robert gift

So heres the case. You are called for a heart attack. A patient that has no ID walks up to ambulance and says chest hurts. You run 12 lead and find PSVT, 200pulse, BP 146/100, cool,pale, moist skin, resp 24, clutching chest, but can still talk in short sentences. So in talking you realize obviously this guy needs medical care but also that he is illegally in the USA.

So what would you do? Treat him? Refuse him? Report him? Take him to hospital and say nothing? What?

His illegal status is none of my business.

I resent having to spend a lot of money and waiting one and a third years for my wife to LEGALLY be allowed into the US from China.

And I am angry at illegals having babies they cannot afford and burdening our healthcare system.

But I also feel compassion for them.

They perform exhaustive manual labor that I have dreaded doing part time.

I also wish they were not constantly in fear. Seeing my POV with emergency lights, (I'm a volunteer firefighter) some appear scared that I am some kind of authority

capable of detaining and arresting them.

Their's are hard lives and I try to help them with kindness and assistance.

Why am I now receiving notices of topics to which I have not responded?

How do I stop them?

Thank you.

Debate is good, and up until this thread, I would say I have agreed with at least 90% of every one of your posts I have read. I just find it weird that you aren't seeing the obvious; that the UK systems "works"

However...

Thanks for acknowledging the sad truth of the matter. Shame the OP doesn't seem to see it that way.

The only silence around here is following your feeble attempt to cover up for your obvious lack of insight, by trying to make a joke out of it.

Listen...

Even thinking English citizens agree that FAKE runs are an unnecessary, absurd, rude, imposition which should cease.

None knew of these fake runs - so much for media attention of this nonsense.

What does a photo of my front porch have to do with this?

Well done. You have managed to contradict every post you have made on this thread.

Please, keep posting

Presumably you have heard of silent burglar alarms?

I invented the silent fire alarm!

When i did my emergency driver training, over 15 years ago in Scotland, so don't call me bloody English ;-) we would drive around Glasgow under instruction of the driving assessor monitoring the radio, when a REAL emergency call came in, we would respond to it, as an extra, additional resource, usually to from the opposite side of the city & run the call until stood down by control advising us of the first crew's attendance. That way we were able to get real world assessment of a real world situation but in a fully controlled & structured way, while always having the option for the assessor to terminate the drive, to discuss any training issued they had identified without detriment to the original caller, & if for some reason, we were to arrive on scene first, the driving assessor/paramedic would simply treat the patient until back up arrived, so at no time was there ever any such thing as a FAKE emergency drive.

Now that makes a little more sense if you can get on scene before the other unit.

But I have the answer:

Do fake emergency runs only when you have fake emergencies!

None of my students, all of whom suffered my substandard training deficient in fake emergency runs, have ever been in a mishap.

Without taking right of way from others and barging through red signals, they were able to learn the options and imagine, discuss and decide what to do at various intersections.

Without forcing vehicles off the road or driving onto shoulders or medians, curbs, and interrupting progress, they were able to learn how to go around traffic.

Without exceeding the speed limit, they were able to conceive driving down streets at higher speeds and identify hazard spots and know what horrible things can happen at higher speeds.

Without traveling in opposing lanes, they were able to understand how to negotiate congested, slow and stopped traffic and confused drivers.

Without annoying everyone with unjustified siren noise, they were able to understand about deaf drivers and drivers "deaf" due to vehicle sound-proofing, operating stereo and air conditioning and wind and tire noise at higher speeds.

Isn't it amazing how they could accomplish all of that without imposing risk, inconvenience and annoyance on the public?

Military aircraft routinely fly over residential areas and practice targeting buildings. It is called training. They can't fly over the forest and pretend the big oak tree is a terrorist hide out or something. It just doesn't work that way.

In regards to the topic at hand.. who cares?

I care about people needlessly being put at risk.

Military aircraft sometimes fall out of the sky.

Inexcusable if they do so over populated areas when there are so many unpopulated areas in which to dump your aircrap.

There are many buildings separated by large open areas where one could eject with a very low probability of killing innocents on the ground.

When I flew east of Denver, there was a better chance of walking away from an "extrairport landing" on preferably an unoccupied farm road or field.

I completely disagree. This must be debated, because it is only a matter of time before some idiot here in the US decides that we should do it too. Why wait until it is thrust upon us to give it any consideration? Be proactive about it! Know the issue ahead of time!

And any attempt to stifle the free exchange of professional ideas with "who cares?" is frighteningly ignorant. If you don't like a discussion, go back to polishing your nozzle and leave the intelligent discussion to the professionals. But it is not your place to tell others what they should and should not discuss.

Most American citizens would not tolerate such nonsense.

I assume English citizens have no idea fake emergency runs are being done.

How would they ever know?

If they did know, they would work to stop it.

But in chasing tornadoes I am not needlessly

-endangering others by speeding, You might want to go and watch those tornado chasing programs - they drive like nutjobs

-barging through red signals taking right of way from deserving others, - as a matter of fact, I watched one of the tornado chasers do just that on one of the shows-

inconveniencing drivers to move onto shoulders or up curbs where their tires can be damaged, (Imagine that truck getting a flat tire from a nail for nothing!) - you have a group of vehicles that have revolving yellow lights and driving like nutjobs the other drivers do not know what type of vehicle they are so they do indeed make other drivers move to the shoulders

-disrupting traffic flow, (need I say more)

I would complain about their taking right of way from deserving others, disrupting traffic and causing others to make evasive maneuvers,

forcing others to halt their progress and drive onto a shoulder possibly containing debris, etc. and causing them to try to merge back into traffic from a shoulder.

I stay on the west side, (hopefully) trailing side, of tornadoes, and always park legally on the shoulder.

Their yellow lights are simply to inform others that they may be stopped alongside the roadway, maybe ON the roadway, if a tornado is crossing before them, so that others also looking at the tornado don't hit them.

Here, yellow merely means caution, and, I believe, anyone can display that color.

Yes, a dangerous tornado in front of you does tend to disrupt traffic flow.

I'd rather have a funnel in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy. -Gift, 1976

to the rest of the board i apologise if this seems to be personalised and instrusive towards Mr. gift , but his repeated inability to enter into meaningful debate leads to the need to ask these questions

so Mister ( or is it Master ?) Gift

do you actually have the slightest clue what you have been spouting about , because i strongly suggest that you don't

your answers strike me as those of someone who those with experienced and knowledge of the theory of education and training delivery would call an 'unknowing incompetent' in that you do not understand that there is a awider field beyond that of your own limited training and experience and do not understand the processes underpinning the preparation for practice of those in other places or whose scope of proactice is different to your own

you state that you are an emergency driving instructor

are you

1. some who holds the necessary professional and legal accreditations to deliver ab -initio driving instruction for reward ?

2. someone who holds a nationally recognised teaching and assessing qualification which allows you to teach in post compulsory education?

3. someone who holds a nationally recognised teaching and assessing qualification which allows you to teach in Health professional education ?

4. do you hold a bachelors Degree from an internationally recognised Higher Education Institution or Higher Education Qualification awarding body which would be recognised as a First cycle completion award under the Bologna Process ?

4a. if you don't hold $ above do you hold a vocational or technical award from a recognsied educational awarding body which fits into the National Qualification Framework at the higher education level ( e.g. the UK BTEC 'Higher National' awards ?

or are you just a proof by assertions 'Training Officer' ?

But how does my dismal, shameful, utter lack of education, training and experience diminish the inappropriateness of FAKE emergency runs in the UK?

They remain FAKE.

They expose the public to NEEDLESS risk.

They take right-of-way from others without justification.

They impose upon others the need to takevasive action - without justification.

They annoy others with needless noise pollution.

Nonetheless, regardless of the legal minutiae and attempt at deflection from the real issue - emergent driving training can be accomplished through normal driving, observation and discussion - why defend a faulty tradition and "malpractice"? (Yes, I love coining new woids.)

Do your own citizens know of these FAKE runs? My English friends did not.

Would they object if they did? My English friends certainly do.

When I was in London with a patient, I assumed the fire truck operating lights and siren was on a REAL emergency response.

It never occurred to me, nor to my English friends, that it could possibly be a joy ride.

They understand, as do I as a driver destructor, that such driving can be learned through normal everyday driving.

Driving emergent is decision-making, which can be practised (English spelling) in normal everyday driving.

Regardless of whatever you wish to name your legal loopholes permitting it, FAKE runs are FAKE runs and are unnecessary.

You can observe such driving while responding to REAL emergencies.

And now, with videos, you can also rehearse such decision-making in the classroom.

Since 1989 I have been recording videos for teaching and criticism.

The medical clinicals are invaluable. There is little substitute for practice on (a) patient who needs the proceedure

or practising on deceased patients upon which you can cause no harm.

Practising on (a) patient in the hospital is not comparable to driving FAKE emergencies in the nonconsenting public.

My English acquaintences, who never considered that anyone would ever do FAKE runs, agree thathis tradition of malpractice should cease.

That is the whole issue - you can practise emergent driving without doing it.

No need to impose unnecessary risks, inconvenience and annoyance on the public.

These FAKE runs need NOT be done. They should be made illegal to end this ridiculous tradition.

You can train as you drive NORMALLY, anywhere - as you approach ANY intersection, travel ANY street, encounter ANY traffic congestion, you can discern/discuss what is best to do.

Excerpts from our driving course:

When driving emergent, ALWAYS SIGNAL EARLY every turn, lane change, when entering and exiting Interstates (motorways), when pulling out from parallel parking.

Early signaling helps others notice turn signals despite the distraction of das blinkin' lights.

Never use four-way flashers except when parked.

Options, in order of preference:

Coming to RED SIGNALS (I reject the term "negative" intersection)

1) Progress through right-most (UK) vacant lane or turn lane.

2) Go into opposing lanes and pass platoon of stopped traffic.

3) Position behind/between shortest lines of vehicles - influencing them to spread out - some squeeze left, others squeeze right (but some may pull into intersection)

4) Pull behind shortest line and cause vehicles to enter intersection* when cross-traffic has stopped for the EV.

*Firetruck pulls behind man stopped at red signal.

Man pulls forward into intersection to clear out of the way.

Cross-traffic vehicle broadsides man and he dies at the scene.

That fire truck should have gone into opposing lane #1 and passed.

Better that the EV take on the risk and make its own way rather than influence others to move forward.

STRAIGHT-A-WAYS

1) Prefer travel in lane #1

2) travel in turn lanes. Minimize travel on median because of possible debris.

3) pass traffic using opposing lane #1

Try to position EV LEFT in your lane.

This aids vehicles in front seeing the emergency lights in both mirrors and in hearing the siren, and influences them to move right.

Trucks may never see or hear EV unless you position left.

When there is a raised median, some vehicles will move left and stop against the median.

When that happens it oftens starts others moving left and stopping.

Rather than try to get drivers to move right, some will not, it then becomes best to position between lanes #1 and #2.

In some areas, traffic stacks up in lanes #1 and #2 and lane #3 is mosty open.

Without siren we travel in open lane #3, not exceeding the speed limit. (We are then a regular vehicle legally traveling in a lane.)

ONE-WAY STREETS:

Use lane #1 if two lanes

When three or more lanes, lane #2 is often best because some vehicles in lane #1 will move left and stop against the curb.

(Often they are drivers intending to turn left at the next intersection and they do not want to change lanes into lane #2

and be unable to get back into lane #1 from which to turn left.)

EXITING INTERSTATES

We turn off the siren and signal early as we safely change lanes towards the deceleration lane.

Since I am below the speed limit and not required to have the emergency lights operating, I have turned off ALL lights so vehicles ahead will not pull right into the lane.

WE DO NOT STOP AT RED SIGNALS SIGNALS UNLESS NECESSARY

Once stopped, you appear parked and cross-traffic will continue to cross.

By the time drivers hear your siren, it is often too late for them to stop.

(This is the fault of law enforcement parking with ALL lights operating, even though only lights facing rearward should be used.)

So we try to keep moving forward just to show our need to cross.

Most, if not all, of the variables can be encountered making use of everyday trips such as returning from calls.

No need to make special trips, no taking right of way from others, no disrupting traffic, no annoying everyone, no endangering others with FAKE emergent runs.

What most needs to be practiced is learning vehicle clearances, maneuvering and backing on courses with cones and cone obstacles.

This can be conducted in parking lots where no one is exposed to any danger and inconvenience.

All the CEVO (Controlled Emergency Vehicle Operations) classes I have taken state that when there are multiple lanes of traffic traveling in the same direction, an emergency vehicle running lights and sirens should travel in the lane farthest to the left allowing for other traffic to move right towards the shoulder. This is also done to avoid the necessity of quick maneuvers when vehicles are on the right shoulder.

The problem is that some vehicles will head left to the left shoulder.

It seems that when one driver moves left, others follow. (Perhaps because when the EV moves right to pass that left vehicle,

others see the EV to the right and are influenced to move left.)

Sitting on the left side of the vehicle, a driver can more easily see what is left of him and how far left he can go.

The most feared driving maneuver is changing lanes to the right.

One cannot see as well, cannot judge clearance as well, and is more worried about moving into other vehicles.

Moving left is much easier.

Also, I would rather not roll tires on the shoulder where they more easily pick up nails and debris.

Better to move right and remain on the travelled portion of the pavement.

So clearly you have never visited, nor met anyone from England, but no doubt have a shitload of DVDs starring Hugh Grant

Thank you. The most sensible and accurate thing you have stated yet.

I have been to England twice.

Even climbed onto the roof of the Bond Street carillon.

As a former professional firefighter and fire inspector, exited my hotel room descending from the 6th floor checking out a fire stairway and exited outside.

There was no sign indicating that opening that door would summon the fire brigade.

Brilliant.

England is full of wonderful, polite people.

it's some what irrelevant

My whole post is entirely irrelevant.

'right of way' is a set of rules for agreeing who goes first , not an absolute rigid code

Uk emergency vehicles 'request' the right of way by use of warning devices and their positioning

what happened to the rule of 'space and time to stop'

for the umpteenth time the use of warning devices is a request for other road users to allow the emergency vehicle through ...

but not in the UK unless they willfully obstruct a specificed Emergency worker or Police Constable in the execution of their duty ...

But people, especially polite and genteel English, feel obligated. Just as I would.

I bet few really know it is but a "request".

Police have followed ambulances and have cited drivers for not yielding.

I try to position the vehicle so lights are most easily seen.

11 or 12 regional Ambulance services undertaking 2000 -4500 emergency and urgent details a day - a significant proportion of which will attract at least one if not more emergent responses ( one scene = one detail whether it;s a cut finger or 60 casualty Mass casualty incident with 20 front line vehicles, control and equipment tenders etc etc)

30 odd regional fire and rescue services, 30 odd regional police services plus coastguard, search and rescue, national blood service , various military vehicles ...

plus the private and voluntary sector in EMS and Fire 100 k is a ball park figure, possibly a little optimistic.

Thank you.

Never say never.

I try not to pass on the right but with all of the stupid human tricks I have encountered in my still short EMS career it does happen. If I can see that you are clearly dumb and have clearly pulled over to the wrong side and are clearly holding still, I will go around you on the right but NOT if you are still moving.

Just for fun I will throw out there that my FAVORITE stupid human track when noticing an ambulance in the rear view mirror on the 2 lane highway is to lock up the brakes, not pull over, but just panic and lock them up. Ambulances can stop on a dime you know (sarcasm for anyone that may have missed my tone in text ) .

I am a bit bitter on the emergent driving today. Lots of snow last shift and long hauls with new vent patients that wrecked in the snow that I am now expected to drive fast in WITHOUT wrecking. Fun times.

I must be old because I really am not that excited to go emergent. The kids sure do like it though don't they.

When the patient dies, I regret, 'Could/should I have gotten him to the ED sooner?'

Was I driving too slowly for conditions?

Should I have taken a better route?

(I still feel horrible about a mother who was talking enroute but died shortly upon arrival.

She had vomited blood following surgery for esophageal erosion.

Reluctant to call an ambulance, she finally did.

As the patient was being loaded, her daughter was coming home from school for lunch and started running.

That was the last she saw her mother alive.

I blame the paramedic on scene for not loading and going.

We.re there 20 minutes as he tried to be a hero and start his oh so important IV.

The hospital was three minutes away.)

I try always to pass on the left, but others' maneuvers can make that impossible or impractical.

As a fire department instructor, I have had PSAs on the radio - but never about simply engaging right turn signal, safely changing lanes to the right and stopping.

You're obviously not reading any of the replies, so what's the point in discussing this any further? To me, it looks like you'd really like this system and are a little annoyed that you don't have the authority to do it in your part of the world.

As you keep quoting your "English Friends" being forced to give way and being unaware - I'd just like to add, yet again, that the vehicles are fully marked up as TRAINING vehicles. Nobody in the UK is forced to yield/ give way to emergency vehicles. If they don't want to, they don't have to and that's why we stop at red lights and proceed when safe.

Dust: We are not debating whether using L&S is of any benefit for the patient. We know it isn't and it bugs the hell out of us. What we are debating is whether advanced driving courses is a good idea to lower accident rates/ personal injury claims/ reduce insurance costs. The evidence is clear....over 100,000 L&S runs in the UK daily, from the Ambulance service alone, with nary an incident.

I appreciate every one of your and others' points.

I suffer enough REAL emergent responses that I am not envious of anyone who would risk FAKE ones in public.

Do you really believe that drivers and pedestrians notice and comprehend any "TRAINING" markings?

If so, why would anyone interrupt their rightful progress and willingly make risky evasive maneuvers?

All they know is there are operating emergency lights and sirens compelling them to

stop for their green signal,

pull over and stop at the side of the street,

accelerate down the street to get to an area were they can get out of your way (smart move by that autoist seen in a video!)

or perform whatever obligations necessary to yield or nervously squeeze out of your way.

United States emergency vehicles are also "asking" for right-of-way.

But a driver can receive a 4-point Failure to Yield Right of Way to an Emergency Vehicle citation.

Did that lorry stopped on the on-ramp shoulder become a hazard to accelerating motorists by starting from a dead stop and trying to get back onto his on-ramp?

(On Interstate highways, I regret tractor-trailer rigs slowing and stopping on the shoulders. Trying to accelerate from zero back to 55 mph not only costs them a lot of their expensive fuel and causes pollution, the rig can present a hazard to speeding motorists, especially on upgrades.)

(When there are no vehicles in lane 1 on Interstates, I turn off our wig-wagging headlights and some other lights so that truckers and vehicles in other lanes will not slow or pull off and stop. Only enough lights to remain legal do I keep in operation. As necessary, I turn the lights back on when approaching within 100 yards of vehicles in lane 1.)

So, it is not only the problems of yielding to and making way for your firetrucks, it is also the complications of trying to get back into traffic - all for nothing.

You can practice emergent driving without imposing upon others.

Are you sure the claim of over 100,000 emergent responses in the UK daily is correct?

I have seen a couple driving course programs and have been fairly impressed, even though I'm not a 12-week medic. The driver training programs as described does seem to go well above and beyond most programs in the states. Is this the standard practice in the UK or just for government run operations?

The two biggest issues, (or at least causes of concern), I would see are:

1) Secondary accidents caused by emergent ambulance training. I don't have statistical data, and any is welcome, but the anecdotal information I have is that for every accident an ambulance is in, it causes ten.

2) Liability (legal and ethical) regarding a fatal accident caused by training. I would think it would be difficult to defend the reasoning for emergent travel as a part of training. There was a point made that the training was done without a patient because then a patient is not endangered. While this is true, it does nothing for the other occupants of the ambulance, other drivers, pedestrians, etc. By that reasoning, wouldn't it make more sense to perform the training during the lowest traffic levels of a day? Or is that already done.

Have either of these conditions existed? And if so, were the driver and trainer defended and recused by laws that have been stated? Did/Would the law protect them in a civil suit?

Edited because I spelled "practice" with an s. Dammit Dust!

My English friends object to being forced to yield "give way" for something not an emergency.

They object to being put at needless risk.

(Presumbly, hopefully, these joy rides have never led to any mishaps.)

But what of the driver who interrupts his progress and pulls onto a motorway shoulder and gets a flat tire?

Does he know his sacrifice was for nothing?

What of the car which bumped the other vehicle which unexpectedly stopped before a green signal, because a fire truck was taking right-of-way.

Sure, it is the trailing driver's fault.

None of these drivers suspects this could be anything other than a real emergency.

What of the car moving out of the way and scratched another vehicle?

Will those conducting this faulty practice know of the flat tire, the two cars bumping, or the car damaging the other?

Learning emergent driving can be accomplished without this obnoxious nonsense.

You have lost the argument, and embarrassed yourself. You are clearly trolling here and on YouTube. You have failed to formulate a credible argument for what you believe to be “malpractice”. You have failed to acknowledge that those foreign driving practices occur with full support of the law in other countries. You have failed to acknowledge the input of 3 English members here who have more experience of this issue that you or I. You have failed to enlist the support of your "English friends". You have failed to cite any references that suggest the US system of emergency driver training is better than the European model. You have admitted you are just a jolly volley, and to hearing voices in your head.

I get it - short yellow school bus

Jog on.

My English friend agrees with every one of the items I listed.

Just because less-enlightened people agree with these public exercises does not make it right.

Less-enlightened people thought the earth was flat.

What does the public say?

References? We don' need no stinkin' references.

Try thinking about it. Have an original thought for perhaps the first time in your life.

Ask your citizens if they approve being subjected to these "joy rides."

I know two who don't approve, and neither do I.

I am an emergency vehicle driver instructor.

I know all of these concepts and maneuvers can be accomplished without subjecting the public to FAKE runs.

I used the term, FAKE.

Is it a REAL response to a fire or emergency?

No?

Then it is a FAKE.

I also used "Joy Ride".

You expose the public to NEEDLESS risks and annoyance.

You impose taking right of way from others. (obligating others to "give" you right of way)

You force others to stop and yield and move out of your way. (making others "volunteer" to give way)

You blare noise into homes and businesses.

As MedicRN stated, you may desensitize the public to sirens.

If there or here, it is still wrong.

Matters not if some unenlightened bureaucrats made it "legal".

My English acquaintances, who had no idea such is done, oppose the imposition.

Perhaps they will start an effort to get this "malpractice" stopped.

We do need to practice on closed courses to learn vehicle clearances and maneuvering, etc. (We use parking lots and cones.)

But emergent driving proficiency can all be gained driving normally and using just a little imagination and thought.

And now you also have videos from which to learn.

I agree with Scott that this kind of training seems not only appropriate, but necessary and should be done more often around here.

The idea of this kind of training is to drive lights and sirens while taking the adrenaline out of the situation. New drivers need to relax and worry more about the road than the patient. Practicing without a patient at first helps work towards that goal.

As far as whether L+S saves time/lives, I don't know. I imagine it depends where you are. When it is rush hour in the city I work, lights + sirens can save me a half hour or more. At night when there aren't any cars on the road it probably makes no difference at all.

We practiced emergent driving just by imagining what we would do at various intersections, congestion, interstate on and off ramps, etc., as we encountered them.

So easy. Every drive was a rehearsal.

We would NEVER do fake emergent runs, even when participating in MCI exercises and transporting PTs to hospitals.

If I ever encountered a fake emergent run, I'd sign a complaint and have a ticket issued to the driver.

Years ago, I actually did witness such and the police went to the volunteer firefighter's home and cited him.

Just before the court appearance, the DA kindly called and suggested I not make the trip to court.

He said he believed every word of my complaint.

But the driver and his passenger would lie that he did no such thing and two against one would win.

One can overcome their adrenalin just by discussing and being aware of it.

Yep, some would say they were "d!ckheads" for doing it, but they would go to court over it. With me a short blast from the airhorn would startle them and they moved to the left pretty much immediately.

I forgot earlier to comment on the interstate driving. I know some would disagree, but if there is no traffic and nothing but open road, I strattled the center line. Gave me extra room to the left and to the right just in case something happened and I had to make a drastic move. Luckily I never had to.

I was making what we called a "kamikazee" run to St.Louis. It was a coal minor with near traumatic asphixiation. I picked him at the coal mine, worked with him in the ER and they requested me as the driver, especially the nurses that went. I stayed on that center lane every chance I got. I even passed the service's owner and he congratulated me for doing that. I only had to pass someone on the right decause the old man driving the caddilac had no business even driving.

Crotch is right, you can never say never on passing on the right. Only do so when absolutely have to. Buut weaving in and out of traffic causes confusion of other drivers not knowing which way you are going. You don't want to zig and someone else zags.

Most drivers are very good and try to help the EV.

But at higher speeds with road and wind noise, and stereo playing, they will not hear the siren.

Reporting egregious cases and signing a complaint will get a ticket issued to them.

Then you must appear in court.

If they show up in court claiming a passenger, it will be two against two and they will win unless you have a dash cam.

Nonetheless, their receiving the ticket and going to court may get the point across to them.

Since I am always paranoid about blowouts or something, I also often create a safety margin by placing the left tires in the right wheel track of lane one and right wheels in the left tire track of lane two.

Although when lane 1 is less worn, I stay on the smoother pavement.

Why called "kamikaze"?

Another occasion,

We came onto I-270 with vehicles backed-up in both lanes moving about 10 mph.

Several vehicles in lane 1 moved left, so I had no choice but to go around them on their right.

This placed me straddling the lane line.

This started other vehicles ahead in the left lane moving left, and those in the right lane moving right.

This became an advantageous situation for the EV because I am always concerned about damaging tires from nails and debris on shoulders.

Since Hi-Lo is so much more pleasant and less "demanding" than Wail, I used it just as needed all tha way.

No crash, but almost.

Clear sunny afternoon years ago.

I'm eastbound in lane #2 of three-lane eastbound one-way street.

Approaching two-lane northbound one-way street against red signal.

Several vehicles in lane 2 of northbound have stopped. They can easily see/hear EV approaching from their left.

Guy in van behind those stopped vehicles moves into vacant left lane and passes the vehicles.

I'm right in front of him as he accelerates towards me. Am I invisible?

I accelerate and avoid his hitting my rear.

If possible, I would have called police on him suspecting drunk/drugs.

Thought about all that could have happened.

(But I always think about all the terrible things that can happen in everything I do.)

Military aircraft do practice over civilian areas. When Floyd Bennett Field was Naval Air Station Brooklyn, almost every weekend, the Reservists flew over my house as they practiced "Touch and Go", landing just long enough to put wheels down on the runways, and gun it to take off again.

Then, there was that incident a few years ago, where a jet doing "live fire" training was way off target, and shot some holes through the roof of a school in New Jersey. It was at night, and the custodians on duty were not injured.

But now there are fewer open areas and they cannot avoid it because housing has spread everywhere.

Then the new residents have the audacity to complain about the decades-old airfield they moved next to.

Did not a crash recently occur north of San Diego?

But that may have been unavoidable because the houses were on final approach.

Both to avoid needless noise pollution and crashes in populated areas, they should get (fly) away from populated areas as soon as possible.

question between transport by ground versus air

Based on patient presentation

ST elevation in leads V1-V4

Elevated Blood Sugar

slight facial droop to right side of face

BP of 70/40

Would you have transported by Ground ambulance to the receiving facility which is one hour away on the ground or would you have opted for Air transport?

Did not know ED is 1 hour.

But would have started rehydration en route ground with O2 and recheck all.

If one can already have a head start en route vs waiting for helicopter arrival, assessment, packaging, loading and take off, what is the actual difference in ED arrival?

I would never have thought to recheck.

I would have trusted my glucometer.

Though would doubt family could cause such a rise in BGL from injesting jelly beans.

Don't they need time to digest?

Why not transport by ambulance rather than helluvaexpensivecopter?