Dont ya hate it when that happens?
A lot of stupid disagrements have started just because some one could not
follow the thread.
Those of us that can follow them know who said what.

Read my post and you'll see that I responded appropriately, and to the proper
individual.

If this doesn't suit you, too bad.


James S. Prine
http://hometown.aol.com/jsprine/

If you read my post you would see that I was replying to Dwayne, not you,
James.
I also did not mention any names.

But ... your reply was exactly on topic and is a great example of exactly
what I was saying.
Thanks.

William Lee


"James S. Prine" wrote in message
...
Dont ya hate it when that happens?
A lot of stupid disagrements have started just because some one could not
follow the thread.
Those of us that can follow them know who said what.

Read my post and you'll see that I responded appropriately, and to the
proper
individual.

If this doesn't suit you, too bad.


James S. Prine
http://hometown.aol.com/jsprine/

Soliloquy wrote:
We are ambushed, just by non-human things.

Quite frankly, I find it fascinating, yet rather odd, that you'd have the
audacity to compare inanimate objects with the workings of malicious human
beings.

No one has ever said (certainly not I) that working in industrial plants was
entirely safe...quite the contrary.

I've worked in an industrial plant myself...Amax Nickel Refining Company, in
the Ammonium Nitrate division (Area 13...lovely number!), and know how nasty
things can get. I had more than a few close shaves there, including narrowly
missing falling into a vessel filled with ammonia (the fumes literally consumed
my coveralls and I passed out while I was attempting to 'gauge' the tank), and
falling through a roof into a burning building while fighting a fire.

Is it not an ambush of sorts?

No, no, it's not an ambush of any sorts. Inanimate objects do not act from
free will, and so, cannot 'ambush'.

The only difference is that with an industrial accident, there
will be no backup support, no SWAT team.

Wow...here in Louisiana, the industrial plants are required to have their own
fire departments, HAZMAT units, medics, etc. And, it might interest you that
not every law enforcement agency has its own SWAT team...small municipal
departments cannot afford them in any event...and depending upon a State or
County team might take far too long to be of any benefit.

Ambush by human means or by mechanical means is the same if the
recipient is dead or crippled.

My dictionary defines 'ambush' as 'a deployment of persons in hiding to make a
surprise attack', and I'll have to go along with the dictionary in this issue.


With the police fetish of taping the
perpetrator

Fetish? I understood that videotaping perpetrators was to simply provide an
'unbiased witness', so to speak, during public contacts. A 'fetish' denotes
something entirely different.

I feel that
police should be required to wear cameras when entering homes or
businesses, to preclude those unfounded claims of brutality. If the
actions are honorable and according to procedure, why not tape them?

An interesting idea. But, would you like public service officials entering
your home and videotaping everything you do and say, the appearance of your
home and furnishings, etc? And, who would store the tapes, administer them,
etc? How long would they be kept? Would the video records have to be shared
with other government agencies, such as the IRS, Family Services, and so on?
Opens a lot of cans of worms, does it not?

Of course, there is always the possibility that they don't want the
video tapes since they (the tapes) show what abuses the police are
capable of.

LOL...being human beings, I imagine 'the police' are as capable of stupid,
silly, dangerous, or occasionally criminal behavior, as anyone else. But your
suggeston that 'the police' are afraid of being videotaped while performing
their duties doesn't necessarily hold much water.

What I had a
problem with is that the police, after securing the youths in the police
car, continued with an inspection of the stolen car.

Why? Was the vehicle impounded? Prior to being 'towed', or even sealed, the
police are invariably required to inventory the vehicle and its contents.

Three officers
were pulling packages out of the trunk, and ripping wrapping paper off
them, it was Christmas time and whoever owned the car must recently have
made purchases. They were looking for stuff to steal.

Really? Did you see any of the Officers steal anything, or is that just your
hunch? If you thought the Officers were trying to steal the items, why didn't
you obtain whatever information was available about them, and make an official
complaint, or call your local media?

Hell, if they
found anything of value, they could blame the black kids for stealing
it.

LOL...you can't have it both ways. The black kids in the stolen car *had*
already stolen the property. It had to be identified and undoubtedly
inventoried. There might have been information (not known to you) about one
(or more) of the packages inside the car that the police were trying to locate.
You didn't have all the available facts, but you immediately jump to the
conclusion that the police were trying to steal things.

They were actually peeking around the trunk periodically to see if
anyone was watching.

Yes, it's called 'situational awareness', for one thing. How did 'the police'
know that a backup team of punks might not have showed up to ambush them and
set their colleagues free? Sounds crazy, doesn't it, but we're finding out
more and more that gangs of thieves are acting in concert, with tactics,
communications, and weaponry available to facilitate all sorts of nasty things.

There was another officer in front of the stolen
car, they need not fear for their safety, no crowd had gathered.

LOL...it doesn't take 'a crowd' to fire a shot from a roof or a window, or to
initiate a drive-by shooting.

They
were paranoid that someone would see them, maybe that someone would FILM
them.

Actually, if seems that the paranoia in this incident is emanating from you.

Police need to use their brains. As they are programmed by
indoctrination that we are all "their enemies", they are ever willing to
do such atrocities as these.

Interesting, and yes, apparently I was correct about assuming that you are more
than a little paranoid. In the 'high school raid' in S.C. that you mentioned,
even you admitted that arrests had been made, yet you add that police dogs were
used to 'terrorize' the students, etc. You read an article, and take it as
gospel. Interesting indeed.

Even in Israel, some of the soldiers have
enough chutzpah to violate orders and refuse immoral commands.

My goodness....now you're equating foreign soldiers' actions with those of
American police officers! Unreal.

Too many
police use the excuse that they are just doing as ordered.

Ok...provide some documentation...names, dates, places. Prove it.

No one has
the right to violate others in such a manner. They didn't find anything.
What assholes. Brave armed men with crew cuts and dogs, corralling the
evil teenagers.

Oh, we're back to South Carolina again? Sorry, I thought we were still in
Isreal with the I.D.F. Sorry, my mistake g. As you wrote, arrests *had*
been made, so, what's your beef? That the teenagers had been 'terrorized' by
the police? I say again, you read an article, no doubt a totally UNbiased
article, and you feel that it is totally factual. Okay, you live in your
little world, and let the rest of us live in ours, amigo.

This was truly sickening. I can see why police abhor cameras.

Again, an unfounded assertation unproven by fact.

I grew up with a kid whose father was a commander on the PGH fire
department...

Remainder snipped for brevity...so now, the actions of a Fire Department
official many years ago are the basis of your problem with authority ficgures,
specifically, the police? If you knew that the man had stolen property in his
home, why didn't you say something it when it could have done some good, rather
than rant about it years later?

Yes, we have had suicides, yes the job is stressful. Have you tried
breathing chemicals all day?

Er, yes. I live in Louisiana, where our atmosphere reeks 24/7 from the nearby
chemical and refining plants...they don't call my neighborhood 'cancer alley'
for nothing g.

Have you worked 16 hours a day 6 days a week for several weeks (I
haven't but many have been compelled to).

Yes, I actually have pulled tours like that...for months on end. I really like
the 'days off' which you have to spend in Court after working 16 hours, or
attending mandatory training, etc.

What about all the small time cops? Do they automatically get the
same adulation without the work?

LOL...there you go again, with 'adulation' and I guess you'll be referring to
'worshipping cops', etc., again.

Of the following, none of them knew that the building was going to fall.

WRONG! Many of the NYFD members knew that the buildings *were* going to fall,
it was just a matter of time. Radio transmissions from the doomed men inside
the towers have confirmed this.

By concentrating on the valor of the
firemen, we omit recognition of the citizens that also did truly heroic
things.

Nonsense! I think everyone out there, in whatever capacity, performed well
that day...and in the horrendous days that followed. Except of course the
thieves and looters.

I suggest that you and others support the police, the ones worthy of
support, and leave the worship for church.

I can make some suggestions for you, too, but doubt that they'd make much
difference g.


James S. Prine
http://hometown.aol.com/jsprine/

And you for yours. Sorry to see you abandoned as you have been.

LOL...Airborne...we're *supposed* to be surrounded g.


James S. Prine
http://hometown.aol.com/jsprine/

Clifton T. Sharp Jr. wrote:

I almost pooped my pants when we were taught the Illinois regulations for
driving with lights and sirens. The laws are such that if a car "driving
code" is sitting at a full stop and some drunk loses control, spins out,
rolls over, and hits him, the guy with the lights and sirens is responsible.
Fortunately, the courts hold otherwise if there's any evidence that the
"code" car wasn't responsible.

It's much the same in Louisiana...no matter who is truly at fault in a given
situation, the police are nearly always held responsible, as far as civil
liabilities, etc.

Really makes you want to run around and help people, eh?




James S. Prine
http://hometown.aol.com/jsprine/

Clifton T. Sharp Jr. ...

^ I've been on the scene when a firefighter saved a life
^ by pulling someone from a burning building. I've also
^ been there when firefighters cried because they couldn't
^ pull someone, or discovered a lifeless body.

^ I can tell you that the latter guys weren't crying
^ because of missed glory.

No, of course not. They behaved as most humans would. But I wasn't talking
about how people behave in their jobs or how well they perform them. What I
was describing is one of the primary reasons why people seek dangerous jobs.
For glory. And as I said, much of that is suppressed in most people after
their education and training. In addition, since you brought it up, the
reason someone takes a job does not necessarily affect how they perform the
job.

^ Frank:
^ Why do people do dangerous jobs? Either for the glory, the
^ money, or, more rarely, because it is something important
^ that must be done.


^ I wasn't a hero, I was the guy covering the
^ omission. It was all stuff someone had to do
^ and no one was doing it.

^ I've been in the "hero" spot once or twice and all it does
^ is confuse me.

^ It never seemed to me that I had done anything exceptional
^ at all ...

^ To me, it seemed like any other little task I'd done ...

Were we discussing you or are you seeking glory?

Frank

Clifton T. Sharp Jr. ...

^ Frank wrote:
^ ... I wasn't talking about how people behave in their
^ jobs or how well they perform them. What I was describing
^ is one of the primary reasons why people seek dangerous
^ jobs. For glory.

^ I can't say I've ever seen anyone in a public-safety job
^ for more than six months who meets your description. I've
^ seen a few who lasted a shorter time, but they quit fast.

That statement is consistent with what I have been describing. Unless you're
examining these people during the initial screening process or during their
initial training you are not likely to see any.


^ This is a serious question. How did you get glory-seeking
^ out of what I said there?

I didn't, but early in this discussion you asked "how many lives have you
saved?" (which implies "you don't know what you're talking about, you're not
one of us") then in your previous message you proceed to describe some of the
super things that you've done. These are not definitive but they are
indicators that you want people to know that you've done some great things.
Why do people want others to know that they've done great things? Most people
who want this sort of attention don't come right out and say something like
"look at how good I am, I save lives daily!". They would be scorned if they
did so they learn to disguise their effort in a way just like you did. I
personally would have chosen another person to use as an example.


^ I said I'd had the glory seat once or twice and didn't
^ WANT it.

True, but you receive more glory by saying those things and then stating that
you don't want glory because of them.

Frank

Frank, has anyone ever told you your a butthead? If not allow me to be the
first.

"Frank" wrote in message
news:01c3ad5f$4cedff30$0125250a@obhlfrnsmfnowhve.. .
Clifton T. Sharp Jr. ...

^ Frank wrote:
^ ... I wasn't talking about how people behave in their
^ jobs or how well they perform them. What I was describing
^ is one of the primary reasons why people seek dangerous
^ jobs. For glory.

^ I can't say I've ever seen anyone in a public-safety job
^ for more than six months who meets your description. I've
^ seen a few who lasted a shorter time, but they quit fast.

That statement is consistent with what I have been describing. Unless
you're
examining these people during the initial screening process or during
their
initial training you are not likely to see any.


^ This is a serious question. How did you get glory-seeking
^ out of what I said there?

I didn't, but early in this discussion you asked "how many lives have you
saved?" (which implies "you don't know what you're talking about, you're
not
one of us") then in your previous message you proceed to describe some of
the
super things that you've done. These are not definitive but they are
indicators that you want people to know that you've done some great
things.
Why do people want others to know that they've done great things? Most
people
who want this sort of attention don't come right out and say something
like
"look at how good I am, I save lives daily!". They would be scorned if
they
did so they learn to disguise their effort in a way just like you did. I
personally would have chosen another person to use as an example.


^ I said I'd had the glory seat once or twice and didn't
^ WANT it.

True, but you receive more glory by saying those things and then stating
that
you don't want glory because of them.

Frank

"Saving lives', 'heros', etc.; all of it is a crock.

One might as well give an airline captain a medal every time he lands an
aircraft, after all, 'he's just saved several hundred lives!"

LOL

James S. Prine
http://hometown.aol.com/jsprine/

Clifton T. Sharp Jr. ...

^ I don't believe I've saved any lives. But I didn't burst
^ in here bragging about how dangerous my surroundings are
^ and try to use that to diminish the contribution of public
^ safety personnel to society.

No one did that. The guy asked a good question: why do emergency services
personnel get all the glory when there are other dangerous, and sometimes
more dangerous, jobs out there. And I answered that question: because we
don't want to pay them what they are worth so we thank them with glory. You,
on the other hand, for a reason you wish not to admit, have turned this
discussion so that it centers on you.

I'm not here to discuss you, I'm here to discuss radios.

Frank