cp702

You aren't buying it, though. The model still belongs to humster3d; they just give you limited rights to it.

I took m_m_tennis as the base, and took the gear from m_m_fatcop_01 (which has it all nice and separated on a suse). I used a suse instead of attaching it for ease of texturing.

Can you post the wdd and wtd too? Also, for things like an odd file, it'd be better to use a codeblock than a quote, and spoilertag it. Also, I don't know if you can move them around this way. I've been using 3ds max if I need to move stuff around.

Check out gfxle's stuff on GPM.

And that's exactly what I did.

We're talking about jobs that people have. Not generic "things that can end your life". I really don't see how "government can end your life" plays into this discussion. Unless you're talking about police policies on shooting people, but we had that discussion.

See, EMS, fire, military, those make sense. Gang member, well, that isn't exactly what anyone calls a respectable job or one that we should support. Any claim that politics is "everything you do can end your life" is ridiculous. Completely, totally ridiculous. Seriously. Lose the video, find some stats if you want to back up the claim.

Politics? "Everything you do could end your life"? Are...are you serious?

One thing you could do with it would be to use it to make a video or photos. Also, any way of exporting it so that no one can re-import it would be allowed.

What do you mean? Are they the state troopers? Are you in Alderney, or Liberty City?

You might not be able to give it unlocked to anyone else, but I think you'd definitely be able to *buy* it for someone else (the difference being that in the second case, you don't have a copy).

I think the lesson here is that terminology is a pain. Was what I described as "shoot to kill" what you describe as "shoot to stop"?

@Darkangel: We're using different definitions of "shoot to kill". You and Comm are contrasting it with "shoot to stop"; I (and CG Blaze, I assume) are contrasting it with "shoot to maim". The way I define the term, it means that you should only shoot when killing the person is absolutely necessary, and so you shoot with the intent to kill them. If they survive and stop being a threat, awesome, stop shooting, but you are not trying to maim them. You are trying to stop them by killing them. EDIT: To be clear, I am not saying "empty the magazine". I would say "shoot center mass only if killing them is the only possible way to stop them, and only shoot as long as that is true". I just call that "shooting to kill", because I implicitly contrast it with "shooting to maim".

PCSO=?

Also, shouldn't this thread go in Random?

Or, as I like to put it: ~(~P) ->

My edit is roughly what I was trying to get across. I consider shooting center mass to be shooting to kill, while "shooting to disable" makes me think of people who try to claim police should shoot people in the arm. Obviously, you only really shoot to stop the threat, and if they aren't a threat anymore, you should stop shooting.

No. Just flat no. A firearm is a lethal weapon, and should never be used for any other purpose. Shoot to disable is more dangerous for the officer, for the public ("shooting him in the arm" is incredibly difficult, and if you miss, that bullet can hit a bystander), and is not really any better for the suspect. EDIT: Also, you are not supposed to shoot someone unless there is imminent threat to life. If you have the chance to evaluate and decide that shooting to disable is justified, there is not imminent threat to life, and you should not be shooting.

Actually, the way it works is that you have one mesh for the entire lower body. If the cop is wearing long pants, the mesh contains long pants and shoes. If he's wearing shorts, it contains both the shorts down to a point, and then the legs, with the legs sort of running up into the shorts a bit. Basically: shorts are a different model from long pants. You can't really get them out of long pants. Not sure what you mean by "legs" here; is it just the actual legs, or do you mean lower body?

Whipped this up a while ago: http://www.mediafire.com/?8hijv348853hh4i It's based on m_m_tennis (best ped I could find with short sleeves and shorts), so he's older than the default cops. @Harper: Shorts would be a different model. Your legs are much narrower than your pants, and with fewer wrinkles. The default models don't have legs (just pants), but you can change that to be actual shorts.

The 4S is probably much cheaper now.

This is what I meant by "talking past each other". You had seemed to me to make a distinction between "less lethal" and "less-than-lethal", which I'm pretty sure are the same thing. Both terms mean things like pepper spray, tasers, and batons. They contrast with "lethal", which includes firearms.

And I was saying that "less-than-lethal" and "less lethal" are two terms for the same thing. Also, the reason I was saying that armed officers should have come was partly because, according to others, only armed officers carried tasers.