The new wave of bans for ramming into something

[ErmakDimon]

rant post incoming, anyone that wants to stay positive please don't read.

So it caught my attention that a few people have been banned for ramming into things (as police) to stop armed criminals (!). The ban reasons claim that hitting a car or a wall at 60mph would kill the officers inside. Now I have some problems with this. I have this video from real life here that shows a similar situation to what an officer would've been in.

Now, as you can see, here an officer rams his crown Vic into an armed suspect, hitting a brick wall (just like the one in subs park) in the end, I'd say that was about 40mph. The suspect is killed, treat neutralized, the officer needs to be taken to hospital but is alive and well, without serious injury. This is the first part of why I think bans shouldn't be handed out for this.

Here's the second part.
On my experience in the PLPD, probably 10 times within the last half of the year I've seen suspects that fled from police hit an object or a car at 70+mph, restart their engine and keep going.
One important situation was when we were chasing a car the driver of which was aiding and abetting, I set up a roadblock at the city bridge. The car comes onto the bridge plowing through my charger, the only thing that stopped him was that the front of the car got in the air and was sitting on the roof of my charger. He then gets out as if nothing happens, pulls out a gun and tries to shoot us, we shoot him down. When I informed a staff member (I think he witnessed it) about it he did nothing.

So why should police officers be punished and civilians stay free? Why should we be punished for something that could be done in real life?



EDIT: what I think could be done to prevent such bans is adjusting the speed at which it knocks you unconscious after a hit and remove the rule whatsoever

 

[glacial]

Check the beginning of the video things like this shouldn't be allowed as he could've crashed into a pole or crashed into the police cruiser and the swat van. Realistically he would've died because of 70-80mph down an off ramp. Bit salty... :/ @Matt

 

[matt]

Check the beginning of the video things like this shouldn't be allowed as he could've crashed into a pole or crashed into the police cruiser and the swat van. Realistically he would've died because of 70-80mph down an off ramp. Bit salty... :/ @Matt

If an armed gun man is killing masses of cops and civilians if an officer has the chance and is capable of not driving into a tiny pole then taking that risk is acceptable, due to the fact i'm a sick driver I knew i was capable of it. Saying that driving into someone is a large risk because you don't know your driving skill is like saying shooting someone is a large risk because you don't know your shooting skill.

//phone

 

[Atomic]

Here I see you are talking about my ban on Callum Byford but you have clearly not read it correctly have you. The ban reason was Callum rammed his car into another car at around 60-70MPH to push the vehicle into Dom Gandhi to kill him. The difference between this video you are showing us and the ban is that in the video the officer is him ramming a suspect into a thin wall that would break easily. But what Callum did was ram his police car directly into the side of a Tesla which at 60 mph would have a really high chance of killing him due to the fact the Tesla is 2.1k kg car and would not move as easily as the thin wall. If Callum was to have just run Dom over at 60 MPH and not pushed the car into him he would have been completely fine with no risk of killing himself as the worst that would happen to the car is a dented bonnet.

 

[Death Howl]

Seriously?

The police are put in many situations and need to take necessary action. The longer a pursuit is or the longer it takes to arrest a suspect the more lives at stake. Long as the officer does not put anymore than his own life and the suspects at risk it can be considered. It is part of a officers duty to risk his life if it means potentially saving someone.

Here is a scenario you are chasing a car going 80 in the business area, consider the speed limit, number of crossings and average number of civilians in the area. Now both the bridge and parker tunnel are the safest areas to attempt any dangerous vehicle stop if you miss that window the suspect will not stop or care to avoid anyone in his way. So what would you do there?

@Glacial_Subzero if the officer or officers are outgunned you need to take down the suspect before someone is hurt or killed. Being outgunned could mean waiting for backup which only gives the suspect more time to get away or kill. Ending the situation if you are outgunned could mean using a vehicle however a situation like this is one of the most dangerous considering realistically windscreens do not stop bullets and you need to make sure nothing else is in the way.


What im saying is that I would rather destroy my car and possibly myself rather than risking fellow officer or civilian lives.

 

[Sneaky]

60-70MPH to push the vehicle into Dom Gandhi to kill him

this risk is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than stopping, getting out and shooting him. if we enforce this we now should also enforce criminals who crash into shit 5 times and restart their engine.

the tesla weighs less than the cruiser which is atlesst 4k, also the cruiser is modern reducing the risk of a fatal crash due airbags and stuff. the tesla absorbs the most force too. #physics

i got a complaint which resulted in a written warning for a similar situation which i still found utter bullshit and entirely hypocritical , i feel that comparing this to a similar situation shows that RAMMING POSES A SMALLER RISK THAN STEPPING OUT AND GET RUN OVER/sniped
http://plays.tv/video/58af4a023ef76667d7/when-you-pull-a-tlya?from=user

 

[Tyla Jai]

I think this is an interesting discussion and I would really quite like some more staff members views on this such as @Youseff, @MrLewis (and anybody else involved) who banned me for going 40mph into a suspect without simply quoting "the purpose and intention of these rules, is to recreate real life to an enjoyable extent."

**Edit: Youseff has chosen not to make any comment on this matter for whatever reason.

 

[joey]

To all the officers arguing that they would rather kill themselves and a couple criminals to save innocents and fellow officers, you should really think of this chain:
Respect life in the following order:
Yourself>Officers>Govs>Innocents>Criminals.

So arguing you should drive 80 MPH into a tesla, to save someone, is dumb.

 

[Illuminathan]

There is different types of ramming a vehicle, one of them (which is the most common used) is to hit them in the back from the side which would make them turn around (1 or 2 times) without damaging anyone.

 

[McYeke]

Having seen the video that I am going to assume this is about and @The HitMan does see his errors as he went so fast he actually picked up the car and practically threw it at Dom which is unrealistic however ramming into a person is fine if it is a necessity HOWEVER ramming into a vehicle at excessive speeds just to move the vehicle forward to kill someone taking cover behind is dangerous to your own life as you can die in the collision.

The statement you are making Ermak is invalid as you CAN run over a person as an officer IF you can (key word here) JUSTIFY your actions i.e. you are being shot at and it would be more risky to reverse than drive straight into the suspect

On my experience in the PLPD, probably 10 times within the last half of the year I've seen suspects that fled from police hit an object or a car at 70+mph, restart their engine and keep going.

If that is the case you make a report on them for being in breach of;

3.15 Vehicle Damage
Players are not allowed to take action that is likely to lead to the damaging of their vehicle (except speeding within reason), or a vehicle belong to a friend unless they have a good/reasonable reason for doing so; for example, driving off-road on uneven terrain or intentionally driving into sides of buildings without good/reasonable

reason is not allowed. For a reason to be deemed as good/reasonable, the benefit of committing such actions must outweigh the drawbacks.

Remember the key word JUSTIFY aka JUSTIFICATION

Ignore the last part under justify yourself as you have to justify the reasoning on it.

 

[Exnem]

I'm seeing more criminals crash into shit, restart their engines and drive off without notice from staff than officers ramming into things to end a situation, getting banned for it in the process.
I don't understand why we need to make reports and AR's if a staff member can pick up an officer just as easily for the same thing.

An armed civilian poses a high threat to the public and the rest of the police force if gone rouge, the majority of these situations end in a massive shootout with just a single or two civilians killing 10s of officers because the officers simply can't outgun a rifle, which means they need TFU (SWAT) to cover them.

An officer would always take the first most suitable option to end any kind of situation either lethally or non-lethally regardless of their own life.

Hitman took a chance and rammed into a vehicle in an attempt to stop the gunman instantly, which succeeded and potentially saved multiple officers' lives.
Not to mention that officers lives are always at risk in any kind of situation, any incident they respond to their life is always on the line, they don't know the severity of the situation until they're in the middle of it. We've all seen police getting massacred in regals and slums. I don't exactly see any action taken by staff when this happens because the officers have "weapons to protect themselves" although it's proven that using lethal force to enter a property guarded by 4 armed suspects with rifles failed and 90% of the officers died just trying to enter the door.

Which means officers should realistically retreat, and not stand guard of the door. Yet this still happens, and no action is taken.

I see some officers doing this though, saving their own life and returning with backup. The numbers of officers doing this is increasing with every training session held.

Hitman put his own life at risk in attempts to save many others, which succeeded and he most likely came out alive, as well as many other officers and possibly civilians.
The actions he took were justifiable as only one of two potential deaths occurred compared to a shootout where over 4-6 potential deaths could have occurred.

In a shootout your life, the shooter's life and all civilians surrounding the area's lives is always at risk.
In a car chase, your life and officers lives, civilians lives and the rogue drivers life is at risk.

How does any action taken in a shootout or car chase make it justifiable?

Officers receive no reward for stopping the criminal, where as the criminal escapes and is caught later, making the escape a futile action.
The suspect will always be warranted if identified by officers.

This image, while not relevant to the situation, presents a dangerous situation for both officers, the suspect and surrounding civilians.
The gunman has the gun to his own neck, and could if he wanted to start a shootout with the officers, potentially catching civilians in the crossfire.
The officer took a chance to ram right into the suspect to end the situation immediately, which succeeded.
The officer still put his life on the line for it, but was rewarded with a much safer situation where the suspect is in a controlled environment, because he was rendered immobile due to the injuries applied to him via the officer's action.
Your life in a shootout is always at risk, yet is justified in what manner?

The similarities are, you never know what could occur if you let the suspect run the situation with his own decisions. Stopping a suspect before he can do anything at all is safer than letting him shoot at you.

Hitman KNEW the suspect was armed, he KNEW the situation could get out of hand if the suspect was allowed to do as they wished, and all officers should know the consequences of ramming their vehicle into something at ludicrous speeds, but it's better to save a potential of 3 or more people's lives at the cost of potentially two.

You can never predict a situation, I made a mistake long ago to ram into another vehicle in order to stop their vehicle, but none of the occupants were armed, and I knew this, but did it anyway to stop them, I went about 40-50 MP/H yet this still risked everyone's lives including bystanders as the vehicle would have shifted a considerable amount.
This is something you can class 3.4 and 2.1.
My actions did not outweigh the negatives and also caused severe damage to the vehicle and both occupants including me.

Hitman however took actions that outweighed nearly every negative aspect of the situation.

If you want to tell us; "doesn't matter, you still put your life at risk" then what in the fuck are you supposed to do in a shootout? Run away so that you're safe again, although you're the officer along with other officers trying to prevent unnecessary civilian deaths inside another apartment building or in the streets?

What do you prefer?
Ram your car into another car, with a high chance of ending the situation before it begins, although risking your own life regardless?
Let the suspect shoot at you and have a chance of you being killed anyways?

Tyla rammed a suspect against a concrete wall at around 30 to 40 MP/H. While this swiftly kills the suspect instantly realistically, this also puts his own life at risk by doing these speeds, but getting out of his car and letting bullets decide the situation, which the suspect has more of with a rifle mind you, is by far more dangerous than ramming your car into the wall. The suspect can kill you with a single head shot instantly in both situations, but the suspect had no time to decide when the vehicle came at him, sirens and headlights blazing, blinding him.

3.4.
I have always hated this rule (along with many other rules) personally, as it doesn't specify what you're allowed to do, or not, much like the building guidelines that were recently released that help you understand what you're allowed to or not.

But there are so many aspects of this rule I can't cover myself, and you'll have to deal with it.

People have their own views of the rules, and sometimes they mistake their actions for being justifiable when a staff member's view on it makes it unjust.

The building guidelines allowed everyone to be on the same page, many rules are loosely set and no-one really has the same view at all.
If you ask me how you should clarify these rules, keep in mind that your staff team along with the owners are the ones that wrote and changed them, it's your own responsibility to ensure we can all follow these rules, not mine, I'm just a member of the community looking for an enjoyable experience.

 

[M]

I think this is an interesting discussion and I would really quite like some more staff members views on this such as @Youseff, @MrLewis (and anybody else involved) who banned me for going 40mph into a suspect without simply quoting "the purpose and intention of these rules, is to recreate real life to an enjoyable extent."

**Edit: Youseff has chosen not to make any comment on this matter for whatever reason.

I think the main issue with yours was that it was painfully bad and you had to do two turns with a gun pointed at you and because it wasn't opportunistic at all.

 

[mango]

Let me just go back to the video you showed us, he approached the man at let's say around 40mph but then started to brake as he got closer. As he was braking, he hit the wall at around 15-20mph by hitting a person and then into a brick wall. So if you went 3x faster than that into a vehicle with no intentions of slowing down then, of course, it would kill him.

 

[The HitMan]

In my case, there was a shootout taking place at Subs, I making sure that we did not get flanked, I see Dom driving about, I know full well what he was planning on doing, so once his car was disabled I drove straight at him, in my mind at the time I just wanted to take him down so I thought I would run him over as before I turned around he standing at the front of his, I floored to around 70 when I hit his car which then hit him and pushed the car down the road, the damage caused to both vehicles would have been very high due to how fast I was going,but Gmod does not have a damage system. The trigger on which when you crash the car and you would suffer damage did not get triggered due to me hitting the side of the car, had it I would have suffered alot of injuries at the time. Here is the video of what happened: http://plays.tv/video/595e68157369658d52/crash?from=user I have looked at crashes done at around 60/70 and the damage to both cars is very heavy and not mention both drivers would be killed or have serious injuries.

 

[Sgt.James]

Respect life in the following order:
Yourself>Officers>Govs>Innocents>Criminals.

The way I know it is slightly different. Victims>Civs/Innocent by-standers>police and other gov related workers>suspect/subject.

There has been a discussion before regarding section 3.4 and how Officers are to threat that rule (can't exactly recall the outcome of it :/). To be honest, the rule itself does sometime conflict with the Officer's duties when it comes to handling life threatening situations. And in those situations it should be thoroughly considered whether or not it should be considered a breach of that rule or not. At the end of the day, the staff member should have the final say, and if you disagree with it, dispute the punishment and or make a staff complaint. Additionally, making suggestions to change specific rules to meet current game standards should also be considered.

In regards to Callum's ban, ya'll don't know the details, sure you can assume, but at the end of the day only callum himself and the staff member handling his situation know what happened. Callum can always dispute his punishment if he believes it's unreasonable.

 

[Exnem]

I want people to voice their opinion on this.
Both vehicles have NO rollcages, both vehicles were chosen to be as similar to the dodge charger and tesla which were presented in the plays.tv video hitman provided.

Both vehicles in this video weigh nearly the same, although here on perp it's lighter.

Ignore f.lux, it's being an asshat.

Firstly, yes this video is completely irrelevant to this situation, yes this is a game that simulates damage, yes it may be completely incorrect as to what would happen in real life, but it's worth a shot IMO as this could be the potential outcome if perp was as "realistic"
I have no clue at what speeds you would receive injuries from minor to major, this is why I ask you to leave your opinion and come to a conclusion.
Personally I don't think the officer would die whatsoever, but be incapacitated and unable to move due to injuries applied to him via the steering wheel/dashboard and floor.
Both vehicles would be rendered completely useless as the tesla lacks room for a driver and the squad car lacks an engine at that point.

The officer's car was doing around 60 when he hit the vehicle, and in real life the vehicle wouldn't pop up onto the officer's hood, but rather absorb the damage a bunch and shift. But as expected still shift in a manner that would kill the suspect.

 

[Creepis]

Calling @Slayerduck and @Rogue Matiz Tyres to try this out.

OT: It varies to be honest. You shouldn't get punished when there is already a game mechanic in place and you have a justifiable reason to put your own life at risk to save yourself or potentially other people unless you are certain that the action you will take will certainly kill you which just brings up rule 3.6, staying alive. In the past I've seen LEOs (slander 100%) using their vehicle to neutralize a threat, ensuring the certain death of a suspect where as some bullets can render a criminal threatless if aimed right which can be treated with modern medicine with a higher survival rate if done right and of course, as fast as possible instead of crushing several bones with a (multi) ton vehicle. Judging from Byford's situation, both people involved would end up with serious injuries or end up dead.

Using your car as a weapon to ensure the publics safety is not always the best option. You could hit an innocent/by-stander in the process of doing so and is best used depending on the situation.