This is stupidly dangerous for the people on those boats, and they probably don't realize it. Crew Dragon is basically unexploded ordnance with a helping of gasses toxic at the PPM level. Everything went right today, and they broke out the oxygen tanks and masks because there was too much toxic gas in the air. It is highly irresponsible to allow them close. They're more than welcome to assemble in international waters, so long as they don't do so right beside the explosive device.
This is not a private mission, this is a mission executed by the US government, who happened to subcontract out the vehicle to a private company. Hence why the government would reasonably be expected to pay for (directly, or indirectly as part of their contract) the security.
Regardless of who pays for the security, the government (US and otherwise) frequently provides security, that's because they have a monopoly on the use of force. Consider, for example, how oversized loads on highways are frequently escorted by police (dependent on local laws).
Consider, for example, how oversized loads on highways are frequently escorted by police (dependent on local laws).
This seems less common recently. Those giant tubes that I assume are the bottom section of wind masts are all over the road recently, and I never see any police. Someone ought to write some tickets on the people who are afraid to pass with a 7.5' car in a 12'-wide lane when a load is hanging 1' over the lane, 7.5' off the ground...
Ugh, what rhetoric. Defund the police is not abolishing the police, it is removing their responsibility as only tool we have in the toolbox against many different societal problems. The police are a hammer. Sometimes you need a hammer, especially if the problem is a nail. Problem is when someone has a few screws loose, they tend to also get hammered.
I agree. You seem to think that the police function should be re-examined and adjusted and you seem to be OK using the short hand of "defund the police" to communicate that. Unfortunately there are other folks who think that "defund the police" really does mean to zero out the budget of the police and there are all sorts of positions in between those two.
So I would assert that as a means to communicate clearly, "defund the police" fails miserably. It is terrible rhetoric that just sows confusion and promotes division.
If we were to do a poll you're probably right. The majority of HN is left leaning. Personally I don't want to defund the police (especially since i'm not from the US which would make my opinion invalid.) I'm going to make an assumtion and tell me if I'm right. You have been on Twitter for at least 2 hours in the last week. Is this the case? let me know if possible.
MMH is not vented on landing. When it’s released, it’s because of a mistake. That’s why the approaching crew take the precautions they do, and don a gas mask when toying with the craft.
Nothing bad happened to these boaters. But they were downwind from a substance which, had it leaked, would have put every one of them in the hospital and taken decades off their lives.
I was listening to the feed. They clearly discussed the dropping concentrations of both MMH (although I think they called it "MMT"?) and NTO. If they weren't just staging an elaborate ruse, then those substances were going somewhere. At at least one point they asked the crew if they wanted to exit immediately or wait. The crew replied they were happy to "hang out" a bit longer.
Even though you're flip-flopping (in the same paragraph) about whether there was a dangerous condition, you do seem to concede that shooting people is not the way to rescue them. So, you're ahead of most USA national security experts.
The gas being discussed appears to have been remennants from the use of the thrusters on orbit or something. They were very explicit that there was not a leak.
Hanging out a bit longer meant staying inside the capsule longer instead of seeing a doctor sooner to avoid exposing themselves and more of the crew to those fumes. They were at 2.5ppm if I recall the radio chatter correctly.
This is not a private mission, this is a mission executed by the US government, who happened to subcontract out the vehicle to a private company. Hence why the government would reasonably be expected to pay for (directly, or indirectly as part of their contract) the security.
Regardless of who pays for the security, the government (US and otherwise) frequently provides security, that's because they have a monopoly on the use of force. Consider, for example, how oversized loads on highways are frequently escorted by police (dependent on local laws).