E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
James Palka / AP
Congressional intern Daniel Hernandez walks with emergency personnel as Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is moved after the shooting in Tuscon, Ariz., on Saturday, Jan. 8.
By Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
msnbc.com
How fast was the emergency response in Tucson?
It depends on your perspective.
The Pima County Sheriff's Office released on Friday a timeline of the shooting in Tucson, Ariz., of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others, appearing to show the first ambulance arriving 20 minutes after the first 911 call came in.
That information seemed to match reports just after last Saturday's shooting, in which witnesses told reporters that ambulances were 10 to 15 minutes behind the first sheriff's deputies.
It turns out that that's not quite what happened. The sheriff's press release was incomplete.
The first fire/rescue medical personnel arrived at a staging area near the Safeway supermarket 8 minutes after the first 911 emergency call came in. The first ambulance for transporting patients arrived a minute later.
But these units and later-arriving ones were held away from the Safeway in a staging area, even several minutes after the gunman's weapon was secured, out of fear there was a second gunman. This is standard operating procedure in emergency services. First responders who become victims can't help anyone.
The first medical units didn't actually reach the Safeway until 11 minutes after the emergency call. Even then, some were held back for safety. During that time, members of the congressional staff and other volunteers provided first aide to the injured.
And it was not until 16 minutes after the first emergency call that the medical response was upgraded to a mass casualty incident, although the initial 911 call reported that there were "multiple shot." The battalion chief said he never makes that call until one of his crew is on the scene to confirm initial reports, which often are misleading.
Perspective matters
Counted as police and firefighters count their response times, the medical units arrived only five or six minutes after they were dispatched.
But counted from the time the 911 call came in, it was 11 minutes or more before patients were being treated.
"Yes, from the perspective of someone on that horrible scene, calling 911, and waiting and waiting and waiting, it would seem like a long time," said Tom Brandhuber, fire chief for the private Rural/Metro Fire Department in Pima County, whose ambulances responded. "The units got there as quickly as possible. They all descended on the scene at once. And they were able to get all the patients off the scene quickly."
Another factor of perspective: Congresswoman Giffords would naturally have been the focus of much of the attention from witnesses waiting for ambulances. The ambulance that took her to the hospital did arrive 20 minutes after the first 911 call, and left for the hospital 10 minutes later. That total time, 30 minutes, makes her survival of a gunshot wound to the head all the more remarkable.
The timeline
Here's a timeline of first responders for last Saturday's events, compiled by msnbc.com by merging information from the Pima County Sheriff's Office, the public Northwest Fire District, and private Southwest Ambulance and Rural/Metro Fire Department. Two cautions: Times were given in whole minutes, and clocks could vary from one computer-aided dispatch center to another.
10:10 a.m.: The shooter opens fire. Nineteen people are shot.
10:11 a.m.: Pima County Sheriff's Department receives the first of many 911 calls about a shooting with multiple victims at Safeway, 7100 N. Oracle Road, Tucson. That call was taken by a general call taker, who determined that this was both a police and medical emergency, and transferred the information to specialists for both types of calls.
10:14 a.m.: First medical units are dispatched. Northwest Fire/Rescue (public) sent a "first alarm medical," a higher level of response than a simple heart attack or single gunshot victim would receive. That included three fire engines with advanced life support capabilities, a battalion chief, and three ambulances. Those ambulances aren't normally used to transport patients to a hospital, so two ambulances were also dispatched by private agencies with contracts with the county, Rural/Metro Fire Department and its sister company Southwest Ambulance, to provide not only treatment but also transport.
10:15 a.m.: Southwest Ambulance dispatches a second ambulance.
10:15 a.m.: Deputy Thomas Audetat is the first sheriff's deputy on scene and detains the suspect.
10:16 a.m.: Deputy Georgina Patino is second on scene and secures the weapon.
10:17 a.m.: Southwest Ambulance dispatches a third ambulance.
10:19 a.m.: The first medical personnel begin arriving, from the county agency, Northwest Fire/Rescue, but are held in a staging area nearby to make sure the situation was secure. Northwest's first responders were six firefighters with medical certification as paramedics or EMTs, on two vehicles, a paramedic fire engine and a paramedic ambulance. These vehicles are fully equipped for medical treatment, but don't transport patients except when no other transport is available.
10:20 a.m.: The first ambulance for transport arrives from Southwest Ambulance, Paramedic 838, and is held for safety. It was Southwest's second ambulance dispatched, and arrived first, five minutes after it was dispatched.
10:22 a.m.: Northwest paramedics and EMTs are allowed to move to the treatment area and start working. Even then, not all the units moved in at first. "Even when they said it was safe to send in, I sent one rescue company and engine company, until I knew it was safe," said Battalion Chief Lane Spalla from Northwest Fire/Rescue. "It's hard for us to sit on the corner while people need help, but we have to make sure it's safe. And we have to make sure we're sending the units to the right place. Those are always good minutes that are needed. I thought law enforcement did a fantastic job clearing the scene in three minutes. We've been on calls for individual gunshot victims that took longer."
10:23 a.m.: Second and third ambulances from Southwest Ambulance and its sister Rural/Metro Fire Department arrive (Paramedic 837 and Rescue 76). They are held at the staging area waiting for the "all clear." They arrived in the staging area six minutes and nine minutes after dispatch.
10:23 a.m.: Six more Northwest firefighters arrive, for a total of 12 medical personnel in the treatment area, with others waiting in the staging area.
10:24 a.m.: The three ambulances from Southwest Ambulance and Rural/Metro Fire are given the all clear, and move to the treatment area by the Safeway.
10:24 a.m.: A neighboring firefighter unit arrives. By now there are 30 or more medical personnel making their way from the staging area to the Safeway.
10:27 a.m.: Northwest Fire/Rescue upgrades the call to a "second alarm medical," indicating mass casualties. This effectively doubles the response, sending three more fire engines, three more ambulances, and other officers.
10:27 a.m.: A fourth ambulance from the private sector, a Rural/Metro Fire Rescue unit, is dispatched.
10:31 a.m.: This entry in the sheriff's public timeline is a source of confusion. The sheriff's office reports that Rural/Metro's Paramedic 831 is the first ambulance on scene, but this turns out not to be correct. It's the fourth ambulance for transport on scene, not the first. This ambulance had not been dispatched until 10:27. The sheriff's timeline for public release may focus on this ambulance because it's the one that will carry the congresswoman.
10:35 a.m.: The first ambulance to leave is Rescue 76 from Rural/Metro. It was on scene for 11 minutes before leaving. It arrived at Northwest hospital at 10:43.
10:36 a.m.: A second ambulance leaves the scene, Paramedic 838, and arrives at a hospital at 10:45.
10:41 a.m.: A third ambulance leaves the scene, Paramedic 831, with Rep. Giffords for University Medical Center, arriving at 10:54. (There were incorrect reports that she was taken by air ambulance. Others were, but the ground ambulances arrived at the Safeway first, and left first.)
10:48 a.m.: A fourth ambulance leaves the scene, Paramedic 837, and arrives at a hospital at 11:06. Other ambulances follow.
Standards for response times
The nationwide standard for arrival times is usually six minutes: one minute to handle a call ("dispatch time"), one minute to gear up and get on the road ("turnout time"), and four minutes to drive ("travel time"). That six-minute standard is used by the National Fire Protection Association.
Time is of the essence in handling gunshot wounds, heart attacks and other life-threatening emergencies. The American Heart Association says that brain death starts between 4 and 6 minutes after cardiac arrest.
These standards are not laws, and municipalities are not bound by them. Communities can adopt those standards, striving for the highest-quality fire and ambulance response, or they can not adopt them. Even when adopted, they are merely guidelines, though sometimes legal contracts between municipalities and ambulance companies set certain response times.
Rural/Metro Corp. and its subsidiary, Southwest Ambulance, have 20 stations in the Tucson area, and more than 75 ambulances. Based in Scottsdale, Ariz., Rural/Metro serves about 400 communities in the U.S.
Southwest Ambulance (Rural/Metro Corp.) said its standard, under its state license or so-called "certificate of necessity" issued by the Arizona Department of Health Services, is for response within 8 minutes in 70 percent of the medical calls. It said it exceeds those, hitting 8 minutes in at least 90 percent of calls.
Calculating 'response times'
Working from that timeline, these are the approximate response times:
Times for the first medical units: three minutes of dispatch time at the central dispatch before the medical units were called, then five minutes of turnout and travel time. "Response time" from the perspective of the medical units: five minutes. Then another three minutes of hold time for safety of the first-responders. "Response time" from the perspective of a person who dialed 911: 11 minutes.
Times for the first ambulance for transport: three minutes of dispatch time, at the central dispatch before the medical units were called, then six minutes of turnout and travel time. "Response time" from the perspective of the medical units: six minutes. Then four minutes of hold time for safety of the first responders. "Response time" from the perspective of a person who dialed 911: 13 minutes.
"These are good times," said Chief Brandhuber from Rural/Metro. "They show multiple agencies working together well on a mass-casualty event."
Delay in upgrading the response?
The first 911 call reported "multiple shot."
"There was a shooting at Safeway at Ina and Oracle where Gabrielle Giffords was, I do believe Gaby Giffords was hit."
Responder: "At the Safeway sir? ... Was somebody shot there sir?"
"It looks like a guy had a semi-automatic pistol, and he went in, he just started firing and then he ran."
"She's hit, she's breathing, she still got a pulse ... we got one dead... there's multiple shot."
Responder: "Oh my God."
Other callers told of "a bunch of people shot" and "a total of 10 people, maybe more."
Sheriff's radio tapes show an early call from an officer, "Start multiple med units. ... People down. ... I'm counting at least 10."
And another officer pleading, "Start every ambulance we have out here."
And a third, "We're really short on medical personnel."
It would be 16 minutes before the incident was upgraded to a mass casualty event.
"According to our records, the incident was upgraded to a second alarm medical at 10:27 a.m. and additional ambulances were dispatched according to protocols," said Jackie Evans, Southwest Ambulance's market general manager for Southern Arizona.
That's 13 minutes after the first medical units were dispatched, and 16 minutes after the 911 call.
Battalian Chief Spalla said he was responsible as the scene commander for calling for an upgrade, which doubled the number of crews responding, and he is always cautious about taking this step. If too many units are sent to a minor incident, that puts them out of position if genuine calls come in.
"We might show up and there's nothing. Stories often change from the first 911 caller to the second, from the time we get on the scene, from the ambulance crews to the ER doctors. We sent a higher level of response from the beginning, more than we would send for chest pains, and until I get units on the scene, until I get eyeballs on bodies, I don't upgrade again."
Did the delays matter?
There were plenty of paramedics and EMTs, pronouncing as deceased five of the victims, and assessing, stabilizing and treating the 13 wounded, preparing them for transport to the hospital, said Capt. Adam Goldberg, who also serves as a spokesman for Northwest Fire/Rescue. (The New York Times describes the scene that a first responder from Capt. Goldberg's company encountered at the Safeway store, and the life-saving choices made by paramedics, EMTs and doctors at the hospital.)
If the ambulances for transport had arrived sooner, the most seriously injured patients might have left sooner for the hospital, Goldberg said. He said he "absolutely" does not think that the wait for an ambulance made a difference between life and death in this case, but one can never be sure.
Two doctors were at the shopping center before the paramedics and EMTs, and the five dead had already been covered. The sixth to die, the 9-year-old girl, was in cardiac arrest with wounds presumed to be fatal, and wouldn't normally have been rushed to the hospital if there weren't enough paramedics to work with her, Goldberg said. After confirming the five deaths, the paramedics and EMTs went to work furiously on the 13 injured.
"As the ambulances arrived, they were given patients out of our treatment for transport," Goldberg said. If the ambulances had arrived sooner, patients would still have needed to be stabilized. "You don't just take a patient and throw them on the ambulance."
So both things are true at once, he said: If the ambulances had arrived earlier, the first patients might have left earlier. And it might not have mattered. "It's a valid question," Goldberg said.
Battalion Chief Spalla said the delays in the staging area were frustrating, but once at the Safeway his crews had all the people they needed.
"I had more than enough resources to treat at the scene," Spalla said. "We were plenty busy. Treatment never asked for an ambulance that we didn't have for them. If there had been 10 ambulances sitting on the corner, I couldn't have used them until I got triage going."
The earliest firefighters and paramedics on the scene recount their frantic first minutes outside the Safeway grocery store. NBC's Lee Cowan reports.
Leave a Comment:
Enough is enough. I am already getting tired of reading anything anyone can come up with on this tragedy.
Please, unless something important comes up - lets see no more. I do think the media make things worse.
I agree. How many more ways can they milk this tragedy?
Doesn't matter if the ambulances teleported over to the scene within 10 seconds of the 911 calls, point is that EMS are not allowed to go on scene until it is deemed safe by police. What if there was a 2nd shooter? Not only will there be the shooting victims wounded, there will be also EMS wounded too. Can't save lives if EMS is wounded. Common sense.
VERY TRUE!!!! We at this point and time in the Public Servant field CAN NOT, repeat, CAN NOT teleport to a scene. And EMS are kept off scene till CLEARED, repeat, CLEARED to physically be on a scene that is UNSAFE. And if they were teleported on scene, sometimes you can not reverse an injury that is inconsistent with life. I feel they did the best job they could of and should be commended for the job they did, that resulted in no further loss of life. Once again EMS is the unwanted Step Children.
It is always good to review response times and evaluate what happened to see if there are ways to improve. But this is not the case here. It's the typical blame game. We will NEVER have instantaneous response times...EVER! Unless something happens right in front of an EMS crew with fully stocked ambulance, it takes time to respond. I understand it seems like forever while you are waiting for help.
One of the first things I learned in EMS was don't let the rescuer become the rescuee. Sounds like the response times were pretty reasonable.
msnbc - please no more time lines
THE NEGATIVITY NEEDS TO STOP HERE!!!! My wife was a traumatic brain injury victim from a motorcycle accident on May 1, 2010. Between first responders and a life flight ride to University Hospital she was in surgery in 60 minutes. She has recovered 95% since then. The decisions made by 911 dispatchers, fire fighters, police officers need to be praised and not scrutinized. The system works. It's not perfect but it does get better day by day. It saved my wife's life just like it saved Gabby's life.
If your attention span has already been maxed out,
then just don't read it for heaven's sake....
I have to agree, here. Evaluation is always important after an incident like this. That's the only way we learn to do things better on the next call. Just because your actions are being evaluated doesn't mean you did anything wrong, and it's silly to be afraid of it. The very public nature of this incident pretty much assures that the evaluation will also be public, but it is to be expected, not dreaded or fought against. If you handled things the best you could, just stand up for your actions, but don't get offended when people look at what you did. Sure, there will be a few cranks who don't have the knowledge to properly judge, but isn't everyone in public safety used to that by now? You just do your best to educate them and don't take it personally if they can't or won't understand.
I live in Tucson, not far from the shooting, and the intersection it was on is one of the busiest in town. There's NO WAY they could get to the scene faster than they did, unless they have magic powers. We have a huge traffic problem in Tucson, it's always congested, all hours of the day, I'm surprised they were able to get there as fast as they did! They should all be applauded for handling it the way they did. No one expects this to happen in their city, in their backyard, and it's always shocking.
They reported it on the radio at 10:25 that Gabriel Giffords was dead, and we just sat in shock... the media jumped the gun! They ran with this story as far as they could, and now they have nothing else to report, so lets turn on the response time. I drove past the University Medical Center and couldn't BELIEVE the number of news vans.. the mob of reporters just waiting for the victims to come out. They create hysteria. They do it with every big news story.
Instead of picking apart the response time, and second guessing whether 2 extra minutes would have made a difference (which I doubt), lets applaud how quickly they responded, how quickly they got the victims to the hospital (Northwest Hospital is a good 20 minute drive from that intersection, they they drove FAST!!!), applaud the grace under pressure, applaud the fire, police, emt's, and citizens who helped, and boo the media and how they keep milking this story for every last drop!!!!
Is this the best you can do MSNBC? Get off of the nit-picking and try a little journalism for a change....it must be a slow news day.
Commons Sense: We're not nit-picking. We're clarifying what's true. Without this clarification, the sheriff's timeline, widely publicized, made the response look worse than it was.
Bill Dedman
Really??? Not only on this story but the one about how the night before was his desent into darkness. Do you really think it was just that one night. If you are not just nit picking about things then why aren't you asking the Sheriff where his officers at least one were at the start of the event. After all the threats and all the rhetoric the media constantly wrote don't you think it odd that not one Sheriff's deputy was on hand at a meeting place for a Congresswoman that, according to even your network, had been threatened in the past?
Where was the questioning of Dupnik on those matters or did I miss that? Also why do you allow a tool like Dupnik get away with spouting out his "oh its all political" rethoric without calling him on it. I guess you don't have time to ask the hard questions since you all seem in too much of a hurry to get out your next fact lacking story. If Im not mistaken your network was still reporting Giffords dead hours after the shooting.
You are nit picking! If your original stories weren't so hurried you could have caught these timeline facts from the start and again called the Sheriff on his false report. Instead of having to clarify why don't you take the time to do it right the first time.
THE NEGATIVITY NEEDS TO STOP HERE!!!! My wife was a traumatic brain injury victim from a motorcycle accident on May 1, 2010. Between first responders and a life flight ride to University Hospital she was in surgery in 60 minutes. She has recovered 95% since then. The decisions made by 911 dispatchers, fire fighters, police officers need to be praised and not scrutinized. The system works. It's not perfect but it does get better day by day. It saved my wife's life just like it saved Gabby's life.
Common Sense: Get some. This is called FOLLOW UP. If you're not interested, then why the heck are you on here?
@StepinUtah: You're right about the first responders. And I'm very happy to read your wife is doing well. God Speed!
I can't even tell if they're truly trying to "inform the public" as Bill Dedman states, or if they are trying to "nit-pick," or what precisely. This article goes in every direction possible.
But the real problem I have with it, is the whole "response time" garbage. "Response time" means the time from actual radio dispatch, when the dispatcher actually says "Paramedic 123, Engine 456 respond, address, incident type, etc."
If the first caller made the call at 10:10AM, that call goes through to a central dispatch center called a PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point). That PSAP has the responsibility of figuring out what kind of call it is (medical, police, fire, all of the above, and the address for jurisdiction purposes; there are over 8 fire departments and 5 law enforcement agencies in the Tucson area) and transferring to the appropriate dispatch center. That takes time. That is not immediate. And depending on how hysterical a caller may be, it may take longer than two and a quarter seconds.
Not only does the 911 call-taker ask what is the problem, he or she MUST verify the address or location. It is common that people under duress will give the 911 dispatcher the wrong location or address. After that has been verified, the call is transferred to the appropriate agency which in turn, must verify the address, location and incident type.
THEN, the 2nd call-taker (in this case at the Sheriff's department) "sends" the call to the actual dispatcher who sends the officers over the radio. As that is happening, usually another dispatcher calls the Fire Department (in this case Northwest Fire). The dispatcher who notifies the Fire Department MUST verify Medical/Fire jurisdiction to make sure there is no delay by calling the wrong fire department. In this case, the Safeway is at the corner of Oracle road (north to south) and Ina road (east to west). That entire corner and all the businesses around it are in the jurisdiction of Pima County Sheriff's department for law enforcement purposes. Including Ina road and south of it, Northwest Fire department has jurisdiction for fire and medical purposes, HOWEVER, the north side of Ina road, belongs to Rural Metro fire department. This is why it's critical to take a couple extra seconds to verify precisely where the incident is taking place.
Now, there are only so many ambulances within a 5 minute drive from that Safeway, this would surely make sense to most people. After 5 or 6 or 7 have arrived, the next closest ones are gonna be quite further away, and then numbers 10 and 11 or whatever, are gonna be even further away, duh!
There are things to fix in fire departments everywhere, but 98% of the time, when a dispatch goes out, EMT's and firefighters begin to walk (yes walk, NOT run) immediately in the direction of their truck. And when told to "hold off," they have to wait for law enforcement to give the "all clear." Even then, if a Fire Department Chief knows that there was a shooter, and only 2 Sheriff Deputies have gone inside and within a few seconds the call "all clear" was given, common sense would dictate that there is probably no way those 2 Deputies have made a thorough search of a huge store like a Safeway. So still, the Fire Chief has the responsibility that his personnel are safe, thus he only sent in 2 units at first.
It's such an easy concept to understand, to not turn your medical responders into victims.
And last but not least, when medical personnel arrive on scene, that is the first level of care for a patient. They are not running in and picking up people left and right and dumping them into an ambulance. Patients can be stabilized (believe it or not) in places other than hospitals, like at a Safeway if you have trained personnel. So just because an ambulance doesn't "scoop up (as it's called)" a patient within 16 seconds after arriving, it doesn't mean that that patient is not being taken care of.
Alexito,
Thank you for your explanation.
I do believe this was the fastest that they could have safely responded. Hindsight will always be 20/20 as they say, I never thought of the fact that EMT's can become casualties too if they don't do a search.
Thanks for your comment, kathyT.
It's an essential part of our job (our role in the democracy, if you will) to analyze the performance of government, so citizens have good information so they can get the best government. Response times of emergency services are an important issue everywhere, and the issue was raised by the sheriff's timeline and by witness accounts. This posting both shines a light on the issue and helps to clarify what's true.
How about reporting the creditable facts on ongoing issues. The fact that the Sheriff's report mistakenly overlooked 3 EMT's is neither news or important to anyone. As for the EMT's, they keep their own logs, and wouldn't be too difficult to verify by using 911 radio records, hospital records, milage and drive time accounts by subsequent activities. You do monitor the radio, don't you?
The facts seem to be lost, their is no point, nor purpose, beyond just the headline. I am with others, unable to ask the difficult questions? Worry about the distractions, so the real questions go unanswered? Yep, and people wonder why the media has a credibility standing just above lawyer and politician...
It's a same to call one's self "News" when your first priority is to protect your financial interests, butts second, then relevent information (well somewhere between covering your butts to uninterested social pieces).
What ever happened to the investigative reporters with the balls to not accept the status quo? Where are the "next" Schorr and Woodward???
Ha, MSNBC abducated it's "roll" as a responsible news organization years ago, just watch your OWN primetime line up of leftist hate and vitriol. The seats at the Hale Center were barely cool before Matthews restarted the hateful rhetoric machine.
I realize there is a difference between "news" and "comment" - will you inform your viewers that is the case on other (more successful) cable news outlets too?
The "Dupniks" with badges in Tucson MAY have cost needless loss of life screwing around looking for the "second gunman"-THAT is the gist of this reporting. I don't blame EMS - I blame the Tucson Dupnick Dept.
Sorry, James, but we don't work for MSNBC. (That's a TV channel. Different company from the Web site you're reading, msnbc.com.) We don't have viewers; we have readers.
Sure, cute. There is NO relationship between NBC and MSNBC and this website? None. Look at your own avatar - oh and nice job MISSING or ignoring the broader point.
Mr. Dedman (interesting last name for a story such as this), Perhaps some of these posters don't remember things like the Watts riots in the 60's when firemen were on the scene very fast only to be met by flying bullets. They had to back off to prevent being murdered while trying to save the neighborhood.
It is important that the area be secured. If your responders are gunned down also, you will really be in trouble.
Still, I cannot imagine how very long the time must be, especially if you are conscious, waiting for help.
This article may not be news as such, but it certainly shows us how this particular part of our community is serviced by fire and police. (Everything on MSNBC or any other news outlet is not always news. Some items are public service. Some are entertainment. Get a grip, guys.)
I think this kind of information is valuable. Knowing these 'guidelines' perhaps those waiting for the responders could offer solace to the wounded or ill, instead of making matters worse by wailing "Where are they?" and wringing their hands.
Sorry, James, but this poster started going on about the primetime lineup, cable outlets, etc., which has nothing to do with us. We're msnbc.com, a Web site owned by NBC and Microsoft. (It would make sense to guess that we're owned by MSNBC. HomeDepot.com is probably owned by Home Depot. But in our case, no. Different companies.) If you call your pizza place and complain about your dry cleaning, they're not being "cute" if they suggest that you've called the wrong number.
If you have a criticism of the article because of something in the article, we're all ears.
well I guess you shut him up..........thanks.
So true. According to the news media(all) nothing is ever correct or fast enough or just plain to their satisfaction. They are just trying to find the next juicy thing to start a controversy.
Well this average person does.
I'd like to know about ANY communication delays between those securing the scene and the first responders waiting to be let in .
This is proof positive that the media are just a bunch of ambulance chasing vultures, who feed off of others miseries..........
William, thanks for your comment.
If we had not clarified the timeline here, then the record would have stood with the timeline reported everywhere yesterday, making the first responders look worse.
I understand your quick reaction, but we're trying here to make sure the record is carefully documented in this case, and to give everyone involved a chance to explain what really happened.
dedman, the media is merely " doing their job." Driving this tragedy into the ground. Yea the media never goes too far HU ? You can't really believe the news people are thinking of the public's best interest in anything. The media publish harmful and dangerous "facts" all the time.
When an emergency of this magnitude takes place, response time often becomes a second day, or follow up, story. There is nothing harmful or dangerous about the piece. Just journeyman reporting. It also serves to correct the misinformation about response time that is common to this kind of incident.
There is a way to deal with "vulture journalism" when you believe you have encountered it. Don't read the story. Change the channel.
Mr. Harlan, Have you ever been a reporter of any kind?
One person (reporter) at a time may quite possibly miss something. When an event is going on by definition there is usually more that one thing happening at a time. 'First responder' reporters are in a hurry to get something out and usually do a good job of getting that done. After an event, however, many, many more details can be and are revealed.
I have been to many events in many cities, read the newspaper in the morning and said, "That's not what I saw.".
Later qualifying or quantifying the details would be what is going on with articles like the one we have all just read.
I would think we could all learn some valuable information from this article as I stated above.
BILL DEDMAN:
Can you possibly comprehend the irony of your own statement? THAT is precisely the problem with the media these days...FAILURE to fact check BEFORE 'reporting everywhere'!
You realize, don't you, that it's much more difficult to alter (clarify) a false perception than it is to report it correctly in the first place?
However, I believe the 'enlightened' public has realized that fact-checking does not coincide with 'getting the scoop'!
nice reporting work
This is ridiculous!! Cant you people (msnbc) be grateful in "any" way and stop trying to fan the flames.. Just how fast do you expect them to get there?????
Considering the fact that many ARE still alive and congresswoman Gifford's looks like she is going to make it, I THINK THE RESCUE TEAM DID VERY WELL!!!!
Find something to be greatful for......
yea kdubb513.......it's about time people start speaking up for the Ambulances and police personnel. Thank you thank you......
I have been in multiple situations like this, when I worked for Rural/Metro in the early 1980's and when I was in Iraq in 2009. I just want to say, LEAVE IT TO THE PROFESSIONALS!!!!. If you are not out there putting your life on the line, JUST SHUT UP!!!!
Same old, same old. Cops more worried about "catching" someone than saving the injured victims. And we let people with this type of outlook control an emergency? Police are there to SERVE, not control (if they don't like this, get a different job!). Some NON-police associated people need to re-write these "rules". Police have morphed into thinking that catching a criminal is more important than preventing a crime or helping a victim! Do we let injury #1 (or here, #2, #3 ...) die while we see IF there is a criminal #2 to be snagged? We can always catch criminal #2 later but cannot revive injury #1 who is now dead.
Bechtel, There's nothing in this story to support your claim that responders didn't pay attention to the wounded.
"But these units and later-arriving ones were held away from the Safeway in a staging area for several minutes, because of fear there was a second gunman.
The first medical units didn't actually reach the Safeway until 11 minutes after the emergency call. Even then, some were held back for safety. During that time, members of the congressional staff and other volunteers provided first aide to the injured."
Your words, not mine Bill.
gbob, It's standard operating procedure, in Tucson and everywhere else, for a shooting area to be secured before medical personnel are allowed in.
Dead first responders can't help anyone.
That's not valuing their lives more than anyone else's. It doesn't make sense to get paramedics and EMTS killed. Once the area is secure, then they can move in quickly.
This doesn't equate to the police officers not being worried about saving victims.
Police have morphed into thinking that catching a criminal is more important than preventing a crime or helping a victim!
The police were trying to prevent a crime: more victims.............
@Ashley and Bill:Well put.
@ Bechtel
You have no clue about what you are talking about. The police were there to CONTROL the situation in order to SERVE the public. Plus, I highly doubt any non-police personnel would want it any other way. The EMS/Fire will control the medical/fire side after the shooting stops and the threat of shooting is gone. These are not combat medics! The police didn't have a CSI team there slowly and methodically doing an investigation while EMS crews were sitting down the block. The police were finding out if there was another shooter as quickly as possible. Do you really think that any of the law enforcement community wanted to hold up EMS while a little girl was lying on the ground dying? Many of these people have children of that age.
Having EMS show up in waves SAVES time. The first units set up incident command, who then directs each incoming unit to their assignment. These are the people who will CONTROL the medical/fire side.Orderly, efficient use of resources. The "delay" in response is negated by this. Those following units don't disappear into the chaos once they get out of their rigs because they are doing their own thing. Victims don't receive inadequate treatment, transported in the wrong order, or sent to the wrong hospital. For instance, hospitals have limited ORs and trauma surgeons, so you try not to overwhelm/strip resources of any one place. People who have never dealt with situations like this do not understand that response times are only a small picture of what is happening. You can have a great response time, but the call is run like S***. More important is time to hospital. If the victims were at the hospital in an hour then it was a success. The fact that so many of the wounded survived was a success.
Secondly, after the scene has been CONTROLLED by police, the EMS crew are the most valuable lives there. May not be PC to say, but it is true. Unless you have a magic wand to treat and transport victims without EMS, they are the only people with the training and equipment to do the job that needs to be done. If they are dead or wounded nobody is treated.
Finally, there is not a non-police person dumb enough to want to rewrite these rules. Here is a example why. About 10 years ago in my area the local sheriff stated that his deputies would not show up to an attempted suicide unless there was a specific threat of a weapon. EMS was up in arms over this because there is no such thing as a weaponless house--knives in the kitchen, beer bottles, baseball bats, etc. Shourtly after this announcement a deputy happened to roll up on an attempted suicide w/o weapons because he was in the area. He was the first on scene, and while walking up to this weaponless house the patient ran out from the front door and stabbed him. The officer was not hurt because of his vest, but the chances that a medic would have been seriously hurt or killed was absolute if they would have shown up first. The policy was changed.
Sorry to all about this long post, but had to vent.
I am a retired EMT and from what I read. I feel these Ambulance's and Police personel did exactly what they were suppose to do. I say leave them alone and let them do their jobs. They are highly trained to do what they do, so stop trying to put blame on someone. I think things went down precisely as it was ordered to go.. If it had been me on the ground I wouldn't have wanted them to be any better than they were, they and everything was right on. It all went down perfectly. Jo Ann Plopper of Illinois.
I, too, am an EMT. The FIRST thing we are all taught in EMS is the primacy of scene safety. You are trained to protect yourself and your crew so that EMS workers don't turn into additional casualties. In all drills and exercises, you must always use BSI and survey scene safety before performing any intervention. This is the first article I've seen that gives an explanation to the concerns expressed from the very first about the length of time it took for EMS to come upon the scene. This explanation is now documented and reflects accepted standard operating procedure. That others used the accurate and documented information reported here to bash MSNBC reflects their own ignorance and bias.
I found the article to be quite informative. It just helps to explain the whole picture of what EMS has to deal with before entering a scene. I never even thought about the potential for "other armed suspects", and probably a lot of other people never thought about that danger as well. Thanks for shedding some light on this so people may come to a better understanding of what these rescuers are faced with everyday.
Mr. Dedman: As a public safety professional, I was drawn to this article by its headline, "The emergency response in Tucson: Timeline shows ambulance delays." While it's true that what the timeline shows, your story clearly shows that wasn't necessarily the case. The criticism you're facing is based on the fact that you (not the Sheriff's Office ..., there was no criticism from them) made an issue of the alleged delayed response via your headline, and then debunked it. I did appreciate you drawing attention to the on-going issue of emergency medical responders not coming into the "hot zone" until law enforcement makes the "scene safe."
I hope the police and fire department decision makers don't injure themselves patting themselves on the back.
Sloppy Police work from the top down. I have never heard of a planned rally with speakers etc. without the police being around to direct traffic, watch the crowd size and generally keep an eye on things. Had police been at the site when it happened then there would have been less confusion about a "second" shooter.
Sheriff needs to be fired. Not the way we do things in TEXAS.
This was not a rally. It was a congressman talking with people on the street. Meeting and talking with them as they walked by. Yes she advertised she would be there but it was not a rally with speakers etc. In a normal civil society, no police were expected to be there. She had held these "your congressman on the corner" meet and greet many times before with no problems...just normal everyday happenings in Tuscon. Probably not in Texas.
What people sometimes forget is that it is imperative that the scene of an incident is secured for EMS personnel. Had they not made sure that it was safe for the responders there could have been many more victims of this horrible incident. The first thing an EMS responder is taught is scene safety.
.... whats wrong with a complete history of what took place ? I see no wrong in doing so .... the more accurate information, the better.
I am an EMT and would like to give my perspective. The scene was handled correctly. I will be the first to tell you that if I had been there I would have been going nuts waiting to be allowed if not on the scene, then to treat patients brought to me BUT I never would have gone into the scene. Not because of being held back by crazed police, but because if those police hadn't secured the scene EMS could have become victims. How can I help the real ones if I'm hurt or dead from a 2nd gunman? It bothers ALL EMS to not be able to help immediately but we must have a safe scene and be safe ourselves to do our job. Finally in that case, it IS the police's job to control the scene. It is a crime scene. When there is a fire - the fireman are in charge. When I have a patient - I am in charge. These are the jobs we are trained to do.
I am tired of this so called news organizations sick twisted sensationalizations! The Headline states Ambulances delayed in Tuscon. Well after reading the facts that are buried half way in the article they were not delayed. So much for the CHEAP SHOTS!
Brok,
Thanks for your comment.
In truth, the ambulances were delayed. And for a reason, as we explain.
They were not delayed getting to the scene, as the headline implies, but were detained in a staging area waiting for the area to be secured so it was safe for them to enter. BIG difference in my opinion. The headline is the misleading part - not the story! When one reads "ambulance delays", one thinks they took too long to arrive on the scene...and in this instance, that was NOT the case. They arrived at the staging area in an appropriate time. And once the scene was secured and it was deemed safe, they were allowed to enter and treat the injured. Exactly the way it is supposed to happen. I don't have any issue with the article itself, just the headline - typical media sensationalism to grab our attention so we read the article.
I must say Donna you nailed it , could'nt have said it better. One other thing in the article mentioned that a unit that was dispatched second to another arrived prior to them . Anyone in emergency service knows this is a meaningless statment , it infers that the second unit was somehow dragging their feet when we all know that any number of things determines who arrives on scene first, not just who was dispatched first. Anyway we all know that the media does this all the time with their headlines ("ambulance delays") so Iam not surprised but I am surprised that MR Deadman tried to defend it , just goes to show how convinced they are they can do no wrong .
Thank you Punnisher. As to your comment about the ambulance that was dispatched second arriving first - one has to consider the distance each unit had to travel as well as the traffic each unit had to deal with. I am sure every EMS unit, Fire truck and Police car always does their best to arrive in a timely manner. The rest of us can help by getting out of their way. Most states have laws that mandate we pull over and STOP to allow them safe passage. This means cars in both directions. The only exception to this law is if one is on a divided highway (grassy median, paved median with barriers, etc). I have almost been in an accident myself when I pull over and then try to re-enter the traffic flow because of the number of cars who don't bother to get out of the way. They are the ones that would be the first to complain if it was one of their family members needing help from Emergency Responders.
Ambulance, EMT, and fire personnel are NEVER sent into an area with live gunfire, or when the area is not deemed 'secure' by police personnel. That is SOP, and was the same in this case. You don't send additional unarmed people into a shooting scene until it is safe. Common sense.
Staging off of a scene with shooting is standard in the Fire/EMS industry...ambulances should not bringing more potential victims to the scene. Is it up to Law Enforcement to mitigate the threat, secure the scene and "clear" EMS to begin work, and making sure those EMS providers have cover while working.
By all accounts, this was a well manged scene. Everyone who left the scene alive, is still alive today. In a multiple casualty incident, dead is dead, and resources are used to save the ones still alive. Only when you have enough resources on the scene, does a victim already in cardiac arrest get attention...traumatic cardiac arrests, at any age, are statistically non-survivable events.
I actually found it interesting.
Most posters here missed the point, which was to clarify the timeline in a more accurate way, which actually put first responders in a more positive light than what was originally cast. Try reading the article before you comment. Idiots.
This story is confusing as I believe Gifford's and others were transported via helicopter.
ZONA, There were reports to that effect, but they were incorrect. I went over this carefully with the chiefs today. Rep. Giffords was transported by ground ambulance at 10:41 a.m.
Three helicopters were sent, and did transport patients, but the ground ambulances arrived first.
Surface units ALWAYS arrive first , for it is they who determine weather there is a need for aviation units !
Well, William, REA40, CommonSense1, why don't you all think B4 U open the hold in your face. Becoz U all would probably be the first to complain it these tragedies had involved UR families and these folks were late.
Besides MSNBC is and was doing their job so we can get the correct information, these are services that are depended on and the respect of what they do and how that its done be done right. What if there would have been another gunman and he lay in waiting for them and more persons would have been injured or killed then what?
I don't think U would all have jumped in to help except to critize from a chair while sitting on UR duffs and besides if U don't want to hear anymore don't click on it to read anymore no one is forcing you to read or watch anymore about the subject. U have a choice and it seems U chose to watch and read it. U have no one to complain about except URself.
Ok lets analyse the crap out of everything, and everybody. B.S.! The emergency personnel did a great job!
I wish someone would have killed that crazy assassin, child killer, and we would not have an expensive trial, and house and feed the creep for years. Maybe we will get lucky and he will meet his demise in jail?
When I read this article, I didn't feel like it was placing blame on the first responders at all. It seemed to just clarify an earlier report. After I read this, I felt confident as a citizen that things were handled properly. It seems we'd all like to know if they weren't so positive changes could be made. Here, however, it seems as though everything was done as best as it could be in such a dangerous situation. It seems to me that some people complaining about the article didn't actually read it all the way through.
Life's is short enjoy it and all your friends, family, and others in your circle. U never know when something like this may involve U or those U luv.
Bill, which insurance companies paid for the ambulance rides and which did't? What were the deductables for the insured? Was hospital stays covered or not. I'll bet if you investigated the health care system as well as you did response times there wouldn't have been so much confusion because of the political hype as there was and is now. How about you take the lead on this one?
Excellent question. I think Bill reads the comments. maybe he can start a story here. My experience with ambulance charges and insurance payments - the ins. pays about half, saying that is the normal and customary. TIP; if you get that bs on your bill, re-submit it. make them repeat the lie twice. then submit the bill asking to see their normal and customary charges for every item in your bill. The ins. co. will pay before they let you see that, but the law says they must.
How about that, Bill? Another story for ya ! And I won't sue if you use them. I think you can see my email - contact me if you'd like more background. I was Execuative Director of Local 666, AFL-CIO, SEIU.
Justagal...Unfortunately the picture of the Congresswoman has been on every TV network, newspaper, and online news source, numerous times this week..MSNBC is not the first.
My heart goes out to Tucson...just an awful, awful thing to happen.
IVA , your asking for investigative journalism , we do not have that anymore . but we do have talking points , political hacks and reporters reporting on subject matter they know little about. In my twenty plus years in emergency service I have found they get it wrong almost as often as they get it right.
I find this article offensive and I find the photo of the Congresswoman equally offensive. There is no need to post a photo like that other than to further sensationalize a tragedy. As a resident of Tucson, I will choose to no longer get my news here.
As another gal from Tucson I felt this article was very insightful and not at all offensive. We would not get this type of in-depth analysis in our local paper. The photo in question ran everywhere, not just here.