TexasCHLforum.com

Duty to act applies to EMS/Fire personnel only when on the job...An off-duty paramedic cruising down the road on his/her own time who witnesses an accident does not have a duty to act and is not "abandoning" a patient should he/she decide not to stop. Good Samaritan laws are supposed to apply to an off-duty paramedic who stops and provides aid, but things could get messy should the incident end up in court. The scary part is that the paramedic's agency will most probably not provide any type of legal assistance for an off-duty incident.

An interesting scenario would be to consider an incident in which a CHL shoots an armed attacker (no questions about the legal/moral aspects of the shooting), and the attacker is wounded and hits the ground, etc. The weapon falls far out of the attacker's reach, there are no accomplices, and the scene is safe. The CHL calls 911 then approaches the attacker and notices that he's having difficulty breathing, etc. The CHL begins CPR and is found there upon EMS and PD arrival. EMS takes over patient care, but the attacker dies. EMS and PD reports all note that the CHL was found performing CPR upon their arrival, so there's no dispute that the CHL was doing something physical to the attacker following the shooting.

Later, the attacker's family sues the CHL alledging that the CHL was not happy with the results of his shooting and claim that the CHL's CPR was actually further action to ensure the attacker's demise. After all, the CHL just used deadly force. Why would he then try to save the attacker's life?

I know it's a reach, but that scenario could be reason enough for a CHL/home owner involved in a self-defense shooting to simply call 911, stay safe, and take advantage of the fact that he/she is not required to render aid. Could providing aid be misrepresented as evidence that deadly force might not have actually been necessary?