Curious Canadian Couple Visits Newtown, CT One Month After Shooting

page: 13
54
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


the shows on television do have an element of accuracy in them. They even hire professionals to act as technical advisers to ensure that they don’t depart too far from reality. For the most part, the techniques used on the shows to collect and analyze evidence are the correct techniques for that particular situation, however, in real-life it may not look as pretty as the state-of-the-art equipment on TV.

www.crimemuseum.org...

Regarding the Gallagher show, the first row is pretty far from the stage. I was just suggesting you go and let me know if you come out clean as a whistle.




posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


the shows on television do have an element of accuracy in them. They even hire professionals to act as technical advisers to ensure that they don’t depart too far from reality. For the most part, the techniques used on the shows to collect and analyze evidence are the correct techniques for that particular situation, however, in real-life it may not look as pretty as the state-of-the-art equipment on TV.

www.crimemuseum.org...

Regarding the Gallagher show, the first row is pretty far from the stage. I was just suggesting you go and let me know if you come out clean as a whistle.


1)AN ELEMENT OF ACCURACY. To you, this means they are totally factually based? Again, go talk to a real forensic expert, then come back and tell us all how embarrassed you are.

2)
Still pushing the Gallagher thing, huh? Do you not understand the difference between downward force from a blunt object and the velocity and trajectory of a bullet? DO you not get the difference between a watermelon and a human body? (Yeah, you're a teacher all right...im sure).

This is without a doubt the silliest thing I have ever seen presented as evidence in this case...and man, that says a lot.
edit on 1-2-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
There is a critically important but seemingly overlooked question that MUST be asked:

Would the results of such a test be different if one went to a Gallagher Two (Ron Gallagher) show as opposed to a Gallagher show (Leo Gallagher, the original)?

Also, are there trajectory discrepancies between a Sledge-O-Matic and a firearm?



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


To you, this means they are totally factually based?

Please quote me where I stated this.

I have spoken to forensic experts. I actually have a degree in investigative techniques and I'm an expert handwriting analyst, but I'm sure you think I'm making this up, too.

If all you can do is laugh at what I'm attempting to convey, you're the one with the problem.
What do you want from me? You want me to post photos of actual blood spatter that was caused by the weapons supposedly used in this tragedy? I'm not going to do that.
edit on 1-2-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brocade
Or it could mean that the shooting didn't only happen in the classrooms but also in the kitchen, wherever that is in the school. I don't see why they would lie about the number of dead, I can't see any reason for that at all.


I don't see how...we were told the total number of dead, who's class they were in, or where in the building they worked, how they died (GSW), and where they died (a hallway near the entrance, and two classrooms)

if there were other fatalities elsewhere in the building, that would impact the numbers we were given...



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NickDC202
 
Give me a table, a camera, two watermelons, a sledgehammer and an AR-15 and I'll help find out!



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by NickDC202
 


Also, are there trajectory discrepancies between a Sledge-O-Matic and a firearm?

It would probably come down to the difference between the pounds per square inch applied.
Me pounding a watermelon wouldn't get that great of a trajectory, but a body builder would do pretty well.
Then, it would be interesting to test the guns and ammo used on a pig carcass to see the difference in the collateral damage and how far the carnage was spread.
But, that's just me and I'm only here to see how many people I can get to laugh at me.
edit on 1-2-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


To you, this means they are totally factually based?

Please quote me where I stated this.

I have spoken to forensic experts. I actually have a degree in investigative techniques and I'm an expert handwriting analyst, but I'm sure you think I'm making this up, too.

If all you can do is laugh at what I'm attempting to convey, you're the one with the problem.
What do you want from me? You want me to post photos of actual blood spatter that was caused by the weapons supposedly used in this tragedy? I'm not going to do that.
edit on 1-2-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)


1)You are passing them off as evidence based on the idea that they contain "an element of accuracy". So either, you dont understand what that phrase means, or you take them as fully accurate. Those are the only two ways you could possibly think it is logical to pass CSI and Criminal Minds off as evidence.

2)So now youre a teacher and a educated investigator? Yet you dont understand simple things like basic physics, burden of proof, EVIDENCE? Wow....

3)I do have a problem. I have a problem with people trying to pass of idiotic idea as viable theory. I have a problem with people making statements that they refuse to back up. I have a problem with people who think CSI, Criminal Minds, and Gallagher are solid evidence.

4)Yeah, if you have them, id love to see them. But you dont. YOU DO NOT HAVE SAID PHOTOS. You have NO PROOF, at all, that these kids *should* have had blood on them, and on top of that, you have NO PROOF that these kids *didnt* have blood on them. You, again, are making things up.
edit on 1-2-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by NickDC202
 


Also, are there trajectory discrepancies between a Sledge-O-Matic and a firearm?

It would probably come down to the difference between the pounds per square inch applied.
Me pounding a watermelon wouldn't get that great of a trajectory, but a body builder would do pretty well.
Then, it would be interesting to test the guns and ammo used on a pig carcass to see the difference in the collateral damage and how far the carnage was spread.
But, that's just me and I'm only here to see how many people I can get to laugh at me.
edit on 1-2-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



Are you trying to claim that force is the only difference between downward trajectory of a blunt object and the impact of a flying projectile fired from a gun? Seriously?

yeah, you're a teacher alright.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
But, that's just me and I'm only here to see how many people I can get to laugh at me.


Afterthought, I wasn't trying to poke fun at you and if you read it as being aimed at you, I apologize.

I tend to be a somewhat snarky/sarcastic/silly and saw an opportunity to shoehorn my way into the debate you two were having and hopefully make both of you and others reading my reply have a good laugh.

Again, I apologize if it did not come across that way to you and if you'd like me to edit my post I'd be more than happy to-- just say the word.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Yeah, I have a pretty varied resume. You don't have to believe it and I don't care if you do or not.
I posted that bit of exterior text to show you that fictional shows utilize forensic experts for their shows. That's it. I never ever stated that they demonstrate EXACT science. Please stop insinuating this.
How am I supposed to use real concrete evidence when we don't have any? That's why we're talking about this, right?
You had your laugh for the day and I'm glad I could help you out with that. No need to thank me.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by manmental
 


I don't think there is any question that the glass was broken in one of the doors or windows. I've seen a helicopter shot of it myself. The question is who broke it and how.

One of the things I find just baffling about this event is one of the first response on the scanner coming in at about 9:37 EST is the dispatcher saying: "There's a broken _...and they're not sure why". Who is not sure why? Who reported the broken window, which going by the scanner, that report came in after about 1 minute after the shooting started. This doesn't make any sense.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Yeah, I have a pretty varied resume. You don't have to believe it and I don't care if you do or not.
I posted that bit of exterior text to show you that fictional shows utilize forensic experts for their shows. That's it. I never ever stated that they demonstrate EXACT science. Please stop insinuating this.
How am I supposed to use real concrete evidence when we don't have any? That's why we're talking about this, right?
You had your laugh for the day and I'm glad I could help you out with that. No need to thank me.


So in other words, you posted something that is well known-that there is AN ELEMENT of accuracy to these shows-fully admitting (whether knowingly or not) that they are not fully accurate, yet you continue to push it as some sort of evidence.....hmmmmm....



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by NickDC202
 


It's all good, Nick. Don't think another thing of it.

It's just tough when your intentions at describing a point get all twisted and so far removed from what was originally meant. It's as if people purposefully twist and tie your words in knots just to make you look crazy. This is exactly what is happening with the media and conspiracy theorists. It's simply not a worthy cause and doesn't get anyone anywhere.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
i want to preface this by saying that people like you anger me in a way that is beyond description. your willful ignorance, and emotion, coupled with a NEED to be right, cripples your capacity for logic, reason, and critical thought. It is taking quite a lot of restraint for me to reply to you in a civil fashion, that adheres to the terms and conditions. if this were elsewhere, i would not be so civil, or restrained.


Originally posted by FlyersFan
YOU started it. Don't like it?? Then don't start it.


seriously? how old are we?



Feeding off the dead ... it was a ghoulish vacation. What the hell kind of people go to another country to see where 26 people, mostly children, had just been brutally murdered? It's sick.


who's feeding off the dead? there is a distinct lack of information, and they just wanted answers about a case that just seems off when you look at it....it is natural to want information when you have none...its not as if they were looking to roll around on the floor where the blood stains are, or collect souvenirs..they wanted answers...how is that sick?

stop being so dramatic and sensational.



So Sandy Hook was a walk in the park ... just another day .. ?? IT WAS A BLOODBATH. THE CHILDREN WERE BUTCHERED. The first responders on TV were having a hard time because there were dead children and there was BLOOD EVERYWHERE. That's a blood bath.


I never said it was a walk in the park...don't you DARE presume to attribute words to me that were not mine..

words like "bloodbath" and "butchered" are usually reserved for when someone goes nuts with an axe, or machete, or a sword, and hacks his victims all to hell...that didn't happen here...in this instance, all that language does is sensationalize the event, to get more of an emotional response to the situation...people make rash decisions when driven purely by emotion, and that is not what we need right now

It was a huge tragedy, a very sad event for anyone involved....but spinning, and hyping, and sensationalizing is totally unnecessary..it was awful enough to begin with..



What do you care? The people in the town will GLADLY pay for it rather than have their kids stuck in a building in which their peers were butchered.


From everything i've seen, the vast majority of the students didn't see or hear much of anything, so where's the trauma?

and we both know DAMN well the people of newtown aren't going to be footing the bill...it will end up being american taxpayer's money that foots the bill for a new school, if they choose to demolish (unnecessarily), and rebuild...

i mentioned that my old school had a lot of bad things happen, i mentioned i caught a bullet in the shoulder, from a gang drive-by, there are STILL clear and present dangers to the students of that school...but its not being torn down..danger exists...its not the building that caused it, it's the world it exists in.



IT WAS A MASS MURDER SCENE. You really can't help but downplay this, can you?
My god ...


i'm not downplaying anything....i've said it was a huge tragedy, a horrible event that shouldn't have happened, a needless loss of life.....explain to me what purpose is served by using sensational language, and trying to stir people into a frenzy with panic words?

you are making more of this than is reasonable. and how do you feel about the fact that politicians are using these dead kids to push political agendas? does that disgust you as much as my "downplaying" the situation?
edit on 1-2-2013 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


You are obviously insinuating that I have tied your words in knots, so please, tell me what I have construed out of the context you intended. Id love to see it.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought

Originally posted by theAnswer1111
reply to post by Afterthought
 
You're right. The blood spray from a .223 shot can extend upwards of thirty feet...but it's too controversial to talk about those types of details any further.


Agreed. I just had to put that out there though because it should be making everyone say "Huh?". Especially with the shows we see on TV today like CSI and Criminal Minds that are educating us about this type of evidence after a shooting.


For the record, this was my original comment.
Yes, these shows attempt to illustrate as closely as possible the forensic evidence of a crime scene. Yes, they do utilize experts.
This is all I'm trying to convey. The shows we see on TV that depict crime solving techniques is as close as we can come to understanding the carnage involved here and how the police and investigators accomplished/not accomplished securing and documenting the scene at Sandy Hook.
I'm sorry if this comparison doesn't please some people and makes me look like a loon, but this is what I stated and I do stand by it.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
You aren't a parent, are you? Maybe you should try using your heart and try to understand that no 6 year old child is going to be comfortable sitting in a classroom, knowing that 26 people (most of them his/her own age) had been brutally murdered. These are kids who still check under the bed and in the closet before going to sleep at night. They are still at the nightlight stage .. or the 'keep the closet light on' stage. Putting them in a place like that will NOT be helpful for them to learn their ABCs and 123s.


Did you not notice that the vast majority of the student body did not see or hear much of anything? in fact, there were many students that weren't even aware anything at all was happening..how exactly is it that he students would be scared or distracted by what is, in many of their minds, a non-event?

And explain to me how somehow a new building is going to magically fix these kid's memories or psyches, if they are in fact traumatized by the event.

make no mistake, this is not being done for the kids...NONE of this crap is for the kids....this is for the rest of us....saying it's "for the children" is just a convenient excuse they can use to make anyone who disagrees look bad..
edit on 1-2-2013 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus

Originally posted by FlyersFan
You aren't a parent, are you? Maybe you should try using your heart and try to understand that no 6 year old child is going to be comfortable sitting in a classroom, knowing that 26 people (most of them his/her own age) had been brutally murdered. These are kids who still check under the bed and in the closet before going to sleep at night. They are still at the nightlight stage .. or the 'keep the closet light on' stage. Putting them in a place like that will NOT be helpful for them to learn their ABCs and 123s.


Did you not notice that the vast majority of the student body did not see or hear much of anything? in fact, there were many students that weren't even aware anything at all was happening..how exactly is it that he students would be scared or distracted by what is, in many of their minds, a non-event?

And explain to me how somehow a new building is going to magically fix these kid's memories or psyches, if they are in fact traumatized by the event.

make no mistake, this is not being done for the kids...NONE of this crap is for the kids....this is for the rest of us....saying it's "for the children" is just a convenient excuse they can use to make anyone who disagrees look bad..
edit on 1-2-2013 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)


I see no reason to believe it is being done for any reason OTHER than the children and the community....of course the kids didn't "see/hear" much....this was discussed at length when this first happened. Kids that age absolutely could not have even began to fathom what was happening.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


Exactly, You are presenting Csi, Criminal Minds, and Gallagher as though they are evidence of something. THEY HAVE NO BEARING ON THIS EVENT. At all. Whatsoever.

They are irrelevant. Period.





new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join