Jump to content

Antia

Members
  • Posts

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Forums

Gallery

Downloads

Tutorials

News Stories

Wiki

Community Guidelines

LSPDFR BOLO Series

GTA5 Native Database

GTA5 Native Parameters

Release Highlights

LSPDFR Mod Showcase

LML User Contributions

Posts posted by Antia

  1. I am surprised by the comments here like "It's so unrealistic that the officers run towards the hostiles during a shoot-out" or "I am sick of AI ramming into my vehicle during a police chase". I don't have that. During a shoot-out, cops will take cover behind cars or anything that provides cover and after the shootout there is like 2 dead cops which simply got hit during the shootout. Furthermore, I am hardly being rammed. Sometimes they will, but usually I am perfectly fine chasing others and keeping my car in a good shape. 

  2. Wait so they were testing if that bridge was capable of holding a certain load? Best way to test if a bridge is gonna collapse is by LETTING PEOPLE GO UNDER IT 🙄

     

     

    On 3/16/2018 at 12:52 AM, Giordano said:

    I get this was a busy area, but you're stress testing an "INSTANT BRIDGE" that was constructed quickly, and testing the tension lines. Was public safety not considered at all?  It's funny how we always say "this could've been avoided", but nothing ever changes.  We say it over and over again, but never take the steps to avoid it.

    Hmmm, in this particular case I agree that deaths could have been avoided, but not in all cases I think it's bad. In last century/decades mentality has changed to 'every death is one too many'. We are going in a state of too much security and too much safety. Every little threat to safety has to be eliminated. Not necessarily bad, but in some cases this should not be a thing at all. Especially when it comes to innovations, you can accept some deaths. Best example is the self-driving cars. Every time a self-driving car kills someone or even 'just injures' someone, I see the company responsible putting a halt to testing. I think we are limiting ourselves in innovating ourselves. We should accept that someone got hit by a car, and just move on developing it. What if during the industrial revolutions, the developers of innovations for that time stopped developing it after a death? We would be nowhere near where we are right now.

  3. I decided to make a start with designing skins. I've been trying to master GIMP and I am still learning. Today I'd like to show you my first skins. Hopefully you guys can give me feedback, hints or tips so I can improve the skins and myself :)

     

    My first 2 skins:

    (Models are from t0y. I take no credits for the models. The cars can be found here: 

     

     

    Blaine County Sheriff Ford Police Interceptor



    Taurus - front.png

    Taurus - back.png

    Blaine County Sheriff Chevrolet Tahoe



    Tahoe - front.png

    Tahoe - back.png

  4. 2 hours ago, TheDivineHustle said:

    I don't entirely agree with that philosophy. If an officer has discharged his weapon at someone, there are no second chances. The individual now needs to be neutralized, because they actually pushed law enforcement to fire their weapon and they're a threat to public or officer safety (if the shooting is justified). There is no leg shot or arm shot, it's a fatal shot, and I don't understand why you'd have sympathy for an individual like that.

    That's a very dangerous road that you're going in now. Eventhough that individual did a horrible thing, it's not upto us or upto the police officers to judge over his life like that. Lethal force should only be applied when necessary and not because the guy is a piece of shit. Driving someone off the road because he cut you off isn't a good thing either. I'd really not go there, in terms of sympathy. I advocate for attempting to save as many lifes as (safely) possible.

     

    Furthermore I notice the mentality amongst Americans that once a firearm is being used, it should be to kill. That certainly explains why most of the shootouts I see turn out in a massive bulletparty. I don't think that's the best thing. The way TheDivineHustle puts it, he says that once a suspect is shot down and is still alive, he should not be given aid or executed "The individual now needs to be neutralized". That's a massive undermining of the court system.

  5. 5 hours ago, Hastings said:

    Well, damage to the femoral artery will usually lead to a really quick death (at least out here the ambulance would arrive just in time to declare DOA)...

    Of course. I mean, you're using a firearm on someone. There's a chance you're gonna kill the guy, but when the alternative is center mass and you're not in immediate danger, the legs would definitely have my preferral. Netherlands is a small country so the ambulance will arrive quickly here, except for some rural area's. But there's a maximum time of arrival and dispatch is continuously moving ambulances in the regions to make sure that that deadline can be reached. 

  6. 5 minutes ago, Black Jesus said:

     If they decided to hug the guy and he just surrendered, then that is also is a "great result". Doesn't mean it was a good idea. If you guys don't have less lethal tools, then don't use firearms as the less lethal tools. And if you don't see an issue with the massive hazard that cop on the bike created for himself, then idk man lol

     

    You've already decided to shoot to kill by aiming for his legs, because it's a firearm. I don't under understand this logic. It's SO counterproductive. "Lemme shoot you in a potentially fatal place, to avoid fatally shooting you.."

     

    And if you really analyzed the Wendy's video, you would've seen that they did evaluate what they were shooting at. It's the whole reason why they kept shooting. The dude was up and running the whole time, and didn't stop until he collapsed at the outside. If we could see that from our crappy angle, then the cops definitely saw it. The sound guy was in a kill zone. A tiny ass corridor that the target just happen to run through. Just like if some bystander was behind this stabber while the cop decided to shoot at his legs, it's a kill zone.

    The less lethal tools we have here are pepperspray and baton. Pepperspray would have been an option as well. The biking cop took a risk, but I wouldn't say massive hazard. He knew what he did and he did his job well. 

     

    It's not true that you decide to shoot to kill when shooting for the legs. I don't have the numbers at this moment, but I am pretty sure that less people that got shot in the leg died than survived. Shooting someone in the leg is not choosing to kill, it's choosing to disable with a potentional of killing, which is a lot better than killing.

     

    In regards to Wendy's case, just wondering: If this exact case was happening again, is there anything that the police should have done differently to deal with this situation in your opinion? Or was this a feasible outcome?

  7. 13 minutes ago, SuperStumpje said:

     

    Not saying it wasn't terrorism, just saying the official statement of the guy being a nutjob isn't a lie. From what I've read, they're still investigating if it was terrorism or not. And I'm sure they would have kept him locked up in a mental clinic if they could, but I don't think there's a way to force people except by a judge, who would only get involved if the person committed a crime, which he hadn't before this thing.

    They were very quick to confirm it wasn't terrorism though. And afterwards they figure maybe it's necessary to investigate that. And the entire media coverage was very very slim for such an incident. In that sense omroep west has done us a great favour, but NOS hardly reported on it right after it happened. Then the days after they figured maybe something else was going on. 

  8. 21 hours ago, SuperStumpje said:

     

    To be fair, the same guy did throw pretty much all his belongings out of his window while yelling random crap a few months ago, before finally calming down enough for cops to enter his home and take him down to a mental clinic. It's probably safe to say he's got some serious mental issues, which probably led to this as well.

    Having mental issues doesn't mean there is no chance it was a terrorist attack. Also mentally ill people are perfectly capable of making terrorist attacks. Really depends on which of the many mental illnesses you got. Furthermore, he got released. They wouldn't release someone that is so mentally ill he'd be able to attempt to kill people like that. Lastly, his neighbours are saying that after his stay in the mental clinic, he had such a beard, but not before he went in there. Sounds like he radicalized there.

     

    18 hours ago, ToeBius said:

    We never said that it wasn't possible, it is not a good model to go with.  American cop's have shot people and stopped them without killing them.  Everyone gets mad every time a cop kills someone in a situation where the officer "FEARED" for his/her life or the life's of other's.  

     

      This will NOT alway's work, it is NOT a good idea or philosophy to base your life and training on.  If you can shoot someone in the leg to subdue them without risking the life's of other people then you may but then you come into the contex of "Did you fear for your life?" 

     

     Obviously this officer did NOT fear for his/her life, or this may of turned out differently with either the suspect dead/wounded or the officer dead/wounded.

     

     Police in the U.S. do not kill people all the time.  If you would look amd do research, then you would see that most of the encounters that U.S. police have result in the suspect not being killed.

     

      Our philosophy is that when you are to shoot someone then you should be shooting because you are fearing for your life or the life of another .

     

    And I would like to say...

     

    Why did he shoot him?

     

    Why didn't he taze him?

     

    Why didn't he mase him?

     

    Why didn't he fight him habd to hand like a man?

     

    Why didn't he show him love and affection?

     

    He should of fought him with hugs(Loretta Lynch's advice)

    Okay, let me nuance my piece a bit. First and foremost, I support American Police as much as I support Dutch police. Of course not every encounter leads to a shooting and the majority of cases work out like they should. It's the excesses though. Excesses in which some people on this forum still tend to defend the police. Back the blue is great, but not unconditionally. I joined this forum quite recently and as soon as I said anything about legs or taser, I'd be knocked over by posts with all kinds of vids and links explaining why you don't do those things. I figured this case was very good to show that the alternative to how US police do it, works out as well. 

     

    16 hours ago, Black Jesus said:

    I don't think any of us Americans said it was impossible, just incredibly impractical in most situations. And kind of counterproductive imo. Seems retarded to shoot someone in the legs to preserve their life...when again...you're shooting them to do it. Other tools could've arguably have be applied first, if the cops didn't put themselves in the shittiest position possible. Also the Wendy's video isn't a good referral for something like this. They thought the dude had a gun, and they thought he fired it too, so that's why you get a much crazier reaction.

     

    But this shooting..."Oh hey, there's the terror suspect. Lemme hop on this bike and then get within 3-5 yards of him with no cover. What a surprise, he's coming after me. Looks like I need to shoot since I put myself in this shitty position. Now instead of aiming for center mass on a moving target, you know that tactic that's taught pretty much everywhere that trains people in firearms...Lemme just unload at his legs and basically put him in an equally as deadly situation, just with shitty shot placement. Oh look, the shot to legs admittedly did not completely stop him yet, now we still need to tase the dude." Police work should not be done like that lol. And guns should not be applied in a "quasi less-lethal" way. A well equipped department in the US probably could've done this without shooting the guy at all. I say well equipped, because not many departments carry beanbag shotguns or impact launchers in patrol cars.

     

    So we'll watch, but I don't think we need to learn from you guys lol

    True, every situation is different and every situation requires a different approach. The approach in the videos is not the best for other situations, true.

     

    However, your view of this is totally cranked. Apparently you think that everything the officers did was a bad thing, whereas the result is great. Of course, beanbags would have been an option, but standard 112-call police don't carry those and having to wait until one arrives isn't possible as it's an active threat. It looks like you'd have chosen to kill the guy, most likely with 30 bullet holes in his body if this were not a well equiped department (of which there are 1000s in the US). Tasers are not rolled out in The Netherlands yet, except for special teams like our S.W.A.T. (the guy in the shorties with the taser). We currently have a pilot running with regular officers carrying a taser, but that's not in The Hague.

     

    This is how you subdue someone that is actively stabbing people. You tell him to put his hands up, when he denies, you shoot him in the leg and/or warning shot. As LAST MEASURE you shoot to kill. I really wonder how the US police would have dealt in this situation. 

     

    Also, firing 30 rounds at wendy's cannot be defended. It was a continuous stream of bullets flying by without a single moment of evaluation of wth they're even aiming at. Cost the life of an innocent person. You can't defend that way of working.

    14 hours ago, Sinnisa said:

    I had the privilege to work in Netherlands and I must say, I never felt safer. Their police is very well trained and funded, especially the KMar. What's more I've personally seen their BGTV(apprehension) tactics and they don't shy from firing warning shots in the air in public, which was quite a surprise for me! If i remember correctly they even have special anti-terrorist teams roaming the big cities 24/7. All that being said they still are the perfect place for terrorist attacks, just like Belgium and Germany...

    Of course. You're talking prevention now. 100% security doesn't exist and most of prevention works behind the scenes by intelligence agencies etc. For now the Netherlands is a very safe country and it surprises me that Belgium had their attack in Brussels, France had multiple major attacks in Paris, Germany had attacks in Berlin and the Netherlands has stayed clean of that. 

  9. Terrorist confused man knives down 3 people during a terror attack incident in the Netherlands

    *Some pictures/videos may be considered disturbing for some people.*

     

    Okay, so in The Netherlands we are somewhat "proud" that we didn't have any recent islam-related terror attack like Germany, Belgium and France had. All of them are somewhat neighbouring countries and have had to deal with major terror attacks. On the 5th of May we figured out why we have never had a terror attack -> MSM and police are rushing to call this an 'incident' instead of a terror attack, by a 'confused' person. Confused is now THE word-to-go to cover up terrorism.

     

    Let me walk you guys through the case:

    On the fifth of May a person started stabbing people randomly on a square in The Hague. There is currently no footage of that going down, but eyewithnesses say that he was specifically aiming to slit peoples throats. He was also heard saying "allahu akbar". The police response time was very quick (as you can expect in a big city). Within 3 minutes the first police officers arrived on scene. (Note how 1 officer "borrowed" a civillian bicycle, welcome to the Netherlands :D) See this video for what happened when the police arrived:

    https://twitter.com/omroepwest/status/992787627148443653

     

    Notice how the guy keeps saying "allahu akbar" after he got shot in the leg. Other angle can be watched here: https://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/7423653/37e9ff5e/schietincident_den_haag.html

    So the police arrived and starting shooting at his legs once he started walking towards the police officers. He still won't let go of the knive so the police decide to shoot some additional warning shots, which seem to have no effect on the suspect. The final arrest can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0UDLRsw794

     

     

    So there are two notes that I want to make: First, the MSM and the police are so eager to defend islamic-based terrorism. They are spinning the whole story. This very clear picture of the suspect says a lot of what culture the suspect comes from: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DccGaWdX0AAbi8P.jpg. Trust me, nobody in The Netherlands wears a hat when it's 25 degrees celsius. Furthermore, the days after, additional information started to leak out. The guy appears to be a refugee from Syria. I think we can thank EU politicians for being so blind to the dangers that accepting everyone with no proper plan other than "Poor people, be welcome! Here, take this house that dutch people are for approximately 7 years on a waiting list for, take 10.000 euro's and we'll make sure you get all the benefits that hard-working dutch people get". 

     

    The other important note that I want to make is: AMERICANS, WATCH, LEARN! This guy got shot in the leg, something that is basically impossible when I have to believe you guys on this forum. The suspect was walking/running towards the police and it didn't turn in a massive shoot-out where 30 bullets are needed in order to kill a suspect (refferal to the Wendy's video that I lately saw on this forum). So is it possible to shoot someone in the leg when he comes at you with a knive? Apparently yeah, and he didn't even die from bullet fragmentations in his artery! And then they use a taser to finish this and arrest the suspect alive. This is how police work should be done.

     

     

  10. On 6-5-2018 at 2:12 AM, Giordano said:

     

    This isn't really accurate.  You'd be surprised how many people still use melee weapons for attacks.  Just 'cause America has a huge gun problem doesn't mean a gun was used for every single incident that happens.

     

    12 hours ago, ToeBius said:

      Please tell me that, when you wrote this up, you just got done drinking.

    I was somewhat sarcastic. The point I was tryna make is that being an American or having a gun won't always keep you alive. 

  11. I think it's the undiplomatic way Trump approaches things is how things work out for him. He is not a politician, like Obama or Clinton. They are always so diplomatic and are obviously going for their own poll ratings. Trump is different, which seems to be working out for him. That makes him quite a logical thinker. No SJW-crap, gun regulation thing etc. 

     

    It won't make him that popular by those that love politically correct shit like MSM or hollywood (BIIIIIIGGGGG TIME policor). So I doubt he'll win the elections again, but it's good to have a president that is not going for the next elections win, but instead just does things that are in favour of the country. I think America can thank Trump for what he does as a president. Aside from whatever personal shit his opponents have for him, he hasn't made like enormously bad decisions. Of course that's a matter of perception, like "muslim-ban". Perfectly legal if you ask me. If it is statiscally proven that most terrorists come from those countries, it's matter of national security. 

  12. On 29-4-2018 at 7:02 PM, GTALawEnforcer said:

     

     

     

    Ban all knives, vehicles, and even sharp household utensils. Everything now needs to be square and not have any rounded edge that can be potentially sharp. Lmao, Jk. Was being sarcastic above too. Luckily if someone involves me in a knife fight they will lose, since I'm American and have a gun. What's that saying again....-...Oh yeah. Don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

    You being an american won't do a thing once you get out of your country. And inside your country nobody will start a knife attack on you, because they're american and americans have guns. 

  13. wow, that is unbelievable. Looks like during the firing of the first shots the cameraman was able to take cover but the sound guy was too late for that... Then the robber ran towards him and the cop kept shooting :/ Tough luck, crazy braveness to jump in the midst of a shooting as a film crew. Cameraman got lucky. If he stayed there too, he would have been shot as well.  Sad to see this though

  14. 1 hour ago, Hastings said:

     

    I may appear a bit biased, but I definitely with you on the Skripal case. Yep, smuggle a top-secret neural gas to one of the most secure countries on Earth to kill a traitor to make a statement... by the gas that is not supposed to be traced back to Russia as it's top secret... and somehow they survived... because apparently UK hospitals store antidots for Soviet top secret gases... just in case...

     

    Nevermind, it's off the topic.

     

    On the topic I say, honestly, I believe in 'chemical weaponry'. Imagine, Assadian army is fighting a decentralized force which holes up in basements, trenches, underground structures (plenty of that in Eastern cities) etc. Clearing all those places is nearly impossible, so Assadians opt to use chlorine to force them away. Not an impossible scenario at all. And I doubt they really care about chemical attacks as much as Europeans do and this is not a big deal for them but a nice cause for other countries to stir the pot and show who's the boss.

     

    Shit, I'd hate to die in the nuclear fire just because some Syrian guys can't storm a basement of a 400 y.o. shed in the desert.

    Exactly. It just doesn't add up. And then the investigation reports remain classified. So the OPCW (The swiss lab is part of OPCW) won't ever inform the people about it. Only the governments, who are obviously trying to handpick whatever they like from the report, but leaving out a lot. That all in order to create 1 big enemy: Russia. Fear is one of the few ways to emotionally influence people by a lot. Creating a common very dangerous enemy in the east gets things done. Sad to see this evolving :/

     

    It's indeed not an imposssible scenario, eventhough it's still morally and ethically unacceptable to do so. But it looks like no chemical weapon was used at the first place. IF Russia is able to indeed prove those people are the people from the video. 

  15. I think the initial point they were trying to make was that US is now trying to play the good guy, bombing countries that use chemical weapons, but that they haven't been so good either.

     

    Anyway, Russians claim to have identified 17 people that are supposedly dead. Interesting fact is that they're bringing them to OPCW HQ in The Hague... ALIVE. At least 7 of them are clearly identifiable as being in the video, being a victim of the attack. (Source: https://nos.nl/artikel/2228854-rusland-syrische-doden-uit-nepvideo-douma-komen-naar-den-haag.html Dutch National News, big time pro-western. In Dutch but tweet speaking for itself.). If this is true, that means US, UK and FRA have a lot of explaining to do.

     

     

  16. 36 minutes ago, Hastings said:

    I like yours more, at the very least it's a clear system. 

    Yeah a couple of years ago we merged all 25 policedistricts to 1 big national police organisation. As you may know our country is pretty small, which is in this case a benefit. That makes it so that we have very standardized processes and systems in place now, which is a good thing. The bad thing though that there is 1 central application proces, and being denied for that, means that you have no alternatives, except for waiting 6 months/1 year to reapply. In that sense I am jealous of Americans who have pleeeennttyyyy of choices :D

×
×
  • Create New...