Hacker News Reader

Comment by tomschlick | Hacker News Reader

I never said he forgot. Only that he is not a trained EMT with access to a trauma kit that would stop 4 GSWs. From the video he is also alone and has to secure the scene until backup arrives.

Even if he had a kit in his car, he can't risk getting it with a gun still in the car. From his perspective he felt threatened enough to shoot and the gun is still with the victim(s) which could be turned against him.

The video you provided was different because they immediately realized that the undercover officer was not a threat, and had multiple people on scene as well to start helping.

View on HN

I made a response to a similar comment in another location (see ref 1).

I only want to respond to the following claims:

> he is not a trained EMT with access to a trauma kit that would stop 4 GSWs [gunshot wound, clarification added]

There are other cases where Minnesota police officers are documented to have responded to gunshot wounds (ref. 2) Indeed, certain MN police departments provide additional training, beyond basic first aid, for trauma situations - see the edit to ref. 1.

Further, you're implying that highly-specialized training ('EMT'), specific medical supplies ('trauma kit'), and injury severity ('4 GSWs') are important in considering rendering aid. My contention would be that, those factors absent, having a gun drawn and yelling at a victim are not appropriate responses to an event of this type.

> he is also alone and has to secure the scene until backup arrives

Backup is clearly present by the time the video is rolling and multiple officers appear on the video when Mr. Castile's girlfriend is removed from the car.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=12047969

[2] http://www.startribune.com/documents-detail-accidental-eden-...

> Only that he is not a trained EMT with access to a trauma kit that would stop 4 GSWs. From the video he is also alone and has to secure the scene until backup arrives.

I was trying to say even if he had a kit and was moonlighting as a rescue squad volunteer, nothing in his behavior indicated he was attempted to help.

The video I linked was an example of how "attempted to help" might look like, and there is difference there it seems.

Can see the other points of wanting to secure the scene or saying he was threated, but don't see the point at all of "well not an EMT, so that's why looked indifferent to the a person's suffering and death. If only he had a kit with him, he would have knelt down and attempted to stop the bleeding, but didn't so kept pointing the gun at him and watched him die..."

Kit or no kit, they still don't administer aid alone while there is still a potential threat. Getting that guy out of the car requires holstering your weapon and going in the car when you still might not know where the weapon is.

Safer for the officer to wait for backup. That was my point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com