3 ms·
I like how it's written and straight to the point, but calling an almost 300 pages book as "handbook" about _rescue_ is kind of funny.
by woliveirajr 8y ago
I like how it's written and straight to the point, but calling an almost 300 pages book as "handbook" about _rescue_ is kind of funny.
- gumby 8y agoFrom the front of the book, in a big red box: > This textbook contains information on specialized rescue techniques > and is intended for use as a part of a training course involving closely > supervised field training with qualified instructors. A person cannot > become proficient in technical rope rescue by simply reading this > handbook. Every rescue situation is unique, requiring size-up and > decision-making skills gained through personal experience. It's a textbook, and confusingly is called both a textbook and handbook. I suppose it's probably worth tossing in your gear bag before going out on a rescue, which would make it also a "handbook". BTW this is a great example of government in action, far far from the cartoonish invective of popular speech.
- davio 8y agoAlso like seeing "Slamma Jamma" in a government publication
- garduque 8y agoEx-mountain rescue for a busy agency out west. I would say our books were "reference" books. They are for theoretical discussion in a classroom, not an on-the-job resource as I would consider a handbook or textbook.