Crime Restrictions in "The Hills"

[Engelbert]

8 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

 

How can we lobby IC for longer police helicopter observation of specific areas?

You can't. Obviously people never listen properly. It's all about numbers, playerbase. You cannot compare LS to LA, simply because we lack numbers. I dunno how many players LEOs have, bur if they shift some of their numbers elsewhere...well depends on what they want to roleplay really. I often see ten cars chasing one, which means that, there's least 8 cops loose, that could be needed elsewhere.

Edited August 19, 2023 by Engelbert

[DasFroggy]

18 minutes ago, Engelbert said:

You can't. Obviously people never listen properly. It's all about numbers, playerbase. You cannot compare LS to LA, simply because we lack numbers. I dunno how many players LEOs have, bur if they shift some of their numbers elsewhere...well depends on what they want to roleplay really. I often see ten cars chasing one, which means that, there's least 8 cops loose, that could be needed elsewhere.

 

The question's still a legitimate one, because it attacks the core of the argument that's being leveraged - "Take it IC." 

 

Okay, I'm going to take it IC, but there'd better not be any OOC rules to go against my IC initiative, otherwise we can no longer say "IC issue", and must address it OOC. Either an IC avenue exists to ensure police helicopters can freely patrol any area in any numbers for any duration of time, or the "IC issue" response is invalid.

[Engelbert]

4 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

 

The question's still a legitimate one, because it attacks the core of the argument that's being leveraged - "Take it IC." 

 

Okay, I'm going to take it IC, but there'd better not be any OOC rules to go against my IC initiative, otherwise we can no longer say "IC issue", and must address it OOC. Either an IC avenue exists to ensure police helicopters can freely patrol any area in any numbers for any duration of time, or the "IC issue" response is invalid.

I think people discussed the helicopters already and they will not like it, if there 's even bigger chance to be spotted before they are done with breakin or robbery.

Edited August 19, 2023 by Engelbert

[Mythology]

13 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

 

The question's still a legitimate one, because it attacks the core of the argument that's being leveraged - "Take it IC." 

 

Okay, I'm going to take it IC, but there'd better not be any OOC rules to go against my IC initiative, otherwise we can no longer say "IC issue", and must address it OOC. Either an IC avenue exists to ensure police helicopters can freely patrol any area in any numbers for any duration of time, or the "IC issue" response is invalid.

The only thing you attacked with this arguement is, yet again, the increasing amount of hyperboles people slur and sling trying to "prove a point".

There are enough politicians who want to do political roleplay, advocate for lower crime rates and budget spendings. Hand them their roleplay and see what kind of beauty they can do.

[DasFroggy]

Just now, Mythology said:

The only thing you attacked with this arguement is, yet again, the increasing amount of hyperboles people slur and sling trying to "prove a point".

There are enough politicians who want to do political roleplay, advocate for lower crime rates and budget spendings. Hand them their roleplay and see what kind of beauty they can do.

 

Except that we've established that "lower crime rates" requires measures that can't happen due to OOC restrictions. You know what would help with lowering crime rates? More helicopters, with each one accomplishing more to secure the area than any number of law enforcement officers, and at a much lower cost. 

 

...any time an IC solution is found that'll offer a legitimate, genuinely IC means to lower crime rates, it'll be attacked and shut down OOC. So which is it, is there an avenue to get more helicopter patrols for longer periods of time IC, or are we going to have to continue addressing this OOC?

[varthshenon]

26 minutes ago, Mythology said:

The only thing you attacked with this arguement is, yet again, the increasing amount of hyperboles people slur and sling trying to "prove a point".

There are enough politicians who want to do political roleplay, advocate for lower crime rates and budget spendings. Hand them their roleplay and see what kind of beauty they can do.

In case you didn't get it from what DasFroggy said, admins or the server are prohibiting crime measurement OOCly so crime can still exist.

[Mythology]

41 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

 

Except that we've established that "lower crime rates" requires measures that can't happen due to OOC restrictions. You know what would help with lowering crime rates? More helicopters, with each one accomplishing more to secure the area than any number of law enforcement officers, and at a much lower cost. 

 

...any time an IC solution is found that'll offer a legitimate, genuinely IC means to lower crime rates, it'll be attacked and shut down OOC. So which is it, is there an avenue to get more helicopter patrols for longer periods of time IC, or are we going to have to continue addressing this OOC?

 

More helicopters? Are you classifying that as a legitimate and probable course of action to happen IC?

 

17 minutes ago, varthshenon said:

In case you didn't get it from what DasFroggy said, admins or the server are prohibiting crime measurement OOCly so crime can still exist.

No, server/admins are prohibiting idiotic and over the top ideas proposed by players who think the solution to a cockroach infestation is a nuclear warhead.

[cryybabyycryy]

44 minutes ago, DasFroggy said:

 

Except that we've established that "lower crime rates" requires measures that can't happen due to OOC restrictions. You know what would help with lowering crime rates? More helicopters, with each one accomplishing more to secure the area than any number of law enforcement officers, and at a much lower cost. 

 

...any time an IC solution is found that'll offer a legitimate, genuinely IC means to lower crime rates, it'll be attacked and shut down OOC. So which is it, is there an avenue to get more helicopter patrols for longer periods of time IC, or are we going to have to continue addressing this OOC?

More helis, longer patrols? What over South LS? That won't solve anything. A large part of this issue is people not wanting to rp/patrol in slow areas, you allow them more and they are still not going to want to patrol in these areas. 

[DasFroggy]

33 minutes ago, Mythology said:

a legitimate and probable course of action...

 

...would be to allow IC policy requests from the public to override OOC mandates, but you're STILL dodging the question. If the public demands this IC will it hit OOC restrictions, yes or no?

 

33 minutes ago, Mythology said:

server/admins are prohibiting idiotic and over the top ideas proposed by players who think the solution to a cockroach infestation is a nuclear warhead.

 

Somehow "Tell the civvies to arm themselves and KILL ANYONE THAT TRESSPASSES" is legit being proposed as "reasonable" while the request of "Let our one patrol helicopter investigate areas of high crime for ten more minutes than currently allowed" is considered a "nuclear solution".

 

I mean, I'll be fair, I'm all for the first suggestion. I think we should do away with rules of engagement entirely, and let people shoot eachother whenever for whatever... But let's be real, the current attitudes in the quoted post alone show that the only time it's "fair" is when only one side is allowed to enjoy OOC reinforcement of their preferences, and if anything practical is proposed to handle the matter IC by the other side, it'll be shut down because it's "a nuke used to fight bugs".

 

"Can we shoot first if we think we're in danger?"

"No, that'd be using a nuke to fight bugs. You'll be punished OOC and never be allowed to legally acquire guns for ANY of your characters ever again if you EVER shoot first, even if you KNOW people are trying to kill you."

Edited August 19, 2023 by DasFroggy

[Frakkennewguy]

1 hour ago, DasFroggy said:

 

The question's still a legitimate one, because it attacks the core of the argument that's being leveraged - "Take it IC." 

 

Okay, I'm going to take it IC, but there'd better not be any OOC rules to go against my IC initiative, otherwise we can no longer say "IC issue", and must address it OOC. Either an IC avenue exists to ensure police helicopters can freely patrol any area in any numbers for any duration of time, or the "IC issue" response is invalid.

 

Hey, if you lobby in game, try and work with PD to make more patrols happen, whatever options present themselves and there are OOC restrictions that prevent a resolution when you get there, that's a whole different thing and you SHOULD take it OOC.

 

But for now, I think you still have IC options. Engage with PD or SD, both even. Talk to your politician friends about funding or law changes. Create RP and do your best to bring people into this ICly and if it DOES become an OOC issue, you're much more likely to be seen favourably for creating RP.

1 minute ago, DasFroggy said:

 

"Can we shoot first if we think we're in danger?"

"No, that'd be using a nuke to fight bugs. You'll be punished OOC and never be allowed to legally acquire guns for ANY of your characters ever again if you EVER shoot first, even if you KNOW people are trying to kill you."

 

 

I'm pretty sure that IG we're a Castle Doctrine state. If you find someone in your house, you can absolutely shoot them without any warning.