Remove Lethals from Detectives

[furrycactus]

Self explanatory.

Detectives on station, as far as I've noticed, have a huge issue with whipping out their revolver full of lethals at the slightest of issues - whether because they're just absolute idiots, or because they genuinely don't have any other gear. They aren't officers, they're not meant to go around arresting people and responding to security threats, they're meant to serve as an investigative role on the Aurora. To me of course, the ideal solution would be that Detectives have their gun taken away entirely (after all, the FT and CSI don't get a gun) and replaced with a flash or something, but I don't see that as being a popular idea. So my suggestion really comes down to two things;

 - Remove the Detective's access to lethal rounds off the bat. Make them start with rubbers instead. They can get lethals from the warden, or from a hacked autolathe.

- Completely replace the revolver and lethals with a .45 and rubbers like the Officers have. Same deal as before with getting lethals. I'll always think it's weird that they have a revolver of all things. Noir is cool and all, but it feels like the Detective goes far too into that theme, however not everyone might agree with that part.

(or just take the gun away from them completely please)

Point is, its kind of ridiculous that regular Officers have to jump through hoops to get access to lethals, when they're the ones that should be responding to potentially dangerous security issues; yet Detectives can (and often do, especially when they shouldn't) whip out their revolver full of lethals whenever they want.

Some better clarification on a Detective's exact duties would be good, too. Because as far as I've seen IC, the expectation of them is to stick to investigating and not doing an officer's job, but it's practically a meme at this point seeing a Detective try and shoot down antags with their revolver.

If other people have stories or experiences about this kind of thing they'd like to share, I wholly encourage it. I'd like to know everyone's opinions on this too.

[Kaed]

Having personally witnessed Noir click an antag horizontal for firing on them with a weapon that didn't even harm them significantly, I tend to agree.

 

Personally I would not be against detectives being removed entirely I know that's not going to happen. So something that mitigates their instant shutdown capabilities would be great.

[Coalf]

We DID do this already, it, funnily enough, had the opposite effect.

Detectives started acting like security officers since they had rubbers meaning they had less-than-lethal which equaled in them firing twice as often and using it as basically a taser.
Not gonna upvote or downvote this, but I doubt it'll get accepted.

[OffRoad99]

I don't think this would work. We've seen CSI arming themselves to the teeth, as if they were Security Officers in a Code Red situation, and go after criminals. And they don't even spawn with a weapon, excluding that useless flash in their locker.

 

I'd rather see some rules enforced/clarified regarding the Detective's use of firearms, rather than see the gun removed. They shouldn't even run after criminals in the first place, that's a job for the Officers. I'm fine with having a lethal weapon that actually works for self-defense purposes, even if it kills/cripples your attacker.

With my Detective, I often grab a pepper spray and a flash and call for the Officers if I'm either threatened or attacked. And to this date, I've only fired once with that revolver, against a couple of heisters that had some of us trapped in the Bridge.

 

Imho we should all learn not to grab that handgun as our first option in a dialogue/confrontation. It's a -1 from me.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Have you ahelped these detectives? Do you feel its fair to punish me for their behavior?

[Arrow768]

Moving this to the policy subforum.

[tbear13]

I support the suggestion. I don't see a reason for a detective, who's supposed to be a back-line role, to be armed better then the ones in front-line roles. What's the reason for that?

[Butterrobber202]

It’s a side effect from the 'Noir' style detective, honestly just give them flash rounds.

[Kaed]

23 hours ago, Senpai Jackboot said:

Have you ahelped these detectives? Do you feel its fair to punish me for their behavior?

This isn't about you.  You always act like we are attacking you when people question detectives.  It is also very difficult to ahelp this sort of thing, because detectives have equipment and they are allowed to use it, with few restrictions.  Someone shot your IPC detective with a laser a couple times? Self defense, the fact that you fucked them up way more than they did you is irrelevant.

Someone is threatening a civilian?  Protecting a crew member.

There are all kinds of ways that can just sort of be just okay enough to not result in any sort of action.  The problem is that it's just what detectives are given, and it's unreasonable to expect them to never use their equipment. But these problems can easily be reduced by changing the options available to detectives.

Detectives are not high priority targets.  They do not really even have a pressing need for self defense that surpasses all of the officers from round start, because their role is cemented as a support.  They don't perform arrests, they perform investigations and questioning.  Frankly, if the detective role evaporated, it would not change much, officers and would just take over their duties.

But some people like playing them, so we keep them in.  But they don't need a gun that fires live rounds so they can be the hero the station needs and gun down the bad guyz.  I'm not even opposed to them having the option to have lethal rounds, placed in the armory, like the rest of security.  Just don't start with them.

It's not a punishment, it's restoring sanity to security so people follow the same logical progression of force.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Kaed

[Arrow768]

If I remember correctly the last time this came up, the lethal rounds have been kept to act as a deterrent of detectives trying to arrest people / deal with non lethal situations.
With lethal rounds they cant just go in and shoot the suspect in most cases.

With non lethal rounds / less-than-lethal rounds the level of violence required, that allows the detective to fire their weapon, is much lower

[Kaed]

14 minutes ago, Arrow768 said:

If I remember correctly the last time this came up, the lethal rounds have been kept to act as a deterrent of detectives trying to arrest people / deal with non lethal situations.
With lethal rounds they cant just go in and shoot the suspect in most cases.

With non lethal rounds / less-than-lethal rounds the level of violence required, that allows the detective to fire their weapon, is much lower

The problem here is not them interfering in officer business, it is their tendency to grasp hold of any justification to whip out their pistol and fill a bad guy with bullets.  It's entirely reasonable to fire back on someone who is threatening you or has even struck you with a weapon, however, when your main option is a weapon that is literally capable of killing someone it becomes a problem that it is the first thing they can get hold of.

Security also has a tendency to not persecute internally in most cases for 'excessive self defense', especially if the detective is someone popular or they dislike the antag in question.  People will be people.  I would be more okay with relaxing the restrictions on detective involvement if we also took away their round start murder gun.

[Arrow768]

Indeed, you are on point here.
But removing their lethal sidearm wont solve the problem, instead it will lower the level of violence required that allows the detective to utilize their (non-lethal) sidearm.

If the detective is supplied with a non-lethal weapon and uses it to take down a suspect, the only applicable charge would be illegal detention.
However it is very unlikely that this will be applied and most Heads of Staff would wave the usage of a stun weapon to detain a hostile away as "proper use of force due to extenuating circumstances".
And they wouldn't be wrong there. If the detective is present and they can detain a suspect with no permanent injury, while there is a crime in progress it would be unreasonable not to use their non-lethal weapon to detain the suspect. (Especially since the detective also had to complete the cadet-ship and is thereby trained in detainment)

It is quite different if the detective only has a lethal weapon.
If they use it to take down a suspect that does not pose a direct lethal threat to the detective, bystanders or the station as a whole then the applicable charges would be one or more of the following: Assault, Manslaughter, Gross Negligence and Illegal Detention
At this point it immediately becomes a administrative issue (improper escalation of hostilities; improper use of force as detective) and any head of staff would be hard pressed not to prosecute the detective and remove their sidearm immediately.

Therefore I do not think that it is a good idea to remove lethals from the detective.
They are fine as a self-defense option (when faced with lethal force) and provide a deterrent against using the sidearm to detain crew members.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

What arrow said. This is about me and all detective players in a partial way because youre taking away a tool from me due to the behaviors of others. Because it is weapon it is somehow different for you. An apt comparison is if we had a thread about removing handheld medical scanners because of a few people abusing them somehow. Should all handheld scanners be removed or should we first try to punish the offenders?

Its very easy to ahelp. Its a bit more of an investment for irs and player complaints.

 

The lethal gun is a deterrant to force. If they are bypassing this deterrant for dumb reasons then we can punish them. "Im stressed" is not an applicable defense for murder when you are sec.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Marlon Phoenix
Its not ALL about me

[Kaed]

49 minutes ago, Arrow768 said:

Indeed, you are on point here.
But removing their lethal sidearm wont solve the problem, instead it will lower the level of violence required that allows the detective to utilize their non-lethal sidearm.

If the detective is supplied with a non-lethal weapon and uses it to take down a suspect, the only applicable charge would be illegal detention.
However it is very unlikely that this will be applied and most Heads of Staff would wave the usage of a stun weapon to detain a hostile away as "proper use of force due to extenuating circumstances".
And they wouldn't be wrong there. If the detective is present and they can detain a suspect with no permanent injury, while there is a crime in progress it would be unreasonable not to use their non-lethal weapon to detain the suspect. (Especially since the detective also had to complete the cadet-ship and is thereby trained in detainment)

It is quite different if the detective only has a lethal weapon.
If they use it to take down a suspect that does not pose a direct lethal threat to the detective, bystanders or the station as a whole then the applicable charges would be one or more of the following: Assault, Manslaughter, Gross Negligence and Illegal Detention
At this point it immediately becomes a administrative issue (improper escalation of hostilities; improper use of force as detective) and any head of staff would be hard pressed not to prosecute the detective and remove their sidearm immediately.

Therefore I do not think that it is a good idea to remove lethals from the detective.
They are fine as a self-defense option (when faced with lethal force) and provide a deterrent against using the sidearm to detain crew members.

Detectives assisting with arrests honestly shouldn't be a problem as much as people make it out to be.  Try to look at this from how it affects gameplay.

When an antag dealing with security, there's normally a tacit understanding that security will try to non-lethally restrain you unless you start trying to kill them.  You can get into a fight with security and reasonably expect them to baton you, or shoot you with a taser, or something, unless  you start going murder-mode.

This expectation and escalation is entirely bypassed by detectives for little other reason than 'to deter them from detaining people'.  When you have a detective as an opponent, you have to be prepared to kill them if you start something, or they will fill you with lead.  Any opposition with the detective immediately becomes High Noon and both of you are gunslingers or are dead or dying.

It doesn't matter a whit to any antagonist bleeding to death on the floor if the detective is later arrested for excessive self defense.  It's over for them now, and they may not have even gone into this fight intending to kill anyone.  And this can happen on code bloody green, because detectives don't have to escalate arms like EVERYONE ELSE in the department

18 minutes ago, Senpai Jackboot said:

What arrow said. This is about me and all detective players in a partial way because youre taking away a tool from me due to the behaviors of others. Because it is weapon it is somehow different for you. An apt comparison is if we had a thread about removing handheld medical scanners because of a few people abusing them somehow. Should all handheld scanners be removed or should we first try to punish the offenders?

Its very easy to ahelp. Its a bit more of an investment for irs and player complaints.

 

The lethal gun is a deterrant to force. If they are bypassing this deterrant for dumb reasons then we can punish them. "Im stressed" is not an applicable defense for murder when you are sec.

What the literal bleep is this argument, jackboot.  This is about lethal weapons being given at round start to people who don't need them.  And even if there was a way to 'abuse' medical scanners, I would also lobby for them to be changed so it can't be abused.  It isn't a punishment for medical players (or detectives), it's removing a vector for abuse.

A deterrent doesn't have to be lethal to deter.  Ahelps do not solve this problem, because the problem is intrinsic to the mechanics we give.  If people have a gun, they will use it when they have a chance.  Detectives are far more menacing than they really need to be right now.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Kaed

[Arrow768]

First of all, sorry. It got a bit longer than I intended to.

2 minutes ago, Kaed said:

When an antag dealing with security, there's normally a tacit understanding that security will try to non-lethally restrain you unless you start trying to kill them.  You can get into a fight with security and reasonably expect them to baton you, or shoot you with a taser, or something, unless  you start going murder-mode.

Yes, that is required by our escalation rules.
If security goes after you with lethal weapons and you do not pose a lethal threat that is a violation of ooc rules and needs to be ahelped. (No matter if it is the detective or not)

2 minutes ago, Kaed said:

This expectation and escalation is entirely bypassed by detectives for little other reason than 'to deter them from detaining people'. 

The statement, that our escalation rules are bypassed by the detective is not correct.
Our escalation rules also apply to the detective.
You are correct, that detectives have (by default) no means to stun crew members.
If you can not detain them with the means you have available it would be wise to reevaluate your situation and call for backup.
Generally security (including the detective) can match your level of force, but not exceed it.

2 minutes ago, Kaed said:

When you have a detective as an opponent, you have to be prepared to kill them if you start something, or they will fill you with lead.  Any opposition with the detective immediately becomes High Noon and both of you are gunslingers or are dead or dying.

Indeed, we removed / nerfed all the easily accessible insta-stun weapons, so this is the expected result.
Of course, you are free to start a petition to return insta-stun weapons.

2 minutes ago, Kaed said:

It doesn't matter a whit to any antagonist bleeding to death on the floor if the detective is later arrested for excessive self defense.  It's over for them now, and they may not have even gone into this fight intending to kill anyone.  And this can happen on code bloody green, because detectives don't have to escalate arms like EVERYONE ELSE in the department

That is the case with all rule violations.
The person on the receiving end is fucked. Its very rare that admins will step in to correct the effects of the rule violation.
Of course the offender will be dealt with and hopefully learn something from the experience.

And again, the escalation rules apply to detectives aswell.
If they draw their sidearm to take down a non-lethal threat on code green (as well as blue and possibly red). ahelp them.
They will get a detective ban faster than you can say "quickdraw".
But if people do not ahelp bad detective play, nothing will change.

If you do not ahelp bad (detective) play, then nothing is going to change.
It is also the players responsibility to ahelp bad players so mods/mins can investigate the issue.

Generally, if you are unsure if something was proper escalation, just ahelp it.

[Scheveningen]

On 11/26/2018 at 4:10 PM, Arrow768 said:

Of course, you are free to start a petition to return insta-stun weapons.

Something I will oppose till the cows come home. I miss you, Betsy, Shannon, Candy, Lauren, Stacy, Annabelle, Erica, and Janebell.

General reminder that neglecting to report a roleplay issue makes you complicit to it and thus part of the problem.

[furrycactus]

I hadn't considered the other side of this argument before, and I'm glad it was explained, and I can understand it now. Also @Senpai Jackboot I apologise if it came off as though I was pointing the finger at you, as I certainly wasn't.

That considered though, I think at least clarifying the expectations of the Detective and what they are explicitly expected to do and not to do in regulations and standard operating procedure would still be a good thing. Perhaps for FT/CSI as well, if them often arming up to the teeth is an issue as well.

Edited December 3, 2018 by furrycactus
typo

[Carver]

The main reason you give lethals to the Detective is so every antagonist with a chip on their shoulder can't kill the investigative team easily, and actually is at risk for attempting to do so. What would be better would simply be policing the shitheels that use it poorly (i.e. validhunting when there are capable Officers who should be doing that, or neglecting their job in favour of validhunting when it's unnecessary).

Don't punish the role, punish the idiots.

[AmoryBlaine]

Just give them a .45 with rubber. You can knock people out cold with it, and not kill them while still injuring them badly. It also makes it easier to obtain or exchange ammunition if things get dicey. 

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

If I get rubbers I get to use my gun more often.

[LorenLuke]

12 hours ago, AmoryBlaine said:

Just give them a .45 with rubber. You can knock people out cold with it, and not kill them while still injuring them badly. It also makes it easier to obtain or exchange ammunition if things get dicey. 

I was surprised by, and find myself in agreement with, the conclusions reached by others here, given I didn't think of the ramifications they allege that make perfect sense.

Let's look at something, real quick- if I shoot you dead lethally, things depending I will more than likely get the powers that be tapping me on my shoulder with a ban hammer in their other hand. Generally, this is something I want to avoid and is a primary fear floor most players in taking action.

But this is an OOC punishment that's in place more to ensure that those who ignore consequences of IC actions are removed from the environment so as to not disrupt enjoyment for the rest. ICly, you're dead and I killed you, with the various consequences from that (which I should be want to avoid).

With those two things in mind and a gun in my hand, which gun--per bullet--has a greater chance of making me cause someone's death? Lethals obviously. Which gun would I, therefore, be more leery of and less likely to use? Lethals.

If you're worried about detectives killing people, slap them with the consequences of doing so when it happens. Otherwise, when they have a way to unload their weapon where it's less likely they suffer the consequences above, they'll more likely take it. And I, for one, if I had to be shot as an antagonist without provocation, would rather be perforated so I could observe without consequence instead of thrown in a cell and potentially griped at for not attempting to RP from in the cell with the person who saw fit to shoot first, ask questions never, and took it on themselves to go 'You know what this round needs? Less antags'.

[DronzTheWolf]

2 minutes ago, LorenLuke said:

I was surprised by, and find myself in agreement with, the conclusions reached by others here, given I didn't think of the ramifications they allege that make perfect sense.

Let's look at something, real quick- if I shoot you dead lethally, things depending I will more than likely get the powers that be tapping me on my shoulder with a ban hammer in their other hand. Generally, this is something I want to avoid and is a primary fear floor most players in taking action.

But this is an OOC punishment that's in place more to ensure that those who ignore consequences of IC actions are removed from the environment so as to not disrupt enjoyment for the rest. ICly, you're dead and I killed you, with the various consequences from that (which I should be want to avoid).

With those two things in mind and a gun in my hand, which gun--per bullet--has a greater chance of making me cause someone's death? Lethals obviously. Which gun would I, therefore, be more leery of and less likely to use? Lethals.

If you're worried about detectives killing people, slap them with the consequences of doing so when it happens. Otherwise, when they have a way to unload their weapon where it's less likely they suffer the consequences above, they'll more likely take it. And I, for one, if I had to be shot as an antagonist without provocation, would rather be perforated so I could observe without consequence instead of thrown in a cell and potentially griped at for not attempting to RP from in the cell with the person who saw fit to shoot first, ask questions never, and took it on themselves to go 'You know what this round needs? Less antags'.

If you want to give Detective something but their current revolver, there's a detective m1911 in-code. It should have the same mechanics as the revolver naming, but be a .45 pistol, but at the same time I haven't tested it myself.

[Mofo1995]

As detective, which is my favorite role these days, I've only used my gun twice as a nonantag. Once was to shoot a dog that was killing me, and the other was a "WAWNING SHOT" to break up civil unrest in departures. Because I know I have a lethal weapon, I avoid all combat and let security officers handle all arrests, but having the Tsar in mt holster is my defence if antags try to single me out for my investigations. In short, its a last line of defence which is used appropriately sparingly, and I would really prefer no change. As an antag I've never been validhunted by a detective and I never see it happening.

[LorenLuke]

2 hours ago, DronzTheWolf said:

If you want to give Detective something but their current revolver, there's a detective m1911 in-code. It should have the same mechanics as the revolver naming, but be a .45 pistol, but at the same time I haven't tested it myself.

I mean, given all the above, I'd prefer the more lethal option. How about, for argument's sake, we give the detective a 2 shot 'vaporiser', where one shot just... Kills the person it hits, no questions asked. I doubt you'd ever see a legit, non-griefer, nontag detective use it except in actual fear of life due to the IC/OOC consequences of using such a weapon, given that trying to use it to take down a fleeing perpetrator or what have you will more than likely result in a horrible 'BWOINK!' noise.

Point being that, the more lethal the detective's weapon, the less likely that you're going to have some rules/admin-fearing player use it without due cause.

Edited December 28, 2018 by LorenLuke
Typo

[Hocka]

17 hours ago, Senpai Jackboot said:

If I get rubbers I get to use my gun more often.

Was this sarcastic or serious? As a genuine question.