"Snitching" Clarification or Modification

[Dawnof33]

This may just need clarification, but it's hard to tell as I've seen the following mentality in use/abuse by many people, supported by admin players, and also contradicted by others when asked about it. I'll paint a scenario.

 

You're walking down the street, minding your own business. A couple of guys jump out and decide to assault and mug you. Then they make a comment about how you'd better not "snitch" while waving a gun and then depart. You, being a regular civilian, call the police and report it. The criminals might get thrown in jail if they're caught for maybe a week or something. They see the calling of the police as "snitching" which warrants a PK and start trying to stalk you, find and shoot you. So while they could end up in jail, your character is, in their eyes, justified to be killed.

 

If this is a mindset that needs clarified in the rules, then no rules really need changed just clarified. The rules DO mention that you can't PK over reporting "petty crimes" to the police.

 

If this is intended and allowed, it seems like it needs to be reconsidered. Lots of criminals just don't seem to be behaving intelligently because they apparently think that this is appropriate, and the consequences each party face are, IMO, completely unbalanced. They try to instigate conflict, then if there is retaliation it becomes instantly PK-able? That seems to contribute to a toxic mentality that just detracts from the fun of role-playing, especially for civilians.

 

And please, FTLOG, keep the responses on-topic and logical, not trollish. You know who you are.

[PeopleKind]

The way I see it?

 

If the player calling the police is a regular law abiding civilian, then it makes no sense to PK them at all.

If the person calling the police is a rival gang member, then killing them for it is reasonable, however I still think it should be escalated properly instead of directly to gun violence.

 

 

Killing someone for acting like any reasonable civilian would act like is just DM mentality in my honest opinion. But at the same time, calling the police right infront of said criminals is also a pretty stupid move, but even then, jumping straight to murder is excessive.

 

TL;DR; Murdering someone for acting & reacting exactly how a normal law abiding citizen would IRL is just overkill & shows a DM mentality. Like, are you really gonna risk life in prison instead of a few months/years for a couple of firearms & robbery charges?

 

It's mentalities such as that that result in robo characters.

Edited February 16 by PeopleKind

[Steeled]

Killing a player over calling 911 isn't justifiable, but it depends on the scenario. If the victim was held gunpoint and they called 911, that'd greenlight the robbers to start shooting since the victim basically didn't fear for their life. If the victim was already robbed, left alone and then called 911, it would make no sense for the robbers to try and find the victim to stalk them and then kill them. This would just put them at risk of facing more charges than what they could get from the mug, which is overall not worth it. This ofcourse depends on the victim like PeopleKind said. If the victim is a regular citizen, they shouldn't be killed over calling 911 after being robbed and left alone. If the victim was in a gang, then it'd kind of make sense for the rivals to shoot them for "snitching". 

[Moonsong]

Why should a player ever be killed over something YOU instigated knowing the risks robbing an average citizen would be? The criminal needs to take non-lethal steps to ensure the civilian DOESN'T call the cops, get their ID, search their phone for compromising information, threaten to leak it if they call the cops, threaten to torch their house, whatever but don't kill them for doing something any reasonably minded person would do once it's safe to do considering they'd probably never see you again. That's just a really shitty thing to do, and in my opinion borderline DM and perhaps even PG.

[Barbary]

The better way to combat this would be to create a partial 911 call system. Once a 911 call is initiated, a trace immediately begins that shows the location of the 911 call. You do that, then people will be incentivized to flee instead of kill because the cops are going to be coming no matter what.

 

As things works now, 911 callers work straight out of Payday. Just kill the NPC before they can pull the alarm.

[Dawnof33]

2 hours ago, Moonsong said:

Why should a player ever be killed over something YOU instigated knowing the risks robbing an average citizen would be? The criminal needs to take non-lethal steps to ensure the civilian DOESN'T call the cops, get their ID, search their phone for compromising information, threaten to leak it if they call the cops, threaten to torch their house, whatever but don't kill them for doing something any reasonably minded person would do once it's safe to do considering they'd probably never see you again. That's just a really shitty thing to do, and in my opinion borderline DM and perhaps even PG.

 

Well, the problem is that once they do, it's fair game to them. I think the better solution for them would be to not be idiots about their crimes - like not wearing masks or otherwise leaving your identity revealed? The excuse that someone could have identified them, the police get involved, and it's "snitching" is just misrepresented IMO. The criminals should have the responsibility to not get caught or leave evidence to their identity. Committing a violent crime in a public venue that has video footage, for instance, is just asking to get police involved. They shouldn't be able to claim it's "snitching" when that information, the video, etc, is shared.

[DLimit]

20 minutes ago, Dawnof33 said:

 

Well, the problem is that once they do, it's fair game to them. I think the better solution for them would be to not be idiots about their crimes - like not wearing masks or otherwise leaving your identity revealed? The excuse that someone could have identified them, the police get involved, and it's "snitching" is just misrepresented IMO. The criminals should have the responsibility to not get caught or leave evidence to their identity. Committing a violent crime in a public venue that has video footage, for instance, is just asking to get police involved. They shouldn't be able to claim it's "snitching" when that information, the video, etc, is shared.

And if they choose to be idiots by risking not only themselves, but their set and block with foolish crimes? Catch a DP.

[Whiskey]

I don't think an actual written clarification would hurt, though I think the problem mostly stems from the misconception that "snitching" applies to everybody. Now obviously if you pull out your phone and start calling the cops while the guy whose just had a gun in your face is within hearing shot of it you're probably gonna catch a round or two but generally speaking as a criminal you should expect the average person who doesn't gang bang or run with some OCG to call the police.

 

Hunting down a 9-5 worker who called the cops on you after you burgled his home, resulting in your arrest shouldn't be something people accept outside of very specific circumstances.

[FearnR]

+1 Agreed, “snitching” is being trusted with inside information, and then sharing that information externally thus breaking that trust. Exceptions of course for extortion but that’s an entirely different situation. 

 

Failure to take caution while committing a crime and therefor getting the cops called on you is not that.

[Baby Stepper]

On 3/7/2024 at 11:58 AM, FearnR said:

+1 Agreed, “snitching” is being trusted with inside information, and then sharing that information externally thus breaking that trust. Exceptions of course for extortion but that’s an entirely different situation. 

 

Failure to take caution while committing a crime and therefor getting the cops called on you is not that.

this for sure. +1