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?
Specializes in E/R, Med/Surg, PCU, Mom-Baby, ICU, more.
Guns are not tobacco, that is correct. I think it is important to look at gun violence from a public health perspective and treat it similarly as any other public health issue. Education, support, and legislation. And Andy, despite what I hope is not attitude, I will respond briefly. Recent articles I have read show the numbers of gun violence has increased, at least in 2015. But without federal research, it is difficult to say exactly.
In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans. … By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 [per 100,000].†Yes this massive decrease despite the fact that Congressional Research Service showed that the number of privately owned firearms increased from 192 million in 1994 to 310 million in 2009.
In addition an incident with four or more homicide victims was the threshold count for mass killing established by the FBI a decade ago; a federal law signed by President Obama in 2013 defined the threshold as three or more victims killed. Pure smoke and mirrors from Obama to promote his antigun stance.
I don't see myself trying to hunt down a whacko with a gun. I see myself behind the thickest, locked doors in the facility(I identified them early on) staying quiet, and aiming for the door. If they get past the keypad or kick it in I will start shooting. It may deter them enough to move on or I may get off a lucky shot.
adjective 1. Also, epidemical. (of a disease) affecting many persons at the same time, and spreading from person to person in a locality where the disease is not permanently prevalent.
2. extremely prevalent; widespread.
noun 3. a temporary prevalence of a disease.
4. a rapid spread or increase in the occurrence of something: an epidemic of riots.
If gun homicides have been decreased in almost half since 1993 why are you using the word "epidemic"?
Specializes in E/R, Med/Surg, PCU, Mom-Baby, ICU, more.
That doesn't matter. If I'm armed, I have options I wouldn't otherwise have.
My gun is for self defense FIRST. If I'm able, I might defend you if the opportunity arises.
According to American Police Beat, the average response time for an emergency call is 10 minutes. Atlanta has the worst response time with 11 to 12 minutes and Nashville comes in at a lightning speed of 9 minutes. Seconds count when it comes to self defense but the disillusioned thinks multiple minutes are adequate.
Specializes in E/R, Med/Surg, PCU, Mom-Baby, ICU, more.
There is the ability to make all guns "smart guns," which means that the weapon cannot be fired unless the owner pulls the trigger. It is keyed into the owner's fingerprint. However, in the US, the NRA "owns" our congress that this bill would never get to the floor of the House of Representatives!
Just how much would this technology add to the price of a gun? Costing $1,798 for a package of one iP1 smart gun, and one RFID smartwatch (which must be worn to operate the gun), Armatix's smart gun costs more than four times the cost of a Glock new G43.
How will a smart gun's sensitive electronics hold up under the regimen of cleaning and oiling necessary to keep a handgun in good working order? Could cellphone signals interfere with a smart gun's RFID signal, rendering it inoperable? And what if you forget the PIN code (which must be entered into the smartwatch to unlock the gun)?
One certain problem with the iP1 system is the fact that both the handgun and the smartwatch that unlocks it need batteries to operate. Should either of those batteries die at an inopportune moment, the iP1 would be useless -- an $1,800 "paperweight," unable to fire.
It actually only took a couple of officers to light their SUV up. Granted a lot showed up but initially it was only a couple of officers, the two were bleeding out then the rest showed up.
I do not CCW to protect the world, I carry because I feel it is reasonable and prudent to arm myself. I carry a firearm like I carry life insurance.
I do believe that there was an interesting anecdotal story of a recent attempted terrorist attack in Texas that ended up with two dead terrorists with canoes for heads due to a CCW holder.
"Light them up"? Is the Rambo terminology supposed to convince anybody that you know what you're doing?
Defending yourself is your right. Along with that right goes the responsibility for the damage resulting from your choice to escalate a crime into a gunfight, especially in a caregiving situation, which is the setting under discussion.
You have every right to arm yourself. I believe, however, that if you are not accountable for knowing the limits of your skill as a fighter, then you are no more a "responsible gun owner" than the gangsters and terrorists that frighten you so much
And, btw, no one asked you to protect the world. What concerns us is protecting ourselves from you.
The rifles used in the attack were illegal under California law because they were modified and violated the state's ban on assault weapons. The article you quoted has nothing to do with the San Bernardino shootings. It is NBC news quoting Mother Jones (A magazine which caters to the left side of politics) statistics.
So is the inflated sense some people have of their own ability. Which has been my point all along. Which is my sole reason for opposing concealed carry in a caregiving situation.
The OP has concerns about the discovery of their CC weapon while at work.
1) Carrying a gun at work would violate workplace rules at most hospitals and clinics.
2) At work, a nurse is responsible for the safety of their patients. Except in the most extreme circumstances, I don't know how your gun makes your workplace safer.
3) Even in the most extreme circumstances, a nurse has more immediate responsibilities than 'aim for the head'.
If you fear the outcome of an 'active shooter' situation in our workplace, address it now through your existing policies and procedures. We are all at greater risk for being grabbed, hit, or otherwise assaulted by patients or their family members than we are for being shot. Depending on your facilities size and location, it may be wise to have some 'rapid response' team in place to handle the firearms. As I stated, nurses have other priorities.
Having a CC license should not preclude you from gaining a nursing license, and vice versa. Your nursing license would only be threatened if you violate your State's Nurse Practice Act. Variously by State, even being arrested for certain crimes will cause you to lose your license regardless of the legal outcome. Given the awful choice between defending your personal safety (outside the workplace) and defending your nursing license, well, there are other jobs.
The OP asserts that 'one nurse with a gun' could have averted the tragedy in San Bernardino; lots of assumptions in that scenario. I understand the emotion and the moral intent of this reaction, but I cannot resolve those aspects with my understanding of my ethical commitments as a nurse. That is, when the time for words has ended and the bullets (or fists) fly, it is my job to triage and begin interventions. I'll leave the weaponry to the professionals.
For me, carrying a gun in the world would just cause me more anxiety than it would bring me peace of mind.
I want to gauge opinions based on our CURRENT situation after the shooting yesterday in San Bernadino, CA. 
AndyB
176 Posts
No government stats will be available for 2015 for quite a while but year after year gun homicides have declined. Here is a article that is only a couple days old from the Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/03/weve-had-a-massive-decline-in-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/?tid=sm_tw
In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans. … By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 [per 100,000].†Yes this massive decrease despite the fact that Congressional Research Service showed that the number of privately owned firearms increased from 192 million in 1994 to 310 million in 2009.
In addition an incident with four or more homicide victims was the threshold count for mass killing established by the FBI a decade ago; a federal law signed by President Obama in 2013 defined the threshold as three or more victims killed. Pure smoke and mirrors from Obama to promote his antigun stance.