Double standards - Confiscating weapons. 3.18 edit.

[Husky]

What rule do you wish to Edit/Add: 3.18 Storages and Trunks

Your version of the rule: While their life is in immediate danger a player must not use their storage boxes/trunks to avoid losing valuable items that the player is currently holding on their person, this is also including the confiscation of firearms or illegal items whilst on duty as an LEO. This includes detaching weapon attachments with the intention of avoiding their loss.

Why do you believe this rule should be Added/Edited: Currently if an Officer confiscates a firearm it would lead to a simple IA and a slap on the wrist, however if a civilian did this it would lead to a ban and in some cases long term depending on their record of rule breaks. The double standards of current within the PD compared to that of civilians is silly, although covered by IA I believe negatively effecting a player in such a way should be punishable via the rules and not just "3.4".

 

[Lelios1]

@Mage that's because a lot of times either the law broken was too minor to justify a warning or it was a policy break which we cannot really enforce as it's not plainly covered via laws or rules. After that other post about the same issue where it was concluded with a reply by Simon, I have seen a lot of situations where staff members punish the officer with a warning or ban and then suggest that an IA complaint is made so it gets handled via there as well.

 

[ALOO89]

you confiscated guns when it not save and you did that to me lot of time at the end you die

 

[Husky]

Wrong, happened 2 nights ago and Ayjay simply stated “times have changed, we deal with things differently make an IA” I argued it was against the law therefore it breaks a server rule but he ensured me it’s an IA thing. Stupid imo

 

[Super_]

Being as I'm a Staff Member and also a member of Professional Standards in the PD, I'll give my personal thoughts regarding the suggestion and then move on to present both sides of the argument regarding this issue of guns being confiscated.

Firstly, I personally don't believe this needs to be added under Rule 3.18 as like @A1L stated, Law 4.6 already covers that, and if an officer does confiscate mid-shootout when their life is potentially in danger/area not clear, then they can be reported for Rule 4.1 and punished by staff members. And while many users are under the impression that all staff members say "make an IA complaint", this is not entirely true as me and a few others have dealt with sits regarding this. Even that once incident at Bank where an officer confiscated @Husky 's gun while being sniped at from the Office roof was dealt with by me and the gun was refunded as an example.

Now, onto the beefy part of the issue: the "make an IA complaint".

As @Lelios has pointed out, due to how this specific law violation by an officer can be considered, in my opinion and from experience, a minor rule violation where nine times out of ten, the issue is resolved via a verbal warning (for incidents where it's dead obvious the officer has unlawfully confiscated a firearm). But when it can't be proven in the admin sit/report, then that's when the "make an IA complaint" typically comes into play.

Just for clarification before proceeding, like @Hendricks said: staff have been informed to try and resolve any incidents relating to Rule 4.1 in the admin sit instead of simply saying "make an IA complaint". If a staff member does inform you to make an IA complaint without doing any form of investigation, then it would be best to make a staff complaint on the staff member failing to perform their duties.

As @Ayjay has stated on a number of occasions, Internal Affairs was created in order to deal with police misconduct and to have a separate punishment system for officers that can impact their progress in the PD, such as reprimands and written warnings that prevent them from applying for new roles for a specific number of days/weeks/months as well as more severe punishments such as demotion or being dishonorable discharged if proven guilty of misconduct - which some may argue losing progression in the PD could be a more severe punishment rather than receiving a server warning/ban that doesn't impact their progress. (Unless you want to take the Community Bans and Warnings policy into consideration.)

Also as well, I'd like to direct your attention towards Section 4d of the PLPD Handbook which gives information regarding the confiscation of illegal items:

As we can see from this subsection, confiscation should generally only take place when a supervisor has given permission to, although this can be easily ignored if the supervisor "isn't available" but the more important aspect of 4d would be the final point that states how confiscation should occur within an area that can take place without disturbance and of course, with this whole issue of guns being confiscated, this is also against PLPD policies.

So which then brings the issue into more clear light: the issue with confiscating weapons is both a law and a policy violation which then, when taking everything else that I've stated into consideration, should these types of issues be resolved via Internal Affairs or should this issue be resolved exclusively with server warnings/bans? The way I'll personally proceed about this is to try and resolve the situation in the report for convenience sake but if you want greater punishments to be issued towards the officer, then Internal Affairs might be the best way for the officer to receive disciplinary action.

 

[Husky]

Gonna copy and paste this as on phone:


Wrong, happened 2 nights ago and Ayjay simply stated “times have changed, we deal with things differently make an IA” I argued it was against the law therefore it breaks a server rule but he ensured me it’s an IA thing. Stupid imo

For it to be properly enforced making it an actual server rule would be fine and it being a small edit would be for the best, a lot easier than changing the way IA works. Ayjay is very against the 4.1 enforcement unless it’s something ridiculous but double standards are a must in this community where punishments are lengthy.

 

[Lelios1]

IA or Staff

Personally, I don't feel like how a lot of reports end up with the generic response: Make an IA complaint Make an IA complain Make an IA complai Make an IA compla Make an IA compl Make an IA comp Make an IA com Make an IA co Make an IA c Make an IA Make an I Make an Make a Make Mak Ma M I feel...

perpheads.com

 

[Slayerduck]

Cops usually don't bag it for their own benefit, you get nothing from it. Flanks for guns itself would also be invalid. I didn't read all of this topic answers cuz tldr; but i can tell you one thing: If i made an AR on every mingegrab i see by civs as a LEO i could have my own AR section and 80% of the server would be gone. During shootouts i sit camping and 3 out of 4 of my kills are mingegrabbers.

 

[Husky]

you filthy bush sniper smh

 

[ErmakDimon]

The way I see it IA should deal with IC matters while staff should deal with OOC matters

 

[Husky]

Agreed, we should be enforcing server rules within sits and taking the necessary OOC actions and then letting IC punishment take place via IA. No safe space for cops with IA.

 

[ErmakDimon]

@Husky I mean it's sort of pointless having both 4.1 and ia, one of them should be removed. Cause I feel like punishment from both staff and ia on the same situation feels a bit excessive

 

[ErmakDimon]

@Husky I think it should be either ic punishment or ooc punishment, but not both

 

[Husky]

@ErmakDimon And minge grabbing my rifles that cost well over 25k and receiving IC punishment yet me gunning you down and you losing 5 minutes to get me banned for a month isn't excessive... hmm. Double standards, I'm finna start a Paralake court house and start sentencing RDM'rs to 70 years in jail so they can avoid lengthy bans!

 

[Husky]

@ErmakDimon Criminals receive both so I don't see the difference here Ermak.

 

[ErmakDimon]

True tbh, our main concern when confiscating is not money but preventing mingegrabbers. What I've seen more recently is officers waiting for like 5 minutes after the situation ended to confiscate guns because of possible flankers which I feel is excessive as well. If there's no shots being fired anymore confiscating should be just fine

 

[ErmakDimon]

@Husky but the criminal side doesn't have what pd has, which is deferred progression. Imagine you're about to get cpl/sgt/etc but you get a reprimand/warning for confiscating guns which pushes your progression AT LEAST a month back AND you get a warning/ban ooc

 

[ErmakDimon]

Add to that the time it takes for an ia to be dealt with and you're looking at 2 months of progress wasted AND a ban/warning

 

[Husky]

@ErmakDimon I've kicked 5 people from the top org within the server for breaking -server- rules, if you have the right people in right places you can ensure RP is smoother and has larger punishments. Ask @Jamal, my entire Org were warned of the consequences of failing to follow server rules, is he back in the org? Nope. Will he be in the near future? Nope.

Org leaders are to set standards: https://gyazo.com/1ab61581f6e214902158419ebe461a9b and thats what I am attempting to do. The voiding of a promotion within the PD is annoying, trust me I have been pushing for TFU since being back and luckily my 1mo ban limit ends in about 6 hours (yay) but I'd much rather have that than been banned in itself for a month.

 

[ErmakDimon]

If you compare that to criminal, you get ban/warning and lose 10 minutes of your time and maybe a day's profit. Seems like the double standards are the other way around

 

[Super_]

Or as an alternative solution, maybe introduce a mechanic where normals officers are unable to confiscate guns unless there is no Senior Officer+ on similarly to how only SGT+ can confiscate drugs. Being as its around 75% of these incidents seem to be with regular officrs