Ban Request - Luke Person (killing over ticket)

[Garrett Woodfield]

Your Steam/In-game Name: Alex Zaigar / xAl3xTh3Sn0wM4n
His/Her Steam/In-game Name: Luke Person / Luke
His/Her SteamID: Idk.
Reason: Broke quite a few rules, putting his life at risk, realistic playing, realistic actions, and causing problems, he shot me over a 200$ ticket, and he lied in admin sit saying i was gonna arrest him, even though it was a ticket. But if i was gonna arrest him, it would be a maximum of 3 years, which i dont see a reason to arrest him..
Evidence:

Video:

Demo: https://mega.co.nz/#!vUgWnKTa!qvAdZmsXQhJ9mEKSw1cq1Zv7xqZciOpGDNGN-GaV9y0

Tick: just around 56000

 

[blackdown]

+ Support, he had no reason to kill you, especially over a ticket. On top of that, he also killed you directly outside of the police department, also against the rules.

 

[DocBerry]

+Support - was there, saw the entire thing. had no reason to kill you. was also killed by Matt while I surrendered during a Fear RP . No demo because I turn off recording after 2 hours of no action.

 

[Murtsley]

+Support

+ He wrote the laws, found a loophole with the parking space thing, and it doesn't fall into law 9.0 Section, technically breaking 2.3
+ Shot him for no apparent reason - 3.3
+ Openly knows of the loophole, and still hasn't reported it (1:07 in the video...)

 

[Hulapyk (Sir Binary)]

I was there as well as the Lt. at that time, when he shot the first person, I did /act surrender and crouched. He turned around to me, and gunned me down without a word.

 

[M]

Good report, however we should put all of this evidence into the one that is already up as he has broken a lot more rules.

+S

 

[Tut Greco]

Luke broke

3.3 , 2.1 and killing officers over a ticket (can't find the number xD)

It's not realistic to kill an officer over having a ticket in his hands writing it for someone, or telling the person he will receive a ticket... That's why I stated 3.3 and 2.1

 

[Andoyan]

+Support. No reason to kill over a ticket none would have done that irl if they dont have serious problems lol. But also 3.4 he killed you infront of the PD which would cause many officers to run out and shoot him because he is armed and just killed an officer

 

[Death Howl]

+Support he was attempting to stop you from ticketing him by stating the fact that nothing is needed to park there which is correct but then he disrespected you so you had a right to give him a fine.

Get a demo of him lying to a admin that is a serious offense.

 

[Luke]

The only rule here that I feel I need to justify my actions for is rule 3.4, so:

3.4 Putting your Life at Risk - Players must at all times act realistically, meaning that any actions taken that may put a player’s In-Character life, freedom from imprisonment and/or general wellbeing at risk must be done so in a realistic fashion

Using a firearm in the method that I demonstrated is a realistic way to kill someone.

for realistically good/beneficial reasons and in such a way that can be justified as reasonable.

I had reason to believe that I would spend at least 4 years in prison if I did not take extreme action; I will explain my respective reasoning for this below:

1. The LEO seemingly charged me with a violation of a traffic law and an anti-social law; I have personally witnessed people imprisoned for such offences by LEOs who are seemingly unable to properly and effectively uphold the law and complete their duties. Next, I will explain why I believe the LEO that I had killed could also be described as seemingly unable to properly and effectively uphold the law and complete their duties:

1a. The LEO had seemingly charged me with a traffic offence that I did not commit; there is no law that prevents me from parking where I had parked, and there is a law that does allow me to park there.

1b. The LEO had seemingly charged me with anti-social behaviour; I did not verbally abuse this officer DIRECTLY (the word 'directly' is quoted from the respective law) - I instead stated that if the LEO were attempt to ask/demand money from me in a 'mugging' context, that he could "go fuck himself". As the LEO had not implied that he would attempt to mug me, and presuming that he did not intend to mug me, this was not a direct demonstration of verbal abuse.

1c. The LEO had arrived on the scene with 1 other LEO in response to a shooting resulting in the death of the member of the public; the LEO, after looking at the corpse proceeds to seemingly disregard the murder and look-into a traffic violation involving potential witnesses and suspects of that murder; this demonstrates that the LEO is incapable of effectively prioritising - in my experienced opinion, it is unwise to not treat potential suspects of an aggravated murder with extreme caution, not properly question potential witnesses, and to treat a inconsequential parking violation with a higher priority than a murder.

1d. I only pulled my weapon as a direct response to a sudden and unexpected movement from the LEO; when the LEO had 'equipped' the ticketing 'tool', I had presumed that they were using their handcuffs - the animation is very similar; the LEO had also aimed the ticket at me, implying that it was not a traffic ticket, as that is typically aimed at vehicles. Below, I will justify why I was at an increased state of alert and hence more inclined to pull my weapon:

2a. As I explained within 1a through to 1c, I did not trust the LEO to effectively perform their duties and readied myself for them to continue to perform erratically and unexpected; as they were an armed LEO, I was ready to respond to an illegal use of their firearm or other such potentially dangerous tools.

2b. The reason I was at the scene was to murder another member of the public and so was already at a heightened state of readiness to use my firearm; this member of the public had already tried to kill me once and I believe that they would try to kill me again and would not be safe until they were either dead and/or effectively appeased; I specifically believe that I was not safe as they knew of my place of work.

A person who was seemingly the friend of the person who I was looking for, had just been shot and killed by a number of armed members of the public - this is when the LEOs arrived and so, as a result of the unexpected shooting, I was at an even more heightened state of alert and more willing/ready to use my firearm.

2c. The vehicle that had seemingly belonged to the man, who I was looking to kill, was parked at the Police Department and so it had seemed likely that this man was in the area at the time. While speaking with the LEO, I was fully aware that this man was likely to be nearby and likely to be armed; it was apparent to me that while speaking to the LEO that I might seem to be distracted and open to an attack; because of this, I was also aware that if I was to be taken into custody for any reason that I would likely be unable to defend myself as a result of being handcuffed and/or disarmed.

2ci. My concern about being attacked was later validated as I had been shot by the man, that I was looking to kill, immediately after shooting the LEO who I had later killed.

3. If I were to be arrested, I would also be likely to be searched; this would also likely lead to being charged with the illegal use of a firearm, which is a somewhat serious offence; as a result, this would lead to an increased prison sentence.

Risks are deemed to be unreasonable when it can’t be appropriately and effectively justified; for example, if a player was to rob the bank and fail, leading to their death, that player would be expected to demonstrate to an administrator that they had a realistic and reasonable plan and/or mind-set to succeed.

This statement, with reference specifically to the example provided, implies that justification can be made in the form of the action leading to a successful resolution - The man who I was looking to kill had effectively been killed; the government officials who visually witnessed me commit the respective crimes had all been effectively killed; I effectively escaped the area of the crime; I was never killed; I was never arrested; an arrest warrant was never issued for my name.

This rule is specifically relevant to the violation of any In-Character law, meaning that murders, thefts, etc, are all expected to be conducted realistically; for example, if a player kills another player, which results in the former’s death and/or imprisonment, it will mean that the player has failed and unless they can effectively and appropriately demonstrate/prove that they had a realistic and reasonable plan to succeed, an appropriate punishment will be enacted.

This statement, with its respective closing sentence, implies that a punishment will be enacted if a player fails to effectively justify a failed criminal action; this inherently implies that a punishment will not be enacted if the crime was successful, hence meaning that it would not be against this particular rule.

A common example would be for a player to murder a Police Officer in order to avoid receiving a traffic ticket; this would likely result in the enactment of an administrative punishment because this specific example is deemed to be inappropriate - this is because the risk (death/life-imprisonment) involved with the murder of a Police Officer is grossly disproportionate to the benefit of avoiding a traffic ticket, typically.

As I have explained above, I do not believe that I would only receive a traffic ticket as a result of my actions.

To close, my actions in question lead to the ensuring that I would not spend time in jail and the death of a person who would wrongfully attempt to limit my freedom, cause financial harm to me, and abuse their power.

 

[Niko]

In response to Luke:
At no point did you show any signs of disabilities, meaning that your car was not legally parked in that very spot, which is reserved for disabled people only. If you do/did, however, have an IC disability, you failed to role-play it out properly, by displaying it in any form of /me. This, along with verbal abuse, mainly only leads to a ticket if you ask most players on the server. And as you mentioned, it wasn't exactly a verbal abuse, which means you only illegally parked.
You also mention that "there is no law that prevents me from parking where I had parked". However, every person with common sense will realise that the exact spot you parked on, is a handicap spot. While it may not be directly stated in a law (as far as I remember, since I'm not currently on the server), everyone will know that it's an illegal parking, unless you can prove you have a disability. This can be done either by handing the officer some sort of document with the information, or by displaying an actual disability. However, as you did neither, the officer would have to ticket you for your parking - Which happens all the time. Whenever a person parks in a handicap spot, they receive a ticket, as long as they show no signs of disabilities, which you did not.

Now, you also did pull out your weapon in a very public area, and proceeded to gun down an officer. This is the most unrealistic thing I've ever seen, that definitely put your life in danger. Not even 10 feet away is a police station, where not only officers, but also SWAT would hear gunfire. If even one of those reacted, chances are you'd be imprisoned for 10 years, or dead. Compared to 4-6 years in prison, or just a ticket (as you would initially have received), which sounds worse?

I honestly do not believe you have justified your actions in any way possible, and therefore I +support this request.

 

[M]

Despite the justification, I still rebuke Luke's actions.

It all comes down to the way that he has weighed this up. Having gunned down the officer could have resulted in a much more immediate adverse effect given your proximity to the police department; even if you did have an escape plan, DNA evidence would have been present and so the traffic was a much more viable option in terms of valuing your life.

Conversely, the traffic offense was not specifically stated as a law and so Luke is correct on that matter; however the more reasonable solution to the issue would to be resolve it through a coherent discussion with the Lieutenant.

If you were at a 'heightened state of readiness' to use your firearm against the other person - of whom you stated shot you immediately after you killed the officer - it suggests that you would have still been found guilty of the concealment and use of a firearm: a charge which you specifically stated you were trying to avoid in your justification.

EDIT

Additionally, Luke states that another LEO was on the scene. This means that he would have instantly responded to the Life Alert as he would not have been able to leave the area to a significant extent during the short period of time.

 

[Garrett Woodfield]

Response to luke...

That was alot to read i might of missed some parts
But you were NEVER going to get arrested. You broke 3.4 by risking your life over a traffic offence or a maximum of 2-3 years jail time. Which you were never gonna get. You should not kill over a tickey unless wanted... Thats not realistic at all.. You should receive either a warning or ban in my opinion.

 

[MoronPipllyd]

Accepted

The user in question will receive a 3 day ban for breaking Rule 3.4 by risking his life and freedom by murdering a police officer to avoid a $100-$1000 misdemeanor ticket