Dec 5 '15

    Quote from catlady95
    And that would be 2 shootings that year - which was a COMPLETE shock. Now the below is just a quick google because I have homework to research anyways - but ya. You can see the difference I hope?

    "Over the decade and a half studied, the researchers found 23 incidents of mass shootings in the other 10 countries, resulting in 200 dead and 231 wounded. In the United States over the same period, there were 133 incidents that left 487 dead and 505 wounded."
    But then, how does that compare to a percentage of the population? The US has a much larger population than many other first world countries.

  • Dec 5 '15

    Quote from catlady95
    I just don't understand how you guys can be on your what...335th? shooting this year, twice this week, and STILL think the answer is more guns! Do you not know what life is like in every first world country except the united states? It honestly frightens me.
    Crazy how those terrorists just went around throwing rolls and potatoes at all those people in gun-free Paris.

    Terrorists tend to do what terrorists do regardless if it is illegal.

  • Dec 5 '15

    Quote from ClaraRedheart
    I've been a lurker for awhile, and I know that this post has been brought up 1-2 times in the last 2 years that I've been an RN. So... you grouchy old farts that would rather I'd revive an old post can just stuff a sock in it. I want to gauge opinions based on our CURRENT situation after the shooting yesterday in San Bernadino, CA.

    Truth be told, One single caregiver with a concealed carry permit could have shut this couple down before they hit 14 fatalities.

    I plan on getting my CC in January, but I know as an RN, should my handgun be discovered, I'll probably lose my license. It will stay in my car when I am at work. If someone wants to carry out mayhem at my workplace, we are ALL sitting ducks. It is not ok or fair. What are your thoughts?
    You may or may not lose your RN license... and you may or may not lose the CCW license if you're caught. It depends upon if you're carrying at a place that's not legal for you to do so. Please remember that many work places may actually allow (or can't disallow) the public from carrying but your EMPLOYER can require you not to.

    From a more "tactical" standpoint, yes, it is more difficult to hit small targets like heads. I was taught to shoot "center of mass" if I ever have to shoot someone. I was also taught 2 different "failure to stop" methods. Honestly, I sincerely hope I never have to do that. If I'm ever confronted with an active shooter situation, I'd much rather escape than engage. Engaging the shooter is always my last choice.

    One other thing to remember. If you ever discover that I'm carrying, you might be quite surprised that I am... for when I'm carrying, I'm the nicest, meekest, easy-going guy you could ever meet who seems quite alert for someone so laid back. I'm also probably watching your hands and the hands of everyone around me. My gun isn't going to magically leap out of its holster and start blasting away... I probably also know where the exits are, where good cover and concealment are, and where my family is, just in case I have to get them out quickly too.

  • Dec 5 '15

    Body armour is great, but they have heads that were likely not covered. A CC with a decent aim could have stopped the massacre.

  • Nov 26 '14

    Quote from 1wellnessnurse
    Rua61 I'm so sorry. I'm not trying to be inflammatory. I was trying to describe a situation. Without the use of pictures, one uses descriptive words. If it was a short person versus a large person, I would have used those words. I was merely trying to paint the picture of what happened.
    It's so sad that this turned into a weird racial thing.
    My focus was meant to be in the fact that my dear father is dying. Dealing with a glioblastoma, multiple pulmonary embolisms, confusion, and DVTs in his legs is hard. I was hurting because this frail person that I love was attacked.
    I really meant this discussion to be about how hard it is to protect people when you are far away and they have their own ideas (like taking endless walks).
    I'm sorry for offending people. I thought bringing this discussion up in a nursing forum, we would talking about how do you care for someone who is dying but trying to live.
    I'm hurting and sad. I'm sorry I didn't get my words right.
    My 13 year old son and I were reading this together and frankly he and I are shocked that people would criticize you for sharing here.

    What happened to your father is simply wrong.

    My son just said "There should be a light that clicks on in someone's head that says "This is wrong".

    (edited to add - I remembered recent cases in the news of people being "sucker-punched" as the new sport by the way . . . . .appalling. Not saying this was the case here but I cannot understand hitting a very small man who stops on the street. )

    You touched our hearts tonight and your family will be in our prayers.

  • Oct 23 '14

    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    '

    You are welcome to consider it disingenuous, but the notion that Democrats are less fearful of losing elections because of NRA power is not a reasonable one, in my opinion. All of them want to get reelected and not all Democrat Senators serve primarily liberal constituencies.

    Is there some be some notion that Democrats inherently do or should vote party lines, regardless of the issue, regardless of their personal opinions, or regardless of the desires of the folks they represent. Is that why it is so interesting to conservatives when Democrats vote their conscience rather than with a party?

    Clearly I am not the only person who feels that the obstruction in this matter is related to the NRA and to eagerness of Republicans to further the agenda which was established vocally by McConnell when Obama was first elected.

    In reality, Obama could simply appoint the SG now, while Congress is on it's extended vacation shirking all legislative responsibilities while attempting to save their own sorry arses in the upcoming elections rather than to serve the nation and the people.
    In the first paragraph, you bemoan that Democrats are beholden to the NRA in order to get re-elected. In the second, you claim that they are voting their conscience. (Although I'm not clear on which issue they are voting their conscience.) May it perhaps be that they are representing the will of their constituents, which, by the way, is what they are elected to do?

    Again, I am amused by your use of the term, "obstruction" when the Republicans lack sufficient numbers to obstruct anything. How can Republicans be responsible for obstructing a vote that Harry Reid has not called, especially when the White House has asked that the vote be delayed.

    You are correct that Obama could appoint Murthy tomorrow. After all he has a pen and a phone, as he proudly proclaims. Why do you suppose he has not done so?

  • Oct 22 '14

    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    It is not only Republicans who are fearful of the power that the NRA presumably has when it comes to elections. It is a sorry state of affairs when every Republican votes against something because of a threat by the NRA thereby requiring that every Democrat or INdependent vote for it regardless of the NRA threat, IMO.
    To what are you referring?

    WASHINGTON — Facing a possible defeat in the Senate, the White House is considering delaying a vote on President Obama’s choice for surgeon general or withdrawing the nomination altogether, an acknowledgment of its fraying relationship with Senate Democrats.
    The nominee, Dr. Vivek H. Murthy, an internist and political ally of the president’s, has come under criticism from the National Rifle Association, and opposition from the gun-rights group has grown so intense that it has placed Democrats from conservative states, several of whom are up for re-election this year, in a difficult spot.
    Senate aides said Friday that as many as 10 Democrats are believed to be considering a vote against Dr. Murthy, who has voiced support for various gun control measures like an assault weapons ban, mandatory safety training and ammunition sales limits.
    The troubled nomination is the latest setback for a president who has struggled to get his nominees past members of his own party, even after Democrats changed filibuster rules to prevent repeated Republican blockades of Mr. Obama’s choices for cabinet jobs. Dr. Murthy is one of four nominees who has run into trouble this month after some Democrats have balked.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/15/us...n-general.html

    This article was written in March of this year. As of the time it was written, Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader had not brought Murthy's nomination up for a Senate vote.

    Your blame of Republicans for "blocking" this nomination, if that is what you are referring to, is a bit disingenuous. Not a single Republican vote is necessary if he has the support of the President's own party, including the Senate Majority Leader's confidence in calling a vote.

  • Oct 22 '14

    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact...-was-right-ab/


    It is pretty clear when you read the thoughts and comments of conservative consumers of those media outlets that ignorance about ebola and about modes of disease transmission is rampant. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a Surgeon General who could address this with the public at large as would be the responsibility of that office? Unfortunately, the nominee for that post holds pretty typical views on gun deaths and ways to try to address that issue (his views are in line with the AMA and the majority of American citizens if you want to believe the data), but the NRA finds that too "radical". And so we are a nation scared spitless about a virus that has been known for almost 40 years, without our typical medical leadership in the government.

    Thank you for prompting me to read your previous post again. I had missed your implication on my first read that conservatives have succumbed to Ebola hysteria. How have liberals escaped such an unfortunate fate?

    You indicate that but for NRA opposition, we would have a Surgeon General who would be able to effectively guide the national response to Ebola. I didn't realize that the NRA held the power to prevent the approval of a nominee. Actually, they don't. Neither do the Republicans, who lack the votes necessary to block confirmation.

    "There are 55 Democrats in the Senate. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid changed the rules to kill filibusters for nominations, it would take just 51 votes to confirm Murthy. Democrats could do it all by themselves, even if every Republican opposed. But Democrats have not confirmed Murthy."

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wh...rticle/2555053


    Perhaps a Surgeon General who is knowledgeable about the containment of infectious disease would be able to meet that challenge. But I suspect that Obama doesn't find that to be a priority, since his response to public criticism (by conservatives and liberals alike)was to nominate a political czar, rather than an experienced public health expert.


close