6.10 Clarification

[Sindarin]

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

What law do you wish to change/add: 6.10 - Obstruction of Emergency Services

Old: Any person who obstructs a member of the emergency services in their duties commits an offence.
New: Any person who obstructs a member of the emergency services with the exception of obstructing the Paralake Police Department (Refer to law 6.5 in cases with the Paralake Police Department) in their duties commits an offence.

Why should this change/addition be made: It makes it easier for some people to understand, as currently 6.5 handles obstruction of a LEO, and is the more serious crime (Based on PLPD common practice), however some people just see it as the failure to comply law when in reality it is both. However, since people see it as failure to comply they go with 6.10 instead since they think thats the obstruction law for the PLPD.

6.5 - 'Any person who fails to comply with the legal orders of a Law enforcement officer such as refusing to provide ID when detained or obstructs a Law enforcement officer executing their duties commits an offence.'

What is the aim of this change/addition: Makes the law easier for people to understand

Additional Information: N/A

 

[213]

I don't feel the need to include "with the exception of the Paralake Police Department" into law 6.10. There are many troll cops who may very well obstruct EMS from performing their duties, and they could be arrested for it. I feel uneasy about giving officers more immunity as no one is above the law. Officers who fail to follow the law are also in direct violation of Server Rule 4.1 which should be enforced.

As far as charging minge grabbers, what is keeping you from charging them with 6.5? In most cases, officers repeatedly ask people to step away from the guns or not to pick it up. Although they are also violating 6.10 as officers get sidetracked due to their actions, if they don't listen to your commands, charge them with 6.5 as well (penalizing them with whatever carries the higher sentence of course). If anyone has an issue with it, they can make an IA and fail miserably.

 

[Sindarin]

I don't feel the need to include "with the exception of the Paralake Police Department" into law 6.10. There are many troll cops who may very well obstruct EMS from performing their duties, and they could be arrested for it. I feel uneasy about giving officers more immunity as no one is above the law. Officers who fail to follow the law are also in direct violation of Server Rule 4.1 which should be enforced.

As far as charging minge grabbers, what is keeping you from charging them with 6.5? In most cases, officers repeatedly ask people to step away from the guns or not to pick it up. Although they are also violating 6.10 as officers get sidetracked due to their actions, if they don't listen to your commands, charge them with 6.5 as well (penalizing them with whatever carries the higher sentence of course). If anyone has an issue with it, they can make an IA and fail miserably.

The change gives officers no level of immunity, the exception refers to this, if you are obstructing a law enforcement officer 6.10 does not apply, rather its 6.5 that officers should follow, and I am saying that nothing is stopping officers from charging people with 6.5, they should be doing 6.5, but some people instead do 6.10 hence the extra information

TLDR: The goal is to make it clear obstructing a cop should be handled as 6.5 not 6.10

 

[northnortheast]

They both carry almost identical sentencing guidelines, and as with almost all laws it is up to the officer's discretion on how they want to handle it, so I do not see the huge issue with keeping them as is here.

It makes it easier for some people to understand, as currently 6.5 handles obstruction of a LEO, and is the more serious crime (Based on PLPD common practice), however some people just see it as the failure to comply law when in reality it is both. However, since people see it as failure to comply they go with 6.10 instead since they think thats the obstruction law for the PLPD.

If someone obstructs an LEO, even if they haven't been given a warning, they are still liable to 6.10 or 6.5, but this is up to the officer's discretion (usually based upon if they've been given ample warning). Of course if they continue they could garner a 6.5 charge instead, but given the near identical sentencing guidelines once again, not an issue at all.

I don't see need for clarification when this hasn't been brought up as an issue by anyone as far as I have seen. As I see it, all this would do would complicate the two laws more by adding extra exemptions, and just be shuffling definitions around.

 

[Eric Jonson]

PLPD are still emergency services. We handle emergencies just like the other departments. I dont see the point in this. I've never seen anyone have an issue with it besides you tbh. The sentences for both issues are almost identical the difference being the max fine is a thousand dollar difference. Not really a big deal.

 

[MalekIsWeird]

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

What law do you wish to change/add: 6.10 - Obstruction of Emergency Services

Old: Any person who obstructs a member of the emergency services in their duties commits an offence.
New: Any person who obstructs a member of the emergency services with the exception of obstructing the Paralake Police Department (Refer to law 6.5 in cases with the Paralake Police Department) in their duties commits an offence.

Why should this change/addition be made: It makes it easier for some people to understand, as currently 6.5 handles obstruction of a LEO, and is the more serious crime (Based on PLPD common practice), however some people just see it as the failure to comply law when in reality it is both. However, since people see it as failure to comply they go with 6.10 instead since they think thats the obstruction law for the PLPD.

6.5 - 'Any person who fails to comply with the legal orders of a Law enforcement officer such as refusing to provide ID when detained or obstructs a Law enforcement officer executing their duties commits an offence.'

Law 6.10 is way more broad and general than 6.5. 6.5 is explicitly speaking of "lawful orders," and the only mention of obstruction as you mentioned below is regarding warrants.

If a person starts car blocking cops whilst out of voice range or being mischievous to get in their way that makes 6.10 a necessity because 6.5 doesn't concern them when they haven't been given lawful orders.

The lack of knowledge to distinguish both laws is purely rooted from the fact players are at an influx of joining the server so it's not the ONLY law they're new to. It took me over a year to truly grasp the laws ever since I first joined so I don't personally expect the common patrol pistol sweater cop to know every law especially considering not only are they new but they don't receive formal training to become a cop from the start which sets them back in their law knowledge as well as all the other crucial police-related necessary assets they will require on duty, setting the bar way lower than the arbitrary expectation which is implied regarding law knowledge present in the suggestion you're making. If anything this will help them do their job easier and if they mistakenly charge you with the wrong thing that's why an IA system exists.

What is the aim of this change/addition: Makes the law easier for people to understand

Additional Information: N/A

If anything this aim contradicts the point of the suggestion. Sweater cops are only gonna have a harder time doing their job and people will find the loophole of not being ordered to not obstruct as a way to bully them instead of leaving it as it is then teaching the cops the difference as well as utilizing the IA system to punish any one who charges you wrongfully due to any incompetence in law knowledge.