i118 - Interference with Emergency Personnel*

[Redfield5]

i118 is defined as "a willful and wanton act by non-emergency (Civilian and Research) personnel that interferes with the tasks of Medical, Security, or Engineering personnel. Such acts include, but are not limited to: unauthorized participation in an attempt by Security to effect an arrest or respond to an active threat situation, disturbing injured crew outside of exigent circumstances when not qualified or authorized to provide medical treatment beyond basic first aid or CPR, impeding the movements of emergency personnel whilst they are responding to a call. entering areas marked by any sort of emergency barrier (Security tape, Engineering tape, inflatable walls; non-flashing emergency shutters are exempt from this regulation), or intentionally disregarding an order given during an emergency situation by emergency personnel during a status of elevated alert. i118 may be applied alongside additional charges, depending on the given situation.

A charge of i118 entails a mandatory sentence of 10 minutes, followed up by an optional charge of 1,000 credits.

*Emergency personnel include Medical, Security, and Engineering personnel, whose duties place them in direct response to crises and emergencies that arise during a working shift.

**An emergency situation is defined as "any situation that presents a clear and present hazard to structural, health, or public safety."

[Carver]

This sounds like one of the most abusable "crimes" I've ever seen. Like, "insulting an officer" tier. Perhaps when the average player in these departments doesn't act like a moody 15 year old then this would be a sensible addition, but I truly do not trust the playerbase in the slightest to not abuse this.

[Redfield5]

This sounds like one of the most abusable "crimes" I've ever seen. Like, "insulting an officer" tier. Perhaps when the average player in these departments doesn't act like a moody 15 year old then this would be a sensible addition, but I truly do not trust the playerbase in the slightest to not abuse this.

 

Then give me a way to improve the player base. So far, half of our population is made up of moody teens.

Honestly, I'm just tired of "heroic citizens" getting in my way during a foot pursuit in such a way that I can't immediately effect a detention upon a suspect. Like, we're running, and I can't make a safe ranged shot on a fleeing suspect without some assistant hopping into the line of fire. When I do fire and hit the assistant instead, I either have to deal with two threats instead of one, or I have to get berated over the comms by some assistant yelling "SHITCURITY SHOT ME WHEN I WAS TRYING TO HELP THEM."

[Carver]

This won't change shitsistants at all, those will always exist as they are people who won't care what happens to them either way. Regulations won't change people being dips, it will just allow other people to be dicks. Look at firelock warnings as a fine example of stuff people ignore anyways. This is, in essence, trying to mix the 'spirit' of firelock warnings (Don't fuck around with shit you aren't meant to) and the 'spirit' of Insulting an Officer (Make it easier on officers/heads by punishing people who act like a cock in some sense), but it'll just end up with the worst of both, getting ignored by those it's meant to punish and abused by literally everyone who falls under it and hates someone else.

I truly get what you're trying to do here, but I just don't see it helping whatsoever. The community needs to grow up and security needs a whitelist before anyone could be trusted with a regulation/law such as that.

[Redfield5]

-snip-

 

I yearn for a Security whitelist; I really fucking do. However, that's been shot down routinely.

[Nanako]

this could also cover people who refuse to open doors for paramedics, or shove doctors around while treating patient. i'd approve of that

[UnknownMurder]

-snip-

 

I yearn for a Security whitelist; I really fucking do. However, that's been shot down routinely.

I also support a Security Whitelist. I've already seen Security in interrogation room beating the prisoner and reported to staffs. They haven't told me the verdict or what happened with the player.

[Redfield5]

this could also cover people who refuse to open doors for paramedics, or shove doctors around while treating patient. i'd approve of that

 

Exactly. You guys get enough shit, not only from Security but from the rest of the crew.

The argument against a whitelist, given to me, is that no one will sign up and Security's playerbase will fall apart. I honestly don't mind that. I want more competent officers than incompetent ones.

[Arrow768]

I think we are a bit of topic here since a whitelist is already discussed somewhere else.

Back on topic:

I dont think that this will be possible with our current security force.

Most people dont know that they need a warrant to arrest or search someone on green.

If we get the issues with security sorted out, then yes I would support this, but until then this is going to be abused by sec.

[Redfield5]

I think we are a bit of topic here since a whitelist is already discussed somewhere else.

Back on topic:

I dont think that this will be possible with our current security force.

Most people dont know that they need a warrant to arrest or search someone on green.

If we get the issues with security sorted out, then yes I would support this, but until then this is going to be abused by sec.

 

Let's just call the situation what it is: a shitshow. Everything I've suggested tends to get shot down for being "slow" and "ineffective," and thus we keep sticking with our slow, ineffective CCIA investigations. Nothing will get done, because everything has a consequence.

[Guest]

May I present a real life example, U.S. Code § 111?

This mostly only applies to government LEOs or other federal agents that fall under this regulation, but effectively it means you cannot violently resist or attack a LEO even if the initial charge they are attempting to arrest you for is invalid. Performing a citizen's arrest and failing to physically overpower the officer will lead to being charged under this law if the officer manages to nab you for it.

Stuff like impeding depends on the circumstances and intent but it's mostly limited to willful violence or directly and physically trying to stop a LEO from doing their job.

Now, while I would like to see this regulation come into place, here's the thing:

-- its enforcement should only come into play when there's obvious impediment of emergency responder efforts and said personnel need to be designated as such in an event as emergency response.

-- Personnel may not retroactively designate themselves as emergency responders to twist this rule and get someone into trouble.

-- Burden of proof lies upon the person reporting it if no security officer is present to witness the violation.

-- Disrupting emergency responders should be a serious issue as engineers, security officers and medical personnel should all be protected by regulation from inane attacks in the event the aforementioned need to do their job to help people.