l3ubba

It's not a woman's watch but it still looks nice and it is what I wear. You can have the links taken out to fit your wrist. I am of a pretty slender build so I don't have huge wrists either but I like this watch because it looks nice, very easy to read, and it is low profile so it doesn't look huge on my wrist. http://www.skagen.com/us/en/men/products/watches/grenen-mens-titanium-link-watch-pdp801xltxmp.html?referer=productlisting But for work I wear a Timex Expedition digital watch so I don't mess up my nice watch.

Yep I agree with the department policy, never heard of a state law that prohibits you from taking pictures of a traffic crash, at least not in my state. It is always safer to not take pictures, so yeah, if you don't take any pictures of work then it is harder for people to try and get you in trouble. I have some pictures from traffic crashes and I have shared them with friends on occasion, I have never got in trouble for it.

Not sure who told you all that but they are mistaken. Sure, if the department has a policy against it then you can get in trouble with the department but it would not involve any legal action. And yes, if the person gets upset that you took a picture of your car they can sue you but I can almost guarantee they won't win because if it is just a picture of a wrecked car then they have no leg to stand on from a legal point of view.

15 different privacy laws? What statute book are you reading all this from? There is no law against taking pictures of an accident (at least not in the US). License plates are visible to everyone on the road so they are not private.

Years? It has only been three years since we left Iraq. So you are saying life expectancy went down in the past three years? That is not true, as a matter of fact the life expectancy has been slowly increasing in Iraq since 2006. It is increasing very slowly but it is increasing.

Yeah your life expectancy is going to go down when your country is the site of a major war. I'm pretty sure the life expectancy for people in France went down during WWII too.

That is such a broad question. Do you want me to give you my opinion on each country? It is impossible to give an opinion on such a broad range of countries because each one is different and the reason for their current situation is varies from each country. Not to mention the fact that what unr3al said is true; third world technically refers to countries that were not aligned with NATO (first world) or the Communist Bloc (second world) countries and while most of these countries were poor (that is where the stereotype came from) not all of them were.

For what you are doing probably not. 2GB of video memory is still really good. You can always spend the extra money for more memory if you want. The more memory that your graphics card has the less memory it has to pull from your system's RAM. If you don't want to spend the money then it isn't a big deal, most graphics cards have 1-2GBs of memory so 4GB is a lot. It is really up to you. The biggest thing you want to make sure of is that the new graphics card will fit onto your motherboard, that there is enough room inside your computer case, and if your current power supply can handle the upgrade or if you are going to need a new one. I am not sure how big the GTX 680 is, but I know when I built my PC I got a full size tower because the graphics card I put into it (GTX 780TI) was a pretty big card.

Like others have said, I would recommend upgrading your graphics cards. Your processor and RAM look fine based on the games you are playing. Not sure what kind of budget you are working with but something in the GTX 500-600 series would be a good upgrade. You can get a GTX 660 for about $150 or so. Just don't forget to look at your power supply before doing so. Anytime you make an upgrade to your PC make sure your power supply can handle it. Upgrading the power supply is really easy, I would recommend a 600 watt power supply if you want to upgrade the graphics card.

Nothing new, NYPD has been using them for several years now. They are actually a cost saving alternative to regular patrol cars for units that don't have the same needs as patrol officers. Some agencies use them for their parking enforcement officers or transit police. Those police officers don't need to respond anywhere quickly and don't need to transport prisoners so why spend extra money on a regular patrol car and all the gas they use (police cars are very fuel efficient) when it is not necessary.

Really? Is that all you know Kazakhstan for? There is much more to Kazakhstan than that. They have a thriving economy (one of the largest in Central Asia) and a very advanced information and communication network. They are actually a very respectable country and I have found that very few people know much about the countries in that region. Everyone just hears that the country ends in "stan" and assumes its a shitty country, probably because of our experience in Afghanistan.

The Caprice is rear wheel drive which in terms of handling is better than all wheel drive when it comes to cornering. Not sure why people get the idea that all wheel drive is the most badass thing for police cars because the best police cars were all rear wheel drive (CVPI, original Caprice). The engine is bigger than the Taurus and unless the agency buying them springs for the upgraded twin turbocharged engine the Taurus engine has less horsepower. The Taurus with the twin turbocharged engine is only 0.4 seconds faster than the Caprice, so not a huge difference. The Caprice is actually slightly bigger than the Taurus and if Chevy is doing what they said they would do they have modified the interior to make it more comfortable for a police officer with a duty belt to sit in. Like I said, I've had one chance to spend a shift in a Taurus and it was a huge improvement over the Impalas I was used to riding in but worse than the CVPI. I have not had a chance to try out a Caprice because so few agencies have them. I didn't mean to hijack this thread though. I will be more than happy to continue via PM or a separate thread if you would like to talk about it more.

I have always been a fan of rotators and I feel they provide the greatest visibility to other vehicles approaching, especially from the sides. However I will say that with all of this LED technology getting better and brighter I think it is actually creating a bigger hazard instead of increasing officer safety. At night time if you are on the side of a road on a traffic stop or traffic crash and you have your lights going it is absolutely blinding to other drivers who are approaching you. These super bright lights might provide greater visibility to your vehicle but it makes it harder for other motorist to see the officer or other hazards around the vehicle. That is why I am actually a big fan of lightbars that allow you to turn on your front facing lights and only turn on a few rear facing lights.

Tampa isn't too bad. We have Busch Gardens and Clearwater Beach that are both really nice. Plenty of good food and lots of good breweries if you are old enough to drink. It can be patchy, some spots are really ghetto and some spots are really nice. The area immediately around MacDill is really nice, but you won't be able to afford any place in there, even the smaller houses in that neighborhood are $500k+. It just depends what block you are on. In some areas it can be really nice on one block then the next block is a shit hole. I'm not too sure what it is like living on base because my dad was an senior officer and we lived off base, but I heard it is nice. I haven't seen the single soldier (or I guess airman for you guys) barracks but the family housing for enlisted and officers look really nice. But come on, it is an Air Force base, we all know that the AF has the best housing and dining facilities of all the armed forces.

I find the title of this topic offensive. Nobody should have a favorite war. Do you understand what you are saying? You are a big "war fan", do you understand how wrong that is? I hate to be one of those people that blames video games and TV shows (because I usually hate those people) but I do think that the amount of violence that the younger generation is exposed to makes you guys so desensitized to violence and makes you think that combat is all fun and heroic like in Battlefield or whatever game you play.

At least before the Caprice was reintroduced and the CVPI was still on the market, then the answer is yes. However, now that Chevy has brought back the Caprice (which I hear is the most badass police car on the market) Chevy is a much bigger contender especially given the reputation and legendary status that the Caprice had back in the 90s. And now that Ford has discontinued the CVPI and switched to the Taurus I think that Ford and Chevy are on equal grounds now. I am not a big fan of the Taurus model police cars, they are smaller than the CVPI was on the inside. I haven't got to spend much time in one though, only got to spend one 10 hour shift in one. Wasn't as bad as the Impala was but I would rather be in a CVPI. Hell yeah, I spent about 8 years living there before I joined the Army. My dad was stationed there but now he is retired. He still works there but now he is a contractor. MacDill is a nice base and the Tampa area isn't bad. I am not a big fan of living in Florida but there are far worse places to live than Tampa in the state. Do you know if you will be living on base or off? If you live off base then try to live in Hillsborough County if you can find an affordable place, it will be an easier commute and you will be close to everything. Pinellas County is the next best choice after that. I would not recommend living in Pasco County (that is where I lived), there is nothing up there and most of the county is a huge shit hole, but it is one of the cheaper places to live. Polk County is similar to Pasco but with worse traffic due to I-4. Not sure what pay grade you are but there are nice spots in Hillsborough that can be affordable as well. I am probably going to be moving back there in about 2-3 years once I am done with my tour here in Germany.

Actually that is not true. Most agencies have vests that have the plate insert for added protection against blades. Every defensive tactics instructor will tell you that the lethal range for a knife wielding suspect is 21 feet, this is known as the "21 foot rule" (crazy name, I know). I don't know about you but if I know the suspect has a knife I'm going to want to stay out of that 21 foot range meaning that open hand tactics (commonly referred as "going hand to hand") is not desirable because that puts you at extreme risk of being stabbed. OC spray is useless in any situation where you need an immediate effect because it can take anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes to take effect and a determined suspect can fight through OC spray easily. Using a baton brings up the same issue with open hand tactics, you have to be close to the suspect to use it and that puts you in extreme danger. You could attempt to use your taser however unless you work for an agency that issues the larger cartridges (not many do) then the max range of a standard X26 taser cartridge is 15 feet. Not to mention that if you use the taser you have to make sure both prongs hit the suspect and penetrate his clothing to make contact with his skin and they have to get a good enough spread on the suspect. With all those requirements I do not want to bet my life on the taser when I only have one cartridge to get it right. Law enforcement in the US is trained to be one level above the suspect and the knife is a deadly weapon meaning the police respond with deadly force. And I find your example of using a firearm against a knife wielding suspect offensive to police officers here and an extreme exaggeration of what they do. No police officer in the US wants to shoot someone but sometimes there is no other choice. And when a police officer is forced to shoot someone they are not happy about it and I doubt any of the are thinking "yeah bitch how'd you like that". Those kinds of statements incite hatred towards police because people will actually believe that police think and say those things.

I think he was referring to if someone sprinted at a police officer with a knife an armed police officer would be able to defend himself. I think that if it is working for the police in the UK then there isn't any reason to change it. And apparently according to a survey someone mentioned the majority of police officers themselves do not want to carry firearms.

No, I was not trying to be sarcastic in my post. I apologize if anything I said seemed sarcastic, that was not the intent of my post. And I didn't mean that you specifically were trying to tell police what they should do, I was referencing what many people say in the US. That part was a little more of a general rant on my part than a response to what you said. You are correct that when a police officer shoots someone they have to deal with what happened and that can be an issue for some officers and that is why most (if not all) agencies require their officers to talk to a psychiatrist after a shooting even if it didn't kill the suspect just to make sure the officer isn't having trouble coping with the situation.

They must spend months and months training Russian police to be the best marksmen if they are shooting arms and legs with a pistol. I'm not sure how many people have shot pistols here but they are the most difficult weapons to fire accurately. I have shot probably well over 5,000 rounds from pistols and about 2,000 of that was through my personally owned Glock 23 that I used in the police academy. It was much more challenging for me to qualify with my Glock in the police academy than it was for me to qualify with my M16 in the Army and the furthest distance I shot from in the police academy was only a little over 20 meters compared to the Army where I shot at targets up to 300 meters. So when people say that the police should try and aim for arms or legs I just laugh and know that they have probably never fired a pistol (or any firearm for that matter) because if they had they would know how difficult that is. But you are correct, police in the US shoot for center mass. That doesn't necessarily mean they shoot for the chest, it is whatever the largest target that is exposed. So if the suspect's head is the only thing sticking up then you aim for the head, if his entire body is exposed then you shoot for the chest, etc. What they taught me in the police academy is that you are not shooting to kill, you are shooting to stop the threat.

We say Hooah in the Army, although around my unit only the douchebags say it. Not sure what its like in the other units. I know in TRADOC (training units) we said it a lot, but TRADOC is not the "real" Army. Sounds like someone from the Army needs to come down and remind them they are in the Air Force.

Police officers having and using their weapons is not the issue. The issue is that the public doesn't know jack shit when it comes to the law and police tactics. They know what they have seen on TV and heard from media sources which do a pretty shitty job when it comes to reporting on such topics. Now 99% of the public has a messed up idea of what policing should be. It will never be good enough, if a police officer shoots someone then the public will say "why didn't he use his taser?", then when a police officer tases someone the public says "why didn't he use his pepper spray?" and when a police officer uses his pepper spray the public says "why are cops such pussies? He should have just tackled the suspect.", and when police officers go hands on with someone and tackle them it just cycles back to OC spray, taser, etc. My point being that no matter what a police officer does there is always someone there to criticize how the situation was handled. Unfortunately the police are always in the wrong and always power tripping, abusive dicks in the eyes of the public and the media only makes it worse. This is one of my favorite internet memes (for those of you old enough to remember this TV show) and while it is funny it is also sad because it is very true and not just on the internet but in the media as well.

Of course, those numbers a very important. I don't want to sound like I am saying that those innocent people on death row are just collateral damage or anything. But yes, I agree with you on that point.

What kind of logic is that? Just because someone does not want to leave a comment has nothing to do with racism. Sounds like you are just trying to incite something here. On topic, Of course in the true media fashion they have dissected a story and only shown the parts they want to use to get ratings with. I read the 11 page report from the hearing officer who conducted the investigation and submitted the recommendation and included in that document was the teacher's own responses to those findings. In the report the teacher makes some very good points and I almost thought that she was wrongfully fired, but in the end she did violate at least one district policy and possibly one or two more. The hearing officer who wrote this report did seem to claim certain things as facts without any reliable evidence however even with that in consideration it is indisputable that the teacher violated a district policy that clearly states a violation of said policy could result in termination. My personal opinion is that the teacher had good intentions and what she said was misinterpreted and blown out of context. However, even with that in mind she still violated a district policy which, when violated, could result in termination.

I don't see any classifications on it. This is DoD wide mandatory training so even people without security clearances have to complete this training. Not sure who told you AT Level 1 was classified but they are very wrong. Lol