Ian Dalum

[M]

Your Steam/In-game Name: Chris Andrews
His/Her Steam/In-game Name: unknown/Ian Dalum
His/Her SteamID: unknown
Why Should This Player Be Punished:

• Violating rule 2.1/3.4 - The player walked into an active shootout without a weapon, running a serious risk of being shot and potentially killed at no benefit to himself.

Evidence (Demo Required):

 

[lamby]

I did not see you, i only saw dead cops on the floor. I did not even know where these shots came from as i just got upstairs and immediately looked to the left and right. I did not see you the first time. And i complied too.

 

[Death Howl]

I did not see you, i only saw dead cops on the floor. I did not even know where these shots came from as i just got upstairs and immediately looked to the left and right. I did not see you the first time. And i complied too.

That is not the point you do not ignore gunshots no matter where they are. Plus I think the dead bodies would be a Dead Giveaway(Bad Pun). You put yourself at risk, Distrupted rp and almost cost Chris his life so tell me why were you in the building clearly seeing signs of a firefight.

 

[MattIs]

I'm not too sure on this one - He may just be curious to what's going on and thinking that the police were inside so he was safe.
He didn't shoot you though - your life is constantly put at risk just by playing and yes it was stupid for him to run in but it could of been a trojan horse plot for all you know.

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

Most of the players in Perp do that tbf. They scavenge the place to see if there are any guns etc they could pick up. I am not saying that it isn't 3.4. He might even have been a distraction for his friends to kill you when you weren't paying attention. To have a nice and clear perspective of the situation it would be better if @Envionic posted his demo for us to see his point of view.

Spoiler

But I am no staff so do whatever you want.

 

[M]

i just got upstairs

Can you provide a demo please? If you just entered the building, it would only make sense within the rules to leave when you heard gunfire.
[DOUBLEPOST=1458150546,1458149249][/DOUBLEPOST]

dead cops on the floor.

Seeing dead cops on the floor and continuing to enter an area with audible gunfire whilst unarmed and uncertain of what is going on is not wise; curiosity killed the cat, and the cat would have probably broken rule 3.4.

I did not even know where these shots came from

Doesn't particularly matter, you should have left the building/not entered it upon hearing the gunshots. Your demo will nicely demonstrate what you knew/didn't know.

Maybe my friends were shooting?

Yeah, but you didn't know that and you walked in unarmed and alone. Contacting your friends before risking your life would be the strongest option by far.

could of been a trojan horse plot for all you know.

Looks like it was, and if it was the case what does it matter? Someone in there has just shot at people, @Kitty was announcing that I was in there and presumably people were on the stairwell with guns playing defensively; he risks his life by being the Trojan horse and I could have quite easily mistaken him for someone who wants to kill me and shot him - maybe even killed him.

Most of the players in Perp do that tbf. They scavenge the place to see if there are any guns etc they could pick up. I am not saying that it isn't 3.4.

You're right in saying that it's not, not against rule 3.4, but what you're missing is that it is not relevant. If it is against the rules, it is against the rules, irrespective of what others do. I've personally seen several people lately walking into areas of gunfire (and subsequently killed/not), for instance when @Murtsley recently dealt with someone at Slums for me with a verbal warning due to their honesty and clean record.

He might even have been a distraction for his friends to kill you when you weren't paying attention.

As I've said, being the 'distraction' is also a risk that doesn't directly benefit him if he is fatally injured.

If his friends were there why would he leave?

As aforementioned, he wasn't certain of whether it was his friends or not:

Maybe my friends were shooting?

On a final note, even if it was his friends shooting, it implies that they are in danger and him joining them without means of defending himself is still a large risk to his life.

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

As aforementioned, he wasn't certain of whether it was his friends or not:

I never talked about the gunfire. I talked about his friends being in the place and they had guns so he felt safe. He then entered the building to probably see if anyone was alive so his friends would be sure that they are safe.

As I've said, being the 'distraction' is also a risk that doesn't directly benefit him if he is fatally injured.

Under law 11.11 you cannot shoot an unarmed suspect. In heated situations then sure you might accidentally pull the trigger but at that moment you had a small break from all the people shooting at you and you shooting at them. Ian did not do anything aggressive towards you to make sure that he wouldn't be mistaken as he had a gun. Then george came and tried to shoot you down and if he did or he was good at shooting then they would have succeeded.

You're right in saying that it's not against rule 3.4

Also I am not saying that it IS NOT against 3.4. It is and going in a crime scene when there is a shootout you risk your life to the maximum and destroy the LEOs trigger happiness as they die because of the people that just won't leave the area. Why? Because they want free guns. It may not be related at all though.

 

[M]

I never talked about the gunfire. I talked about his friends being in the place and they had guns so he felt safe.

The gunfire is relatively significant. His friends might just be in the wrong place and it could result in his death; he didn't need to be in there right at that moment, and so he was risking his life.

He walks into the room that they say the assailant is in, I don't see any way of him knowing that it is a police officer at the time. He sees the bodies, runs around amateurishly rather than leaving, and all factors considered - runs a real risk of being killed at no benefit to himself.

Under law 11.11 you cannot shoot an unarmed suspect.

Yes, but nobody can rely on that - not every officer is going to follow the law and will slip up when they're being cornered and shot at. Doing something which so greatly influences the chance of a slip up is only a risk to your life, again, at no benefit to yourself.

Ian did not do anything aggressive towards you to make sure that he wouldn't be mistaken as he had a gun.

People with guns will do things like say 'hello', but I don't take that as gospel for being no threat until I've seen whether they have a weapon or not. This can't be used as an argument, as he can't be sure it will not result in him being shot.

they would have succeeded.

It doesn't matter whether you succeed or not. Lots of people succeed in things they plan to do, but it doesn't automatically mean that rule 3.4 hasn't been violated; that's simply not what it says.

Also I am not saying that it IS NOT against 3.4. It is and going in a crime scene when there is a shootout you risk your life to the maximum and destroy the LEOs trigger happiness as they die because of the people that just won't leave the area. Why? Because they want free guns. It may not be related at all though.

I mistyped what I was intending to put, it has been fixed.

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

The gunfire is relatively significant. His friends might just be in the wrong place and it could result in his death; he didn't need to be in there right at that moment, and so he was risking his life.

As stated above, with his demo, we can see if he communicated in a way for him to know what was going on and if he knew how dangerous it was. Also his friends were all over at the stairs and he obviously didn't see any officers until he ran to the apartment you were in.

I don't see any way of him knowing that it is a police officer at the time.

Angelina shouted that you were in her apartment and by yelling "He is..." Ian knew that there might be 1 officer in there dead or alive. He went to check so he had less chances to get shot as the LEO would have see that he was unarmed OR you would have shot him once leading to him being injured and bleed but as his friends had bandages (obviously) he would have been ok. Now you headshoting him would be unlikely but possible. If you shot at him he could have ran to cover behind the door/wall.

It doesn't matter whether you succeed or not. Lots of people succeed in things they plan to do, but it doesn't automatically mean that rule 3.4 hasn't been violated; that's simply not what it says.

It actually matters. Not as an automatic excuse for 3.4 but it does matter.

Spoiler

Are you even sure that he didn't have a concealed weapon on him? He might have went in there for you to see him unarmed and when you were looking away he could have killed you easily.

 

[John Daymon]

In my eyes the User violated 3.4, he simply walked into an active shootout without a weapon as explained by Chris and as we can see in the video, obviously the User may have not had any intentions to kill any officers or anything in that manner however please understand that if you hear shots in real life you would try to flee till you don't hear them anymore, thus it should be done in-game aswell

 

[M]

didn't see any officers until he ran to the apartment you were in.

@Kitty was clearly stating that there was a hostile inside the room. He also saw the bodies and instead of moving back out, he decided to frivolously run around; this action only endangers himself.

Ian knew that there might be 1 officer in there dead or alive. He went to check so he had less chances to get shot as the LEO would have see that he was unarmed

Please, make your mind up: one remark demands the provisioning of the demo, the next assumes you knew his every intention.

Even if this was the case, he ran a risk of being shot at no benefit to himself - his friends are the ones with guns and the ones shooting at the police officer. If the police officer is cornered (as I was), they're more than likely going to shoot at anyone who comes in at that point until they have confirmation that officers are ready to support him.

OR you would have shot him once leading to him being injured and bleed but as his friends had bandages (obviously) he would have been ok.

Not necessarily once, not necessarily needing to be more than once. It could have been a fatal shot, or still led to his death. How do you know that his friends had bandages, and more importantly, how would he know that for sure when making the ballsy decision?

It actually matters. Not as an automatic excuse for 3.4 but it does matter.

Read the rule. It refers to actions that pose a threat to life/freedom from imprisonment. Of course the massive crowd of people with firearms is going to win against the lone cop with the beretta, but what has the unarmed man succeeded in doing rather than risking his life, and not causing much of a distraction at all (as I was still mainly able to focus on the point of entry)?

Are you even sure that he didn't have a concealed weapon on him? He might have went in there for you to see him unarmed and when you were looking away he could have killed you easily.

It doesn't matter in the slightest. If he had a weapon on him, when running into a firefight he should be careful and have it readied; if he had a gun on him and he didn't chose to use it there is only a further lack of aforethought demonstrated.

 

[lamby]

Just never mind, i cant get the demo.

 

[jay_]

He broke rules So on, so on. Understandingly you put a Ar on him. But I just want to ask one thing, Could you please take it down? I'm sure the cop you is like "He Broke Rules He must be punished". But I'm sure the Civilian you deep down in the kindness of your heart is like "I know he broke rules but I'll let it slide". Ian isn't the best role player without a doubt, But He's a funny guy who will really help your day if you're down. Without him My Experience on perp wouldn't be as fun. He might not be in your life perp wise, But you never know; The future is home to many things. You let me off with a sorry in an admin situation And I'm for ever great-full for that. But can you let Ian off? I'm pretty sure if the Ar got accepted it would be a Permanent Ban. I've recently annoyed him and I feel really bad about it. If he hears I got the Ar down I hope it will show I'm sorry.

He's Not too bad


Please do the "Right" Thing.

 

[Loejseren]

Walking onto the crime scene without knowing what's going on, is basically just risking a jail sentence or a bullet to the head. Therefor Envionic is going to be warned for breaking 3.4.

Accepted