c13

Police rarely fire their weapons outside of state required qualification, which in most states is only twice a year and done in a mostly static position. Each agency has their own standards, training and curriculum in place, but budget and quite frankly relevance (it is extremely rare that a cop draws their gun, let alone fires it) make it a lower priority. Additionally, a direct quote from one cop I've talked to is "most cops only care that their gun goes bang when they pull the trigger." Plus police officers rarely train on their own time unless they are into guns. To me, the most alarming thing in the video is the lack of cover. There were half a dozen cops exposed to a known armed suspect for several minutes, but it took forever for someone to comment on it. All it takes is a split second for a shot to be fired towards them. With the lack of cover, it made an incident of the child hostage being hit much more likely should the suspect open up.

I think everyone over the last page needs to take a step back and calm down, then look at things from a new perspective. Let's rewind way back to the days of LCPDFR. As anyone who has ever worked with code before knows, anything and everything will go wrong if you change one line. Sam once said that there were often times when he would add a new line and 10 different things that were working would suddenly make the game crash. This brought up many issues with releasing finalized versions. It was several years ago, I believe it was LCPDFR .9, that a definitive release date was given about a month in advance. Like usual, the site went down due to the excessive amount of traffic. The few who were able to download it and get in game quickly noticed a critical error: the game crashed when they called for backup. People were furious, as could be expected. For people that haven't been around a while, that is the main reason why the official response to questions about release dates has always been "when its done." Additionally, it does get troubling keeping hype up for a new version. I'm sure a lot of people would be much more annoyed if there was no news whatsoever. It puts Sam and LMS in a tough spot, and I am sure they believed .4 would be finalized sooner rather than later when the first preview was posted in February. But life and game breaking errors can often get in the way and I am in no way privy to this information. I guess what I am trying to say is that I share frustration with many of you, but we have to sit back, relax, and not be at each others throats because that is not going to help anything.

My reply from an old thread like this: For me, this happened in the days of .95 RC3 (testers version). I was parked in the alleyway on Jonestown street in downtown Alderney, just northwest of the Plumber's Skyway entrance, in EVI's shiny new slicktop caprice. I had a K-9 as a partner at the time. I start hearing yelling, and a Spanish Lords member runs in front of me holding a pistol with another deputy right behind him. I jump out, press the hotkey for the K-9 and we get involved in the chase. I call for backup before rounding the corner heading north on Myung street, where I catch up with the other deputy about half a block away from the gang member. My K-9 easily catches up to the suspect, and is about to jump when the suspect turns around and opens fire. The cop I am with and I start returning fire with Glock 19s as my dog retreats, and civilians are running everywhere. About 15 feet away to the left, the doors open up to a car and two more gang bangers jump out, one with a glock and the other with an uzi. We're heavily outgunned, have no cover and we're being flanked, when two backup units arrive from the south at the same moment the other deputy goes down. I sprint back to the cover of a sheriff's car, return fire and the two suspects go down. The K-9 then sprints forward and latches onto the original suspect, making him drop his weapon. I arrest the suspect and call for a transport. I think this crazy situation is already over, but I was wrong. I turned around to start heading back to my car when I hear more gun shots. I turn around thinking it's the AI police being stupid and corrupt by shooting the unarmed suspect. However, two more gang members are firing at the remaining deputies to break out the original suspect. I start firing from a flanking position, and my dog goes down as well as another deputy. Then the original suspect gets a gun and joins his compadres. I call for more backup, as there are now only 4 deputies on scene including me. I get to cover again, return fire again, and more backup starts to arrive from the south and east. The remaining suspects quickly go down, littering the Myung street with more shell casings, blood and bodies than usual. By the end of it, 5 suspects were killed, 2 officers were killed and my dog was killed also. All of it happened in about 2 minutes.

Please don't. A lot of departments overreact and get defensive about the idea of their agency in Grand Theft Auto. Some have even put cease and desist orders on texturers/developers. But on topic, if you are going for their older vehicles with Whelen Edges, I would look for a whelen siren. For their newer Tahoes, I would look at Federal SIgnal stuff.

"My feelings are more important than facts"

Except I countered every single one of your proposals. Each one is a meaningless feel good idea, potentially does more harm than good, or has massive potential for abuse. The quote you are attributing to me is completely ignoring the context of what I was replying to. It's a fact every time something like this happens people with guns respond to fix it. It's a fact mass shooters primarily commit their travesty in gun free zones. It's a fact that a majority of mass shooters give up or kill themselves, or at the very least shift their focus away from unarmed victims, every time other people with guns appear.

Tell me how gun registry possibly prevents crime. "Oh, but guns can be traced back." Report it stolen. The only thing a gun registry solves is giving the government a convenient list of who owns guns and how many they own. As of 2017, there were 112,710 cases in 29 states where people failed a background check when attempting to purchase a firearm. Attempting to purchase a firearm while having your rights revoked is a felony. 12,700 were further investigated. 12 people were prosecuted. Let that sink in for a moment. One thousandth of a percent were prosecuted. Think of all the violent offenders that could have been locked up, and probably went off to continue to commit crime. Enforce the laws we have now before we add more laws that will hassle law abiding citizens and where criminals will fail to be prosecuted. Banning private sales will not exclude people gifting firearms to family members. "But what about people selling guns to known criminals?". There's already a law for that. It's called straw purchasing. Enforce the laws on the books. A majority of guns at gun buybacks are older guns found in the attic of a deceased relative. Then there are often throwaway guns used by gangs since many buybacks have rules of no questions asked. On the 4-6 month waiting period, let me tell you of an anecdote. When I worked at a gun store, we sold NFA items. That means short barreled rifles/shotguns, suppressors, and full autos. One time, some one sent in a form with the tax stamp to the ATF. There was an entire page not filled out. It got approved 9 months later. You know why? They rarely bother reviewing those items too closely, as people looking for NFA items have presumably purchased firearms before and passed background checks. They take the $200 tax stamp on those items and put it in a bank, letting it collect interest for 6-9 months. I'll let you in on a little secret. Depending on how inundated NICS is with calls, a background check can be completed in as little as 5 minutes. If it's not in the system, it's not going to come up. "But those people with homicidal intentions might be dissuaded if they have to wait so long". Perhaps. But what is more likely to happen is a woman is killed by a stalker because she had to wait 6 months to get protection. Psychiatric evaluations? All that has to happen is someone ruling that wanting a gun for self defense is crazy. I'll pass. I'm not going to get into a 9/11 debate, but short and sweet, it was a failure of our government to react to many warning signs and have a plan in place to react to a hijacking. The Israeli's have some of the safest airports in the world. You know why? They profile. And now we get to the most sickening part of your argument. There is absolutely no right that should be "annoying and inconvenient" to exercise, especially to the degree you describe. When that happens, it becomes a privilege. "But you can't shout 'FIRE' in a crowded theater." You're 100% correct. But we don't gag people before they enter. We prosecute them after the fact. We don't give people psychiatric evaluations before they are allowed to vote. We don't even require a photo ID in many states which is far greater of an issue. Just come out and say it. You don't trust yourself with a firearm, therefore you don't trust anyone with one.

We've been over this many times. Of the difficulties of enforcing gun laws in the US as compared to islands. Of the difficulties of rounding up all the guns. Of the difficulties of getting criminals to obey the law, and how they will see it as an opportunity to take advantage of a defenseless population. We've talked about how guns are an equalizer. How women and the elderly are most likely unable to fight off a single criminal without one. Of how you are more likely to be attacked by multiple people than caught in a mass shooting. We've talked about how the primary firearms used in crimes are handguns, as they are concealable, cheap and there's no real con to ditching them. How rifles are used in less than 400 murders a year, and that doesn't specify the style of those rifles. We've talked about how crime is dropping and has been dropping for decades, while simultaneously there are more guns in civilian hands than ever before in the US. How despite every state having a concealed carry permit system, and some states not even requiring permits to carry concealed, it's not the wild west gun control advocates screamed it would be. We've talked about areas with some of the strictest gun control having some of the highest murder rates. How a majority of mass shootings occur in gun free zones. How a majority of shooters give up or kill themselves upon facing armed opposition. We've talked about the difficulty of requiring background checks for everyone. How the gun show loophole is a myth. How the ATF said a national registry would be required to enforce it. We've even talked about how a majority of mass shooters passed a background check or acquired their guns through illegal means. We've talked about the fact that not everyone lives in a city, and there are many places in the US where police can be hours away. What are you trying to accomplish with that statement?

Statistically speaking, a vast majority of mass shooters, attempted or successful ones, give up or kill themselves upon being confronted by someone with a gun. At the absolute worst case scenario once a good guy with a gun enters the picture, the focus is taken away from taking out defenseless people and engaging the other armed party. Obviously it's not realistic to put officers at every religious institution, and many won't have the funding for armed guards, but it is realistic that there are many people who have concealed carry permits who would be willing to act in such an event, should the location not be a gun free zone. Mass shootings are also fairly rare comparatively. While such events are much more common in the United States than other developed nations, you would still be more likely to win the lottery and be struck by lightning in your lifetime than to be caught in one. At the end of the day, regardless of where you are at, you are the primary one responsible for your own safety.

So what happens every time someone shoots people? More people show up with guns to arrest/kill that person. Wouldn't it improve the chances of survival if there is already someone with a gun prestaged? Additionally, knowing that there is armed security is often a deterrent. James Holmes had multiple theaters with larger seating capacity closer to his apartment, but they were not gun free zones. BTW, I find it funny that you're complaining about racism and making fun of someone for being "orange" in the same post.

Implying that because something doesn't work 100% of the time it's not worth doing.

Because no one has ever prevented a mass shooting, bad people with guns are all powerful deitys and guns are instantly useless in the hands of potential victims.

I was playing last night and I got in pursuit of a suspect who was flying over route 1 and eventually on the Pacific coastal highway. Due to heavier traffic, I fell back a bit and was responding behind two other units. It gave a sense of realism where I wasn't always the first one to a call, where I am always reacting to what was going on and having to call backup myself. It was one of my favorite moments in a while. After talking to others, a common issue we have is a sense of being alone on shift. I feel like I have a solution that can mitigate it, and should be fairly simple to implement. Back in LCPDFR, there was a kind of hidden feature where if you set a waypoint, you could call for backup and a unit would spawn next to you then respond to the waypoint alongside you. Such a feature could easily be implemented, and with features that didn't exist before like code 2 backup, it will give a sense of an actual department responding instead of a lone player who shows up first and reacts to everything. A nice feature would also be the ability to have backup stick around until dismissed, like in OnScene backup.

Can anyone tell me what I did wrong on this?

Don't draw a gun, there is a chance that some one just kills you anyways because he doesn't want a witness. What if down the line, during another robbery attempt (because people who commit violent crimes tend to be repeat offenders), he starts killing people? Japan and South Korea have much higher suicide rates. This is with firearms being near completely banned. Besides suicide, all the scenarios you list come from not following the rules of firearm safety. See point above. Having a gun in the house doesn't make people want to kill themselves, there are greater issues at play in their life. You are oversimplifying it. The most sickening thing of all is people like you. You accept that the world is a messed up place. You accept that there are sick people in the world. You accept that some people are more physically capable than others, or that there could be more than one attacker. You know people get robbed. Beaten. Crippled. Raped. Have their lives ruined. Killed. All by sick individuals for little to no reason. Your solution? Lol just let the government deal with it after the fact. People who own guns have small penises. People like Toebius, me and others choose to put the safety of ourselves and our families in our own hands. You want to entirely rely on the government for protection. You think people with guns are playing "judge, jury and executioner". We accept that if some one is actively harming us, there really is no question of what is going on. You believe everyone lives in a city, where police response times are under 10 minutes. If a call gets made at all. You choose to remain blissfully ignorant that there are places in the United States where people may live an hour away from the nearest police. The fact is that people have an ability to defend themselves in the United States. And that terrifies you because you are reliant on the government. Yes, a majority of guns are designed to kill. Again, firearms are an equalizer. Your phone isn't going to protect you. The police aren't going to protect you. Your precious baseball bat you talked about before isn't going to protect you. They are not shields. They are not alarms. They won't make things disappear. The best scenario out of all your personal solutions is the police showing up to you beaten, missing half the most valuable stuff in your home. If you get lucky, they might find a suspect in a few months, and he will be released after a year or two in prison. And hopefully you won't have any life long lasting injuries. Unlike you and your little baseball bat, I've had years of training with my firearms. I can confidently say that if someone is unfortunate enough to break into my house, they aren't getting out scratch free. Key points with all your arguments: Drugs aren't used in self defense. Speeding isn't used in self defense. All the punishment for violating laws that you brought up is done retroactively. We don't put electronic sensors in our cars that force us to drive the speed limit. We don't punish people for thinking about doing drugs. Guns in the US are already heavily regulated. A majority of crime committed with them is done by people who couldn't pass a background check, and have previously been arrested for violent crimes and given light sentences. I've said it before and I will say it again, in 2010, 48,000 felons (people who aren't legally allowed to have firearms) attempted to purchase firearms. That is a felony. 44 of them were prosecuted.

Rockstar updated the names of the police wail and yelp a while ago. Current ones: "SIREN_PA20A_WAIL" "AIRHORN_EQD"

Again, ignoring every other part of the post like you always do. Like I said in my post, firearms are an equalizer. While if he had a knife, he was slashing at people right next to him, had one person been concealed carrying, the stabber could of been taken out from a distance and injuries could have been prevented. Maryland has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. That is where he bought the guns. Court documents show that the shooter was on SSRI, like so many others. He punched through the door of his mom's bedroom because she hid a video game controller. Unlike you, I offered a solution that would make sense besides "ban all guns." And what do you mean "no chance to survive." Over 75% of gunshot victims are able to be saved in the US. You don't care about the natural right to self defense, so I shouldn't be surprised.

This argument has been hashed out time, and time, and time again on here. I still haven't seen a shred of evidence that I'd be safer without my guns. Crime rates in the US are dropping as well while thousands of guns are being purchased every day. This is with every single state allowing concealed carry permits for it's residents and many states having no requirement for a permit to carry. The problem with arguments like yours is that it inherently assumes all people who have firearms are evil and looking to kill each other. If this was the case, then suburban and rural areas would be littered with bodies, as they have the highest firearm ownership rates. You conveniently ignored the most damning part of my post, so I'll elaborate on it. After the "Assault Weapon" Ban of 1994, the Clinton administration, easily the most successful administration to wage war on the 2nd amendment, directed the Center for Disease Control to study the use of firearms in self defense cases. It's results completely contradicted what they were hoping for. The 10 year study, from 1994 to 2004, found firearms were used in self defense cases to prevent crimes between 800,000 to 2.5 million times. The reason why an exact number is so hard to find is because if a crime is prevented, then there is no reason for police to make a report on it. The reason why people like me cling to our guns so feverishly is because they are a great equalizer. A favorite quote of mine is "God created man, Samuel Colt made them equal." An average woman would have no hope of fighting off an average male attempting to cause her harm. An elderly person would have no hope of fighting off an average male attempting to harm him or her. An average male would have no hope of fighting off multiple men attempting to harm him or his family. A majority of gun crime is committed in low income areas in major cities, where gang life is the only way to make money. Those areas also have the strictest gun control laws. For a while, it was illegal to leave your house with a firearm in Chicago unless it was disassembled. Surprisingly, gangbangers didn't give a shit about it. A majority of mass shootings, which make the news far more often than the 50+ people shot a week in Chicago, occur in gun free zones. In Nevada, it is illegal to bring a firearm into a hotel. That didn't stop Steven Paddock. It is illegal nationwide to bring a firearm into a school. That didn't stop Adam Lanza. James Holmes, the shooter who shot up a screening of The Dark Knight Rises, had multiple theaters with larger auditoriums closer to home than the one he chose. The one he went to was a gun free zone. People that commit mass shootings are attempting to get the highest body count. They can't do that if some one shoots back at them because it brings them from offense to defense. Or it just kills them. In a vast majority of cases, attempted mass shooters either give up or kill themselves when confronted with some one with a gun, be it law enforcement or civilians. Firearms are used for sport, hunting (unlike Germany, there is vast wilderness in the US with large predators), and most importantly, to protect the most inherent natural right, the one to self defense.

Yet another mass shooter on SSRI drugs. If we want serious change, we need to do the following: 1. Take a serious look at the drugs we are pumping children full of and stop diagnosing "ADD" and "ADHD" because a kid finds school boring 2. Bring back mental asylums. People that break down, such as Adam Lanza or Katz were known to have mental issues. They shouldn't of been on the streets to begin with 3. Make psychiatric records exempt from Doctor/Patient confidentiality. This will allow background checks for firearm purchases to prevent these people from buying firearms. Banning guns which prevent between 800,000 and 2 million crimes every year will just lead to a rise in crime.