SAPR should change to SAHP. Here are some reasons why.

[dionkoffie]

Would love to see sahp. I think it would also fit the server a bit better.

[FatCatTuxedo]

 

 

[AtlasOLimbo]

I have spent hours talking to SAPR both IC and OOC and they provide a roleplay experience more quality than most factions on the server, especially other LEOs. As was said here, just because you get pulled over for breaking the law doesn't mean they're bored. *If* SAHP were to become a thing, it should be another faction all together. I don't think seeing a mass resignation when the faction is restructured/renamed of rather high quality roleplayers would be fun for anyone.

Edited March 23, 2023 by AtlasOLimbo

[Vash Baldeus]

13 hours ago, Wildcat said:

 

 

 

ye bro look at all this vast countryside those fuckin cowboys need to stick to the prairie fields bro ..

Okay, I take that back. Now I wonder why does SD need automatic corruption perms then, hm? Something that is given to them once they are out of probie stage and no one checks if they don't abuse it in non-ic ways? You think 100% of the department irl is corrupt? Not the case. This needs to change if I am honest, where people need good IC reasons and background story to give them those perms, yet, here, no need for it whatsoever. 

 

Biggest issue no one checks if this permission is not abused to the point where it breaks server-rules, and trust me, if there is a way to abuse something humans will abuse it.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Vash Baldeus

[Vash Baldeus]

2 hours ago, AtlasOLimbo said:

I have spent hours talking to SAPR both IC and OOC and they provide a roleplay experience more quality than most factions on the server, especially other LEOs. As was said here, just because you get pulled over for breaking the law doesn't mean they're bored. *If* SAHP were to become a thing, it should be another faction all together. I don't think seeing a mass resignation when the faction is restructured/renamed of rather high quality roleplayers would be fun for anyone.

Okay, but why were they given permission to pull people over outside national parks? Clearly responsibility of SD.

[eTaylor]

4 minutes ago, Vash Baldeus said:

Okay, I take that back. Now I wonder why does SD need automatic corruption perms then, hm? Something that is given to them once they are out of probie stage and no one checks if they don't abuse it in non-ic ways? You think 100% of the department irl is corrupt? Not the case. This needs to change if I am honest, where people need good IC reasons and background story to give them those perms, yet, here, no need for it whatsoever. 

 

Biggest issue no one checks if this permission is not abused to the point where it breaks server-rules, and trust me, if there is a way to abuse something humans will abuse it.

Corruption is heavily restricted, and isn’t at all handled the way you described it. It’s monitored and dealt with in character, and OOC violations are heavily punished. In most cases it leads to immediate removal from the faction. 
 

3 minutes ago, Vash Baldeus said:

Okay, but why were they given permission to pull people over outside national parks? Clearly responsibility of SD.

Because they’re a state law enforcement agency. 

[Vash Baldeus]

3 minutes ago, eTaylor said:

Corruption is heavily restricted, and isn’t at all handled the way you described it. It’s monitored and dealt with in character, and OOC violations are heavily punished. In most cases it leads to immediate removal from the faction. 
 

Because they’re a state law enforcement agency. 

So, you claim that coming to a PEACEFUL protest in full riot gear in mass numbers is okay, cause that's something SD done recently. I would understand being around the block in full riot gear, but coming out, standing infront of the protesters who peacefully do so just to intimidate? I see it a problem.

[Pogis]

3 minutes ago, Vash Baldeus said:

So, you claim that coming to a PEACEFUL protest in full riot gear in mass numbers is okay, cause that's something SD done recently. I would understand being around the block in full riot gear, but coming out, standing infront of the protesters who peacefully do so just to intimidate? I see it a problem.

 

If you get intimidated by SD taking precaution and gearing up, then you're the problem.

 

I've never witnessed a peaceful protest remain peaceful in GTA:W. SD probably only used common sense to realize that things will go sideways anyway.

[eTaylor]

15 minutes ago, Vash Baldeus said:

So, you claim that coming to a PEACEFUL protest in full riot gear in mass numbers is okay, cause that's something SD done recently. I would understand being around the block in full riot gear, but coming out, standing infront of the protesters who peacefully do so just to intimidate? I see it a problem.

That’s you filling in a complex decision making process that you had no part in with information you don’t have. The risk management assessment report wasn’t made because “corruption permissions”. And the deployment was to facilitate a lawful protest by the community of Little Seoul. The specific order specified that deputies were not there to disrupt, halt or hinder it in any way. Instead to protect it from disrupting parties that want to instigate a riot. The manner of deployment and utilization of resources is entirely IC. 

Edited March 23, 2023 by eTaylor

[Vash Baldeus]

1 hour ago, Pogis said:

If you get intimidated by SD taking precaution and gearing up, then you're the problem.

 

I've never witnessed a peaceful protest remain peaceful in GTA:W. SD probably only used common sense to realize that things will go sideways anyway.

Take it you have not seen how they handle a violent one have you?