On or around Mon, 26 Dec 2005 08:35:59 +0000, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:
traditionally, you have a springloaded trigger which you hold closed, rather like a grenade handle, which releases when you die.
but as pointed out elsewhere in the fred, these days it could be almost anything.
Going back to the thing about the bloke - they challenged, and he ran, and they chased him all through a tube station and down to the platform and onto a train, and *then* shot him. If they were any good, they'd have shot him to disable him long before he got to the tube train - if he HAD had a bomb on a deadman trigger, it'd have done far more damage down there than in the street. So even by the lights of what they were allegedly trying to do, they didn't do much of a job.
Basically, if we're going to have armed police officers as a habit they need MUCH better training.
You can make one more sophisticated than that, from what is easily available, a hert monitor that will trigger the device if your hert stops beating for a set period of time.
That is the dumbest thing I have see written in a long time.
Those "bastards" are the same "Bastards" that are protecting you and your liberties even though you don't know it or seam to care.
Try having a pop at those"bastards" that want to infringe on your liberties by making it unsafe to go out by blowing themselfs up because they dont agree with your way of life, religion or politics.
Yes, I'm aware of the technical possibilities, having worked on marine electronics, robotics, cars and being a general computer geek first and foremost.
I couldn't be bothered to respond to his post properly being as he'd taken the original "deadman's switch" meaning and stuffed it full of anything that seemed to be laying around. He then went on to do the usual fuzzy thinker's favourite of saying that anything at all from an organisation, the Israeli army in this instance, can't be relied upon because of specific mistakes.
Law of diminishing returns and all that. Can't have a reasonable argument with an unreasonable man. Don't argue with an idiot as he will drag you down to his level and beat you through experience etc etc.
Initial news reports stated that he was challenged and ran, but later reports said that this had been shown to be false after CCTV evidence had been shown to contradict almost everything eye-witnesses had said, including the padded jacket that he wasn't actually wearing. He'd apparently walked to the platform, run onto the train as it was about to pull away, then been jumped on and shot by police officers who quite probably had just been told to tackle that chap without knowing that the intelligence was totally flawed.
Here's an exerpt from a BBC website page on the differences between the initial reports and later evidence:
"CCTV footage is said to show the man walking at normal pace into the station, picking up a copy of a free newspaper and apparently passing through the barriers before descending the escalator to the platform and running to a train.
He boarded a Tube train, paused, looking left and right, and sat in a seat facing the platform.
The eyewitness has subsequently told a newspaper that the man he saw vaulting the barrier must have been a police officer."
formatting link
Some people tackle me from time to time for being a "wooly liberal" (which I'm not) because I rarely like to make up my mind on a subject of national discussion. The reason for this is because I know full well that all you can be certain of when reading reports about any event is that you're only getting a small part of the story, and might be getting total fabrication, intended or not. The BBC page above might be based on misinformation, it might not, and we're never likely to know as we're not directly involved. This is why I usually pepper what I say with "apparently", "a report said", "according to" etc rather than "this happened", "that happened".
A deadman's switch is any action that is taken on the failure to provide an input. Any "failsafe" system implements the function whatever you term it. I illustrate why the reflex police apologist's reply "They had to kill him properly to make sure he couldn't press the trigger" is just bollocks, whoever told them it was a good idea.
So, how many "specific mistakes" does it take to become evidence of something systematic ? When does something move from c*ck-up to conspiracy ?
It would be extremely easy for someone to hire a very anonymous Vauxhall or similar from the local hire shop in my name. They need a clone of my credit card and driving licence, nothing else. Quite commonplace crime I believe.
A week's hire would be very normal and arouse no suspicion at all. I'd be aware it happened at the end of the month when the credit card statement arrived - maybe...
I don't think anyone elses landie looks quite like mine, should be easy to prove from the pictures that it was not mine. Best thing to do if you are worried is have a unique paint job, then again, it is the police burden to prove beyond reasonable doubt that you were the driver, remember Gerald Nabarro ?
Again I think the internet could prove that I was at home when I say I am at home from email logs.
You shoot somebody 9 times in the head because it kills them, outright, no messing about with a wounded suspect who may be about to detonate a large, or small bomb and blow innocent bystanders to bits, One death , lots of deaths you call it.
I think that the Police did what was necessary to protect innocent people. Given the heightened state of alert, the fact that the person ran when challenged( and don't give me that crap about being a foreigner who didn't understand a police challenge, he had been here for some time) the Police on the ground did the right thing . Questions raised by the shooting should be directed at the government who let so many civil liberties of the majority go to pot by pandering to minorities with in the country who wish to flout the law.
Nowt to do with landrovers. The sad thing is it has happened and there is little or no evidence that the perpetrators have undertaken not to do it again!
Given their track record and provided that their are no independent witnesses they can basically do/say what they like and our gutless magistrates will believe them.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.