Ranger61

@RoegonTV Thanks. I thought that was the deal but was worried. GTA has been acting funny since the recent update.

Which settings in the carols do i mess with to get the taillights and headlights to flash?

Very well done. Its been a long journey, but its paying. Thanks for sticking with the project.

Deadly force is only appropriate if the officer feels his or her life or the lives of others are in imminent danger. A suspect refusing to relinquish their gun doesn't mean deadly force can be applied. If the suspect appears to raise the gun, or charges officers are examples where police can escalate. Giving the suspect time to evaluate their situation is important. Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not the police officer who fired the gun was in imminent danger (which it appears that he was) and did he in any way contribute to the escalation of the situation that unnecessarily deviated from tactics, techniques, and procedures. The last part is where I have questions and I think police could find themselves in a dispute. I think the police already explained the victim was not the initial target. That kind of places them at a disadvantage from a civil standpoint from the jump. They have to explain There are a lot of factors that influence my opinion about a settlement. I don't think the family should get any thing because it appears to be a justifiable homicide. There is strong evidence to argue the victim at a minimum contributed to the outcome, if not made it inevitable. However, we do have to evaluate the tactics, techniques, and procedures in place. If, for example: training was inadequate or lacked, accountability in the department was flawed. These factors could have deprived the shooting officer with the appropriate tools and guidance to handle the situation. If other officers made mistakes, that can also contribute to liability civilly. Police shootings can be very complicated, and should be treated as such by everyone, including the public. Ask hard questions, but wait for data before drawing conclusions.

From a tactical standpoint, the video doesn't help the police. The suspect having a gun should not automatically clear the police. Justifiable use of deadly force doesn't mean the police employed appropriate tactics and procedures throughout the confrontation. The videos released still leaves questions about whether or not law enforcement was too aggressive and contributed to a deterioration of the situation. In a alot of shootings, there is room for improvement by people tactically. For example: The suspect often has to overcome the same mental and physical effects of a deadly force confrontation that an officer has to overcome. Tunnel vision, loss of perception, confusion, fear. Just because you have say "POLICE" doesn't remove the process the brain goes through. Giving suspects time and space to evaluate the situation and arrive at favorable logical conclusion is often as important as verbal and physical persuasion. I personally see the family of the shooting victim coming into a very large settlement from the city in order to avoid a painful trial. I don't feel completely comfortable with that scenario because I don't like the idea that political pressure rather than facts could sway justice. However, that is a realty. And the other side is there is a good chance police screwed up somewhere along the way in this event that would devastate the city's case at trial.

One issue I've encountered is a performance drop with vehicles using the enhanced light patterns in populated areas of the city. Its not a big issue, just a little stuttering, but I noticed it.

@rms8723 Thank you so much. I see what I need to hide now.