Mr.Quiggles

Thanks for the update Sam, it's always good to know that both you and the community is doing well.

I don't know. Denuvo clearly has "Rockstar Montreal" as a partner on their website.

As some of us await anxiously for the GTA V release for PC, some of us have bound to be wondering, how long will it take to be modded? Rumors from /r/PCMasterRace and GTA forums suggest that Rockstar is including a DRM (Digital Rights Management) software. What does this mean? Well for one, you won't be able to pirate it. (I don't endorse this anyways). Well that's a win right? Apparently not. DRMs, from the limited information I researched, can include performance bottlenecks, crashes/instability, no-offline play, and no access to the game's files for editing. Tl;dr, DRM? AKA: No modding support. Will someone crack through the DRM? Will GTAV be available exclusively through Steam? Will Rockstar even include a DRM? Watch our panel discuss tonight at 7 on Weasel News. Sources: http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/2lkf3z/gta_v_pc_version_will_probably_have_no_mods_due/ http://gtaforums.com/topic/745799-v-pc-to-use-denuvo-drm/#entry1066428562

Very well said. I can't define myself as any political party, I differ all over the place. Depending on the issue, I can vote Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or even Green Rainbow Party if that's still around. It's a trend proven time after time again that whoever pays the most for there campaigns, ends up winning. Money is the #1 deciding factor.

I think we interpreted this differently. When the other guy said, "I dont really care for our party system, the Government is supposed to serve is citizens and protect our borders not bicker like children," I couldn't help but think of Libetarianism, for which I know much about. For what he said is the sole duties of the government in a libertarian system. Defend borders, protect citizen's rights, private public goods private sector fails at, and to never interfere with people's rights, as it's the people's duty to sort issues out. I quoted your response because when you said, "This" it made it sound like you were completely agreeing with him. I completely agree with the 51%, tyranny of the majority bit. I live in a state where all the money and power flows to the city of Boston, where the rest of us at other parts of the state, not affected by Boston in any way, have to put up with all Boston based ideas, laws, taxes, and representatives. We have representatives, sure, but do they have any say? No. Simply because Boston and the surrounding communities have a larger population than anywhere else in the state, they get to dictate everything. Assault Weapons ban in Boston? Sure. But why out here? It's a problem that's been going on ever since voting began for white, land owning, privileged males. However, it seems in a Democracy/Republic type system, this is unavoidable. Honestly, is there a solution? I can't think of one. The best we can do is to be aware of it, and make sure minorities (including whites in a few years) have their voices heard.

You guys sound like Libertarians. I support the ideas of Libertarianism, I just don't think it's a reality in this world with the type of Gov we have now. George Washington himself reminded us of the dangers of political parties. "There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged." - George Washington's Farewell speech. He may be correct, time will tell. It'll be interesting to see how the Republicans will work. Obama will most certainly veto whatever they say. Back to let's sue the president policies I suppose.

Nice response. CP702 is right about County, I overlooked County Police Departments because I live in the north, where it's not common to see a County Patrol division. (Either local PD will assist towns w/o Police, or the State). One thing to add on about the National Guard, the one reason I mentioned the National Guard (Which yes, is directly under the control of that State's governor, with addition to the State Police), is I live in Massachusetts, and when the Boston Bombings happened the National Guard was deployed to provide the most basic of police functions like guarding subway (T) stations, and to provide their resources like makeshift command centers and Humvee vehicles. Since the National Guard is under the jurisdiction of the Governor of that state, he can basically deploy them to do whatever (Assist Police, Quell Riots, Disaster Relief). I always thought of them as the "Armed Forces" of the State, like how Obama is head of the armed forces of the country.

Their differences are jurisdictions and duties. Police Officers work out of a Police Department, which is responsible for a City level. They have jurisdiction only within the city. (This means they can only perform their duties such as arresting within the confines of the city boundary). Sheriffs Department is the primary law enforcement for a county level. (States are divided into counties which contain cities). Depending where you are in the United States, Sheriffs Departments have different duties. Up North where I live, they're primarily responsible for maintaining county prisons and lockups. However, in the South and West of the US, they traditionally are assigned a patrol responsibility as well. The Sheriff and his Deputies only have jurisdiction within a county. As you know, the US is split into 50 different states. Every State has a State Police, which is responsible for anything and everything more or less. State Police generally are responsible for protecting State buildings and infrastructure, in particular Highways. Very rarely are highways patrolled by anyone else but that State's State Police. Since the State Police are usually the biggest in the state, they are also responsible for rural policing, for communities that don't have police. They also provide disaster type responses for cities that cannot afford such equipment needed to respond with. State Troopers have jurisdiction throughout the entire state. The United States does not have a federal police force unlike many other countries. The FBI is the closest thing to it. Generally, where a Federal Police Response is needed, the National Guard of that State will be called in with addition to federal agencies such as ICE, FBI, ATF, DEA, ect.

"The Nation's First, The World's Finest" Massachusetts State Police - Particularly Helicopter Pilots

A little obvious, I know, but an excellent car nevertheless. (Massachusetts State Police).

I rarely get game crashes, so I usually return to the station, park, shut off the engine and bring the shotgun or rifle into the station and then exit the game.

Oh sorry, that's what I thought you were asking for. They look so bad, glad to see they'll be gone soon.

He's right, Massachusetts has largely switched to mainstream POLICE INTERCEPTOR FPI's now. Here's what I found http://1drv.ms/1rWCK01 But again, if you even see a Taurus (Very rare, most departments don't like them) it will most likely by a real Police Interceptor.

^ inb4 reformat HDD, delete system32 files. On a more serious note, try Right Click > Properties > Security > For Each Group or User name grant full control to the file. If there's an "unblock" prompt on the General Tab, try that too. Also, try enabling hidden files. Perhaps there's a hidden file on the desktop that's not allowing the visible file to be deleted. EDIT: Try launching OS in Safe Mode if it's a Windows OS, that stops certain processes from launching which might help you out.

I don't see anything out of the ordinary here. Hmm, it's probably hardware related then.

Would it be possible for you to send us a list of your installed programs? Maybe a photo or something. Perhaps there's system processes taking up too much resources.

If you're arresting somebody, unless you have special warrants, you do need to inform of them of why they're being arrested and read them their Miranda rights. If you're simply detaining them for a limited period of time, then Miranda rights do not have to be read.