[Scan-DC] Fw: FW: Fw: "Signal 13" - Montgomery County Police?

[Gregory Menton]

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Gregory Menton <gmentoni at yahoo.com>
To: scan-dc at mailman.qth.netScott; Fink <taurusnva79 at yahoo.com>; Jerry Burns <jerryb31 at hotmail.com>; Kelley Steve <kbear73 at msn.com>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2009 4:11:34 AM
Subject: Fw: [Scan-DC] FW:  Fw:  "Signal 13" - Montgomery County Police?


Come on! Signal/10-13 is a universal (almost) message for: "I'm in deep s***. Sent me help 
FORTHWITH !"
The powers that be on Mt. Olympus want to change it to Signal-1, or some such generic crap ? Since we're all going to "plain English" (for now; if we're going to be PC we'll have to have bilingual radio runs), why don't we have them scream the aforementioned sentence over the channel ?
-GM



----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Samuel C. Dixon <scdixon at comcast.net>
To: scan-dc at mailman.qth.net
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 10:37:48 PM
Subject: [Scan-DC] FW:  Fw:  "Signal 13" - Montgomery County Police?



-----Original Message-----
From: Samuel C. Dixon [mailto:scdixon at comcast.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:34 PM
To: 'scan-dc-bounces at mailman.qth.net'
Subject: RE: [Scan-DC] Fw: "Signal 13" - Montgomery County Police?

Actually Signal 1 is the replacement for Signal 2 is a routine request for
back up. At least that is the case in NoVa

-----Original Message-----
From: scan-dc-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:scan-dc-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Lee Williams
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:27 PM
To: Scan-DC
Subject: [Scan-DC] Fw: "Signal 13" - Montgomery County Police?

------------------------------------------------
From: "Lee Williams" <leonzo at hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:57 PM
To: "Doug Kitchener" <oldsdoug at hotmail.com>; <scan-dc at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [Scan-DC] "Signal 13" - Montgomery County Police?

> Signal 13 was universally used by most DC area law enforcement agencies as

> Officer needs emergency assistance. With the abolishment of ten codes 
> technically no DC area law enforcement agency should be using that 
> anymore. The current/correct code to use now is "signal 2". The only 
> problem with saying signal 2 is it gives no context. For example is an 
> officer saying signal 2 because they want to search a car but not by 
> themselves? That's appropriate but there is no need for multiple units 
> responding lights and siren. But an officer fighting with someone on the 
> side of the road will also say signal 2. That would mean units responding 
> lights and siren. So there is still some confusion as to exactly what's 
> happening when an officer says signal two.


______________________________________________________________
Scan-DC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Scan-DC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scan-dc
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Scan-DC at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html