4.6 Confiscation

[Daigestive]

Is this a new law or a change to a current law: Change

What law do you wish to change/add:

4.6 Confiscation
No weapons or evidence shall be confiscated by Law Enforcement when immediate harm is at risk, such as under gun fire or assailants nearby, where the officer should be prioritising his own or others lives over a confiscation. When immediate harm is not at risk evidence is permitted to be confiscated if the officer is unable to watch over the evidence and leaving it where it is would risk it being tampered with by a member of the public.

Why should this change/addition be made: Too often are guns confiscated because "I can't watch over them" when there's a nearby raid. For example, if you snipe from Regals overpass during a bank robbery and get rushed. A cop will confiscate your gun even though you could be revived and there's a bank robbery right next to it you're involved in. Cops will confiscate your gun in situations where they are 1v8, last alive on the stairs behind Bazaar gas,if there's a raid at projex. The problem with this is really there's no way for criminals to get guns back after they are confiscated. A lot of situations, cops end up losing where they've still confiscated guns only because they can't watch over them. For me this shouldn't happen, the first excuse people will use is the whole other people will tamper with weapons bs. Obvious response is anyone uninvolved that does would break 3.4 and should be dealt with by staff. If there's a nearby shootout, no cop should be essentially bagging up a gun ready for forensics where they'd have to put it in their vehicle and take it all the way to PD. They should prioritise the shootout nearby, rather than their 1k pension fund. There are a lot of situations where cops have lost and confiscated guns for this knowing they were likely to lose, it shouldn't happen if there's no way to get them back.

What is the aim of this change/addition: Confiscating a gun shouldn't be prioritised over a nearby shootout when there are assailants nearby.

Additional Information: Nerf Crim

 

[Jonah]

What if we made this an actual rule instead of a law?

It's stupid that if a cop confiscates a gun while their life is at risk they have to go through IA.

 

[Frankie Rankin]

-1 I personally play cop a lot. and in your example of the bank raid. if there is a risk someone can take the gun that can be a threat to officers life if a cop cannot watch the gun he's al liberty to take it and I cant stress how many times I have died to a picked up gun I cant confiscate. and @Jonah Its officers discretion that's why it goes through IA, However i do agree with you when if there under fire they should not run and grab it and should be warned for that

 

[Kenty]

-1 I personally play cop a lot. and in your example of the bank raid. if there is a risk someone can take the gun that can be a threat to officers life if a cop cannot watch the gun he's al liberty to take it and I cant stress how many times I have died to a picked up gun I cant confiscate. and @Jonah Its officers discretion that's why it goes through IA

So the officers discretion could be confiscating a gun a few seconds before death because they couldn’t look after it? As an officer, you should just leave the gun if you’re an officer, why risk your life over some confiscating cash when you can just run away and deal with things once your buddies respawn.

I like this idea, but I think there should be a rule around this instead of policies and laws like @Jonah said

 

[Frankie Rankin]

I like this idea, but I think there should be a rule around this instead of policies and laws like @Jonah said

as I stated if has under fire he should be warned

 

[A1L]

Kind of like this, yes mostly officers in shootouts will confiscate your firearm if they're unable to watch over it considering if there is a flanker at Gas station and they can't look over it, it'd most likely be confiscated. I agree to some-what having a rule in place, however only if their life is direct risk, such as if there is a gunmen at front of Slums and you're at the Gas station, sure I wouldn't mind a rule for this.

@S2B3 Gamma If they're under fire, they shouldn't be confiscating firearms regardless, this would kind of be unrealistic to confiscate a firearm mid way getting shot at, I know a lot of officers including myself will confiscate firearms if we're unable to look after them, if they're like a little bit away from the shootout, sometimes I put the firearm away in a corner so they're less likely to get minge-grabbed. Otherwise, I like this rule suggestion.

Would like this to mainly be a rule instead of a law.

 

[Hendricks]

What if we made this an actual rule instead of a law?

It's stupid that if a cop confiscates a gun while their life is at risk they have to go through IA.

This usually is enforced under 3.3/3.4/3.6 depending on the circumstances. Usually it is quite difficult to be able to take staff action if no videographic evidence is provided as the view of ‘safety’ could be interpreted differently from both sides otherwise staff should be disciplining this if the evidence is provided and the staff member has deemed the actions to be unrealistic and/or endangering accused’s own life by confiscating a weapon midgunfight or when danger is imminent.

 

[Jonah]

This usually is enforced under 3.3/3.4/3.6 depending on the circumstances. Usually it is quite difficult to be able to take staff action if no videographic evidence is provided as the view of ‘safety’ could be interpreted differently from both sides otherwise staff should be disciplining this if the evidence is provided and the staff member has deemed the actions to be unrealistic and/or endangering accused’s own life by confiscating a weapon midgunfight or when danger is imminent.

I still get told I need to make an IA so not everyone is enforcing it.