Character
Rules
Events
Map
RP Points
Proplimits
Statistics
Steam Group
Members
Hall of Fame
Team
Bans
Blacklists
Warnings
Changelog
Content
11-18-2015, 10:29 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:04 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
I'd like to offer my opinion on this blacklist.
"The rules are clear there was no-one around the vehicle to be injured (pedestrian wise) so no need to shoot him." - Suarez
How near must people be around the vehicle for it to be valid to shoot at it? In my opinion, if there were pedestrians nearby it would actually make less sense to shoot at the vehicle as they could be injured by the bullets. In real life a reckless driver usually gets their car shot at when no one is close by enough to get injured by direct fire or ricochet. Even if the driver may not have caused IMMEDIATE danger to anyone, they were still a danger to the citizens of the city as, based on what Ukraine has said, they were driving recklessly. Breaking through a barricade is reason enough for the driving to be considered reckless.
In my opinion, a good way to judge whether a blacklist or ban was valid is by checking for precedents. I have come into contact with at least two similar situations in player report form where no punishment has been handed out (in-game, a lot more, but the player report ones have actual video evidence).
See below:
The accused:
"I didn't even know who you were when picking you up because you were far enough away for me to see your name." - Suarez
Since you were far enough not to see their name could you have been far away not to see the big picture and reason as to why Ukraine was shooting at the car?
It all comes down to this: did Suarez have more evidence that the shooting was invalid or was it simply assumed that the shooting was invalid because the reason was not clear? If it's the latter then it is breaching presumption of innocence. 'Innocent until proven guilty'.
To summarize:
Someone drove recklessly, broke through barricades, causing not immediate danger, but danger nonetheless to the citizens of the city. Player was under FearRP and had to stop as he was being apprehended by the police. When the perpetrator did not stop and sped away Ukraine shot at it in attempts to stop the vehicle or disarm the perpetrator.
If any of the above is incorrect or requires adjustment I would like Ukraine - the blacklisted player, Suarez - the moderator that issued the blacklist or any of the staff team to offer comments on it.
If any staff disagrees with the points I made above I would like an example to be provided where shooting at a recklessly driven vehicle would be allowed.
"The rules are clear there was no-one around the vehicle to be injured (pedestrian wise) so no need to shoot him." - Suarez
How near must people be around the vehicle for it to be valid to shoot at it? In my opinion, if there were pedestrians nearby it would actually make less sense to shoot at the vehicle as they could be injured by the bullets. In real life a reckless driver usually gets their car shot at when no one is close by enough to get injured by direct fire or ricochet. Even if the driver may not have caused IMMEDIATE danger to anyone, they were still a danger to the citizens of the city as, based on what Ukraine has said, they were driving recklessly. Breaking through a barricade is reason enough for the driving to be considered reckless.
In my opinion, a good way to judge whether a blacklist or ban was valid is by checking for precedents. I have come into contact with at least two similar situations in player report form where no punishment has been handed out (in-game, a lot more, but the player report ones have actual video evidence).
See below:
- The following player report was denied (because reason for shooting at the car was unclear)
http://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=59093
- The following player report was approved. Even though I shot at the vehicle with no one nearby I was not sanctioned with a blacklist from weapons (as the accused here was driving recklessly and it was a sufficient reason to shoot at their car)
http://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=65545
The accused:
- Drove recklessly;
- Was confronted by the police and told to stop;
- Drove off even after being warned to stop;
- Was shot at by the police. Shot at NOT for breaking FearRP, but for endangering lives of citizens.
"I didn't even know who you were when picking you up because you were far enough away for me to see your name." - Suarez
Since you were far enough not to see their name could you have been far away not to see the big picture and reason as to why Ukraine was shooting at the car?
It all comes down to this: did Suarez have more evidence that the shooting was invalid or was it simply assumed that the shooting was invalid because the reason was not clear? If it's the latter then it is breaching presumption of innocence. 'Innocent until proven guilty'.
To summarize:
Someone drove recklessly, broke through barricades, causing not immediate danger, but danger nonetheless to the citizens of the city. Player was under FearRP and had to stop as he was being apprehended by the police. When the perpetrator did not stop and sped away Ukraine shot at it in attempts to stop the vehicle or disarm the perpetrator.
If any of the above is incorrect or requires adjustment I would like Ukraine - the blacklisted player, Suarez - the moderator that issued the blacklist or any of the staff team to offer comments on it.
If any staff disagrees with the points I made above I would like an example to be provided where shooting at a recklessly driven vehicle would be allowed.