taser usage clarification

[Vaeldious]

This is exactly why that server rule was implemented, iirc. You may not use the taser on someone holding a weapon, for reasons stated above. If that's not the rule, then it should be changed.

While I agree that it makes little to no sense to taser someone holding a firearm for a multitude of reasons, Administration is bound by rules as they stand, not how we think they should be or what makes logical sense IRL. Currently, the server rule scope specifically only covers actively shooting, and makes no mention of in-hand. It's not our job to interpret rules or the reasoning for the way they are; rather, it's our job to enforce them. It IS clear that the requirements of tazing needs to be addressed from both HQ (server rule) and SAPD (server regulation) based on the consensus of this topic. However, the way the player that was tazed went about it was all wrong. Provoking, namecalling, insulting, and moaning in /p is not the way to handle a situation where two parties disagree. It's simply not constructive and stirs the shitpot unnecessarily. Had he said "Hey man, that doesn't seem right, can we talk?" I'm confident Administration would have been more open to hear out his debate on the spot. Instead, he stooped lowly and childishly to provocations and disrupting the server environment, which IS a rulebreak, hence the negative feedback and resistance he received.

...But that's for another topic, don't you think?

Indeed it is, however I will not idly stand by when someone misrepresents a situation intentionally to their own agenda and argument or by accident because they are unaware. This is a clarification topic, and my response aimed simply to clarify.

[Jeremy.]

lol how I was provocative? I simply stated the sapd regulation for taser usage and he was the one trying to incite things, not myself. Go re-read the chatlogs I posted in the first post, you can clearly see how he tried to make things go his way by disabling me from using any kind of chat. So yea whenever you're not winning an argument and you are aware of what you've done wrong  you should rather mute someone and try to provoke him by saying someone is "smartass" is something normal from an administration team. You clearly have wrong vision about what administrating itself is and I just remembered Arslan's topic about you.

You people need to understand you can't enforce a rule which suits the scenario you've took part just to make the things go YOUR WAY, you did wrong you suck it up and admit your mistake, being an admin doesn't mean you're 100% right on all your decisions but your ego clearly can't accept it and just because I'm on criminal side doesn't change the fact of me being aware of taser regulations.

[Jeremy.]

Provoking, namecalling, insulting, and moaning in /p is not the way to handle a situation where two parties disagree. It's simply not constructive and stirs the shitpot unnecessarily. Had he said "Hey man, that doesn't seem right, can we talk?" I'm confident Administration would have been more open to hear out his debate on the spot. Instead, he stooped lowly and childishly to provocations and disrupting the server environment, which IS a rulebreak, hence the negative feedback and resistance he received.

[20:48:26] Bogdan_Gvardia: (2) i was holding a deagle in my hand
[20:48:38] Bogdan_Gvardia{909090}: (2) nope
[20:48:42] Bogdan_Gvardia{909090}: (2) go read sapd regulations lol
[21:00:07] PM to JoshThePenguin(11): I'm not making anything on my own, I stated the SAPD regulation itself.
[21:00:28] PM to JoshThePenguin(11): Cops are not allowed to shoot a suspect in combat or while holding a gun in their hand.

So from this chatlog you understood the fact that I'm "Provoking/namecalling/insulting/moaning and showing a childish attitude" ? There's something wrong with you for real lol. Let me show you again the chatlogs from Josh maybe it will be easier for your brain to comprehend stuff.

[20:48:13] JoshThePenguin: (1) Who says we can't shoot an armed suspect with a taser, you weren't shooting when I shot
[20:48:16] JoshThePenguin: (1) Be happy I hit your vest
[20:48:21] JoshThePenguin{909090}: (1) Don't act all cool and shit against me
[20:48:34] JoshThePenguin{909090}: (1) That still gives me the right to tase you
[20:48:40] JoshThePenguin{909090}: (1) I just cannot tase you in an active shootout
[20:48:47] JoshThePenguin{909090}: (1) Dude, stop smartassing.
[20:48:50] A staff member has muted you from all chat functions.
[20:48:53] You have been muted from all chats temporarily.
[20:59:43] Staff message from JoshThePenguin(11): Don't make up your own server rules or SAPD regulations, thank you.
[21:00:51] PM from JoshThePenguin(11): We aren't allowed to tase suspects who are actively shooting, that's a server rule to begin with.
[21:01:18] PM from JoshThePenguin(11): Besides that, we're permitted to tase anyone who holds a gun or whatever.
[21:01:21] PM from JoshThePenguin(11): As long as he's not shooting.
[21:01:32] PM from JoshThePenguin(11): if you're not the cop here, stop smartassing and stop making shit up.

I hope I made it easier for you, thanks.

[Chase]

Apparently SAPD needs to adopt the use of force triangle and enforce it across the board. It's really simple. Deadly weapons are met with deadly force. Unarmed and non compliance is met with less lethal.

[Stivi]

This is exactly why that server rule was implemented, iirc. You may not use the taser on someone holding a weapon, for reasons stated above. If that's not the rule, then it should be changed.

While I agree that it makes little to no sense to taser someone holding a firearm for a multitude of reasons, Administration is bound by rules as they stand, not how we think they should be or what makes logical sense IRL. Currently, the server rule scope specifically only covers actively shooting, and makes no mention of in-hand. It's not our job to interpret rules or the reasoning for the way they are; rather, it's our job to enforce them. It IS clear that the requirements of tazing needs to be addressed from both HQ (server rule) and SAPD (server regulation) based on the consensus of this topic. However, the way the player that was tazed went about it was all wrong. Provoking, namecalling, insulting, and moaning in /p is not the way to handle a situation where two parties disagree. It's simply not constructive and stirs the shitpot unnecessarily. Had he said "Hey man, that doesn't seem right, can we talk?" I'm confident Administration would have been more open to hear out his debate on the spot. Instead, he stooped lowly and childishly to provocations and disrupting the server environment, which IS a rulebreak, hence the negative feedback and resistance he received.

Oh please, spare me the "be polite" crap. Did you know it's against the server rules to argue back? Yeah that shouldn't happen, but it is, and it gives the admin handling the situation ultimate authority. Because he may or may not have ( nothing in the logs ) thrown provocations around, he can still be right. I got banned for refusing to go to jail for bribing a cop. The police-side admins really don't know where to draw the line between SAPD regulations and server rules, but both instances are solved with a copban.

You pull this shit often, if a player is provocative doesn't mean he is wrong. Cena used to have some good ideas for the server, some of them even implemented. If we were to go your way, there would be no moving forward, so stop with the bullshit from the past and deal with what you are given.

It's really simple. Deadly weapons are met with deadly force. Unarmed and non compliance is met with less lethal.

However that is not on the server rules, and I for one think it should be changed/clarified. Apparently, you have to be in an active shootout, which, ever since the in-combat script has lost its definition now. Can you change it or does it need HQ?

[Younes]

Apparently SAPD needs to adopt the use of force triangle and enforce it across the board. It's really simple. Deadly weapons are met with deadly force. Unarmed and non compliance is met with less lethal.

It is correct that tasers shouldn't be used when a person is actively holding a weapon; however throughout the previous year(s) and ever since it was implemented, there was an exception for when the suspect isn't shooting (actively using the weapon), as stated in the rules.
The SAPD regulations state that you cannot use a taser on someone that is holding a weapon as somehow you (Jeremy) managed to get. However if a person isn't using a weapon at that moment, or haven't used it at all before, you have a light chance to use taser on him as long as he's no holding a hostage, near civilians..etc. and is in an actual isolated place as we all know, taser shocks your body and causes unwanted movement and could lead to pulling the trigger unintentionally.

This matter in fact wasn't clarified ever since the taser was made. I myself was taught that the taser can be used as long as the suspect is not shooting with a weapon (even if holding), however regulations stated otherwise. This matter will be brought to discussion and should be clarified for the members of the law enforcement services..


Off topic note.. get back to topic and stop bringing irrelevant subjects to it. If you got an issue with an administrator, handle it personally in PM or propose a complaint against the said administrator. Forum topics are not where you go whining and moaning about an incident that happened to you in-game, trying of it to show a bad picture of the administrator.

[JackDockz]

Well if you were just holding a gun in an isolated place then you can be tazed, to me tazing is better than killing someone.
Well, if the cops shoot and kill you then also you complain about them taking away your "hard earned" weapons. So, i think if you are tazed instead of being shot then you should be happy

[Julio.]

The rules state "active shootout," and the SAPD student guide mentions "when a weapon is unholstered."

Quite clear to me that this is an SAPD investigation and can be done in an RP fashion.

[Jeremy.]

Apparently SAPD needs to adopt the use of force triangle and enforce it across the board. It's really simple. Deadly weapons are met with deadly force. Unarmed and non compliance is met with less lethal.

It is correct that tasers shouldn't be used when a person is actively holding a weapon; however throughout the previous year(s) and ever since it was implemented, there was an exception for when the suspect isn't shooting (actively using the weapon), as stated in the rules.
The SAPD regulations state that you cannot use a taser on someone that is holding a weapon as somehow you (Jeremy) managed to get. However if a person isn't using a weapon at that moment, or haven't used it at all before, you have a light chance to use taser on him as long as he's no holding a hostage, near civilians..etc. and is in an actual isolated place as we all know, taser shocks your body and causes unwanted movement and could lead to pulling the trigger unintentionally.

This matter in fact wasn't clarified ever since the taser was made. I myself was taught that the taser can be used as long as the suspect is not shooting with a weapon (even if holding), however regulations stated otherwise. This matter will be brought to discussion and should be clarified for the members of the law enforcement services..


Off topic note.. get back to topic and stop bringing irrelevant subjects to it. If you got an issue with an administrator, handle it personally in PM or propose a complaint against the said administrator. Forum topics are not where you go whining and moaning about an incident that happened to you in-game, trying of it to show a bad picture of the administrator.

Your fellow admin mate, Vaeldious, started with throwing irrelevant statements and accusations and totally going off-topic. Stop throwing shit everytime on players, you're humans too, you make mistakes aswell but that doesnt mean you are allowed to do something stupid(josh in this case) just to make things go your way, especially when Andeey logged in. This topic wasnt about how shit Josh or Vael are at administrating yet debating a subject about taser regulations. So I hereby ask you to stop trying to take your m8's back and be on topic, thanks.

[Kacper_Gorski]

http://www.argonathrpg.eu/index.php?action=form;n=8

Report him then..?

[Younes]

I'm responding to this topic as the chief of police of the San Andreas police department. As a matter of fact, if you got anything wrong against what happened fill an IA complaint. This isn't a discussion topic, it's a humiliating topic just like the rest.

[Pete]

Topic locked since you got an answer from the SAPD Chief.