Creating new charge for cargo storage misappropriation

[Kaed]

Right now, cargo techs who take stuff out of cargo storage are generally slapped with a i212 Contraband charge.  This charge was originally created for the purpose of people in possession of illegal or dangerous objects, and is mostly used for lack of a more relevant sentence.  It carries a 15 minute sentence, or 20 if they pair it up with hooliganism (which they usually do) which is extremely excessive for someone who decided to, say, throw a smoke or metal foam grenade in the hallway.  More importantly, regulations say that i2 charges cannot simply be fined, forcing them to serve brig time in excess of actual Assault (i208 is 15 minutes and almost never paired with hooliganism unlike cargo bay 'contraband') charges, which should be a far more serious.

So I propose we create a special charge (i119?) that is just for people who are running around playing with toys from cargo, which carries a much shorter sentence and possibility of a simple fine.

Edited July 6, 2019 by Kaed

[AmoryBlaine]

What do you mean by stuff? Most items won't bat an eye if they're taken. It's typically only when it's literal contraband that anyone cares to press them to return it or have it confiscated. It's a bit redundant, since you can just be slapped with theft if you're caught misusing and trying to keep warehouse stock for yourself, and it's clear that you have no intent on doing your job. Which can be compounded with contraband if you're being an extraordinary shitter and have teargas and tact armor in your bag.

[AmoryBlaine]

That is to say, by the standard at which we currently operate, or should, not everything is contraband, or chargable, but if you're clearly misappropriating hardware and stock, it can be theft, grand theft, or contraband- plus neglect of duty if the QM or HoP wish.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

That may be amory but the charge is still being liberally applied and stacked which disproportionately punish the act.

[VTCobaltblood]

I feel that it could be made a part of Directive 4 instead, and punished like Directive 4 normally is - either with a slap on the wrist, or with failure to execute an order if it's serious enough.

[ben10083]

I feel it is best not to focus on the fact of it's origin...but the what the item in question is. If the item is not contraband, it's theft, but if the item is actual contraband, they get punished for it. I don't see the problem here.

[Scheveningen]

Regarding Scientific Experimentation & Warehouse contents - Station Directive 4

To clarify the expectations of research and supply staff, and the proper usage of the equipment they are responsible for.

Qualified researchers in a given field of science are authorized to conduct experiments in any way they deem appropriate. However, unless authorization for their release is granted by command staff or an emergency situation requires it, the works and derivatives of the research department are to remain within their respective labs and testing areas.

The supply department is expected to store and distribute warehouse supplies to the station's departments as deemed appropriate. The stock of the station's warehouse is not to be regarded as contraband if it remains in the warehouse, or is being transported to an appropriate destination.

Station Regulations are considered equivalent to company regulations. Failing to follow them leads to an appropriate contextual charge based on the severity of not following them. This suggestion is round-about and redundant.

If I were CCIA I'd vote for dismissal based on that principle.

[Kaed]

20 minutes ago, Scheveningen said:

Station Regulations are considered equivalent to company regulations. Failing to follow them leads to an appropriate contextual charge based on the severity of not following them. This suggestion is round-about and redundant.

If I were CCIA I'd vote for dismissal based on that principle.

*rolls eyes*

I do not think that anything coming out of the warehouse should be considered 'contraband'.  If we're going to let low level 'antagonistic' items (such as smoke grenades or radio jammers) spawn there, and somehow be immune to being considered illegal while they're in there, they should not magically become illegal the moment they exit the warehouse.  If you steal an officer's baton from security, it is considered theft, not contraband (and officers who try and add theft and contraband together for this are common enough, but that's a separate issue).  The same logic should exist here with the warehouse.  Maybe we don't need a new charge for warehouse misappropriation, but we should at least institute some sort of policy revision that says taking a smoke grenade from the warehouse doesn't fall under the same punishment as being found with an illegal revolver on your person, and consider it theft of station property rather than contraband.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Kaed

[Scheveningen]

If it leaves the warehouse, and the nature of the item qualifies it under the definition of contraband (i.e., a 60 shot brute revolver, not that those ever spawn in the warehouse), it is indeed contraband. The intent of the regulation is to prevent Cargo Techs and QMs being roundstart prosecuted because there's contraband that spawned in the warehouse. Likewise, it is also there in case an antagonist wishes to ransack it for useful tools, including any round-start antagonists in the cargo role.

Nonetheless, it's an IC issue in terms of how security/the HOS/the captain or whatever wish to enforce it. Contraband is being caught with, often, typical syndicate items. You didn't steal them but you somehow smuggled them through, but did not necessarily steal them. Theft is deliberately entering an area, taking what is not yours and misappropriating it instead of immediately returning it. The distinction may not be clear to others, perhaps it is clearer for some other people. It really doesn't matter, however, as this issue can easily be resolved in IC and arguing on that platform for this or that charge dependent on what the context is, and how severe it is. Details, details, details.

[Kaed]

20 minutes ago, Scheveningen said:

If it leaves the warehouse, and the nature of the item qualifies it under the definition of contraband (i.e., a 60 shot brute revolver, not that those ever spawn in the warehouse), it is indeed contraband. The intent of the regulation is to prevent Cargo Techs and QMs being roundstart prosecuted because there's contraband that spawned in the warehouse. Likewise, it is also there in case an antagonist wishes to ransack it for useful tools, including any round-start antagonists in the cargo role.

Nonetheless, it's an IC issue in terms of how security/the HOS/the captain or whatever wish to enforce it. Contraband is being caught with, often, typical syndicate items. You didn't steal them but you somehow smuggled them through, but did not necessarily steal them. Theft is deliberately entering an area, taking what is not yours and misappropriating it instead of immediately returning it. The distinction may not be clear to others, perhaps it is clearer for some other people. It really doesn't matter, however, as this issue can easily be resolved in IC and arguing on that platform for this or that charge dependent on what the context is, and how severe it is. Details, details, details.

This is a mechanics and roleplay disconnect that is not acceptable to me.  It exists as a stopgap to excuse the random spawns allowing 'illegal' items to spawn in the cargo bay.  They can add amusing interactions to non-antagonist interactions, so I agree that them being in the spawn list is fine, but 'contraband' by definition indicates something smuggled into the station illegally.  If it was smuggled illegally into the cargo storage room before the shift starts, why is it not illegal while it's in there?  As you've said, the only reason the regulation exists is to stop big bad sec from beating up cargo techs and performing search and seizures of cargo to confiscate the fun stuff from it.  But that's supposed to be their JOB, and they're being prevented from it by a flimsy, nonsensical regulation that exists solely for OOC reasons.  There are no items that spawn in the cargo warehouse that are overtly dangerous (i.e. guns or weapons), but some of them can be used to FACILITATE dangerous behavior, so shouldn't necessarily be considered immediately illegal and worthy of confiscation.

So, alternatively, you could rework the concept of 'contraband' to be a little more complicated than 'is on OOC antag item list unga bunga', and have officers take people in for questioning when they have items that clearly aren't acceptable to be using, because they are disruptive to the workplace. 

Example:
Where did they get this radio jammer?  From the cargo bay, they say? Well, that's theft. Are they a cargo team member? If no then that's also trespassing.  Did they use it for an assault?  That's also a charge.  Can they not adequately explain where they got it, or has cargo denied that item was part of the stock they took earlier that shift? THAT'S contraband, and raises more questions about how they snuck it into the station.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Kaed

[Scheveningen]

1 minute ago, Kaed said:

If it was smuggled illegally into the cargo storage room before the shift starts, why is it not illegal while it's in there?

Ever work in the backend of a supply shop? I've seen so much weird shit pass around on a conveyor belt for the lost and found, it's not even funny. It could be explained that the cargo warehouse just 'finds' things and the staff from the previous shift that manned it, in the context of the setting, simply forgot to pass it off to security or ship it back to CC. Clerical errors and mishaps in shipping happen almost all the time around the globe.

[Kaed]

2 minutes ago, Scheveningen said:

Ever work in the backend of a supply shop? I've seen so much weird shit pass around on a conveyor belt for the lost and found, it's not even funny. It could be explained that the cargo warehouse just 'finds' things and the staff from the previous shift that manned it, in the context of the setting, simply forgot to pass it off to security or ship it back to CC. Clerical errors and mishaps in shipping happen almost all the time around the globe.

That's still not a logical reason why illegal items aren't illegal while in the storage room, and is largely irrelevant to the argument.  "Weird shit" doesn't become legal because it's laying in a storage closet if it's normally illegal.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Kaed

[Conspiir]

If cargo were not given the grace of it not being illegal, security would be within their right to come in and confiscate anything they'd consider dangerous that they might've seen on the cameras. The same applies whenever research decides to make a gun. If this regulation were to not exist, the jobs of weapons researchers and cargo techs would be severely hampered if security came in demanding they turn over their dangerous items. Not that they should. But they could.

 

The idea is not to just allow that, that whatever is in the warehouse belongs to NanoTrasen.  Anyone removing items for personal use (not professional use; distributing to workplaces is part of the job and part of the reason this regulation protects the warehouse) is a thief. If the item is considered a part of non-regulation gear, is dangerous, is anything considered an illegal item to possess for your station, then it is contraband.

 

That being said, it would probably make sense for it to be a theft and contraband charge depending on the item. What I think you should be lobbying for, is a reduction specifically to the severity of non-weapon contraband charges. Things that wouldn't be considered dangerous shouldn't have 15 minutes of brig time, I think. (Though I might say a metal foam grenade might be skirting the line if you consider how fucking terrifying it would be to suddenly be encased in walls, even if they were weak walls. It'd give me nightmares personally.)

[Kaed]

27 minutes ago, Conspiir said:

That being said, it would probably make sense for it to be a theft and contraband charge depending on the item. What I think you should be lobbying for, is a reduction specifically to the severity of non-weapon contraband charges. Things that wouldn't be considered dangerous shouldn't have 15 minutes of brig time, I think. (Though I might say a metal foam grenade might be skirting the line if you consider how fucking terrifying it would be to suddenly be encased in walls, even if they were weak walls. It'd give me nightmares personally.)

That's reasonable, and brings me back to my original point, then - a separate charge for cargo items which aren't appropriate in the workplace, but in this case also carries over to actual traitor items that aren't weapons.  Split the charges into 'contraband' (which becomes a minor severity charge worth like 3-5 minutes or a fine plus confiscation) and "illegal armaments" or some other more appealing name for people carrying guns and stuff, which replaces the generic 15 minute 'contraband' charge as we have now.

However, stacking 'theft' and 'contraband' on each other for having a smoke grenade is arbitrary and silly, we should also have a policy about only one charge per specific object/item of offense.  You can't charge someone for stealing something that also is contraband because that's two charges on one illegal item, just pick the more severe one. But you can additionally charge them for breaking into cargo to get it, because that's a separate offense item.

But I still don't think it makes sense for there to be an IC excuse that items aren't illegal when they are in the warehouse but outside of it, they are. The items should just NOT BE ILLEGAL but the illegality should be in using them to PERFORM illegal acts.  You also can't treat guns in research as the same situation as cargo.  The guns are part of their actual job, they are supposed to research things, which includes weapons.  Cargo techs have no reason to acquire radio jammers or smoke grenades, if they are illegal items, but they're fun toys to be put in the game as random spawns, so it would be kind of unfun to remove them.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Kaed

[Alberyk]

Voting for dismissal because I don't really think that a charge for this particular case is needed.

[The lancer]

Voting for dismissal. We don't need a new charge like this.

[Arrow768]

Moving to rejected suggestions due to 2 dismissals