Small question to the cops regarding a hostage situation.

[JPostalMan 106]

Today i had a medic hostage after having a prolonged firefight with the APD.

As i sat on the rooftop of an office building (last resort tactic after being chased throughout Kavala)

I asked for a pardon or the medic would get it.

after asking i took fire from an APD officer on a construction building, i shot at him and a civilian standing next to him died. (bad aim m8)

 

Now after that I said if anymore fire came at me that i'd kill the medic (which i had no intention of doing b/c <3 medics)

 

He then denied my 1mil bounty could be pardoned and that i could ask for something else....

 

The question is : Was my proposal to get a pardon too much due to my bounty and that was why i could not receive one? or were the cops being greedy (they weren't high ranked)

[Guest]

As written in the handbook:

 

1. A player may not ask to be pardoned if there bounty is over $2 Million

   1. If your bounty is over the above amount then you must request something else, this does not give you reason to kill the hostage(s)

 

It would have been well within the officer's power to pardon/give a pardon ticket for your 1mil bounty.

 

It may have been part of roleplay to deny you the 1mil pardon, as its fine to roleplay and deny certain things if a counter-offer is given.

 

You also should not have been fired upon unless negotiations had already been underway and negotiations failed(Denying counter-offers for a hostage release is grounds for a failed negotiation)

 

 

 

Did you ask and receive something else? What was it?

[Fat Clemenza 1722]

During a hostage situation, a hostage taker's demand can be a pardon of up to a $2Mil bounty. Sometimes we'll purposely fail negotiations if we think we can apprehend the hostage taker while saving the hostage. More often then not, we'll end up giving into demands because we can't fire until negotiations have fail. The officers must've been confident that they could get you, so that's probably why you weren't pardoned.

[JPostalMan 106]

Well...their attempt got 2 civi's killed :C

I got away scot free though

 

I somehow survived a fall which should have killed me...it was a little drastic and crazy.

 

Also, the officer didn't give me a counter-offer. I even told him to make me an offer.

[Det. Payne 91]

Was there a corporal available? Many times cadets and maybe PO think they can't cant do pardons simply because they can't use the pardon button. Also because under normal rules they also can't even give a cut on tickets.

[JPostalMan 106]

I guess there wasn't. Guess i'm lucky to get away from a bunch of 1 ^'s 

[wrice4 47]

As written in the handbook:

 

1. A player may not ask to be pardoned if there bounty is over $2 Million

   1. If your bounty is over the above amount then you must request something else, this does not give you reason to kill the hostage(s)

 

It would have been well within the officer's power to pardon/give a pardon ticket for your 1mil bounty.

 

It may have been part of roleplay to deny you the 1mil pardon, as its fine to roleplay and deny certain things if a counter-offer is given.

 

You also should not have been fired upon unless negotiations had already been underway and negotiations failed(Denying counter-offers for a hostage release is grounds for a failed negotiation)

 

 

 

Did you ask and receive something else? What was it?

Exactly sir!

[Wheatkings 245]

Sometimes we'll purposely fail negotiations if we think we can apprehend the hostage taker while saving the hostage.

 

That Sir is the absolute worst thing you could have said.

[wrice4 47]

 

Sometimes we'll purposely fail negotiations if we think we can apprehend the hostage taker while saving the hostage. 

 

 

That Sir is the absolute worst thing you could have said.

Sorry, but this made me lmao.

[Fat Clemenza 1722]

That Sir is the absolute worst thing you could have said.

I have to disagree. Taking down criminals is the job of the police department. If I'm the negotiator and I've got a good guy behind the trigger who's got his sights on that monster of a criminal who made the mistake of violating a person's unalienable rights that were endowed to him by the Creator, then I'll do everything in my power (so long as I know I can keep the hostage alive) to take down the hostage taker. If that means being a used car salesman and saying no to a demand for even the smallest item, then so be it. We RP as cops: once the police sniper is informed of what's going with the situation, then he'll make his move; if he's got a shot on the hostage taker, he'll damn well take the shot. He's not going to wait for "negotiations to fail," in order to take a shot. If he did do that, then at least two people die; the hostage and the hostage taker. At this juncture our Hostage Situations are so one-sided [in the favor of the bad guys] it defies description. I can justify purposely failing a negotiation through RP (by saying no to their demands and having a sniper take down the hostage taker and having an entry team move in to apprehend. I did it in Kavala the other day and it worked spectacularly), so to go back to your post, it's the absolute best thing I could've said. Rant Over.

[wrice4 47]

I have to disagree. Taking down criminals is the job of the police department. If I'm the negotiator and I've got a good guy behind the trigger who's got his sights on that monster of a criminal who made the mistake of violating a person's unalienable rights that were endowed to him by the Creator, then I'll do everything in my power (so long as I know I can keep the hostage alive) to take down the hostage taker. If that means being a used car salesman and saying no to a demand for even the smallest item, then so be it. We RP as cops: once the police sniper is informed of what's going with the situation, then he'll make his move; if he's got a shot on the hostage taker, he'll damn well take the shot. He's not going to wait for "negotiations to fail," in order to take a shot. If he did do that, then at least two people die; the hostage and the hostage taker. At this juncture our Hostage Situations are so one-sided [in the favor of the bad guys] it defies description. I can justify purposely failing a negotiation through RP (by saying no to their demands and having a sniper take down the hostage taker and having an entry team move in to apprehend. I did it in Kavala the other day and it worked spectacularly), so to go back to your post, it's the absolute best thing I could've said. Rant Over.

First off, besides deputies, P.O's weapon is not a long range weapon, so there is no sniper shot for them, because of inaccuracy. So, using a closer range weapon, for a sniper shot is a bad idea. The next step up, in terms of weapon range, is the corporal gun, and if there is a corporal playing, he should be the one doing the negotiation. Same thing with a higher rank than corporal, and so on.

 

Second, officers never purposely fail the negotiations.... They always try and work with the hostage taker to keep them calm and let them know you are trying to do something to help them. This also includes stalling them, and telling them they are getting something the hostage taker wants, even though the officer knows that can't happen.

 

Quote: "Taking down criminals is the job of the police department. " - To a certain degree, yes. But, another main objective is to maximize safety and minimize casualties. Also, cops do not purposely fail negotiations to kill the bad guy. The objective is to always get the hostage out safe, and the bad guy detained....alive.

 

 

I understand what you are saying, and your point, but you are the one looking at it one sided. The reasons we have negotiations is to come to a common ground, on a decision. If that can't happen, under certain circumstances, then an alternative solution has to happen. Purposely failing negotiations is not RP-ing it at all; its "wanting" to kill the hostage taker just because you can. Of course your previous situation can work, but taking down (killing) criminals is not the police's job, it is to save the good guys, and detain the bad guys, and that doesn't mean kill them in every hostage situation. I hope the other side of the bridge makes sense to you.

[Dustin87 864]

The best tactic is chuck as many flashbangs as possible and then use a depuyty as a meatshield, once the deputy dies unload all your MX mags into the hostage taker and hope the hostage isnt dead.

[Fat Clemenza 1722]

First off, besides deputies, P.O's weapon is not a long range weapon, so there is no sniper shot for them, because of inaccuracy. So, using a closer range weapon, for a sniper shot is a bad idea. The next step up, in terms of weapon range, is the corporal gun, and if there is a corporal playing, he should be the one doing the negotiation. Same thing with a higher rank than corporal, and so on.

 

Second, officers never purposely fail the negotiations.... They always try and work with the hostage taker to keep them calm and let them know you are trying to do something to help them. This also includes stalling them, and telling them they are getting something the hostage taker wants, even though the officer knows that can't happen.

 

Quote: "Taking down criminals is the job of the police department. " - To a certain degree, yes. But, another main objective is to maximize safety and minimize casualties. Also, cops do not purposely fail negotiations to kill the bad guy. The objective is to always get the hostage out safe, and the bad guy detained....alive.

 

 

I understand what you are saying, and your point, but you are the one looking at it one sided. The reasons we have negotiations is to come to a common ground, on a decision. If that can't happen, under certain circumstances, then an alternative solution has to happen. Purposely failing negotiations is not RP-ing it at all; its "wanting" to kill the hostage taker just because you can. Of course your previous situation can work, but taking down (killing) criminals is not the police's job, it is to save the good guys, and detain the bad guys, and that doesn't mean kill them in every hostage situation. I hope the other side of the bridge makes sense to you.

1) The MXC is more than capable of making a long distance shot. It can make a 300 meter shot with ease; most hostage situations that I've been in; the marksman is usually no further than 300 meters in an attempt to ensure precision.

2) While cops may "never purposely fail negotiations" they will try to low-ball or stall the guy like you said. With the current regulations, I don't see where this takes you since it's not a failed negotiation which does not warrant force.

3) While the objective is to keep people safe, that end can be reached if we have the opportunity to apprehend the bad guy. This means failing the negotiation in most circumstances. The goal here is not killing anyone; it's to bring the bad guy to Justice while seeing the hostage get out safely.

4) Failing negotiations is part of RP. I could stall negotiations with the intent to fail them in order to resolve the situation. I don't "kill just because I can." If it's possible, then we detain the bad guys and rescue the good guys, like you said. However, in order for us to acheive that end, negotiations will have to fail in order for us to stay within the rules. That's the big problem. Negotiations should not have to fail in order for us to use force. That's my big beef at the moment. I've given my view, I shall stick by it. I'll continue to do what works best for me so long as I'm well within the rules. I appreciate your feedback, Wrice. You've got a solid point of view that I can appreciate, but I wanted to offer mine, no matter how unpopular it is. Maybe the rules might change and the guidelines will be in the middle ground between our points of view.

[wrice4 47]

1) The MXC is more than capable of making a long distance shot. It can make a 300 meter shot with ease; most hostage situations that I've been in; the marksman is usually no further than 300 meters in an attempt to ensure precision.

2) While cops may "never purposely fail negotiations" they will try to low-ball or stall the guy like you said. With the current regulations, I don't see where this takes you since it's not a failed negotiation which does not warrant force.

3) While the objective is to keep people safe, that end can be reached if we have the opportunity to apprehend the bad guy. This means failing the negotiation in most circumstances. The goal here is not killing anyone; it's to bring the bad guy to Justice while seeing the hostage get out safely.

4) Failing negotiations is part of RP. I could stall negotiations with the intent to fail them in order to resolve the situation. I don't "kill just because I can." If it's possible, then we detain the bad guys and rescue the good guys, like you said. However, in order for us to acheive that end, negotiations will have to fail in order for us to stay within the rules. That's the big problem. Negotiations should not have to fail in order for us to use force. That's my big beef at the moment. I've given my view, I shall stick by it. I'll continue to do what works best for me so long as I'm well within the rules. I appreciate your feedback, Wrice. You've got a solid point of view that I can appreciate, but I wanted to offer mine, no matter how unpopular it is. Maybe the rules might change and the guidelines will be in the middle ground between our points of view.

We can agree on some points and disagree on others. I appreciate the positive feedback from my response, and not a trash talk back because I disagreed. Glad some people can still disagree, on some things, and discuss them maturely.

Anyways, I can understand some of your points, and glad you can see some of mine. Cheers and hope to play soon.

[Fat Clemenza 1722]

Cheers to you as well, dude. Hope to play with you soon.

[Talindor 872]

All of these replies and no one has made a point to encourage recording? If you feel you have been wronged at that point involving the APD, record it, submit it, and investigation will follow. People post in forums, stories of how unfair a particular situation is for the whole of the world to view, in some cases to promote propaganda (not saying this is one of those cases). If it's something worth doing, it is worth doing right, am I right?

[wrice4 47]

All of these replies and no one has made a point to encourage recording?

Considering everyone that has commented on this post is either APD or R&R, I assume the recording is a given. This isn't about recording and reporting. It was a question/debate about a particular scenario and the outcome that should have occurred.