Request For Office Equipment: Fill & Download for Free

Ah, my boss in Hawaii - at the Public Affairs Office.He could write quite well, but he had a distinctive ‘voice’ and couldn’t modify it to fit various situations. In other words, he could write a fantastic editorial for the newspaper, or a good press release, but when it came to doing a straight-forward, dry request for equipment in a compelling way (ie in such a way that the logistics people would honor said request) he’d come to me. Because I can adapt my writing style to various environments - I can write as required. I’m really flexible, and he knew it.So I wrote a great request for computer equipment and we got it. So some big wig came in and congratulated my boss on getting the equipment, and I said (all innocently) that I was glad my efforts were successful (the conversation took place beside my desk LOL Cause idiot boss had NOT specifically told me that HE’D taken credit for that request LOL He squirmed around in front of said bigwig, and later yelled at me, but I just smiled sweetly and asked what the problem was, cause I DID write it after all, didn’t I?That was me working for the DOD, and it’s HIDEOUSLY difficult to get fired, BTW - as this idiot knew.

Simply to do with costs and turnover of marines.The Royal Marines is a single Commando Brigade (3 Commando) with around 8000 trained marines plus support personnel from the army who complete the same Commando tests (but not the same training) to serve in the relevant formations (29 Commando Royal Artillery, 24 Commando Royal Engineers, 383 troop RLC*). About 1200 marines attend the Commando Training Centre every year, 32 weeks for marines and 60 weeks for officers. These men are considered Commandos and therefore elite and therefore their training reflects this, being the longest for conventional forces in NATO and possibly the world. They are expected to do more with their limited number. This mentality goes back to when the Commandos were established in WW2. This training however costs around £54,000 for each marine in training[1] (and not everyone makes it) and £7000 just to start training. That’s nearly £65 million just to train the 1200 each year.The USMC however (and no disrespect intended) is treated more like a specialised army trained in amphibious operations. From what I could find, they recruit around 40,000 new marines and officers annually (about 33x more than the RM). From the RM figures, this would cost £2.15 billion for the USMC (this would likely be more as the USMC has a higher quantity of and more expensive kit than the RM such as its own air squadrons, tanks and other armoured vehicles, in the UK most of this is owned by the Army, Navy or RAF). For reference, current budget for training is £455 million (4.7x less)[2] . The annual USMC budget is around £31 billion ($40 billion) so a minimum of 7% of the budget would be required just for training. This would mean less money for equipment, salaries, infrastructure, operations etc. The role of the USMC is also different from the RM so they do not need to have a 32 week basic training.Its a simple quality/ quantity argument. The RM has very high quality but a low quantity. The USMC has a good quality but very high quantity. Both services have their advantages. If you want a light infantry brigade to fight in the Arctic Circle, the Royal Marines are the better choice. If you need a rapid reaction armoured force then go to the USMC.*1st Marine Combat Team from the Dutch Korps Mariniers are also attached to 3rd Commando as part of the UK/NL landing force, but these are obviously recruited and trained separately.Footnotes[1] Royal Marines training cut as Afghanistan looms[2] 2019 President's Budget Request for the Navy and Marine Corps

Body cameras themselves? No.The custody of the video itself? Oh yes.First, my problem is not with the body cams themselves. I wish this technology was available sooner. In many instances it can be quite useful to show an objective view of the situation, un-muddled by poor recollections under stress.The problem is not with the body cameras, it’s with the way the information is handled.Ask any defense attorney with a smaller local police department about the reliability of police body cameras and we’d tell you that they have to be one of the most fidgety and sensitive pieces of equipment available. Requests for footage will come back with “the video failed to record” or “the camera was damaged” but strangely this only seems to happen under certain circumstances.The footage isn’t held by any independent agency, it is almost always in the custody of the police department.If there is a serious question about what happened during a traffic stop, especially a situation where the defendant suggests the officer did something that they shouldn’t have done, the body camera footage has a nasty tendency to have “failed to record.”But ignore all of that for one moment and just think about this:In a situation where an officer actually does do something that could seriously jeopardize a case or open up the department for civil liability, the evidence that camera records remains in the custody of the very people it would severely damage.It’s a bit like telling a murder suspect to hang on to the alleged murder weapon for a few days and then send it off to the police station later.It’s not the best system for clear oversight.