Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arkasia)
    They have a duty to uphold the law, not to go all suicidal frogman trying to pull out a sinking car with their bare hands smh

    You seem to understand nothing of the situation, and I doubt you have read up on the case beyond sensationalist headlines, otherwise you would have seen the reports saying they waded in but mud, silt, and weeds prevented them from going further. You would also have seen the dive team reports saying there was 0 visibility in the water, and that there was nothing the patrolmen could have done. A little more background knowledge and you would know that rescuing individuals from inside a closed, sinking car is one of the hardest rescue operations possible in any situation, even for trained professionals. And if you had looked into rescue operations, you would have seen a core tenet is "do not add to the casualties", and come to the conclusion the police followed their training by not jumping in head first. Anything beyond that is overly emotional nonsense that has no relevance beyond your self-gratifying hatred of the police.
    There was 0 visibility? Turn the headlights of the vehicles into spotlights.
    15ft of water? People have been in worse and still came out alive.

    (Original post by JBLondon)
    The fact remains if they hadn't committed a crime, they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's not a 'redundant hypothetical', but a fact.
    If the police hadn't given chase, they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.

    If there were no cars, then they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.

    If there was no lake there, then they couldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.


    See how ridiculous you sound?
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    There was 0 visibility? Turn the headlights of the vehicles into spotlights.
    15ft of water? People have been in worse and still came out alive.



    If the police hadn't given chase, they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.

    If there were no cars, then they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.

    If there was no lake there, then they couldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.


    See how ridiculous you sound?
    Yes, totally me who sounds ridiculous......
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    There was 0 visibility? Turn the headlights of the vehicles into spotlights.
    15ft of water?
    You are not covering yourself in glory in this thread. Indeed, you are talking complete nonsense.

    Car headlights do not help to improve poor underwater visibility; indeed, even underwater lights can make visibility worse though reflections off the suspended particles (in this case, presumably generated by the mud thrown up from the lake bottom by the car impact) that cause the bad visibility. Just try turning your car headlights onto full beam in thick fog to see the problem.

    Fifteen feet depth of muddy fresh water is a very grave risk to the life of any rescuer through disorientation, cold shock and hypothermia, especially in the dark.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    There was 0 visibility? Turn the headlights of the vehicles into spotlights.
    15ft of water? People have been in worse and still came out alive.

    Middle of the night, murky waters, with silt and mud kicked up? Yes, 0 visibility. 15ft of water is plenty when you have no equipment, training, and the car is at the bottom of a lake in a load of mud. The girls were all stuck in the car.

    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)

    If the police hadn't given chase, they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.

    So if the police hadn't done their job? Ok.

    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    If there were no cars, then they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.
    If my aunt had *******s she'd be my uncle. There was a car because they stole it.


    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    If there was no lake there, then they couldn't have ended up in the water. That's a fact.


    See how ridiculous you sound?
    How can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real? I'm pretty sure you're trolling at this point so idc
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    As someone who writes nothing but the pure, utter TRUTH, I have to say this:

    In this situation, the police are not to blame. There is no law saying that they have to put their lives at risk in what would be a futile rescue operation (15ft underwater? Unless you've got diving equipment there is no way you're saving them).

    I suspect people have been watching too much James Bond. You think you can just swim down to the car, punch a window and it will be alright. The reality is that it's freezing cold water, in your heavy clothing, and unlike James Bond it's not in the crystal clear waters of the caribbean, it's a muddy hole.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arkasia)
    Middle of the night, murky waters, with silt and mud kicked up? Yes, 0 visibility. 15ft of water is plenty when you have no equipment, training, and the car is at the bottom of a lake in a load of mud. The girls were all stuck in the car.
    The car is not at the bottom of the lake (well, it is now).

    A car, unless full of concrete or filled with lead, will not normally sink until a couple of minutes have passed (In fact, electrics in the car will work up to 3 minutes underwater).

    What happens is that the car takes on water and when the weight gets too much, it slowly starts to sink.

    Which is why, if you happened to watch the video, you can hear the deputy commenting, around the 1 minute mark (don't know how many minutes of the footage they released), that the car has nearly disappeared.

    So if the police hadn't done their job? Ok.

    If my aunt had *******s she'd be my uncle. There was a car because they stole it.

    How can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real? I'm pretty sure you're trolling at this point so idc
    This part wasn't really for you.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Car headlights do not help to improve poor underwater visibility;
    Indeed the light would also be traveling in the wrong direction across the water rather than in the water

    Light penetration from this would have been VERY poor unless they managed to get a crane and lift the cars into the air and get the lights to point straight down

    But what *******s they are for not doing this.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    There was 0 visibility? Turn the headlights of the vehicles into spotlights.
    15ft of water? People have been in worse and still came out alive.
    I can't tell if this is serious. Should cops reach the submerged or partially submerged car, how do you propose they get the girls out, just open the door? If it was that easy why didn't the girls do it themselves from inside the car? Answer is you can't just open the door due to pressure. So how would cops break the windows from the outside, while underwater? And doing this all in zero or near zero visibility while holding their breath?

    You have a unreasonable expectation of the skill set of a police officer.


    It's awful for the cops involved, first they have to resign to letting girls drown (no doubt that still plays on their minds), and now they're trawled through the mud by some scumbag 'journalists' milking the anti-police sentiment for all its worth. Absolutely disgusting.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    I can't tell if this is serious. Should cops reach the submerged or partially submerged car, how do you propose they get the girls out, just open the door? If it was that easy why didn't the girls do it themselves from inside the car? Answer is you can't just open the door due to pressure. So how would cops break the windows from the outside, while underwater? And doing this all in zero or near zero visibility while holding their breath?
    Most people do not expect to find themselves driving into a body of water and as such, are unsure of exactly what to do in such a situation.

    Even those who think they are knowledgeable, are prone to stress and panic when faced in a live situation, resulting in them losing their life because all their training went out of the window.

    Another fact which may have hampered the girls was that many black folk in the States do not know how to swim.

    You have a unreasonable expectation of the skill set of a police officer.
    Not at all. I think they could have done more, and should have done more. We employ and train the police to remain calm whilst the rest of us are panicking and they are sworn to protect members of the public, regardless of whether they are criminals or not.

    We may feel that a criminal is not worth saving but it is worrying that the police are allowed to play judge, jury and executioners - through their negligence.

    It's awful for the cops involved, first they have to resign to letting girls drown (no doubt that still plays on their minds), and now they're trawled through the mud by some scumbag 'journalists' milking the anti-police sentiment for all its worth. Absolutely disgusting.
    Had this been the family of an officer, or a friend of the officers, I have no doubt that much more would have been done, and indeed, may have even rescued one or two members.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Not at all. I think they could have done more, and should have done more.
    Still drivelling on with your unreasonable expectations, ignorance of what a rescue would have involved and risked and, crucially, your one-track agenda?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    The police, like any other emergency service, have a public duty and are empowered to respond and to assist members of the public who are in difficulty. Whether the victims were criminals or not is largely irrelevant to the story.


    The police, unlike in a Banana Republic, do not get to pick and choose who they should help and who they shouldn't.

    As for the actual situation, 15ft of water is nothing. I would have expected the police officers to put their own lives on the line to save the lives of others. Soldiers put their lives on the line, even sometimes volunteering for suicide missions, in an effort to protect the public from harm.

    That is the ultimate duty, the ultimate sacrifice.
    das right

    BLACK LIVES MATTER
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Most people do not expect to find themselves driving into a body of water and as such, are unsure of exactly what to do in such a situation.

    Even those who think they are knowledgeable, are prone to stress and panic when faced in a live situation, resulting in them losing their life because all their training went out of the window.

    Another fact which may have hampered the girls was that many black folk in the States do not know how to swim.
    Regular police officers aren't trained in low visibility underwater rescue, so how no better training then you or I. What should they have done? How would you save people trapped in a car, 15ft underwater in a murky pond?

    You'll say you would have tried, but they tried. They were unsuccessful, what makes you think you're better than them?

    What cops are trained, or at least experienced, in is making hard decisions. They had to make the decision to leave the girls in the water. You can hear the tremor in an officer's voice over the radio. It was obviously not an easy decision.


    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Not at all. I think they could have done more, and should have done more. We employ and train the police to remain calm whilst the rest of us are panicking and they are sworn to protect members of the public, regardless of whether they are criminals or not.

    We may feel that a criminal is not worth saving but it is worrying that the police are allowed to play judge, jury and executioners - through their negligence.
    I doubt the allegation that they had stolen the car in anyway affected their decision to abandon the rescue. Negligence? How do you reach that conclusion?

    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Had this been the family of an officer, or a friend of the officers, I have no doubt that much more would have been done, and indeed, may have even rescued one or two members.
    Based on what exactly?

    Regardless, many people would kill themselves attempting to save a family member or friend. Police officers should not be expected to go to their deaths in an attempt to save someone.

    They make the decision about when they want to risk their lives, not you.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    Regular police officers aren't trained in low visibility underwater rescue, so how no better training then you or I. What should they have done? How would you save people trapped in a car, 15ft underwater in a murky pond?
    The lake's depth was 15ft. Not the actual car.

    You'll say you would have tried, but they tried. They were unsuccessful, what makes you think you're better than them?
    I'd like to think that as a member of the public, I'd do a lot more than simply take my belt off.

    What cops are trained, or at least experienced, in is making hard decisions. They had to make the decision to leave the girls in the water. You can hear the tremor in an officer's voice over the radio. It was obviously not an easy decision.
    Somehow you heard the tremor in the officer's voice but you didn't hear his commentary on the status of the car, as it slowly took on water and began to submerge, which led you to make asinine comments like "How can you save someone 15ft underwater?" (I paraphrase)?

    I doubt the allegation that they had stolen the car in anyway affected their decision to abandon the rescue. Negligence? How do you reach that conclusion?
    Abandon the rescue? They didn't even try a rescue.

    Based on what exactly?
    Based on the fact that nearly every human being would do everything possible in their power to save their nearest and dearest.

    Regardless, many people would kill themselves attempting to save a family member or friend. Police officers should not be expected to go to their deaths in an attempt to save someone.

    They make the decision about when they want to risk their lives, not you.
    And that is a frightening state of affairs, when they can play judge, jury and executioner.

    If they are allowed to judge who or when someone should be saved, and they weigh your life up against that of theirs, they are always going to choose self-preservation.

    The meaning of a police officer, and any emergency service, is that he goes above and beyond what ordinary members would do, in order to serve and protect the people.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.