# Odd police dialouge in Die Hard **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 8, 2016, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322 "2016-09-08T05:21:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/61 "2016-09-09T17:48:49Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > In the movie, Hans finds it necessary to translate for his second-in-command (duh!); instead of saying “Shoot the window!” he says “Shoot the glass!” > > I’m sure Karl (and the audience) appreciated it. :rolleyes: I was commenting on the fact your quote says “Shit the windows” ("Scheiße das [sic] Fenster) rather than “shoot the windows” (“schießen die Fenster”) (if my translation is correct). I don’t remember which Gruber said.Though I agree about the absurdity of (incorrectly) translating German to a German speaker! ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/62 "2016-09-09T18:02:32Z")
> [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](#): > > I was commenting on the fact your quote says “Shit the windows” ("Scheiße das [sic] Fenster) rather than “shoot the windows” (“schießen die Fenster”) (if my translation is correct). Your translation is correct, but you read my post wrong. I put the “i” before the “e.” “Schiess!” (or “Schieß!”) is a strong imperative. It could be made even stronger by adding “mal”: _“Schiess mal das Fenster!”_ My German isn’t so rusty that I don’t remember the difference between “shoot” and “shit”! :eek: ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/63 "2016-09-09T18:07:41Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > _“Schiess mal das Fenster!”_ Or, indeed, _“die Fenster”_ if we need the plural. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/64 "2016-09-09T19:40:22Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > Your translation is correct, but you read my post wrong. I put the “i” before the “e.” > > “Schiess!” (or “Schieß!”) is a strong imperative. It could be made even stronger by adding “mal”: _“Schiess mal das Fenster!”_ > > My German isn’t so rusty that I don’t remember the difference between “shoot” and “shit”! :eek: Mine is rudimentary, but I sure love languages. If only I could speak more than one! ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/65 "2016-09-09T19:53:25Z")
‘Toc’ is phonetic T in the older British alphabet dating back to the Great War (hence the ‘Toc-H’ welfare organisation, originally based at Talbot House). Only some letters had a phonetic equivalent; Ack for A, Emma for E, Pip for P being some others I can think of. British-American staff conversations before 1941 focussed on common RT procedures and a new alphabet, amongst other things. The later WW2 British one has Tare-for-T, (not Toc) while such terms as Yorker (a particular bowling action in cricket) were unlikely to be known to Americans. Zebra had the defect of being pronounced differently by the two nations. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/66 "2016-09-09T21:31:29Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Lincoln, X-Ray, Ida 483 > > … A 415 fight group, with chains and knives. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2016, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/67 "2016-09-09T23:29:28Z")
> [@Mk\_VII](#): > > ‘Toc’ is phonetic T in the older British alphabet dating back to the Great War… I realize that. What I was asking was: Does the word actually mean something \*other \*than that in British dialect? Why else would it be used in a work of fiction written in the 19th century? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2016, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/68 "2016-09-10T01:05:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > A 415 fight group, with chains and knives. > 🙂 Thank you! ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2016, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/69 "2016-09-10T01:27:09Z")
> [@Hocus\_Pocus](#): > > That’s because Ponch & Jon were riding what? Vehicle type isn’t what I was worried about. I was trying to establish that Abe Lincoln 30 was improper and that 8 Lincoln 30 kept with the nomenclature that was established earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2016, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/70 "2016-09-11T11:50:57Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > …I’d wince horribly over “Roger, Wilco” though. The NATO pro-word WILCO actually includes the meaning of roger and simply adds on the will comply portion at the end. “Roger Wilco” is redundant by a strict application of the NATO pro-words. I know know to “blame” aviators for my pain if I hear it. 😛 But redundancy in the first word is a deliberate feature of radio communications. > **[Ten-code](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten-code)** > > Ten-codes, officially known as ten signals, are brevity codes used to represent common phrases in voice communication, particularly by US public safety officials and in citizens band (CB) radio transmissions. The police version of ten-codes is officially known as the APCO Project 14 Aural Brevity Code. > The codes, developed during 1937–1940 and expanded in 1974 by the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International (APCO), allow brevity and standardization of message traffic. ... > [@](#): > > Experienced radio operators knew the first syllable of a transmission was frequently not understood because of quirks in early electronics technology. Radios in the 1930s were based on vacuum tubes powered by a small motor-generator called a dynamotor. The dynamotor took from 1/10 to 1/4 of a second to “spin up” to full power. Police officers were trained to push the microphone button, then pause briefly before speaking; however, sometimes they would forget to wait. Preceding each code with “ten-” gave the radio transmitter time to reach full power. ---
**Author:** ![Mollie\_Magill](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mollie_magill/32/20882_2.png) [@Mollie\_Magill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mollie_Magill)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2016, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/71 "2016-09-12T14:04:46Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Now that the OP has been answered, can anyone tell me how Powell looked at the building while McClane was having a firefight on the roof (with automatic weapons, no less) and didn’t see the muzzle flashes or hear the shots? Would you believe I watched this last night? Powell could clearly see the muzzle flashes on top of the building, but they were very far away, and could easily have been mistaken for fireworks. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2016, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322/72 "2016-09-12T14:34:42Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I don’t believe McClane shoots at Powell at this time (as others have stated) but doesn’t he shoot at the spotlights later when he discovers that the LAPD are preparing to assault the building? There are officers standing pretty darn close to those lights. McClane never shoots at the lights. The gangsters shoot the lights out. > [@](#): > > Now that the OP has been answered, can anyone tell me how Powell looked at the building while McClane was having a firefight on the roof (with automatic weapons, no less) and didn’t see the muzzle flashes or hear the shots? We are shown Powell’s POV, and he sees flashes of light, but hears nothing, so he thinks nothing of it. There’s lots of things flashing atop LA skyscrapers. It is somewhat unlikely he wouldn’t have heard the shooting, though; you are asked to believe it’s too far away. However, we know Nakatomi Tower is only 35 stories high; it is, in fact, precisely 493 feet high. That is quite close enough to hear gunfire. I suppose it’s possible shots fired from the roof could be behind an acoustic shadow created by the roof itself, but it seems unlikely. The building has many neighbours and you’d hear echoes. You just have to accept it, I guess. “Die Hard” is a wonderful and immensely important film, but I’ll agree with Roger Ebert; the movie does have a glaring flaw, and it’s the LAPD being a bunch of complete boobs. They are portrayed as comically inept and yet there’s no reason for that to be true. You could have made the LAPD competent and still have the movie go more or less as it does; it would have made Gruber and his henchmen seem even more menacing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-police-dialouge-in-die-hard/765322.md?page=3)