Endangering a peace officer

[cosmo]

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



What law do you wish to change/add:

I believe a new Section 6 law should be added, Endangering/firing upon a peace officer (police officer)

Why should this change/addition be made:
if a suspect fires at an officer but doesn't hit any shots, or endangers them in any way (hostage situation, leading him into a dangerous environment knowingly) the most he can be charged for is 9.3 (or false imprisonment), Threat of physical harm, which only carries a maximum 3 year penalty, I believe that the punishment should be harsher, also it adds more RP for ARDM situations


What is the aim of this change/addition:
Add more RP to ARDM situations, and make endangering an officer knowingly actually illegal


Additional Information:

 

[Scoot]

Well if they attempted to assault them with a deadly weapon, we would just give them half the punishment if they didn't hit them as per law 6.7.

As for hostage situations they would be unlawfully detaining someone (9.4) which carries a maximum of 6 years already, as well as a maximum fine of $5,000

 

[A1L]

Even if the person attempts to shoot at misses, it is still considered 9.2.

 

[Bnjemann]

9.2 Physical Assault with an Offensive Weapon​

Any person, who intentionally or recklessly causes another person to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence that is likely to cause great bodily harm through the use of an offensive weapon as defined in law 7.3, commits an offence.

The definition in this context of "apprehend" refers to instilling fear that immediate unlawful injury shall be applied to another. This legally covers shooting someone, even if you don't hit them with a bullet, simply firing at someone, both with direct intent to endanger their life or through reckless negligence is a 9.2 offense. There is no "attempt of 9.2" in this charge, once the firearm was discharged, it is a full blown 9.2 charge. This would be the same, if I swung a bat or thrusted a knife in someones general direction but it did not make contact, I would be committing 9.2 as-written, no attempted charge or any of that.

Furthermore, Reckless Endangerment also covers this description well for any offense of not firing upon another.

Making a separate law for firing at police is unnecessary when firing at anyone unlawfully is already a crime.

 

[cosmo]

9.2 Physical Assault with an Offensive Weapon​

Any person, who intentionally or recklessly causes another person to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence that is likely to cause great bodily harm through the use of an offensive weapon as defined in law 7.3, commits an offence.

The definition in this context of "apprehend" refers to instilling fear that immediate unlawful injury shall be applied to another. This legally covers shooting someone, even if you don't hit them with a bullet, simply firing at someone, both with direct intent to endanger their life or through reckless negligence is a 9.2 offense. There is no "attempt of 9.2" in this charge, once the firearm was discharged, it is a full blown 9.2 charge. This would be the same, if I swung a bat or thrusted a knife in someones general direction but it did not make contact, I would be committing 9.2 as-written, no attempted charge or any of that.

Furthermore, Reckless Endangerment also covers this description well for any offense of not firing upon another.

Making a separate law for firing at police is unnecessary when firing at anyone unlawfully is already a crime.

Ah okay, I was once told I couldn't book someone for 9.2 due to it not being "a direct hit to me" and instead had to book him for 11.9
My apologies

 

[exrobite]

Reckless endangerment is also a thing

Any person whose actions put another person at serious risk of harm and / or death are guilty of this offence, regardless of if the endangered person is harmed or not, or if they’re willingly participating in these actions.