DM for police for small crimes

[DrBeelz]

So I've had this done many times to me from SD and PD both high command and lower ranks but it seems that when you just do a simple felony evade or other small crimes not involving a weapon, the moment your vehicle stalls they get out and immediately pull out their class 2 rifles and if you just get the engine running before they aim it at you they will shoot at your tires and of course then proceed to arrest you as 9/10 you cant get away but that's not the point. The point I'm making is that they immediately escalate from a fun felony evade or small crime to shooting at you. I've heard all their excuses and its been the same every time "I gave you a warning" or "I aimed for your tires" which if one bullet does kill me what are they going to say "I didn't mean to"? can that pass off as not DMing. in my opinion it is not enough escalation and using weapons should be classed as DM in my opinion or at least NRP as it kills the chase as if I did the same to someone I wouldn't have that protection as they seem to get away with those two excuses it seems they have an exception to the rule and I think for fun RP and to stop unnecessary escalation this would benefit the RP between cops and crims.

in conclusion if you are felony evading or doing small crimes with no weapons they should not be able to shoot you or your vehicle that sounds sane right? ive tried to take this IC'ly to find a work around but no one is willing to help as it will effect them so my only hope is that a rule is to stop them as its crazy they can shoot at you when you have no weapons.

Edited May 19, 2022 by DrBeelz

[Thommy]

Shooting tires is an invalid police tactics in the United States due to risks of injuring civilians or damaging properties. LSPD and LSSD have stated in their faction pages that they aim to portray their counterparts, the Los Angeles Police and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Departments, so they should change the policy.

This is something that I think Legal Faction Management should deal with  +1

[Stew Walker]

28 minutes ago, Thommy said:

Shooting tires is an invalid police tactics in the United States due to risks of injuring civilians or damaging properties. LSPD and LSSD have stated in their faction pages that they aim to portray their counterparts, the Los Angeles Police and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Departments, so they should change the policy.

This is something that I think Legal Faction Management should deal with  +1

I have mentioned this a number of times. In the US authorized police force mag dump when they shoot. They do not take tires and they do not injure people with deadly force.

Just to be clear I'm not saying they execute already injured assailants, rather if met with the need for lethal force they don't intend to maim them and never intend to take tires. Intentions are lethal.

[alexalex303]

This suggestion is rather vague, could you please outline exactly what you'd like? There are already rules against DM in place and they apply to everyone. I would be against adding hyper-specific rules because roleplay is much more fluid than that.

If you believe you were DMed by an officer, first you should try to explain your side to them via /pm, and if you can not reach a consensus, make a player report, either in-game or on the forums.

[DrBeelz]

13 minutes ago, alexalex303 said:

This suggestion is rather vague, could you please outline exactly what you'd like? There are already rules against DM in place and they apply to everyone. I would be against adding hyper-specific rules because roleplay is much more fluid than that.

If you believe you were DMed by an officer, first you should try to explain your side to them via /pm, and if you can not reach a consensus, make a player report, either in-game or on the forums.

Ok so to my knowledge the PD and SD have a rule that if they give warnings like "stop or ill shoot" they are then authorised to shoot at tires as that's what they aim for, what I'm trying to get at in my original post is that I think that it should be classed as DM as they escalate a situation to the extreme and there is a chance that a stray bullet does hit someone's head and their excuse is that they aim for the tires and that potential situation can be completely avoided if this rule is in place, if they just use a taser as it is an extremely efficient tool and does not escalate the situation and so to stop that from potentially happening it would be added to the DM rule and encourage more RP.

Doing this would also allow more RP as if they have a taser out I can realistically resist the arrest with /me and /do but with a class 2 you cant do that without breaching FRP and so it just stops RP entirely and so I think this change would help. I'm only saying this new rule will only apply to crimes that do not involve weapons.  

Edited May 19, 2022 by DrBeelz

[kris giggs]

Felony evading is not a small crime as given in your comparison. Running on foot from the police is very serious, let along in a car in which you might kill someone, kill another Officer, and yourself. People often evade for a reason, they might have drugs, they might have a gun, or they are already wanted, in which occasion, you present yourself as a significant threat from the very beginning which in turn will call for a more serious, and intimidating response. In real life, no Officer in LA, or anywhere really will approach you with tazer, let alone barehanded after you just ran from them.

Depending on how long your pursuit goes on, and if it endangers other people or participants in traffic your tires might get taken in areas where the public is not put in acute danger by doing so. If you get hit and killed during this, you guessed it, it's an IC issue. Running from the police should not be taken lightly by either side. How will you estimate whether a crime involves a weapon or not? I can evade, which obviously does not involve a gun by itself, and after the pursuit I pull one out, what happens? Cops have their tazers out and now I can put them under FRP, does that make sense?

[Cyrus Raven]

20 minutes ago, DrBeelz said:

Ok so to my knowledge the PD and SD have a rule that if they give warnings like "stop or ill shoot" they are then authorised to shoot at tires as that's what they aim for, what I'm trying to get at in my original post is that I think that it should be classed as DM as they escalate a situation to the extreme and there is a chance that a stray bullet does hit someone's head and their excuse is that they aim for the tires and that potential situation can be completely avoided if this rule is in place, if they just use a taser as it is an extremely efficient tool and does not escalate the situation and so to stop that from potentially happening it would be added to the DM rule and encourage more RP.

Doing this would also allow more RP as if they have a taser out I can realistically resist the arrest with /me and /do but with a class 2 you cant do that without breaching FRP and so it just stops RP entirely and so I think this change would help. I'm only saying this new rule will only apply to crimes that do not involve weapons.  

I believe this is already taken care by IC regulations (and OOC standards set for the LSPD)

I won't go into too much detail to avoid leaking IC protocols, but for someone to shoot at your vehicle (take tires) there needs to be various thresholds met that can depend on the type of crime you are committing, where you are committing said crime, if you pose a serious threat to yourself and others, how long you've been evading and if there is a supervisor present to authorize said force.

If you feel like a situation was not portrayed realistically to the point that it might breach NRP rules, you can submit an OOC IA report, a player report on the forums, you can /report IC'ly to try and get the situation reviewed on the spot or you can /pm and speak to the player to try and get an understanding of the reasons that led to lethal force being used.

From my personal experience, in the past 3 months I have only been involved in 3-6 incidents requiring PD to ''take tires'' on a vehicle and from what I recall, all these situations required proper escalation from an IC perspective following IC protocols. This isn't to dismiss your opinion, I'm sure they are well intended, but is this truly a rampant issue ?

[DrBeelz]

29 minutes ago, kris giggs said:

Felony evading is not a small crime as given in your comparison. Running on foot from the police is very serious, let along in a car in which you might kill someone, kill another Officer, and yourself. People often evade for a reason, they might have drugs, they might have a gun, or they are already wanted, in which occasion, you present yourself as a significant threat from the very beginning which in turn will call for a more serious, and intimidating response. In real life, no Officer in LA, or anywhere really will approach you with tazer, let alone barehanded after you just ran from them.

Depending on how long your pursuit goes on, and if it endangers other people or participants in traffic your tires might get taken in areas where the public is not put in acute danger by doing so. If you get hit and killed during this, you guessed it, it's an IC issue. Running from the police should not be taken lightly by either side. How will you estimate whether a crime involves a weapon or not? I can evade, which obviously does not involve a gun by itself, and after the pursuit I pull one out, what happens? Cops have their tazers out and now I can put them under FRP, does that make sense?

I do see your points but I do have a different opinion on two things, Yes in real life felony evading is very serious as the risk to human life is high but if we use the real life argument we have to then abide by all of it so if that is the case I expect after 10-20 minutes in a chase I will see all ground units pull away and have air1 follow me until I stop somewhere and a ambush is set as in real life they do this as a chase brings great danger to the public and lets the suspect thinks he's got away so lets do that. However, I understand that doesn't happen as players that have cop character don't really care for other players life as they aren't going to die its a video game they'll just respawn at the hospital they are not worried for other players safety so I don't like the cherry picking of the real life argument. So to get to my second point yes cops do not know if crims have a gun till they get out however lets be honest if you go to the extreme of what could happen then pistols and tasers might as well be removed as at any moment I could pull out a gun so why risk it, and the reason is because for the sake of escalation the cops have to react and escalate from what the criminal is doing. There's a reason they have full body armour all the time to give them that small window to react to the crims escalation. I never shoot at cops, one because they have full body armour and two they have class 2's a pistol really doesn't stand a chance. and so with this new rule I suggest it will make escalation not go to the extreme when its not necessary I want fun for both sides and some cops actually pm me saying sorry that the chase ended before it started and they were looking forward to the chase but they had to follow orders. also if you're felony evading chances are they out number you so if you hold one hostage then they can swap to their class 2's and have so hostage negotiation RP and that's good too as it bring more adrenaline to the situation and proper escalation is then naturally occurring and is as a result of what the crim is doing and not what they could do.

Edited May 19, 2022 by DrBeelz

[Stew Walker]

27 minutes ago, kris giggs said:

 People often evade for a reason, they might have drugs, they might have a gun, or they are already wanted, in which occasion, you present yourself as a significant threat from the very beginning which in turn will call for a more serious, and intimidating response. In real life, no Officer in LA, or anywhere really will approach you with tazer, let alone barehanded after you just ran from them.

We understand though that Police dont shoot people because they MIGHT have drugs or a gun, right? And yes, Officer's in LA will approach nearly every situation with a Taser before switching to lethal force.

[GR_Seb]

7 hours ago, Thommy said:

Shooting tires is an invalid police tactics in the United States due to risks of injuring civilians or damaging properties. LSPD and LSSD have stated in their faction pages that they aim to portray their counterparts, the Los Angeles Police and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Departments, so they should change the policy.

This is something that I think Legal Faction Management should deal with  +1

They also PIT in the city, also pursuits are not against supercars. Also, they have 50 units not 10.  Also there's actual traffic on the road. That's why they don't shoot.

[MrSilky]

Hey!

There are OOC rules for combat RP and the police faction has IC regulations for escalations of force. If you think their escalation was invalid, by all means make an IC IA report, or an OOC forum report and we will be happy to review them!

I do appreciate that on the surface one might think a "simple fun evade" is nothing notable, but as @kris giggs mentions, there is usually a reason. However, per the IC regs, assumptions don't equal escalation. As such, there has to be a confirmed reason to escalate. Again, if you feel the escalation is inaccurate, by all means follow an IC/OOC report.

IA report (Can be IC or OOC) - https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewtopic.php?t=3259

OOC rulebreak reports - https://forum.eclipse-rp.net/forum/4-player-reports/

Cheers!

[Stew Walker]

Tennessee v. Garner (1985), the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment prohibits the use deadly force against a non-violent, unarmed felon who is fleeing. 

This is just how it is irl in the US, not too sure what the IC regulations are for LEO though.

[MrSilky]

3 minutes ago, Stew Walker said:

Tennessee v. Garner (1985), the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment prohibits the use deadly force against a non-violent, unarmed felon who is fleeing. 

This is just how it is irl in the US, not too sure what the IC regulations are for LEO though.

Same as our regs. I'm obviously not going to go into too much detail to prevent metagaming - but lethal force should only be used against an active lethal threat.

[Bala]

I don't agree with or support the suggestion.

I personally feel that if you're evading from a violent crime, I should be able to light you up like a christmas tree if it's controlled, with the thought process being that if you're incapacitated, you cannot hurt anyone else. But that's just me.

That said, I'm content with doing laps of the city with you for 20-25 minutes because you know we won't take your tires or PIT you in the city.

[Clank]

45 minutes ago, Stew Walker said:

Tennessee v. Garner (1985), the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment prohibits the use deadly force against a non-violent, unarmed felon who is fleeing. 

This is just how it is irl in the US, not too sure what the IC regulations are for LEO though.

Tennessee v Garner states an LEO may use deadly force on a suspect that the LEO reasonably believes is a danger/threat to the public if he escapes. Non-violent/unarmed is irrelevant. If a cop believes that me in my car is lethal danger to the public I can get gunned down. 

[Stew Walker]

It actually says quite the opposite lol, there needs to be a danger/threat of violence. Not if the officer believes whether or not it is a plausibility. Fleeing it not violence, as per the ruling. 

[Clank]

8 minutes ago, Stew Walker said:

It actually says quite the opposite lol, there needs to be a danger/threat of violence. Not if the officer believes whether or not it is a plausibility. Fleeing it not violence, as per the ruling. 

The holding ruling literally states "force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

All you need is PC that the suspect is a danger to the public if he runs. For example, a driver driving dangerously gets his car pit into a wall. The car is still able to move and the driver has no regard for anyone and continues driving like a menace. 

[Stew Walker]

1 minute ago, ClankH said:

The holding ruling literally states "force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

All you need is PC that the suspect is a danger to the public if he runs. For example, a driver driving dangerously gets his car pit into a wall. The car is still able to move and the driver has no regard for anyone and continues driving like a menace. 

If theres a scenario where someone who actively poses a threat is attempting to flee of course, I agree here

[Thang]

6 minutes ago, Stew Walker said:

If theres a scenario where someone who actively poses a threat is attempting to flee of course, I agree here

It is important to understand that by fleeing in a vehicle you pose a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others.

If you wanna go by case laws, check out Scott v. Harris, where it was ruled that "PITing" an evading suspect is reasonable.

Then check out Plumhoff v. Rickard, where officers shot at a vehicle which continued to flee after a short stop in a pursuit, both occupants died. This officers' conduct in this case did not violate Fourth Amendment either. Dashcam footage: 

 

[Stew Walker]

13 minutes ago, Thang said:

It is important to understand that by fleeing in a vehicle you pose a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others.

If you wanna go by case laws, check out Scott v. Harris, where it was ruled that "PITing" an evading suspect is reasonable.

Then check out Plumhoff v. Rickard, where officers shot at a vehicle which continued to flee after a short stop in a pursuit, both occupants died. This officers' conduct in this case did not violate Fourth Amendment either. Dashcam footage: 

 

Yes. PIT is fine. Scott v Harris was arguing that this maneuver was considered Deadly Force, which it isnt.

Similarly, the officer's choice to attempt to end the chase by forcing them off-road was found to be a justifiable amount of force, right

Edited May 19, 2022 by Stew Walker

[Frezas]

Hi, I will provide my answer as an officer in game who does not play crim alt and has only PD view on these things. Most of the time (let's say pursuit happens), criminals have only 4 type of cars which are Issi sport, BF400, Shinobi, Paragon, and already kills that pursuit vibe you were speaking about, because it's already stale RP for us as officers knowing that they would escape as we do not have anything to catch up in time. Then let's say we are lucky, and you spin out while driving a car, or we PIT you, and immediately go for box maneuver, most of the criminals would always try to turn engine on even hitting a wall 200 km/h and under gunpoint where everyone screams their demands, this happens all the time and is really frustrating with all NON-RP crashes. As I believe others mentioned felony evasion is a serious crime, and we deal with it as being serious, furthermore I would like to add that gang affiliated vehicles are known to have backup waiting somewhere, so we deploy bigger guns to counter their possible attacks (by my patrol statistics 7/10 pursuits end up in a shootout) and when you try to do something stupid when we have guns in our hands you get shot, you try to take a weapon out - you get shot, you try to run over an officer - you get shot. I am not defending any side, but I provided a non-biased POV from my side as an officer on server. 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Frezas

[DrBeelz]

6 hours ago, Frezas said:

Hi, I will provide my answer as an officer in game who does not play crim alt and has only PD view on these things. Most of the time (let's say pursuit happens), criminals have only 4 type of cars which are Issi sport, BF400, Shinobi, Paragon, and already kills that pursuit vibe you were speaking about, because it's already stale RP for us as officers knowing that they would escape as we do not have anything to catch up in time.

As you said you don't have a crim alt I want you to understand the reason why these vehicles are only used in a chase if possible and its quite simple, with 8 cop cars on average in a pursuit it is extremely difficult to evade and ill explain why. If you are evading you have to take every corner perfectly and have good racing lines to gain distance on the vehicles, doing this greatly increases the chances of crashing it only takes one mistake and we are out as we are swarmed within seconds if the engine stalls and police they do the same but guess what if they crash and stall it doesn't matter the next 7 cars will take over and I don't think only police characters realise or even appreciate that. I'm starting my PD character soon if I get through academy so I'm putting my assumptions to the test of being in a pursuit is easy especially with air-1 its free information.

But to get back onto the topic of the suggestion, I don't want to use real life examples as its a RP server I want everyone to have fun if I am lucky enough to make it into PD I'm going to feel shitty if I am ordered to shoot a guy or his tires that hasn't given me any reason to believe he has a gun and just wants to felony evade as it bring both party's something fun to do (I don't use the real life example of the dangers of a felony evasion as felony evasion is pure fun for the server). of course my character will follow through with the order as that what my character would do but do I want to follow that order no. Every life is important and if an officer opens fire on a vehicle or tires when the evader doesn't have any weapons I would see that officer as not caring for the crims life and that's why I believe this would make sense for it to be implemented into the server.

16 hours ago, MrSilky said:

Hey!

There are OOC rules for combat RP and the police faction has IC regulations for escalations of force. If you think their escalation was invalid, by all means make an IC IA report.

My problem with IA reports IC is that 9/10 it ends as a biased review and honestly it isn't enough for cops to take seriously and to be honest is pointless as it never stop cops from doing the same thing over and over again and the only thing that will stop this is a OOC rule. the reason I'm suggesting this is because this has happened to me many times over my 8-9 months playing everyday and if I have no weapon and get shot at I'm going to OOC report them as in my opinion there's no reasonable escalation. I don't want to OOC report people, I've only done it once but this suggestion will stop this type of gung ho behaviour on shooting people. 

Edited May 20, 2022 by DrBeelz

[Cyrus Raven]

14 minutes ago, DrBeelz said:

My problem with IA reports IC is that 9/10 it ends as a biased review and honestly it isn't enough for cops to take seriously and to be honest is pointless as it never stop cops from doing the same thing over and over again and the only thing that will stop this is a OOC rule. the reason I'm suggesting this is because this has happened to me many times over my 8-9 months playing everyday and if I have no weapon and get shot at I'm going to OOC report them as in my opinion there's reasonable escalation. I don't want to OOC report people, I've only done it once but this suggestion will stop this type of gung ho behaviour on shooting people. 

IA reports are not taken lightly and lead to reprimands for Officers. Keep in mind that you can also take any charge to court. Highlighted in RED are IA reports that were either accepted (''sustained'') or reports where things could be different. I would assume if IA was as biased as claimed we wouldn't consistently see sustained outcomes for IA reports.

(Publicly available through the GOV website under LSPD newsroom https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewtopic.php?t=104882)

Additionally, you can head to another publicly available section of the GOV website, https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewforum.php?f=127 which shows you every suspension, termination and resignation within the LSPD. IAD is not a bias bogey man, or at least I haven't seen anything proving this, it might just be that the complaints being filed are not in breach of any protocol/law.

 

I agree that sometimes OOC rules need to be put in place when issues can't be addressed IC'ly, but have you tried using existing IC methods? Submitting an IA? Court-Case? Petition? Talk to weazel news?

Edited May 20, 2022 by Cyrus Raven

[DrBeelz]

16 minutes ago, Cyrus Raven said:

IA reports are not taken lightly and lead to reprimands for Officers. Keep in mind that you can also take any charge to court. Highlighted in RED are IA reports that were either accepted (''sustained'') or reports where things could be different. I would assume if IA was as biased as claimed we wouldn't consistently see sustained outcomes for IA reports.

I agree that sometimes OOC rules need to be put in place when issues can't be addressed IC'ly, but have you tried using existing IC methods? Submitting an IA? Court-Case? Petition? Talk to weazel news?

What is see there is 5 out of 19 only got accepted and I don't know what happened so this doesn't mean anything to me unless I have context on every report so I wont go into that, I can only go off my experiences I've had for example two times where I've reported high command of either PD or SD and with undeniable evidence with one of them admitting the charge was false that they placed on me the charge didn't go to court??? Now I don't trust the court system in eclipse as I believe after that it is biased and corrupt and my character cant change that. I've also been shot at my officers for nothing and reported it and had dashcam to show for a IA report when I posed no threat and guess what they thrown it away I do think reporting in game is corrupt and this is why I'm suggesting this rule change as honest as I can be I don't believe any of these IC reports work for IA, Court etc.

I hope to be on this server a long time and hopefully I can progress my crim and cop character and tbh I made my cop character as I want there to be at least one cop where if they see me they know that I will be fair and as I've been a crim I know what it feels like when cops are lazy and just end chases or shoot at people or no reason.

Edited May 20, 2022 by DrBeelz

[Cyrus Raven]

6 minutes ago, DrBeelz said:

I've had for example two times where I've reported high command of either PD or SD and with undeniable evidence with one of them admitting the charge was false that they placed on me the charge didn't go to court???

Did you end up submitting a court case for that situation?

6 minutes ago, DrBeelz said:

Now I don't trust the court system in eclipse as I believe after that it is biased and corrupt and my character cant change that.

Yes, but as a player you can, especially if you suspect corruption considering it is is OOC'ly not allowed unless under very specific guidelines and only an extremely limited amount of people can gain this status. For this you have OOC IA reports as well as regular player reports. Keep in mind that regardless of IC protocol, OOC rules come first, which means if you feel like you've been DMed you can report that person like any other player.

11 minutes ago, DrBeelz said:

I've also been shot at my officers for nothing and reported it and had dashcam to show for a IA report when I posed no threat and guess what they thrown it away I do think reporting in game is corrupt and this is why I'm suggesting this rule change as honest as I can be I don't believe any of these IC reports work for IA, Court etc.

Lastly, the chart I showed above should at least be proof enough that the statement ''I don't believe any of these IC reports work for IA'', is untrue. You can check the links I provided, IA reports get sustained every single month and Officer's get suspended, both high-rank members and regular Officers. How can you claim these things don't work when evidence says otherwise? It might just be that for your specific scenario there was either a lack of evidence, no breach of IC regulations occurred or that IA had a different opinion from yours. If you suspect any bias or corruption in any of your IA outcomes, OOC report them for corruption with whatever evidence you have.