MikeyPI

Your logfile is only showing one mod installed, it very well may be an incorrect installation of said mod, or the mod it's self could have a defect. When in doubt, always go with a mod that you know works, or the vanilla game that isnt modded to troubleshoot. We are not responsible for third party mods, and once you've narrowed it down to the fact it is the single mod that is the culprit, you know to contact those developers... Looks to me like it is in the loading process, and you're ending the task because it isnt "responding" when most every mod out there does that.

Logfiles help to figure out what is causing your issues, it could be that your driver for your video card is incompatible with it, could be directx issues, the list goes on and on

I know that it's Christmas holiday for most people out there, so you have nothing better to do than to post just for the sake of it, but if another issue comes about that one of us moderators has to come in here to address, anyone involved in it will be suspended for the remainder of the year, and the topic will be locked until the authors ask for it to be unlocked. Enough is enough with the childish behavior, this site is not a personal baby-sitting service for abuse.

Upload or post your logfile for anyone to be able to help you.. The issues you're stating have many possible causes.

And another clan starting problems loses the right to place anything on this site, you know what you did and we caught you. By the way I will be merging your two accounts together, so get used to this one Beastorc3 will be merged and you will be suspended until the new year, along with 2 warning points... One for each offense. Emergency Operations Clan is not permitted to have topics on EMP anymore.

Topic is going to be closed unless the authors otherwise request.

Yes, enough of that picture from south park, if it is seen again and reported it will get a vacation included with it's posting.

All one has to do to get around the turn based system is have your partner press the skip turn button, this in turn gives the first player the opportunity to purchase another vehicle immediately. This just requires the 2nd player to act and press skip turn found on the bottom right I believe. There is no way to configure it, and I highly doubt that someone would be able to figure out a way to "mod" the feature you want into the original MP framework.

In truth, because people like to falsely report some mods for their own agendas most of the time. True "broken" files for the popular mods tends to be very limited, and usually site-wide for all downloads.

Have you attempted to use other devices aside from your phone?

Unfortunately thats the problem with questions, how they are asked can change the outcome of the poll, such is why political polls are all but useless. The reality as we all can admit I hope is that sometimes, mostly insufficiently trained officers DO use excessive force when addressing certain situations, generally that tends to happen with "non-compliant subjects" from what I've experienced in my lifetime. In other instances they are addressing a probable volatile subject and must respond with some measure of force, the question then becomes what is appropriate given the situation. That is where training is required that is sometimes lacking for departments out there, in some instances it is just that particular officer that is lacking. Such is why I am not, nor would I ever be a local or state level LEO. I simply put don't have the patience for people to attempt to reason with someone in spite of the fact that in my judgement it can be an effective tool in dealing with upset individuals. Most police can and do conduct themselves professionally, but as is always the case the minority can make a very big dent in the reputation of the many, especially if it is perceived to be that the department is condoning the behavior, or covering it up outright. The perception is largely brought about by the media, but none the less if it is present it can cause serious problems in the integrity of a force.

Does it let you post in support from your phone?

I checked the account, there is not a restriction on the account it's self that should prevent you from being able to post or start a new topic (I tested and verified this). Nor is your IP in the list of restricted IP's. So I cannot figure out why your having issues.

Try checking another topic, there isnt a reason I can find that should be restricting you, if it still will not permit you to view it, go ahead and create a new topic and I will attempt to merge them together.

It let me alter it just fine, try again if it still doesnt work, clear your cache.

If I were to vote it would be for sometimes with some officers, yes. I won't say all nor will I say none.

IF sometimes were listed in there, it'd get more votes I'm sure, the poll is too polarized, it's either yes or no... The reality isnt yes or no, it usually falls somewhere in between.

Here are several others: http://www.nj.com/passaic-county/index.ssf/2014/09/police_id_man_killed_after_reportedly_intervening_in_dispute_at_paterson_bar.html http://feministing.com/2014/12/01/young-woman-beaten-to-death-after-intervening-to-defend-girls-from-sexual-harassment/ http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-koreatown-stabbing-argument-20141105-story.html http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/07/05/Good-Samaritan-Beaten-Killed-After-Intervening-To-Stop-Assault-On-Woman These are just examples of what can happen when someone tries to be a hero. And in the grand scheme of things these were not even active-shooter instances. @miniboy: Diff areas/regions have different names for their SWAT, some call em HBT, some HRT, some ERT, some SWAT, some tactical response teams, the list goes on and on. For the most part, they all are essentially the same intention though, better weapons at their disposal and higher training for specialized responses.

Round these parts some convenience stores have substations for police as well.. Doesnt mean they don't get robbed just the same Problem is gotta have them where they need to be when ya need em, in real life application most people are smart enough to strike when they have the best advantage... Every little bit helps but for the most part it's a perception of security that makes people feel safe, not an actual situation. Such is why crime exists, you're asking a relatively small populace to cover a very large area, malls, schools, theaters, concerts are all target-rich environments where security may be present, but you're still asking them to cover a relatively large area. It doesnt take long to open fire into a crowd and do pretty devastating levels of damages... Anywhere that people congregate is realistically a target that could be exploited. Ya dun really see people who are suicidal running amok in police stations, pity at least then it'd be more of a challenge, but it doesnt happen.

Seen these types of topics before, and I have to say that security is but an illusion. In free societies you can't have places locked down as would be required to "secure" them, even then you have even odds one of the security personnel are in fact the shooter themselves (see military base shootings for examples of that). Even the white house has been breached recently, the cost of access is security, and in the end that makes security a deterrent for some, but a highly motivated individual (which in most cases intends to die in the process of their actions) is nearly impossible to prevent from doing their actions. Only thing you can do is train people to respond to the scenario. Thank god we don't have alot of zealot terrorists roaming around doing their deeds, otherwise there would be no actual protocol to prevent/deter them that would be effective within acceptable means by our society. (see russian responses to hostage scenarios for what they had to do with their terrorism issues). It's a trade-off to be free to do what you will, you have to be willing to give up some of the security blanket that could be provided in lieu of convenience, that convenience comes at a cost that in alotta cases you won't have the security requirements met to address the higher end incidents that can occur. Malls are a great example of a place where someone can do quite a bit of damage prior to response being anything to hamper them. Unarmed guards sadly don't have the clout to stop an active shooter scenario.

Yes it is true that one can kill without a weapon, tbh a ballpoint pen can be used as an effective enough weapon to kill someone. The problem arises in that sometimes officers ARE criminally negligent, deciding when that is the case vs. a true accidental "in-the-line-of-duty" event is next to impossible, but to be honest in america that is kind of the sentiment the public perceives, that police are never held accountable for their actions. Imo negligence does not HAVE to lead to prison for your actions, but if you've done something so wrong that you are negligent, you should have to pay the piper, if that means you lose your job, such is life. This same ideal should apply across the board to police, military, any civil service job, accountability must be present to ensure ethical behavior. Such is why politicians are such horrible people, they are rarely if ever held accountable for what they do. Remember the media gets paid for ad revenues, so it is in their interest to make these incidents as polarizing as possible, because it riles up BOTH sides of the fence, the supporters of the police and the supporters of the criminal. In the end I believe that keeping people honest could be obtained by simply placing cameras on the officers involved, I wish i could say that police were always ethical, but there are instances where they are not, having cameras on their person to record any interaction would help to ensure appropriate behavior since there is a recording of the interaction to prove the police were in the right, or in fact in the wrong. Without such devices in the end it's a bunch of people's word against one another where both claim the opposite and usually the truth is somewhere in between.

Not quite, their test isnt really what one runs into real-world, for example, if I fire a rifle round, a 7.62mm (yes I am aware of the fact they shot a 5.56)it will find it's way through the car door without any effort what so ever, certain loads of the 7.62 will go through both sides of the vehicle, where a smaller arm pistol for example will not do this. The thing with tests are they are only as good as the conditions they are set to portray, rifles do NOT have their effective power at close range, a rifle sees the most damaging effect when fired over longer ranges, there is a specific term for this effect though I can't recall it at this time (this is as opposed to a shotgun for example where closer range tends to lead to more devastation to the intended target). It isnt as simple as one round is equal to the other, what you load in charge, type of round, and applicable accessories on a firearm changes it's abilities. If I were to for EX load an AP round into a weapon, it will penetrate certain items better than say a JHP (standard for most law-enforcement sidearms) will, each bullet has it's purposes which they were meant to be deployed against, using them outside of their designated effective use generally leans to less effect than a different bullet that is meant for that purpose. Video example that goes contrary to your sourced video: Again it is far too close for the full effect of a rifle to be exploited, but it shows far better what a rifle round (5.56) does when fired at a target. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gx6-R0KC_I Realize that even in this case I don't feel it was very scientific either, but it shows more accurately why rifles have to be used with care. The way that a pistol round behaves when it strikes a target vs. a rifle round are two totally different intentions. Comparing them really is extremely difficult, as it all comes to application as to whether or not one is better suited than the other.

In several states, including my own, that is simply false in regards to pawn shops. Most of them within many states now are licensed under the same requirements as a regular gun shop would be required to. In the movies it may be portrayed that you can just pick up a gun from a "fence" in a pawn shop, but in most states they are extremely regulated now, so that most of the pawns while still a total scam, are totally legit scams. They don't want to lose the right to sell their merchandise and do what they do by being caught unlawfully selling firearms to people. Most people get their illegal firearms on the street from other criminals, generally drug-related individuals tend to be a great source of firearms as their "clients" will procure them in exchange for the goods/services they require. As to your interpretation of the 2nd amendment, the supreme court tends to disagree with you. The first portion states that we are to have a national defense (at the time bear in mind we didnt have the funds for a full-blown proper military). The Established military cannot be deployed on it's own populace, see: Posse Comitatus in regard to that, hence the national guard to support state-level disasters and defensive needs. The second portion of the 2nd amendment is what permits individuals to lawfully possess firearms for personal defense, hunting, etc. Granted, it was from a time where people did not live quite the same as today, however that's why amendments exist, they could be altered over time, in this one's case it has not been changed over. The supreme court still interprets the amendment to be upheld that it does indeed stand with the intention of the citizen's right to bear firearms, although as I've said before I highly doubt that it was intended for you to have gattling guns or cannons.

@ Fred, that's my primary concern as well. The lack of appropriate training for how/when to use their tools, I do not have anything against tools, but there is a time and a place for every tool. Be it a firearm, Patrol unit, air unit, etc. The problem with most depts. are they purchase the things without appropriate protocols or training for their use resulting in mishaps from them. The other problem I have is so called "less than lethal" that if mis-used are just as effective at killing as their supposedly lethal counterparts. Tools should never be used for convenience because they make things easier, the taser isnt an immediate compliance tool, sometimes the extra 3 minutes of reasoning with someone is the more appropriate option rather than escalation. The problem with giving more people (including law enforcement) firearms that generally have no place in the civilized world is that by proxy, some of those weapons will end up in the wrong hands. Just as time and again legal gun owners don't make up the lion's share of crime committed with firearms, most of the firearms used in crime are not procured legally. They are stolen, which the only way to prevent that is to remove them from circulation completely, which violates the 2nd amendment and frankly is unrealistic given the popularity of firearms in this country. I agree that partisan politics on both sides lead to nothing productive resulting, the pro-gunners want to be able to own a rocket launcher, the anti-gun wants even toy guns removed from the market... With the two extremes it is not shocking that every effort fails miserably. Love it or leave it the right to bear arms does exist in this country, but imo it was never designed to include some of the various weapons out there that have no civilian or recreational application (safely, anyway). I believe background checks, within reason can and should be required for firearms, I however, do not believe it would be wise to have one unified database stating where every single gun is registered, sad truth is some anti-gun nutjob a few years ago went so far as to try to publish on the public domain who all owned firearms in a town because they got ahold of the registration records.. Imagine if the criminal element got ahold of such a list, it'd be a wal-mart for fresh guns on the street to know who has what at which addresses. We live in a world where compromised data can and does do damage, so having things available with easy-access can result in negative fallout. In the end more control, more training, and higher penalties for crimes committed with violence will have far more of an impact than aggression from law enforcement.

People like to side with one side or the other.. "oh it's the police that are too aggressive" "oh if they werent criminals this wouldnt happen" Truth is, yes police forces are over-equipped and ill-trained in alot of regions in the USA, this will offend some people, but it is the inconvenient truth. The tools at their disposal are unfortunately left largely at their discretion upon when to use them. Given the thin blue line brotherhood mentality, when one does wrong it is highly unusual for them to be outed for what they've done. Instead for the good of the department it is more common for them to find no wrongdoing and to just relocate the officer to a different division. Some agencies are good about ensuring the ethics of their officers and being on the straight and level, but there are a great number who will do everything in their power to avoid scandals too. You can't use one side to offset the other, in the end it depends on the departments. The truth is escalation is used for having all the militarized weapons on the law enforcement's side, but at the same time the fact that the police have higher power weapons is why criminals strive so hard for them as well. The North Hollywood shootout type of incidents are EXTREMELY rare, and that is the main justification for weapons like the AR-15 being available for law enforcement. Anyone who's ever dealt with a rifle like that understands that it must be deployed with great care in an urban/populated environment, it really isnt ideal for an urban area because of penetration issues. Yet in some places it is commonplace in patrol vehicles, not just swat. imo that is an overreach that will not have a positive ending. The police here especially as of late I've noticed are far more high-tension than a few years ago, as to why that is who's to say? Police MUST be held accountable for their actions just the same as criminal suspects, but realize there are incidents where someone is being "non-compliant" that when a recording surfaces clearly shows they were in fact doing nothing wrong to end up in the position to where a cop should be assaulting them. If I were placed in a position that a police officer were grabbing at me attempting to assault me, police or no, I would respond, and I would respond extremely violently. Human nature dictates one will defend themselves when attacked, just because you have a badge won't remove those basic animal instincts from the person(s) you're engaging. People will fight to the death with 4-5 guys assaulting them, and just because you're a cop doesnt give you any more right to attack someone than anyone else, as of late it seems that point has been lost. There was a time when police attempted to detain a suspect, their goal was to get them in cuffs, time and again i've seen overreaches where they've used force excessively b/c they are angry over the incident, it's a human reaction, but one you should be accountable for. People are just fed up with the appearance of corruption and overreach by gov in general, not just police. In america more than other nations, race is still a very hot-button issue, it is used by many to promote their causes, and for profit. Sadly, in america it is still a very commonplace justification for why an incident happened... In most cases wrongfully so. If roles are reversed, generally (again going to offend some, but it's my opinion) a minority-on-white incident does not receive the same treatment as a white-on-minority... The media is the primary cause of race-baiting unfortunately, thus propagating the issue and keeping it alive and well. Most nations around the world are much more mature in resolving the racial tensions that they have from previous eras, in america people like to hold onto them for justification as to why they should be given more, instead of striving for equality. In closing, I am sure I will upset some people with my statements, but they are my opinions alone and anyone is welcome to comment here as well, as long as it is kept civil we at EMP won't be pursuing differences of opinions, just as long as they are done in a civil, mature matter.