Police use combat gauze to save a man's life.

[JEFF9K]

Are we allowed to say something good about the police?

In Lorain, Ohio, officers were able to save the life of a stabbing victim because one of them had specially-coated quick-clotting combat gauze, which he bought on the Internet with his own money.

The city is considering the purchase of more of these so that all officers can be equipped.

Does anyone have a problem with “combat gauze,” or do they consider this to be “militarization” of the police?

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/12/using_combat_gauze_2_lorain_police_officers_save_life_of_stabbing_victim.html

[Kali]

1. kind of a passive aggressive post there

if you have something good to say about cops just say it

[uppityperson]

2. seriously

[NCTraveler]

22. It is a great story but the op made an attempt to make it about something else.

Really a good read otherwise.

[Schema Thing]

3. I have a problem with your silly framing.

but no, no one has a problem with combat gauze. In fact, try wrapping it around your fingers, like especially tight mitts.

[LeftyMom]

4. One of the side effects of wars is learning how to put people back together.

"Combat gauze" isn't police militarization any more than improved surgical techniques, better care for head injuries or more effective prostheses are. Hell, army nurses came up with the first disposable sanitary napkins, is an entire aisle at the pharmacy militarized?

Your argument is painfully stupid.

[Katashi_itto]

5. Someone has passive aggressive issues...

[AzDar]

6. Medical supplies are always appreciated...armored tanks w/ battering rams, not so much.

Not sure why that concept seems so hard to grasp...

[Jenoch]

7. I agree with the OP.

There are many more cops like this one rather than the cop in Ferguson.

[EX500rider]

11. There has to be seeing how there are about 900,000 peace officers in the US.

If the percentage of bad ones was as high as many here seem to think the death toll would be in the 1,000's a month.

[Savannahmann]

14. Well the Justice Department seems to think it's that bad.

Of course, what do they know.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/06/opinion/hope-and-anger-at-the-garner-protests.html?_r=1

The Justice Department report describes the Cleveland Police Department as something far closer to an occupying military force than a legitimate law enforcement agency. The officers, for example, seem to take a casual view of the use of deadly force, shooting at people who pose no threat of harm to the police or others. In one case in 2013, for example, they actually fired at a victim who had been held captive in a house — as he escaped, clad only in boxer shorts.
Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story

The report cataloged numerous incidents of wanton violence, with officers beating, pepper-spraying and Tasering people who were unarmed or had already been restrained. Officers escalated encounters with citizens instead of defusing them, making force all but inevitable.

The record in Cleveland is extreme. But aspects of illegal police conduct can be found in cities all over the country, subjecting millions to intimidation and fear that they could be killed for innocent actions.

Eh, whatever right? Just people overreacting to being beaten, pepper sprayed, tasered, shot, and threatened. The cops have the 12th most dangerous job, behind office workers, and delivery drivers, loggers, commercial fishermen, do I really need to continue?

[Jenoch]

17. B.S.

[Savannahmann]

20. OK, what part is BS?

Is the NY TImes article about the report from the Justice Department BS? http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/12/cleveland_police_too_quick_to_use.html

Nope, it's not. Is the extrapolation in that report that proposes that even if the Cleveland rate is cut by well over half, and set nationwide we would be talking about millions of incidents of intimidation?

Here's a map where people combing the news try and get a handle on how many cases there are of excessive force.

http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?reportId=6469

That is from 2010, and you'll see a lot of things on that map. So I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that we have a problem. Nor do I think you can claim that millions of people being intimidated is BS.

Perhaps you mean that the Police have a far safer job than many others is the BS according to you. Well, that is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and there have been many news stories about it. Police never end up in the top ten.

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/personal-finance/10-most-dangerous-jobs-us-1.aspx

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/08/22/americas-10-deadliest-jobs-2/

The 10 Deadliest Jobs:

1. Logging workers
2. Fishers and related fishing workers
3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
4. Roofers
5. Structural iron and steel workers
6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
10. Construction laborers

So what exactly was BS? I'd be interested to hear your answer. Because I've now addressed the reasoning behind every statement I've made, and while I expect you to ignore it, it's here for the edification of yourself, and anyone else who wishes to know the truth.

[Trillo]

8. Is that special coating some of the special stuff allegedly grown from circumcised baby flesh?

I don't have a problem with it, even if it is, as long as those babies got compensation.

[Action_Patrol]

9. QuickClot?

No, it's synthetic.
The powder was bad for emergencies due to reactions with moisture (sweat). The combat gauze is a far more reliable product.

[jmowreader]

10. I have a problem with the logistics of the thing

Asking the cops to buy it with their own money is like asking teachers to buy school supplies out of pocket.

Then again, I can understand why the city didn't buy any: it's expensive as fuck - $40 per single-use pouch.

http://www.amazon.com/QuickClot-Combat-Gauze-Z-Fold/dp/B001E1CLTC

As far as using the product...I'm pretty sure the guy they saved isn't going to sit there and go, "It was invented for the Army? Pull that shit off and let me drain!"

[Savannahmann]

13. It's a lot cheaper if you get the "sport" pack.

I've got a couple around the house for accidents etc.

http://www.amazon.com/Quikclot-Advanced-Clotting-Bleeding-Package/dp/B001BCNTHC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418272341&sr=8-1&keywords=quick+clot

Basically the same thing.

Oh and as far as the departments buying it, I doubt that will happen soon, especially since they're buying bullets as fast as they can, they need them for those six hundred round shootouts with baddies holding hostages.

[uppityperson]

12. Do you seriously not understand what "militarization of the police" means?

Hint, it is not using lifesaving supplies on someone, even if the military uses those same supplies.

[Savannahmann]

15. Ok, I'm going to help out here my friend.

This is militarization of the police.



This is first aid.

?template=generic

Militarization of the Police



First Aid



Ok, now do we have the difference understood? Because I'd go to a total supporter of the Law Enforcement Community if they were passing out more bandages and first aid than bullets and beatings.

Oh, for those who would argue that the cops are professionals who are like totally trained in how to use their weapons.

[Justice]

16. QuikClot saved Gabby Giffords' life - stopping blood flow at scene to avoid cardiac arrest

I have some. It should be in every first aid kit.

[steve2470]

18. ........

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025919944#post73

Taurusny22 (20 posts)

73. Real cop here-I'll give it a shot

But keep in mind I don't have a lot of time to post. With my commute I'm out of the house 12-15 hours a day. I like to spend my time with my 3 teenage boys. Ask me anything.

[eShirl]

19. first time I've ever heard of that stuff being called "combat gauze"

[Action_Patrol]

21. It's the name

That's written on the front of the package.

[RadiationTherapy]

23. Just to be clear you are comparing

this:


with this?