Slashdot Mirror


Training From America's Army Game Saved a Life

russoc4 writes "Most people who play the United States Army's freeware FPS sit through training simulations so that they may be able to get into the action and rack up some kills. The medic skills learned in the training allow you to heal teammates in the game, but it seems that they also apply in real life situations. According to Wired and the America's Army forums, 'a North Carolina man who saw an SUV flip and roll on a highway last November was able to provide medical aid to the victims with skills he learned from the America's Army.'" See? We learn things from videogames! Feign Death works sometimes, too.

379 comments

  1. Yeah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Suck on THAT Jack Thompson.

    1. Re:Yeah! by ODiV · · Score: 1

      Suck on THAT Jack Thompson.

      Which Jack Tompson?

    2. Re:Yeah! by c0d3h4x0r · · Score: 1

      It would have been better if Jack Thompson had been the one in the SUV who got saved by the gamer... THAT would have been sweet.

      --
      Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
  2. YES!!! by AndGodSed · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I have a valid excuse to play violent games! Take that you game banning politicians!

    And yes I am being serious.

    1. Re:YES!!! by samkass · · Score: 4, Funny

      America's Army also helped me learn the exact angle at which to fire a 203 as soon as I come out of a tunnel near the bridge to hit the guys getting out of the convoy on the other side! And to close doors in people's faces if I think they have a grenade! And always fire machine guns into vents if I think there might be movement! AA is incredibly educational.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    2. Re:YES!!! by Mr2cents · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why did he have to go through all that trouble? Were they too lazy to respawn, just like everybody else? Bah.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    3. Re:YES!!! by Valar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Everyone knows that if the SUV driver hadn't learned to drive from GTA, then the vehicle wouldn't have flipped in the first place.

    4. Re:YES!!! by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 0, Redundant

      What game? America's Army is US Army propaganda disguised as a purty game.

      And yes I am being serious.

    5. Re:YES!!! by Higaran · · Score: 1

      What do you have to say about that Jack Thompson?

    6. Re:YES!!! by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 2, Funny

      I pretty sure everyone understands that, however that fact still does not decrease it's awesomeness.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    7. Re:YES!!! by smittyoneeach · · Score: 5, Funny

      It wasn't the driving itself so much as managing the four screaming kids, three cell phones, two GPS and the latte which triggered the impromptu rendition of "When the Touaregs Broke Free"


      (apologies to Roger Waters)

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    8. Re:YES!!! by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now I have a valid excuse to play violent games!

      No. Now they have a valid excuse to ban violent games. I can hear it now: "We've been trying to tell you for years that doing something in a game can teach you how to do it real life. Today it was someone who learned how to save a life. Tomorrow it will be someone who learned how to take it."

      The worst part is they kind of have a point. Every time violence in games comes up, our first counter-argument has always been that games and reality are different and the skills don't translate across. So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

      And yes I am being serious.

      Sadly, so am I.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    9. Re:YES!!! by Heembo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Unfortunately, you do not respawn in AA. Also, even after you get shot once, you start to bleed and aiming is tougher. It's easy to die.

      --
      Horns are really just a broken halo.
    10. Re:YES!!! by Cctoide · · Score: 1

      That's the fault of Maibatsu for designing the Monstrosity with too high a CoG!

      --
      "Let's face it, it's a good story. Accuracy would kill it."
    11. Re:YES!!! by shystershep · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's one thing for the skills to translate to real life-- the whole point of America's Army, after all, is a combat simulator. So you learn some first aid, and you also learn some combat tactics.

      The real question isn't whether the game gives you knowledge, but whether the game makes you more likely to do something you wouldn't do otherwise. Do you have more of an inclination to find people to bandage after doing it in game? Probably not, no more than you would be more inclined to shoot somebody.

      --
      The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    12. Re:YES!!! by cp.tar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The worst part is they kind of have a point. Every time violence in games comes up, our first counter-argument has always been that games and reality are different and the skills don't translate across. So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

      I would disagree with one little bit: skills do translate across. Behaviour needn't.

      Any skill you learn in any kind of context will translate across. Behaviour depends on a greater number of factors.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    13. Re:YES!!! by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just got off the phone with him.
      He's suing the US Army for undermining his position. And he's including gay soldier porn with the filing.*
      -nB

      *because it's Jack: The aforementioned statement was not meant to represent that I know or spoke with Jack Thompson (who is known to file gay porn for some weird reason), nor is anything other than the statement that Jack sees some (weird) reason to file gay porn meant to be a statement of fact. It is this posters opinion that Jack is deranged enough to actually sue the US Army, and in his style would file gay porn, in addition I am positing that Jack would try to stay with the theme and make it gay soldier porn in his posting. If Jack is willing to go with Lesbian soldier porn I will consider reading his filing for spelling errors. Also this disclaimer and all of this post is this posters opinion and makes no assertions of fact or prior knowledge. This is because even though I believe my opinions are true, Jack may not. Then he would sue me. Then I would have to go make a violent video game of me dying via Gay Soldier Porn, to prove some weird point to Jack so he would donate to the charity of my choice (Shriners hospital in Sac CA please), then he would renege on it and PennyArcade would have to step up on it again.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    14. Re:YES!!! by Draek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

      Or, we could claim that you only learn stuff applicable in real-life from games that are as anal about realism as America's Army is. Dunno how it is nowadays, but back when I played it (when they still had a Linux version), to get to play as a medic you had to attend an in-game class (which was quite long), and then take a test about what they'd taught you in it. Pretty f'in far from the likes of GTA, which are the usual targets of anti-videogames propaganda.

      It wouldn't surprise me either to hear about some guy being able to fly a small plane without formal training if he had played Flight Simulator for years with a specialized controller, whereas I *would* be surprised if he had managed to do so after just a couple of weeks playing Battlefield 1942 and UT2004.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    15. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Of course it is, and a time sink to boot.

      I spent 15 minutes reading a first aid manual when I was a kid. Amazing how much of the "medical help learned in America's Army" is just common sense and first aid basics. That ANYONE above the age of 12, in a CIVILIZED FIRST WORLD COUNTRY, would LACK THESE SKILLS, tells me all I need to know about how "educated" and "enlightened" westerners truly are as compared to how much they THINK they are.

      Sheesh. Keeping wounds above heart level keeps the blood from spurting out as rapidly. That's basic physics mixed with basic anatomy or first aid. These were actually taught in 4th to 7th grade in most of the eastern block commie countries not that long ago. In the meanwhile they've "westernized" also. In other words, they now attend twice as much school and get half as much education. IMHO, its all the more reason to teach your own kids, presuming, of course, that you've got some actual knowledge to impart and can offer them a good start in the experience that is life and didn't just breed pointlessly as most humans today do.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    16. Re:YES!!! by budgenator · · Score: 1

      whether the game makes you more likely to do something you wouldn't do otherwise.
      Most people get pretty wigged out when they see a catastrophic injury and freeze, if playing the game means when the brain freezes and goes on autopilot and they give appropriate first aid it's a good thing.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    17. Re:YES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely flawed logic.

      What helped him here is he learned a fact, "keep someones hands above head when they are bleeding, to decrease blood loss".

      This isn't the same as "Yesterday I shot a bunch of people in a game, today I shoot a bunch of people at McDonald's, there really is no difference", which is what the Jack Thompson's of the world like to think.

      And by the way, should we ban paintball? I would think that would "teach" you as much as a first person shooter.

    18. Re:YES!!! by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


        I can hear it now: "We've been trying to tell you for years that doing something in a game can teach you how to do it real life.

        Isn't that what educational games are all about? That *is* what America's Army is supposed to be.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    19. Re:YES!!! by Techman83 · · Score: 1

      The ability to take a life in cold blood and the want to save a life are two completely different sides of the coin. The preservation of life is a strong urge in the majority of civilisation, where as statistically the ability to kill a fellow human is not. Soldiers go through much _real_ training to overcome this and there is research to suggest that even still Soldiers have trouble pulling the trigger. Interesting documentary on the phenomena, wish I could remember what it was called! Aside from that bleeding control and elevation are the basics of first aid, of which all people should learn!

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i cat
      Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
    20. Re:YES!!! by Lemmeoutada+Collecti · · Score: 1

      Actually, while I am not sure about Flight Simulator, I do know that X-Plane is certified for use in flight training by the FAA. Pretty much every pilot who is getting their license now is training on some kind of simulator. The US military has also used flight, tank, and other simulator programs since at least the mid 90s as part of their standard training.

      --

      You can have it fast, accurate, or pretty. Pick any 2.
    21. Re:YES!!! by QCompson · · Score: 1

      So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow. Umm, I'll take the first option, thanks. Did you RTA? The soldier claimed that he learned to raise a hand above someone's head to lessen the blood flow from America's Army. That's only marginally better than claiming that America's Army taught him to duck behind a wall while being shot at.

      I'm astonished that (1) this guy had never previously learned that raising a wounded limb lessens the blood flow, and (2) that the army didn't cover this basic, basic first aid instruction. Do they teach soldiers about tourniquets, or does the army hope that they pick that up in some video game as well?
    22. Re:YES!!! by Descalzo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I would like to see this info you have on other countries' 12-year-olds' first-aid skills. It sounds fascinating. As a teacher who has taught 3-12 grades and as a Scoutmaster, I also have noticed that schools have nothing at all like the first-aid training that is given to Boy Scouts.

      Makes me wonder what part of the core curriculum should be dropped to accommodate it, or how many new days should be added to the school year for this, or how many minutes should be added to the school day for first-aid training.

      What you need to do is get the other parents (I can only assume you have children in the school system, as I can't imagine what else could inspire you to such disgust if you had no direct stake in it) and lobby your local school board. Even better, join the PTA and volunteer your services to teach a first aid class at your child's school. If you aren't a parent, you could volunteer with your local Boy Scout troop as a First-Aid merit badge counselor or something.

      Or you could just rant anonymously on the Internet.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    23. Re:YES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The preservation of life is a strong urge in the majority of civilisation, where as statistically the ability to kill a fellow human is not.
      A few days working customer service has been known to replace the former with the latter. Also helpful are exposure to L.A. traffic and the "It's a small world" ride in Disney.
    24. Re:YES!!! by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      if playing the game means when the brain freezes and goes on autopilot and they give appropriate first aid it's a good thing.

      Yes, and the same thing happens the first time you attempt to dismember a victim.

      Fortunately, playing God of War has helped me suppress my gag reflex.

      I've also learned to be careful of knives which cut both ways.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    25. Re:YES!!! by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      I laugh everytime I see the the lawmakers bitch about violent videogames. Not too long ago, in the Reagan era, there was a horribly violent game called NARC which was endorsed by the federal Winners Don't use Drugs campaign. I guess the lawmakers would shut up if GTA advocated violence against pedophiles as opposed to prostitutes.

    26. Re:YES!!! by aevan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which part to drop? One week of football/t-ball/whatever. Seems to me First Aid fits in perfectly with Physical education and should be part of it. Assume 8 years in elementary school, take one week out of 'gym class' per half-year... and you've 16 weeks of first aid training (mind you would assume first 4 years be really basic).

      If they can spend a week in gym discussing STDs (at least my high school did), can't see why they can't take one week to teach some first aid. After all, aren't physical education teachers supposedly taught some themselves to hold the position?

    27. Re:YES!!! by dosun88888 · · Score: 1

      The worst part is they kind of have a point. Every time violence in games comes up, our first counter-argument has always been that games and reality are different and the skills don't translate across. So, what do we say now? It seems like we have a choice between claiming that this guy did not learn first aid from a video game, or that people only learn good skills from games. Both of those ring pretty hollow.

      I was not aware that that was the maxim that we've been trumpeting in our defense, and if it was it needs to be changed.

      The idea that you should stop certain behaviors by keeping people ignorant is a short term solution. Are we supposed to ban Macgyver to stop people from knowing how to make little bombs? Ban physics to stop the same? Ban common sense to stop people from figuring out how to blow up airplanes?

      Whether you like it or not, you cannot prevent knowledge from leaking out in the long term. If you are to extend the meaning of long term to mean something even longer, then preventing people from obtaining certain items or raw materials is also impossible (think about things that nuclear bombs are made of).

      But see, people base their entire income streams and political platforms on exactly this. There is a huge incentive for them to go around campaigning to ban X or Y, since enough people are small minded enough to like what they hear.

      I never liked the idea of banning anything, since it's just a band aid that doesn't address the real issue that someone is trying to handle. The more I've thought about it, the less I think it makes any sense at all.

      I guess this is the new answer I'm proposing?

    28. Re:YES!!! by enrgeeman · · Score: 1

      hey fucking retard, he played the game, where did it say he's a soldier? in Basic training you learn a bit of that shit though. They also teach you attention to detail...

      --
      sent from my slashdot browser.
    29. Re:YES!!! by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      There was an NFL player, Sean Taylor, killed recently by a completely non-fatal wound to his leg, and his life might have been saved if somebody at the scene knew how to tie a tourniquet or raise the limb. (The primary cause of death was blood loss.)

      Despite how "common sense" these things are, there are a lot of people who simply do not know what to do with a wounded person.

    30. Re:YES!!! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      If they can spend a week in gym discussing STDs (at least my high school did)

      When I was in high-school (this was about thirty years ago) we got one period in biology class to discuss sexually-transmitted diseases (well, venereal disease as it was known back then.) We also saw a 16 mm film on the subject, mostly composed of various body parts (giant penises, swollen vulvas) that had huge syphilitic sores on them. Some people in the class were physically ill from it.

      Didn't seem to help much, though, and a few of the girls in that class got pregnant not long after.

      We never got any First-AID training either, I might add, although they were very careful to teach us how to drive a car. Frankly, I wish they'd offered some training in how to care for someone who was seriously injured. The paramedics don't always make it in time.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    31. Re:YES!!! by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Didn't seem to help much, though, and a few of the girls in that class got pregnant not long after.

      Did anybody contract syphilis 'not long after'? If not, then the education probably helped somewhat.

    32. Re:YES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people get pretty wigged out when they see a catastrophic injury and freeze, if playing the game means when the brain freezes and goes on autopilot and they give appropriate first aid it's a good thing.

      Exactly the same thing in a potentially violent scenario. If the game helped an individual correctly operate in auto-pilot in a dangerous situation, like a robbery--and not freeze up... That's also a good thing. No?

      Much martial arts training basically teaches the same thing, to remove conscious thought and replace it with pure animal survival instinct in situations like that.

    33. Re:YES!!! by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      While I personally agree with you, the situation isn't that simple. What do we do about the people who have the inclination (not the strong will, but just an inclination) to lose their temper and use any skills they acquire? I know, it's not our responsibility to keep them in the dark, but violent video games make those skills so easy and ready to learn, and a person doesn't need to be seeking out that kind of info in order to get it. It's especially worrisome in children, who may not realise (often due to negligent parenting) that such behaviour is bad. We can blame those parents as much as we want, but after a tragedy, the knee-jerkers aren't going to be too reasonable.

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    34. Re:YES!!! by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      I was not aware that that was the maxim that we've been trumpeting in our defense, and if it was it needs to be changed.

      First time reading an article mentioning Jack Thompson, eh?

      The idea that you should stop certain behaviors by keeping people ignorant is a short term solution.

      Just so we're clear, I'm not anti-video game in any way, shape, or form. My wife even just bought me Contra 4 a few days ago, which is basically nothing but violence. I'm just predicting the spin that the Jack "Ass" Thompsons of the world will put on the story.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    35. Re:YES!!! by c_forq · · Score: 1

      At the high school I attended there was, and I believe still is, an elective gym class that had CPR training - among other first aid - as part of the curriculum. The class was titled "Sports Fitness", and pretty much everyone that played any sport took it (part of the class included at least 2 days a week in the weight room, which definitely helped enrollment). Only two real flaws that I can think of were that the class was an elective - not required, and that CPR certification expires and you weren't allowed to take the class multiple times.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    36. Re:YES!!! by sowth · · Score: 0

      ...Makes me wonder what part of the core curriculum should be dropped to accommodate it,...

      How about just using proper teaching methods. Then you won't have to spend more time on each subject than necessary. The whole word method of learning to read is for Chinese (which has thousands of characters) or Egyptian (which doesn't include vowels in their writing). You should use phonics to teach English, because that is the proper way. My friend's little girl will spell words like "turtle" as "trrrtl" when she hasn't seen it before because she was taught with the whole word method. At least with phonics she would get somewhere in the ballpark.

      "Discovery math" is not a teaching method for math, it was supposed to teach logic and get the students thinking ahead. I looked up the website of the people who created it, and the site even said as much. What idiot decided this was a way to teach math? Oh yeah, a bureaucrat. And so the kids just count with their fingers every time they need to do math, assuming they can do any math at all.

      Actually, you shouldn't have to drop anything. Shouldn't first aid be taught in health class? Since when is it not? They had at least some first aid in class when I was in high school, have they completely dropped it?

    37. Re:YES!!! by shystershep · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. In fact, for a certain percentage of people - those like you mention that have temper issues, or even those that may have some mental stability issues - I think the violent video games might send them over the edge and make them more likely to do violent acts. But while the game may be a cause, it's not to blame, any more than a strobe light would be to blame for causing seizures in an epileptic that sat and stared into it intentionally.

      No matter what, there will be people that blame the dancing/books/D&D/movies/video games/etc., because it's easier to point at a scapegoat than it is to address the real problem, which is negligent parenting and/or mental illness. Not much that can be done about the parenting, unfortunately (forced sterilization probably woudln't fly), but that just means that we as a society need to work harder at detecting mental illness in children and provide them some help. A perfectly adjusted child doesn't simply decide one day to take a gun to school & start shooting just because he played a violent video game. There are warning signs, and a progression toward that end. It's too much to hope, but the focus needs to change from 'what can we blame' to 'what can we do to help.' Human nature being what it is, I doubt I'll see that in my lifetime.

      --
      The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
    38. Re:YES!!! by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      I'm USAF, but my training is based of their's.

      Yes, elevation is very much part of the training. So isn't using a tourniquet, treating shock, eye injuries, sucking chest wounds, among other things.

      AA, from what I've read, tries at least a bit to teach some real skills. At least it's proved that it can do that.

      And, as enrgeeman noted, nowhere in the article does it say that he was actually military, just that he'd played the game.

      I think it's more of a indicator of our school systems that people aren't taught basic first aid skills.

      Matter of fact, it might not be a bad idea today to have a 'life skills' class. It's express purpose is to teach children the skills needed to survive and help in society - sex ed could be part of it, along with driver's ed. I'd also add in first aid classes, basic laundry and cooking skills, gun safety*, checkbook balancing, budgeting, why payday loans are a bad idea, etc...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    39. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 0, Troll

      No amount of laws will stop stupidity. What we need are LESS laws, and MORE responsibility. Responsibility will not occur until the safety net of government backup disappears. Then, and ONLY then will "illegal immigration", shitty products, dangerous foods and other such ridiculous things disappear.

      While I'm a Ron Paul supporter and normally a believer in personal responsibility, you have to draw the line somewhere I think. This is why we have things like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Federal crash standards, etc.

      While it'd be great if everyone was far more active in researching their purchases, there's a limit to how much a typical consumer can do in determining if a product is safe or not. Most people aren't engineers or other technical types. Even people who are engineers can't know everything about every product they buy. For instance, how do you know that the food you just bought at the grocery store isn't tainted with bacteria or heavy metal pollution? Have you tested it? Do you test every piece of food you get? I thought not. I certainly don't have the expertise or equipment to test my food for safety, and I imagine most other people also don't.

      Similarly, most people aren't automotive engineers, and don't know much about vehicles. They just get in, start the engine, put it in "drive", and go. Most Americans can't even operate a manual transmission vehicle. While we certainly need more driver training in this country, like some other countries do, there's still a limit to what you can expect from a lowly vehicle operator. You can't give regular consumers a car which is extremely tail-happy and expect them to operate it safely; such a vehicle simply shouldn't be available to purchase, or if it is, some sort of certification should be required so that the person doesn't pose a safety hazard to himself and others. This is similar to aircraft, especially helicopters. Anyone who knows about helicopters knows they simply CANNOT be flown by an untrained pilot, even an experienced fixed-wing pilot. Flying a helicopter has been compared to juggling while walking on a beach ball; many of the maneuvers are counterintuitive, and failure to react properly and quickly means certain death. These machines are extremely dangerous, but people with a large amount of training fly them safely all the time, but this depends on training, and testing and certification from the FAA. There's no similar program for SUV drivers as there is for pilots, nor do I think there should be since cars, station wagons, and trucks are already available for consumers which aren't as top-heavy as SUVs (or, in the case of trucks, aren't normally meant for carrying families around, only work equipment and cargo). There's also "hybrid SUV" designs available which aren't as top-heavy as some. Helicopters are a special case since they do things that no other machine can, and through their cost have a very high barrier to entry.

      Part of living in a society with a government means giving the government the power (and responsibility) to ensure some of these things are safe for our consumption, so we don't all have to waste our own time and effort trying to do so ourselves (and most of us not doing it at all and being shafted). There is a cost to society through taxation, yes, but it's worth it for the economic and social benefits it brings us. Unfortunately, our government is failing us with SUVs by allowing the top-heavy models to be sold, in spite of their extremely unsafe designs.

    40. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The only fear a criminal has, is someone OTHER than a cop who draws a gun. That or a lynch mob. Cops have yet to stop crime. Courts have yet to stop crime. Gulags and prison camps have yet to stop crime. Only individuals and groups who refuse to be victimized have stopped crime, quite literally, dead in its tracks.

      I forgot to reply to this in my other post, but I fail to see how this is very related to the rest of your post, which was about product safety and personal responsibility, not crime. The two could be tied together (should people be more responsible for their own personal safety and protection, or rely on the police?), but it seemed to be just thrown out here.

      Anyway, cops and courts do deter crime, to a certain extent. Without them, and with a disarmed populace, crime would be widespread since there'd be no disincentive. However, the function of cops is not to stop crime, but to investigate crimes, and apprehend suspects for the courts to try. Anyone who thinks the cops' role is to protect people is sadly deluded. The entire "justice" system basically rests on the theory that if you catch suspects and try them for crimes, and this works well enough so that the criminals are usually caught for their crimes and then punished, that this will convince people to not become criminals. Again, this only works to a certain extent. Many criminals are extremely stupid or mentally ill in some way, and simply don't think about the consequences of their actions. Many criminals don't think they'll get caught (which is largely true actually; the success rate in prosecuting crimes is much, much less than 100% after all, probably well under 50%), so it's worth the risk to them. And many criminals commit their crimes "in the heat of the moment", or in some emotional state when they're not thinking clearly and rationally about their actions and their consequences. Criminals who feel they have nothing to lose, or who are bent on suicide (like the various school/mall shooters), aren't affected at all by cops and courts.

      As for gulags and prison camps, those were never intended to stop crime, so I'm not sure why you're mentioning those. Soviet gulags were work camps where political prisoners and other undesirables were sent to be worked to death in inhuman conditions. While they might have promoted them as being a deterrent to crime, they were obviously not: in any society, you're going to have people with politically unpopular opinions, whether it's a crime or not. You might as well outlaw thinking.

      But you're absolutely right: the only thing that can really bring down crime statistics is for people to stop allowing themselves to be victimized, which means taking up arms and defending themselves. This won't stop all crime; that's impossible, with humans being what they are; but it's a lot more effective than calling the police when someone has broken into your home intent on harming you, and hoping the cops get there before it's too late.

      Personally, I highly recommend the "Death Wish" series of movies by the late Charles Bronson.

    41. Re:YES!!! by QCompson · · Score: 1

      hey fucking retard, he played the game, where did it say he's a soldier? At least it's good to know the army teaches basic civility.

      Maybe I meant he's an online soldier!
    42. Re:YES!!! by Gareshra · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting one little thing. Some of the skills from video games can be applied IRL, certainly, but the difference between the game and reality is the understanding of the difference. Just because skills can cross over doesn't mean moral implications can. Just as an example, in Oblivion I played as a vampire who every night would feed on someone, murder them, and then pillage their house. In real life, I'm fairly attentive as to other people's needs and try not to offend or inadvertently injure anyone. Skills can cross over. I don't think that's really too much of a question anymore. The question is whether morality can be altered and relearned from a video game. I doubt this, as when I get a nice kill on people online, I usually either get taunted or complimented, which then leads to him killing me. To think analogously, does playing cops and robbers when you're 5 teach you to be a thief? Does roughhousing and wrestling teach you to kill? Video games are getting more realistic, but we've been playing games like these in the ultimate reality of life for ages, and we're none the worse for wear.

    43. Re:YES!!! by finity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have been on Slashdot for a while, so I know this type of thing is not uncommon but how is this a +5 interesting? This is possibly just a flame. If not, it's a person ranting about how stupid people are not to use some common sense. There is nothing interesting about this post, if anything it is simply inflammatory. To reply to your message, I really agree. Education in the US isn't nearly what it should be, and certainly not when it comes to first aid. I'm lucky in having been a Boy Scout and now a member of the military that I've gotten plenty of first aid training, but throughout school I never received any kind of training. Also, you're correct that much of first aid is common sense. It's important to get trained in these sorts of things though because when the poop hits the fan, you're probably not going to have much common sense. Good training can kick in and override that feeling that makes you want to throw up and pace back and forth. It wouldn't even take much time... Back in my day (I'm only 23) we had fun/exercise field day, we should have had medical field day too...

    44. Re:YES!!! by Kjella · · Score: 1

      IMHO, its all the more reason to teach your own kids, presuming, of course, that you've got some actual knowledge to impart Unfortunately, it doesn't learn you the essential skill of coexisting with a bunch of nitwits in a professional setting.
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    45. Re:YES!!! by Eskarel · · Score: 1
      Well the thing is that they don't directly correlate. First aid is about learning what to do. Shooting someone is about learning how to do.

      Not everyone knows what you're supposed to do in an accident, but once you know, even if you're not very good at doing it is likely to make a difference.

      This doesn't apply to how to do. Everyone and their monther knows that the what to do for firing a gun is point and pull the trigger. Bullet flies out of gun and into target causing potential death or dismemberment, and on the small scale(one person, short range, opponent isn't fighting back) pretty much everyone who can control the movement of their hands can already do this.

      The tricky part about shooting people is the whole aiming, reloading, mechanical reflex sort of thing, and swinging a mouse or joystick around doesn't train this reflex, no matter how you might. You might learn to duck around buildings as opposed to walking out into the line of fire, but you still don't learn how to physically do that without getting yourself shot.

      The idea of any ordinary game as a murder simulator is pretty specious at best(that's not to say you couldn't create a murder simulator using special realistic gun input devices and some sort of motion sensing, but you can do the same thing playing paintball or target shooting and no one really complains about that).

      The big question about violent video games(at least if you're not a complete and total loon), is whether playing violent video games increases the odds of you commiting a violent act or solving your problems in a violent manner.

      Personally I'd say that based on the fact that the number of cases even tenuously linked to video game violence is very small, and that to the best of my knowledge the number of cases involving adults who were exposed to said violence is pretty much non existent, added to the fact that in general murder rates around the world are going down not up(at least as a percentage of population) it's pretty safe to presume that any increase in violence caused by exposure to video games is statistically insignificant and can probably be more readily attributed to other factors.

      Spending all your time alone in the dark and not developing social skills needed for non violent solutions to problems is more likely to be a cause than video games in and of themselves.

      That said, I have nothing against limiting the amount of violence young children are exposed to, or with changing the rather absurd manner in which American society normalizes violence and represses anything even remotely sexual, but I've seen nothing whatever that proves that even in this statistically insignificant sample(people who blame their acts of violence on video games) their is any substantial cause effect relationship.

      However, this isn't a permanent situation, there will probably come a time when the level of realism possible in virtual environments(games) reaches a level so close to that of actual reality that we have to revisit this issue and I think that when that time comes we may have a problem. That time isn't now nor is the current technology sufficient.

    46. Re:YES!!! by ShinmaWa · · Score: 1

      but violent video games make those skills so easy and ready to learn, and a person doesn't need to be seeking out that kind of info in order to get it

      People don't need to be taught to be violent. Killing comes as naturally to a human as breathing, sorry to say. We are, afterall, hunter/gatherers in our primal state. In other words, there's nothing in a video game that teaches anyone anything they don't already know. In other words, I didn't need to play Half-Life to know that I could kill someone by bludgeoning him with a crowbar.

      The fact is, people need to be taught NOT to be violent - as violence is our natural state. It could be argued that violent videogames impede those lessons, but they do not TEACH violence themselves. It's a subtle, but very important, difference.

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    47. Re:YES!!! by gaspyy · · Score: 1

      Where are you from? I grew up in communist Europe too and we too received basic first-aid notions by the time we were 12. There were even contests for kids called something like "Junior Paramedics" (not an exact translation).

      At that time, it seems inconceivable to see a road accident and not stop and provide some basic help. How times have changed...

    48. Re:YES!!! by mehere101 · · Score: 1

      America's Army is kinda different, because the training is administered in such a way that they basically take an actual training course and present that to a person. In other words, the way Americas Army presents it is no different from an actual course in except for the depth. America's Army uses real pictures with real people (of course faked I think) and a course that, while simplified, teaches basic first aid (Controlling bleeding, Clearing and maintaining airways) in a fairly effective manner

      The real issue is that skills like this aren't taught any way other than through specialized activities. You'd think that keeping children safe would include teaching them what to do after they find something unsafe, but no.

    49. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, being on the highway probably means the man is a driver which means he should have learned first aid to get his license, no? (or is that not a requirement in the US?)

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    50. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the infamous Goatse defense...

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    51. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      The difference is that martial arts work instead of presenting some kind of hollywood version of the act. If you tried to learn hand to hand combat from Virtua Fighter you'd probably only hurt yourself.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    52. Re:YES!!! by LKM · · Score: 1

      The only fear a criminal has, is someone OTHER than a cop who draws a gun. That or a lynch mob.

      As a non-criminal, I would say that is my only fear, too. To me, armed idiots who think they have to take the law into their own hands seem more dangerous than both the police or other criminals.

    53. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Mental illnesses are extremely common, 40% of the population will have one at least once in their life. However they are rarely recognized as such by laymen who think it's "just in your head" (yeah, so's a headshot...). While most of these aren't likely to cause a person to go on a killing spree it can cause permanent damage to not treat them. However treatment is expensive (socialized medicine helps there) and often hard to get (obviously less so where most can't afford it).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    54. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Just make sure you don't learn first aid from Battlefield 2. "Oooh he's bleeding! Let's use the defi!"

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    55. Re:YES!!! by dintech · · Score: 2, Funny

      That ANYONE above the age of 12, in a CIVILIZED FIRST WORLD COUNTRY, would LACK THESE SKILLS, tells me all I need to know about how "educated" and "enlightened" westerners truly are as compared to how much they THINK they are.
      Basil Exposition: The shouting is a temporary side-effect of the unfreezing.
      DaedalusHKX (660194): Yes... I'm having difficulty controlling THE VOLUME OF MY VOICE.
    56. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Basic law?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    57. Re:YES!!! by Zenne · · Score: 1

      If I remember the America's Army game correctly, there were parts of it that were literally nothing more than sitting in a classroom in the game, and learning things like the medical info. Complete with quizzes and everything.

      I think we're safe until they make a GTA game based around college...

    58. Re:YES!!! by Sibko · · Score: 1

      This was actually done at my highschool, here in British Columbia. Granted, it was only one week of first aid each year, but it's a start. You're also given the option to attend certification classes for first aid, if you want. [But you have to pay for it, and for highschool kids - it's pretty expensive.]

      My only complaint was that there was too much theory, and not enough practice. Half the week is spent preparing for an exam on what to do in such and such situation, what a first responder does, what the path of blood is through the body, etc. It's important, but not nearly as important in my opinion, as doing CPR drills to the point that everyone could do it with their hands tied while asleep.

    59. Re:YES!!! by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      I completely agree that people need to learn first-aid training. The problem is that there is not always a person available who knows it themselves!
      I know that there usually is, and you would think it would not be a problem, but it is.
      In elementary school, my younger sister's teacher did a first-aid thing with them. Unfortunately, she told them things like
        -gloves are optional
        -tilt your head back if you have a nose-bleed
      among other things.

      There are also many other things people should be taught. I mean come on, what is more important, knowing which settlers landed on the continent first, or how to do first-aid or drive a car without killing someone?

      It is sad what our so-called education systems have become...

    60. Re:YES!!! by darthflo · · Score: 1

      The game teaches you the theory of something (e.g. how often and in what order to perform mouth-to-mouth and CPR), not the actual machanics (e.g. where exactly to apply pressure and how much air pressure's needed). The same applies for negative aspects, too. You may learn where to aim when shooting at someone x distance away, but you won't learn how to steadily shoot a rifle from an ego shooter. You may learn where to stab for lethal effect, but you won't learn how to actually use a knife to stab someone who's hitting back.
      Also, violent movies tend to be more insirational when it comes to innovative ways on how to kill people. They can teach you the technique, just like games and won't provide any hands-on experience, again, just like games.

    61. Re:YES!!! by kklein · · Score: 1

      That ANYONE above the age of 12, in a CIVILIZED FIRST WORLD COUNTRY, would LACK THESE SKILLS, tells me all I need to know about how "educated" and "enlightened" westerners truly are as compared to how much they THINK they are.

      Um. I teach university in Japan. The other day I found myself explaining how an internal-combustion engine works in class, because they had no idea. None. They were fascinated at the arcane knowledge I had acquired in 6th grade in the US.

      I can't even begin to imagine that they know anything about first aid.

      After many years here in Japan, I've come to realize that my "Western education" --whatever that means-- is pretty damned good. If you're going to elicit some sort of "Western vs. something-else" comparison, at least provide a counter-example. Oh, and you'll probably have to leave out the 2nd most-developed nation in the world...

    62. Re:YES!!! by Peeteriz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Around here (Eastern Europe) first aid training is solved by driver's licence training - no certificate of passed first-aid training+tests - no driver's licence.

      At least that way most of adult population has some idea of first aid. Though most things are soon forgotten, there's a good likelihood that at least someone from passers-by will know what to do.

    63. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      I actually spent some of my youth (truly misspent if you ask me) in the public school system, and it didn't teach me how to "coexist with nitwits" it only taught me how to "obey instructions," which doesn't create a healthy human being, only a properly mentally damaged slave. You know, the kind who isn't aware of the mental and emotional chains he's been shackled with since kindergarten.

      Sad but shamefully true.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    64. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      How many times have you been abused (robbed under color of law/authority) by a cop? How many times have you been attacked by an idiot with a gun (other than a cop or "official" agent)??

      How many times has a mannered man with a pistol on his hip and NO symbol of "authority" ever drawn and fired at you (without you trespassing in his home or otherwise initiating some form of unprovoked aggression against him)? I wager none... but who knows?

      And speaking of your declaration, how do you know you're a non criminal? Have any of your past hobbies been declared criminal? Do any of them run that risk? Do any activities you've ever partaken in, now carry a legal penalty? Things change, and government gets bigger. Never smaller. Sooner or later you'll be a criminal too. Even if its a ticket for expired tags, or driving 2 mph faster than the "speed limit", preferably in a speed trap (as those are used SOLELY for the raising of revenue from their hapless victims), you will eventually be a "criminal."

      You have to ask yourself, why are you afraid of "mad gunmen" when they kill LESS people, even on their most bloody years, than UL tested household wares!! Sheesh man, you should really double check your fears. You should fear getting in your car FAR more than you fear gunmen. As for the gunmen, get your own and some training, you'll find yourself far less afraid of guns afterwards.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    65. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Heh heh... First Aid is not a requirement for a "driver's" license out here, but then again, neither is knowing how to actually safely control the damn vehicle.

      Had the insurance companies run the licensing program, instead of lobbying the government to do it, we might have FAR stricter licensing exams and far more rigorous training courses.

      I don't know if you are aware of that little sweet gem, that the insurance companies lobbied for state/federal run licensing schemes to offset their own costs here in the USA. Not sure how it came to pass in western europe, though eastern europe was simply because the government was communist in most of those countries and thus it WAS the insurance company AND the licensing company.

      But yes, skill at operating a vehicle is not truly necessary after taking the exam, during which a minimum of operating skill is required to actually pass. Strangely, the same can be said of trucking (of which I've done a bit) other than the fact that trucking requires that you know what you are doing, since wrecking a 200k USD tractor tends to leave you forever unemployed in that field (since neither trucking firms nor shippers will be willing to put you in a truck or hand you their loads for you to possibly wreck, they would sooner hire ex felons, than someone with a truck wreck on their record.) That being said, the number of wrecks I've seen are usually caused by sleepless truckers (very rare) or idiot car drivers (very common) who try to climb under a tractor trailer and take a look at the poor bastard's rear suspensions.

      Police, of course, always blames the trucker. Regardless of who's guilty, the burden of proof often is left on the trucker, and if he doesn't have enough expensive equipment (cameras, turn signal sensors, radar/collision alert, etc) he's shit out of luck. That and the insane taxes and bureaucracy is why I got out of it, I figured I was better off getting out with a perfect record and no legal issues, rather than risking it, the roads are getting CRAZY out there.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    66. Re:YES!!! by timbo234 · · Score: 1

      ANYONE above the age of 12, in a CIVILIZED FIRST WORLD COUNTRY, would LACK THESE SKILLS, tells me all I need to know about how "educated" and "enlightened" westerners truly are as compared to how much they THINK they are.

      In Australia they went to greate efforts to teach us first aid (mainly focused on resuscitation - think little brother or sister who's fallen in the backyard swimming pool) in school at the age of 11.

      --
      Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
    67. Re:YES!!! by LKM · · Score: 1

      How many times have you been abused (robbed under color of law/authority) by a cop? How many times have you been attacked by an idiot with a gun (other than a cop or "official" agent)??

      Neither has happened to me. In fact, I've never been attacked or robbed at all. However, I fail to see what this has got to do with my point.

      And speaking of your declaration, how do you know you're a non criminal? Have any of your past hobbies been declared criminal? Do any of them run that risk? Do any activities you've ever partaken in, now carry a legal penalty? Things change, and government gets bigger. Never smaller. Sooner or later you'll be a criminal too. Even if its a ticket for expired tags, or driving 2 mph faster than the "speed limit", preferably in a speed trap (as those are used SOLELY for the raising of revenue from their hapless victims), you will eventually be a "criminal."

      So you advocate being armed to protect yourself against the government. I can actually agree with that, to a certain point. However, this is different from what GP said, namely: "The only fear a criminal has, is someone OTHER than a cop who draws a gun. That or a lynch mob."

      GP did not advocate protecting himself against the government, he claimed that the government would not act against crime, and that it was thus his job, or a lynch mob's.

      I see the point in arming yourself in case government changes make it necessary to have a resistance. I do not see the point in arming yourself so you can go after criminals or form lynch mobs. In the second case, the lynch mob poses a bigger threat to innocent people than criminals do.

    68. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      I find this to be an ironic thing but I believe that Australia is a land on its own, socialized and gun controlled and socially controlled, and yet full of "individualistic Aussies". As always, Australia is on its own out there. However, aside from the Aussies, we have the rest of the world, even my former homeland. The Commies got "free" and their education plummeted, as they borrowed high levels of stupidity and illiteracy from the Free West. The Free West borrowed all the tyrannical methodology of the old Communists, and put it to good use. Ironically it is the West that will suffer the most, because until now, the West borrowed lots of trained and skilled (and talented) people from the East (eastern Europe to be exact). Hell even the jet engine is owed to a Romanian scientist, that only engineers are familiar with. Most breakthroughs have come from enlightened minds that fled the Soviet encroachment, but brought the top notch training they received in the maths and sciences to the West. This influx of well trained individuals will cease, now that those countries are no longer the personnel production plants that the West used to depend on. All those who were imported as immigrants were mostly quality people, or at least skilled assholes. One way or another, they improved this country. Now that the West is teetering, many of these people have stayed behind. Especially since jobs were outsourced their way, so they didn't have to risk being interdicted while fleeing their homelands.

      The fall of the Berlin wall was supposed to make the West as well educated as the East and the East as "free" and "prosperous" as the West. Irony intervened here, at its best, in a cosmic sense.

      What I mean by that is obvious, the West teeters on the verge of financial collapse, and has been in recession since 2001 (where outright depression was avoided through the masterful and timely occurence of 9/11, regardless of who did it or why, and the remarkably well implemented energy and finance sinks that were the Afghani and Iraqi Police Actions (they aren't Wars, regardless of who tells you they are). They averted the looming financial disaster masterfully, even if the future depression will be all that much harder to weather. The system needed a reboot, but it has been patched and kept online for a few more years. Gods help us when it finally crashes.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    69. Re:YES!!! by FiveDollarYoBet · · Score: 1

      The in game combat lifesaver course is about 20 minutes long. The real course is 40 hours of classroom work and practical exercises. Having done both, the course in the game is based on the real thing, it just doesn't go into any detail

    70. Re:YES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He actually didn't learn first aid from playing the game so much as he learned by watching an instructional video embedded within the game. The game doesn't make you mimic first aid skills, it gives you three theory classes with a short quiz at the end of each class, that is all.

    71. Re:YES!!! by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      there are a lot of people who simply do not know what to do with a wounded person.

      Well, the first thing I usually do is ask them for their medical insurance card... Hey, my first aid skills aren't free ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    72. Re:YES!!! by sjames · · Score: 1

      They probably don't need to add any time to the school day, just use the time they have more effectively. Most schools have health and PE programs, both of which would be reasonable places to include basic first aid as a natural part of the course.

      When I was in school, despite it's many faults, we WERE taught basic first aid.

    73. Re:YES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the whole point of America's Army, after all, is a combat simulator

      NO. It's a recruitment tool.

    74. Re:YES!!! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I would agree with you (as a ron paul supporter) and add this...

      If I am informed and *want* to buy a car without all the safety features for $14700 instead of $19900 then I should be able to. And I should understand that my insurance will be $1500 a year instead of $900 a year because I'm more likely to be injured.

      The problem is when the government intervenes and forces me to buy these features and with people that lie. For example, if they sell it to me for $19900 and tell me it has all the safety features but it actually has none.

      And the problem there is that people can do bad things and then walk on the consequences.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    75. Re:YES!!! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      As a reference point, I've been abused by cops twice in my life (not physically-- just enormously unjustified rudeness that they could get away with because they were a cop). I've been treated well perhaps a dozen times.
      I donate to policeman survivors funds and when I have a year that I encounter a rude cop, I withhold my donation. It helps me feel better about cowing down to some rude asshat in a blue suit.

      Cops are people. Some good- some bad. Most are at least a little corrupted by the power they hold.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    76. Re:YES!!! by QMO · · Score: 1

      There are also many other things people should be taught. I mean come on, what is more important, knowing which settlers landed on the continent first, or how to do first-aid or drive a car without killing someone? Not knowing first aid can kill a person. Not teaching a generation their history can kill a society/culture. Luckily we don't have to chose, because if we cut out video games and prime-time TV we have plenty of free time to learn both.
      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    77. Re:YES!!! by notorious+ninja · · Score: 1

      Don't most kids in the US learn about first aid in health class? I certainly did. I think it might be mandatory cirriculum in my state (Pennsylvania), but I could be wrong as its been a few years since high school.

    78. Re:YES!!! by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Good catch. Yes. Basic Law would definitely be part of the course, along with the basics of criminal/civil courts. Heck, some areas might do well with some practical rules for avoiding a beatdown during interactions with police.

      Honestly enough, I think that a course like that would be more useful in some areas than calculus, history of music, etc...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    79. Re:YES!!! by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 1

      [Citation Needed]

    80. Re:YES!!! by Descalzo · · Score: 1

      ...despite it's many faults...,

      That's too funny. Whatever.

      But seriously, I agree. Why not remove some self-esteem lesson and put some first-aid in there? I wonder if the school would have to accept some liability for that.... In any case, as I think about it I do remember being taught first aid, including CPR, in my 9th grade health class.

      --
      I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
    81. Re:YES!!! by deconvolution · · Score: 1

      You forget the most important one the AA emphasises: always pick up Russian weapons and drop off your American weapons, the former NEVER jam! Even not mention their GP grenade launcher....

    82. Re:YES!!! by IdeaMan · · Score: 1

      You don't need to have the knowledge when you start. Either way by the time you finish you'll have it.

      --
      They ARE out to get you simply because They are in it for themselves and they don't care about you.
    83. Re:YES!!! by Gorobei · · Score: 1

      Completely agree. Training is all about making the common-sense response automatic. Many untrained people have the brains to figure out what to do, and most of them will actually do it. Many flail around, though, trying to evaluate competing priorities, and some actually manage to kill themselves as well by executing a good plan while missing some vital piece of knowledge or information (e.g. aviate, navigate, communicate, in that order; turn the power off before helping the guy getting fried; don't jump in the water unless the simpler save-the-drowning-guy plans are inapplicable.)

    84. Re:YES!!! by lxw56 · · Score: 1

      While I realize you're joking, witholding first aid to someone who needs it is usually illegal. This is true whether you are a professional health care provider or merely a bystander who knows first aid.

    85. Re:YES!!! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Zimbardo, P. G. & Gerrig, R. J. (2004).Psychologie. München: Pearson Education. Chapter 15+16

      At least according to the lecture's website.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    86. Re:YES!!! by nbritton · · Score: 1

      "Do you have more of an inclination to find people to bandage after doing it in game? Probably not"

      You get lots of points for being a, good, medic in the game, so yes.

    87. Re:YES!!! by BgJonson79 · · Score: 1

      If a biological imperative is pointless...

      Anyone else see an issue with that?

      --

      There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.

    88. Re:YES!!! by ECMIM · · Score: 1

      Mod this guy up some more.

    89. Re:YES!!! by msheekhah · · Score: 1

      WOW.

      --
      Mark Anthony Collins
    90. Re:YES!!! by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      But you're absolutely right: the only thing that can really bring down crime statistics is for people to stop allowing themselves to be victimized, which means taking up arms and defending themselves. That's funny. You need only look at other countries' crime statistics to see that you can have low crime rates without an armed populace.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    91. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Those countries are usually very small, with very homogeneous populations and very high standards of living. Other countries, like Britain, have very high crime rates because criminals have little to fear from either their victims or the courts.

    92. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Before I retired (yes, I'm mostly retired now), I used to donate 12 to 20k a year in taxes to "cops" and their ilk. I find it pointless to actually donate anything else to them. If they couldn't do well with the money they took through their income tax frauds and state tax frauds and municipal tax frauds, then they were the most financially incompetent beings on the planet.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    93. Re:YES!!! by Reapy · · Score: 1

      We had first aid training in our gym class. It probably varies by school. But I have never had to use any of that training, nor encountered any situation where I could even watch it (thankfully), so any knowledge I had at the time is long gone. About all I can remember from the steps is to make sure the situation is safe before you go in yourself, and uh, if you are telling someone to do something, point at them and pick out specific people to help, rather hten saying "someone call 911" you point at a guy and go "you, call 911!". So, not much help I would be :(

      But either way, our gym class had it for a week or two, where we got partners, practiced the (mock) rescue breathing, assumed cpr positions (yeah and by the way how do you expect hs guy to pay attention when you are giving a lecture while their attractive female partner is straddling their body... :( ), and we also had a cpr dummy to practice the real motions on.

      Afterwards we had a test we had to take, going through the steps and demonstrating it to the teacher, who would then "free" us to go play something out in the main gym. If you did well enough the teacher was also offering to help you get a real certification for cpr rather then the "you passed" you got from him.

      So, CPR training does exist in some schools, other's not. It all really depends on the high school, and, more importantly, who the teachers are.

    94. Re:YES!!! by AgentSmith · · Score: 1

      Anyone who thinks the cops' role is to protect people is sadly deluded

      The police must be very deluded. Why is the phrase "Protect and Serve" on the
      majority of cop cars? Especially Black and Whites.

      The police are an extension of the Executive Branch of government which is to enforce the
      laws that are passed whether it's prevention or prosecution.

    95. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The police must be very deluded. Why is the phrase "Protect and Serve" on the majority of cop cars? Especially Black and Whites.

      That's just to make people feel safe. It's just like all the "security" in airports; it's there to make you feel safe, not to actually make you safe. People smuggle guns and other weapons through TSA checkpoints all the time in random tests, and frequently get through.

      The police are an extension of the Executive Branch of government which is to enforce the laws that are passed whether it's prevention or prosecution.

      Just because people set up some agency to do something doesn't mean it's going to get done. If some gang busts into your home at 2AM, how long do you really think it'll take police to get there? How about if there's no police in your town? We have a town here in Arizona that's in the news because the nearest police station is an hour's drive away; budget cuts forced the county sheriff to remove that town's station. Calls to the police usually got response time measured in days. Crime became rampant there, so the people all started carrying guns around.

      People don't want to realize it, but the police are not your personal bodyguards, nor can they be. They can't be everywhere, and if you pin them down on it, they'll finally admit it, reluctantly. If they can't be everywhere, then how are they going to protect you when you're walking down some random street at night, or any time of the day for that matter, and some guy jumps you? This nearly happened to my wife a couple months ago in our own subdivision. Luckily she was heavily armed and nothing happened (it was an illegal immigrant walking around at night, if anyone's interested). If you want to be safe when you're in public, the only way to do this is to arm yourself, or else you're at the mercy of any criminal, or group of criminals, who want to do something to you.

    96. Re:YES!!! by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Those countries are usually very small, with very homogeneous populations and very high standards of living. So, in other words, you were wrong before when you said an armed populace was the only thing that could lower crime rates; now you suggest it can also be achieved by making the population more homogeneous (which I presume means "deport the brown people") or, more promisingly, raising the standard of living.

      Hmm, a country where crime is low because everyone's afraid of getting shot, or a country where crime is low because everyone is well-off? I know which one I'd rather live in.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    97. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      So, in other words, you were wrong before when you said an armed populace was the only thing that could lower crime rates; now you suggest it can also be achieved by making the population more homogeneous (which I presume means "deport the brown people") or, more promisingly, raising the standard of living.

      Actually, it means "deport the people who are in the minority". There's lots of small, peaceful countries with all brown people and no white people. Many Pacific islands come to mind. Any time you have large groups of people with different cultures in the same place, you get tensions and conflict. This even happens in countries where everyone's "brown", but they're still very different from each other based on religion or some other factor. Look at India; they're constantly fighting about religion there. The big key here isn't really just the homogeneous part, but the small factor. In large countries, people are always going to have conflict about something, whereas in small countries, there's a lot less to fight about. Therefore, it's best if countries simply stay small.

      Hmm, a country where crime is low because everyone's afraid of getting shot, or a country where crime is low because everyone is well-off? I know which one I'd rather live in.

      I'm sure everyone would like to live in Norway where every citizen gets a check every month from the national oil revenue, but not everyone is fortunate enough to live on a piece of land blessed with rich resources. There's lots of countries where there's lots of people who aren't well-off for one reason or another; you can't wave a wand and make everyone well-off. So, the obvious answer is that people need to be able to protect themselves. There's no reason to fear getting shot, however; simply don't commit violent crimes, and you probably won't get shot. Some nut may shoot you anyway, but even if he didn't have a gun, a nutcase would still find some other way to harm people. Timothy McVeigh didn't need any guns to kill hundreds of people in 1995, and some Saudi terrorists didn't need any guns to kill thousands in 2001.

    98. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Oh, as another data point, conflict also happens in countries where everyone's "white": look at Northern Ireland. There again, religious differences require people to kill each other in large numbers.

    99. Re:YES!!! by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      [making the population more homogeneous (which I presume means "deport the brown people")]
      Actually, it means "deport the people who are in the minority". And the people who are in the minority in the US are...?

      Thanks for proving my point.

      I'm sure everyone would like to live in Norway where every citizen gets a check every month from the national oil revenue, but not everyone is fortunate enough to live on a piece of land blessed with rich resources. There's lots of countries where there's lots of people who aren't well-off for one reason or another; you can't wave a wand and make everyone well-off. So, the obvious answer is that people need to be able to protect themselves. I think you mean "the simplistic, selfish, testosterone-fueled answer". The humanitarian, progressive answer is to focus on the long-term goal of improving standard of living.

      Your mention of Norway is, as you and I both know, a red herring. Most countries with lower crime rates due to higher standards of living don't achieve those standards by selling their natural resources and splitting the profits among their populace. They just have policies that help everyone rather than mainly helping those who are already well-off. No, you can't do it overnight, but neither can you give everyone a gun and the training and inclination to use it responsibly overnight.

      There's no reason to fear getting shot, however; simply don't commit violent crimes, and you probably won't get shot. Some nut may shoot you anyway, but even if he didn't have a gun, a nutcase would still find some other way to harm people. On the contrary, there's plenty of reason. I'm not afraid of random nuts or people protecting themselves from a violent crime I'm actually committing. I am, however, afraid of people with hot tempers who would otherwise have nothing more than a fist to attack me with, and people who incorrectly think I'm trying to harm them. And if you think that means I should just carry a gun myself, consider that those aggressive, paranoid people are likely to own more guns and spend more time practicing than I ever could anyway.

      A land where everyone has to carry guns to protect themselves from each other is great for gun enthusiasts, survivalists, and wannabe warlords. Not so great for everyone else.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    100. Re:YES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Britain: Rate of murder 1/6 of that in the USA. Pure BS again from the gun nuts here. Get over it, you don't need to flash your fake shiny dick around. You don't need a gun. You want one because you're ashamed of your lack of manhood. Grow a pair and leave the gun behind.

    101. Re:YES!!! by Cctoide · · Score: 1

      Hello. GTA3 reference. Bye.

      --
      "Let's face it, it's a good story. Accuracy would kill it."
    102. Re:YES!!! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No, your statistics are BS. Britain's street crime rate is much higher than the US, if you leave out US's ghettos and gang crime. For the average middle-class person, you're FAR more likely to be mugged, assaulted, burglarized, or even killed in Britain than in the US. The US's high murder is entirely because of gang violence in inner-city ghettos. Once you discount that, it's far safer than Britain. Yeah, that sucks if you live in a ghetto, but it's easy to pick a path in life to get an education and leave the ghetto, it's just that most people simply don't want to because it requires change, and people hate change.

    103. Re:YES!!! by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      aggressive, paranoid people...

      Interesting. So you mean to tell me that I'm going to be more likely to do evil? Interesting, I seem to be among the last minority of polite people. I generally pack, unless I have a bodyguard 24/7, and I happen to not have one. I've moved to a more semi-rural area and then rural, and found that the more people packed, openly or not, the more polite they were likely to be.

      The rule of thumb is always, when you are strong, and powerful, even on a small scale, you feel less need to be rude, because you already know you wield enough power to solve any problems that can be caused by others abusing theirs. I.E. remove force from the equation of persuasion. Reason and force are the only two to use. You can reason or force someone. Most socialists prefer force, so long as THEY don't have to be the ones using it (cowards, in other words.) Most individualists tend not to resort to force immediately. At least most of the ones I met. Why not? As Heinlein put it, "an armed society, is a polite society."

      I prefer to enhance that... "an Enlightened and Armed society is a Polite society."

      If you bother to improve yourself, before fighting hard to improve your financial means, all things will come to you. I learned this back in the days when I was seeking myself. I tried to change the world until these last few years, when I simply let go, and began to live my life. You know what my observation has been? I changed MY circumstances, and everything around me ALSO changed. Without me lifting a finger. I surrounded myself with better quality people, and suddenly I have less headaches. Rule #1... ALWAYS change yourself before changing the world. Its the missing rule for socialists and authoritarians of all stripes. They think that by forcing change upon others, they will somehow "fix" the world. The world has been as it is for aeons. Do you truly think you can "change" it? Do you not think that such an opinion is a slight bit... "ignorant"? I've been in your shoes, fighting, campaigning, trying to "change the world" to "disarm society" and other crap. And then thugs cased my place, cops didn't come, thugs kicked in my door, cops didn't come. Only thing that saved my life or at least my physical integrity, was the fact that I had enough presence of mind to realize that I couldn't engage a half dozen thugs with a hand to hand weapon. I had no prior intelligence on their abilities or their armaments... to engage them would've been Hollywood bravado, and a sure fire way to die. I, however, unlike many, have several escape plans for my residence, in case I am assaulted, even though I do pack, I prefer NOT to engage my opponents, unless I am offered no other choice. But I have no delusions that "society" will help me. Society never did, and I've paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes (after tax refunds) and I got NO service for it. Please excuse me while I refuse to believe in your illusion that my paying for cops is or "social services" will make me safer. It hasn't, and it won't. Not now, not ever, and I harbor no delusions.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    104. Re:YES!!! by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Interesting. So you mean to tell me that I'm going to be more likely to do evil? No. I'm saying that the people who are more likely to do evil are also more likely to have better weapons and/or training than the people to whom evil is done. The guy whose goal in life is to commit armed robbery probably has more experience at using a gun in robbery situations than the potential victim who encounters him in a dark alley.

      I've been in your shoes, fighting, campaigning, trying to "change the world" to "disarm society" and other crap [...] Please excuse me while I refuse to believe in your illusion that my paying for cops is or "social services" will make me safer. It hasn't, and it won't. Not now, not ever, and I harbor no delusions. Whoa there. Calm down, buddy, you're ranting at ghosts.

      I didn't say anything about disarming society -- I have no problem with responsible gun ownership -- and it was the other poster who first brought up the fact that higher standards of living translate into lower crime rates. I'm just pointing out the obvious logical problems with the original claim that crime rates can only be lowered by arming the populace, and the later implication (once the original claim was abandoned) that crime should primarily be dealt with by arming the populace.

      But I have no delusions that "society" will help me. I, on the other hand, have no delusions that a gun in my pocket will turn me into an action hero, or that putting a gun into the hands of every drunken wife-beater in town will somehow make me (or their wives) safer.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  3. And people say you can't learn anything from games by Invidious · · Score: 4, Insightful

    See? Things like this are what make that MMO that NASA's considering developing less-than-ridiculous.

  4. Don't try this at home by FlatCatInASlatVat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And if anything goes wrong, the guy AND the game makers will get sued for millions.

    1. Re:Don't try this at home by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would like to think that a) North Carolina has a Good Samaritan law and b) it would apply in this instance.

    2. Re:Don't try this at home by BadHaggis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And if anything goes wrong, the guy AND the game makers will get sued for millions.

      As far as rendering first aid to an accident victim, most states have a Good Samaritan law which exempts the person trying to render first aid from legal recourse. The game maker probably has some extremely small print disclaimer somewhere which states that they can not be held liable for anything in or resulting from participating in the game. It wouldn't suprise me if the disclaimer probably states something along the lines of 'procedures learned in the game should not be tried in real life.'

      --
      Homo homini lupus
    3. Re:Don't try this at home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good Samaritan laws dont hold up in court if youre a Medical Professional. Ie Nurse, Doctor.

    4. Re:Don't try this at home by schnikies79 · · Score: 3, Informative

      It normally applies if you are certified in First Aid/CPR/AED.

      There are limits to what a non-certified person can do. At least thats I'm taught when I get re-certified every year, that it will prevent you from being sued under the good samaritan law, in Indiana at least.

      --
      Gone!
    5. Re:Don't try this at home by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Right. I'm "certified" for first aid but at a lower level and have no idea how I'd react in an emergency like this type of situation. I like to think that I wouldn't lock up and hopefully be able to find someone more capable than myself.

    6. Re:Don't try this at home by besalope · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yet if you're "certified" and identify that at an accident you become liable for the victims until EMS or professional aid arrives. If something happens to them (death or worse injury) whether or not it's your fault, your balls are still on the line. You can and most likely will be sued. This is why off-duty ems and doctors aren't always willing to respond to nearby incidents. Sure it'd be a nice fantasy world where we could help everyone and be safe, but this is America... Land of the Sued.

    7. Re:Don't try this at home by cart_man4524 · · Score: 1

      to parent Im sorry, I didnt know that my broken leg was worse then getting killed! To everyone else Thats why I dont like certifications, liablity is a big issue now a days.

    8. Re:Don't try this at home by BTWR · · Score: 3, Informative

      Good Samaritan laws dont hold up in court if youre a Medical Professional. Ie Nurse, Doctor.

      Yes they do. Your statement is absolutely FALSE. IAAMS (I am a medical student), and this exact question was in one of my Board exam review books. If you drive by a roadside accident, if you are a doctor/nurse/etc then OF COURSE you should be encouraged to help out since you're the one with the knowledge. I mean, this game player did a great thing, but I'm sure an EMS guy driving by would be even better, you know? And Good Samaritan Laws are there to help you do this good deed. You aren't being compensated, and you can't be punished either.

    9. Re:Don't try this at home by CodeBuster · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope, most states have laws in place to protect "good samaratins" from legal reprecusions. Generally speaking, if you were genuinely trying to help and your help was not specifically denied or the victim was unable to respond one way or another then regardless of the outcome you will not be prosecuted or be held liable for trying to render assistance, however bumbling and ineffective that assistance may turn out to be, in good faith.

    10. Re:Don't try this at home by wfeick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People are close on good samaritan laws, but not exact (at least going by what they've told me every time I've taken a first aid course here in California). There are two legal issues to consider.

      1. Once you begin providing aid, you must continue to provide aid until you can hand off to someone who is at least as qualified as you. This is why doctors don't like to get involved, because they are unable to hand off to any sort of EMT or medic, only to another doctor who is at least as qualified as them.
      2. You can't be sued as long as you stick to your level of training. If you've only taken a first aid course and decide to give someone a tracheotomy, you can (and probably will) be sued.
    11. Re:Don't try this at home by aukset · · Score: 1

      The main difference is when a certified first responder or EMT engages a patient, whether "on duty" or not, they are at that point acting their professional capacity and must act within the scope of their training and certification. If an EMT screws up due to negligence or incompetence, or acts beyond their capacity, the EMT can and probably will be sued. Good Samaritans have some reasonable protection from lawsuit if their attempts to help are inappropriate or cause further injury. Certified professionals are expected to know better.

      --
      No sig now
    12. Re:Don't try this at home by Fireshadow · · Score: 1

      "And if anything goes wrong, the guy AND the game makers will get sued for millions."

      Not necessarily. In the U.S., there are what's called "Good Samaritan" laws. To wit:

      "Any person who, in good faith, renders emergency medical care or assistance to an injured person at the scene of an accident or other emergency without the expectation of receiving or intending to receive compensation from such injured person for such service, shall not be liable in civil damages for any act or omission, not constituting gross negligence, in the course of such care or assistance."

      Emphasis mine. A little digging on the web shows that North Carolina, where this occured, pass a Good Samaritan law in 1975 providing immunity to would be rescuers. In short, Good Samaritan laws give the rescuer a "get out of jail free" card.

      IANAL, so check your state. I hate to hear others state that "they don't want to get involved as they may get sued." Knowing the above, that's a cop-out. Don't be afraid to help if you think you can.

      More information:
      About dot com
      State by state listing

      --
      "It's one thing to talk about the poetry of machines. Quite another to listen to it for yourself."
    13. Re:Don't try this at home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAL, but there are a series of Laws/acts called the Good Samaritan Acts, which prevent such lawsuits from bystanders who try to help out in an accident.

    14. Re:Don't try this at home by FlatCatInASlatVat · · Score: 1

      Glad to hear about the Good Samaritan Laws. I stand corrected. Hey, me and Tom Cruise... We're there to help. Seriously, I would not be deterred from doing what I could.

    15. Re:Don't try this at home by c_forq · · Score: 1

      I know many doctors, and I am going to have to call B.S. on this. I know several who have responded while off duty, and the only thing they mention is that they never give out their name when responding while off duty. However, in some places (my state is not such a region) an off duty doctor is only able to hand of care to someone as qualified or more qualified than themselves, in these areas there is an issue of if a doctor begins giving aid he may not be capable of handing off treatment to an emergency responder.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    16. Re:Don't try this at home by linzeal · · Score: 1

      So does Oregon and most state's that don't have 100's of thousands of lawyers.

    17. Re:Don't try this at home by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      I don't know where it happened, but wasn't there a guy who did CPR on someone saving their life and cracking a rib or two in the process and getting sued for that succesfully?
      I distinctly remember reading about that a few years ago.

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    18. Re:Don't try this at home by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      In California, it's the opposite. Qualified health care providers are exempt from the Good Samaritan law, meaning they can be sued for fucking up when they try to help someone bleeding to death on the street. But a random Joe can help them out and not be in any danger of being sued.

      So it encourages doctors to not help out, awesome. :p

    19. Re:Don't try this at home by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      And if anything goes wrong, the guy AND the game makers will get sued for millions.

      Actually, the guy probably would be fine. You are generally protected by good samaritan laws for any efforts you undertake in good faith to help the victims of an accident.

      I get screwed however, because I've had just enough training (Red Cross CPR and First Aid training) that I'm considered to be a "professional responder" and thus ineligible for the protections of the good samaritan laws in my state. Nice huh? Two days of training makes me a "professional" and thus liable to be held to the same malpractice standard as an EMT, RN or MD if I screw up while trying to save your life. And they wonder why people just keep driving when they see an accident on the side of the road.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    20. Re:Don't try this at home by StringBlade · · Score: 1

      It's pretty much a guarantee that you're going to break ribs applying CPR, usually on the first compression. Broken ribs are far less of a problem than dying. However, if CPR is not administered correctly, then a compression in the wrong place can push the sternum (I believe) into the lungs and create all sorts of new (probably fatal) problems.

      Also, the "CPR" you see on TV is nothing even close to real CPR in terms of how you actually perform a compression (for obvious reasons that they'd seriously injure the actors being "saved"), so just because you saw it on ER or Law & Order (the first half-hour) don't think you're qualified to administer CPR.

      I haven't taken a CPR/AED course since high school (>10 yrs)and I probably remember enough to be effective, but I would never volunteer if there was anyone more qualified than myself in the situation.

      --
      ...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
    21. Re:Don't try this at home by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      I have taken a CPR/First Aid course a few years back as well.
      We witnessed a guy having an heartattack a few weeks before that, we felt like we couldn't do anything and decided to learn so we would at least be helpful and maybe even save a life if possible.
      We never learned about the ribs though, but that is obviously less important, I know I would prefer painful ribs instead of dying.

      Let's just hope I'll never get in a situation where it's needed.

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    22. Re:Don't try this at home by sjames · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is that civil law has been allowed to run so thoroughly amok in the U.S.that Good Samaritan laws had to be passed in order to "allow" people to do anything but watch people die at the side of the road.

      This is mostly because civil law has become little more than a version of "the blame game" enshrined in legal procedures. As much as we might wish otherwise, sometimes things don't work out as well as we might like and it's not always somebody's fault. Even sadder, in many of these cases, everyone involved knows that already but continue on anyway either to "win the lottery" or because otherwise the bills will leave them destitute.

  5. Propaganda by david_craig · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To me this seems like a propaganda story. Especially considering that the article mentions that this story comes from a press release.

    All in the name of making an army recruitment tool seem like a benefit to society.

    1. Re:Propaganda by Cromac · · Score: 1, Troll

      Of course it comes from a press release, do you think that ABC/CBS/CNN/etc would ever print something positive about either the military or a recruitment tool?

    2. Re:Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      you're talking about the same media that will cover thousands of homicides a year without fail but barely makes a peep about hundreds of thousands people using firearms in self defense situations annually. what do you think the real chances are of a story like this making the mainstream media?
       
      don't come off like one of those morons who actually thinks the news prints/broadcasts every noteworthy story they get. you know damn well that the mainstream media pigeonholes stories as policy and not as an exception.
       
      look at slashdot: nearly everything microsoft that is posted here is negative and yet if a six man office in cuba adopts linux it's treated like a major victory. sure, there's no bias here. why didn't we see a front page article about my company abandoning our linux servers in 2006? we are a fortune 50 company after all.

    3. Re:Propaganda by bball99 · · Score: 1

      +1

      eff the mods!

      ooh rah!

    4. Re:Propaganda by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Note how all replies to this post are marked as "Troll". Seems to me that the parent is a troll or at least flamebait.

    5. Re:Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I find it quite suspicious that the guy who helped out is the person quoted as saying that he saved a life.

      Normally in these types of stories, it's the medical professionals who treat the victim afterwards which are quoted as saying "Without this person's help, the victim would not be alive today." It carries some weight, because they're professionals, and they should know.

      With this story, we have the guy himself saying it. He admits himself he's no healthcare professional - we're supposed to trust his judgment on how valuable his help was? Besides, what's he going to say? - "Actually, all the stuff I did had no bearing on the victim's survival. I was pretty worthless out there." or even "Trying to emulate A.A., I actually got stuff wrong, and actually made the victim's chances for survival worse. It would have been much better just to wait for the trained medical professionals to come. Sorry."

      Although what he did sounds like reasonable medical care (I'm no doctor), I don't think you can leap to the conclusion that without America's Army, the person in the SUV would be dead/disabled. I'd like a third party's opinion on it, thank you.

    6. Re:Propaganda by strathmeyer · · Score: 1

      Well, it's not a press release, it's "according to the video game publisher", which really means posting to their webforum the complete text of a newspaper article (http://forum.americasarmy.com/viewtopic.php?t=271086) and the gamer in question also appears to be posting in the thread, so can't we just feel good about this?

    7. Re:Propaganda by david_craig · · Score: 1

      I got the words "press release" from the article, so I assumed that someone was sent a press release that references the article. However, it is possible that the article could have been written after someone saw the forum.

      In terms of feeling good about this, I would love to have a positive reaction to a news story about a video game. Nonetheless, I try to be cautious about the source of information.

    8. Re:Propaganda by phantomlord · · Score: 1

      The guy who did it, as well as the project manager for AA were both on Fox and Friends either Thursday or Friday morning telling the story as well.

      --
      Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
    9. Re:Propaganda by david_craig · · Score: 1

      My original comment was simply to highlight the importance of being sceptical about news items. This is a story that puts a video game in a positive light, and this is a forum with a large proportion of people who enjoy video games (including myself). As it is common for people to be less sceptical about things that they generally agree with, I thought it worth while to point out a reason to question the accuracy of the information provided.

      My point was, "please question the claims made in this article". Of course, it can be difficult to judge how a comment will be taken, so there is always a risk of being labelled a troll (and I did expect karma damage).

    10. Re:Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're going to live under a fascist state, you might as well get used to fascist propaganda.

    11. Re:Propaganda by KKlaus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Having played the game extensively, you can't tell me it's an effective recruiting tool. The first thing you realize when you play the game, is that you get killed. A lot. And reliably so, to the point that even the very best of the best players can't go more than 10 or 15 kills without getting shot.

      It's almost certainly not propaganda, because it sites a very specific and verifiable incident (and gives the guys name), but either way, it's harmless. No one's playing a game where they get shot all the time and then deciding they want some of that in the real world. The only reason AA is still around is because the Army is essentially the mother of all bureaucracies, and even useless projects frequently don't get cut.

      And as an aside, the medic training in the game IS informative. I now know not to give cold water to people suffering from heatstroke (apparently they can go into shock). ...And I know the difference between a BMP and a BTR.

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    12. Re:Propaganda by budgenator · · Score: 1

      The victim had a traumatic avulsion of one of his digits, that means an open artery and people with open arteries can bleed out scary fast, even from a finger or fingers in this case. Yes it's probable the victim would have regained his wits and preformed life-saving self-aid, but surely someone had to and in this case it was a first responder that learned first-aid in a training game. A better account of what happened is in the forums at America's Army.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    13. Re:Propaganda by david_craig · · Score: 2, Interesting

      you can't tell me it's an effective recruiting tool I didn't claim that it was. I mentioned that it was designed as a recruiting tool as possible motive for disseminating information that portrays it in a positive light.

      It's almost certainly not propaganda, because it sites a very specific and verifiable incident Propaganda often cites specific and verifiable incidents (frequently selectively excluding pieces of information, or containing misleading information, or distorting the truth).

      the medic training in the game IS informative I didn't claim that that was not the case. I was merely suggesting that the story should be viewed sceptically due to the source of the information and the possible motivation behind producing it.
  6. Yes you can learn things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The other day it was late at night and my car broke down. I had forgotten my phone and wallet, and needless to say I was SOL. But thanks to my "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" training, I quickly dispatched an old lady in a station wagon who stopped at a nearby traffic signal, and drove home. Thanks "Rock Star", you saved my a$$.

  7. Good Samaritan laws by wiredog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's usually pretty tough to sue someone for trying to help out.

    1. Re:Good Samaritan laws by CautionaryX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Too bad people can sue you for anything these days... and win.

    2. Re:Good Samaritan laws by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Too bad people can sue you for anything these days... and win.
      No usually what happens is when it clear that the plaintiff is going to win, the defendant offers a deal for pretty much what they are asking for in damages paid through an annuity, but they have to sign an non-disclosure agreement and seal the case. After that the defendant spins the press releases to make the case and plaintiff look ridiculous and the plaintiff can't defend themselves due to the NDA. The media tends to eat this up because they can publish the press release and change a few things to make it look like they wrote it pretty effortlessly.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    3. Re:Good Samaritan laws by Lost+Engineer · · Score: 1

      You do realize most of those laws require you to attempt to help out? Sure, if you have no conscience and you can get away anonymously then you're free to leave the man dying on the road, but if anybody else sees you see the guy you better at least half ass it.

    4. Re:Good Samaritan laws by notamisfit · · Score: 1

      The term "Good Samaritan law" has a different meaning in the United States than it does in other countries. In the States, there is no "duty" to help others, and the term simply means that, barring non-obvious negligence, those who offer aid are not to be held liable.

      --
      Jesus is coming -- look busy!
    5. Re:Good Samaritan laws by WK2 · · Score: 1

      Not completely true. Some states, such as Massachusetts require you to help out. Remember the last episode of Seinfeld?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

      --
      Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
  8. WTF? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 0

    America's Army is about squad tactics. About the only time you save a life is when you avoid shooting a teammate. This article makes NO sense to me, unless there's something about the later versions of AA that I don't know about.

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    1. Re:WTF? by MicktheMech · · Score: 4, Informative

      The training missions to be able to play as a medic are simulated first aid lectures. They have nothing to do with gameplay itself. It's an illustrated presentation and goes through things like how to dress a wound. Having gone through them, this news does make sense. I have to say that the AA training gave me a much better idea about how to approach somebody in shock than I knew before. I can only assume that the lessons are accurate.

    2. Re:WTF? by MrMr · · Score: 1

      Well, apparently you can sign up for some advanced field training, where you will learn all those advanced skills lacking in this version.

    3. Re:WTF? by hitmark · · Score: 1

      given what the purpose of the game is, they should be...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    4. Re:WTF? by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      I just hope to god that the tank recognition shit is accurate.

      If I'm ever confronted with the profile of a T-34 and mis-recognize it as a T-44, that'll RUIN my day, absolutely RUIN it, I tell you!

  9. Basic First Aid by maz2331 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everyone should know basic first aid techniques. They aren't difficult and can make a big difference in an emergency.

    At least learn how to control bleeding and perform CPR.

    1. Re:Basic First Aid by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      Right now I've only walked over those white boxes with the red cross on them, and it's only gotten me bonus health points. Only recently I've discovered the black box gives me Berserker! mode. What is this America's Army you speak of?

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    2. Re:Basic First Aid by RealGrouchy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Indeed, and don't learn them (exclusively) from a video game. Learn them from a professional, who will also tell you your legal rights, responsibilities, and limitations as a first aid provider.

      The headline could just have been "man sued for improperly using first aid techniques he learned from a video game".

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    3. Re:Basic First Aid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't first aid training required to get a driving license in the US? It is in most - probably all - countries in the EU, but I personally think that's not enough, since after 15 years of using essentially nothing I've learned there, I;ve forgotten most of it.

    4. Re:Basic First Aid by teg · · Score: 1

      The headline could just have been "man sued for improperly using first aid techniques he learned from a video game".

      Can you be sued for e.g. trying to stop heavy bleeding or doing CPR in the US? And if so, can you be sued if you don't? (e.g. because you're afraid to be sued)

    5. Re:Basic First Aid by The+Iso · · Score: 1

      When I took driver's education in high school (which is not a requirement for a license), we were shown a film going over what to do at the scene of an accident, but I don't think it was covered on the knowledge test.

      --
      "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
    6. Re:Basic First Aid by IdolizingStewie · · Score: 1

      No, it's not. At least not in NC.

    7. Re:Basic First Aid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Can you be sued for e.g. trying to stop heavy bleeding or doing CPR in the US?

      In the US, you can take a complaint on any matter before a court, to have it decided in a legal venue.
      In most states, you can have a hearing (judge and jury trial) on *anything*.

      So the answer you are fishing for is "yes" but it does not mean what you might want it to mean.
      Think about it in terms of "Everyone having recourse to the law" instead of "people needing protection from other litigious people." Do you want to give up your rights in order to allow someone to save your life? That is problematic on a number of levels.

      If you give up the right to seek damages, how can you be specific about what is "CPR?" Where do you draw the line? How do you not exploit this in a way that legalizes assault?

    8. Re:Basic First Aid by plover · · Score: 3, Informative
      Technically, you can be sued for anything in this country. You could be sued for trying to stop the bleeding, or you could be sued for standing by and doing nothing.

      However, if you are going to sue for a stupid reason, your lawyer should be responsible for telling you that you are filing a frivolous case, and not to pursue it. Most lawyers wont take a paper-thin case, but some would rather try for the money. Pursuing frivolous lawsuits is a black mark against them, and if they do it too often they risk being disbarred.

      --
      John
    9. Re:Basic First Aid by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

      Control bleeding yes - cleaning a wound and controlling bleeding until help arrives is often quite important, and can be useful anywhere, not only on the road but also in the office, at home, or just about and abroad. CPR though is another story. Incorrectly administered it can be more harmful than beneficial, and may in fact be deadly. IMHO it's a bit beyond what the average Joe should be expected to know about emergency aid.

    10. Re:Basic First Aid by pinchhazard · · Score: 1

      Isn't first aid training required to get a driving license in the US? It isn't in Washington State, and I don't believe it is anywhere.

      --
      Do you love freedom??? Do you love freedom!!! DO YOU LOVE FREEDOM!!!!!!!!
    11. Re:Basic First Aid by aztektum · · Score: 1

      and if they do it too often they risk being disbarred. On the plus side, with how long it's taking good ol' Jack Thompson to get disbarred, a lawyer may die of old age before it actually happens.
      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
  10. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 5, Informative
    In the US - and elsewhere - most people have no clue how to help a car accident victim and any attempt by an untrained individual to help is invariably counter-productive.

    The best thing to do is to stop, observe, and call 911. Trying to do anything else in a car accident situation is almost always going to cause more harm than good.

    And in the US, most states have good samaritan laws so that if you are acting in good faith, you are not liable. A few places have laws that compel you to render assistance as well, but they are normally only enforced on TV shows like Seinfeld.

  11. I believe it by scubamage · · Score: 1

    The first aid training missions actually do cover some first aid basics that could save a life if its something simple enough.

  12. Let's just hope... by stormguard2099 · · Score: 5, Funny

    He didn't go through sniper school too

    --
    http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
    1. Re:Let's just hope... by gmcraff · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, the AA sniper school lessons on being aware of your breathing when trying to make a long range shot actually helped me be aware of the importance of my breathing when I was on the 100 yard range with my M-14. I managed a 1.5 MOA grouping when I did that, as opposed to my neophyte 3 MOA grouping otherwise.

  13. Depends on the state by Lt.Hawkins · · Score: 2, Informative

    We have Good Samaritan laws that shield good samaritans acting in good faith from lawsuits.

    --
    -- My Sig is a P228.
    1. Re:Depends on the state by xigxag · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the US, anybody can be sued, and probably will be sued if their actions may in any way have contributed to someone's death. Good Samaritan laws only mean that after they've gone through the expense and humiliation of defending themselves, if a jury finds that they acted in good faith, they can't be held liable. N.B., outside of North America, Good Samaritan laws usually denote an affirmative responsibility to assist someone in need in an emergency situation (as well as the pursuant lack of liability therefrom).

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    2. Re:Depends on the state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I recall an ambulance officer's anecdote here (Aust) about a man who was giving CPR to a woman.

      The woman was blessed with particularly sizeable 'lungs' and the man had to remove her over the shoulder boulder holder to get them out of the way (if anyone here had actually experienced boobs, you'd know they're mostly squishy and would absorb a lot of the energy from the CPR, rendering it useless).

      This one man is the sole reason that the woman is alive today, and she likely wouldn't be if he hadn't flopped her titties out. He rendered assistance until the paramedics arrived and took over.

      The fucking ingrateful bitch took him to court, sued him for exposing her breasts and a couple of other things to do with touching her cans and won damages for the humiliation of said events.

    3. Re:Depends on the state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The fucking ingrateful bitch took him to court, sued him for exposing her breasts and a couple of other
      > things to do with touching her cans and won damages for the humiliation of said events.

      Did you know that in many first aid courses in Europe you are specifially told that should you, for whatever
      reason, be involved in such a situation in the US or Australia, you should consider the legal angles
      before you do anything more than call the ambulance?

      You people might want to reconsider your legislation, because it is actively and recklessly endangering
      lives.

    4. Re:Depends on the state by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      The fucking ingrateful bitch took him to court, sued him for exposing her breasts and a couple of other things to do with touching her cans and won damages for the humiliation of said events.

      Crap, stuff like that just discourages people from helping. So he exposed her to give CPR.

      Was his lawyer incompetent? Exposing the chest is part of performing CPR. It's been in all my classes, and yes, removing the bra is part of it.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    5. Re:Depends on the state by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Generally speaking, in most states unless the suing party has a unusually good case or a shark for a lawyer such a case likely won't make it to court, or spend a really brief time there if it does.

      The GS laws work for the most part, by raising the bar to 'more expensive than what you can get out of the average person'. So smart lawyers recommend against suing - no money in it as you need a really tight case to win.

      Doesn't prevent suing if somebody has a real bone to pick - but then, as the pants judge showed, that doesn't take much.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  14. Serious Play. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "See? We learn things from videogames"

    Of course we do.

  15. LOOK! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have issued propaganda, that validates the production of our propaganda!

    Now, "this is your rifle..."

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:LOOK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      insightful?

      what the fuck is insightful about this drivel? fucking mods are on crack....

    2. Re:LOOK! by halivar · · Score: 1

      You should report it before someone gets hurt.

    3. Re:LOOK! by Nimey · · Score: 1

      "There are many like it, but this one is yours."

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:LOOK! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is MY tinfoil hat.

      There are many like it, but this one is MINE!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  16. Re:Lawsuits? by naturalog · · Score: 1

    But keep in mind that if you're a doctor you're obligated to stop and provide help and the good samaritan laws generally don't apply because you've had sufficient medical training.

  17. Not surprising, not as good as a first aid course by syousef · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Human beings learn things in lots of different ways. People learn both correct and incorrect behaviour from watching TV for example. The trick is to learning how realistic the information and techniques you are getting are, and when they can actually be applied.

    For example it's easy to learn the wrong thing from a TV show. Try and play MacGyver for instance and things might go pear shaped. More subtley here in Australia the number for emergency services is 000, but we have had critically ill people receive delayed medical care because people have dialed 911 after watching American TV.

    Why should games be any different? They're interactive so if the simulation is accurate they should be better at teaching us how to react to a situation.

    However like television, usually the primary reason people play games is for entertainment not education. I'm not a betting man but I'd be surprised if you couldn't pick up many many more skills by doing a weekend firstaid course than by playing Americas Army.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  18. Qualifying as a Medic by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those of you who haven't played AA, Medic Training consists of walking into a classroom, sitting down, looking at the screen, and listening to a lecture. Then you take a multiple choice exam. So, there's a real possibility of learning something.

    1. Re:Qualifying as a Medic by snl2587 · · Score: 4, Funny

      This is the main reason I stopped playing AA. If I wanted to learn, I wouldn't be playing an FPS.

    2. Re:Qualifying as a Medic by erbbysam · · Score: 2, Informative

      If I remember correctly, when I played through all of the training to unlock everything a few years ago, all of the answers were available online and I just did something else while the lecture played... so much for learning how to dress a wound while I wanted to be shooting some terrorists.

    3. Re:Qualifying as a Medic by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Yeesh, reminds me of Under a Killing Moon from waaay back. Apparently it was somewhat ground-breaking at the time on my 8MB 286DX2. Amazing graphics!

      Pong and "both ways in the snow" comments coming in 3, 2, 1...

    4. Re:Qualifying as a Medic by couchslug · · Score: 1

      USAF "Buddy Care" basic First Aid training is basically that, and it has saved its share of lives.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    5. Re:Qualifying as a Medic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >286DX2.

      There was no such things as a "286DX2".

      HTH. HAND.

    6. Re:Qualifying as a Medic by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


        It takes an effort to learn something in a regular classroom or course, too.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  19. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you think when that gets off the ground we'll be able to learn how to cure the space clap and other extraterrestrial sexually transmitted diseases? It is something that seems very important... at least according to Star Trek and other Slashdot fare. And, it might make anal probes and the goatse guy less scary.

  20. BF2 is not so good in this area by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Similar thing happened to me but the outcome was not so good.

    A buddy of mine got knocked out when I threw a first aid kit and it hit him on the head.

    And the shock paddles only made things worse.

    1. Re:BF2 is not so good in this area by Cctoide · · Score: 1

      Serves him right for spamming you with ammo packs all the time.

      --
      "Let's face it, it's a good story. Accuracy would kill it."
    2. Re:BF2 is not so good in this area by kc2keo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Speaking of BF2...

      One day I was driving down the road when my car turned off. Turned out the timing belt snapped. Good thing I was a squad leader because I just requested a vehicle drop and the commander delivered right away. While I used that car a fellow teammate started to fix my other car with a "magic wrench".

      Before Patch 1.3 this was not possible for cars to be dropped. Thank goodness for this new gift from EA.

      Well, I think I killed the humor but I'll post this anyway... :-P

  21. Valuable skills by edwardpickman · · Score: 4, Funny

    If flesh eating zombies attack my house they're seriously fucked.

    1. Re:Valuable skills by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Why, are you Charlton Heston?

    2. Re:Valuable skills by BotnetZombie · · Score: 1

      Could you provide a street address with that?

    3. Re:Valuable skills by risk+one · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm the same way with ghosts coming after me while I'm eating tic-tacs in my maze.

  22. Re:Lawsuits? by dschl · · Score: 5, Informative
    In the US - and elsewhere - most people have no clue how to help a car accident victim and any attempt by an untrained individual to help is invariably counter-productive. The best thing to do is to stop, observe, and call 911. Trying to do anything else in a car accident situation is almost always going to cause more harm than good.
    That is so wrong that I am almost speechless (luckily I can still type). The skills you learn in a basic (one day) first aid course can make a huge difference as those courses train you to:
    • Assess the incident scene and hazards - is it safe to help / is further harm going to take place to the patients
    • Ensure that the victim does not move - that can cause more injury, especially in a crash where spinal trauma is expected, such as any vehicle collision. They may also be able to stabilize the person to prevent accidental movement.
    • Check vital signs and if airway, breathing or circulation is not present, clear the airway / perform artificial repsiration / CPR as necessary.
    • Manage a major bleed

    The above isn't as much care as a paramedic or hospital can provide, but good initial response is critical for the safety and health of the victim. If your airway is blocked and you are not breathing, you're facing brain damage within 5 minutes. If you get moved improperly when you have a spinal injury, you're more likely to end up in a wheelchair.

    I spent 3 years as a volunteer ski patroller, and 3 years as a volunteer firefighter for a department which averaged a few first medical response calls a week. Sure, I've received a lot more training in the past than a one day course can provide - just my spinal management ticket alone took me a weekend. However, anyone with a recent one day first aid training course can be ready to stop a major bleed, apply CPR, and monitor vital signs so that paramedics know if the victim's condition is deteriorating. Most importantly of all, a trained individual can prevent some stupid and misguided untrained know-it-all (and many such idiots exist) from doing something stupid such as improperly moving a patient with a potential spinal injury, etc.

    I strongly believe that everyone should at least have a basic level of first aid training, and carry a small first aid kit in their cars. I carry a lot more than a basic kit, but it provides me a higher level of comfort knowing that I'll have both the tools and the training that I need in event of an emergency. There is nothing sadder to hear than the story of parents whose child died from an incident that basic first aid training could have managed, but they either stood by helplessly, or even worse, exacerbated the situation with their improper efforts to help their child.

    --
    Slashdot - the place where you can look like a genius by restating the obvious
  23. BF2 Encouraged me to become a medic by MBraynard · · Score: 4, Interesting
    BF2 encouraged me to become a medic. I played a lot of BF2 and BF2142 and always used the medic kit or the assault class with a medic loadout.

    It fostered in me a desire to obtain basic medical skills. Just as it is helpful to be able to revive your comrad in the game, I thought it would be helpful to be able to render real aid to a person in an accident.

    So I registered for an EMT-B certification class and after about 120 hours of class time and 24 hours of on-site training, I was qualified to take the exam and am now a certified EMT-B and considering pursing the certification all the way up to paramedic.

    I will do it only on a volunteer basis - I already have a profession - but it is a worthwile skill and I am glad I obtained it.

    1. Re:BF2 Encouraged me to become a medic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      You are not a medic.

    2. Re:BF2 Encouraged me to become a medic by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Medic" is a word with several different definitions. Under some definitions, he certainly is one. Three that I can think of off the top of my head:

      1. Any person trained to render emergency medical care, such as an EMT or paramedic. (Chiefly American.) Probably derives from #2.

      2. A soldier trained to render emergency medical care under combat conditions. (Chiefly American.)

      3. A physician. (Chiefly British.)

      Ah, language!

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:BF2 Encouraged me to become a medic by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      Source?

      Wikipedia and Merriam-Webster disagree.

    4. Re:BF2 Encouraged me to become a medic by __aailob1448 · · Score: 1

      Good for you man! Keep making up for all the assholes out there.

  24. Leave it to the pros except for immediate danger by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Informative

    Paxton Galvanek pulled one of the passengers out of the smoking car, then found another bleeding heavily from his hand where his fingers had been lost during the crash.

    A very, very VERY important rule regarding assisting someone who is injured, and this applies to bike, pedestrian vs. car, car vs. car, and motorcycle accidents:

    Unless someone's life is in IMMEDIATE danger, do not move them, especially if they are unconscious. Immediate danger means the car is on fire, for example, AND unconscious. If the are in immediate danger but conscious, ASSIST them (ie, help open the door or smash the window, cut the belt, etc but let them move themselves. If they are in no danger but conscious, encourage them to LIE STILL; shock keeps them from feeling injuries. Leave everything you can to those trained in what to do.

    For example, the first thing bystanders LOVE to do is rip off a motorcyclist's helmet. Helmets are pretty snug and this causes a lot of pull on their neck/spine. If they've' got a neck/back injury, you can turn them from "I'll walk in a few weeks after an operation" to "I'll be in a wheelchair the rest of my life because you ripped apart my spinal cord trying to be a hero." The rule for helmets is simple: if they're breathing, it stays on. If they stop breathing, that takes priority. Some motorcycle riders are now installing inflatable bladders that harmlessly lift the helmet off their head and have a blood-pressure-cuff inflator attachment for the crew to use, and some ambulances are equipping themselves with the version that can be slipped up into the helmet.

    Many riders put labels on their helmets that say "DO NOT REMOVE MY HELMET UNLESS I HAVE STOPPED BREATHING" because all of the idiot bystanders who think it's important to do.

    Also: fire extinguishers are meant to be used to save people, not save cars. If you have someone trying to get out of a car that has a small fire in the engine compartment and you use up the extinguisher trying to put it out- now you have someone still in the car, a fire, and an empty extinguisher. If you have one, use it to protect people in the car should the fire spread far enough while someone else assists the occupants in getting out.

  25. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 1

    Actually, they do apply to doctors as well. Acting in good faith to the best of their abilities..

  26. I need training from America's Army like I need... by pizzach · · Score: 1

    ...a bullet hole in my head. No wait...bad example.

    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
  27. AAA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It takes on the job training to learn the real lessons

  28. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Not only are you wrong, but you're answer is dangerous.

    I strongly believe that everyone should at least have a basic level of first aid training

    And almost no one does. And what someone who either doesn't know what they are doing or did know and has forgotten would do more than likely will make the situation worse.

    In the event of a car accident, the first thing the professionals do (and I am one, and you are not), is to stabalize the spinal cord. The first thing an untrained person would probably try to do is drag the person from the car, possibly killing them in the process.

  29. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just in case a civilian needs to emergency land a space shuttle?

  30. Does AA have a Cardboard Box? by nodnarb1978 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Everything I needed to know about warfare and life I learned from Metal Gear. Yeah, that's right. The original.

    You can infiltrate classified military installations by disguising yourself as an innocuous cardboard box. There's nothing more indispensable than a pack of smokes. And nothing in the entire arsenal of the Military-Industrial Complex is as singularly lethal as a ninja.

  31. Re:ArMY sCUM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This particular stupid, insensitive male thinks you should go fuck yourself.

  32. Re:Lawsuits? by RealGrouchy · · Score: 2

    But keep in mind that if you're a doctor you're obligated to stop and provide help and the good samaritan laws generally don't apply because you've had sufficient medical training. Well, hopefully one's extensive medical training would have explained a medical professional's responsibility in that kind of situation.

    "Doctor, aren't you going to help?"

    "No, ma'am, some guy on slashdot said I didn't have to."

    - RG>
    --
    Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  33. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by ma1wrbu5tr · · Score: 1

    "MMO that NASA's considering"

    Link, please?

    --
    Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
  34. Sorry, but here come some sour grapes by Torodung · · Score: 1

    Two guys, one case undocumented, learn crappy, inadequate first aid from a crappy, simulated lecture in America's Army and it gets a write up, even though the game is about efficiently killing people. I think that's terribly misleading, if not propaganda.

    Great, he elevated the arm, but I hope he had good reason to move that other guy, because that was *really* dangerous (I'm hoping the smoke was in the passenger compartment and it was truly required, otherwise the guy should be smacked, not praised).

    But did he know where the pressure point is on the upper arm? Did he know how, and especially *when*, to apply a tourniquet should there be a severed limb? Could he perform artificial respiration? How about CPR? The victim was LUCKY there wasn't a serious injury involved.

    America's Army, the game, benefits no one but the military-industrial complex. If you want to save lives, and not end them, skip AA and get real training. The Red Cross is a "great place to start."

    --
    Toro

  35. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why cant you aussies just forward 911 to your emergency number like other countries do?

  36. Re:Lawsuits? by mindwhip · · Score: 1
    You really need to read peoples posts properly before attacking them...

    any attempt by an untrained individual to help is invariably counter-productive. So after a 1 day training course your are still 'untrained'?

    I agree fully with you that all people, everywhere, should be trained to a basic level of first aid, even as far as making it a compulsory part of the school curriculum, learning to drive, or something along those lines that most people would not be able to avoid doing... However the point the grandparent was making is most people have no training AT ALL, and would probably try and pull the person from the car and do irreparable damage to the victim's spine, or worse. If you have had absolutely zero training at all you probably will do more harm than good unless you are either really, really, lucky or really, really, brilliant and should have been a doctor instead of a delivery driver....
    --
    [The Universe] has gone offline.
  37. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

    Not *technically* correct, at least as far as my training goes. Generally, yes, you leave the helmet on. Good rule.

    IF you've been taught proper procedures though, the helmet will come off if the person is unconscious; you need access to the airway whether they're breathing or not. It does need proper training though, and shouldn't be attempted without it. (Unless, as you say, they've stopped breathing and are going to be dead anyway.)

    Helmet removal, maintaining an airway on a casualty with suspected spinal damage etc are quite easy with the proper training, it's well worth doing a course if your first aid skills are already quite good.

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
  38. Re:I am black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes. Yes it does.

  39. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by Invidious · · Score: 1

    See yesterday's /.

  40. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well he did "learn" first aid from AA. In the real army when someone is hurt on the battlefield getting them out of the line of fire takes priority. Of course there is no line of fire in a car accident so it would be best to wait for the medics most of the time.

  41. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IF you've been taught proper procedures though, the helmet will come off if the person is unconscious; you need access to the airway whether they're breathing or not.

    Why the hell would anyone on the side of the road need "access to someone's airway" if they're breathing, and said bystanders have no medical equipment (unless, of course, there's a Rescue Rodger on the scene.) The only reason you remove a person's helmet if they've been in a motorcycle crash is because you need to perform CPR to keep them alive. The risk of complete paralyzing them otherwise is far too great.

  42. Please use the fire extinguisher early.. by Ragnarr · · Score: 1

    I used to be a firefighter. Please, if you have the fire extinguisher available and the fire is small enough to knock it out early: use it. Saving it until the end, as the OP is suggesting, won't work as the fire has now grown beyond the capability of your typical 5# dry chem extinguisher to put out. So please, use the extinguisher as quickly as possible and knock the fire out so people have time to remove the victim(s) properly.

    1. Re:Please use the fire extinguisher early.. by SuperBanana · · Score: 1

      I used to be a firefighter. Please, if you have the fire extinguisher available and the fire is small enough to knock it out early: use it. Saving it until the end, as the OP is suggesting, won't work as the fire has now grown beyond the capability of your typical 5# dry chem extinguisher to put out.

      People aren't trained to know what is 'in capability of a typical 5lb dry chem unit', and they're almost never trained in how to use an extinguisher effectively. What if they try to fight it, and fail? Now you're doubly fucked- the person is still trapped and you have nothing left to protect the person with. Fuel/oil fires re-ignite very easily and will do so repeatedly, and cars that are on fire are typically on fire because they started leaking something flammable onto something hot, and that's not going to change. An AFFF (Aqueous Foam) unit has a better chance because the foam cools and also contains vapors to prevent re-ignition.

      By using the extinguisher to keep fire off them, you keep them alive and unburned until the big boys (who are hopefully more versed than you are) arrive with a couple hundred gallons of water and extraction tools.

    2. Re:Please use the fire extinguisher early.. by Ragnarr · · Score: 1

      Wait a second, so you're telling me that the general public is too stupid to figure out how to use the extinguisher in the first place? How is having them not use going to "double ****" the people in the car? Either use it early, or don't bother. You're not going to put the fire out at that point. See, the way a dry chemical extinguisher is by blanketing the fire and smothering it. If the fire is sufficiently large enough, it will burn through the blanket and continue to burn. So, apply the dry chemical early or don't bother. If you'd like some direct research, go to nfpa.org and dig around. You'd find some real facts as opposed to the circumstantial crap you just through out and were modded a "2" for. But hey, you probably stayed in a Holiday Inn last night and thought you were a firefighter at some point in your life huh?

    3. Re:Please use the fire extinguisher early.. by SuperBanana · · Score: 1

      But hey, you probably stayed in a Holiday Inn last night and thought you were a firefighter at some point in your life huh?

      No. I've studied the SCCA manuals which have been developed based on the direct experience of the organization over 60 years of automotive racing, in an organization unburdened by centuries of "tradition" and arrogance you find in fire departments across the country.

      The instructions given to cornerworkers are clear. Don't attempt to put out a fire until the driver is out. If the driver can't get out, SAVE your extinguisher until you know for a fact more is arriving *very* soon, and only use it to directly protect the driver.

      And yes, I've personally put out car fires.

  43. In keeping with the modern trend for convergence by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    We need some novelists, educators, engineers, and coders to recast the old trivium and quadrivium as games so that kids can do something valuable like "learn" without doing something boring like "learn".

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  44. So... by ChePibe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is the argument then that military recruiting is a detriment to society? Would you prefer conscription?

    1. Re:So... by david_craig · · Score: 1

      My argument was not about the military recruitment, but about the whether the article was newsworthy.

    2. Re:So... by NockPoint · · Score: 1
      Is the argument then that military recruiting is a detriment to society? Would you prefer conscription?

      Yes. As long as it includes the children of the rich and powerful.

      Jenna and Barbara with M16's, valuable.

      Letters to home, priceless.

    3. Re:So... by Lost+Engineer · · Score: 1


      Is the argument then that military recruiting is a detriment to society? Would you prefer conscription?


      Yes. As long as it includes the children of the rich and powerful.


      Jenna and Barbara with M16's, valuable.


      Letters to home, priceless.

      Ahh but you're not fully getting it. We want the commander-in-chief as fully reasonable about war as possible. It makes sense not to conscript his relatives. The leader should be invested enough in his troops to make proper decisions but not so invested as to make irrational decisions or so detached as to make callous choices.
    4. Re:So... by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      t makes sense not to conscript his relatives

      His theory is that if Jenna and Barbara were under arms that the President would be a lot less likely to take us into wars that we don't need to be in (*cough* Iraq *cough*). I'd tend to agree with you -- we don't need our Commander-in-Chief distracted -- but I'd also agree with him that we should have a draft and it should include most everybody.

      If people were drafted across racial/gender/money lines then our Government actually would have had to make a decent case for the war. Right now you can't say that the United States is fighting a war -- we don't have a draft and we aren't even paying for the war (raise taxes? pffft! we'll just do some more deficit spending). Our volunteer troops are fighting a war -- the rest of us are sitting on our asses going shopping.

      Let's see Bush justify the war if the children of his rich donors were being drafted into the army and sent to Iraq. Let's see him justify the war if Congress had the balls to tell him that they aren't going to fund it unless we raise taxes to actually pay for it. Of course neither of those things will happen and we'll just continue to stretch the volunteer force until it hits the breaking point.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  45. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by DeusExCalamus · · Score: 1

    "MMO that NASA's considering"

    Link, please?
    Here you go http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/18/0329252
    --
    "...Sleep comes like a drug in God's country Sad eyes, crooked crosses in God's country..."
  46. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many riders put labels on their helmets that say "DO NOT REMOVE MY HELMET UNLESS I HAVE STOPPED BREATHING" because all of the idiot bystanders who think it's important to do.

    If they're so concerned for their spinal cord, why are they riding a motorcycle?

  47. By that logic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By that logic, everything the media says about video games causing violence and being murder simulators is true cause its doesn't come from the government.

    1. Re:By that logic by david_craig · · Score: 1

      That's a very bizarre interpretation of my comment.

      My point is that if the source of the positive information about a particular thing is the same as the source of the item that it is being positive about, then that's a reason to be sceptical about the information.

      Many sources of negative information often also have a self interest in promoting that information (and I don't just mean Jack Thompson). My point is to look at the source of information as part of the process of questioning it's validity.

  48. Tourniquets aren't that bad. by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

    The thing about tourniquets is this: If there is bleeding that is more than a mere scratch, apply a tourniquet. As in, the bleeding isn't likely to stop anytime soon by itself, and could be life threatening.

    People seem to have a fear of tourniquets, but they can be left on for several hours without any damage. Put them about 2 inches above the wound, but not on a joint. Write the time on the casualty's head. Better to just put it on right away rather than using up the casualty's dressing on something that won't work anyway.

    --
    I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
  49. BAD ADVICE by Pentagram · · Score: 1, Informative
    Unless someone's life is in IMMEDIATE danger, do not move them, especially if they are unconscious

    This is contrary to my first aid training. The rule I learnt (and this was a first aid course taken less than a year ago) was that if you find someone unconscious, you put them in the recovery position if (or once) they're breathing. The risk of someone suffocating is greater than any potential damage you might do to them in moving them.

    I've just looked it up (DK First Aid Manual authorised by the British Red Cross, St. John's Ambulance, and St. Andrew's Ambulance).

    The rule is:
    • First, assess the situation (act on any immediate danger)
    • Then, check for consciousness or response
    • If the casualty is not conscious, open airway (if not breathing, go to CPR)
    • If the casualty is breathing, put in the recovery position


    (After the above, treat other conditions, such as bleeding)

    1. Re:BAD ADVICE by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      It depends on the situation. If your manual doesn't explain that, then the organizations that wrote the manual need to write a better manual. (No disrespect to the groups you named, whose training has undeniably saved a lot of lives over the years.)

      A person who is unconscious due to drowning, poisoning (including alcohol overdose), or unknown reasons that do not obviously result from trauma (probably some internal medical condition, cardiovascular or neurological) certainly should be should be placed in the recovery position. But a person who is unconscious due to trauma, such as a motor vehicle accident or a fall or a blow to the head, emphatically should not be moved without proper equipment -- at least a cervical collar, preferably c-collar and backboard -- used by trained medical personnel. It takes a fair amount of trauma to the brain to cause unconsciousness in an otherwise healthy person, and the chance that the trauma involved also caused some spinal injury is very, very high.

      I'm speaking here as a former USAF medic and civilian EMT with ten years' experience in emergency response. If you don't believe me, ask any ER/Casualty doctor or nurse -- I guarantee you'll get the same answer.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:BAD ADVICE by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      Unless someone's life is in IMMEDIATE danger, do not move them, especially if they are unconscious

      This is contrary to my first aid training. The rule I learnt (and this was a first aid course taken less than a year ago) was that if you find someone unconscious, you put them in the recovery position if (or once) they're breathing. The risk of someone suffocating is greater than any potential damage you might do to them in moving them.
      You may well have learned that. In actuality, the rolling of a person into that position is designed to have the least possible risk of spinal cord injuries. The course did though tell you not to move (as in drag them around, lift them, etc) unless absolutely necessary. (They are in imminent danger, or there is absolutely no possibility of assistance arriving in a useful time frame (for example out hiking in the woods, cell phone cannot connect to 911, and going to find help would result in a high risk of losing the person in the woods.))
      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    3. Re:BAD ADVICE by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      In this situation:

        Paxton Galvanek pulled one of the passengers out of the smoking car,

        If there had been smoke coming from the car, I think that would be a possible life-threatening situation. Cars don't explode like in the movies, no, but if the fuel tank or line is ruptured somewhere along the body they can start on fire pretty quickly.

        I wouldn't necessarily have considered smoke coming from the car an emergency, but apparently he did. Now if the car was smoking and I smelled gasoline, that's a whole different story. Unless he talks about it (or gets sued) we'll probably never learn why he made his decision; but IMHO just on that bit of evidence I think we could cut him some slack, eh?

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    4. Re:BAD ADVICE by Pentagram · · Score: 1

      It takes a fair amount of trauma to the brain to cause unconsciousness in an otherwise healthy person, and the chance that the trauma involved also caused some spinal injury is very, very high.

      That does sound quite persuasive. Actually, I looked up spinal injuries specifically, and it does say not to move the casualty if breathing, so although the general first aid points don't mention it, it looks like I gave bad info (can someone mod me down?)

      I remember asking specifically about unconsciousness due to trauma and was told that unconsciousness trumps everything, and to put the casualty in the recovery position -- but the course it was partly based on wilderness first aid/cave rescue so it may have been in that context -- leaving a casualty for a long time.

  50. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by NFN_NLN · · Score: 1

    Mod this guy up he has a valid point. What was 911 taken already? If I was on vacation in Australia and there was an emergency I would dial 911... how the hell would I know about 000?


    Sometimes it's cool to be "different" sometimes you're just a pain in the a$$.

  51. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 1

    Why cant you aussies just forward 911 to your emergency number like other countries do?

    Because our government is a bureaucratic mess.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  52. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Tarison · · Score: 1

    So do you have 000 divert to 911 in case any non-TV-watching aussies happen to visit the States?

  53. advice is for untrained bystanders by SuperBanana · · Score: 1

    This is contrary to my first aid training. The rule I learnt (and this was a first aid course taken less than a year ago) was that if you find someone unconscious, you put them in the recovery position if (or once) they're breathing. The risk of someone suffocating is greater than any potential damage you might do to them in moving them.

    The advice is for bystanders, not trained medical personnel.

    Context: fun for the whole family!

  54. I have the best advice of all!!! by stormguard2099 · · Score: 5, Informative

    don't take first aid advice from /. comments. go get training or information from a more reputable source
    note: +5 informative doesn't mean it's reputable

    --
    http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
    1. Re:I have the best advice of all!!! by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

      Yes like the Red Cross, or Command and Conquer.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    2. Re:I have the best advice of all!!! by noidentity · · Score: 1

      don't take first aid advice from /. comments. go get training or information from a more reputable source

      One can never be reminded enough of this. I took the parent comment seriously, but now I'm a bit disappointed that I did so, just because it was a serious topic. It's not to say it's false, just that I can't know one way or the other. So the best it can do is prompt me to find an authoritative answer.

      Thanks.

  55. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forward 911 to 000?

  56. This is bullshit by ludomancer · · Score: 1, Troll

    Please tell me you guys aren't buying into this crap. With the US at war, an all time low for military enrollment, and the army desperately trying to recruit people through a fucking video game, this is just propaganda bullshit.

    Please someone recognize it for what it is.

  57. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

    True. . . but it's also true that, at least for MacGuyver, they were at least responsible enough to leave out critical ingredients or steps for dangerous things, and NOT leave things out for life-savers "improvised" for the show.

  58. In your face, mom! by cadu · · Score: 1

    I told you a hundred times, playing games is healthy and also very educational.

    i'm so happy to have wasted my life playing! if it wasn't for games i wouldn't be able to handle a lot of real-life situations, like:

    - alien invasions.
    - being surrounded by zombie-demons while working on a base at mars.
    - invasions by some team called the Counter Terrorists.
    - having to shoot wireframe blobs and monsters while transformed into a sometimes ethereal, sometimes human-shaped pulsating blob. *
    - a 2d conversion of the world (probably by some evil madman) that forces us to advance to the 'right' side of it only, while having to be on a vegan diet and kill spawned beasts by jumping on their heads.
    - how to behave during a rave: eat all the pills i can find , while avoiding hitting the blue walls, and the ghost-cosplay clubbers (apparently those are infected with some mortal virus that can make me melt, creepy)
    - ...

    Thanks, video games!!!!!!

    * = if someone had some difficulty finding what game is this, it's Rez for the Playstation2 ;P

  59. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by smurgy · · Score: 1

    'a North Carolina man who saw a space programme flip and roll on the launchpad last November was able to provide engineering aid to the space programme with skills he learned from the NASA MMO'.
    Nope, I'm not buying it.
  60. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by asuffield · · Score: 1

    Also: fire extinguishers are meant to be used to save people, not save cars. If you have someone trying to get out of a car that has a small fire in the engine compartment and you use up the extinguisher trying to put it out- now you have someone still in the car, a fire, and an empty extinguisher.


    On the other hand, if that fire gets to the fuel line, you could have a fuel tank explosion on your hands - it's not the fireball-o-rama that you see on TV, but it will throw the car into the air, and probably kill anybody still alive inside it. So if you can use the extinguisher to put out the fire, that might not be such a bad idea.

    But if you've got a fire in a car, you should really be thinking about picking up anybody still inside the car and getting a couple hundred yards away from it as fast as possible. The best thing to do about a car fire is to be somewhere else, if that's at all possible.
  61. Could the same video games ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... perhaps teach them that they are supposed to shoot the bad guys, and NOT their own teammates or innocent civilians ?

  62. Nah. by morari · · Score: 3, Funny

    What they really mean by "America's Army saved a life" is that someone played the game and, based on that experience, realized how dumb it would be to enlist in the U.S. Army just to die for some greedy politicians' personal crusade.

    --
    "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    1. Re:Nah. by hairykrishna · · Score: 1

      It's an important message. FPS's teach that, no matter how good you are, there's still a chance you'll get killed stone dead by some noob spraying his AK around. Sometimes the noob is even on your side...

      --
      "Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
  63. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mod this guy up he has a valid point. What was 911 taken already? If I was on vacation in Australia and there was an emergency I would dial 911... how the hell would I know about 000?

    There should be a single International standard. However take responsibility for your own actions. Traveling internationally and assuming that things work the same way overseas as they do in your country is dangerously stupid. Many countries distribute literature at the airports (welcome to such and such country) that outlines what the emergency numbers are, often outline unusual laws etc. For example if you came to Australia and tried to drive on the right hand side of the street, you'd probably be arrested and "sorry Id didn't know" would be a very bad answer.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  64. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by beav007 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Don't worry if you missed it. It will be back in a couple of days...

  65. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 1

    True. . . but it's also true that, at least for MacGuyver, they were at least responsible enough to leave out critical ingredients or steps for dangerous things, and NOT leave things out for life-savers "improvised" for the show.

    Yes they made some rudimentary attempt but that doesn't mean that doing the things he did won't get you into trouble.

    I was watching a couple of episodes with my wife last night. The character fixed a brake canister gasket with a piece of PVC. Not recommended even for a temporary fix unless you like driving without brakes. In another episode he was doing some rock climbing using techniques which would get you injured or killed if you tried them for real. I can remember in some other episodes he'd take a compressed gas canister and hammer off the value to turn it into a rocket. Again not safe. Leaving out some key chemicals when doing some of his more dangerous chemical tricks was nice of them but it hardly meant that you could expect reality to work the same way as his stunts in the show, or that it was safe to emulate any of the things the character did.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  66. magical first aid packs! by TheSpengo · · Score: 1

    At least he didn't learn from Battlefield 2! Teammate hurt? Throw first aid packs at his face and all wounds are magically cured! :D

    --
    Weaksauce as they say...
  67. Re:Lawsuits? by masdog · · Score: 1

    How is his answer wrong? He doesn't advocate dragging injured people out of a car when there is an accident. He advocates people getting and refreshing basic first aid training.

  68. Re:Lawsuits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I agree fully with you that all people, everywhere, should be trained to a basic level of first aid,
    > even as far as making it a compulsory part of the school curriculum, learning to drive, or something
    > along those lines that most people would not be able to avoid doing...

    Why not mandate that all who apply for a drivers license must have at least a basic first aid training
    before they can get their license? Many countries already have such requirements.

    And then, for crying out loud, fix your liability legislature. In this case, the proof of burden should
    be reversed, so that the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant was acting against the training
    he or she recieved in basic first aid training.

  69. Like hospitals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've heard a ton of stories about lawsuits against doctors / hospitals due to negligance or whatever the lawyer wants to call it.
     
    If I were a doctor in America I wouldn't go near a dying patient. I'd be bound to get the blame. It's that old adage, you can do a thousand rights, but one wrong and you are disgraced. Sadly, in todays world, I'd probably just walk on by lest there be a lawsuit if I tried to help and failed.

    You know a lot of schools, and workplaces aren't even allowed to stock standard first aid plasters - just in case someone is allergic.

    Yeah, thanks politics, you've done a great service. To the undertaker business.

    1. Re:Like hospitals? by haeger · · Score: 1
      I have a friend who's a doctor. On some occasions people get sick when he's around, although I don't think he's the cause. Anyway, whenever he can, he tries to help, UNLESS he's on an (US)American flight or in the US. If so he doesn't even mention that he's a doctor. He feels that it's too uncertain to help americans. He would probably be fine, but he just won't risk it. Sad state of affairs if you ask me. I don't blame him though. Good thing it wasn't an american who suffered an ruptured appendix on one of our trips. :-/

      .haeger

      --
      You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
    2. Re:Like hospitals? by WK2 · · Score: 1

      In the United States, you can't be sued for helping someone in physical danger, unless you are doing it for personal gain. Doctors and EMTs can get sued. Regular shmoes can't. Doctors and EMTs can't get sued if they try to help someone and are off the clock.

      In some places in the United States, you are legally required to help someone if they are in physical danger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

      --
      Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
    3. Re:Like hospitals? by randyest · · Score: 1

      Wow, he performed an appendectomy on an airplane? That's impressive.

      --
      everything in moderation
  70. heal one by towsonu2003 · · Score: 1

    kill a million. I call THAT a game... oh wait...

  71. For Europeans: American moose = European elk by Schnoodledorfer · · Score: 1

    I'm just trying to help out anyone confused by what Zonk added. The animals referred to as "elk" in Europe ("elg" in Norwegian) are called "moose" in North America. The term "elk" in North America refers to a species of large deer (also called "wapiti") that are native to North America.

    --
    Knowledge is the small part of ignorance that we arrange and classify. (Ambrose Bierce)
  72. Re:Lawsuits? by Tacvek · · Score: 1

    Not only are you wrong, but you're answer is dangerous.

    I strongly believe that everyone should at least have a basic level of first aid training

    And almost no one does. And what someone who either doesn't know what they are doing or did know and has forgotten would do more than likely will make the situation worse.

    In the event of a car accident, the first thing the professionals do (and I am one, and you are not), is to stabalize the spinal cord. The first thing an untrained person would probably try to do is drag the person from the car, possibly killing them in the process.

    The sad thing is that quite a few people with some training would do the same thing, because their training did not cover that. Indeed, the local American Red Cross CPR/First-Aid Instructor mentioned how there where some useful or important things she knew but was not allowed to tell us in the course because the American Red Cross forbids teaching certain things at the lower-level courses because they fear it may confuse the average person (average idiot).
    --
    Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  73. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then maybe you should quit bitching on /. and do something about that!

  74. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by Nullav · · Score: 1
    --
    I just read Slashdot for the articles.
  75. By Neruos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea and Excitebike taught me how to ride a dirt bike and jump ramps.

    I'm calling BS on this. While AA's game is pretty neat, it really doesn't add anything to the grand scheme of 3D FPSs that are out there. Other then being based on real life aspects and using real life textures the game itself is not very complicated.

    Now, I highly doubt this NC man learned how to bandage a wound, brace a limb, attempt CPR and drag a person from a car was credited to a video game. Those things are pretty much common sense and most schools teach a style of CPR and basic medical attention and help in Health and PE classes. I went to school in the US and in around 8th grade learned this stuff.

  76. Dave. . ? Is that you? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Dave Sim reincarnated as a woman. I wondered what he would sound like when writing one of his misogynist essays from a female perspective.

    Kidding aside, and to be fair, I've met the guy you're describing. For some reason, he's the guy many young women seem to be attracted to. I met one woman who told me that her sexual fantasy was to be raped by a bike gang, (but one in which all the bikers looked like a young James Dean.) We all live lives where we deal with that kind of thinking, and probably a lot more than once. --I've listened to many girls describe hideous relationships with such men, and what can you say? "Don't get into a relationship with a jerk?" Seems obvious, but it goes ignored. You can't really stop people from doing what they do; people need to go through the lessons they need to go through, and they need to deal with their karma, so these experiences will happen again and again, and they will seem to describe the entire world for that person until the patterns are completed. It's not a bad thing, it just is.

    In a larger realm of automatic living, where people are managed like cattle, the war of the sexes seems to me a very well crafted conundrum, designed to perpetuate divisiveness and sadness. I've seen the fallout; there's a whole street in a town I once lived where somebody built a co-op housing development designed largely to help out women who have come from bad relationships; single moms and such. I answered an ad for a house to rent and was invited to live in this community. My room mate and I would have been two of the only men in the whole development.

    I really like co-op living, having spent a few years in a condo once set up that way, where each participant's "rent" was really a mortgage payment, and where everybody takes on various tasks needed to keep things running. --Sort of like one of those communes you described, but peopled by professionals and built in a rural setting. This particular community had been around for about ten years, and I was looking forward to it, but my room mate backed out at the last minute. I didn't want to carry the rent for a whole house, so I found another arrangement elsewhere in town.

    Anyway. . , I was later told by several people that I'd dodged a bullet. --I didn't realize at the time that the co-op had been set up primarily for women. There were apparently horror stories of other men who had lived there briefly. It was a community of B&T's, I was told. That is, "Bitter and Twisted" women who had been hurt and who ate men alive through expressions of anger and manipulation and all kinds of other nasty stuff. I'm generally a trusting person and I like helping people, and I'm good with tools and such and I offered these qualities up when interviewed. "What will you bring to the co-op?" I was told later that I was too nice and naive and that I'd have been eaten for lunch by angry women looking to pass on the abuse to others. --I disagree completely with this; it's absolutely possible to be a giving person who doesn't take abuse; it's a mistake to confuse openness with weakness, but still. . , I could definitely see that there might have been some difficult challenges in living in such a community. But people who have been hurt, male or female, don't need to be judged. ("B&T"?? What a horrible label!)

    Anyway, it seems to me that what you are describing is the human who is only half-formed. It happens in female bodies as well, though it manifests differently. People need to develop both sides of themselves; their male and female side, so that they do not need a partner to fill the void, so to speak. Males who think from the reptile brain and have not broken through their automatic thinking, and who have not woken up to their female side often do, in the most negative cases, manifest in the ways you describe. The description for the female version of the same thing is somewhat different, but it is similarly long and discouraging. One of the goals, I think, of the human experience is to achieve

  77. Re:Lawsuits? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1
    Did you not even read his post?

    Ensure that the victim does not move - that can cause more injury, especially in a crash where spinal trauma is expected, such as any vehicle collision. They may also be able to stabilize the person to prevent accidental movement. That sounds pretty close to what you are saying here:

    In the event of a car accident, the first thing the professionals do (and I am one, and you are not), is to stabalize the spinal cord. The first thing an untrained person would probably try to do is drag the person from the car, possibly killing them in the process.
    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  78. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by Nullav · · Score: 1

    Or I could just reload before replying. :(

    --
    I just read Slashdot for the articles.
  79. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by xaxa · · Score: 1

    "In 1991, the European Union established 1-1-2 as the universal emergency number for all its member states. In most E.U. countries, 1-1-2 is already implemented and can be called toll-free from any telephone or any cellphone. The GSM mobile phone standard designates 1-1-2 as an emergency number, so it will work on such systems even in North America. In the UK and Republic of Ireland, the number is 9-9-9 with 1-1-2 working in parallel." (from wikipedia)
    So maybe there will be a worldwide standard someday!

  80. The real irony... by davevr · · Score: 1

    The real irony here is that the car flipped because they were playing America's Army on their in-dash PC...

  81. Too bad its only for Windows by belmolis · · Score: 1

    The fact that people can learn something useful from it makes it all the more regrettable that the Linux and Mac versions have been discontinued. America's Army only runs on MS Windows.

  82. IANAL, YANAL, WANL by overshoot · · Score: 1

    It's usually pretty tough to sue someone for trying to help out.
    I sure hope nobody takes your advice and exceeds their scope of practice as a result.

    I would suggest that anyone with the remotest tendency to help in an emergency do one of two things:

    • Stick to things that you can prove you were trained to do, or
    • Get some really good legal advice first.
    You may think that someone is going to die unless you do an emergency cricothyrotomy, but the Good Samaritan laws aren't going to help you if you try.
    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  83. Ski Patrol: what he said by overshoot · · Score: 1

    Except that our rule is manual stabilization of the cervical spine until the patient is completely secured to a backboard. Those collars aren't all that.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Ski Patrol: what he said by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Oh, backboard + collar is absolutely the preference. But I've had to, e.g., extract patients from vehicles with nothing but a c-collar on, because we just couldn't get a backboard in there. I'm guessing that's not a situation that occurs very often on the ski slopes. ;)

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Ski Patrol: what he said by overshoot · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that's not a situation that occurs very often on the ski slopes. ;)
      Don't be so sure -- we get to haul them out of the rocks and trees on 30-degree slopes with (you might say) marginal traction.

      However, we do have the advantage of (usually) being able to throw a larger team at the problem. Where an ambulance crew has to get by with three total rescuers, we usually go for a team of four even in uncomplicated situations. It's just smoother.

      --
      Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  84. Re:And people say you can't learn anything from ga by ma1wrbu5tr · · Score: 1

    Thank you! The reference deserved a link. I had already decided to Google it for m'self.

    --
    Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
  85. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by Psyrg · · Score: 1

    I am not a doctor, but I'm interested in this stuff. Here is a link to a slide show I've found about how spinal fractures are spotted using radiography by the name of “Imaging Evaluation of Cervical Spine”. Of note are the types of spinal injury that one must be mindful of before moving an injured person. Most of the images are x-rays, which should give the reader some idea of how invisible yet dangerous this kind of injury can be. As has been noted, deciding if it is ok to move someone is definitely not for the layman and should be left for the professionals.

    Wikipedia has some background info on how vertebrae are arranged for those of us who are new to this.

  86. Re:Lawsuits? by schweini · · Score: 1

    Actually, in Germany taking a basic course on "Life Supporting Measure at the Site of an Accident" is a prerequisite for getting a driver's license, and i never quite understood why this is not implemented in more countries around the world. It's less than a First Aid course, but a lot more than nothing. Also, traffic cops often check that your car has the obligatory first aid kit present, and that it is contains all mandatory equipment, and that they haven't expired yet. I have no idea whether all of this actually saves a lot of lives, but it's definitely a good idea, IMHO.

  87. Re:Lawsuits? by overshoot · · Score: 1

    In the event of a car accident, the first thing the professionals do (and I am one, and you are not), is to stabalize the spinal cord. The first thing an untrained person would probably try to do is drag the person from the car, possibly killing them in the process.
    Actually, the first thing that professionals do is ensure scene safety. Skip that step in EMT-B and you flunk, then and there. After that,
    1. Apply bodily substance isolation,
    2. Assess probable mechanisms of injury,
    3. Determine whether your patient(s) have a patent Airway,
    4. Determine whether your patient(s) are Breathing,
    5. Determine whether your patient(s) have a threat to blood Circulation,
    6. Assess patient(s) level of responsiveness,
    7. Then maybe, assuming nothing of greater priority sidetracked you first, then you start to consider spinal immobilization for those most likely in need.
    Triage is another matter entirely, of course.
    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  88. Re:Lawsuits? by shadowbearer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nice post, but I suspect that the GP's point was that *untrained* people would likely cause more harm than good. He's probably right, I don't have any statistics, but it's shocking how few people really know the rudiments of first aid (and keep up on classes which are offered free in many places). Anyway I did want to add something to your response:

      I also feel that first aid courses that put a serious focus on vehicle accident response should be a mandatory part of obtaining a driver's license. I'd consider the first aid kit optional perhaps, but anyone who took the courses seriously would have one anyway.

      If for no other reason (and there are others, such as getting more people trained, and I feel the same as you about that), it might make a lot of people think more seriously about just how dangerous the vehicle they are driving can be. I think we can all agree there are entirely too many ignorant people out on the roads.

      SB

    --
    It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  89. Re:Lawsuits? by budgenator · · Score: 1

    well yeah, we all watch movies and the cars always catch fire in the movies and TV. Isn't that where people learn about important stuff like first aid and global warming from?

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  90. WRONG WRONG WRONG by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    It varies by State in the US, but most States have 'Good Samaratain' laws that shield people who try to render aid in a crisis from any legal action at all. Ironically, if you're a licensed medical professional and screw up rendering emergency aid you have far more legal risk than an ordinary citizen doing the same.

  91. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by mollymoo · · Score: 1

    The first emergency number was 999, in the UK. That was the first emergency number in use in the USA too. So, when the USA changes back to 999 rather than just being "different" for the sake of it you might have a point. Till then I suggest you shut the fuck up.

    --
    Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
  92. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by mollymoo · · Score: 1

    There is an international emergency number for GSM, which also works on landlines in Europe (and, if I read this Wikipedia article correctly, the USA) - 112.

    --
    Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
  93. But this is a special situation by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    AA was developed as an experiment to help developvideo-game-based training simulations to give people a leg up on army training. It is not the same a Halo, GTA, etc.

    The real question I have is when al'Qaeda will discover that the US Army is handing them training material....

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:But this is a special situation by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1

      The real question I have is when al'Qaeda will discover that the US Army is handing them training material...

      Considering the US Army has handing them training material in the form of the US Army for a few years, I assume they'd probably find it rather redundant.

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
    2. Re:But this is a special situation by Zibblsnrt · · Score: 1

      Has been handing them. Me English am much big good yes. :P

      --
      "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
  94. Jack Thompson can still blame video games... by LinuxRulz · · Score: 1

    a North Carolina man who saw an SUV flip and roll on a highway
    yeah, a flip and roll, like in need for speed!
  95. Another point... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    I do agree with sibling posters about the main question being not whether skills are being taught, but whether you're likely to use them.

    That said, there's one more point I don't see mentioned here:

    The medic stuff was explicitly training. As in, from the description, it very much sounds like the only thing he took away from this is trivia (lift their arms, etc), not actual practice (do America's Army medics have to actually simulate the motion of dressing a wound by moving their mouse in a certain way?)

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  96. Re:Lawsuits? by Murphy+Murph · · Score: 1

    And then, for crying out loud, fix your liability legislature. In this case, the proof of burden should
    be reversed, so that the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant was acting against the training
    he or she recieved in basic first aid training.


    Every state has a good samaritan law.
    http://www.cprinstructor.com/legal.htm
    Some are better than others, but most all protect you from liability if you attempt to help at the scene of an accident to the best of your ability and training.
    --
    I dub thee... Sir Phobos, Knight of Mars, Beater of Ass.
  97. He learned from the training, not the gameplay by Fall01 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most people here might not realize that the First Aid training in America's Army is quite a bit more than you'd expect to see in a game. In order to qualify for certain ranks, the player must sit through a twenty or so minute lecture to provide them with some basic training on the subject. Following the lecture, a quiz is given, and in order to qualify, the player must "pass" the test. The game has multiple training "classes", with subjects including on friendly and enemy vehicles, first aid, and a few other Army-related topics I don't remember off the top of my head. It's not like he played a Medic in the game, running around throwing first aid kits at the wounded, and that let him perform well in this real-life situation. He participated in a bit of scripted training in game, with the dialogue being written based on real-life Army training. Some kid feigning death because he saw it work in World of Warcraft is just as silly as someone trying to break a brick wall by jumping headfirst into it. If you're kid is being "educated" by games that don't attempt to teach anything, perhaps your kids should be reading a few more books and playing a few less games? This story is a great example of how games can be used for educational purposes, reaching an audience that might normally not care about the subject or be interested in learning.

  98. Pulled from the Reporter's imaginaiton by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1

    It appears from various news reports that one of the vehicle occupants was only slightly injured ... "pulled them from the wreckage" might not have been accurate, just a reporter looking for drama.

  99. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by russotto · · Score: 1

    True. . . but it's also true that, at least for MacGuyver, they were at least responsible enough to leave out critical ingredients or steps for dangerous things, and NOT leave things out for life-savers "improvised" for the show.
    They left nothing out of the Drano bombs.
  100. Imagine by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

    Far as I can remember it took like 20 minutes to complete.
    Now imagine the benefit of having a mandatory highschool class that spans the school year and includes some hands-on practice on dummies.

  101. What I learned from AA by MrCopilot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Do not shoot the CO.

    --
    OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
  102. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    How else am I going to steal their wallet?

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  103. Re:ArMY sCUM by Oldav · · Score: 0

    Methinks someone got dumpped recently........Talk about bitter, good laugh though it is(-:

  104. Luckily I don't live in the U.S. by funkdancer · · Score: 1

    Seriously, speaking as a Norwegian living in Australia, the US of A is starting to scare me. If not the taser wielding law enforcement officers, then the fact that you are discouraged from helping others in need. Can your society get any more selfish?

    --
    ISO certified == THX certified
    1. Re:Luckily I don't live in the U.S. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      , then the fact that you are discouraged from helping others in need

      False, as others have noted, we have good samaritarian laws to protect you if you choose to help during an emergency. In addition, a number of states have mandatory stop rules. I've been late to work a couple times for stopping to respond - and I've never been dinged for it, instead I've been congratulated.

      There were some problems with lawsuits during the worst of our sue-crazy phase, that's the reason for the laws. Fortunately, I think that we have the crazy lawsuits much more in control than we used to.

      Heck, you noted that you are living in Australia - another poster talked about an incident involving a female and CPR - she sued because the performer exposed her breasts to be able to perform CPR, and won.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  105. Re:Lawsuits? by ls+-la · · Score: 1

    But keep in mind that if you're a doctor you're obligated to stop and provide help and the good samaritan laws generally don't apply because you've had sufficient medical training. 0/2. Even if you're an MD, you aren't obligated to stop and help, and if you are nice enough to stop, you are protected by GS laws (Definitely in MA, may vary by state, but I would be surprised if any state were different.).

    The reason as I was told by my EMT instructor is that many years before the GS laws, EMTs, RNs, and MDs would stop to help. Then they started getting sued; to be honest I'm not sure what level of care they were getting sued for, but I'm sure it was almost always more helpful than harmful. So the professionals started driving by without stopping, and the death rate from accidents went up. Then the Good Samaritan laws were passed so healthcare professionals could stop without worrying about frivolous lawsuits.
  106. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

    I'm going to ask you a 100% serious question.

    Do cars in real life ever explode? Have you ever witnessed this, or even do you know someone who has? Sure, cars can burn very quickly if a fuel line is ruptured, but you're talking about an explosion that would throw the car in the air... I don't think that happens.

    And, frankly, I've heard the opposite of your advice several times. Cars burn, they do not explode.

  107. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 1

    No, your steps are out of order. Spinal stabilization comes before ABCD in suspected trauma.

  108. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 1
    My first post was that most people are best off dialing 911.

    He said I was wrong because people should get involved because anyone with first aid knows what to do.

    I said he was wrong because most people don't have any kind of training.

    Everything else is irrelevant.

  109. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I think you are missing what was discussed. My first post was that most people are best off dialing 911. He said I was wrong because people should get involved because anyone with first aid knows what to do. I said he was wrong because most people don't have any kind of training. Everything else is irrelevant.

  110. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 1

    Like the 'ski patrol' with CPR training? And who are you - other than an AC?

  111. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Acer500 · · Score: 1

    More subtly here in Australia the number for emergency services is 000, but we have had critically ill people receive delayed medical care because people have dialed 911 after watching American TV. Police in my country (Uruguay) just gave up and changed the emergency number to 911... really, a poll showed that over half the country believed that it was !!! (instead of pretty obscure local numbers, which was actually quite useless sometimes - if you weren't in your neighbourhood, chances of knowing the police number were slim to none)

    I haven't attended a first aid course ever... It would have been fun to practise mouth-to-mouth with the girls in my high school class :)
    --
    There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  112. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    I believe that we changed it to reduce the number of false calls - 911 takes more deliberate dialing than 999.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  113. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 1

    Like start bitching anonymously? Or deceive myself that politicians will listen to what I have to say?

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  114. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 1

    I haven't attended a first aid course ever... It would have been fun to practise mouth-to-mouth with the girls in my high school class :)

    They don't do that anymore. You practice on a sanitized dummy covered in a piece of throwaway plastic. Way too much chance of whoever runs the first aid course being sued if you catch something transmitted by saliva or blood.

    It's worth the weekend doing a first aid course. The stuff you learn is interesting and it could save you or a loved on. I did one when my wife first moved in because she has severe allergies and there is a chance that one day I'll need to do CPR. (I don't need the excuse to kiss her. hehe) I really should go do a refresher. My certificate is no longer valid.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  115. From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is why you should not take first aid device from a video game or /.

    Never apply a tourniquet unless the bleeding is 1) immediately life threatening and 2) cannot be controlled in any other way. The best way to control bleeding is direct pressure - which can stop 99% of significant external bleeding. Tourniquets not only cause nerve damage, but if there is an amputation, they can cause ischemic damage to healthy tissue which may decrease the chance of a successful reattachment or make the ultimate amputation worse.

    And don't worry, there is a law in emergency medicine: All bleeding stops eventually.

    1. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by Torodung · · Score: 1

      Exactly. *When* is so very, very important. I certainly wasn't recommending anyone use a tourniquet unless they knew exactly what they were doing.

      I'm sorry if you felt I hadn't made that abundantly clear. I thought I did. I'll be more emphatic this time.

      I didn't think this guy was an adequately trained first responder, despite the "feel good" story, and I don't want a propaganda effort to encourage a bunch of people who clearly don't know what they are doing to believe that watching the "medic cutscene" in AA, and passing the test, is ever going to prepare them to be one.

      Especially if they start Googling techniques without receiving live training from experts.

      Thus, sour grapes. I'm glad it all worked out. I don't appreciate the idea expressed by the article that an untrained gamer can be a competent first responder because of a game. He was a *lucky* and *incompetent* first responder, and I'm glad it worked out.

      --
      Toro

    2. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I saw your second comment below, but there is one important thing to remember: training isn't everything, and common sense is often more valuable than training. An untrained bystander who is calm and thinks about what's going on can be more valuable then a hyper-excited volly firefighter who doesn't take two seconds to step back and think.

      There is a reason that Brady Emergency Care actually states that you should not transport a live venomous snake with you in the ambulance. Anyone with common sense would think.... hmmmm... take an animal that can kill me and put it in a 10'x8' metal box, then jump inside and close the door.... maybe not such a good idea. But you know some hick firefighter/EMT-B did exactly that, hence the reason that its in the book.

      So don't assume that an untrained bystander is going to render poor care, or that a trained bystander will provide good care.

    3. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my explanation. The way we are trained to deal with bleeding in combat is that if we think that it will eventually require a tourniquet, due to significant bleeding, apply it first, rather than go through the steps of pressure dressing, wait for bleeding to stop, another dressing, wait for bleeding to stop, then finally a tourniquet. Is this clearer?

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    4. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      While I agree your point might be true in 1% of the cases, the whole purpose of training and procedure is to be able to know what to do in some situations where most of the untrained people would panick and make mistakes or where the right choice can be counter-intuitive.
      Your firefigher/snake example only shows lack of training and knowlegde of procedure for that particular situation, maybe he thought that the ER team would need it to chose the right antidote.

      Of course, even the better trained people will eventually make mistakes and you can't train all firefighters or EMT-B (or whoever) to the level needed to optimally handle any situation they might get into, so yes, they sometimes need to stop for a second and think of what to do, but even in that case, the best tool they have to chose the right action is their experience of similar situations (and that includes training and theorical knowledge).

    5. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Training can make someone more knowledgeable, but you can't teach common sense, and at the level we are talking about common sense is more important.

      There are actually very few things beyond CPR (which is a community level intervention that everyone should know) in the EMT-Basic level of teaching that are more than a concrete presentation of common sense ideas. If something is broken, make sure it doesn't move that much. If something is cut and bleeding, put a clean gauze dressing over it and apply pressure to stop the bleeding. If someone is having trouble breathing if you have oxygen, give it to them. If a baby comes out, tie off the cord wrap it in something warm, and put it on mom's chest. If someone is not breathing or in cardiac arrest, call for extra help and do CPR.

      This ain't exactly rocket science. (Hell, FWIW, I took my EMT-Basic written and practical exam drunk and passed with flying colors.) And someone with half a brain who thinks about it for half a second can come up with most of it if they keep a cool head.

      In my experience people with 'training' can make some huge errors, often because of a blasé attitude that comes from a false sense of confidence in your abilities. Someone who does not think of themselves as 'trained' is often more cautious and less likely to make those overconfidence type mistakes. So when you are talking about basic level skills, I would rather have a bystander with common sense who remains calm and pays attention than an overconfident EMT-B with an ego the size of Wisconsin, a belt that would put batman to shame, and a blasé attitude. Unfortunately, in my experience EMS tends to attract people who tend to become overconfident when they get a smidgen of knowledge.

      Of course that is again, only at the Basic level of training... a bystander (no matter how much common sense) can't start an IV, cardiovert SVT, or give me morphine for a femur fracture. This also doesn't mean that having EMT-B training is a bad thing. But it does mean at that basic level of care, common sense is much more important than you give credit to.

    6. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 1
      Well, I've never been in combat, but I have trained special forces medic's in trauma resuscitation. My residency is one of the places they trained, because apparently Flatbush Brooklyn is one of the closest things to combat that you get in the US. In fact, they gave me an award as their favorite instructor one rotation since I was the chief resident in the ER and really made sure they got their hands in it.

      And so I am reasonably familiar with both ATLS and the deviations from it in which SF Medics are instructed. To be specific the reason that you may need to use a tourniquet in combat in because its hard to maintain direct pressure under combat situations rather than what you seem to be suggesting, that direct pressure won't actually stop the bleeding. Direct pressure to the wound and if necessary to the artery supplying the area is in fact in every way clinically superior to a tourniquet. The only reason you would not use the superior method would be if it is not feasible to maintain good direct pressure.

      So getting back to your original statement:

      The thing about tourniquets is this: If there is bleeding that is more than a mere scratch, apply a tourniquet. As in, the bleeding isn't likely to stop anytime soon by itself, and could be life threatening. No. Direct pressure is superior. I have controlled a great deal of bleeding in my decade as an ER physician and the years I worked EMS. I have never once applied a tourniquet nor seen one applied except by some asshat like yourself who thinks that they know more than they do. (See my above posts about the dangers of a little bit of knowledge.)

      People seem to have a fear of tourniquets, but they can be left on for several hours without any damage. Put them about 2 inches above the wound, but not on a joint. Write the time on the casualty's head. Better to just put it on right away rather than using up the casualty's dressing on something that won't work anyway. People... like the American College of Surgeons (ya know the ones who write ATLS?) have a very well founded fear of tourniquets because douchetards like yourself cause all sorts of damage with them. In fact, their use is actively discouraged in ATLS, and are only recommended as a last resort. You can cause ischemic injury to the muscle in as little as thirty minutes in addition to all of the other complications (permanent nerve damage because of incorrect application, compartment syndrome, arterial damage and thrombosis in older patients who may have pre-existing vascular disease, post-tourniquet syndrome, etc.) Not to mention the intolerable pain that most people get unless they are sedated or have a regional block done... which you'd probably know about if you had ever actually used one.

      So why not run along and watch some more of your DVD collection of 'real life' trauma-dramas or work on your MySpace before your mom makes you go out and mow the grass. And if I am ever in a car wreck and you find me. Just call 911 for me, ok?
    7. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 1

      And for a good example of what I was talking about see the below comments from the AnotherUsername idiot. A little bit of knowledge can cause a lot of damage.

    8. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by Torodung · · Score: 1

      I saw your second comment below, but there is one important thing to remember: training isn't everything, and common sense is often more valuable than training. An untrained bystander who is calm and thinks about what's going on can be more valuable then a hyper-excited volly firefighter who doesn't take two seconds to step back and think. Without a doubt. A reckless responder who puts his ambulance in a ditch, for instance, just creates a second emergency. An overconfident responder who overextends himself, or doesn't keep a proper sense of emergency (blase), can cause grievous harm.

      Some people don't have "grace under pressure." Unfortunately, the only way to find out is to be put a person in a real situation. Training helps to allay that panic, but I agree that overconfidence is just as dangerous.

      --
      Toro
    9. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      So why not run along and watch some more of your DVD collection of 'real life' trauma-dramas or work on your MySpace before your mom makes you go out and mow the grass. And if I am ever in a car wreck and you find me. Just call 911 for me, ok?


      Wow. What an asshole you are.

      This isn't training I got off of the game America's Army. This is training I received from the Army. As in, Army medics said, 'This is what you do in this situation, and this is what you do in that situation.' One of the things that they said, and I quote: If the bleeding is not likely to stop on its own, or you can tell it will not stop with the pressure dressing, apply a tourniquet first and be done with it. They made us repeat it several times. Sorry if your training says otherwise, but my training says to use it. There isn't enough time in combat to use direct pressure and hope it stops. It needs to be stopped and it needs to be stopped right now.

      Not to mention the intolerable pain that most people get unless they are sedated or have a regional block done... which you'd probably know about if you had ever actually used one.


      One of the things we have to do in our training is apply a tourniquet to another person and then have one applied to ourselves, so I know exactly how it feels.

      Maybe the 'mere scratch' comment is throwing you off. Sorry, I did it as a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor that didn't go over as well as I initially planned. I didn't mean that direct pressure wouldn't work in many cases. But the cases that we can already tell it won't work, i.e. half the leg is gone, use a tourniquet.
      Maybe you should have reread my clarification comment. Here it is again:

      Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my explanation. The way we are trained to deal with bleeding in combat is that if we think that it will eventually require a tourniquet, due to significant bleeding, apply it first, rather than go through the steps of pressure dressing, wait for bleeding to stop, another dressing, wait for bleeding to stop, then finally a tourniquet. Is this clearer?


      See where it says

      if we think that it will eventually require a tourniquet


      That means, again, that if we can already tell that direct pressure isn't going to work. Again, major tissue damage, and we can tell that the casualty is going to bleed out without one.

      Maybe it was this comment that you didn't like:

      As in, the bleeding isn't likely to stop anytime soon by itself, and could be life threatening.


      That's why I added the clarification. Hence why in this current rebuttal of what I said, you probably should have used the clarification paragraph. But I suppose that if you had used that, you couldn't have insulted me as much as you wanted to.
      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    10. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 1
      Thanks, I just made $10 on a bet with a friend of mine. Though as an added benefit you also proved my point to the other poster regarding idiots like you who think they know what they are doing when in fact they haven't got the medical knowledge to adequately pick their own nose.

      One of the things we have to do in our training is apply a tourniquet to another person and then have one applied to ourselves, so I know exactly how it feels. Wow, Torodung wasn't joking about you putting that tourniquet around your neck.
    11. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      I am not claiming to be some fancy emergency room doctor or whatnot. I am just saying what I have been trained to do. If it will save the life of one of my friends, I am going to do it. Say whatever insults you want to me. I know what I have been trained to do, and I am going to do it exactly as I have been trained. If my friend is missing a leg, and I know that direct pressure is not going to stop that artery from spurting, I am going to use a tourniquet immediately.

      Unlike your nice, clean emergency room, we don't have all the fancy tools that you do. We have only what we carry, and all that we carry adds weight. We can't afford to have the latest and greatest in medical care that you obviously have access to. We have a small pack of basic medical supplies, dressings, a couple IV kits, and the tourniquet. That's it. Sorry if it isn't good enough for you, but for us, it saves lives.

      I don't know what the hell your problem is, but I am done with this conversation.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    12. Re:From your friendly neighborhood ER doctor by NIckGorton · · Score: 1

      I am not claiming to be some fancy emergency room doctor or whatnot. I am just saying what I have been trained to do. If it will save the life of one of my friends, I am going to do it. Say whatever insults you want to me. I know what I have been trained to do, and I am going to do it exactly as I have been trained. Oooh, I am a 'fancy emergency room doctor'? My aren't you being quaint in a poorly executed attempt at an Argumentum ad Verecundiam (tradition.) That is, you are attempting to negate the readily verifiable evidence that tourniquets are essentially not used as an emergency treatment for hemorrhage in the the developed world today within emergency medicine, EMS, or as part of ATLS (Advanced Trauma Life Support - promulgated by the American College of Surgeons.) You would also like to disregard all the evidence that is readily available about the dangers of tourniquets within the medical literature. (Just search Medline with the terms tourniquet and ischemia.) So you make an appeal to the authority of tradition: that's how you were taught to do, so you will do it in an unthinking fashion regardless of the dangers that it poses.

      Unlike your nice, clean emergency room, we don't have all the fancy tools that you do. We have only what we carry, and all that we carry adds weight. We can't afford to have the latest and greatest in medical care that you obviously have access to. We have a small pack of basic medical supplies, dressings, a couple IV kits, and the tourniquet. That's it. Sorry if it isn't good enough for you, but for us, it saves lives. Perhaps you didn't notice, but I also said I'd never used a tourniquet in all the years that I did EMS either. And ATLS, which is designed for both pre-hospital and hospital based trauma resuscitation actively discourages their use. But just as a reminder: you and I and pretty much everyone reading this conversation are not in a jungle. I suspect that you are sitting your fat ass in front of your computer, eating a bag of cheetos, and smoking a cigarette. And since we aren't in a jungle, if someone is hurt, how about you just call 911, let the professionals take care of it and try not to hurt yourself or anyone else with your painfully out of date information?

      I don't know what the hell your problem is, but I am done with this conversation. Excellent! Though its no problem. In fact, you are quite entertaining.
  116. Re:Lawsuits? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    I think that he still has a good point that people should be trained. I'll admit that my first aid training isn't much better than what the boy scouts taught(before some later watering down), and I get it every year.

    Still, I at least get the things like CPR, managing bleeding, etc...

    You call 911 first, to get the responders rolling. Then you do what you can.

    What you do in the 5 minutes before the first responders get there can save a life. Slowing down a major bleed, getting an airway cleared, performing CPR.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  117. no wonder by gslavik · · Score: 0

    as a trained red cross life guard, when I saw the medical training in AA, the thought going through my head was "holy crap, it's the same thing I learned in life guard training."

  118. Re:Lawsuits? by MBraynard · · Score: 1

    I think that he still has a good point that people should be trained.Well. Ok. Are you?

  119. ARC says stop when tired by gottabeme · · Score: 1

    The American Red Cross CPR training says to continue giving CPR until help arrives or until you get tired. Yes, that's right, until you get tired. So unless California is way off base here, I don't see how your #1 could be correct.

    --
    "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    1. Re:ARC says stop when tired by wfeick · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can definitely stop when you're too tired to continue.

      It comes down to how you define "tired". When I took the course, they were pretty clear that it means really, really, really tired (at least in their eyes). Their concern was that one person would start doing CPR, someone else would not bother to stop since the situation was being handled, and then the first person would give up too soon. They really wanted you to be prepared to give CPR for quite a while if you were going to start it. It's also wise to establish if there's a second person who's CPR certified so you can trade off periodically.

      They also noted that if you're doing a good job of CPR when the EMTs arrive, they may very well have you just continue while they tend to the things you're not qualified for.

      Ultimately, in the unlikely event that it ended up in court, you'd need to defend that you didn't make a half assed attempt that possibly dissuaded someone else from stepping in.

      All that said, it's been a few years since I took the course and I should probably take a refresher. They change their minds (and the course materials) periodically.

  120. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by linzeal · · Score: 1

    Seriously why aren't your 911 calls routed to your emergency number? Are you using 911 for something else or is it just to be different? You could keep both you know.

  121. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

    we have had critically ill people receive delayed medical care because people have dialed 911 after watching American TV.

    It's pretty sad; this is why several countries now route 911 to their local emergency number.

    Not all of them, of course. In India, five or six years ago, a newspaper tested out the emergency phone numbers (100-103) by dialing them up to "report" an emergency. They never got through.

  122. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by Twanfox · · Score: 1

    Does it matter if it burns or explodes? Either case is likely to endanger people inside the passenger compartment of the vehicle and cause death if the person(s) aren't removed from the vehicle or the fire controlled before it reaches the fuel.

  123. Oops. Apologies to you. by Torodung · · Score: 1

    I now see that you were responding to another post that was beneath my view threshold at the time. Your advice is sound and welcome, while his advice was... lunatic.

    Perhaps the "more than a scratch" poster applied a tourniquet to his neck to stop a bad nosebleed?

    --
    Toro

    1. Re:Oops. Apologies to you. by AnotherUsername · · Score: 1

      Actually, this is how we are trained to deal with bleeding in combat...

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
  124. Bullshit Puff Piece? by LKM · · Score: 3, Interesting
    As readers on kotaku.com found out, that is possibly a planted puff piece and might not have actually happened at all:

    I went online to find other coverage of this story to see what kind of spin was being put on it. Searching for Paxton Galvanek returned no news results. However, it did point out that he's the president of a marketing firm in New Jersey. Given that the headline mentions "press release" and how there's no source link, I'm going to call this a plant. Unfortunately, I doubt this really happened. It would be good if it did, but given that no news agencies (not even local news) have covered it, and the hero in question is an advertising engine, I'm taking the whole thing with a grain or two of salt. http://kotaku.com/346176/americas-army-player-saves-real-life#c3777221

    Not to mention that pulling somebody from a car without first figuring out what their injuries are is a fucking bad idea, unless the car is about to explode (hint: it isn't, unless you're in a movie).
  125. Re:Lawsuits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "And in the US, most states have good samaritan laws so that if you are acting in good faith, you are not liable. A few places have laws that compel you to render assistance as well, but they are normally only enforced on TV shows like Seinfeld."

    The good samaritan laws only protect you if you do not exceed your training.

  126. Tom Cruise disapproves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Tom Cruise told me Scientologists are the only ones who can help. Why would he lie?

  127. Macro by Krneki · · Score: 0

    Meh, just make a macro. /s Medic, we need a Medic!

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  128. References? by overshoot · · Score: 1

    No, your steps are out of order. Spinal stabilization comes before ABCD in suspected trauma.
    Let's just say that I'm having a problem with the idea of stabilizing the spine of someone who doesn't have a patent airway. It's certainly not what my medical direction requires.

    However, I'm willing to be convinced.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  129. Well said by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

    Well said. If we're going to start counting lives saved by such games, we also need to count how many people are killed because kids play this stuff, grow up thinking war is cool, then join an army and find out the truth.

  130. Re:Lawsuits? by krasmussen · · Score: 1

    In Denmark it has been obligatory to attend a 7-hour first aid course in order to obtain a driver's license for about two years now.

  131. wow by Freeside1 · · Score: 1

    The most surprising part of this is that WoW players actually go outside, let alone encounter a moose.

  132. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by asuffield · · Score: 1

    Do cars in real life ever explode?


    Yes, but only when the fuel line and tank have been compromised by the crash (and the tank is mostly full), so it's relatively rare. They try to design them to stop it from happening.

    A well recorded instance is the early Ford Pinto, where cost-cutting meant that the fuel system was easily compromised in a crash.

    Note that it doesn't ash the whole car like in Hollywood - there's just not that much fuel in there. It's a shockwave and a new source of fire, that's all.

    Here's a video of an exploding fuel tank in a Pinto.
  133. Role Playing MUDs - Crafting Systems by The_Pey · · Score: 1

    I administer on a MUD called Shadows of Isildur http://middle-earth.us/ that is geared around role playing in Middle Earth some 500 years before the Fellowship of the Ring events occurred. One thing that is particularly fascinating about this MUD is its robust crafting system that allows one to do anything from mining, to jewelry making, armor smithing, gardening, apothecary work and so on. As of right now, there are over 3000 crafts on this MUD based on real life methods and techniques.

    The techniques used and displayed within this scripted crafting system are the same that are used in real life. Interestingly, I've heard reports back from players who have described applying the gardening or cooking techniques in-game to real life applications with strong results. One player has described having prettier roses after applying the pruning techniques in-game. Others have tryed out the cooking methods with similar results. The same goes for wood carving and metal work. Personally, I've learned tons about herbology and jewelry work.

    --
    Hmmm...
  134. well then by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    I guess this means I'll be ready in the event Earth is invaded by those horrible Strogg characters.

  135. Re:Lawsuits? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    Yes, Did you miss the second sentence in that paragraph?

    For an admitably limited value of 'trained'. I'm no EMT, but I am trained on stuff like clearing airways, immobilizing broken limbs, handling eye wounds, CPR, bleeding, tourniquet, etc...

    It's all about limiting damage until the real medics can get there. Or, if the area is dangerous, getting the casualty out of the area to the medic.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  136. FPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First Person Student?

  137. bzzzt by Shakrai · · Score: 1

    While I realize you're joking, witholding first aid to someone who needs it is usually illegal. This is true whether you are a professional health care provider or merely a bystander who knows first aid.

    Sorry, but your wrong, at least in my state. When I went through all of the Red Cross training we were told that you have a legal obligation to assist in a professional setting (i.e: I work at a hospital and would have to assist until more qualified personal showed up), but you have no such obligation "on the street".

    If you do choose to start providing assistance then you have a legal obligation to remain until relived by someone with equal or superior training to your own (i.e: I have to stay until the EMTs show up.... the EMTs have to stay until a nurse or doctor shows up/takes over), but you have no legal obligation to offer said assistance in the first place, unless it occurs in a professional setting and is an expectation of your job duties.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  138. No, it's RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT. by plover · · Score: 1
    There's a subtle distinction here. The Good Samaritan laws are a "defense" against a lawsuit that has been filed, not a magical "prevention" blocking a lawsuit from being filed. A lawyer who tried to sue a first responder in such a state would almost certainly be found in contempt of the court for filing an intentionally frivolous lawsuit. But that doesn't mean they can't be filed.

    Here's a hypothetical situation that indicates the need to allow these suits to be filed: What if the first responder was actually negligent in a related incident? What if they went to the accident scene and, before performing CPR, flicked their cigarette butt into a pile of leaves that a few minutes later ignited a puddle of gasoline? There is certainly a case to be made that the first responder went to the crash to attempt to perform CPR, and that he couldn't very well perform it with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth. But there's an equal case to be made for suing the first responder for carelessness. These circumstances are far from easy to sort out, and a lawsuit would be a wholly appropriate way to resolve them.

    You can indeed be sued as a first responder. As an American citizen you can file a lawsuit for any damn thing you want. (Hell, convicted felons have sued the prison system for failing to give them ice cream.) But if you're suing a first responder your chances for success are likely to be close to zero, and the courts are likely to be unfriendly to you as a result.

    --
    John
  139. Shouldn't the army have provided this training? by jordan314 · · Score: 1

    ...instead of a video game?

  140. Hollywood : Playstation: Flight Simulation by Randym · · Score: 1
    In at least 2 movies, the fact that one of the characters learned how to fly using a simulator on Playstation is a significant plot point.

    In Snakes on a Plane, Kenan Thompson's character lands a 767 using his knowledge. In the upcoming Fool's Gold, Matthew McConeguay's (sp?) character also learned flying that way. However, from the Fool's Gold trailer, it looks like Kenan's character paid more attention.

    --
    DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
  141. You misunderstood my comment. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

    I advocate arming yourself for protection against ANY thug who would take something from you by force. How and when to use your force to defend yourself is YOUR prerogative and exclusively at YOUR discretion.

    Exactly what I said. Here's a presumed example:

    If someone were to dump poison chemicals in your water supply, YOU would be their greatest threat.

    Government is a paper tiger to all but the law abiding. You and me stand to get shafted since we're lawful and honest (I make a big presumption here), but the REAL crooks, murderers, thugs, robbers and terrorists do not require permission, nor wait to be busted. Patsies and honest people do. Real evil people rarely get caught, and generally they get caught by an attentive passersby.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    1. Re:You misunderstood my comment. by LKM · · Score: 1

      If someone were to dump poison chemicals in your water supply, YOU would be their greatest threat.
      Government is a paper tiger to all but the law abiding.

      Then you should help change the government instead of taking the law into your own hands. A society where everyone practises vigilantism is more dangerous to the honest individual than a society where the government has a monopoly on force and uses this monopoly to protect honest individuals.

    2. Re:You misunderstood my comment. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. Authority as it is today, if you bother to read the Common Law documents since its early roots in England (and a few other places) they all state that authority is in the INDIVIDUAL MAN, but he DELEGATES IT... (capitalized are important terms you should look up in their original form) to others, in GOOD FAITH, until such time as that GOOD FAITH is VIOLATED.

      The LAW, comes from YOU, ME, and everyone else. Government was meant as an arbiter everyone could agree upon. So far, they have VIOLATED that GOOD FAITH. Perhaps the realization that letting the fools burn themselves is a good thing, will come in time.

      I find your statements interesting, because most people externalize their own faults to others. For example, someone who has never lived in a dangerous neighborhood will extoll the values of the police state, I should know, I've been like you, long long ago, years ago, in fact. Someone who has, will tell you that your first enemy is the thugs, your second enemy is the enemy of the thugs, aka the crooked cops. Both will abuse you. But at least the thugs do it for free, and you can kill them in self defense. The crooked cops are an army, and will kill you with far greater ease, and no one will hold them liable, nor have the power to do so (since cops and judges back each other up, call it a collusion of interests.)

      There is no enemy to crime, like a healthy and vibrant economy. And no, governments don't create, nor protect, healthy vibrant economies, they never have. Wherever government gets confiscatory and begins to tax its inhabitants, the economy shrivels, crime rises, and tyranny rises with it. Government can HELP a healthy economy by making sure nobody else messes with it either, but it does not help the participants in a healthy economy by taxing them and starting "economic health" projects. Whenever government has gotten involved in running the economy, failure was a sure thing. Wherever it stayed out of people's business and wallets, success was guaranteed. Look around the world, if you want examples. (And stop trusting Hollywood to give you an accurate world report. Hollywood would let you believe the cops are always good AND ON TIME... there is always a savior when judges or cops do what is human and look out for number one... but in real life, none of those things are true, each is responsible for himself or herself. No more, no less.)

      I would love to see a small area come under the sway of "informed consensual accord" rules, but I wager there aren't enough people who actually want to live without being depredated by others "for their own good."

      Oh well, to each his own, and it seems the majority wants tyranny, so I say, let them rot in the bed they've made for themselves. I plan to sleep elsewhere.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  142. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 1

    You seem to think it's somehow natural that 911 should be used.

    911 was not the first number used, nor was the US the first country to use such a system. 911 was only announced as the number in 1968.

    http://www.911dispatch.com/911/history/

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  143. Re:Not surprising, not as good as a first aid cour by syousef · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the info. I'm sure I've come across that number somewhere. I think from memory it's built to use whichever network is available regardless of carrier (whereas 000 only uses your own mobile carrier).

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  144. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

    Immediate danger means the car is on fire, for example, AND unconscious.

    But how do you determine if the car is unconscious? Ask if it knows what model it is?
  145. Re:Lawsuits? by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
    In the US - and elsewhere - most people have no clue how to help a car accident victim and any attempt by an untrained individual to help is invariably counter-productive.

    Uh. In Germany, you don't get your drivers license until you show that you've taken part in a first aid class.

  146. Re:Leave it to the pros except for immediate dange by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

    Mainly because proper helmet removal can take a couple of minutes...by the time they've stopped breathing (which can happen at any time with an unconscious casualty) you're pushing it dangerously close for time, and it's not a procedure you want to hurry.

    Airway maintenence is very simple, you don't need equipment to do it. Around a third of motorbike fatalities are directly related to blocked airways.

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.