why didnt she just got out of the car or roll down the window instead of trying to drive towards the cop? I feel that would be the correct thing to do If she didnt steal then she has nothing to worry about. Not saying shooting her was an appropriate response, just feel the whole thing could have been avoided
She did escalate the situation, but she didn’t cause her own death. Shooting someone who is running away is some old west sheriff shit. She was trying to drive away, not hit the officers. The only situation that a cop should shoot someone is if their life is in direct and immediate danger.
Didn’t see the bodycam, just went off what others said. I was under the impression she was flooring it straight at police officers blocking the exit. Removed my comment.
Why didn’t he just let her drive off, taking her plate details to log a warrant? I feel that would be the correct thing to do. If he didn’t stand in front of her car aiming a gun at her then he has nothing to worry about. Not saying stealing is appropriate behaviour, just feel the whole thing could have been avoided.
It’s how it works in other countries. Many police forces would judge that this situation was not worth escalating, and not worth putting anyone in danger over, and would act accordingly.
Listen, I get the whole ACAB thing, and I think the unjustified shooting of anyone is awful. And I know black people are treated extremely unfairly by the police.
But as someone who (even briefly) worked retail, some shoplifters are batshit. I will not be surprised if the video shows exactly what the police said in this case. Being pregnant is not gonna stop a cop from shooting you if you drive your car at them. And it’s insane to think otherwise.
We need better addiction solutions. A pregnant woman should not be risking her life to score alcohol.
Edit: That said, I also won’t be surprised if the cops lied. Obviously.
Edit 2: Seen the video. She shouldn’t have driven at him, but I do not think he was justified shooting her. His life was not in danger. She was at a dead stop, she could’ve floored the gas as hard as she could and he would’ve been fine. Fucking awful.
Somehow she made it out of the store without inflicting her hypothetical murderous shoplifter rage on anyone but I guess she was just like some kind of bull triggered by red and blue lights. Thanks for providing some entirely unnecessary made up context to preemptively justify the actions of people you apparently know are a bunch of lying racist murderers.
Somehow she made it out of the store without inflicting her hypothetical murderous shoplifter rage on anyone
Employees aren’t supposed to engage with shoplifters unless they’re loss-prevention. You let them leave and let the cops handle it. If no one tried to stop her, of course she didn’t try to get past them. Also don’t put words in my mouth, I said nothing about murderous rage.
but I guess she was just like some kind of bull triggered by red and blue lights.
She didn’t want to be caught. She’s a mom with two kids and another on the way, and clearly not thinking rationally or she wouldn’t be shoplifting alcohol. If you aren’t thinking clearly and you don’t want the cops to stop you, driving away (even towards them!) while they try to stop you may seem like a good choice. Again, don’t mischaracterize what I said.
Thanks for providing some entirely unnecessary made up context to preemptively justify the actions of people you apparently know are a bunch of lying racist murderers.
The world is not black and white. A person is not automatically a good or bad actor in every situation purely because of the color of their skin or the uniform they wear, and pretending otherwise is childish.
I didn’t justify anything, I simply said I won’t be surprised if the cops didn’t lie about this situation.
Please learn to recognize nuance. The world will be better if we all strive to understand one another.
Hadn’t heard that. Having seen the video though, I really don’t think they were justified in shooting her. At all. Their lives were not in any immediate danger. Trigger happy fucks.
Here’s the fucked up part. We were all told to NOT make the payments. Well in hindsight, that was a bad idea, because I could have almost paid off my loans interest free. Now I go back to owing $10K+ and will have to pay interest on it. This whole situation is really shitty for everyone.
That’s bs. No one was told to not make payments, just that required payments and interest were on hold. Same with all the idiots that decided the eviction moratorium meant they don’t have to pay rent. Ever.
Yes, I have student loans (30k), too, and had rent payments until a year ago.
I feel your pain, but if you could have paid on your loans, you should have. That’s on you.
I still disagree. We were put in a position, as I stated. What we did with that is on us. I didn’t make payments either. We were all hoping for loan forgiveness, but we mostly knew that wasn’t happening. I can say I gambled on that and lost, but I certainly wasn’t forced to.
It was a dick move to cancel auto payments and force anyone wanting to continue to pay to go back and set it up again. There were also the people saying to not pay and invest the money, which didn’t actually work out that well if you tried it.
There were people that said keep paying if you can, or even pay more, in many places these people were drowned out by the invest crowd.
When police departments fight against releasing bodycam footage and only do so under immense public pressure, then still drag their feet and delay as long as possible, that tells you all you need to know.
The amount of people that either cannot read or cannot fathom that their preconceived notion of how this legislation will work is much too high. And the cockiness of their demeanor…
The payments end when both criteria are met. The minor turns 18 and they have graduated high school.
For someone who is complaining about people’s reading comprehension, it’s kind of weird that you seem to have missed what the comments are actually saying they don’t understand.
I don’t think you quite understand the level of rigor that these components are manufactured with. If the documents are not provided, or if they’re counterfeited, the parts are assumed to be out of spec. The precision required for these things, as well as the integrity analysis done after they’re completed, are absolutely critical, and can make the difference between 1000 and 10000 hours MTBF on something like a compressor stage.
I agree that the parts are probably out of spec and assuming they are, is definitely the way to go, but I am dissapointed by the lack of precision in articles like that.
This is the first (maybe the second) link in the chain of misinformation. Every time this article will get reposted, rewritten or reblogged the inaccuracies will move the baseline for the next one.
Fair, though keep in mind the intended audience is the average layperson, which means the bar is set pretty low in terms of the technical nuance of the writing.
Exactly. Try to explain that a .05 difference in carbon content can result in a substantial increase/decrease in tensile strength - eyes glaze over. When the right engine blows eyes unglaze.
That, or how quality analysis can detect things like improper metal crystal formation and other molecular-level defects that impact material integrity and suitability, amongst many other things.
I’m going to start off with saying I am a certificated aircraft mechanic, and I’ve been exercising my privileges as such for several years on both passenger and cargo aircraft for several airframes.
This situation is actually a VERY big deal and it is going to be VERY expensive and time consuming to fix.
When a part is sold or repaired by a manufacturer, it comes with an airworthiness certificate. In the US, this is FAA form 8130-3. It not only certifies that the part conforms to specifications; but it shows who certified it, who tested it, what specs it meets, and the history of the part. Both the airline purchasing the part and the mechanic installing the part need this document to legally repair the aircraft.
There could be a variety of problems with receiving fake parts that slip by SUP inspections (Suspected Unapproved Parts), and these are both legal and safety problems. A fake serial number means you don’t know the true history of the part. It could have been pulled from an abandoned aircraft from a third world country, and even though it passed a bench test, it could be a ticking time bomb. It could be a part in exceedence of service hours, but the paperwork that came with it says it’s freshly overhauled.
It could just plain not meet specifications. Premature failure is a big deal. Especially when the list of things that can be broken on a plane (MEL / Missing Equipment List) and still be safe for flight depend on a rated level of reliability. As an example, an aircraft can operate with a certain number of brakes not working for a limited period of time (such as up to two inoperative, no more than one per pair, for no longer than 10 days or 10 flight cycles). This assumes that all of your other brakes aren’t going to prematurely, simultaneously fail before that time limit is up.
This article specified that these are engine parts, which adds a whole other level of risk to flight safety. The CFM56 from this article can be rated for ETOPS 180, which stands for Extended Operations up to 180 minutes. Normally, twin-engine aircraft are required to remain with 60 minutes of a suitable airport in the event of an emergency. This often limits what routes certain aircraft can take. ETOPS allows certain aircraft to go farther than the 60-minute rule (in this case, up to 180 minutes), which is a huge deal in terms of flight time, efficiency, and simply whether or not they can fly internationally. To maintain ETOPS rating, the aircraft has to meet stricter specifications. These can range anywhere from parts with tighter tolerances, to things like larger oxygen and fire-extinguishing bottles. They also need to be able to start their APU in flight for a source of electricity in the event they lose an engine.
The airline is also limited on the number of in-flight shutdowns they can have. This number is intentionally very low. If the airline as a whole exceeds this number, their fleet-wide ETOPS rating will be revoked.
Parts have to be specifically rated for ETOPS to be installed on an aircraft flying ETOPS routes. Bad parts make this a huge risk. An in-flight shutdown is a very dangerous situation, and bad parts dramatically increase the risk of that becoming a dual engine failure while that plane spends 3 hrs diverting to the closest airport.
Going forward, there is no good way to check if the parts sold actually meet specs until they’re disassembled and checked. Directives from the FAA will be issued. Inspections will be performed. Airplanes will be grounded and rectified. The manufacturer might be able to provide a list of parts that need to be recalled, but more than likely EVERY part they issued will be pulled. They may also have their repair station and manufacturing certificate from GE revoked. Even if they don’t lose their certification, most of the airlines will avoid them now.
To address the points you made in your comment, lefixxx, false documents mean bad parts. These parts absolutely DO pose a safety risk. They very likely ARE out of spec, timed out, or simply not rated for what the papers say. Even if the part is tested and meets specs, the history of that part is lost. It will need to be overhauled and made “new” again in order to be airworthy.
All of the regulations and strict document control requirements we follow have all been written in blood. People HAVE died because of things like this in the past, and it’s our mission to keep it from ever happening again.
Edit:
Here’s an excellent article detailing Partnair Flight 394, and the aftermath wherein they discovered a plethora of counterfeit parts not only on the airplane, but also across the industry at the time: …medium.com/riven-by-deceit-the-crash-of-partnair…
Can I just say, thank you for the extremely informative post.
This is the kind of comment that reddit was valuable for - being able to jump on a thread about find an obscure expert in pretty much any niche field. Lemmy hasn’t really reached a sufficiently large userbase, so seeing a post of this is like a breath of fresh air.
these COULD pose a huge safety risk. Until the parts are tested it is unclear if they are actually bad.
this is a badly written article
The article is correct. The safety risk is that the parts COULD be dangerous to use. Whether the parts are actually defective or not is irrelevant because they don’t know; that’s what makes them a risk.
But it is inevitable that if they’re not testing parts, ornwhatever, that parts not meeting standards will come into use.
Which means you’re wrong about this only potentially being a safety risk. It IS a safety risk. Period.
They’re intentionally falsifying documents to save a buck. They should be fucked out of business and the idiots who thought it was a good idea thrown in jail. (That would likely be the Execs.)
And importantly, it wasn’t safe for a very long time, specifically because these rules and regs weren’t yet written. A TON of flight safety laws, rules, and guidelines have been written in direct response to accidents that have destroyed planes and killed everyone on them, so it’s actually quite accurate to say those rules are written in blood.
Is it insane to play Russian roulette? There’s a good chance nothing will happen if you pull that trigger, right?
By definition, risk means there is no guarantee of a specific outcome. There is no risk of falling if you jump off a cliff (without special aids) - you just fall. Smoking increases your risk of cancer. Bob Hope lived to 100, apparently cancer-free, while smoking. Neither of these statements are untrue, he just didn’t suffer the results those risks indicated. While that’s good for him, it’s not the attitude I want taken with aircraft parts.
If any of the paperwork is missing or falsified the part is scrap. When we buy material it comes with certified reports on the alloy’s component elements.
Inconel is often used around engines for heat resistance. If it has too much of an element that changes at what temperature it becomes ductile you could lose some very important components or systems.
Steel doped with sulfur raises its embrittlement temperature.
They’ll be tested to sort out the urgency of the corrective action, but those parts are scrap. Also, someone might be going to prison.
There is no reason to fake the certification documents unless you’re not following the required standards.
Why would a manufacturer go through all the effort and expense to make parts at the required standards, with hugely expensive manufacturing, only to take on a huge risk to save a negligible amount on the paperwork? That is a horrible business decision.
The paperwork cost isn’t negligible at all. For example a company I used to work for had to replace a simple O-ring that failed. It’s an old part and quite rare these days and cost $800 to replace. You could buy a functionally equivalent (likely better) uncertified part for about 5 cents. That is why uncertified parts are such a problem, because certified ones are so incredibly expensive. Plenty of companies would love to step in and buy a few thousand O rings and sell them for $400 and a few are willing to forge a paper trail to make it happen. It’s a problem that I don’t really think will be ever totally solved without making certification too easy and potentially sacrificing safety by having bad certified parts.
If you spent $800 on an oring and it fails and the plane goes down, the manufacturer is liable. If you spent $0.05 on the oring and the plane goes down, you’re liable. Like you said, paperwork isn’t cheap. Because its basically liability insurance. If you made the oring, would you accept liability for $0.05?
The problem isn’t the manufacturer or the operator, it’s the middleman looking to make a profit on the the difference. In any case $800 is an absolutely ridiculous price point regardless of liability. I don’t know where the fair price point is but not even close to that. Liability isn’t the primary driver for the cost anyway, it’s difficulty of certification. Getting any part certified runs from high 5 figures to many millions of dollars and these are all extremely low volume parts. Boeing has only made around 11,000 737s since 1967. The plane I’m working with now only has around ~250 built since 2015 and is quite successful. For comparison Toyota produces about 20 cars per minute. When you need to pay back certification costs and turn even a modest profit on such low volume you need to charge a ton for each part.
To be clear I am absolutely not in support of non certified parts, it’s just a big problem in the industry and for rather obvious reasons.
Most metal parts testing is destructive. I.e., once you test the parts, they are destroyed and you can’t use them anymore. That’s why the trust I certificates is so important. They certify that metal from the same batch passed those tests. That’s why it’s a huge safety risk if the certs are fake, there’s no guarantee that the metal can meet the requirements, and no way to test without breaking the parts.
There is no rule dictating what is and what isn’t a word.
Language is an ever changing object.
Was an idea communicated by expressing the sound? It’s a word.
You didn’t do this, but some people so firmly cling to the idea of rules (which as we have covered, do not exist) that they will feign ignorance at the introduction of an unfamiliar presentation. I find it odd.
This could lead into a topic about how everything around us, society similarly, has no rules. It’s just a collection of ideas stacked haphazardly, any of it can be changed by any one of us. But I will stop there.
This is a sign that there are extremely right safety standards and lots of oversight. The amount of documentation needed for all aerospace parts means it is quite difficult to falsify records for long without getting caught. The fact that any of these types of event are big news and often result in arrests should help you be confident that the standards are real and enforced. There will always be bad actors, and finding them like this is part of reality. Just look at the safety record of commercial aviation to see proof that the system is working.
Not sure. Prolly depends on their investigation. If it’s one guy covering his ass that’s different than a manager pushing it as a normal thing. Anything fabricated had to be bought-off/stamped by someone, so they should be able to sort it out.
Absolutely, and other distributors will likely have to confirm their chain of provenance, and new procedures will be added for additional part tracking.
They 100% do not screw around with this stuff, ever.
People are always saying “I don’t know about Bizzle, that dude won’t fly.” If I can’t drive there, I won’t go. You really should consider it, there are a lot of really cool things that you will only ever find out about when you drive past it on a state highway. It somewhat limits my destinations, but North America is a big place that I’ve yet to see all of so I don’t mind so much.
The party of personal responsibility hatez taking personal responsibility by standing in the way of law and order. Ken Paxton should be in a jail cell not as ag.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.