EMT's on break deny pregnant woman help after she has heart attack

[Broken Parachute]

This really made me upset when I read it. It's so frustrating to think this actually happened.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/12/21/2009-12-21_bklyn_ma_rips_callous_emts_as_he artless.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34516684/

[TheDemosRock]

that's disgusting

[xshady121]

Eh, while it may be morally disgusting, they are legally not obligated to do anything.

While they may lose their jobs (their contract had some sort of language saying that while even on break, they are sworn to help), they can not be criminally prosecuted. Or civilly held responsible.

[caveBEAR]

If I were these guys lawyers, I'd try to spin the whole incident as 'modern art'. They're fucked as it is, so might as well go for broke.

[xshady121]

If I were these guys lawyers, I'd try to spin the whole incident as 'modern art'. They're fucked as it is, so might as well go for broke.

They're not fucked and they won't need lawyers.

They can't be held responsible either criminally or in a civil case.

They may try to sue the city when they get canned, but they would be unsuccessful in that regard.

[caveBEAR]

They're not fucked and they won't need lawyers.

They can't be held responsible either criminally or in a civil case.

They may try to sue the city when they get canned, but they would be unsuccessful in that regard.

Oh, I know they're not legally fucked. Before I read your comment on their contracts, I thought they would be able to keep their job/at least fight for it, and wondered about the public backlash on that.

I just meant they were fucked in a 'public eye' sense. The mother who Twittered while her son 'drowned' is crucified, and these guys will be, too.

[Nerdy91]

This is disturbing.
I hope they lose their jobs because being EMT's is obvoiusly not their calling.

[ryanhorizons]

that is really sad.
but do they have an oath like doctors do? if not then i hope they get bad karma for letting that happen.

[sleepyseanzzz]

that is really sad.
but do they have an oath like doctors do? if not then i hope they get bad karma for letting that happen.

i'm not sure if EMT's take the hyppocratic oath, but that's nice that you hope their wives (if they are men) get heart attacks while pregnant

[zion the lion]

If I read that correctly and 11 minutes was the response time, I'd be too ashamed to ever admit that.

Shit like this happens all the time, it's sad, but what annoys me more is how many people act like they would have done more. Its not too hard to just assume it was a little case of burnout.

[Fringe]

Massive dick move on those EMT's part. And now two people are dead. What a great world >.>

[samsara]

Dang thats messed up. They as health care professionals should have felt morally obligated to do something for that poor woman.

[aoftbsten]

That's horrible.

[KidRobot]

i'm not sure if EMT's take the hyppocratic oath, but that's nice that you hope their wives (if they are men) get heart attacks while pregnant

That isn't how karma works.

[Rock]

Eh, while it may be morally disgusting, they are legally not obligated to do anything.

While they may lose their jobs (their contract had some sort of language saying that while even on break, they are sworn to help), they can not be criminally prosecuted. Or civilly held responsible.
Does it really matter what they legally are or are not obligated to do in this instance? Why would you even bring that up? We're talking about a human being desperately in need of assistance.

[Rock]

If I read that correctly and 11 minutes was the response time, I'd be too ashamed to ever admit that.

Shit like this happens all the time, it's sad, but what annoys me more is how many people act like they would have done more. Its not too hard to just assume it was a little case of burnout.
Agreed.

If someone was dying, you don't think you'd do everything in your power to help the person? I mean, it's one thing if you have to put yourself in harm's way to do it, but that obviously wasn't the case here.

Dang thats messed up. They as health care professionals should have felt morally obligated to do something for that poor woman.
Or as human beings.

[xshady121]

Does it really matter what they legally are or are not obligated to do in this instance? Why would you even bring that up? We're talking about a human being desperately in need of assistance.

When the article mentions the family hiring attorneys, then yes it is relevant.

Get off your moral high horse and brush up on your reading comprehension.

[Mitch]

Agreed.

If someone was dying, you don't think you'd do everything in your power to help the person? I mean, it's one thing if you have to put yourself in harm's way to do it, but that obviously wasn't the case here.


Realistically I would not do a thing besides call 911, for, unlike an EMT, I am not trained to help save lives.

[TriangularDuck]

So, an ambulance comes and "did not have some of the equipment to help," but two off-duty EMTs are supposed to have them? Give me a fucking break. The EMTs probably knew that there was nothing they could do, and told them to call 911 to get a team that was equipped to handle the situation. The fact that the people who came to help, supposedly with equipment needed for someone in cardiac arrest, did not have the life-saving equipment needed should be the "shocking" part of the story.

[Lirr168]

Did anyone catch this detail?

As for Green and Jackson, fire department officials said they were working as dispatchers out of fire department headquarters

They weren't assigned to an ambulance and therefore would not have had any lifesaving equipment on them. They were correct in telling people to call 9-1-1 and not rely on them to help. Should they have stayed anyway? Probably, but they were in no better position to assist than any other bystander with CPR training.

[Rock]

Realistically I would not do a thing besides call 911, for, unlike an EMT, I am not trained to help save lives.
Uh huh. I'm saying in each respective situation, if you could do something to help save a person's life, you would do it. For example, if someone was being crushed under a heavy object, you'd go try and lift it off of them. These people could have done something and they didn't do it.

[Rock]

When the article mentions the family hiring attorneys, then yes it is relevant.

Get off your moral high horse and brush up on your reading comprehension.
I don't think the part about the family hiring attorneys is the major discussion point of the story.

Ha. Get off of your intellectual podium and figure out how not to be a douche bag when making a reply. This is both a moral and civil issue, but I think we're leaning on the side of moral here.

[Rock]

So, an ambulance comes and "did not have some of the equipment to help," but two off-duty EMTs are supposed to have them? Give me a fucking break. The EMTs probably knew that there was nothing they could do, and told them to call 911 to get a team that was equipped to handle the situation. The fact that the people who came to help, supposedly with equipment needed for someone in cardiac arrest, did not have the life-saving equipment needed should be the "shocking" part of the story.
They could have at least performed CPR, no?

They weren't assigned to an ambulance and therefore would not have had any lifesaving equipment on them.

they were in no better position to assist than any other bystander with CPR training.
Correct. And I understand that.

Okay. While that may be true, apparently no other bystanders had CPR training, which means that they could have and should have administered CPR.

[Lirr168]

I don't think the part about the family hiring attorneys is the major discussion point of the story.

Ha. Get off of your intellectual podium and figure out how not to be a douche bag when making a reply. This is both a moral and civil issue, but I think we're leaning on the side of moral here.

How is it a civil issue? A citizen, which is what these EMTs were at the time of the incident, cannot be compelled to help someone else. It is purely a moral issue. I can't say I agree with their decision based on the facts presented, but I sure as hell support their right to be morally bankrupt.

[Rock]

How is it a civil issue? A citizen, which is what these EMTs were at the time of the incident, cannot be compelled to help someone else. It is purely a moral issue. I can't say I agree with their decision based on the facts presented, but I sure as hell support their right to be morally bankrupt.
You're right - it's not a civil issue. Thanks for the correction.

[Anything1216]

What do you expect? Their bagels were getting cold. They never taste the same reheated. :shrug:

[zion the lion]

Agreed.

If someone was dying, you don't think you'd do everything in your power to help the person? I mean, it's one thing if you have to put yourself in harm's way to do it, but that obviously wasn't the case here.


Or as human beings.

I know damn well that after a while people just dont help other people. You'll walk past a girl getting mugged or raped in an alley, or you'll hear your neighbor beating the shit out of his wife or child and you just turn up your tv, it happens all the time, people get burned out, and they stop caring. Every single time I hear something like this, and everyone around goes "oh those horrible bastards, I would have done anything I could have" when in reality, they wouldnt.

You have to imagine, EMT's see so much with their jobs, after a while of trying to save dead infants or little children who are severely burned or abused, you have to emotionally detach yourself or else you fall apart. I doubt these two were evil heartless people, I dont think that they deserve to have a heart attack while pregnant just because they ignored this woman.

[saysmydoctor]

Some idiot legal analyst on TV said that this is tricky politically even though these individuals signed a contract that binded them to help ON and OFF duty.

Open and shut fucking case.

[samsara]

Agreed.

If someone was dying, you don't think you'd do everything in your power to help the person? I mean, it's one thing if you have to put yourself in harm's way to do it, but that obviously wasn't the case here.


Or as human beings.

I think that was a give.

[xshady121]

Some idiot legal analyst on TV said that this is tricky politically even though these individuals signed a contract that binded them to help ON and OFF duty.

Open and shut fucking case.

Are you saying legally as in criminally, civilly, or strictly pertaining to their job?

[saysmydoctor]

Legally. I'd imagine breaking a contract is a criminal matter. Maybe I'm an idiot? It's possible.,

[Jason Tate]

Eh, while it may be morally disgusting, they are legally not obligated to do anything.

While they may lose their jobs (their contract had some sort of language saying that while even on break, they are sworn to help), they can not be criminally prosecuted. Or civilly held responsible.
Wanna bet?

[xshady121]

Wanna bet?

Yup.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/04/03/2009-04-03_subway_rape_victim_comes_forward _after_s.html

Unless New York City has implemented a good Samaritan law since last April (which it hasn't) there is no ground for them to be tried. The DA right now threatening a (Criminal) lawsuit is just blowing hot air and doing so to put on a show.

[Jason Tate]

Yup.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/04/03/2009-04-03_subway_rape_victim_comes_forward _after_s.html

Unless New York City has implemented a good Samaritan law since last April (which it hasn't) there is no ground for them to be tried. The DA right now threatening a (Criminal) lawsuit is just blowing hot air and doing so to put on a show.
Let me point out the obvious: That doesn't mean they can't be tried and found guilty and responsible.

[xshady121]

Let me point out the obvious: That doesn't mean they can't be tried and found guilty and responsible.

Yeah. It's not like our judicial system is built on precedent or anything.

[Jason Tate]

Yeah. It's not like our judicial system is built on precedent or anything.
Yeah, it's not like it's 100% of the time that open and shut or anything. Welcome to the real world.

[xshady121]

Yeah, it's not like it's 100% of the time that open and shut or anything. Welcome to the real world.

If no one was found criminally responsible in the Esmin Green case, then these two certainly aren't going to be found guilty either.

The city may pay out, as they did with Esmin Green, but if you think these two will be held responsible in civil court, you're mistaken.

Feel free to quote this post in 5 months or so when this case is settled and nothing happens to them.

[Jason Tate]

If no one was found criminally responsible in the Esmin Green case, then these two certainly aren't going to be found guilty either.

The city may pay out, as they did with Esmin Green, but if you think these two will be held responsible in civil court, you're mistaken.

Feel free to quote this post in 5 months or so when this case is settled and nothing happens to them.
I find it humorous that you keep using words like "certainly" when discussing legal cases. There is absolutely nothing certain about it. Legal precedent may say it's unlikely - but that does not make it impossible.

They're already being punished by the union.

[xshady121]

I find it humorous that you keep using words like "certainly" when discussing legal cases. There is absolutely nothing certain about it. Legal precedent may say it's unlikely - but that does not make it impossible.

They're already being punished by the union.

And they'll lose their jobs.

[Jason Tate]

And they'll lose their jobs.
Good.

[xshady121]

Good.

Agreed.

[Lirr168]

This is just another example of the media hyping a story without providing all of the details. The story has made national headlines now and nearly every source reporting it has neglected to mention that these two were not even assigned to an ambulance; they were dispatchers. Why is this important? Because they had no access to life-saving equipment! The real crime here is that when an ambulance did arrive, those EMTs did not have the correct equipment. Where is the backlash against them? They are the ones who should be losing their jobs.

[Jason Tate]

This is just another example of the media hyping a story without providing all of the details. The story has made national headlines now and nearly every source reporting it has neglected to mention that these two were not even assigned to an ambulance; they were dispatchers. Why is this important? Because they had no access to life-saving equipment! The real crime here is that when an ambulance did arrive, those EMTs did not have the correct equipment. Where is the backlash against them? They are the ones who should be losing their jobs.
CPR is "life saving equipment."

[saysmydoctor]

CPR is "life saving equipment."

Yup.

[five inch taint]

Used alone, CPR will result in few complete recoveries, and those that do survive often develop serious complications. Estimates vary, but many organizations stress that CPR does not "bring anyone back," it simply preserves the body for defibrillation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defibrillation) and advanced life support (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_life_support). However, in the case of "non-shockable" rhythms such as Pulseless Electrical Activity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulseless_electrical_activity) (PEA), defibrillation is not indicated, and the importance of CPR rises. On average, only 5%-10% of people who receive CPR survive. The purpose of CPR is not to "start" the heart, but rather to circulate oxygenated blood, and keep the brain alive until advanced care (especially defibrillation) can be initiated. As many of these patients may have a pulse that is impalpable by the layperson rescuer, the current consensus is to perform CPR on a patient that is not breathing.
Studies have shown the importance of immediate CPR followed by defibrillation within 3–5 minutes of sudden VF cardiac arrest improve survival. In cities such as Seattle where CPR training is widespread and defibrillation by EMS personnel follows quickly, the survival rate is about 30 percent. In cities such as New York City, without those advantages, the survival rate is only 1-2 percent.

[saysmydoctor]

He brings up a valid point. CPR isn't 100% effective, so why even use it?

I bet you wore a condom though, right?

[Broken Parachute]

Too bad we'll never know whether she was part of that 1 to 2 percent, huh?

[ArtForLovers]

I agree that they probably did do the right thing by saying call 911, but why would you say hey call 911 to the person who is hurting? Better yet, instead of saying call 911, why didn't they call 911? And they most definitely should have stayed. What if CPR was needed? Cannot rely on some bystander to know it, when the EMT knows CPR. Classic case of "oh there is a lot of other people that can deal with this, I don't need to do anything"

[ArtForLovers]

Used alone, CPR will result in few complete recoveries, and those that do survive often develop serious complications. Estimates vary, but many organizations stress that CPR does not "bring anyone back," it simply preserves the body for defibrillation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defibrillation) and advanced life support (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_life_support). However, in the case of "non-shockable" rhythms such as Pulseless Electrical Activity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulseless_electrical_activity) (PEA), defibrillation is not indicated, and the importance of CPR rises. On average, only 5%-10% of people who receive CPR survive. The purpose of CPR is not to "start" the heart, but rather to circulate oxygenated blood, and keep the brain alive until advanced care (especially defibrillation) can be initiated. As many of these patients may have a pulse that is impalpable by the layperson rescuer, the current consensus is to perform CPR on a patient that is not breathing.
Studies have shown the importance of immediate CPR followed by defibrillation within 3–5 minutes of sudden VF cardiac arrest improve survival. In cities such as Seattle where CPR training is widespread and defibrillation by EMS personnel follows quickly, the survival rate is about 30 percent. In cities such as New York City, without those advantages, the survival rate is only 1-2 percent.

I am CPR certified. Which I guess is pretty pointless to have. Next time I will not use it...
:-|

[Lueda Alia]

This made me sick.

[Tristan Needler]

For the people citing this quote: As for Green and Jackson, fire department officials said they were working as dispatchers out of fire department headquarters.
Why do you ignore the next sentence? But they had appropriate training to assist in an emergency.

[Villanova1L]

Eh, while it may be morally disgusting, they are legally not obligated to do anything.

While they may lose their jobs (their contract had some sort of language saying that while even on break, they are sworn to help), they can not be criminally prosecuted. Or civilly held responsible.

Unless someone tries to argue that EMS workers are constantly under a duty to help, which would make this in the scope of their employment, but that's an attenuated argument at best.

[Jason Tate]

Unless someone tries to argue that EMS workers are constantly under a duty to help, which would make this in the scope of their employment, but that's an attenuated argument at best.
According to the NY Post (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/mike_rips_emts_in_preg_mom_death_5d 0UDQYANcSrLDN4ZnqitI), A union official said EMT members are not contractually entitled to a responsibility-free meal period; members on duty and in uniform have an obligation to act in an emergency, and leaving a patient is "an act of abandonment," he said.

A union spokesperson told AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-nk2m6C0apw1BSyeyslbjxJ6ZbwD9CO07M01 ) that NY EMT workers consider their job as a 24 hour kind of job: "Our people tend to spring into action whether they're on duty, off duty, whatever they're doing," said Robert Ungar, spokesman for the Uniformed EMTS and Paramedics, FDNY. The city's EMTs have a "very strong bond with the people of New York City that they serve," he said. "They view themselves as always being on duty."

Mayor Bloomberg said ""The Fire Department, including EMS, is responsible for life-saving, and their first responsibility is to do that. But even if they weren't part of the Fire Department sworn to protect all of us, just normal human beings, drop your coffee and go help somebody if they're dying. C'mon."

So yeah, that argument is going to be made ... by their colleagues.

[Jason Tate]

Used alone, CPR will result in few complete recoveries, and those that do survive often develop serious complications. Estimates vary, but many organizations stress that CPR does not "bring anyone back," it simply preserves the body for defibrillation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defibrillation) and advanced life support (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_life_support). However, in the case of "non-shockable" rhythms such as Pulseless Electrical Activity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulseless_electrical_activity) (PEA), defibrillation is not indicated, and the importance of CPR rises. On average, only 5%-10% of people who receive CPR survive. The purpose of CPR is not to "start" the heart, but rather to circulate oxygenated blood, and keep the brain alive until advanced care (especially defibrillation) can be initiated. As many of these patients may have a pulse that is impalpable by the layperson rescuer, the current consensus is to perform CPR on a patient that is not breathing.
Studies have shown the importance of immediate CPR followed by defibrillation within 3–5 minutes of sudden VF cardiac arrest improve survival. In cities such as Seattle where CPR training is widespread and defibrillation by EMS personnel follows quickly, the survival rate is about 30 percent. In cities such as New York City, without those advantages, the survival rate is only 1-2 percent.

Thanks wikipedia.

[Villanova1L]

According to the NY Post (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/mike_rips_emts_in_preg_mom_death_5d 0UDQYANcSrLDN4ZnqitI), A union official said EMT members are not contractually entitled to a responsibility-free meal period; members on duty and in uniform have an obligation to act in an emergency, and leaving a patient is "an act of abandonment," he said.

A union spokesperson told AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-nk2m6C0apw1BSyeyslbjxJ6ZbwD9CO07M01 ) that NY EMT workers consider their job as a 24 hour kind of job: "Our people tend to spring into action whether they're on duty, off duty, whatever they're doing," said Robert Ungar, spokesman for the Uniformed EMTS and Paramedics, FDNY. The city's EMTs have a "very strong bond with the people of New York City that they serve," he said. "They view themselves as always being on duty."

Mayor Bloomberg said ""The Fire Department, including EMS, is responsible for life-saving, and their first responsibility is to do that. But even if they weren't part of the Fire Department sworn to protect all of us, just normal human beings, drop your coffee and go help somebody if they're dying. C'mon."

So yeah, that argument is going to be made ... by their colleagues.

Going through the parts you highlighted I can see some counter arguments to be made:
1. There is a chance they weren't "on duty." I think the article said something about breakfast bagels? If they never reported to work then this wasn't a matter of a "responsibility free meal period" but that they hadn't reported to work so no obligation attached.

2. Other EMTs considering it a 24 hour job doesn't necessarily mean they are under any legal obligation. The argument can definitely be made that if the bulk of EMTs consider themselves on duty 24 hours that these EMTs should have done the same.

3. The Mayor's comment is definitely a common sense approach, but again likely doesn't create a legal duty.

I agree with you that what they did was terrible and there is a chance of legal action, much more than the person who said it was definite they wouldn't. However, settlement is most likely just so it gets out of the news as fast as possible.

[xshady121]

Going through the parts you highlighted I can see some counter arguments to be made:
1. There is a chance they weren't "on duty." I think the article said something about breakfast bagels? If they never reported to work then this wasn't a matter of a "responsibility free meal period" but that they hadn't reported to work so no obligation attached.

2. Other EMTs considering it a 24 hour job doesn't necessarily mean they are under any legal obligation. The argument can definitely be made that if the bulk of EMTs consider themselves on duty 24 hours that these EMTs should have done the same.

3. The Mayor's comment is definitely a common sense approach, but again likely doesn't create a legal duty.

I agree with you that what they did was terrible and there is a chance of legal action, much more than the person who said it was definite they wouldn't. However, settlement is most likely just so it gets out of the news as fast as possible.

Or they would argue that they called 911 and that there was little else they could have done.



While they could have done CPR, they will be sure to point out that they were dispatchers.

[samsara]

There are a lot more life saving methods other than CPR. They are trained to do them if someone is in need. They didnt. They might have been able to help a slight bit.


All the people saying that they were obligated or they couldnt have helped would be singing a different tune if something like this happened to them or someone they knew.

[Villanova1L]

Or they would argue that they called 911 and that there was little else they could have done.



While they could have done CPR, they will be sure to point out that they were dispatchers.

Completely agree. I also agreed this case would most likely settle.

My argument: That there is an argument to be made that EMTs are constantly on duty. Could, and likely will, be made at some point. The quotes Jason posted confirm this belief. You don't think there's an attorney in NY who wants to take this on for the publicity alone?

I hope you aren't this callused by just one semester of law school. Or if you're still in undergrad working on that political science degree, I can't wait to hear how cold you are after going to law school.

[caveBEAR]

He brings up a valid point. CPR isn't 100% effective, so why even use it?

I bet you wore a condom though, right?

Condoms don't break sternums when worn incorrectly.

[Jason Tate]

Going through the parts you highlighted I can see some counter arguments to be made:
1. There is a chance they weren't "on duty." I think the article said something about breakfast bagels? If they never reported to work then this wasn't a matter of a "responsibility free meal period" but that they hadn't reported to work so no obligation attached.

2. Other EMTs considering it a 24 hour job doesn't necessarily mean they are under any legal obligation. The argument can definitely be made that if the bulk of EMTs consider themselves on duty 24 hours that these EMTs should have done the same.

3. The Mayor's comment is definitely a common sense approach, but again likely doesn't create a legal duty.

I agree with you that what they did was terrible and there is a chance of legal action, much more than the person who said it was definite they wouldn't. However, settlement is most likely just so it gets out of the news as fast as possible.
Maybe reading what I post before commenting will be better suited for you.

[Villanova1L]

Maybe reading what I post before commenting will be better suited for you.

I did? :shrug:

I'm confused why you're so hostile towards me.

[saysmydoctor]

There are a lot more life saving methods other than CPR. They are trained to do them if someone is in need. They didnt. They might have been able to help a slight bit.


All the people saying that they were obligated or they couldnt have helped would be singing a different tune if something like this happened to them or someone they knew.
Slippery slope.

[five inch taint]

Thanks wikipedia.

:-d

[Broken Parachute]

BUMP

One of the EMT's from this story was shot and killed last night. Hmm...

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/07/19/2010-07-19_greenhouse_club_where_offduty_em t_was_shot_in_face_sued_for_discrim ination_three.html

[caveBEAR]

BUMP

One of the EMT's from this story was shot and killed last night. Hmm...

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/07/19/2010-07-19_greenhouse_club_where_offduty_em t_was_shot_in_face_sued_for_discrim ination_three.html

Holy shit! A dude was shot in New York? Must be connected to the EMT Heart Attack case, New York is such a peaceful, non-violent place.

:rolleyes:

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Holy shit! A dude was shot in New York? Must be connected to the EMT Heart Attack case, New York is such a peaceful, non-violent place.

:rolleyes:

A lot of Internet commentators are attributing this to karma.

[GeeBee]

BUMP

One of the EMT's from this story was shot and killed last night. Hmm...

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/07/19/2010-07-19_greenhouse_club_where_offduty_em t_was_shot_in_face_sued_for_discrim ination_three.html

I don't get what the big deal is. She wouldn't have gotten preggers if she wasn't whoring it up in the NYC anyway...
(please note my sarcasm)

[Broken Parachute]

Holy shit! A dude was shot in New York? Must be connected to the EMT Heart Attack case, New York is such a peaceful, non-violent place.

:rolleyes:Where did I say it was connected to the case? The EMT worker involved in the original case was shot, so I bumped the thread to post it. How is that not relevant? And don't hate on New York because you live in a state full of geriatrics.

[<*)))><]

Florida is just made up retired New Yorkers.

[caveBEAR]

Where did I say it was connected to the case? The EMT worker involved in the original case was shot, so I bumped the thread to post it. How is that not relevant?

I read the 'Hmmm' to be more as 'oooh, a conspiracy' than 'karma'. With the influx of moron posters recently, I've just been jumping straight to 'moron' when trying to attach connotation.

And don't hate on New York because you live in a state full of geriatrics.

I'm from Queens, numbnuts.

[Broken Parachute]

I read the 'Hmmm' to be more as 'oooh, a conspiracy' than 'karma'. With the influx of moron posters recently, I've just been jumping straight to 'moron' when trying to attach connotation.



I'm from Queens, numbnuts.Well hello there, fellow Long Islander. I am from Brooklyn.

[caveBEAR]

Well hello there, fellow Long Islander. I am from Brooklyn.

Well how do you do?

I refer to New York as a violent place with nothing but love. Florida is boring.