Butler County Sheriff Says Deputies Will Never Carry Narcan, Gives Questionable Reasoning

Sheriff Rick Jones says that his deputies won't carry Narcan unless the law forces them to.

Sheriff Rick Jones says that his deputies won’t carry Narcan unless the law forces them to.

Sheriff Rick Jones Says No To Carrying Narcan

Butler County, Ohio – Butler County Sheriff Rick Jones has publicly stated that his deputies will never carry Narcan, the drug which reverses the effects of an opioid overdose.

Many other departments don’t want to use Narcan, and for a variety of reasons. Officers aren’t medical professionals and departments don’t want them administering medication. Narcan can be a financial burden on a tight police budget.

I’ve even had private conversations with law enforcement administrators who said that they oppose carrying Narcan simply because it’s absurd that police officers should have to respond and then eat up their budgets repeatedly saving the same people who won’t stop abusing drugs.

None of those reasons are why Sheriff Butler said that his deputies won’t carry Narcan.

When asked about deputies administering Narcan, the sheriff said, “They never carried it. Nor will they. That’s my stance,” according to Cincinnati.com.

The sheriff told The Enquirer that when people are revived with Narcan, they are often angry and can react violently. This makes it an officer-safety issue for officers who administer the drug. It’s an excuse that doesn’t make much sense.

It’s true that people can react violently when they are revived with Narcan. After all, you just took away their high and gave them a raging headache. They worked hard to steal that $10 to get high. It makes no difference to them if they were effectively dead prior to being revived; they’re pissed.

This is part of the reason why police to get dispatched to overdose calls with medics. Police officers are there to stand by in case the situation gets out of control.

Sheriff Rick Jones’s Deputies would still need to provide protection for EMTs, unless the sheriff is refusing to protect them as well.

As far as danger to officers goes, reviving people with Narcan is near the bottom of the list of dangerous things we do.

If an officer arrives at an overdose, they are generally dealing with an unconscious person who’s about as dangerous as a corpse. Officers have the chance to remove all weapons and get in a position where the person can be restrained prior to reviving the person.

Risking a fight with an unarmed person, lying on the ground, who was just about dead, is probably less dangerous than conducting a traffic stop.

I can’t say for sure, but I suspect that Sheriff Jones is opposed to Narcan because he’s opposed to taxpayers repeatedly paying to save addicts from themselves. Perhaps that’s something that you just can’t say when you’re an elected official.

Do you think that officers should carry Narcan? We’d like to hear from you. please let us know in the comments.

  • Rick Williams

    Don’t get me wrong… I’m not in favor of LEOs having to carry Narcan and eat up their already tight budgets, however… Using the logic “Why repeatedly save someone from themselves” brings in to question whether EMS should save patients with heart conditions… Coronary artery disease is self-induced in almost every case. What about repeatedly saving injured construction workers? They chose a dangerous profession (I won’t mention a few others because I think you get it). Maybe LEOs shouldn’t respond to domestic violence calls at addresses where the woman has been offered help, but refuses to leave the abuser, too? That’s completely predictable, dangerous, costly… So to hell with battered women as well if they stay with the scumbag? Where do we draw the line at “this is your fault, deal with it…” ??

    • Angry American

      You’re way off base on the coronary artery disease example, but are a lot closer with the domestic abuse victims. Heart disease is NOT always or even mostly self inflicted. Way too many factors involved to list here.

    • Katrina

      You are really reaching on some of your examples. How about LEOs aren’t trained medical personel and leave it at that. Leave administering medication to EMS who are trained. EMS will also send a bill, as it should be. There is at least a small chance the municipality will be reimbursed.

  • Paul W Moore Jr.

    Legal Vs illegal activity. You want to use illegal drugs, suffer with the result.

    • Christie Manrow Welch

      AMEN!!

  • CarolinaCries

    If they carry narcan, then they should also provide insulin for diabetics that go into a diabetic shock, Epi-Pens for people with allergies…all free to the person of course. Where do they get the funds to save everyone? Especially addicts who KNOWINGLY put themselves at risk? It’s not the taxpayers burden to keep addicts alive.

    • Christie Manrow Welch

      EXACTLY!!!!

    • David Cloutman

      You don’t treat “diabetic shock” by administering insulin. Hypoglycemia in people with diabetes is caused by accidental overdose on insulin, and usually it’s not immediately life threatening. ODing on opiates is.

      As for the usual “not the taxpayer’s burden” rhetoric, if keeping people from dying in the streets is not the job of the public sector, I’m unclear as to why I pay taxes.

      • mark white

        Ok Doc, now that we got our diabetes lesson, go away. And no, its not on the tax payer to save junkies. Let the rats die

    • m.bluth

      Don’t forget nitro for heart patients.

  • Rodney Sverko

    One city council in midwest decided that after 2 narcan revivals theywill let the patient die on the third response…..
    Once again, police are asked to do too much of other agencies responsibilities……

    • Vince Moore

      So twice is ok? Three times is where you draw the line? Rodney, I have experienced the loss of 2 family members to this attack that is quite possibly chemical warfare. The latest was my son. He never hurt anyone-other than himself, and his mother and I. Officers are asked to step into that gap, as was I, because we are the 1st ones there. I encouraged trainees to get used to carrying their duty weapon at all times… because you can’t know when being prepared might save a life. A life saved is a life with possibilities. My nephew battled heroin addiction for 10 years. He started in the navy. Worked, made car payments, paid rent… one night he got bad street product laced with Fentanyl. If it were your son, grandson, daughter, granddaughter niece, nephew would you not want them to have every opportunity to finally beat this addiction monster?

      • Rodney Sverko

        I did not say it was my decision, I too was a LE officer for 40 years and yes in our jurisdiction narcan is being used daily. Too many on the streets in trouble…

  • JBo

    I think cops should enforce the law and keep the peace, that’s how they’re trained. EMTs should take care of the sick and injured, that’s how they’re trained. Firefighters should fight fires and rescue people who are trapped, that’s how they’re trained.

    We should all work together and have each other’s backs because we are each experts in our own profession.

  • Chris James

    The overwhelming message I’m taking away from these comments is a police officers duty to protect (pro·tect/
    verb
    keep safe from harm or injury.
    “he tried to protect Kelly from the attack”
    synonyms: keep safe, keep from harm, save, safeguard, preserve, defend, shield, cushion, insulate, hedge, shelter, screen, secure, fortify, guard, watch over, look after, take care of, keep; inoculate
    “they fought to protect their homes and families”) life is at the whim of the officer and they get to pick and choose who lives or dies. I’m shocked by the arrogance. You can stop blaming Obama and BLM for the current state of affairs, you need look no further than the squad room to find the source of why you no longer enjoy the public’s trust. The come onto forums like this and hear the poison right from the source.

    • Katrina

      What source are you hearing poison from? Most of the comments FOR carrying narcon are from actual officers, those against are the general public.
      Maybe you should not jump to false conclusions and be so judgmental!

  • BadAss350

    I don’t think LEO’s should carry narcan. Their job is to serve and protect not administer medical help.

    • Scott Lavender

      Actually law enforcement officers are first responders. They often supply basic medical aid in many emergencies. As a LEO I was trained in CPR, basic first aid, using a defibrillator, etc. Those few minutes before EMS arrives can mean life or death.

      • Katrina

        That is all well and good (and appreciated!!), but do you really want to carry medications? Insulin and glucose for diabetics, EpiPens for allergic reactions, Narcan for OD? I think LE has enough hats to wear as it is. And don’t mess up wearing any one of them because there is a lawyer just waiting to file their next law suit.
        I would rather see your bugets used for protective gear, updated equipment and training. Your lives are at least as valuable as an addict who OD’d.

      • disqus_j5Nj3oxoii

        Agreed but it’s not you job. They made the choice, it falls on them not municipalities.

  • Bob Novotny

    I work for an agency that has all patrol officers carrying narcan. Is it frustrating to revive the same addict more than once, yes. No we aren’t medical professionals, but it’s not different from doing CPR on someone. What if an addicts young child got into the parents stash & overdosed? An officer/deputy may very likely be first on the scene.
    I personally couldn’t refuse help to a person in a medical crisis, whether it’s self inflicted or not.

    • Bob Novotny

      & yes, we should also have epi pens

  • Vince Moore

    This Sheriff is way off base. Many of you are not aware that the drugs that are killing our young people are NOT the drugs you saw on Starsky and Hutch. Heroin is not what’s poisoning them. Fentanyl, Carfentanyl and the new “grey death” are synthetic opioids. Fentanyl is prescribed to terminal cancer patients usually as a transdermal patch. Carfentanyl is the equivalent to elephant tranquilizer. Grey death can kill via inhalation or absorption through the skin. This idiot is putting his deputies at risk by not educating himself on what the threat really is, these new additives are being used to cut heroin because it’s cheap and more addictive than heroin is, repeat survivors are repeat customers. I was law enforcement, and I’ve been EMS, now I’m a father who has lost his only son because of these additives coming from clandestine Mexican and Chinese labs. As a longtime law enforcement professional the picture of the Sheriff screams Wyatt Earp wannabe! Loud adornments on his uniform… cross draw holster – incredibly impractical. All signs to those of us actually doing the as self indulgent foolishness. My last word on this is PROHIBITION NEVER WORKS, when they tried it with alcohol we had death, blindness, criminal control of the prohibited substance and an unsafe product.

    • Debbie Christian

      Thank you Vince. You make absolute sense. These drugs out there now were not chosen. Yes, you heard about heroin deaths, few and far between….we are not talking about heroin anymore. This is “terrorism” at it’s worst. These drugs aren’t coming from America, they are being imported INTO America. Wake up people. We are dying in droves.

  • Vince Moore

    One more comment… Counterfeit pills are now being seized in many parts of the east coast. Pills indistinguishable from OxyContin, Oxycodone, hydrocodone, ecstasy! They have been determined to be FENTANYL. Pure FENTANYL=PURELY FATAL.

    • Katrina

      That should be terrifying to anyone contemplating taking ilicit drugs.

  • Lynn B

    Agree 100 % — if there that damn stupid to do this shit ~~ Than they suffer the out come — they are POLICE Not Medical Professionals !!!

  • Carl Hungus

    Nobody tells LE what happens NEXT after you put some junky into immediate DTs. Violent and vomiting. Not to mention, LE aren’t trained in managing a compromised airway.

  • Michael McDonald

    I used to be opposed to helping drug addicts, but after looking into it there are people who get hooked on prescription meds because their doctors either over-prescribe and they have no idea how to gradually ween them off the pills, and when the drugs are taken away they get desperate.

    There but for the Grace Of God go I.

  • Nena Miller

    Being the parent of a drug addict who has been saved from dying twice, I appreciate that the police administered Narcan. As she lay dying someone cared enough to administer a life saving drug. She has been homeless (cannot live her with that issue) she has made damn stupid choices. They were hers, I get it. To say she deserves death I don’t agree with. My sister was a diabetic who didn’t do what she was supposed to and she was saved from diabetic coma as well, more than once. My profession is RN and the number of self inflicted problems resulting in miserable people that we all take care of is staggering. Repeat domestic abuse survivors, gang members with gunshot wounds, attempted suicide survivors, and so many more. There are normal family members on the other side of each of these humans in crisis who appreciate the efforts of our police each time they respond to the situation. We appreciate a non-judgmental attitude and the help they offer. Everyone who is revived does not come out of their situation in a violent manner either.

    • Katrina

      While I sympathize with having a daughter in this situation, police are not medically trained. Medications should be left to EMS period. That is not sentencing her to death.

    • Nelson Hallford

      As a nurse, it is your job to care for those that seek medical help. Not so with LEO’s

      • Nena Miller

        It could mean death, yes it could. And sometimes the people nurses deal with did not seek their own medical help. I won’t belabor the pros and cons but I do appreciate the police who are willing to use Narcan. Sometimes the paramedics are involved in other situations and the police always respond to the calls. They do CPR, pull people out of burning cars, and homes, deliver babies and more and I appreciate that as well because those jobs are not really theirs either. There just ends up being crossover with first responders. Some would rather use the Narcan then watch a person stop breathing completely as their color goes from grey to blue. We have three police officers in our family as well and the call they do not want is the call of a well being check with a foul odor. If the officers could have saved a life they would have preferred that (regardless of the medical condition). If officers would be willing to carry the Narcan I think they should be allowed do so.

    • d gasawa

      Who do you think should pay for the service and the Narcan?

  • TheOldGuy

    I’m conflicted about this issue. I have lost a family member (niece) to an opioid overdose. So part of me believes that if anyone could save a life, they should try to save a life. What causes me to be conflicted is that no one forced addicts to use drugs in the first place. It’s a conscience choice they made on their own. By doing so they accepted the risks that come along with that choice. Using an opioid is like skydiving without checking to see if you packed your parachute before jumping.

    • Katrina

      I’m sorry for the loss of your niece. I agree with the rest of your comment. Police have enough hats to wear without adding administering medication. As you said, it is a conscious choice. To pamper them because addiction is a “sickness” is crazy. They made the choice to take the med the first time.

  • disqus_j5Nj3oxoii

    I support him 100%. if these fools want to kill themselves while using drugs let them freaking die. Less of a strain on society and more time can can better be used helping law abiding tax paying citizens not this drug use scum. Let them die, its their choice to be fools and use drugs.

  • Edward Lewis

    Officer Blue writes. “This makes it an officer-safety issue for officers who administer the drug. It’s an excuse that doesn’t make much sense.”

    Well then, Officer Blue, maybe YOU need to join the force and administer the Narcan. And when a druggie you are trying to revive tries to choke you to death, maybe it will make sense to you then.

    Criticism is easy for arm-chair quarterbacks, but none of them ever take the field.

  • Peekin-In

    Why do I see a lawsuit looming over police dept’s. for administering that?? Police now have to protect the public, be social workers for the mentally ill and effectively determine they’re mentally ill. How much pressure do they have to have? They’re to enforce laws, protect the public and arrest those who deserve it. The public needs to get off drugs, stop stealing and beating up people and be respectful and quit blaming society and their parents for their screwed up lives. I sincerely believe people know the difference between right and wrong and should be held accountable for their choices.

  • George Boatright

    The sheriff does not need a reason. I see a huge tort type liability in administering meds by those who do not have the medical training allowing them to invade anothers body. Besides . . . who wants to?

  • Terry Poynter

    no. why continue to spend taxpayer money on people committed to killing themselves?

  • #FreeKekistan 🐸👌🚁

    No. They should not carry Narcan. It is not the job of the police to assist people stupid enough to get addicted to drugs, in this manner. Lock their asses up. Using illegal drugs is illegal and and using Narcan would be wasting taxpayer dollars to help someone THAT IS A CRIMINAL. There are far more important things police officers could spend taxpayer dollars on. Why put our officers in potential harm’s way for a person that clearly wanted to pass the fuck out on drugs?

    • Deijay Clark

      And locking them up wouldn’t cost even more than the Narcan? Good rhetoric.

  • Debbie Christian

    So what happens when one of your officers comes in contact with lethal drug? No narcan? He dies?