Warning Dispute (kerzify)

[Mage]

Punishment Type: Warning
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @kerzify
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: Not Applicable

Your Steam Name: Mage
Your Roleplay Name: Mao Kaisa
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:0:37831563

Why were you punished?: 2.5 - User arrived onto Industrial with intentions of raiding the property, this user then noticed another user standing outside of the property with a weapon in passive, the user then killed the other user for no appropriate reasoning as they did not have confirmation that the user lived inside of the property, or had keys to it.

Why should this appeal be considered?: Me and my org were about to raid Industrial 3, while waiting for Mak to come, I parked outside Industrial 3. Then I see a vehicle pull into Industrial 3 which I recognise as someone who assosciated with the people that are basing there. As a result, my intention was to pull in behind them to try and gunpoint them, since we were likely outnumbered, it was the best chance at pulling the raid off. However when I turn around the corner with my gun out, the other individual already has a gun out in passive, likely because they were able to foresee this happening. So I had no other choice but to shoot them, as I am unable to gunpoint them myself (their gun is already in passive), and then I proceed to instantly begin the raid and crowbar the door.

 

[Acerius]

The person had been coming and going from Industrial 3 for at least 30 minutes prior to you killing them. It stands to reason that your recognition of them being associated with the occupants was well grounded.

You took the necessary steps to try and gunpoint them as they were about to unlock the door and enter the building itself. It is simply unfortunate that they heard you running towards them down the gravel pathway, which gave them cause to move back as far away from the door as possible and pull a gun out into passive. It was absolutely clear beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was trying to get into the building, and subsequently the requirement under Rule 2.5 for 'entering/exiting the property' had been met.

If we're being honest, had you of not shot them, they absolutely would have either shot you or alerted the occupants inside of your presence and the imminent raid. You are also correct in your assumption that at that point, they were no longer gunpointable given their gun was in passive.

Given the layout of the property boundaries for Industrial 3, it also stands to reason that there is no real cause for anyone to have been in that enclosed car park with a gun in passive if they were not an occupant and guarding the property. Industrial 3 requires you to run the whole length of the property to get into that small enclosed car park.

You took the necessary steps required, and the warning will be removed.

Reviewed with @Collier, @Megasaw, @sza, @Lhealey05, @Medium, @Vollgas and @Matthew

For the avoidance of doubt, I wrote this explanation and take all the credit for it.