[Resolved] Damage proof unless violent criminal

[Arran]

What if, cops can not make any damage to any criminal unless they have done some violent crime in the past 60 seconds?

Well that's a problem because if cops can't hurt a criminal if they haven't done anything violent you're saying that cops can't hurt anybody (you said "criminal") which means we'd also have to make it so that civilians and such can't hurt anybody either, to have this implemented sensibly.

[Rusty]

Well that's a problem because if cops can't hurt a criminal if they haven't done anything violent you're saying that cops can't hurt anybody (you said "criminal") which means we'd also have to make it so that civilians and such can't hurt anybody either, to have this implemented sensibly.

I think the primary goal of this was to eliminate cops killing wanted players when they haven't committed a violent act. A lot of dumb cops like to kill even the lowest wanted levels, like drug dealers for example, and I think they do this as a way to get away with deathmatching with no consequences. He could've worded it better, but I think that's what he meant, making it so that cops can't damage wanted players unless they've committed a violent act in the past minute.

[Zergad]

I think the primary goal of this was to eliminate cops killing wanted players when they haven't committed a violent act. A lot of dumb cops like to kill even the lowest wanted levels, like drug dealers for example, and I think they do this as a way to get away with deathmatching with no consequences. He could've worded it better, but I think that's what he meant, making it so that cops can't damage wanted players unless they've committed a violent act in the past minute.

Right. Drugdealers, who gain stars, shouldnt be kill-able, because they didnt use violent the last 1 min.

So this Suggestion could work fine.

[psyKapa]

Well that's a problem because if cops can't hurt a criminal if they haven't done anything violent you're saying that cops can't hurt anybody (you said "criminal") which means we'd also have to make it so that civilians and such can't hurt anybody either, to have this implemented sensibly.

Arran, sorry for my english mistakes but rusty explained it well.

I think the primary goal of this was to eliminate cops killing wanted players when they haven't committed a violent act. A lot of dumb cops like to kill even the lowest wanted levels, like drug dealers for example, and I think they do this as a way to get away with deathmatching with no consequences. He could've worded it better, but I think that's what he meant, making it so that cops can't damage wanted players unless they've committed a violent act in the past minute.

[Schulz]

Yeah well... but then again, if this is gonna be added then a "violent act" should be when a criminal simply opens fire. Otherwise it's gonna put us (cops) in risk too damn much. I don't really agree with this if the "violent act" does not involve opening fire. I mean it's true that there are Dmer cops that just shoot the suspect but, making cops not able to do nothing isn't the best solution either.

[psyKapa]

Yeah well... but then again, if this is gonna be added then a "violent act" should be when a criminal simply opens fire. Otherwise it's gonna put us (cops) in risk too damn much. I don't really agree with this if the "violent act" does not involve opening fire. I mean it's true that there are Dmer cops that just shoot the suspect but, making cops not able to do nothing isn't the best solution either.

If the subject is simply randomly shooting there is no need to kill him, you can use the tazer that will immobilize the suspect for a few seconds giving you the chance to arrest him.

[Jamie]

I for one totally support this.
Cops need to learn the true way of how to arrest.

This will definitely solve the 1* DM problem which police chiefs have had to deal with.

A few cops used the ability to kill star'ed criminals for kdr farming. Now that kdr has been disabled it is now just a fact of people learning how the new system works.

I vote that cops should only be able to,
Kill a criminal when a violent act has been done in the past 60 seconds.

In my opinion in addition to this F1 should be updated heavily.

[Schulz]

If the subject is simply randomly shooting there is no need to kill him, you can use the tazer that will immobilize the suspect for a few seconds giving you the chance to arrest him.

Of course there is! Because they are never randomly shooting, they are always trying to kill you, sometimes they already opened fire looking for you as the target, but you are getting cover behind a wall or something and that's when officers have all the right to take the criminal down. If this is implemented that would mean that officers should get injured first in order to actually take down the suspect.

That's what I said, which puts us in high risk. And no, I'm not gonna use a tazer against a Spas or M4, when I'm in complete danger.

[Denos]

I really hope soon that cops will kill 1* will be jailed for DM, that is why I support this and voted +60 sec of violent act choice

[Will]

Cops don't even try to arrest you. They don't care for getting the max money, just kills. Voted for second option

[V.]

Of course I voted for the second option.Nothing's more annoying than you chasing a criminal,all by yourself,getting one or two nightstick hits on him but before being able to arrest him a cop comes and kills that criminal,resulting in you chasing that criminal for nothing.

[psyKapa]

This voting as ended and I would like to see some response from a head staff member, I know that it might be needed some scripting, but at least let us know if it as been accepted or not.

[Pager]

I Voted for "Kill the criminal when violent act has been done in past 60 seconds " because if this be added there won't be abuse from cops side

[PiXoVa]

i think Kil a Crime at anytime will Make alot of DM , That why i use voting for the Second Answer . Thanks

[StevieFTW]

Why should cops be restricted to be able to kill criminals when they are shooting while cops can be killed at anytime? I find this bullshit ( unless the rule#1 change was revoked ).