MFogleman

Rollover crashes are generally pretty safe assuming the roof doesn't collapse and squish you to death, and you are wearing your seatbelt. The energy dissipates without you suddenly coming to a stop like if you hit a tree. Most of the damage will be from broken windows/debris causing cuts/scratches.

If you are not wearing a seatbelt, you run the risk of being ejected from the vehicle, and the higher risk of being 'partially ejected' from the vehicle, which is often worse.

I personally observed only 1 vehicle where the roof caved in on rollover (I believe it was a mid 2000s mustang). If the driver had been a few inches taller, I imagine he would've been hurt pretty badly.

The only other time I saw a roof collapse in wasn't from a roll over, but striking a tree roof first at a high rate of speed.

The only rollover crash I ever observed that the driver couldn't walk away from was a rather fortunate partial ejection. The vehicle only rolled onto its side, pinning the drivers arm between the road and the door as it slid for a few dozen yards.

The durability of the laminated safety glass should not be understated. A fire department's extraction team's approach is likely to be "cut through the glass with a circular saw".

Granted, all of this is anecdotal, with a very small sample size. Either way, wear your seat belt.

1. I think they have a little more to complain about than a typo, and subsequent response.

2. Did you read the article? The name of the act is just a silly prod. The act would have the law treat the President's personal social media accounts (ie @RealDonaldTrump) the same way as official social media accounts (ie @POTUS)

Examines strengths is their pages on individual items. The rest I imagine if SEO fodder. They do try to sell their guide, but their website is one of the top references for a lot of nerds trying to research ingredients in nootropics, multivitamins, and preworkouts.

Take for example their page on Creatine[1]. Summarizes and links 746 references. Their chart goes over "What do people claim this does" "How much of an effect does it have on that thing" "How sure are we about that"

[1] https://examine.com/supplements/creatine/

The biggest concern here is case data left on the device. Just having a device or the software isn't enough to get into most phones. Cellebrite kits come with a huge case of various types of USB cables that do something to allow access to the target device. Any old USB-C wont work, you have to have the correct USB-C from the kit to go with the target model

edit: Turns out the cables are on Ebay as well for about $5 - $30

I've only taken a brief glance at this report, so I apologize if my issue I'm about to bring up is already addressed within.

It seems that this report is falling into the common trap of 'Officer deaths are down, the job must be safer'. Officer training has increased in the last 20 years, as has protective equipment, and life saving measures.

Page 38 states "Further, the data presented on Chart 5 (which includes the average number of police fatalities due to shootings, stabbings, assaults, bombings, and vehicular assaults) suggest that intentional attacks against law enforcement are at historically low levels.200"

The FBI's statistics[1] report that in 2017, 60,000 officer were 'assaulted'. 2677 were assaulted by firearm, and over 267 of them were injured.[2]

Quite simply, the most thorough and definitive source of attacks against law enforcement officers is not used to measure attacks against law enforcement officers, instead we are simply measuring deaths. Safety is a difficult thing to measure. If a pilot with 5,000 hours of flight time has crashed 4 small charter air planes with 0 deaths, is he safer than the pilot who has 2,000 hours of flight time with 0 crashes?

What we can measure is things like 'Felonious assaults' and 'Injuries per weapon type'. Which we have measured, but people keep ignoring in reports like this. Reports and reviews such as this usccr report are important, but we need to look at the situation at hand accurately if we want to address it properly

[1]https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2017 [2]https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2017/tables/table-85.xls

  The three most powerful words for building credibility are "I don't know"

I had a supervisor once who always had an answer to your question. He was always 100% sure he was right. He was not always right. Consequently, going to him for help would sometimes result in the problem becoming worse.

The best supervisor I ever had was the one who routinely told me "I don't know, let me call {PersonInOtherDepartment}" or "See if the answer is in {RelevantManual} under {PossibleSection}. If you don't find it, give me a call."

We treat "I don't know" as an admission of failure far too often. It should be seen as an entry point to improvement.