Printable View
Gee. I feel all disappointed inside that you couldn't answer such a simple question on basic criminal investigations Tink. Impersonating a police officer, either in person or via text is a felony. I'm very glad the nice folks here at JupMedia have your ip address logged so you can be backtraced. Have a nice day.Quote:
Blackice, you failed to make any sort of argument other then bash me personally. You can tell all your friends about me, duh, who cares, really, get a life.
Yes it does : injured or cornered enemies always give the most dangerous times for the PBI [poor bloody infantry] I still think the trooper did the right thing.Quote:
foxy, you missed the word INJURED!!!!!!!!!!! That made a whole difference in what I was saying.
In the tape shown here, the soldiers were talking in the background of the shot, when one suddenly shouted out "this one's still alive" [or words to that effect] at THAT moment he has to decide whether to 'check' the enemy, or protect his comrades ..................
He killed the enemy, protected his group, followed his training.
As pointed out earlier, soldiers are trained to KILL ................ NOT apprehend.
This... "soldiers are trained to KILL ................ NOT apprehend."...is probably the best and most accurate description of the difference between soldiers and police there is.
Soldiers who are regulated to the status of being peacekeepers generally incure more losses and injuries because they are not trained to enforce laws and be the civil authority...soldiers are meant to behave as soldiers not policemen.
Blackice, you are getting too pathetic on me now. Did you fail in the academy or is your "knowledge "based on some dumbass community college course? Really...because if you knew any better , you'd know that a crime scene is sacred ground. You'd know that only very qualified ppl and detectives are allowed in. You'd know that the first responding officer's task is to secure the place and make sure NOBODY goes in. You'd know that the more people that go in, the more damage you are doing to the evidence left. And last, you'd know that only evidence collection team, which is a handfull of selected highly trained officers, can do the task you are asking me about. As far as getting Jupiters to investigate my "bogus claims"
BRING IT ON!!
May I call you Officer Tink.... It just seems so much more... er.... respectful, (if that's even the word I'm looking for... but I hope you know what I mean.....)
You and I are pretty much diametrically opposed... that's clear.... But I have that horrible need to explain myself and my comrades in arms, both past and present, to you. Take it for what you will, I can no more prove you aren't an active duty police officer any more than you can prove that I am a fuzzy faced 16 year old who has no idea what he is talking about... I do it with pride in what I did and what my comrades in arms did then, previously and now.... fair enough?
Funnily enough I wrote a diatribe on this the other day.... See here. I would suggest that your "guys and gals on the job" come from groups two or three. I don't think I need to expand on this point further, it could be conceived as being disrespectful to their service which would be wrong of me even on the most basic level.....Quote:
we have a lot of military guys and gals on the job, the comparison comes from them.
Yes, Erok has/had and absolute right to express his opinions. If you look through the conversations he and I had over his time here you will notice that he and I argued like cat and dog.... but in the end I was a supporter of his right to say things and of him personally... My final message to him was that he can come here and PM me for any help he wants.... He never will, probably, but the offer is always there..... I don't offer that to many people in this world.... I liked Erok even though I can guarantee you will _never_ be able to piss me off like he did.... ;)Quote:
Like I said before, er0k had the right to express his opinions. I'm not going to sit here and praise a photo of a soldier patting a little kittie, because personally there's nothing calming and cute about what we're doing in Iraq.
Soldiers do "pet kitties", we do throw stuff for dogs, we offer kids food and help, we place our bodies between the 'bad guys" and the civilian.... and we do it willingly, with the knowledge that we are doing the "right" thing.... It's a hard concept to grasp for most people.... I had recently, (ok three years), left the military when the first Gulf War began.... I was scared shitless..... Because I knew that so many of my friends were in combat without me..... I _so_ needed to be there.... I couldn't think of having men I had served with for so long dying without me being there to help..... That's what you will _never_ understand.... It's not meant offensively.... it's a simple fact....
It's so easy for the media to show you the "bad" stuff and omit the good.... Dig a little deeper into what is going on over there.... You might be surprised to find that the "hordes of Ghengis Khan", as the media like to portray them, are a group of human beings trying to do an incredibly difficult job, and do it with dignity and respect for the indigenous population. You of all people should understand that in a group of 130,000(?) there are going to be some "bad apples". If you can't see that the media prey upon those "bad apples" to make the whole look bad then you have a bit of a problem......
You're right.... There is nothing "calming and cute" about what is going on in Iraq.... War is never either of those things... but sometimes it is necessary..... You can argue up and down with me about the reasons... they are technically irrelevant since we disagree about the benefit/loss... That's ok.... I fully understand that doing the "right thing" from a position of strength is no less valid than trying to do it from a position of weakness... The difference is that doing it from a position of strength is more likely to succeed and it will be less "painful" in the end.... You can trust me on that if you like....
As to your links to "unpretty" pictures..... Er.... You see as bad or worse in an RTA, (Road Traffic Accident), every day don't you? These pictures _shock_ you? I can generate worse injuries with my Honda Pilot at 30mph... Why are they so shocking to you? Humans break easily.....
Ok, I'll bring it on and no, I've neither attended the academy, nor have I taken one of those 'dumbass community college courses' of which you speak. I do, however, believe in the power of a well read, literate mind.
To answer my own question, since you seem to be completely incapable of doing so:
There are 4 different methods of plotting the location of objects and evidence on a crime scene sketch. They are as follows:
1. Rectangular-coordinate method
Commonly used in rooms, this method uses two adjacent walls as fixed points from which distances are measured at right angles.
2. Triangulation method
Commonly used in outdoor scenes, this method uses straight-line measures from two fixed objects to the evidence to create a triangle with the evidence in the angle formed by the two straight lines.
3. Compass-point method
Uses a protractor to measure the angle formed by two lines.
4. Cross-projection method
Used in some interior crime scenes, this method is useful to show the relationship between evidence found on the floor and on the walls. A sketch is made presenting the floor and walls as if they were one surface.
Uniform and concise notes must be taken so that if the investigating officer becomes unavailable, his partner or senior officer may testify using the notes which the investigator has taken.
Source: Criminal Investigation (seventh edition) by Wayne W. Bennett, LL.B. and Karen M. Hess, Ph.D. - copyright 2004 by Wadsworth publishing. It's used as a text in the police academy, and the entire course content is required test material for peace officer certification.
You're right about 'sacred ground' and crime scenes, although you again could've garnered that from LA Law. :rolleyes: The question I asked which you failed miserably at answering you couldn't have, however.
Did I bring it enough there, officer tinkywinky? Oh! you were talking about the IP address thing... that's up to the moderators, if they so choose. I'd rather just serve up Tinkerbelle a flambe.
[edit] The following comes direct to you from Mrs. |ce, who was also a source in writing this, she being the Legal person of the family:
There is absolutely no way you could pass a 'dumbass community college' course and you are completely lacking in credibility. Anyone, even off the street, could rip you to shreds on a witness stand. I fail to understand how such a person could ever even pretend to be a Police Officer, let alone actually be one. A patrolman must also be qualified to do the crime scene investigation as |ce has stated, so that if he becomes an officer in a smaller community where there is no investigator or evidence gathering unit, and the patrol officer wears 'many hats' he will be able to do his job. I pity you, and my prayers go out to anyone who happens to be under your protection.[/edit]
TS is trying to say soldiers are trained to kill, nothing more nothing less.Quote:
Soldiers who are regulated to the status of being peacekeepers generally incure more losses and injuries because they are not trained to enforce laws and be the civil authority...soldiers are meant to behave as soldiers not policemen.
As for every other thing he has said, above...............It is all true.
I live with the guilt that I am alive and so many of my friends/mates are dead every day.
jinxy,
How exactly are you putting what I said in conflict with TS's statements ? For one thing : there is no conflict ! Secondly : my words were, as they all were, directed at tinkerbell ! and those particular words were in response to foxyloxley's post and again directed to tinkerbell ! Without the whole post they are completely out of context.
I don't think you read the posts...or you didn't read them very well !
Eg :
He reads the posts.
Its late in the UK, we get tired, and [well me anyway] drunk :drink:
You cannot see emotion on the web, hence emoticons, nor body language, but YOU try reading Jinxy's post again, its not an attack, merely a statment of fact.
Pax
Ok foxyloxley,
If I read jinxy's post as directed at tinkerbell rather than me ( the quote threw me off ) it makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up ! :)
Eg