Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
With the military it's different. They are trained to kill. They are trained to be hostile, paranoid, and untrusting in every interaction. To take command of a situation where they have been authorized to intervene by using.. well.. pretty much... any means necessary. When a state trained asset like that kills a civillian/suspect its basically up to the military heads to determine whether he should be punished or not. Many times the outcome is politically driven but there is no real implication to a military person shooting ur ass dead and not really having to explain himself. For all purposes, the military could even say they are going to punish him publicly and then throw an honor ceremony for him privately.how do u really punish a dog u trained to bite for biting? They are meant for dealing with external threats to our country and our people.
Is Trinidad truly under such a threat that we need a Defence Force or is it a relic of colonialism that today is kept to keep certain members of society happy and quiet??
Miktay wrote:With the military it's different. They are trained to kill. They are trained to be hostile, paranoid, and untrusting in every interaction. To take command of a situation where they have been authorized to intervene by using.. well.. pretty much... any means necessary. When a state trained asset like that kills a civillian/suspect its basically up to the military heads to determine whether he should be punished or not. Many times the outcome is politically driven but there is no real implication to a military person shooting ur ass dead and not really having to explain himself. For all purposes, the military could even say they are going to punish him publicly and then throw an honor ceremony for him privately.how do u really punish a dog u trained to bite for biting? They are meant for dealing with external threats to our country and our people.
Yep. The military iz trained & equipped 2 fog up the place.Is Trinidad truly under such a threat that we need a Defence Force or is it a relic of colonialism that today is kept to keep certain members of society happy and quiet??
Except 4 the 1970 and 1990 coup attempts u would have a point.
Dizzy28 wrote:Miktay wrote:With the military it's different. They are trained to kill. They are trained to be hostile, paranoid, and untrusting in every interaction. To take command of a situation where they have been authorized to intervene by using.. well.. pretty much... any means necessary. When a state trained asset like that kills a civillian/suspect its basically up to the military heads to determine whether he should be punished or not. Many times the outcome is politically driven but there is no real implication to a military person shooting ur ass dead and not really having to explain himself. For all purposes, the military could even say they are going to punish him publicly and then throw an honor ceremony for him privately.how do u really punish a dog u trained to bite for biting? They are meant for dealing with external threats to our country and our people.
Yep. The military iz trained & equipped 2 fog up the place.Is Trinidad truly under such a threat that we need a Defence Force or is it a relic of colonialism that today is kept to keep certain members of society happy and quiet??
Except 4 the 1970 and 1990 coup attempts u would have a point.
I would imagine today there are elements of the Police currently trained in internal threats such as militias and insurgents/coup (GEB etc,)
rollingstock wrote:coltspeed wrote:rollingstock wrote:“transfer” includes let, hire, give, lend or part with possession."
This may seem self explanatory, but it's not, possession in law constitutes control. The firearms may have been in the physical possession of the children but the defence force personnel would have retained control as a result.
so i could point a loaded gun but u would be in control where i choose to aim.
I don't think that their intention was to display the guns given the surroundings they were in.
Stick to what you can understand, this appears to be beyond your comprehension.
coltspeed wrote:rollingstock wrote:coltspeed wrote:rollingstock wrote:“transfer” includes let, hire, give, lend or part with possession."
This may seem self explanatory, but it's not, possession in law constitutes control. The firearms may have been in the physical possession of the children but the defence force personnel would have retained control as a result.
so i could point a loaded gun but u would be in control where i choose to aim.
I don't think that their intention was to display the guns given the surroundings they were in.
Stick to what you can understand, this appears to be beyond your comprehension.
Easier to understand plain english than parable language saying d same damn thing. How could someone account for control when it was physically in someone else possession. Technically and practically the person in possession is in control not the person in supervision as they are now accountable for the person in possession...
RedVEVO wrote:^^^
Anybody who have family or foe in the TTDF ..
Know that these guys are paid TT$ to :
1. Drink up a tab
2. Carry big ass guns
3. Work out in the Gym 24/7
4. Eat the best food - Chef prepared.
5. Chase woman .
So the noise you talking about is of no consequence .
Enjoy the song and dance.
16 cycles wrote:don't think AG ever confirmed or denied it was his children prior to this weekend....
how do the laws apply to scouts handling firearms? (minors handling rifles)
16 cycles wrote:
how do the laws apply to scouts handling firearms? (minors handling rifles)
streetbeastINC. wrote:Heard the last officer that ''committed suicide'' they never found the gun..he hid it after he shot himself and broke his ribs........any light on that case???
zoom rader wrote:Always has to be that PNM chinren holding and shooting guns.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests