DivineHustle

Exactly, I see no issue with the way things are. Removing their equipment will only decrease their capabilities of being able to do what they do best. Keep the peace.

Ok thanks for that. Wasn't aware of this.

Out of curiosity, how do you know what weapons criminals use? I assume you haven't shaken hands with every criminal in America.

​In all honesty, the environment in the picture you provided appears to be very nasty, hostile, and crime ridden. I don't see any issue with an armored truck or two providing non-lethal support to riot officers. It also seems like people are judging whether or not the vehicles are necessary, solely based on the appearance of the vehicle. I don't understand how the physical appearance is relevant. If objects are being thrown at law enforcement, then an armored vehicle is necessary. This is the United States, police aren't just going to be pelted with objects and have their windows smashed out.

This is all I'm saying. I'm not saying that we should swap out the police for the military. I'm just saying that if a sniper rifle could potentially save lives, then I'm all for it. If an APC can save some lives, then let them have it. If grenades can prevent a terrorist attack, then more power to them.

c13 has addressed a lot of what I was going to address, so I'll leave that on the table as it is. I'm not sure where you got the whole tank thing from. I don't think anyone agrees that a full blown tank with a cannon should be deployed to a riot. You also need to understand that gun laws are more in favor of the American people. If a criminal can go and purchase an assault rifle from the black market, then I should be able to purchase a handgun from my local gun dealer. Once the criminals have their guns taken, then I'll gladly give up mine. The American people refuse to be left defenselessly slaughtered by gangs and thugs with weapons. You're also not considering the specific circumstances of gun owners. There are people that live in very rural and agricultural areas, maybe two or three small houses every few miles. What happens if their homes are broken into? Should they just sit there and wait 45 minutes for the local sheriff to show up, helplessly at the mercy of the burglar? No, that's retarded and anyone that believes that should see a psychologist. If you break into my home, I'm gonna light you up like the 4th of July. You shouldn't be in my home to begin with, and if you hadn't broken in it wouldn't be a problem. Most American police officers also support gun ownership. That should say something about the legal aspect and impact of it. Making guns illegal in the United States isn't realistic. So rather than make it illegal and leave law abiding citizens defenseless, why not make it legal and allow law abiding citizens to defend themselves against criminals? It's a very simple situation really. I think that because some people don't reside in the United States, they assume the situation is much worse than it actually is. The last fear I have in the United States is being shot by a gun. I don't fear being shot at all, and never have. I can even say that the majority of Americans don't fear being shot. I honestly fear getting beat up more than getting shot.

But of course the 98' LA riots, when approximately 50 people were killed, this would be appropriate. Or the Ferguson riots where the national guard was shot at and injured. Or the Baltimore riots where black gangs created a truce with the sole purpose of lethally harming law enforcement. If you've ever been to some of these American cities, the police NEED the tools and resources that they currently possess. If you have not been to any of these cities, then I really don't understand how you could determine whether or not the local police of that city need those tools. Sure you can read reports and such, but they're never as accurate and precise as physically being in the city yourself. Criminals are capable of purchasing some serious weaponry if they really wanted to, and the police need to be prepared for it. How often criminals use these weapons is irrelevant, because we've seen how a situation can unfold when law enforcement are outgunned (North Hollywood shoot out). I actually read somewhere that during this shoot out the police had to purchase weapons from the local gun dealer. That's fucking retarded.

I don't think it really matters how much it costs. If it's a terrorist and they've killed innocent people, then they should be evicted from this planet.

I'm having a hard time understanding the purpose to this, is my issue lol. I think that what the president is trying to do is very retarded, in my opinion. I don't see any issue with the way things are now, as far as police equipment goes. If it ain't broke don't fix it. It's not broke, so I don't see any sense in fixing it. The police should always be much more equipped than criminals. It should never be an equal match.

"Rather than ensure that our law enforcement officers' are much better equipped than criminals, let's limit their use of equipment; potentially decreasing the capabilities of law enforcement." Brilliant idea Mr. President.

This article doesn't provide much information so I'll post the article and the link. If anyone has more information on this, it would be much appreciated. A French court has acquitted two police officers who were accused of contributing to the deaths of two teenagers in a blighted Paris suburb a decade ago. The long-awaited and closely-watched verdict may revive memories of 2005 nationwide riots and stir up a new wave of mistrust, anger and violent protests, similar to those seen recently in the U.S. The court in the western city of Rennes ruled that police officers Sebastien Gaillemin and Stephanie Klein were not responsible when two Muslim teenage boys chased by police entered a power substation to hide and were fatally electrocuted in October 2005. Thousands of vehicles were torched, public buildings were burned and thousands of people were arrested in the three weeks of riots after the deaths of Bouna Traore and Zyed Benna. (AP) http://news.yahoo.com/photos/french-police-acquitted-in-teen-deaths-that-sparked-riots-1431959105-slideshow/french-police-acquitted-in-teen-deaths-that-sparked-riots-photo-1431957333483.html

It's also amazing how some people say that we should just nuke the entire middle east. Just wipe out the entire land area and bomb any communities of survivors.

I feel like this would only attract some sort of attention from left wing human rights groups that enjoy supporting terrorists, condemning it as in humane and wrong. This is a sort of mental torture and we'd probably be criticized for it I'm sure. A great idea nonetheless though.

MURICA!!!! Just glad the officers and civilians got home safely.

A mod where you patrol a city of your choice would be awesome. You could apply to be a city guard and if you're accepted you go through a sort of training, with other new guards. Then if you pass the training you're awarded your guard armor and weapon , if you fail you're just dead as usual lol. Then as you patrol the city, random incidents could spawn. Shoplifting, pick pocketing, brawls, and maybe even an invasion from another city. You could also receive some sort of pay for being a guard. You could also probably move up in the ranks of being a city guard and assign specific guards to certain areas of the city depending on its crime rate. As you move up in the ranks your armor changes accordingly. Soon you could become the general of the city or something, this would open a whole new window of commanding. You could probably also control the amount of pay guards receive and depending on your set amount, that'll determine the number of available guards you have to assign. Just some ideas :P.

One thing I don't understand is how people can be divided and controversial over this. He was a terrorist, he got what the hell he deserved. As someone said above, I think death was too easy for him. He should have gotten firing squad.

No, I'm not sure where you got that from. I said that people who consider joining ISIS and leave their nation in an attempt to do so, but then return later with a change of decision should still be punished. This isn't a matter of consideration, this is a matter of following through with a decision and then changing that decision at the last minute. It's like running into a bank with a gun, then walking out because you decided that you don't want to rob the bank anymore. I don't see any logic in allowing them to walk free when they were on the verge of committing a serious crime. It isn't dangerous thinking, it's really common sense thinking. If you can't handle the punishment of a crime, then don't do it. It's that simple. These people know exactly what ISIS does, and what they're capable of doing. When they make the decision to go and join them, they should automatically be put on a blacklist of rejection to entry back into the country. Leaving things they way they are now, is dangerous thinking, and it's actually very stupid. The system is broken, and to leave it broken doesn't make any sense. Who cares if they get angry of being revoked their citizenship? If they try anything stupid, then they'll suffer the harsh reality of the first world justice system. Life moves on. ​

Interesting. I think that if you even made the consideration of joining a terrorist group that you pose a threat to public safety. The fact that you even considered joining a cult of murderers shouldn't be taken lightly. What if I decide to fly out and then "change my mind" to receive the benefits? In my opinion, that entire system is ridiculously broken.

And this is why I think that it's kind of fucked up. Terrorists can go to a suspect part of the world and commit horrible acts of immorality, fly to Sweden, then head to whatever country they want. What might happen is countries might start blacklisting Sweden.

This is kind of a surprise for a lot of people. Many people wouldn't expect modders to put harmful things in their downloads. I don't expect it, and this only makes Rockstar dislike the modding community even more. Regardless of what Rockstar says, it's kinda obvious that they aren't all too excited about modding for 5. Edit: Sorry if I sound very negative, but this is a negative situation. All I'm saying is that now Rockstar has a negative grudge to hold against the modding community.

​I did feel kinda weird typing that, thanks for the heads up man.

Do the Swedish people support this type of action by its government? If something like this were to happen in the US, there'd be a lot of people that would want to close the borders. Probably what the US should do anyways.

I also hope that modding isn't affected by this. It's not necessarily the modders that will be affected, more so the moddèè's, persè.

I would donate but I don't possess a credit card.