Pseudonym

this is an incredibly based and REAL common sense pilled take.

oh I thought it might mean like you needed to have that charge on you 3 times. But yeah your interpretation seems more like how it's intended and common sense, but like..... i'm probably on my 40th offense on some of these crimes. Does that mean they can do the third offense level punishment every time I get charged with it from now on? It's stuff like that in the handbook that I really dislike. It's not even a gray area, it's just like undefined, unknowable.

After further reading, I'm not 100% sure my previous message is correct, but I don't think there is much differentiation between detainment and arrest, and reasonable suspicion vs probable cause in the handbook. The only real mention of "detain" is saying you can detain a civ if they are "interfering" with an investigation, and if you notify them why they are being detained. I believe I have been detained multiple times when I was completely innocent, without doing something that could be considered as interfering with an investigation. I will be paying more attention to that from now on. And, sadly, there is no use of "reasonable suspicion" in the handbook, which in the USA is generally the level required to detain someone. Given the handbook says: Let's take that serious and go through an example situation. Let's say someone is flying without a pilot license. If we look at the ticket guide we can see: Let's think about this more carefully. Probable cause, according to the handbook, is when you have grounds conduct a search OR make an arrest. Now, if you were to send someone to jail, it's pretty obvious that you would have to arrest them. Yet flying without a pilot license doesn't actually provide you the probable cause needed to be able to arrest them. So it's a crime that you can be jailed for if you do it 3 times, but it's not a crime that you can be arrested for. You'd have to be arrested on some other crime that grants probable cause, and then you could finally get sent to jail for this crime. Does this sound right? Does this sound like how it's intended? Does this sound like how it's actually played out on the server? I don't think so, yet if we accept your logic that people need probable cause to be arrested, it means that you can't arrest someone for these "Does not warrant probable cause" charges, and if you can't arrest them, how could you even ticket them either?

I don't believe you need probable cause to detain someone. That would mean anyone who is detained could be searched by the APD, which is incorrect.

they told me to leave the redzone, and not get back in the m900. how would I get back in the m900 and leave the area instead?

how so? as long as you don't restrain or detain them it seems fine to me. I landed a m900 at mushroom pro once trying to audit the apd, they told me to leave redzone, not get back in my m900, then they impounded it leaving me 2 km away from nearest garage even though I was in sight of the m900 outside of redzone, i wasn't detained, and it wasn't blocking a path or roadway. what officer in there right mind would impound a random m900 from someone who isn't wanted, and who you forced to leave the area of the m900?

idk but what's stopping the APD from telling them that? why does it matter that it's "governed by the APD" or not?

ok well then what's stopping them from saying "leave silver pro or be shot"?

I've been trying to audit the impound rules recently, and the most insane thing to me was that they could literally just detain you randomly when your not wanted, impound your vehicle mid legal run, then unrestrain you and leave. There is nothing that prevents that scenario.

i already wrote the code, on how to do it, in the workshop mod, and I have it here if you want to see it. i have the code

yes

yo dawg, respect. addiction is like one of the hardest things to deal with. i'm glad to see ur trying to make that step. good luck dawg!

were gonna miss you dawg!!!