Jump to content
Swattpup1989

Regarding Police

Recommended Posts

I understand the fact of the realism on the server but cops not being required to identify a traffic stop is not realistic. I have been pulled over and before you even give them your license you can ask the reason for being stopped. And they are required to tell you. The fact this isn't a thing is beyond redic.

Being pulled over for suspected speeding when going 50 is a bit excessive. When asked why I was being pulled over, I got told a spot check and then it changed to suspected speeding.

Upon refusing to show my license due to lack of a reason for the stop, I got threatened with more charges. This is beyond unrealistic.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have noticed since I started playing on this server. The police have gotten more and more out of control with things. Such as ticketing people for going down a 1 way street properly and stating the street markers say other wise yet they don't.

Or the fact they use force all the time due to boredom. Either make there be a tighter leash on the police and make them follow the same laws as us. Or get rid of the PD entirely. It seems they are out for blood rather than out to protect people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Swattpup1989 said:

I understand the fact of the realism on the server but cops not being required to identify a traffic stop is not realistic. I have been pulled over and before you even give them your license you can ask the reason for being stopped. And they are required to tell you. The fact this isn't a thing is beyond redic.

Being pulled over for suspected speeding when going 50 is a bit excessive. When asked why I was being pulled over, I got told a spot check and then it changed to suspected speeding.

Upon refusing to show my license due to lack of a reason for the stop, I got threatened with more charges. This is beyond unrealistic.

Hi, Just my input on this, Our protocol states that we first Identify the driver and then we can give the reason of the stop. But just let you know, you are fully entitle to know why you had been pull over, but there's steps, First thing first, we Identify THEN we give the reason.
Failure to Identify is an arrest able offense.
As show here:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pertinax said:

Hi, Just my input on this, Our protocol states that we first Identify the driver and then we can give the reason of the stop. But just let you know, you are fully entitle to know why you had been pull over, but there's steps, First thing first, we Identify THEN we give the reason.
Failure to Identify is an arrest able offense.
As show here:

 

In Kansas, its not like that. Upon the stop they ask do you know why I stopped you today and then tell you and ask for ID

I mean its a legit question, she could have answered while I was grabbing it instead she was very rude. Immediately after it, she went off duty. Seems they want to meet a quota rather than do their jobs

Edited by Swattpup1989
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Swattpup1989 said:

In Kansas, its not like that. Upon the stop they ask do you know why I stopped you today and then tell you and ask for ID

Exactly is different in every state. But in our State of San Andreas based on California, and what our commissioner has been issue in out city is that we ask ID first then tell you.

Also, if the civilian ask, in our state, for the officer identification, the officer have to give the Badge number. But he may or not give you his full name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Swattpup1989 said:

I mean its a legit question, she could have answered while I was grabbing it instead she was very rude. Immediately after it, she went off duty. Seems they want to meet a quota rather than do their jobs

Is up to the officer discretion, if he/she first wants to check your ID and then tell you the why of the pull over. Or tell you while doing it.
But again our protocol states, ID First then Reason. You can ask the reason but it will be given to you until you identify your self.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Duty and Off Duty cops need to follow the same laws we do. Not just break them all because they are the law.
Illegally parking with no parking pay but because your a cop its okay
Illegally u-turning with no lights or sirens but because your a cop its okay
Failure to identify yourself or answer simple law questions
Using excessive force or threatening people

The list goes on and on.
The Internal Affairs department is a joke, no offense, but, like nothing gets done to those cops unless server staff get involved.

Or saying someone is driving dangerously due to being a mule with a crate yet everyone knows scriptly we cant put it on the seat. Yet when you say you have OOC proof of placing it on the seat, you get ignored and they continue speaking about it.

Edited by Swattpup1989
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jasmine said:

How about walking into the basement of Tequilala and demanding everyone give IDs?

Is that in the handbook? Happened 2 times today.

The reason behind it can variate. One of the common reasons is that we have a wanted Man over there, So to find out who is the wanted man, we need to check every ones ID.
There could be a 911 Call giving us probable cause to search the place.
There's multiple reason that could lead to this action but all of  them require probable cause, If the officer doesn't have probable cause for a pat down you can report it to IA.
Also to make things clear, any interaction with a police officer is requiring the civilian to provide his ID, The officer can exercise this requirement or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense, me being pulled over and stopped had 0 probable cause. I was stopped for half a second due to my sick kid came in the room and needed something. I pulled around the corner and got pulled over for speeding after 1/2 a block. Im in a mule, it takes like 2 blocks for them to even hit 70.

Legit, out of control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Swattpup1989 said:

On Duty and Off Duty cops need to follow the same laws we do. Not just break them all because they are the law.
Illegally parking with no parking pay but because your a cop its okay
Illegally u-turning with no lights or sirens but because your a cop its okay
Failure to identify yourself or answer simple law questions
Using excessive force or threatening people

The list goes on and on.
The Internal Affairs department is a joke, no offense, but, like nothing gets done to those cops unless server staff get involved.

Off duty cops do need to follow traffic laws. On the other hand Duty officers does not, since the law states that any emergency vehicles may park or be left in any way. These for multiple reasons. One the officer may had to run to catch a suspect, leaving the cruiser behind, Provide Traffic coverage to the scene, leaving the vehicle close to an illegal parking vehicle to check his plates on the MDC. etc etc.

But the law states that emergency vehicles may disregard the traffic laws.
 

The illegal U-turn may be because the situation requires to do so, and with out lights and siren since you don't know if he is attending an emergency like an active armed robbery or a robbery that lights and sirens may scare the criminal and there fore giving him advantage to run. There's way to many reasons that a police officer may do this actions that you are not aware off.

Failure to Identify your self again is against the penal code.

Again if the person is not complying at all then he is in desobay of an order by a police officer, this is an arrest able offense and the officer can use force to sedue the individual if he is refusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pertinax said:

The reason behind it can variate. One of the common reasons is that we have a wanted Man over there, So to find out who is the wanted man, we need to check every ones ID.
There could be a 911 Call giving us probable cause to search the place.
There's multiple reason that could lead to this action but all of  them require probable cause, If the officer doesn't have probable cause for a pat down you can report it to IA.
Also to make things clear, any interaction with a police officer is requiring the civilian to provide his ID, The officer can exercise this requirement or not.

They came in gave no reason then left not arresting anyone.
If cops bust up a club or bar, they don't sit at the entrance and check every single persons ID.

They stand at the entrance stopping people who match the description of a known suspect.

I mean, every single person at the table looked and dressed different, different genders different races.
Explain why everyone there was IDd???

 

Edited by Jasmine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reason for stop should always be the first topic of conversation, not identifying the people in the car, so +1 from me on that.

 

A good amount of players become cops then think they can just demand whatever they want to citizens or else they get charged, and that's always been an issue.

 

Another thing that should be added to PD protocol is what qualifies as a LAWFUL order. As far as I am aware, there is no outline of lawful orders, it's just up to cops using common sense, which is something people often lack. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pertinax said:

The reason behind it can variate. One of the common reasons is that we have a wanted Man over there, So to find out who is the wanted man, we need to check every ones ID.
There could be a 911 Call giving us probable cause to search the place.
There's multiple reason that could lead to this action but all of  them require probable cause, If the officer doesn't have probable cause for a pat down you can report it to IA.
Also to make things clear, any interaction with a police officer is requiring the civilian to provide his ID, The officer can exercise this requirement or not.

I don't care if you're looking for Bin Laden in Tequila-la, you will never see in America, you being required to give your ID to a cop just because there may be a wanted person in the room, cops are paid to do investigations, not just ID whoever they want (which, sure, could be considered investigation, but there are other means of finding stuff like this); There is such thing as the constitution which prevents things like this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jasmine said:

They came in gave no reason then left not arresting anyone.
If cops bust up a club or bar, they don't sit at the entrance and check every single persons ID.

They stand at the entrance stopping people who match the description of a known suspect.

 

For the first part I will be agree with you, with out having cause to enter the establishment may lead to disciplinary actions. Again if there's not a reason. But it may be reason that you do not know why. That is the job of internal affairs to determine.

Now, the second part. Right now we are limited to the resources that the server have, we just see the name of the man that is wanted, and we do not see a Face on the MDC currently, how ever, we can role play seen the face of the guy in the MDC. So at this point we do not have a suspect description and he may be with a mask, since every one is out with a mask.
So we need the ID of every one to know who is the suspect. And a warrant is more than a probable cause to search the people.

Edited by Pertinax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pertinax said:

For the first part I will be agree with you, with out having cause to enter the establishment may lead to disciplinary actions. Again if there's not a reason. But it may be reason that you do not know why. That is the job of internal affairs to determine.

Now, the second part. Right now we are limited to the resources that the server have, we just see the name of the man that is wanted, and we do not see a Face on the MDC currently, how ever, we can role play seen the face of the guy in the MDC. So at this point we do not have a suspect description and he may be with a mask, since every one is out with a mask.
So we need the ID of every one to know who is the suspect. And a warrant is more than a probable cause to search the people.

Well, that is 100% confirming our point. Their should be RP required giving:

/do descriptions of perps.
/do as to gender and skin color
text or radio calls to communicate a perpetrators details.

The fact that you use the mdc and random names is why we think it is BS.
You should be forced to have better RP, when trying to catch a crim. 
If you don't even know the gender and skin color, what cloths they had on, you shouldn't be out looking for them. (re: its MG)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Flucifial said:

Reason for stop should always be the first topic of conversation, not identifying the people in the car, so +1 from me on that.

There's a lot of IC reason why we do ask for ID first, one of them that I can tell you is that before we get out of the vehicle we look in to the registry owner and if the driver is not the registry owner, we have probable cause that the vehicle may be stolen, in that case we proceed with an investigation, like calling the owner. During this investigation, you may be placed on cuffs to DETAIN you until we are confident that the vehicle is not stolen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Swattpup1989 said:

Just to clarify the illegal uturns with no sirens and such. Everytime it has been a cop swingin around to talk to a buddy on the side of the road or to bs with another cop. Doesn't seem like much of an emergency to me. Seems more like misuse of a government vehicle.

I would be agree with you in this one. If he brakes the law as you say, just to talk to his buddy may be headed in disciplinary actions. But again you don't know if he saw the person and he may be wanted so he turns around to check if he really is. That's why there's Internal Affairs investigations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pertinax said:

There's a lot of IC reason why we do ask for ID first, one of them that I can tell you is that before we get out of the vehicle we look in to the registry owner and if the driver is not the registry owner, we have probable cause that the vehicle may be stolen, in that case we proceed with an investigation, like calling the owner. During this investigation, you may be placed on cuffs to DETAIN you until we are confident that the vehicle is not stolen.

How do you have probable cause that a vehicle is stolen just because the driver isn't the R/O? I think probable cause for a stolen vehicle is if someone actually reports the vehicle stolen, otherwise, there is no probable cause. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My view on law enforcement in the server is that it's been okay but it's rapidly degrading. I used to be a criminal main over a year ago, and most of my interactions with police officers were within the boundaries of what I'd consider realistic, and for a couple of months, I was a supervisor in the LSPD, however, since returning to criminal, two months ago, I've been noticing more and more gross abuses of power. I'm not sure if this is because I now know (OOCly) a lot more about police regulation, and when they are pushing it, or if there truly are more abusive cops, but there are quite a number of officers that have absolutely no regard for law and what is acceptable.

To give you an example, two days ago I went to the police department to inquire about a revoked gun permit. The officer that I was questioning asked for my identification, which I found reasonable. There were several other officers in the room. Another officer says, "I want to see your licenses too!", and a Detective identifies me verbally, by my full name. Then another cop says, "You have to show it or its failure to identify". I show the officer my identification, even though another law enforcement officer identified me, and she had no WORK RELATED reason to know my name. Then the officer that initially threatened me with a charge, asked to see it as well. 

This is the kind of gross abuse of power, that I feel is borderline NonRP. There was absolutely no work related reason for the 5th officer in the room to know the same name that 4 other cops knew, and verified that I was not wanted. It was quite simply a power play.

The usual response to this is file an IA report. The issue with that is that officers are not punished harshly enough, nor are the reports dealt with in a timely manner.

I will provide you with a second anecdote.

Last month I was involved in an armed robbery with two other people, and one of the victims named me as a perpretator later on. She was a female character. A cop, with no evidence what-so-ever, based on her word of mouth, searched me and my vehicle. I did not have anything illegal in my possession. Furthermore, after he established that I did not have any illegal items, and I was not wanted, he placed me in cuffs, and inside his cruiser, and quite literally kidnapped me to face my accuser, that was in a different area. My car was left unlocked on the side of the road. I protested it, and the officer said that "I'm being detained for an Investigation".

I filed an IA report, on the 10th of September. I just received an answer on 14th of November, saying that, of course, the officer broke policy, and that he was "disciplined".

Now I ask you, what do you think was the discipline? My guess is a written warning. 

What would the discipline be for me, or any other person if we kidnapped someone under no legal bases and kept them there? Prison.

The fact that the cop was not at the very least fired is exactly why people feel the way they feel about law enforcement. There is very little recourse for most abuses of power, and even when they get confirmed, it's a slap on the wrist for the cop.

This was a long rant, so I will present you with some solutions to end it:

  • If an officer is found to be in breach of a serious protocol, think force matrix, false detainment, etc, he should be fired. No written warnings, no suspensions.
  • If an officer is found to have falsely arrested someone, they should be fired. No written warnings, no suspensions.
  • If an officer is found to be issuing orders that are not lawful, he should be suspended.

The current punishment system is not proportional to what abusive law enforcement officers can inflict upon their victims.

Edited by alexalex303
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Flucifial said:

How do you have probable cause that a vehicle is stolen just because the driver isn't the R/O? I think probable cause for a stolen vehicle is if someone actually reports the vehicle stolen, otherwise, there is no probable cause. 

As police officer we just double check. because In my experience, 80% of the times, the vehicle is actually stolen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Internal Affairs does nothing when it comes to this stuff. My buddy just had to pay a ticket even though it was proven he was given the ticket wrongfully. But because he would face jail time for failure to pay. He had no choice but to pay. So now he lost money for no reason.

You have so much faith in your IA department yet look at all the posts regarding it. The videos and screenshots explain enough. The IA department has been and always will be based towards the police.

I mean I had a cop tell me today. There is a lack of police officers reason PD and SD have been sharing jurisdiction. Last thing you guys will do is start firing cops. Lets be honest here.

And regarding the owner of the vehicle. She pulled up, said on the radio vehicle is registered to my name. She walked up and I showed proof of ownership to the vehicle. I unlocked it and locked it. She still proceeded to harass me.

On top of that, discretion is super skewed with you guys. Because we look like a gang, we get treated like one. Me and my group legit have a name. Have never done anything illegal. We fish, mine, and hunt. Yet we are still treated like criminals and as such get threatened constantly which is bullshit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pertinax said:

As police officer we just double check. because In my experience, 80% of the times, the vehicle is actually stolen.

That right there is an issue, because it shouldn't be that way, doesn't matter how much % of times the vehicle is actually stolen, You shouldn't treat the stop as a possible stolen car  unless the cars reported stolen.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.