3.4 Question

MalekIsWeird said:

This is a help & Support because I presume that if this was asked in F6, the question would be complicated to answer in a clear and timely manner given how busy staff are with other cases. This was made due to the creation of this AR:

Post in thread 'Action Request (idk)'

Today at 9:48 AM

chokolad tomte has stated the following: "Anyways im pretty sure the f6 is enough of a input in my opinion as I said that he just got hit in crossfire when I was shooting the cop who started running"

He is referring to an F6 I opened with him in game following your report to ask him at the time what the reason for shooting you was.

I will be requesting a demo to look into his perspective of the incident further.

• SadBoy

And I was hoping to find an admin opinion and allow people to speak their mind on the ruling as well.

The question is if a single lone police officer is present at a residence and there is a group of armed individuals prowling to raid it, is it 3.4 to hold up the cop to use him later as a hostage and disable him from being a threat right before crowbarring the entrance to the home?

Click to expand...

I am pretty sure if there is a cop within the vicinity you can’t raid a property

MalekIsWeird said:

This is a help & Support because I presume that if this was asked in F6, the question would be complicated to answer in a clear and timely manner given how busy staff are with other cases. This was made due to the creation of this AR:

Post in thread 'Action Request (idk)'

Today at 9:48 AM

chokolad tomte has stated the following: "Anyways im pretty sure the f6 is enough of a input in my opinion as I said that he just got hit in crossfire when I was shooting the cop who started running"

He is referring to an F6 I opened with him in game following your report to ask him at the time what the reason for shooting you was.

I will be requesting a demo to look into his perspective of the incident further.

• SadBoy

And I was hoping to find an admin opinion and allow people to speak their mind on the ruling as well.

The question is if a single lone police officer is present at a residence and there is a group of armed individuals prowling to raid it, is it 3.4 to hold up the cop to use him later as a hostage and disable him from being a threat right before crowbarring the entrance to the home?

Click to expand...

It should be a 3.4 breaking because you don't know if hes single or he has a partner outside. And he can aswell press panic button or whatever. So even if its one cop you shouldn't disable him or start a raid with him nearby

You should not commit any crimes within the line of sight of the police or initiate a raid when officers are already present at the scene. Always wait until the police have left before initiating a raid on the property, and plan your raids more carefully.

This is especially important when there are many people present, as there is a high risk of unarmed casualties who may not have time to take cover when you open fire into a crowd.

Ellie said:

You should not commit any crimes within the line of sight of the police or initiate a raid when officers are already present at the scene. Always wait until the police have left before initiating a raid on the property, and plan your raids more carefully.

This is especially important when there are many people present, as there is a high risk of unarmed casualties who may not have time to take cover when you open fire into a crowd.

Click to expand...

Would there be no argument in defense of a criminal group that ensures the clearance of an area then takes the lone cop as a hostage? I think this is important so that in the future nobody thinks that technicalities can be alibis or conversely people know there is an exception there if all qualifications are provably met.

My thoughts also were that the benefit of having a negotiation leverage while knowing there is no immediate consequence (i.e a ridealong officer, a medic or a firefighter able to report the ongoing situation immediately blowing the cover of the burglars) would outweigh the risk of violent police response as that sort of response is to be expected anyway later on when the door alarms or shots are fired and the target cop would not be able to cause it any sooner as they would be confirmed to be vulnerable given the proper coordination by the criminals who cleared the area of any possible other partners that target officer would have then the target would be in captivity under gunpoint immediately prior to the raid starting.

So first of all you shouldnt commit any crimes in the eyesight of an LEO. Now if they take the Police officer hostage inside or start a hostage situation it depends if it benefits their freedom and not just the 5000 dollars.

it’s 3.4

MalekIsWeird said:

Would there be no argument in defense of a criminal group that ensures the clearance of an area then takes the lone cop as a hostage? I think this is important so that in the future nobody thinks that technicalities can be alibis or conversely people know there is an exception there if all qualifications are provably met.

My thoughts also were that the benefit of having a negotiation leverage while knowing there is no immediate consequence (i.e a ridealong officer, a medic or a firefighter able to report the ongoing situation immediately blowing the cover of the burglars) would outweigh the risk of violent police response as that sort of response is to be expected anyway later on when the door alarms or shots are fired and the target cop would not be able to cause it any sooner as they would be confirmed to be vulnerable given the proper coordination by the criminals who cleared the area of any possible other partners that target officer would have then the target would be in captivity under gunpoint immediately prior to the raid starting.

Click to expand...

If it’s beneficial to you to do so within a relevant situation where that is the case, sure. But if you’re literally breaking into a base whilst you use a cop as a hostage, you’re creating more and more issues for yourself rather than simply waiting for an officer to leave the situation entirely avoiding having another liability. In the event of having something done like jailbreaking or getting a cop to unlock city hall to kill the mayor, sure. For a Burglary? Daft. The cop will see your method of escape, what you took from who and where, all sorts.

If you’ve already been killing people inside the building and take hostages there’s good odds an officer is going to call it off because they cannot confirm the life status of people you’ve already killed and they’re more likely to approach that situation with a faster paced, more aggressive response.

Furthermore, it just drags along another player as a mere prop to a crime. Not necessarily the most fun experience to be held against your will for 15 minutes ignoring call-outs all whilst your exact location is tracked and accessible by a dispatcher who will upon realisation become suspicious that the officers been silent inside a property for so long.

There’s just too much you’re missing out on to argue this is allowed and for these reasons above, it’s just not worth allowing for raids. If the cop actually has access to a government facility you need to get inside, this is different. For a private property? No.