Goonhub
08-14-2013, 10:42 AM
So, the detective has very few tools to investigate, and this has been discussed several times and blabla.
A few weeks ago I had a fun round with Wydamn as detective. I joined as hos and found Wydamn interrogating a suspected mindslave.
I said a few bullying things and left the suspect with the good cop. Wydamn got a confession and hunted the guy named as master. He got the dude arrested, and found out we had been fooled by a false confession.
The real master came shooting on the shuttle, but we shot him better.
Investigating can be kind of flawed and slow, but it really is fun.
So... let's add the paraffin glove test, or something similar. A test to find out if Subject X shot a firearm. or if a specific pair of gloves were used when shooting a firearm.
Some way for the detective to swab a hand/glove and get a result when the subject shot a gun/shotgun. Energy guns and tasers could leave a different trace, because who cares about real life science, but maybe those could stay undetectable.
If you read the description below, you'll see that it's very unreliable. I'm not proposing the test to fail or misidentify non shooters.
It would always work correctly, but only tell you if that dude fired a gun, any gun.
A few weeks ago I had a fun round with Wydamn as detective. I joined as hos and found Wydamn interrogating a suspected mindslave.
I said a few bullying things and left the suspect with the good cop. Wydamn got a confession and hunted the guy named as master. He got the dude arrested, and found out we had been fooled by a false confession.
The real master came shooting on the shuttle, but we shot him better.
Investigating can be kind of flawed and slow, but it really is fun.
So... let's add the paraffin glove test, or something similar. A test to find out if Subject X shot a firearm. or if a specific pair of gloves were used when shooting a firearm.
Some way for the detective to swab a hand/glove and get a result when the subject shot a gun/shotgun. Energy guns and tasers could leave a different trace, because who cares about real life science, but maybe those could stay undetectable.
If you read the description below, you'll see that it's very unreliable. I'm not proposing the test to fail or misidentify non shooters.
It would always work correctly, but only tell you if that dude fired a gun, any gun.
Quote:The first such test was the "paraffin test" also known
as the "Dermal Nitrate" or "diphenylamine test." (1) It was introduced in
the United States in 1933 by Teodoro Gonzalez of the criminal
identification laboratory, Mexico City police headquarters. In this test,
the hands were coated with a layer of paraffin. After cooling, the casts
were removed and treated with an acid solution of diphenylamine, a reagent
used to detect nitrates and nitrites that originate from gunpowder and may
be deposited on the skin after firing a weapon. A positive test was
indicated by the presence of blue flecks in the paraffin. Although this
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
test often but not invariably gave positive results on the hands of
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
individuals who fired weapons, it also gave positive results on the hands
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
of individuals who had not fired weapons because of the widespread
distribution of nitrates and nitrites in our environment. The paraffin
test is in fact nonspecific and is of no use scientifically.