Completely agree.
I don't carry anything daily but I have a reasonable Kit in my car, a more specialised kit in my range bag. OP's approach doesn't seem paranoid at all, seems wholly reasonable to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Worst case scenario
- Thread starter Madriverrob
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Completely agree.
I don't carry anything daily but I have a reasonable Kit in my car, a more specialised kit in my range bag. OP's approach doesn't seem paranoid at all, seems wholly reasonable to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd remind all posting here taking issue with my posts that I haven't directly insulted anyone, belittled them, or accused them of trolling.
The example of a 'kid with their legs blown off' - it's getting very specific now with such examples, but I assume those here understand the nature of the injury would determine potential secondary injuries that would affect treatment i.e. hollow organ damage due to a blast.
If damage due to frag, it wouldn't be classed as 'blown off'. Hence the example was terribly poor and lacking in insight.
If you deal with my points specifically and individually, I'll reply. However, trying to belittle someone with a group gathering such as seen here is childish and cowardly.
Again - I haven't directly insulted anyone - I have challenged the points.
The example of a 'kid with their legs blown off' - it's getting very specific now with such examples, but I assume those here understand the nature of the injury would determine potential secondary injuries that would affect treatment i.e. hollow organ damage due to a blast.
If damage due to frag, it wouldn't be classed as 'blown off'. Hence the example was terribly poor and lacking in insight.
If you deal with my points specifically and individually, I'll reply. However, trying to belittle someone with a group gathering such as seen here is childish and cowardly.
Again - I haven't directly insulted anyone - I have challenged the points.
Not really about you is it Mountaingoat?
You have come to a group of people who practice skills to make them self reliant in emergency situations. You seem surprised that people here overwhelmingly think you are wrong in your assertions that we should be reliant on state apparatus!
Have you considered your opinion might be misplaced?
You asked for a mass casualty event where the kind of kit the OP is advocating would have been useful and you have been given chapter and verse of a local, recent event. You seemed to think I was talking about mines in a far off land. I have taken the time to educate you.
You seem surprised that people doubt your motives? How's the post count going?
I will leave it to you to have the last word fella. I think everybody else left already.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have come to a group of people who practice skills to make them self reliant in emergency situations. You seem surprised that people here overwhelmingly think you are wrong in your assertions that we should be reliant on state apparatus!
Have you considered your opinion might be misplaced?
You asked for a mass casualty event where the kind of kit the OP is advocating would have been useful and you have been given chapter and verse of a local, recent event. You seemed to think I was talking about mines in a far off land. I have taken the time to educate you.
You seem surprised that people doubt your motives? How's the post count going?
I will leave it to you to have the last word fella. I think everybody else left already.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The World trade Center?
What other terrorist scenarios might overwhelm the emergency services? A chemical attack? An attack that rendered the roads impassable for responders? Far too many scenarios to list.
This post is specifically regarding terrorist attacks. These would entail stabbings, IED's etc - this is my speciality - hence commenting specifically in this thread. Notice I don't comment on how to carve a spoon, as my knowledge in this area is close to zero.
My opinion in this instance is nowhere near misplaced as I have direct experience with these types of situations.
'Misplaced' is thinking wilderness survival training qualifies you to comment on terrorist attacks/injuries sustained as a product of said attacks. Again, this is a lack of humility.
RE 'legs blown off' - again, I ask you to comment on what specific device would blow someone's legs off. Someone suffering from frag is very different from someone having their legs 'blown' off - which would be landmine or small IED - otherwise the classification would not be 'blown off'. This alone shows you have no experience in this area, yet feel qualified to comment.
And - as I already mentioned - if someone suffered an injury due to legs being 'blown' off, it is likely a bomb injury (given there have been no landmines used in most terrorist attacks in the West) - at which point there will be hollow organ damage - this drastically affects treatment of how one should stem blood loss. Of course, you know this already.
My opinion here has worth as I'm specifically trained in medical care RE common battle injuries i.e. gunshot wounds (penetrative & perforation-type), IED's, landmine injuries etc - in essence, everything you'd likely encounter in a terrorist attack.
But my opinion holds no weight as some folks who have dressed a wound in a forest disagree with me?
Yes - arrogance.
#28 clap clap clap.
Why don't you read the article and give us the benefit of your experience? My understanding is that the weapon used was akin to a pipe bomb.
"Legs blown off" under these circumstances is probably akin to a Claymore or other Anti Personnel mine.
Please explain how a CAT, an Israeli dressing and the knowledge of dealing with a trauma injury would not be helpful in some way?
Please explain how quickly you think 80 - 100 Ambulances would be on scene?
Please explain how in your state sponsored utopian response a homeless man came to be looking after 2 dying casualties?
My Wilderness, Forestry and Shipboard medical training equip me to manage casualties way beyond EFAW. Please note this is advanced medical training akin to a First Responder but with life support training for an extended period without external medical support. I'm trained in a number of procedures even a paramedic wouldn't perform. I also undertook a specialist course of training dealing specifically in gunshot trauma. (Because I am a Firearms Instructor) Then I did a further training on the use of Haemostats because they became available and looked useful.
That's not arrogant, it's fact.
Might surprise you who is on this forum and what is available to appropriately minded civilians.
If as an army medic you think you would either undertake treatment happily without kit or not treat at all, comfortable in the immediacy of the emergency services then our training is obviously poles apart.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why don't you read the article and give us the benefit of your experience? My understanding is that the weapon used was akin to a pipe bomb.
"Legs blown off" under these circumstances is probably akin to a Claymore or other Anti Personnel mine.
Please explain how a CAT, an Israeli dressing and the knowledge of dealing with a trauma injury would not be helpful in some way?
Please explain how quickly you think 80 - 100 Ambulances would be on scene?
Please explain how in your state sponsored utopian response a homeless man came to be looking after 2 dying casualties?
My Wilderness, Forestry and Shipboard medical training equip me to manage casualties way beyond EFAW. Please note this is advanced medical training akin to a First Responder but with life support training for an extended period without external medical support. I'm trained in a number of procedures even a paramedic wouldn't perform. I also undertook a specialist course of training dealing specifically in gunshot trauma. (Because I am a Firearms Instructor) Then I did a further training on the use of Haemostats because they became available and looked useful.
That's not arrogant, it's fact.
Might surprise you who is on this forum and what is available to appropriately minded civilians.
If as an army medic you think you would either undertake treatment happily without kit or not treat at all, comfortable in the immediacy of the emergency services then our training is obviously poles apart.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Of course. Firstly, I'd be interested on your thoughts RE haemostats - specifically your experience with haemostatic granules (since you mention haemostats).
I'm sure. The army has only really recently started training with Celox in latter years
How about you give us the benefit of your experience on the points I raise above first?
What mob were you with and where did you serve?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How about you give us the benefit of your experience on the points I raise above first?
What mob were you with and where did you serve?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Already addressed earlier in the post.
PS I didn't say bandages etc would not be helpful. I said carrying them isn't necessary.
Big difference.
I'd encourage you to stop misquoting.
I ask again RE granular haemostats.
Possibly I misunderstood your point. Your previous posts indicate that you believe terrorist attacks will leave a few wounded from knife attacks and that in urban areas the emergency services will be available quickly (I took that to be your point) I disagree; that you've only experienced such small scale attacks so far is no indication that it will always be the same.
I also have military experience. We were taught triage and to expect no outside help for hours (possibly weeks) I wasn't a medic. I did however serve my last tour in a special ops wing alongside the PJs (the finest combat paramedics ever known) and I was the 1st Aid instructor. Later as a cop I had to learn even more 1st responder skills than combat medicine (I had to learn to deliver a baby in the backseat of a police car if needed among other things) And again, triage was stressed as outside help might be quite some time in coming even in urban areas after a natural disaster. I also learned much, much more about terrorist threats than is fit for publication.
Last edited:
With any luck, the discussion will eventually get back to what training and easily carried equipment is useful. As well as a discussion on what scenarios to reasonably expect (the most difficult part in an evolving world situation)
I agree - the scale could increase. In this sense we're talking data/statistical analysis.
Taking terrorism data for the UK since 2000: there's a 1 in 9.4 million chance any UK citizen will be involved in a terrorist attack.
I have a greater chance of dying from hot water injuries.
Should I prepare for death from hot water during my daily travails?
Would failing to do so be lack of preparedness on my behalf?
Should our OP carry a full medikit in the off-chance the terror threat increases?
(rhetorical; no need to reply)
No-one has mentioned the psychological aspect of terrorist attacks/mass casualty situations. One of the reasons so many soldiers who suffered complex polytrauma on operations in Afghanistan was that they received effective care from the point of wounding to the time they reached the Role 3 Hospital at Camp Bastion. This started with 'buddy care' by other soldiers, continued with the patrol medics, then the MERT. One of the key factors in ensuring that soldiers on the ground, including medics, were able to render effective immediate aid, was the training they underwent - as part of their normal work, but also - and significantly - in the run-up to deployment, and then consistent reinforcement. Soldiers are, of course, also trained to be able to overcome the effects of hyperarousal, or the fight, flight or freeze response. Even so, events outside their normal range of experience can still trigger instinctive responses. Another factor is that soldiers have been through a selection process. Interestingly, the Royal Marines, who undergo probably the greatest level of selection during recruitment and basic training, have significantly lower rates of mental health issues than the rest of the forces (although Special Forces MH data are not reported). HART paramedics undertake selection and specialist training for major incidents.
Emergency services staff attending major incidents such as terrorist attacks, who are usually able to manage stuff most people would find extremely difficult, can find it difficult to function, especially in the early stages. In other words, a major incident (one that is outside the individual's usual sphere of experience), may trigger a different reaction than a minor, or 'normal' one.
How does this play out when an incident occurs? Hyperarousal will see many people running away or freezing; sometimes it also appears as people appearing confused, or unable to concentrate properly. The response can also mean that people feel that time is slowed down (an example of this is people stating that events seemed to unfold in slow motion, or saying that emergency services took a long time to respond when in fact they were there quickly).
We can't generally tell how an untrained individual will react - until it happens. In the same way, recent research by KCH and in the US has found that trying to screen people to see if they are more likely to be susceptible to PTSD doesn't work. Imagining that you will be able to function normally in a major incident because you can function in other challenging circumstances is misguided and rather arrogant. Even the most mentally resilient people can turn into headless chickens in a critical incident.
For me, carrying kit like tourniquets (leaving aside the implications of misuse) and dressings might provide an individual with some reassurance, but I suspect that actually being able to use them effectively in the midst of a major incident is unlikely. If the person carrying them has some relevant experience, for example as a military medic, then the chances of effective use increase - but I suspect that most such people wouldn't bother. They'd use whatever was to hand in the immediate situation, and then hand over to the paramedics.
To head off the inevitable question, I'm a former forces medic who's also worked in civilian healthcare. I've worked in various conflict zones including NI, Bosnia, Iraq and 2 tours working in the hospital in Camp Bastion. I've completed Major Incident Medical Management and Support (MIMMS) training, and have acted as bronze commander during incidents such as aircraft crashes. I now teach mental health first aid & resilience to various sectors both civilian and military, including NHS ambulance staff, firefighters, police officers and SAR personnel. The organisation I work for was involved in providing support to emergency service personnel following the recent Manchester PBIED incident.
Emergency services staff attending major incidents such as terrorist attacks, who are usually able to manage stuff most people would find extremely difficult, can find it difficult to function, especially in the early stages. In other words, a major incident (one that is outside the individual's usual sphere of experience), may trigger a different reaction than a minor, or 'normal' one.
How does this play out when an incident occurs? Hyperarousal will see many people running away or freezing; sometimes it also appears as people appearing confused, or unable to concentrate properly. The response can also mean that people feel that time is slowed down (an example of this is people stating that events seemed to unfold in slow motion, or saying that emergency services took a long time to respond when in fact they were there quickly).
We can't generally tell how an untrained individual will react - until it happens. In the same way, recent research by KCH and in the US has found that trying to screen people to see if they are more likely to be susceptible to PTSD doesn't work. Imagining that you will be able to function normally in a major incident because you can function in other challenging circumstances is misguided and rather arrogant. Even the most mentally resilient people can turn into headless chickens in a critical incident.
For me, carrying kit like tourniquets (leaving aside the implications of misuse) and dressings might provide an individual with some reassurance, but I suspect that actually being able to use them effectively in the midst of a major incident is unlikely. If the person carrying them has some relevant experience, for example as a military medic, then the chances of effective use increase - but I suspect that most such people wouldn't bother. They'd use whatever was to hand in the immediate situation, and then hand over to the paramedics.
To head off the inevitable question, I'm a former forces medic who's also worked in civilian healthcare. I've worked in various conflict zones including NI, Bosnia, Iraq and 2 tours working in the hospital in Camp Bastion. I've completed Major Incident Medical Management and Support (MIMMS) training, and have acted as bronze commander during incidents such as aircraft crashes. I now teach mental health first aid & resilience to various sectors both civilian and military, including NHS ambulance staff, firefighters, police officers and SAR personnel. The organisation I work for was involved in providing support to emergency service personnel following the recent Manchester PBIED incident.
Fantastic post.
Much like Napoleon daily firing guns over the stables to condition the 'flight' response of his horses for when they were on the battlefield.
As you also addressed, those trained (i.e. military medics) wouldn't walk around town carrying tourniquets etc, but would improvise with their knowledge/equipment at hand. And those who don't have such training (or have never used the likes of a tourniquet in a high-intensity situation such as during an attack) would struggle to use them effectively in the midst of an incident.
Similar threads
