Police weapon roleplay suggested change.

[Teenyinnit]

Hiya, I'd like to start off by saying that I really enjoy 99% of interactions with the PD and SD however there's literally one thing which drives me nuts.

 

I used to train police officers and police cadets IRL (UK) and it was my job to hammer into them to loudly announce when they were about to use force as a warning.
Force in this instance includes any form of ramming, Taser, Gun (within reason) etc.

 

I've found that a few members of the PD have got into the habit of Taser first, ask questions later, which in my experience is a fireable offence as it's deemed as overly aggressive in real life.
Just saying "if you move I will Tase you" or "I have a taser here but I won't use it if you comply" - gives us the chance to decide what we do, rather than being instantly restrained with no chance to act out a particular scene.

A lot of my bad experiences with PD IC have been when I've been tazed without being given the chance to RP, and these tazes often come much without warning at all.

Guns - obviously if there is a firearm present the current PD method is absolutely on point and perfect - no complaints here.

Pretty please can PD rework some training for police to announce escalation of aggression with Tasers, not only because it's realistic but also because it give the Civs a chance to roleplay a little.

I'm not trying to tell the PD how to do their jobs, but with my IRL experience I just thought I could maybe help make it a little more realistic as Tasers are a form of weaponry and *legally* officers worldwide (mostly) are required to announce a tazer before firing.

 

Hopefully this made sense!
Just trying to help as someone who is trained on tasers!

[TheCactus]

@Teenyinnit I agree with you and it sucks to see it. I understand of you tase someone with no warning if they have been fleeing for a while, are actively using force on someone else or are about to get into a vehicle to leave the area while detained. When they just tase someone to avoid any kind of reaction and force the script upon the other player, it just sucks as a roleplay experience.

You can IA report someone if they don't use their tasers correctly but we're miles away from getting them fired.

[Benjenova]

This is something I tried to argue several times in vain admittedly my action afterwards were not commendable, but the frustration of lack of being able to rp due to the excess taser use can be overwhelming 

[idgafashlee]

+1! I think this is a great suggestion as it promotes roleplay (and that's what we are all here to do right?)!!
I think many have fallen victim of being tased for "no reason" or more-so tased without warning and unsuspecting of the fact it's about to happen. I think something as simple as giving some type of warning (you gave excellent examples) should be simple enough and promote roleplay; as the criminal then has to make their next choice wisely as opposed to immediately being incapacitated without warning. I believe that some LEO's do give this type of warning, but it would nice to see this as a standard within the factions, and this is a suggestion that PD/SD could implement easily.

[Pazz]

For the sake of transparency, tazers, or less-lethal force, are specified under two of the LSPD's force levels. There is a difference between the two, though, which is that one level requires a verbal warning prior to the tazer being used, and the other does not. If a suspect is resistive, not following instructions, or has committed a criminal offense outside of a citation, but is not assaultive, then there should be a verbal warning prior to the actual utilization of less-lethal force (tazers). If a suspect is assaultive, then there is no need for a verbal warning. These levels and prerequisites make sense and exist already, primarily because it is logical to use the verbal warning and de facto threat of being tazed to gain compliance, and it is illogical to ask someone to stop beating you up with the threat of a tazer. Basically, the policy exists and it is logical - if someone is simply being non-compliant, use the verbal warning and basically the threat of a tazer to gain compliance prior to actually using the tazer, if someone is being assaultive (eg. attacking an officer or another player) then there does not need to be a warning because the threat needs to be stopped as soon as possible.

While labeling things an "IC issue" is one of my pet peeves along with "find out IC", these are things that can be followed up with a formal in-character complaint. In the past, there have been formal disciplinary actions and suspensions issued to members of the LSPD faction on the in-character basis that they did not adhere to the force levels and their prerequisites, by, for example, not issuing a verbal warning prior to tazing a player that was simply being an IC nuisance by not complying. 

That said, it occurs far too often that a player gets tazed and then simply ignores these effects and has to be tazed another seven times before they either give up and comply, or an administrator needs to get involved to put the roleplay back on track. It is unreasonable to, beyond the initial verbal warning, expect continuous warnings when the players themselves fail to roleplay the tazer effects realistically, and, personally, if a player fails to hold themselves accountable with regard to roleplay standards and failing to roleplay these effects realistically by constantly running after being tazed, then I won't be holding a member of the LSPD faction accountable for having to taze this player seven times to gain compliance without six more different warnings after the initial one. 

I think that there's a middle ground that can be reached. The policy and prerequisites are in place for it, the IC investigative entity is in place for it, it just needs to be watched closer in-game, and the players that thoroughly enjoy running after being tazed for the seventh time should probably reconsider whether or not they're providing good interactions and roleplay as well.

[Teenyinnit]

35 minutes ago, Pazz said:

For the sake of transparency, tazers, or less-lethal force, are specified under two of the LSPD's force levels. There is a difference between the two, though, which is that one level requires a verbal warning prior to the tazer being used, and the other does not. If a suspect is resistive, not following instructions, or has committed a criminal offense outside of a citation, but is not assaultive, then there should be a verbal warning prior to the actual utilization of less-lethal force (tazers). If a suspect is assaultive, then there is no need for a verbal warning. These levels and prerequisites make sense and exist already, primarily because it is logical to use the verbal warning and de facto threat of being tazed to gain compliance, and it is illogical to ask someone to stop beating you up with the threat of a tazer. Basically, the policy exists and it is logical - if someone is simply being non-compliant, use the verbal warning and basically the threat of a tazer to gain compliance prior to actually using the tazer, if someone is being assaultive (eg. attacking an officer or another player) then there does not need to be a warning because the threat needs to be stopped as soon as possible.

While labeling things an "IC issue" is one of my pet peeves along with "find out IC", these are things that can be followed up with a formal in-character complaint. In the past, there have been formal disciplinary actions and suspensions issued to members of the LSPD faction on the in-character basis that they did not adhere to the force levels and their prerequisites, by, for example, not issuing a verbal warning prior to tazing a player that was simply being an IC nuisance by not complying. 

That said, it occurs far too often that a player gets tazed and then simply ignores these effects and has to be tazed another seven times before they either give up and comply, or an administrator needs to get involved to put the roleplay back on track. It is unreasonable to, beyond the initial verbal warning, expect continuous warnings when the players themselves fail to roleplay the tazer effects realistically, and, personally, if a player fails to hold themselves accountable with regard to roleplay standards and failing to roleplay these effects realistically by constantly running after being tazed, then I won't be holding a member of the LSPD faction accountable for having to taze this player seven times to gain compliance without six more different warnings after the initial one. 

I think that there's a middle ground that can be reached. The policy and prerequisites are in place for it, the IC investigative entity is in place for it, it just needs to be watched closer in-game, and the players that thoroughly enjoy running after being tazed for the seventh time should probably reconsider whether or not they're providing good interactions and roleplay as well.

Agreed this policy is in place, however I'm finding that a few of the officers aren't following this policy at all for not combative issues.

Example: Old lady doesn't immediately put her hands up for a simple traffic stop.
- It is unreasonable to use a taser on this character IC as no warning has been issued and she is non-combative.

Example2: Old Lady doesn't immediately put her hands up for a simple traffic stop however has a gun on her hip.
- it is reasonable to hold a taser at the ready and discharge if character tries to run after warning "I will tase you if you run"

Example3: Old lady is simply running away on foot from an officer with no firearm in vicinity.
- it is unreasonable to use a Taser in any sense, there is no threat to civilians a Taser shouldn't even be drawn at this moment in time.

Example4: Character sneaks into PD building but is not being threatening
- it is unreasonable to discharge a taser without warning.

Example 5: character is acting threatening or using threatening language.
- it is reasonable to discharge a taser with warning.

Example 6: Character has a blunt weapon (baseball bat) at the ready
- it is reasonable to discharge a taser without warning if this character tries to run.

[Teenyinnit]

58 minutes ago, Pazz said:

For the sake of transparency, tazers, or less-lethal force, are specified under two of the LSPD's force levels. There is a difference between the two, though, which is that one level requires a verbal warning prior to the tazer being used, and the other does not. If a suspect is resistive, not following instructions, or has committed a criminal offense outside of a citation, but is not assaultive, then there should be a verbal warning prior to the actual utilization of less-lethal force (tazers). If a suspect is assaultive, then there is no need for a verbal warning. These levels and prerequisites make sense and exist already, primarily because it is logical to use the verbal warning and de facto threat of being tazed to gain compliance, and it is illogical to ask someone to stop beating you up with the threat of a tazer. Basically, the policy exists and it is logical - if someone is simply being non-compliant, use the verbal warning and basically the threat of a tazer to gain compliance prior to actually using the tazer, if someone is being assaultive (eg. attacking an officer or another player) then there does not need to be a warning because the threat needs to be stopped as soon as possible.

While labeling things an "IC issue" is one of my pet peeves along with "find out IC", these are things that can be followed up with a formal in-character complaint. In the past, there have been formal disciplinary actions and suspensions issued to members of the LSPD faction on the in-character basis that they did not adhere to the force levels and their prerequisites, by, for example, not issuing a verbal warning prior to tazing a player that was simply being an IC nuisance by not complying. 

That said, it occurs far too often that a player gets tazed and then simply ignores these effects and has to be tazed another seven times before they either give up and comply, or an administrator needs to get involved to put the roleplay back on track. It is unreasonable to, beyond the initial verbal warning, expect continuous warnings when the players themselves fail to roleplay the tazer effects realistically, and, personally, if a player fails to hold themselves accountable with regard to roleplay standards and failing to roleplay these effects realistically by constantly running after being tazed, then I won't be holding a member of the LSPD faction accountable for having to taze this player seven times to gain compliance without six more different warnings after the initial one. 

I think that there's a middle ground that can be reached. The policy and prerequisites are in place for it, the IC investigative entity is in place for it, it just needs to be watched closer in-game, and the players that thoroughly enjoy running after being tazed for the seventh time should probably reconsider whether or not they're providing good interactions and roleplay as well.

Just because I can, here is what I use to train in the classrom:

 

Use Of Tasers

Under Police procedures, the use of a Taser should be determined according to the circumstances. The officer must verbally warn the subject where practicable.

The device may be used to:

• protect human life;
• protect the officer or others from violence where it is occurring or imminent;
• protect an officer in danger of being overpowered or the officer or others from risk of actual bodily harm;
• protect from animals.

Police should use force that is reasonable, necessary, proportionate and appropriate to the circumstances, and that force should be no more than is reasonably necessary for the safe and effective performance of their duties.

There are many factors a police officer may consider when assessing whether it is reasonable to use a Taser. These include the age and physical condition of the subject; the involvement of mental illness, drugs or alcohol; and the risk to the officer, the public and the subject.

A Taser should not be used:

• for an investigative purpose i.e. the video and audio capability should be used only as part of normal deployment;
• near explosive or flammable materials;
• where there is a likelihood of significant secondary injuries such as from a fall;
• to coerce someone to move;
• against someone who is passively non-compliant (i.e. refusing to move or acting as a dead weight);
• to rouse someone who is unconscious, impaired or intoxicated;
• to target existing injury areas of a subject;
• as a crowd control measure;
• when the subject is holding a firearm;
• against a mental health patient solely to make them comply or submit to accepting medication or treatment.

In some circumstances, it should not be used unless there are exceptional circumstances. This includes against:

• someone in handcuffs;
• a female suspected of being pregnant,
• an elderly or disabled person;
• a child or an adult of small stature;
• someone in a vehicle or using machinery where there is a risk of the vehicle or machinery becoming out of control;
• a subject who is fleeing (Taser use should not be the sole reason for using a Taser);
• anyone for more than one 5-second period.

An ambulance must be called any time a Taser is used on a person.

[ArcAngel]

I have frequently seen on police live shows, that they announce "Tazer Tazer Tazer" before using their tazer, i agree (In the UK)

However, what you are talking about is internal IC policy (Force Continuum), and would likely be addressed better of an IC nature. With LSPD/GOV etc.

[Teenyinnit]

Just now, ArcAngel said:

I have frequently seen on police live shows, that they announce "Tazer Tazer Tazer" before using their tazer, i agree (In the UK)

However, what you are talking about is internal IC policy (Force Continuum), and would likely be addressed better of an IC nature. With LSPD/GOV etc.

Hey! Apparently this is already the policy under the Taser guidelines, however officers are in fact ignoring it and reporting it doesn't seem to yield any change as officers are unlearning this rule somehow! - if you see above, Pazz has actually put the correct method used by PD, which isn't being adopted by some officers

[Pazz]

Reporting it through IC means certainly will yield change. If there is a pattern or a surge of any sort of incorrect use or application of policy and it is recognized as an issue that affects more than one or two specific individuals, it is commonly swiftly followed by a faction-wide IC notice that aims to educate and steer faction members in the right direction and subsequently makes it easier for supervisors of the faction to proceed to disciplinary actions.

[Teenyinnit]

ok, in which case I'll report to Gov I guess each time it happens, hopefully it will yield change!

[Bala]

Personally, I wish the same energy that went into asking cop factions to do extra things was something that the community had for the other side of those interactions.

I'm all for this, if it's going to lead to better roleplay but, if we're going to end up doing this and people just get up from being tased and shake it off like they're Taylor Swift, I can't see it being a viable and worthwhile change.

This is only my personal preference, might be a part of PD but i'm only speaking for myself when I say this (because I don't want to get into the shit on this one) but I care more about what actually goes on in the server than whether something is simply true to real life or not at this point. Eclipse isn't real life and I think trying to make it too realistic is part of what blurs the lines with other stuff. So, it's very much for me, what is right for the the server?

Is this an entertaining game mechanic? Does this lead to something positive? Is this worth the effort needed to make it work?

I feel like this is somewhat going through the motions. Your voice doesn't just randomly give out when you've been talking for 15 minutes in real life, you don't need to press a button while running to make yourself audibly louder in real life. I don't want to see cops getting into more /b with crims because they needed to voice reset or the audio streaming distance fucked them. Or, even in an older character's age, claiming they just simply couldn't hear it. 

Simple fact is, young or old, everyone has the same capabilities in the game so we shouldn't treat anyone different based on how they've dressed or aged their character. Best believe, you cross that line where force can be used, I'm making grandma feel 22 again with that taser.

[MrSilky]

On 8/25/2023 at 11:46 AM, Teenyinnit said:

ok, in which case I'll report to Gov I guess each time it happens, hopefully it will yield change!

Reporting to GOV will yield nothing other than potential discourse between the factions without context of investigation which will not result in any meaningful outcome. The best thing to do is to raise an IC or OOC complaint via the relevant faction so it can be dealt with based on their policy and investigated. Should you then disagree with the outcome of the complaint, you would then have ammunition for meaningful dialogue with GOV should you wish to do so. Jumping the ladder right away would yield adverse outcomes. 

LSPD IA - https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewforum.php?f=24

SADOC IA - https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewforum.php?f=1194

LSSD IA - https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewforum.php?f=1738

LSEMS IA - https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewforum.php?f=580

SAGOV IA - https://gov.eclipse-rp.net/viewforum.php?f=2788

[Beet]

On 8/24/2023 at 9:51 PM, Teenyinnit said:

Hiya, I'd like to start off by saying that I really enjoy 99% of interactions with the PD and SD however there's literally one thing which drives me nuts.

 

I used to train police officers and police cadets IRL (UK) and it was my job to hammer into them to loudly announce when they were about to use force as a warning.
Force in this instance includes any form of ramming, Taser, Gun (within reason) etc.

 

I've found that a few members of the PD have got into the habit of Taser first, ask questions later, which in my experience is a fireable offence as it's deemed as overly aggressive in real life.
Just saying "if you move I will Tase you" or "I have a taser here but I won't use it if you comply" - gives us the chance to decide what we do, rather than being instantly restrained with no chance to act out a particular scene.

A lot of my bad experiences with PD IC have been when I've been tazed without being given the chance to RP, and these tazes often come much without warning at all.

Guns - obviously if there is a firearm present the current PD method is absolutely on point and perfect - no complaints here.

Pretty please can PD rework some training for police to announce escalation of aggression with Tasers, not only because it's realistic but also because it give the Civs a chance to roleplay a little.

I'm not trying to tell the PD how to do their jobs, but with my IRL experience I just thought I could maybe help make it a little more realistic as Tasers are a form of weaponry and *legally* officers worldwide (mostly) are required to announce a tazer before firing.

 

Hopefully this made sense!
Just trying to help as someone who is trained on tasers!

As someone in the realm of law enforcement in the UK, I am particularly intrigued on this experience you call upon to bolster your post.

Out of interest, can I ask, how long it took you to become a specially authorised instructor/AFO instructor - the standard level of instructor that is required to undertake CED training? Do you have a lengthy career in firearms experience or have a lengthy career in law enforcement? I would presume so due to the competition, expertise and training requirements these roles need. Always nice to reach out and rub shoulders with fellow professionals that are rarely found in these communities.

All the best. 

[dawpi]

On 8/25/2023 at 12:36 PM, ArcAngel said:

I have frequently seen on police live shows, that they announce "Tazer Tazer Tazer" before using their tazer, i agree (In the UK)

However, what you are talking about is internal IC policy (Force Continuum), and would likely be addressed better of an IC nature. With LSPD/GOV etc.

Since I don’t have my laptop, not able to write an essay out, but made me chuckle when I read ‘announce before using force’ in the original post. Since it appears this is mostly mentioning the UK, breaking policy as long as you can justified will land you no punishment or reprimand. Breaking the law is another matter. Announcing the use of force prior to using it is a choice for a police officer to make. Personally I’d never unless I was trying to challenge someone for the purpose of ‘scaring them’ into surrender. Whether someone deploys a baton and strikes or PAVA spray — officers can announce or not, up to them, though advised not to so the person remains exposed and ‘vulnerable’ to those being effective. Tasers, similar to red-dot challenge on the taser, is a choice of an officer. I have seen a person being tased with nothing said, and I have seen an officer say ‘I got my taser out’ or yell ‘TASER TASER’ prior to deploying.

Also TPAC trained officers WILL NEVER announce or give ‘demands’. If they want you off the road, you are coming off the road. 

[tigerpet15]

+1 I totally agree. Because cops extensively use tasers and my experience with PD/SD is that they are just trying to get over the RP as fast as possible (Im not saying all of them are though Ive had really great RP scenarious with cops). I think we should consider actually prohibit use the tasers when suspect is midly ressisting. I believe it would promote more RP (like actually being able to tackle someone during on foot chase) and actually be able to have on foot chase and not to be taserd after few seconds. I believe there should be new script implementing a realistic reload for tasers something like 10-30 seconds with the new minigame script. Because to my best knowledge tasers are fireable only once and it would make officers to use other methods of stopping a suspect on foot like tackling or with /mes and /dos. Like IRL cops when arresting someone who is ressisting the jump on him and try to put hsi hands into cuffs and they are not just blatanly using tasers every few seconds when they are in on foot chase. 

 

Taser reloading