> @talonxv said: > > @ryan218 said: > > You realise this is the same Starfleet which programmes its computers to accept a Captain's authorisation code and voiceprint from the Bridge even though said Captain isn't even on the bridge, right? And which allowed the ship's command codes to be locked out with said authorisation from a location said Captain wasn't even at?! > > > > Also, I seem to recall Paris being allowed computer access when he was brigged, and he was supposedly under 'solitary confinement'. > > Yes I do and these are major breeches in security. > > But another fun fact. When you get sent to the brig awaiting trial, guess what, the brig is now your appointed place of duty. Yes that's the way it works in any military or military like service. Even in the Coast Guard. > > So for Burnham to leave the brig, that's abandoning her appointed place of duty. At a minimum that under the UCMJ is article 89, Unauthorized Absence. At worst desertion of your post in the face of the enemy, which along with Mutiny is a capital crime. > > A few other crimes could be tossed on Burnham. Let's run them shall we? > > Unauthorized use of a computer to circumvent security > Disobeying a Lawful order for the what 2nd or 3rd time? > Conduct unbecoming > Unauthorized Absence > And possibly desertion(a damn good case can be made here). > > And yet many keep trying to say Burnham did nothing wrong leaving the brig? > > Wrong. I mean seriously, this kind of mentality that she was in the right for humanitarian reasons is hand wringing at best and asinine at worst.
Say the brig HADN'T been about to explosively decompress, killing her. (Which it WAS.) It's not desertion, either: you actually want UCMJ Article 95, resisting arrest and escaping from custody. (And does that even count if you then immediately report to the officer who arrested you in the first place? Hmm.)
In the situation as it stood, however: any halfway decent court is going to make allowances for extenuating circumstances, such as "I'M LITERALLY GOING TO EFFING DIE OF ASPHYXIATION IF I DON'T GET OUT OF HERE RIGHT THE HELL NOW!"
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
> @angrytarg said: > We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.
This verges on an appeal to ignorance fallacy, Targ. Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example). Given that Starfleet is usually written similarly to the US Navy, the UCMJ is a decent substitute for laws or charges that haven't been explicitly cited in canon.
Doesn't hurt that one real-life law, the Fourth Geneva Convention, WAS cited explicitly in DSC (though they apparently missed the part where mining a corpse violates the Convention, too).
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.
Mainly this.
Implying Burnham was in dereliction of duty for escaping the brig rather than dying if this had happened to be a 21st century US soldier operating in a US theatre of operation onboard a US naval vessel means people are still just making things up to complain about.
The computer was clearly designed to not let prisoners die. Starfleet is not in the happit of even allowing people into situations where that might be an option (unless your TNG S1 Picard then he'd happily pull the trigger himself for the greater good). And even modern organisation in the civilised world recognise (or at least pay lip service to) the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example).
There's your problem right there. Starfleet's not a military. It's organised along paramilitary styles. That's to allow the writers to pick which parts of various organisations from across history they want to use without tiresome pendants moaning their stripes are two centimeters to high and they shouldn't be wearing that type of hat on a tuesday.
(Obviously that goes without saying it dosn't stop tiresome pendants moaning that those division patches are only to be worn on the uniforms of a certain series and that crew members working in the galley are Operations not Engineering.)
All those silly nitpicks that people have that Starfleet dosn't work like their favourite military? Those are features not bugs. It's because Starfleet operates differently.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example).
There's your problem right there. Starfleet's not a military. It's organised along paramilitary styles. That's to allow the writers to pick which parts of various organisations from across history they want to use without tiresome pendants moaning their stripes are two centimeters to high and they shouldn't be wearing that type of hat on a tuesday.
(Obviously that goes without saying it dosn't stop tiresome pendants moaning that those division patches are only to be worn on the uniforms of a certain series and that crew members working in the galley are Operations not Engineering.)
All those silly nitpicks that people have that Starfleet dosn't work like their favourite military? Those are features not bugs. It's because Starfleet operates differently.
Starfleet fulfills all the primary functions of a military service plus a few extras, is organized in a military-style structure, and is equipped as a matter of course with armament and legal authorization sufficient to glass an inhabited planet. That is enough information for one to accurately describe them as a military force. And I'm not going through this garbage argument again.
That's quite apart from the context you conveniently removed from your quotation, which is that I was disputing @talonxv's assertion of what laws Burnham supposedly broke by trying to save her own life at the expense of giving the ship's computer a word I can't say on this forum. The point was, if you're going to cite real-life laws to argue Star Trek (which is indeed a somewhat dubious proposition), at least cite the right real life laws.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Under the UCMJ, Burnham would have been under arrest for violation of Article 94, Mutiny or Sedition (as well as Article 90, Assaulting a Superior Officer, but that would probably be regarded in a court martial as being subsumed by the Article 94 violation - if the court felt her Article 94 violation justified, though, they might change the charges down to a 90). She hasn't been tried yet, so she wouldn't be regarded as guilty. If she turned herself over to appropriate authorities after escaping the brig to save her life, she wouldn't get an Article 95 (Resistance, Flight, Breach of Arrest, and Escape) piled on there, due to extenuating circumstances. (On the other hand, if she, say, tried to make her way to a shuttle to effect an escape, that would add Article 95 charges on there.)
There can be no Dereliction of Duty (Article 92) when one has been relieved of duty, which is part of the arrest procedure, so no violation there. And since all of these fall under what are called the "punitive articles", none of them are subject to an Article 15 (Non-Judicial Punishment). If the captain of a ship feels that a court martial is not called for, he or she can decide not to charge a suspect with a punitive violation; however, the suspect can force the issue. (For an example of this in fiction, I refer you to chapter 5 of Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers, when Hendrick is being charged with failure to obey an order to "freeze", but insists on mentioning to the colonel that he got up and punched the DI. The fact that he did this while his testimony was being taken and recorded for non-judicial punishment meant that the colonel had no choice - it had to go to court martial at that point.)
Let's also bare in mind that United Earth (the organisation Starfleet supposedly answers to) clearly subscribes to many of the humanitarian laws of our world, including a little thing called the United Nations Convention on Human Rights (it also stands to reason that the European Hegemony would maintain the European Convention on Human Rights). Now, I'm not well versed on the UNHCR, but the ECHR specifically gives prisoners the right to life if their life is threatened (I.e. It is illegal to prevent a prisoner escaping death, assuming of course that death has not been legally sanctioned). If Starfleet regulations (and the Starfleet JAG) prohibited Burnham from seeking escape from a clearly fatal situation, and she died as a result, that would make Starfleet legally responsible for her death.
Yes, you read that right, under our own laws any military (in the ECHR at least) that enforced the regulations talon just cited against a prisoner in a burning brig would be violating that prisoner's basic human rights. Burnham had every right to ask the computer (the only figure of authority she had immediate access to) to facilitate her escape from a situation which would otherwise result in her certain death.
And as I've pointed out, Paris had the same computer access when he was brigged. No, this isn't an 'it's okay because everyone's doing it', it's an 'it's established in canon as Starfleet practice even a century after DSC takes place'. Tuvok even mentions in an episode that the Voyager's computer is programmed to automatically release prisoners if the Brig becomes uninhabitable, which is exactly what Shenzhou's computer did, once it was given a safe method to do so.
You can't condemn DSC for violating canon and then condemn it for being stupid when it does, even if it's following canon accidentally.
> @talonxv said:
> > @valoreah said:
> > I don't see what's the big deal with the computer allowing Burnham to exit the brig. I don't see Starfleet as being the "let the folk in the brig die" kind of organization.
> >
> > Seems to me the system would have fail safes built in to allow for stuff like massive hull breaches etc. The ship was under attack with most of the brig totally destroyed and open to space. I also seem to recall the alert saying power failure to the brig force field was imminent. Makes sense the AI would allow for exit under those circumstances.
>
> Except the fact the AI should of let her out only to get her to an escape old, not let her wander freely about.
>
> I look at it this way. Burnham should of NEVER EVER had voice communication with the computer.
>
> Now abandon ship gets announced by the surviving senior officer or captain. Computer does a check, still has a prisoner in the brig.
>
> Computer notifies senior officer. Senior officer can either send someone or instruct the computer to deal with it.
>
> Computer is elected to get the prisoner off the ship. Finds nearest escape pod and directs the prisoner to it. Any attempt to deviate is met with security fields until prisoner gets on track to the pod.
>
> Get prisoner on the pod. If it already has people aboard computer notifies senior officer on the pod, person is armed a d takes control of prisoner waits for rescue. If pod is only inhabited by the prisoner, locked down to only essential needs to preserve life, ZERO computer control till rescue.
>
> Now we have positive control over a prisoner awaiting court marshal.
>
> This is how you properly secure prisoners while abandoning ship. And all it takes is a few sub routines.
>
> So enough with this "oh we have to let them go to save them." ****. No. You don't.
So when Lon Suter was able to exit his confinment due to battle damage which lead to him being the person who saved Voyager at the cost of his own life The Doctor should have locked him back up instead of utilizing his talents to save the ship?
"Everybody's doing it" isn't an excuse for bad writing, and Voyager had some real stinkers in terms of contrived situations and unlikely outcomes.
No, this isn't an 'it's okay because everyone's doing it', it's an 'it's established in canon as Starfleet practice even a century after DSC takes place'.
an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,
It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,
It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
In fact, Poul Anderson wrote a few novels on this basis. The aliens enslaved primitive warriors; the warriors slew them and took over their starships. Fortunately, the craft were largely self-sustaining, so this led to such scenes as an interstellar craft touching down, a ramp lowering, and swordsmen riding their horses into battle.
I know you don't care for large parts of the Trek canon, Patrick, but unlike what yourself and your collaborators have done with the Masterverse tales, writers for the shows have to work with the universe they're given. The only "Roddenberry Rule" that was suspended was the one Gene came up with for TNG, in which interpersonal conflict between crewmembers was not allowed. So "it's how this is done in canon" is not an "everybody does it" defense, it's consistency between sources. You may well disagree with how the sources do things, but it is what it is.
an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,
It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
In fact, Poul Anderson wrote a few novels on this basis. The aliens enslaved primitive warriors; the warriors slew them and took over their starships. Fortunately, the craft were largely self-sustaining, so this led to such scenes as an interstellar craft touching down, a ramp lowering, and swordsmen riding their horses into battle.
Kzinti from Larry Niven's novels obtained their technology in this manner, but they seemed to be far more successful than the Kazon. The main difference between the two was the Kzinti were trained as mercenaries while the Kazon were slaves.
an alien race too stupid to mix hydrogen and oxygen in an electrical field to make one of the most abundant compounds in the universe,
It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
In fact, Poul Anderson wrote a few novels on this basis. The aliens enslaved primitive warriors; the warriors slew them and took over their starships. Fortunately, the craft were largely self-sustaining, so this led to such scenes as an interstellar craft touching down, a ramp lowering, and swordsmen riding their horses into battle.
Kzinti from Larry Niven's novels obtained their technology in this manner, but they seemed to be far more successful than the Kazon. The main difference between the two was the Kzinti were trained as mercenaries while the Kazon were slaves.
Part of it is how long the race has been working on reverse engineering and understanding the tech. Also… not all Kazon sects lacked the tech to make water. but the ones who did have it didn't want to share, and were more interested in selling water.
> @patrickngo said: > secondly, did you know the USAF has had ground combat in infantry roles since 1960? that they have a special forces sub-branch, and have had it since the Kennedy administration? hmm? or that it's been against the law to portray accurate, current-service uniforms in media for a long time? they only have to get 'close', but one of the reasons shows bring in advisors is to avoid running afoul of federal laws regarding the wear of the uniform. (hence why Stargate command's uniforms were solid olive drab when that went out of use in the eighties, then went to chocolate chip desert camo instead of three color.)
Yeah, actually I have looked into that, Patrick. The various Stargate series were BETTER about accuracy because they DID have Air Force advisors (among other things, they would always complain once every few months that Amanda Tapping needed to get a haircut to keep Carter's hair within regulation). A lot of the extras were even active duty Air Force personnel.
But they still made mistakes — one of the funnier ones, there's an extra in the pilot who is somehow wearing NCO AND officer rank insignia at the same time, and one of SGU's characters is a master sergeant at age 20 — and there are definitely allowances for story necessity. For example, according to the research I've done, Air Force special ops troops are more organized around supporting air combat operations, not the stereotypical commando stuff that SG-1 usually does (not to mention Jack's backstory including an exfil of a mole from East Germany). Realistically the SGC would be much more of an interservice operation with many more Marine and Army personnel going offworld.
As far as Star Trek, their most prominent "expert advisor", helping write Chakotay's purported Native American cultural background on Voyager, was a fraudster.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
I've met Army people who wore Marine Corps patches, it's NOT unheard of, also the guy in question was chosen for the job because he had that sort of combat expertise.
Usually when you see someone in one service wearing another service's patch, it indicates prior service in that branch. (At HQ SAC/XOXP in the '80s, we had a Naval Senior Master Chief who also wore a couple of USAF ribbons because of prior service in the Air Force, and one sergeant who wore a missile crew badge because he had been an officer and missileer once, until having to leave courtesy of "up or out". He enlisted after that, because there's no requirement for enlisted personnel to be promoted according to a schedule.)
Incidentally, it's not "illegal" to have an accurate uniform on-screen. It's just that most actors and costumers can't be bothered to learn all the piddly little details that we absorbed into our blood in Basic, and don't really understand why military personnel worry so very much about such "trivialities" as the exact order of ribbons or the precise angle one's hat sits at (or, for that matter, where exactly a salute goes depending on whether you're wearing a cover, glasses, or neither).
and is equipped as a matter of course with armament and legal authorization sufficient to glass an inhabited planet.
So was any civilian ship going into hostile territory on Earth. And the ones that weren't hired those that were. You don't study ice caps without taking anti-polar bear weapons. You don't study space phenomena that can rewrite reality and not pack a metric craptonne of torpedoes.
That's quite apart from the context you conveniently removed from your quotation,
I didn't need the context, I needed the quotation to address the point raised above. If it was your point or no it dosn't matter, it was a useful illustration of several of the above posters.
which is that I was disputing @talonxv's assertion of what laws Burnham supposedly broke by trying to save her own life at the expense of giving the ship's computer a word I can't say on this forum. The point was, if you're going to cite real-life laws to argue Star Trek (which is indeed a somewhat dubious proposition), at least cite the right real life laws.
And that's why I didn't bother with the context, because you were already doing that. I was just furthering @angrytarg 's point. Which you've pointed out is yours (more or less).
Basics part 1 & 2 are among Voyager's best episodes and many fans wished Suter (& Seska) had not been killed off.
I'm no VGR fan because I find it a lazy man's TNG when the setting and premise would force a DS9 style show (which I love). It was side characters like Suter and Seska that managed to elevate some tedium. When the show finally returned to personal villains we got the gods damn Borg Queen.
One last thing, the franchise owners cannot "hijack" the name of their franchise, what they say goes, thats not only how it works for Trek its how it works for all TV and film franchises.
Yeah, but in patrickngo's world (I guess that's who you're talking to) the franchise is his now. It's the same toxic ownership that Star Wars fanbois seem to have doubled down on. If they have a nostalgic attachment to something it is immutable and holy and any attempt by the people who actually own that piece of entertainment to add or subtract to their own property is treated as a direct assault on all personal copies and memories held by the fanbois.
How does the quote function work exactly? When I'm quoting somebody who posted from their mobile it's > and @handles but when I'm quoting other posters I get either nice neat quotes I can split and move and sometime jumbled messes of code where punctuation marks are replaced by an assortment of symbols.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Comments
> > @ryan218 said:
> > You realise this is the same Starfleet which programmes its computers to accept a Captain's authorisation code and voiceprint from the Bridge even though said Captain isn't even on the bridge, right? And which allowed the ship's command codes to be locked out with said authorisation from a location said Captain wasn't even at?!
> >
> > Also, I seem to recall Paris being allowed computer access when he was brigged, and he was supposedly under 'solitary confinement'.
>
> Yes I do and these are major breeches in security.
>
> But another fun fact. When you get sent to the brig awaiting trial, guess what, the brig is now your appointed place of duty. Yes that's the way it works in any military or military like service. Even in the Coast Guard.
>
> So for Burnham to leave the brig, that's abandoning her appointed place of duty. At a minimum that under the UCMJ is article 89, Unauthorized Absence. At worst desertion of your post in the face of the enemy, which along with Mutiny is a capital crime.
>
> A few other crimes could be tossed on Burnham. Let's run them shall we?
>
> Unauthorized use of a computer to circumvent security
> Disobeying a Lawful order for the what 2nd or 3rd time?
> Conduct unbecoming
> Unauthorized Absence
> And possibly desertion(a damn good case can be made here).
>
> And yet many keep trying to say Burnham did nothing wrong leaving the brig?
>
> Wrong. I mean seriously, this kind of mentality that she was in the right for humanitarian reasons is hand wringing at best and asinine at worst.
Say the brig HADN'T been about to explosively decompress, killing her. (Which it WAS.) It's not desertion, either: you actually want UCMJ Article 95, resisting arrest and escaping from custody. (And does that even count if you then immediately report to the officer who arrested you in the first place? Hmm.)
In the situation as it stood, however: any halfway decent court is going to make allowances for extenuating circumstances, such as "I'M LITERALLY GOING TO EFFING DIE OF ASPHYXIATION IF I DON'T GET OUT OF HERE RIGHT THE HELL NOW!"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
> We don't know Starfleet's regulation. Everything posted here in regards to US military laws is completely irrelevant. And again, the brig was gone. Physically gone. Only held by a forcefield that was about to collapse. She didn't use anything unauthorized, she asked the computer to please not let it die which it found a reasonable request. This is now literally grasping straws just to find SOMETHING to hate on DSC it gets ridiculous. I mean (wrongly) quoting some RL laws that don't apply in the first place to proof the show blows? Come the oink on.
This verges on an appeal to ignorance fallacy, Targ. Military forces tend to have ROUGHLY the same rules (at least among humans; I wouldn't try to apply this argument to the Klingons or Romulans, for example). Given that Starfleet is usually written similarly to the US Navy, the UCMJ is a decent substitute for laws or charges that haven't been explicitly cited in canon.
Doesn't hurt that one real-life law, the Fourth Geneva Convention, WAS cited explicitly in DSC (though they apparently missed the part where mining a corpse violates the Convention, too).
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Mainly this.
Implying Burnham was in dereliction of duty for escaping the brig rather than dying if this had happened to be a 21st century US soldier operating in a US theatre of operation onboard a US naval vessel means people are still just making things up to complain about.
The computer was clearly designed to not let prisoners die. Starfleet is not in the happit of even allowing people into situations where that might be an option (unless your TNG S1 Picard then he'd happily pull the trigger himself for the greater good). And even modern organisation in the civilised world recognise (or at least pay lip service to) the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
There's your problem right there. Starfleet's not a military. It's organised along paramilitary styles. That's to allow the writers to pick which parts of various organisations from across history they want to use without tiresome pendants moaning their stripes are two centimeters to high and they shouldn't be wearing that type of hat on a tuesday.
(Obviously that goes without saying it dosn't stop tiresome pendants moaning that those division patches are only to be worn on the uniforms of a certain series and that crew members working in the galley are Operations not Engineering.)
All those silly nitpicks that people have that Starfleet dosn't work like their favourite military? Those are features not bugs. It's because Starfleet operates differently.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Starfleet fulfills all the primary functions of a military service plus a few extras, is organized in a military-style structure, and is equipped as a matter of course with armament and legal authorization sufficient to glass an inhabited planet. That is enough information for one to accurately describe them as a military force. And I'm not going through this garbage argument again.
That's quite apart from the context you conveniently removed from your quotation, which is that I was disputing @talonxv's assertion of what laws Burnham supposedly broke by trying to save her own life at the expense of giving the ship's computer a word I can't say on this forum. The point was, if you're going to cite real-life laws to argue Star Trek (which is indeed a somewhat dubious proposition), at least cite the right real life laws.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
There can be no Dereliction of Duty (Article 92) when one has been relieved of duty, which is part of the arrest procedure, so no violation there. And since all of these fall under what are called the "punitive articles", none of them are subject to an Article 15 (Non-Judicial Punishment). If the captain of a ship feels that a court martial is not called for, he or she can decide not to charge a suspect with a punitive violation; however, the suspect can force the issue. (For an example of this in fiction, I refer you to chapter 5 of Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers, when Hendrick is being charged with failure to obey an order to "freeze", but insists on mentioning to the colonel that he got up and punched the DI. The fact that he did this while his testimony was being taken and recorded for non-judicial punishment meant that the colonel had no choice - it had to go to court martial at that point.)
Yes, you read that right, under our own laws any military (in the ECHR at least) that enforced the regulations talon just cited against a prisoner in a burning brig would be violating that prisoner's basic human rights. Burnham had every right to ask the computer (the only figure of authority she had immediate access to) to facilitate her escape from a situation which would otherwise result in her certain death.
And as I've pointed out, Paris had the same computer access when he was brigged. No, this isn't an 'it's okay because everyone's doing it', it's an 'it's established in canon as Starfleet practice even a century after DSC takes place'. Tuvok even mentions in an episode that the Voyager's computer is programmed to automatically release prisoners if the Brig becomes uninhabitable, which is exactly what Shenzhou's computer did, once it was given a safe method to do so.
You can't condemn DSC for violating canon and then condemn it for being stupid when it does, even if it's following canon accidentally.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Again:
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
It actually makes sense if the alien race only acquired their technology instead of developed it themselves. If the advanced alien race that they got the technology from no longer uses electricity and they are not intelligent enough to figure things out for themselves, then they can have an interstellar civilization without knowing how their technology works.
I know you don't care for large parts of the Trek canon, Patrick, but unlike what yourself and your collaborators have done with the Masterverse tales, writers for the shows have to work with the universe they're given. The only "Roddenberry Rule" that was suspended was the one Gene came up with for TNG, in which interpersonal conflict between crewmembers was not allowed. So "it's how this is done in canon" is not an "everybody does it" defense, it's consistency between sources. You may well disagree with how the sources do things, but it is what it is.
Kzinti from Larry Niven's novels obtained their technology in this manner, but they seemed to be far more successful than the Kazon. The main difference between the two was the Kzinti were trained as mercenaries while the Kazon were slaves.
My character Tsin'xing
But please, continue to condescend to those who disagree with you.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
> secondly, did you know the USAF has had ground combat in infantry roles since 1960? that they have a special forces sub-branch, and have had it since the Kennedy administration? hmm? or that it's been against the law to portray accurate, current-service uniforms in media for a long time? they only have to get 'close', but one of the reasons shows bring in advisors is to avoid running afoul of federal laws regarding the wear of the uniform. (hence why Stargate command's uniforms were solid olive drab when that went out of use in the eighties, then went to chocolate chip desert camo instead of three color.)
Yeah, actually I have looked into that, Patrick. The various Stargate series were BETTER about accuracy because they DID have Air Force advisors (among other things, they would always complain once every few months that Amanda Tapping needed to get a haircut to keep Carter's hair within regulation). A lot of the extras were even active duty Air Force personnel.
But they still made mistakes — one of the funnier ones, there's an extra in the pilot who is somehow wearing NCO AND officer rank insignia at the same time, and one of SGU's characters is a master sergeant at age 20 — and there are definitely allowances for story necessity. For example, according to the research I've done, Air Force special ops troops are more organized around supporting air combat operations, not the stereotypical commando stuff that SG-1 usually does (not to mention Jack's backstory including an exfil of a mole from East Germany). Realistically the SGC would be much more of an interservice operation with many more Marine and Army personnel going offworld.
As far as Star Trek, their most prominent "expert advisor", helping write Chakotay's
purported Native American cultural background on Voyager, was a fraudster.
(By the way: the thing about filmmakers not being allowed to portray current, period-accurate uniforms? Isn't true. https://www.stripes.com/why-can-t-hollywood-get-military-uniforms-right-1.159651 )
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
My character Tsin'xing
Incidentally, it's not "illegal" to have an accurate uniform on-screen. It's just that most actors and costumers can't be bothered to learn all the piddly little details that we absorbed into our blood in Basic, and don't really understand why military personnel worry so very much about such "trivialities" as the exact order of ribbons or the precise angle one's hat sits at (or, for that matter, where exactly a salute goes depending on whether you're wearing a cover, glasses, or neither).
Wrong way around. Starfleet fulfils the role of those extras and as a bonus is the only armed response the Federation has.
Oh, so you did read the word 'paramilitary' then?
So was any civilian ship going into hostile territory on Earth. And the ones that weren't hired those that were. You don't study ice caps without taking anti-polar bear weapons. You don't study space phenomena that can rewrite reality and not pack a metric craptonne of torpedoes.
I didn't need the context, I needed the quotation to address the point raised above. If it was your point or no it dosn't matter, it was a useful illustration of several of the above posters.
And that's why I didn't bother with the context, because you were already doing that. I was just furthering @angrytarg 's point. Which you've pointed out is yours (more or less).
I'm no VGR fan because I find it a lazy man's TNG when the setting and premise would force a DS9 style show (which I love). It was side characters like Suter and Seska that managed to elevate some tedium. When the show finally returned to personal villains we got the gods damn Borg Queen.
Yeah, but in patrickngo's world (I guess that's who you're talking to) the franchise is his now. It's the same toxic ownership that Star Wars fanbois seem to have doubled down on. If they have a nostalgic attachment to something it is immutable and holy and any attempt by the people who actually own that piece of entertainment to add or subtract to their own property is treated as a direct assault on all personal copies and memories held by the fanbois.
How does the quote function work exactly? When I'm quoting somebody who posted from their mobile it's > and @handles but when I'm quoting other posters I get either nice neat quotes I can split and move and sometime jumbled messes of code where punctuation marks are replaced by an assortment of symbols.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!