Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
ThatMuricanGuy

Amendment to CCTV Rules

Recommended Posts

Jax    550
10 minutes ago, effion said:

My stand on it is same as Invictus.

If the player has a recording and CCTV does exist then it should be allowed to use with no need for consent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
PaNYT    3

100% agree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
MomoIsHere    312

This got my support. The rule for consent should be removed, as it is unnecessary and makes way for PG and p2w.

Share this post


Link to post
Juicebox    18

Can we make this an amendment to the rule already? 😁

Share this post


Link to post
tomatoz    22

I for sure support this. I work at a 24/7 that has already been robbed twice and people sometimes really do not want to give OOC consent to CCTV camera footage being roleplayed just because they don’t want to be arrested. Most places and stores have active CCTV cameras at all times, so I’m hoping this is made as an amendment to the rule eventually. 

Share this post


Link to post
effion    140
2 minutes ago, tomatoz said:

I for sure support this. I work at a 24/7 that has already been robbed twice and people sometimes really do not want to give OOC consent to CCTV camera footage being roleplayed just because they don’t want to be arrested. Most places and stores have active CCTV cameras at all times, so I’m hoping this is made as an amendment to the rule eventually. 

You don't need OOC consent for a 24/7.

Share this post


Link to post
tomatoz    22
Just now, effion said:

You don't need OOC consent for a 24/7.

Either way, there are many other places that need active CCTV camera footage such as trucking lots, government buildings, most buildings, and houses. I know some people don’t give OOC consent to roleplay the CCTV camera footage just so they don’t get arrested.

Share this post


Link to post
eTaylor    191

Why not just do what they did on LSRP? That worked just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
St3fan[NL]    382

100% agreeing. The amount of times for e.g. at Davis 24/7 / Gas station people complained that they give no consent for CCTV, just to get away with a battery or murder charge.

 

IC gas station record the pumps to record people driving off without paying, IC inside the store would be CCTV.

Share this post


Link to post
Soup    13

This is something that I fully agree with for many mentioned points above. Business properties especially will have CCTV for their own protection, knowing full well a robbery could commence at anytime, they're there to provide evidence if necessary to the fact. If the player working in the store, or even, around where there are cameras posted which realistically would be able to capture the footage of what had happened, actually showing the footage should not be put in the hands of the offending party for obvious reasons.

That being said, there should be adequate evidence ready to be displayed from the providing party to clarify the situation fully - this, as the post declares, should be inform of video evidence so that, before the CCTV is shown ICly, the admins can determine if it's realistic that the cameras in question captured said event, taking into account blind-spots, where the incident happened etc. 

 

This, removes the perpetrator(s)'s "play-to-win" attitude which comes with denying any evidence being brought up against them, however, takes realism more into account with locations of cameras, where they stood at the time of the robbery (which dictates what the camera sees) etc. Without pictorial evidence, it'd be quite difficult to establish the abovementioned, which would in-turn make it difficult for the admin to believe (in player-owned businesses such as trucking sites where CCTV is manually implemented by other players).

CCTV being reviewed without video evidence would be for admins to discuss, as it still gives the perpetrator(s) the play-to-win attitude knowing full well they can rob vehicles outside a company property when no one is around, just because they know it won't get captured on CCTV because of lack-of-players around despite the CCTV being right on-top of them or their vehicle-of-choice if it's involving a vehicle theft. 

 

Either way, I'm all for this rule to be changed.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...