Punishment Type: Ban
Appeal Type: Dispute
Which staff member issued the punishment?: Sindarin - SamSN was also involved in the decision
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: 1 Week
Your Steam Name: Sorle
Your Roleplay Name: Emiliano Ross
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:0:51990442
Why were you banned/blacklisted?: 2.5 - User killed a player and two others in collateral with a grenade at city hall, he had thrown this grenade as the player was making a 911 call for him holding the grenade. He had pulled out the grenade due to verbal insults as a 'deterrent'.
Why should this appeal be considered?: The claim of it being a "deterrent" was false - I misspoke due to rushing my initial response and maintained that it wasn't being used as a deterrent throughout the rest of the report. Was kinda just pulled out for the sake of having it ready for my plans of attempting to mug with it - in that process I decided to mess about with a funny feature I found - was not taken to kindly and I was clearly trying to have a bit of fun which was met with a 911 call, which led to the escalation of the situation.
The claim is that killing the person is not a valid escalation - this person attempted to call the police on me for possessing a grenade. This is a felony charge which carries confiscation as a possibility - as I had two grenades this could lead to great monetary loss on my part and is a valid reason to kill. Not only that, but the response by police to call of a grenade would inherently endanger my life as they would arrive with guns drawn, ready to shoot anyone seen with explosives. The 911 caller knew this and went ahead with it. This has always been a very valid response to "snitching" for serious crime and I see no reason why it wouldn't be now.
The claim made by Sindarin is that the crime itself only carries a maximum sentence of 3 years and $3000 fine, this however ignores the entire principle:
The collateral was simply natural selection at a point - a good couple of seconds before throwing I said twice to move away, and I also made genuine effort to throw it to the side, out of range of everyone but the target. One of the people was literally bearhugging me and running towards the grenade as I threw it so I see no way I could be blamed for that, and the other simply just didn't move after I made my intentions clear; however there was still a very decent attempt to avoid catching them in the blast radius, I didn't see a way they would've been hit but they were somehow.
The grenade is thrown far away from anyone else in the vicinity but my intended target & one person walked directly towards it, while another (who from my view was very far out of what the radius should be) did not move at all after being given adequate warning to move.
Additional Information: Think my words were entirely misconstrued throughout the whole situation - can provide as many clips of the actual discussion as I have to anyone handling it to show this.
Appeal Type: Dispute
Which staff member issued the punishment?: Sindarin - SamSN was also involved in the decision
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: 1 Week
Your Steam Name: Sorle
Your Roleplay Name: Emiliano Ross
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:0:51990442
Why were you banned/blacklisted?: 2.5 - User killed a player and two others in collateral with a grenade at city hall, he had thrown this grenade as the player was making a 911 call for him holding the grenade. He had pulled out the grenade due to verbal insults as a 'deterrent'.
Why should this appeal be considered?: The claim of it being a "deterrent" was false - I misspoke due to rushing my initial response and maintained that it wasn't being used as a deterrent throughout the rest of the report. Was kinda just pulled out for the sake of having it ready for my plans of attempting to mug with it - in that process I decided to mess about with a funny feature I found - was not taken to kindly and I was clearly trying to have a bit of fun which was met with a 911 call, which led to the escalation of the situation.
The claim is that killing the person is not a valid escalation - this person attempted to call the police on me for possessing a grenade. This is a felony charge which carries confiscation as a possibility - as I had two grenades this could lead to great monetary loss on my part and is a valid reason to kill. Not only that, but the response by police to call of a grenade would inherently endanger my life as they would arrive with guns drawn, ready to shoot anyone seen with explosives. The 911 caller knew this and went ahead with it. This has always been a very valid response to "snitching" for serious crime and I see no reason why it wouldn't be now.
The claim made by Sindarin is that the crime itself only carries a maximum sentence of 3 years and $3000 fine, this however ignores the entire principle:
- Sindarin attempted to compare it to reporting someone for 10.1 - which is a misdemeanour charge while possession of explosives is a felony.
- When reporting someone for 10.1, you are not actively attempting to have difficult to obtain items taken from their possession - such as in the case of possession of explosives, where you are entirely banking on the idea that these wholly illegal items will be confiscated & I will suffer great financial loss.
- The response to a 10.1 call is never going to be weapons drawn with intent to shoot - explosives calls immediately put my life, as the perpetrator, at much greater risk.
The collateral was simply natural selection at a point - a good couple of seconds before throwing I said twice to move away, and I also made genuine effort to throw it to the side, out of range of everyone but the target. One of the people was literally bearhugging me and running towards the grenade as I threw it so I see no way I could be blamed for that, and the other simply just didn't move after I made my intentions clear; however there was still a very decent attempt to avoid catching them in the blast radius, I didn't see a way they would've been hit but they were somehow.
The grenade is thrown far away from anyone else in the vicinity but my intended target & one person walked directly towards it, while another (who from my view was very far out of what the radius should be) did not move at all after being given adequate warning to move.
Additional Information: Think my words were entirely misconstrued throughout the whole situation - can provide as many clips of the actual discussion as I have to anyone handling it to show this.
Last edited:
