I have been following this thread that I started with interest, particularly the comments from Pete1950, Arqubus and Shadow, and have learnt quite a few things I didn't know. I still think that in a sensible world this incident could have been dealt with quietly, as I have still seen nothing to suggest Sgt Nightingale was a threat to society, but in the real world I can now see that Sgt Nightingale has probably been dealt with as leniently as he possibly could have been. It is a pity that in todays world following policy and procedure (and possibly the law) takes pecedence over common sense. I hope his stay at MCTC is as short as possible.
Ok Pete, you obviously know everything there is to know about it. Out of interest, what name would you give to the places that most of us call Open Prisons?
Hi Al, I lived in a few places around there, but all a bit further away than you were. I spent quite a few years in a village called Great Totham, and then a few years in Little Totham. Colchester was always our best local town, especially when we all got driving licences and could enjoy the night-life delights on offer! No Army connection - just grew up around there. I've got a military background now though, 'cos I joined the RN when I was 20 and just signed-on for another 5 years I've got 2 mates who have worked at Colchester MCTC, and both of them really enjoyed their time there, both for the work and for the area. Steve
It made the local paper http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/local/10064452.Locked_up_SAS_hero_set_for_appeal/
I have had postings in Pompey, and served on Pompey based ships but I'm working at Yeovilton now. Yeovilton has been my on-and-off home for years, and I've always managed to get back there after jobs working away.
Perhaps we have all learned something, johnv. I hope stays at MCTC are always as short aspossible and as long as necessary. Your references to “common sense” and “a sensible world” are intriguing. Everybody is in favour of common sense, but each person has a different idea what it means. I may have misunderstood what you mean by it, but I am guessing you mean this offence should have been swept under the carpet by the police, or the prosecutors, or the Court Martial. Is that because SAS guys, or soldiers generally, should be exempt from the criminal law? Or because the Firearms Acts are too strict in banning handguns? Or because everybody should be allowed to keep unlicensed guns and ammo at home? Sweeping under the carpet is just what was done by the police with the News of the World phone hackers, by the BBC with Jimmy Savile, by the Catholic church with abusing priests, etc etc ad nauseam. My version of common sense involves dealing with problems transparently and honestly, not suppressing them. But perhaps that’s just me. The next time the media publish misleading stories monstering some accused person (who might be innocent) or condemning the harsh punishment of some offender (who may actually have been treated leniently), no doubt we will see a new flush of ill-informed indignation as usual. I already know what my reaction to it will be. How about yours?
Or you could adjust the zoom level on your display so the words are in a size to suit your eyesight. If you need help doing this, you only have to ask.
My references to 'common sense' and 'a sensible' world are about people making judgements and decisions in their everyday lives based upon experience, knowlegde and skill. We are moving to a world where following procedures and policies to the letter, often written by someone without that experience, knowledge or skill, is becoming the norm and woe betide you if you cross the line. It reduces people to little more than drones and makes them unhappy. There is a difference between an honest mistake and a deliberate attempt to do harm. I would like to think that Sgt Nightingdale made an honest mistake, which could have been handled with discretion, whereas the News of the World, the BBC with Jimmy Savile and the Catholic Church with abusing priests were deliberately covering up wrongdoing that was doing real harm to real people and was therefore complicit in that wrongdoing. This to me is the difference, and if the Army or Police had 'covered up' the incident, and it subsequently came to light, I would have thought that they had exercised sensible discretion. I accept that it is a very fine line and occasionally some people will disagree with the outcome. And I bet you did break the speed limit on your trip across Germany, because the Autobahns I have driven on have all had sections with speed limits, notably by each junction, and you dodged the question, but I didn't really expect you to incriminate a member of the legal profession, I hope you haven't been covering up law breaking :wink:
Yes, why don't I up the zoom on my browser, to accommodate one person's choice of font-size, out of many hundreds of contributors who require no zoom at all. What a proportionally sound approach! Outstandadoobly idea!
"My version of common sense involves dealing with problems transparently and honestly, not suppressing them. But perhaps that’s just me." What like this? "Or you could adjust the zoom level on your display so the words are in a size to suit your eyesight. If you need help doing this, you only have to ask."
Pete, I would also like to add a request for normal font size. PS. I've got perfect 20-20 vision and don't need to zoom to look at anything else on this forum.
OK, glad to hear it. So what is your problem then? Are making some kind of joke? Being sarcastic? I really have no idea what you’re on about. I like to make posts in a slightly more legible font and a slightly larger font size than the forum default (I find the default size rather hard on the eyes). Why would that be a problem for you, or for anyone else? Since you haven’t explained what you mean, I am left genuinely puzzled.
