Medics and weapons

[marktigger]

I know the geneva convention rules about medics being armed to protect themselves and casualties and agree with them 100%(have actually had to argue with authority about this who were under impression medics couldn't be armed) but have seen a few pictures on facebook of the CMT who won the military cross in afghanistan deservedly. But to my mind her kneeling with rifle at ready position with red cross to the fore is slightly the wrong message. Yes armed no problem but a little more neutral maybe. Not criticizing her an any way but those who released the photograph could have made better choices.

[Tinman]

Very old picture. I have no problems with medics looking all bombed up and steely eyed. In fact our recent AO, our oppositions are not signatory of the GC. We conduct ourselves with very stringent ROE.

[shotleylad]

Very good photograph and very much give the right message.

[james k]

We are soldiers you know? The "we" part of that being an affinity that remains after several decades as a medic. You will find that even the restrictions on self defence and defence of a casualty have all but withered away.
If a medic, Army or RN, is in a multiple under attack then they can shoot back with the rest of the guys until a casualty occurs and it becomes time to treat them.
In addition there are also Casualty Patrols where a multiple of medics have to fight their way through to casualties, this isn't very different to an Infantry Fighting Patrol and will be armed in the same way.
Long gone are the days when Medics would never expect to take part in a fire fight and nurses only weapons training would be how to "clear and make safe" the weapon of a casualty.
I didn't start out as a Medic but as a CMT with the Army and MA with the Royal Navy, I've fired many types of personal, crew served and support weapons and not just on the range.
The job title Combat Medical Technician included the word Combat for a very good reason.