LAPD Officers Shoot Man Five Times in Broad Daylight


Recommended Posts

You can clearly hear the officer shout 'let go of the gun! gun!" before shooting him.

If the homeless guy went for his weapon and actually drew it and aimed it at the officers, then the cop that fired off 5 shots had every right to do it. 

However 1 well aimed headshot would of done the trick. Wasted 4 bullets :/

 

Again, I'm sure someone will correct me here. but I believe training dictates body shots and multiple shots. Its great to put someone down in one, but with a smaller target you are more likely to miss. I know at such a close proximity that chance is reduced but it would show they are following training by taking the body shots.

OK, but 6 guns pointing at him wouldn't have had the same effect?

I would assume I'd be out gunned, further prolonging the standoff would result in a shooting in which I would lose, regardless of whether I get a shot off or not, also don't police officers have training on disarming overpowered subjects?

You are also assuming the man in the video was making rational and correct assumptions.

 

It's easy to say "I would assume....", but if you were actually in a situation where you found yourself fighting off six people, you are NOT going to make the best judgement calls. The situation was too hectic and quick to assume anyone would make any proper judgement calls.

  • Like 1

It's the Uncle Jimbo Rule:  Just yell "he's going for my gun" (doesn't matter if you have 4 - 5 people there to help you hold him down or someone else has a taser or if he's actually not going for the gun at all), and you're free to kill.

  • Like 2

Either he has the gun, or he doesn't. Saying "He's going for my gun", doesn't give them the right to shoot. Saying "He has my gun", does. If you're the cop and you see him grabbing gun, then you can easily put you hand on it since you're the guy on top.

Also, I thought holsters were made to pull the weapon straight out so no one could grab from an angle?

Actually, if he was going for his weapon, he absolutely does have the right to shoot.

 

I love how people think that cops should be at the precipice of death  before they are allowed to discharge their weapons.  

You are also assuming the man in the video was making rational and correct assumptions.

 

It's easy to say "I would assume....", but if you were actually in a situation where you found yourself fighting off six people, you are NOT going to make the best judgement calls. The situation was too hectic and quick to assume anyone would make any proper judgement calls.

 

Also from the article:

 

 

 

Witnesses told the Times that the man killed was known locally as "Africa," and had apparently been living in a tent on Skid Row for a number of months "after spending a long stretch in a mental health facility."

Actually, if he was going for his weapon, he absolutely does have the right to shoot.

I love how people think that cops should be at the precipice of death before they are allowed to discharge their weapons.

I didn't for a second think they had to be at the 'precipice of death' I was asking as there were a lot of officers presant at the time, so was this an a good example of a last resort measure..

There responses I have been given so far would indicate, even if they are unsure, someone will take a couple of minutes to try and explain a situation how they interpret it.

This is something I do like about this forum, a lot, and commend anyone who is prepared to answer in a reasonable manner.

Again, I'm sure someone will correct me here. but I believe training dictates body shots and multiple shots.

Yup. Center of Mass (the largest target, most likely to hit) and a 2-3 shot volley. 2 cops x 1 volley each covers this incident.

...and Its great to put someone down in one, but with a smaller target you are more likely to miss. I know at such a close proximity that chance is reduced but it would show they are following training by taking the body shots.

Bingo.

ok....  stop you green pacifist idiotic no responsibility jerks!  Simple rules to live by and you will actually LIVE:!!!

 

1. Don't sell illegal substances. 

2. Don't be an ass to other people or attack them and become a threat.

3. DO NOT fight with police, they are here to kill you if you mess with them...and WE hired them to do that.

4. DO NOT FIGHT WITH POLICE!

5. Cant stress this enough, but take responsibility for your own damn actions.  I don't care if it was 10 vs 1, or 1 vs 1, the second you don't obey an officer(s) request, you become a threat, and in their eyes, a threat they have to rid at times by force..which leads to YOU being dead.

 

simple people...next!!!

So in your eyes, the police is just there to kill if they're disobeyed?

I didn't for a second think they had to be at the 'precipice of death' I was asking as there were a lot of officers presant at the time, so was this an a good example of a last resort measure..

There responses I have been given so far would indicate, even if they are unsure, someone will take a couple of minutes to try and explain a situation how they interpret it.

This is something I do like about this forum, a lot, and commend anyone who is prepared to answer in a reasonable manner.

A bullet does not discriminate on how many officers were there.  Wrestling for a gun is just as easy to kill a person if 1 police officer is there, or 20.  Or perhaps the bullet  strays and strikes a mother or a child.

So in your eyes, the police is just there to kill if they're disobeyed?

Now add the claim here:  the dude went for a cop's side arm.

 

Not a clear answer anymore.

A bullet does not discriminate on how many officers were there. Wrestling for a gun is just as easy to kill a person if 1 police officer is there, or 20. Or perhaps the bullet strays and strikes a mother or a child.

I have tried to avoid going in that direction, it's easy to say what if he shot this guys mother or child or that guys mother or child.

I have some knowledge of ballistics, in so much as I am aware of what a bullet can do to a target, be the target inanimate or live, my initial question was about police training on a situation like this, UK police aren't armed, so a 6 on one scenario of police on an assailant can be common if said situation requires it, they're trained to restrain by pinning, and immobilising limbs, if needed, pepper spray and tasers, armed responses are only used when dealing with armed assailants.

Now I know the police in the USA is armed, and understand why, but before the altercation escalated into the shooting, the assailant was throwing fists, and I was caught off guard as I was expecting the police to pin him down, face down, this why I asked about restraining methods and training.

Fighting them, and grabbing for the officers firearm, are several levels up from simply disobeying and clearly aggression. Not smart.

Oh I have no dispute, I know the other user posted just to be the very thing he called others in his post.

My original question (I think) is better phrased above :)

It also seems like a lot of you are missing the part where several of the officers were distracted by the woman that picked up the other officer's knight stick.  At that point, it was no longer 5 cops on 1 person, more like 2-3, and it looked like at least one of them were distracted by that incident as well.

I usually don't post in these but I will this time.

 

Anybody can be a monday morning quarter back and say what they could have done or would have done.  The issue is that whatever training you have, the event happen in seconds.  You cannot go through every possible scenario and be cool headed and think clearly every second, a lot of it is gut reaction.  If you want to live and are in the face of authority be complacent, they will not shoot you for being complacent/submissive.  Know your rights, do not resist arrest, do not attack, do not go for anything hidden on your body without explaining exactly what is happening and moving at a slow rate.  Many gun owners know more about the firearms they keep on their person than the officer, many can even take apart their gun and put back together blind folded (there are competitions for doing this).  Why isn't anyone saying that the dead guy should have been complacent, why is the focus on the cops that pulled the trigger?  If he was docile/complacent/submissive this issue would not have occurred and there wouldn't be news. 

 

If I was in a situation where I was going to live or die based on my actions, I would not push my luck and try to resist unless I had a ace that would get me out of that without altercation...maybe like a hundred or so snipers aimed at their heads or someone with a big ass rocket launcher aimed at them, but that isn't real life....Real life says, police are an authority figure (people may or may not like that) and need to be respected as well as listened to when instruction is given to us...they have been given the ability to hurt us if needed, if we make a move in the wrong direction force will be given.  If we show that we are intended or are using deadly force they are going to use the same. 

 

 

I will be with all of the cop haters when there is a shooting where the cops shot a guy even when he was submissive...If they put him on the ground, restrained him, then shot him....that would be news and a conversation worth having.  All of these resisting arrest and have the potential of deadly force, yeah the guy deserves to die for being a bit on the stupid side of things.

So in your eyes, the police is just there to kill if they're disobeyed?

 

If I behave in a way that they feel threaten ...... YES!  

 

Since when do we need to question authority at every step? Follow the rules......

 

(this does open up to poor behavior and iligal police practices and abuse, however, i say take your beating, have someone video it or simply report it, then sue them for a few million and be happy....also get the officer arrested and fired).

 

This particular case to me fits the rule of not following police orders, etc, etc, etc......

 

Police arent angels, i know that, but people arent either....have some dignity and act and take responsibility for your own actions.

Since when do we need to question authority at every step? Follow the rules......

 

(this does open up to poor behavior and iligal police practices and abuse, however, i say take your beating, have someone video it or simply report it, then sue them for a few million and be happy....also get the officer arrested and fired).

 

Spoken like a "good little citizen"TM  :x

 

Authority is to be questioned if it is being used to stifle or censor or destroy.

 

As for the rest of your post - "take your beating and then sue" ?? Seriously that's your plan if this happens ?

 

Unbelievable.

  • Like 2

I usually don't post in these but I will this time.

 

Anybody can be a monday morning quarter back and say what they could have done or would have done.  The issue is that whatever training you have, the event happen in seconds.  You cannot go through every possible scenario and be cool headed and think clearly every second, a lot of it is gut reaction.  If you want to live and are in the face of authority be complacent, they will not shoot you for being complacent/submissive.  Know your rights, do not resist arrest, do not attack, do not go for anything hidden on your body without explaining exactly what is happening and moving at a slow rate.  Many gun owners know more about the firearms they keep on their person than the officer, many can even take apart their gun and put back together blind folded (there are competitions for doing this).  Why isn't anyone saying that the dead guy should have been complacent, why is the focus on the cops that pulled the trigger?  If he was docile/complacent/submissive this issue would not have occurred and there wouldn't be news. 

 

If I was in a situation where I was going to live or die based on my actions, I would not push my luck and try to resist unless I had a ace that would get me out of that without altercation...maybe like a hundred or so snipers aimed at their heads or someone with a big ass rocket launcher aimed at them, but that isn't real life....Real life says, police are an authority figure (people may or may not like that) and need to be respected as well as listened to when instruction is given to us...they have been given the ability to hurt us if needed, if we make a move in the wrong direction force will be given.  If we show that we are intended or are using deadly force they are going to use the same. 

 

 

I will be with all of the cop haters when there is a shooting where the cops shot a guy even when he was submissive...If they put him on the ground, restrained him, then shot him....that would be news and a conversation worth having.  All of these resisting arrest and have the potential of deadly force, yeah the guy deserves to die for being a bit on the stupid side of things.

To question the actions of any government official, even when they may be acting appropriately, is expected in a democracy. We should criticize government and its actors as often as we can in an effort to ensure they are doing the best job they can do and to ensure we're giving them the tools needed to meet our needs. I agree with the sentiment that police should have better training on how to deal with suspects without their guns being the sole tool they reach for. We need to ensure that police are arresting with as high a frequency as possible so that assumed criminals can be placed before a court, as our constitution requires.

 

Police should go through extensive training without having access to their weapons. They should be required to be experts at dealing with the worst possible encounters while being disarmed. Police have a very dangerous job and at times using their arms are without a doubt required, but lack of training leads to them being used far more often than needed in the US. This is something we should review and adjust. Even though cops today are acting as they are trained that doesn't negate our duty to adjust when needed.

 

Also, I am very much against the prevailing idea of "compliance" at all costs with police. Of course, non-compliance with police can be a risky road to go down, but police are no supposed to be judge, jury, and executioner. Non-compliance with government actors is a fundamental component of our structure of government... And for good reason, police can do illegal actions to. Those illegal actions should not be complied with by citizens...

 

For instance, take a major case that has lead to a Grand Jury indictment of two Philadelphia police officers. They pulled up to a guy on a motorized scooter and told him to get off the scooter, essentially. He was aware that these two officers tend to run around beating people up so he drove off due to being afraid. When those cops caught up with him they beat him horrifically. Including a cop using his baton to knock the guy off his scooter while driving alongside him. The only saving grace for the victim was the security camera on a local business which caught the violence by the officers.

 

Police are not Gods and shouldn't be treated as such. Generally speaking, complying with the police is the best course of action, but non-compliance in and of itself doesn't justify whatever happens to you at the hands of police.

  • Like 3

If I behave in a way that they feel threaten ...... YES!  

 

Since when do we need to question authority at every step? Follow the rules......

 

(this does open up to poor behavior and iligal police practices and abuse, however, i say take your beating, have someone video it or simply report it, then sue them for a few million and be happy....also get the officer arrested and fired).

 

This particular case to me fits the rule of not following police orders, etc, etc, etc......

 

Police arent angels, i know that, but people arent either....have some dignity and act and take responsibility for your own actions.

fair enough, for the record, I still believe, further training would benefit not only the US Police, but Police around the world, however, as a law abiding citizen, I do understand the 'behave like a law abiding citizen and you have nothing to worry about' part of your post

I try not to jump to conclusions, but this video clearly shows several mistakes leading to the shooting:

 

1. The suspect is reacting violent towards multiple cops which makes his actions very irrational.

2. At the beginning of the video there is an officer with his baton in his hand just outside the scuffle. I am assuming this officer previously was in the scuffle, lost his baton, and went to retrieve it; however, when he noticed the suspect becoming more violent he drops the baton. Proper protocol would have been to secure the baton instead of discarding it.

3. The same officer then trys to draw his gun, fails, and re-joins the fight as the suspect moves closer to him by grabbing the suspect from behind.

4. The same officer trys to get two punches in (one as he flips the guy around after grabbing from behind and the second just after the suspect loses balance and falls to the ground) before the officer jumps on top of him and starts yelling for someone to get his baton. Proper protocol would be on subduing the suspect face down and not trying to throw punches

5. Unfortunately, you can clearly see for a brief instant around 15 to 16.1s that the suspect does put his hand on the handle of the officers gun and try to pull up partially lifting the officer. (it's very quick and you have to look, but it does happen).

 

I feel the officer that dropped his baton and attempted to throw punches should be punished for breaking protocol, but without knowing how the scuffle started, whether the suspect instigated or the cops, I would say thus far it is a shooting that I would defend the rest of the cops on.

  • Like 2

from the video, it's clear that the homeless man attacked the officers.

 

It is?! You must've been watching another video then???

 

From the video the black cop first dropped his baton which the woman picked up, then he dropped his own gun behind him, presumably because he hadn't used his holster clip, he noticed his gun wasn't in it's holster and starts shouting "He has my gun!" believing the suspect had it so the rest of them just unloaded their clips into him.

Gross stupidity and incompetence leaving yet another unarmed man dead

It is?! You must've been watching another video then???

 

From the video the black cop first dropped his baton which the woman picked up, then he dropped his own gun behind him, presumably because he hadn't used his holster clip, he noticed his gun wasn't in it's holster and starts shouting "He has my gun!" believing the suspect had it so the rest of them just unloaded their clips into him.

Gross stupidity and incompetence leaving yet another unarmed man dead

 

- He did not drop his gun; yes, something was dropped, but it was not his gun. You can see the suspect grabbing for and holding onto the gun handle in the cops holster while on the ground at 15s. You can also see the cop take his gun out of the holster, check it and begin pointing at the dead suspect while the item you thought was his gun is still on the ground.

To question the actions of any government official, even when they may be acting appropriately, is expected in a democracy. We should criticize government and its actors as often as we can in an effort to ensure they are doing the best job they can do and to ensure we're giving them the tools needed to meet our needs. I agree with the sentiment that police should have better training on how to deal with suspects without their guns being the sole tool they reach for. We need to ensure that police are arresting with as high a frequency as possible so that assumed criminals can be placed before a court, as our constitution requires.

There is a time and a place.  Questioning an officer when he is questioning your existence for being there or doing what you are doing is not the place for it.  We should criticize government when we can, no question about that.  Police have a lot of training, but there is a lot that cannot be trained for.    Watch this video and question why did the get shot in the first scenario and why did the preacher shoot in the second scenario, police go through this ever 6 months and it is more vigorous and has a lot more scenarios.  If you can't figure out why the preacher got shot in the first scenario, it is simple he doesn't want to hurt anyone (like most people) he wants to settle this without the use of force and wants to be kind and open minded (like most monday morning quarterbacks like to do and even he likes to do after the fact.  Why did the preacher shoot in the second scenario, he feels his life is in danger and learned from the first scenario that in a split second you will loose your life so he is going to shoot.  In a situation that can escalate quickly, stay calm when in the presence of authority and be complacent.  If you have an issue with what is being done, you will have your time in court.

 

 

Police should go through extensive training without having access to their weapons. They should be required to be experts at dealing with the worst possible encounters while being disarmed. Police have a very dangerous job and at times using their arms are without a doubt required, but lack of training leads to them being used far more often than needed in the US. This is something we should review and adjust. Even though cops today are acting as they are trained that doesn't negate our duty to adjust when needed.

They go through hand to hand combat training.  But if you watch the video above, you don't know what is going to come at you and it takes less than a second for someone to pull a weapon out and start using it.  By the time a person realizes that another person has a weapon out and they start using it and your weapon is holstered, you are dead or severely hurt.  You have no time to think about the situation.  I think this is the problem with all of the monday morning quarterbacks, they have no clue the reaction time required to be able to deduce a life threatening situation to a non life threatening.  Let me post another video...try to stop that guy from killing you (you barely saw him pull out his gun), while that guy is an expert shot (and a bit full of himself), situations happen that fast.  When they start making robocops that can take a knife or a bullet at first, then we can say things like they shouldn't have used their guns.

 

 

Also, I am very much against the prevailing idea of "compliance" at all costs with police. Of course, non-compliance with police can be a risky road to go down, but police are no supposed to be judge, jury, and executioner. Non-compliance with government actors is a fundamental component of our structure of government... And for good reason, police can do illegal actions to. Those illegal actions should not be complied with by citizens...

 

On the street, it isn't the place for you to state what should and should not happen, it is happening, it is happening to you, and it is happening at a very fast pace.  It is not your place to argue with the officer at the time, you are not the judge, jury, or executioner either (if that is the case I am robbing a bank, and it is legal for me to do so, nothing the cops say or any rules apply to me, so f the police --- yes there is a bit of sarcasm in that to show how it could go in the reverse mindset).  They are there to uphold the law, if they are there or questioning you it is because they believe that you aren't doing something right.  If you believe they are in the wrong, don't start an argument there, take your licks then take them to court (that is what the court system is for, that is when you get to face a judge for your actions, then get sentenced or are let free).

The common theme from most of these recent episodes is that someone resisted arrest. To be perfectly frank, I have been arrested several times in my life, mostly as a juvie. Thing is, I never resisted. I'm not sure why that concept is so hard for some folks to comprehend. Don't resist, and if the cops cross the line, sue the city for millions. It's happened multiple times with the Denver PD in the last few years.

 

You wanna win, just take your beating. You'll be a rich man later. ;)

 

 

duh_winning_tshirt-r3817174990ca4674b1aa

  • Like 1

all over a tent. a man is dead all over a tent....

 

6-7 officers against one man? no way... murder outright

 

It is gross incompetence really. Unfortunately there are too many people prepared to immediately defend this death, and accept it.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!