Cyrus Raven

I do not know your particular circumstance. However, I have been on this server for over a year, I have seen admins be given warnings, punishments and even removed from staff team. Both PD IC and Staff OOC have to use what they can see at any given point, if it means they have to conduct an investigation IC'ly or help you out OOC'ly by finding out when you turned your bodycam I think that is a good thing. Like I said, I do not know your personal circumstance, but I find it very hard to believe that people are looking to just punish you both IC'ly or OOC'ly with no reason at all.

Two things: - PD/SD are not at fault for a lack of Justice System. Many like myself support one and I believe it is being worked on. - An IA system is the best we can do to hold police accountable. Evidence is either dismissed for IC reasons (nothing in the footage showed wrongdoing, etc...) or for OOC reasons (Lack of RP in placing a bodycamera or dashcam on). If you find OOC issues then you can always submit an OOC IA report OR if rule breaks are involved. A normal player report.

Cops IRL don't have pursuits that involve high-end sports cars 99.9% of the times and crazy drivers that will go 210km/h in a city. Desync is also a big issue, we have other tactics, the reason you don't see most of them being used is because they don't work with desync, hopefully when new rage version comes it will fix most of the issues, but until then not much we can do.

Where and who said you can't use the Hellfire to ram?

+1 and I would also request streets be scripted with /setgps in mind (just like houses) so you can use that command for often for meetups. Right now it only works for house addresses, but making it so that you can /setgps to a general road would be cool too.

I think the argument is that because they have a physical item, opening inventory and dragging it is all that is needed while PD/SD spawn their items, thus requiring a bit of RP + we are suppose to display a higher standard of RP, so I don't mind. Like others have stated if the timer is accompanied by an automatic /ame for specific weapons then +1

@BallinByNature The report that spawned your reply was the basis for this discussion, but I am more interested in the effects it can have in future situations, I will try and elaborate bellow. ''This rule is not something new, all players are held to the non-RP standard of performing realistic actions. Having this rule actually does the exact opposite, it sets the guideline that basic investigations are actually required (not prevented?) instead of just guessing at charges which would not hold up in any real sense'' Let's move away from the report in question and into hypotheticals, which I think is the ideal way to test ideas/concepts. You stated that a ''requirement for placing irrefutable charges is confirming the identity beyond a shadow of a doubt which cannot be done with masks on and based on voices. '' Person X is seen and heard, wearing the same clothes he always wears, and in his personal vehicle, shooting at police officers and eventually getting away. The officer that was leading the pursuit provides a brief hunch of who it might be, given the available evidence. IB is called in, bullet casings are collected, tire marks on the road are collected, body cam from the officer is collected. Although at no point do we see the man unmasked, after further investigation involving the collected evidence, we determine that the tire marks belong to the vehicle that matches Person X and the bullet casings from a weapon recently bought under Person X's name, all of this done via the initial hunch that the officer gave because he heard the man speak and saw that he wore his usual outfits. Person X is brought in for questioning, he comes in once again using his usual attire and his voice resembles the one the initial officer heard. We ask him the questions that need to be asked, he denies everything and provides a vague alibi for his whereabouts during the situation. He is let go. My question to you is, can we charge Person X based on the above investigative RP or are we not allowed to do so given that we never saw him without a mask ? Depending on the reply I might bring up other points you made, but I believe going straight for the main question would be more productive than engaging in a huge back and forth. Thank you for the initial reply and any future ones.

should be it, not quite sure. The fix is also available in the official eclipse discord (https://discord.gg/y2gxAjg)

I am unsure, but if you go to the official rage discord (https://discord.gg/ragemp) , you should see the fix under #announcements

Rage pushed an update, check Eclipse discord for a fix on how to get in. Should work for everyone once they follow the instructions.

I understand, I will reach out to them, thank you.

Aldarine, with all due respect, this is something that caught most of us (PD) off guard, thus the response here and the thread being made. I don't think it is obvious or explicit anywhere within the server rules that Officers aren't able to use inductive reasoning and charge someone even if they happen to wear a mask. Furthermore, it strikes me the wrong way that this is considered to be a non-RP thing when the information gathered from the report this response is taken from was all IC, the assumptions were IC'ly made (clothing, voice, gang colors, hairstyle, etc...) and thus an IC charge was added, correctly mind you. I will give you an example bellow of a type of investigation that was made and concluded which according to this recent ''clarification'' would be considered non-RP. Example: Person X was spotted adjacent to Alta Street apartments, he was seen in a specific set of clothes, with a specific hairstyle, tattoos and a vehicle as well as IC'ly having a specific height, skin color. At the time he was masked. Soon after (next day, but less than 24 hours) he was spotted at LSC with the same vehicle, same clothing, same tattoo, same hair style with no mask. Information was compiled and he was charged following a two week long investigation. Now, supposedly, he was wearing a mask in the initial situation, even through our investigative efforts we technically can not charge him, although 99% of his other features, including a vehicle match, correct ?

I can understand what you're saying, but keep in mind what is being discussed here has no bearing on the value of an officer's word when charging or how officers ought to be handling basic investigations. The point here is to specifically discuss how we are no longer able to charge someone if they wear a mask, regardless of how much investigative RP has been done and other things (like clothing, voice, tattoos, etc... match). As for your last sentence which I believe is relevant ''You also have the problem where eventually everyone will start to recognize everyone and it will be impossible to successfully evade from crimes. so overall a good predecent has been set and cleared. '' I think that this will lead to situations where PD/SD can confidently ID someone (even with a mask), but they will have to ignore it or dumb their own reactions due to OOC restrictions. Being a well known gang with known criminals is a double edged sword, it means that a lot more officers will start to build a profile of you, they will be able to tell who you are based on your vehicles, your clothes, your hairstyle, etc... To be clear 99.9% of times officers don't ONLY use this to charge someone, but my point is that this OOC rule would mean that we can not charge you, even if we have all the evidence pointing to it except a clean view of your face as you are wearing a mask, this much restriction is not something I believe should be in place. It's so easy to avoid this, change your car colours more, use each others vehicles, get different hair styles or different hair colours. If all of this is done and you get ID'ed through something like voice and charged with no further evidence besides that, then yeah, we definitely have a problem.

I understand your point, although I will say, this is a double standard, tons of people recognise others by the sound of their voice outside of PD related matters. Just yesterday I was at LSC with someone and their friend approached and said ''Hey X'' after hearing him talk to me (he was masked). ID'ing someone by voice is something that happens, whether or not it shouldn't be done by PD/SD given their power is a different issue. Charging someone based solely on voice is not something I think happens. What CAN happen is you hear someone and you assume their identity, continuing to investigate you notice that person is wearing the same clothes they usually where, in the same vehicle, same hair style, etc... At that point the chances that person is on their alt dressed exactly the same is very very slim. More importantly, I would like focus the overall point of this discussion. What you mentioned Aldarine isn't simply to prevent PD/SD from charging people solely based on mask and/or voice. We don't do this as explained above. The staff member in question said the following: ''what is required for them such as confirming the identity beyond a shadow of a doubt which cannot be done with masks on and based on voices\'' What this means (unless I am wrong and if so feel free to correct me), is that we as PD/SD can not charge someone for a crime if they have a mask on, regardless if we have matched their clothing, tattoos, accessories, vehicle, voice and have gone through a bunch of other investigative RP, all because it was OOC'ly decided that the requirement for identification CAN NOT be achieved if they have a mask on. Not only is this an IC issue which should be handled IC'ly (charging someone while they are wearing a mask is rare as is), but it also presents a problem for future investigations as criminals now know about this OOC ruling and have literally no incentive to ever cooperate with any officer/detective, knowing that as long as they commit crimes wearing a mask they can not be charged. On the other hand, doing away with this rule would allow PD/SD to charge someone if multiple things point towards that person being the culprit. Someone might ask ''Well Cyrus, isn't your method prone to failure ? Doesn't this mean that people can be accidentally charged?'' To which I would answer. Yes, that can happen. However, we have IC resources to punish those who do charge people wrongfully as well as compensation for any jail time served. Furthermore, I would first look to establish if something is a problem in the first place. I remember when I was in SD, we kept losing the majority of our pursuits as most vehicles were sports cars, drags or super cars. We decided to take the time to compile some data. We noted down how many pursuits we lost and specifically to what vehicles, which ended up giving us something substantial to backup the request for faster cruisers. Regardless of how people feel about the cruiser stuff, my point is, a problem was established, evidence was presented, the problem was addressed. For this situation, it feels like the problem hasn't been established at all, which is why I encourage people to post any reports or recount any stories (that can be backed up by PD/SD) about situations where someone has been wrongly charged because of wrongful ID while wearing a mask and/or through voice. Are these things that happen every day ? Every week ? Every month ? Is it severe enough where an OOC rule is needed or can this be dealt with IC through IA (or even OOC'ly through IA) ? ^^^ The above question is paramount to understanding and coming up with a proper response, it might very well be that this is something that happens very often and I am not aware of it, if that is the case and the evidence bears that out, then keep the rule, if not then I would seriously reconsider what was decided today.

I believe we already do a lot of the things you mentioned. However, the way the ruling affects us is by not allowing us to make IC decisions based on the way someone looks (tattoos, clothing, voice, accessories, etc...) Taking these things and then charging someone should be an option that officers have and is something IC, my main point is, I don't believe this is abused (Please do post any examples showcasing this) and thus should be kept IC.

I agree. If it were up to me a justice system would be in place already. Do you see how this can restricts us from doing proper investigative RP as well essentially dumbing down what we as Officers observe on a day to day basis from interacting with people? Or do you think this is a necessary measure given your experience?

Dear Eclipse Community, In a recent report a decision was reached by a member of staff with regards to how law enforcement (namely PD/SD) can charge people. The decision specifically said the following: With that being said, following a conversation with representatives of the LSPD and LSSD factions we have had both clarify to all LEO faction members what is / isn't acceptable in terms of placing irrefutable charges and what is required for them such as confirming the identity beyond a shadow of a doubt which cannot be done with masks on and based on voices. Therefore, situations such as this should not happen again in the future. This, in my view, is very concerning. An issue which was previously dealt with in an In-Character way, can now lead to OOC punishments. In my view, the core argument against such a decision is that Officers should have the autonomy to determine the charges on a suspect without OOC punishment, which I view as mixing. We already have IC (and OOC) protocols that outline the requirement for charging someone, investigating someone, searching someone, etc... All of this is in PD/SD handbooks. The above ruling was given because someone was charged while wearing a mask. Regardless of your view on charging people with masks, I think it is reasonable to allow these actions to unfold IC'ly. This means that if someone does get charged incorrectly then they can lose their job, get suspended, fined, demoted, etc... Having this rule prevents us (law enforcement) from performing any sort of basic investigations and more importantly provides civilians and criminals with masks a blanket immunity to any possible charges, assuming they aren't caught. Furthermore, this takes any sort of IC story building away, such as getting to know criminals, their patterns, their clothing, their voices (text and VOIP), their vehicles, etc... This is the basic outline for the discussion, the above are MY PERSONAL views on the matter. However, the reason for this thread is so YOU the community can discuss. I'm sure this will turn out like any other thread that mentions PD and Criminals in the same breath, but I would hope people look past this individual case and ponder to themselves whether or not this type of precedent is something you want in the server (E.g: OOC punishments for reasonable IC actions)

RageMP (the platform everyone uses the join the server) needs to be updated, they require this for almost all GTA 5 updates. The GTA Online Summer Update was released today, this means RageMP needs to update their platform for compatibility. This might take a while, until then be patient. Once it is updated your RageMP launcher will auto-update when you start it. If you want to stay updated you can join their discord (https://discord.gg/ragemp) and they will post when the update has been completed and released. There is a way to join with old version of GTA, but I suggest you check out #i_have_a_question in Eclipse Discord (https://discord.gg/Mnqszn) for further information, although I suggest you wait.

Can we improve/scrap the current car speaker system ? More often that not I just default to listening to music on youtube, /carurl only takes certain URLs, you can't queue music, you can't have long playlists/compilations since it goes over the music time limit (10 mins IIRC). Feature List: - Make any youtube and/or streaming link work - Volume Slider/Option - Allow for longer songs - Music Queue system - Dedicated Slot for speaker in cars. (These are standard in 99% of cars, shouldn't be taking any space, or at least have a dedicated slot like clothing) - If someone does /window [0-3] then make the music play louder for others (same as if someone opened any doors in the car via interaction menu) I really love the idea of being able to listen to music IG, it reminds me of old-school SAMP servers with their radio streaming features. Hope some improvements can be made to current system as it doesn't work most times.

At the end of the day, with regards to ''Just IA report it'', as PD/SD there isn't much to be done. I support and hope that something like a legal/justice system is coming, but I am unsure of when that will be happening. Until then IAs are your only option.

Given a recent report where it was stated that chat messages can be heard as long as you can scriptly see them in chat, I suggest you allow the 911 calling system to work with /low. Right now if someone calls 911 and types /low Police it will not put them through to dispatch, only if they type ''Police''. We can already to /rlow, /low, /melow, /dolow. Adding this extra bit of function would be nice. Screenshot of how the system works currently: As you can see, the dispatch script only puts me through to the option chosen when I type ''Police''. Doing ''/low Police'' will not work.

Something a lot of people don't seem to understand is that this is the only way to address the issue IC'ly. It's not like the OP can create an organisation via a script, buy tow trucks, assign the vehicles to the company, buy an HQ and hire employees all in an easy and efficient way. If this was the case then this suggestion wouldn't be needed, people would notice the demand for tow trucks and would start something up. Consider this OP's OOC way of saying ''hey, I noticed that this was an issue and has been an issue for a while, give me the ability to create and run this scritply''.

+1 Make towing it's own separate faction. Makes things easier and would also mean the streets would have less random vehicles abandoned. At this point taking away towing from LSC/Bayview in favour for a dedicated faction sounds more efficient than the current system.

*chooses to ignore the part where every PD in this thread has said no to extended mag, recignizing how OP it is* Why even bother replying if you're not gonna read what is being said... Also +1, like the idea. Some people have said that most items besides the extended mag are cosmetic which I'm not 100% sure on. I was under the impression grips and laser sight did something to weapon stats, might be wrong, will check and update in a bit.

Not sure who thought this was a good idea, but every other day I get taken out by a bag of chemicals or some furniture box while driving, just end the suffering and make this no collide please.