Suggestion Topic: 2.5 Excessive Negativity Suggestion Description: Justice for Sofia kenndey 2.5 rule is completely wrong I’m with @Taylor he shouldn’t get banned for 2.5 just because he killed someone holding a weapon how can anyone knows what the other guy attention is and that person talking to him telling him stop changing the radio whatever he is talking to him and he pull his gun out or he was holding weapon already it doesn’t matter didn’t aim at him or just holding gun in hand he is allowed to kill him that is simply and realistic way if your taking to police officer then suddenly pulls out a weapon or you holding a weapon already in hand of course the police will shoot at you or kill you and This literally is him threatening police officer life
Why should this be added?:
- this should be changed
What negatives could this have?:
- negative thing about is we are human of course if we feel threatened we react like that people will miss use this and get someone banned they come in front cop holding a weapon if cop reacted boom he got banned
Exactly this is why it is against the rules. It was not clear what his intentions were. The rule says it has to be a direct and explicit threat for this exact reason. If we would allow killing over simply holding a gun, it would become a bloodbath. Furthermore, he was being a nuisance for no reason at all and then kills him after he gets a reaction.
This is a roleplaying server, not a death match lobby.
While there are absolutely contexts in which flashing a gun at somebody in passive stance is a threatening gesture worthy of escalation (and/or killing them), this situation wasn't one of them.
All of this started over a radio that Taylor kept messing with when it was clear this behaviour was unwelcome. Far too many users seem to think it is acceptable to pick fights with random people completely unprompted simply to eventually escalate to killing them. Going up to somebody to annoy them simply to bait enough of a reaction to kill them for is behaviour we absolutely do not condone.
What recourse did the aggrieved player really have here? How was he supposed to get Taylor to stop without opening himself up to being killed? He'd tried telling him to stop and it didn't work, so he tried it with a gun. It is a threatening gesture, sure, but I think it's important that we all understand that he only did it so Taylor would stop and not to escalate the interaction any further. I highly doubt there was ever any intention to actually kill him.
It would be an extremely dangerous precedent to set that anyone can just go up to anybody, annoy them to the point of retaliation, then immediately kill them. It's shit roleplay and opens people up to being killed for absolutely no reason.
