A TIERED MARCH FRAMEWORK FOR NON-MEDICAL PUBLIC SECURITY AGENTS RESPONDING TO FIREARM CASUALTIES: A COMPETENCY-BOUNDED PROTOCOL PROPOSAL
Abstract
In most civilian firearm incidents the first person to reach the victim is a public security agent without medical training, who occupies the critical interval before the arrival of pre-hospital emergency services. In Brazil, where firearms account for roughly three-quarters of intentional violent deaths, this interval frequently determines survival. This article proposes a tiered adaptation of the MARCH protocol (Massive hemorrhage, Airway, Respiration, Circulation, Hypothermia), drawn from the Tactical Combat Casualty Care framework, designed specifically for non-medical security personnel operating in high-violence urban environments. The proposal is conceptual rather than empirical. It does not report a controlled trial or measured patient outcomes. Its contribution is a decision architecture that separates a basic sequence, executable by any trained agent within legal and clinical limits, from an advanced sequence restricted to health professionals and certified tactical responders. Each step carries an explicit competency boundary and a binary decision gate intended to prevent both inaction and overreach. The framework occupies a defined position between layperson hemorrhage-control initiatives and full clinical trauma courses. It is grounded in the international TCCC literature and in field training experience accumulated in Brazil, and it is structured to be transferable to any jurisdiction facing high rates of penetrating trauma and variable emergency response times. The article argues that the tiered logic, rather than the mnemonic itself, is the element that makes battlefield-derived trauma care safely deployable by non-medical first responders within bounded and legally defensible limits.
Author Biography
Electrical engineer and judicial expert in ballistics, firearms and shooting instructor and gunsmith licensed by the Brazilian Federal Police. Author of eleven books on ballistics, personal defense, and firearms instruction. His work centers on the technical design of training protocols for security personnel.
References
Butler FK, Hagmann J, Butler EG. Tactical combat casualty care in special operations. Mil Med. 1996;161(Suppl 1):3-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/161.suppl_1.3
Eastridge BJ, Mabry RL, Seguin P, et al. Death on the battlefield (2001-2011): implications for the future of combat casualty care. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(6 Suppl 5):S431-S437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3182755dcc
Kotwal RS, Montgomery HR, Kotwal BM, et al. Eliminating preventable death on the battlefield. Arch Surg. 2011;146(12):1350-1358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2011.213
Jacobs LM, McSwain NE, Rotondo MF, et al. Improving survival from active shooter events: the Hartford Consensus. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(6):1399-1400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e318296b237
Fórum Brasileiro de Segurança Pública. Anuário Brasileiro de Segurança Pública 2023. 17ª ed. São Paulo; 2023.
Ministério da Defesa, Brasil. Portaria Normativa nº 16/MD, 12 abr. 2018: Diretriz de Atendimento Pré-Hospitalar Tático do Ministério da Defesa.
National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians. PHTLS: Prehospital Trauma Life Support. 9th ed. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2019.
Bellamy RF. The causes of death in conventional land warfare: implications for combat casualty care research. Mil Med. 1984;149(2):55-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/149.2.55
