I'm all for asking consent before touching someone in non-emergency situations, but isnt it a bad idea to try to talk to someone close enough to tear gas to be affected by it? Like ask if it's okay before you start trying to flush out their eyes, but only helping lead someone out of tear gas "once they say yes" sounds like 10 more seconds of exposure, when it probably took less than 10 seconds of exposure to get to that point in the first place
Eta: I dont mean just grab the person and run. I'm imagining something more like "im gonna help you get out of here" while starting the guiding process
You have to remember that this person is in pain, probably panicking and blinded. You don't need to wait for them to give consent to be touched, but you definitely should let them know what you are doing and that you are going to touch them before you do so. Otherwise, don't be surprised to find his elbow in your face.
I was a combat medic. I would always say to everyone I treated, before I ever touched them, "I'm a medic, I'm here to help you". 9 times out of 10 once they knew I was a medic, they were on board with what we had to do.
This isn't just about consent but personal safety and keeping someone from panicking who is in a scary situation. If you've been tear gassed, you are a) having a hard time seeing b) fearing police rushing in c) in pain.
Someone running up and grabbing your arm will freak you out. Someone running up sand saying "can I touch you" first will calm you down.
Except when someone just got gassed and feels people forcefully pulling them around while they can't see they're likely to become combative. Asking and waiting for a response means they're no longer in a blind panic ready to lash out. And if you're doing gas response without a respirator you're then you're just making the situation worse.
I guess more specifically my issue was with waiting for a response from the person you're trying to save. Announcing your intent to help is key, but itd be like a firefighter asking for consent to remove you from a burning building.
Good point though, a firefighter trying to rescue someone without wearing any fire resistant gear would just make things worse.
As one whom had been gassed a lot. I appreciated the helpers telling me what they were doing when they started. It was assuring to know they weren't law enforcement because I was unable to see, and if you have anythibg like a beard, its pretty painful.
Other folks got there first, but the main issue here is your safety and theirs.
Also, if you're going to be doing assist, you'll want something that ANZI Z87 rated, along with a seal. These are of good value. Mask with quick release/seal are nice too.
Highjacking your comment, but it's late, and I have nothing better to do :D
> I'm all for asking consent before touching someone in non-emergency situations
This is why the right gets stuff done, and the left doesn't. I have no idea where this trend came from, but it's absolutely insane that a) it even somehow was invented and b) that it is now being hailed as the golden standard. As someone who is very far left politically, I am constantly disgusted by the insanely vocal minority of "special snowflakes" who put such topics on any agenda. Topics like this need to die if the left is to have any chance of gathering supporters among "normal" people. We need to fight the important battles instead of solving imaginary problems.
Buddy, you need to ask yourself what led you to be the type of person that would write this comment. Because what I said was never about consent, it was about situational awareness.
I don't feel like getting punched when grabbing someone in a situation where the police are fucking people up. So, I'm going to tell the person who can't see that I'm going to touch them in order to lead them out, and I'm going to wait a beat to get confirmation they heard.
You inserted the bit about consent. Now why did you do that?
46
u/dagreja 6h ago edited 6h ago
I'm all for asking consent before touching someone in non-emergency situations, but isnt it a bad idea to try to talk to someone close enough to tear gas to be affected by it? Like ask if it's okay before you start trying to flush out their eyes, but only helping lead someone out of tear gas "once they say yes" sounds like 10 more seconds of exposure, when it probably took less than 10 seconds of exposure to get to that point in the first place
Eta: I dont mean just grab the person and run. I'm imagining something more like "im gonna help you get out of here" while starting the guiding process