Post navigation

Prev: (04/24/23) | Next: (04/25/23)

In Seattle, ‘obstructing an officer’ could soon include city’s firefighters and medics

(Image: CHS)

Seattle has a law against obstructing a police officer. It may soon expand the restrictions in a move officials say are needed to protect the Seattle Fire Department.

A Seattle City Council committee is hearing details of the proposed legislation Tuesday that would explicitly add firefighters and SFD personnel to the Seattle Municipal Code’s definition of the gross misdemeanor crime.

“SFD staff have provided Central Staff with incident records that show that aggressive persons
have, at times, engaged in behavior that has interfered with SFD personnel who are attempting to perform their duties,” a council staff memo (PDF) prepared for the Public Safety and Human Services Committee reads. “Examples of such persons and behavior include overdose patients who may become combative while regaining consciousness after receiving Naloxone or another overdose reversal treatment; unhoused persons who attempt to prevent SFD personnel from extinguishing illegal burns; or persons in mental or behavior health crisis, or other persons, who throw items at SFD personnel or threaten to physically attack SFD personnel.”

“Not all of this behavior could be a basis for a charge of Obstruction,” the memo acknowledges.

Under the proposed legislation, the municipal code’s definition of a public officer would be expanded to include SFD firefighters and other SFD personnel and the offences described for obstruction would expand to include a specific reference to the fire department’s work to include: when the person’s conduct or presence hinders, delays, or compromises legitimate fire department actions or rescue efforts; threatens the safety of fire department personnel or members of the public; or attempts to incite others to violence.

The proposal comes as some Seattle Fire Department duties overlap with public safety responsibilities previously covered by police. One example, the Health One unit created to respond to homelessness, substance abuse, and mental health issues launched in 2021.

 

$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE

Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 🖤 

 
 

 

Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
AllisonSeattle
2 years ago

Wouldn’t this just be used against peaceful protestors undertaking road-blocking actions? I can imagine a nightmarish scenario where people begin to believe their luxury of having an ambulance or fire truck respond to medical emergencies without having to navigate protest blockage actually outweighs the need for climate sit-ins demanding more money for the government so it can change the weather.

Please Match The Requested Format
2 years ago
Reply to  AllisonSeattle

It will absolutely be used for this purpose, as this is the purpose it was designed for.

If we don’t want these Republican-policies-implemented-by-nominal-Democrats in this city, then we need to not elect awful politicians like our current mayor.

It’s that simple.

Nandor
2 years ago

having a bit of difficulty recognizing sarcasm?

Capitol Hill Resident
2 years ago
Reply to  AllisonSeattle

You’re joking, right? God I really hope so.

First, blocking traffic is illegal and interferes with peoples right of free passage. Your rights end when they interfere with those of others.

Second, ambulances transporting people who may be dying or SFD getting to the scene of a fire, car accident or OD are a more immediate concern than climate sit-ins (a masterburtory activity at best) If it was you or someone close to you dying on a stretcher or who’s home were burning down you would most certainly want help to get there unimpeded by idiots blocking roads for no better reason than they think everyone needs to listen to and agree with them.

d4l3d
2 years ago

Could be considered an expansion of a wedge and bludgeon tool until the more vague perimeters are meaningfully tightened.

someone
2 years ago

where is the exception for refusing treatment? and why does it reference “members of the public”?
Would be good legislation, but this should be a rough draft that needs to be refined quite a bit. As it is right now, it’s ripe for abuse.

Wallet Inspector Union Boss
2 years ago

You’ll never see a charge when police themselves obstruct SFD and MedicOne, bet on it.