[Domitius] Zybwivcz - Killing a tider as the station is melting down? That's a ban

[Zybwivcz]

Character name: Keaton Margaret

Ban type: Server
Ban length: 1 day
Server you were playing on when banned: Sybil
Round ID in which ban was placed: 163764
Time ban was placed: 2021-06-08

BYOND account: Zybwivcz

Ban Reason: As a security officer shot lasers at an assistant and killed them when they fought back non-lethally. While their was other threats on the station. The station was slowly going into chaos with a blob nearby but this doesn't justify killing somebody just because they are wanted.

What Happened: A blob had spawned in maint just south of the library on Metastation. There was plasma flooding the halls. There was a bomber on the loose who had blown up medbay once already. I was going to fight the blob, with an axe in one hand and a laser in the other. I see a wanted assistant running west in the hall just north of the library. I shoot at him once, using the laser gun as it's in my hand and the other has the axe so I can't draw my disabler or sheathe my held items. I don't fire again because I see it's a lethal shot even though the assistant doesn't appear to be particular injured, I use the sechailer and then type "Halt!" in chat. He doesn't stop. Having already tried to get him to stop voluntarily and given he's still trying to run, I shoot at him a single time again and continue the chase. Those are the only two times I pull the trigger before he pulls out a weapon. He slips me with soap causing me to drop what I'm carrying, and pulls out a stunbaton. We stun each other and both try to get the second stun in but I manage to before he can baton me a second time. At the same time this is all happening there's shouting over common about a huge fire, an explosion notification, and several shouts about the blob. It's a situation where there are multiple red alert causes on the station, and a wanted assistant has just used a stolen stunbaton he has no reason to have to try to stun me. Cuffing him and dragging him back to SEC to process him myself means ignoring the blob that's in the next room and that I was on my way to deal with. Leaving him, either uncuffed or just cuffed to a chair ensures he's going to be able to escape before I can get back to him. The baton and the wanted status give a pretty good reason to think he's an antag, so I use the laser to kill him and then go to fight nearby in the library.

Why you think you should be unbanned: It's well established the level of force SEC can use during red alerts and equivalent situations is higher than normal. There was, at that moment, a plasma flood in the halls, a blob in the library, and a bomber still at large. Arresting someone who is marked for arrest is a legitimate arrest. Firing a laser at an unwounded person twice while also asking them to stop voluntarily is less optimal than using a disabler exclusively but it's obviously not an attempt to kill them.

An assistant with zero reason to have a stunbaton on him using it to try to stun you after you've been slipped is not "fought back non-lethally". Slipping you and running, even grabbing the dropped gun and running, is "fought back non-lethally". Someone who's been set to arrest using a baton they have no legitimate reason to have trying to stun you with it after they slip you is a prelude to "stunned you then armbladed/esworded/toolboxed/stripped and spaced you" not "fought back non-lethally". Anybody who has any experience as SEC, or in general, realizes that.

The station wasn't "slowly going into chaos", it was in chaos with a growing blob a screen away and a hall filling with plasma just past that and a previously bombed medbay. A wanted assistant pulling out a stunbaton and trying to stun you isn't "fought back non-lethally", it's how 3/4s of SEC deaths start. A single laser beam, followed by two attempts to nonharmfully and verbally effect an arrest, followed by a single laser beam, is very technically "shot lasers" but it obviously isn't an attempt to gun down an unarmed assistant at full health or "killing someone just because they are wanted". If SEC shoots you and yells "halt!" as you are running away the reasonable thing to do to get them to stop shooting is to halt. If the round had been at blue alert this would have been a questionable ban, considering the state of the station it's ridiculous. An admin whose response to having all of this explained is "You kill everybody who is wanted on the station when there is a red alert?" doesn't know what they're talking about.

[Malkraz]

Non-antags acting like an antag can be treated as an antag.

If you choose to retaliate with violence, you in turn have opened yourself up to violence. If you choose this route, do not expect admins to help you out if you die, even if you were not the original instigator.

You can't kill or maim security for trying to arrest you for legitimate reasons.

The 'act like an antag, get treated like one' part of Rule 4 of the main rules also apply to security. Stunning an officer repeatedly, using lethal or restricted weapons on them, disrupting the arrests or sentences of dangerous criminals, or damaging the brig, are examples of behaviour that may make you valid for security under Rule 4.

[Domitius]

First off thank you for making time to write up this appeal.

Lets go over the incident first.

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

[2021-06-09 03:42:02.076] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at [floor] with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (Port Primary Hallway (76,135,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:02.423] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: 80.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (74,135,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:02.723] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at [commemorative plaque] with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (Port Primary Hallway (74,135,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:05.865] SAY: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) "why" (Port Primary Hallway (64,136,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:08.242] SAY: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) "HALT!" (Port Primary Hallway (65,136,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:13.109] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at [floor] with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (Port Primary Hallway (55,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:13.599] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: 59.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (58,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:15.457] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has slipped on the [soap] (Port Primary Hallway (64,129,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:16.783] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has stunned John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) (NEWHP: 38.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:18.712] ATTACK: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) has kicks Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) with onto their side (paralyzing) (NEWHP: 99.3)  (Port Primary Hallway (64,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:18.712] ATTACK: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) has shoved Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) (NEWHP: 99.3)  (Port Primary Hallway (64,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:20.983] ATTACK: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) has stunned Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) (NEWHP: 99.3)  (Port Primary Hallway (64,129,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:24.977] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has thrown the stun baton  (Port Primary Hallway (64,127,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:28.044] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has flashed(targeted) John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the flash (NEWHP: 37.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (64,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:30.578] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has flashed(targeted) John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the flash (NEWHP: 37.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (64,129,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:32.058] SAY: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) "why kill" (Port Primary Hallway (64,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:32.790] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has stunned John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) (NEWHP: 37.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (64,129,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:37.248] SAY: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) "theres a fucking blob" (Port Primary Hallway (64,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:37.259] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: 37.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:37.339] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: 37.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:37.929] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: 17.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:37.992] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: 17.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:38.684] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: 2.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:38.783] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: 2.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:39.268] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -19.8)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:39.358] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -19.8)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:40.095] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -34.8)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:40.146] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -34.8)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:40.695] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -57.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:40.767] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -57.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:41.274] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -81.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:41.376] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -81.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:41.377] EMOTE: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) seizes up and falls limp, his eyes dead and lifeless... (Port Primary Hallway (64,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:42.135] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -105.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:42.267] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -105.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:42.728] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -129.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:42.809] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -129.2)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:43.215] SAY: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) (DEAD) "why" (Port Primary Hallway (64,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:43.353] ACCESS: Mob Login: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) was assigned to a /mob/dead/observer
[2021-06-09 03:42:43.389] GAME: John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) Client John_Pootis/(Alex Barber) has taken ownership of mob Alex Barber(/mob/dead/observer) (Port Primary Hallway (64,128,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:43.429] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at *no key*/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -150.4)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:43.569] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot *no key*/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -150.4)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:43.914] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has fired at *no key*/(Alex Barber) with the laser from Port Primary Hallway (NEWHP: -150.4)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:44.111] ATTACK: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) has shot *no key*/(Alex Barber) with the laser (NEWHP: -150.4)  (Port Primary Hallway (65,130,2))
[2021-06-09 03:42:51.809] SAY: Zybwivcz/(Keaton Margaret) "I wasn't until the stunbaton, to be honest" (Port Primary Hallway (65,129,2))

And our ahelp exchange.

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

Ticket Opened by  domitius to  zybwivcz
	Hey, when you have a second(I see you're fighting a blob) what happened between you and Alex Barber?

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	The wanted assistant who pulled out a stun baton to attack me in the middle of a blob?

Reply from  domitius to  zybwivcz
	That would be the one yes

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	Kind of think that answers the question

Reply from  domitius to  zybwivcz
	So to make sure I fully understand the sequence of events, you enter the area, he pulls out a stun baton, you fire lethals at him, he slips and takes your baton, you flash and then kill him. Is that correct?

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	I was chasing him and hit him with lethals once before I realized I had a normal laser in my hands and not a disabler, so I used the sechailer and told him to stop , paused to take out my stun baton when he didn't. He slipped me with some soap and then pulled out his own baton.

Reply from  domitius to  zybwivcz
	Why didn't you try to bring him to medbay or to clear up the mistake?

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	There was an active blob in the next room I was on my way to deal with. He was a wanted assistant with a stolen SEC weapon. He was an antag or a tider self-antaging, didn't have the time to stop and process him back in SEC just in case it was the latter.

Reply from  domitius to  zybwivcz
	You shot somebody twice and then killed them when they protected themselves back non-lethally. Regardless of the blob. Please take the next day off to cool off and re-read our rules.

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	It was a red alert situation. He was an assistant with a SEC weapon. He used it when I tried to detain him nonlethally

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	In addition to the blob there was a bomber on the loose and plasma flooding in the halls.

Reply from  domitius to  zybwivcz
	He was flashed and stunned on the ground. He was already harmless. You decided to execute. If the blob was such a high priority you shouldn't have taken time to kill them.

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	I shot him because he was clearly a threat and I couldn't take the time to bring him back to SEC.

Reply from  domitius to  zybwivcz
	You kill everybody who is wanted when there is red alert?

Reply from  zybwivcz to  domitius
	He was acting like an antag and taking the time to take him back to SEC would have meant ignoring the blob.

Logs read that you saw them in the halls loitering while wanted and then fired lethal shots at them twice, hitting once, and then shouted "Halt!" before firing again 5 seconds later. At this point any confusion about your gun not being a disabler should've been realized. Since you chose not to switch after shouting the last shot was deliberate. They slip you and you stun each other though you win the fight to the second stun. You then kill them.

Fireside chat with Malkraz.

I would like to thank Malkraz in highlighting several parts of our rules so we can go over them.

Non-antags acting like an antag can be treated as an antag.

Having a stun baton while the armory(and security) is open because of the blob is not acting like an antag.

If you choose to retaliate with violence, you in turn have opened yourself up to violence. If you choose this route, do not expect admins to help you out if you die, even if you were not the original instigator.

They never reacted with violence.

You can't kill or maim security for trying to arrest you for legitimate reasons.

You did not have a legitimate reason, you were going judge dread on them.

The 'act like an antag, get treated like one' part of Rule 4 of the main rules also apply to security. Stunning an officer repeatedly, using lethal or restricted weapons on them, disrupting the arrests or sentences of dangerous criminals, or damaging the brig, are examples of behaviour that may make you valid for security under Rule 4.

See point one.

Now lets go over why you think you should be unbanned.

It's well established the level of force SEC can use during red alerts and equivalent situations is higher than normal. There was, at that moment, a plasma flood in the halls, a blob in the library, and a bomber still at large. Arresting someone who is marked for arrest is a legitimate arrest. Firing a laser at an unwounded person twice while also asking them to stop voluntarily is less optimal than using a disabler exclusively but it's obviously not an attempt to kill them.

The station was at blue alert with trouble brewing. The halls were not even on fire yet. You weren't arresting them you were firing lethals at them and told them to stop moving. It's obvious to you maybe that it wasn't an attempt on their life but it obviously wasn't to them.

An assistant with zero reason to have a stunbaton on him using it to try to stun you after you've been slipped is not "fought back non-lethally". Slipping you and running, even grabbing the dropped gun and running, is "fought back non-lethally". Someone who's been set to arrest using a baton they have no legitimate reason to have trying to stun you with it after they slip you is a prelude to "stunned you then armbladed/esworded/toolboxed/stripped and spaced you" not "fought back non-lethally". Anybody who has any experience as SEC, or in general, realizes that.

This is all hypotheticals.

If SEC shoots you and yells "halt!" as you are running away the reasonable thing to do to get them to stop shooting is to halt.

If ANYBODY shoots you several times with lethals, even security, and asking you to "Halt!" the reasonable thing to assume is they are trying to kill you. Especially if you were wielding an axe in your offhand you can easily prove to be an intimidating figure.

Conclusion

Whether a mistake or not we can't ignore that you opened up this interaction with LETHAL shots several times and took absolutely no steps to defuse the situation or to amend the mistake. They were only wanted and by your own admission you didn't know why but decided that their status, self-defense, and your paranoia was a justified reason to kill them. While I understand the situation was elevated due to various elements you had plenty of non-lethal methods at your disposal that you willingly chose to ignore and over-escalated the situation at every step.

I am denying this appeal.

P.S. I have updated the ban reason to fix my grammar mistake.

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

As a security officer shot lasers at an assistant and killed them when they fought back non-lethally. While their was other threats on the station. The station was slowly going into chaos with a blob nearby but this doesn't justify killing somebody just because they are wanted.

to

Code: Select all

As a security officer shot lasers at an assistant and killed them when they fought back non-lethally. The station was slowly going into chaos with a blob nearby but this doesn't justify killing somebody just because they are wanted.

[Domitius]

Link to parsed logs of this round
https://tgstation13.org/parsed-logs/syb ... nd-163764/

Ahelp logs taken from Statbus.

[Pandarsenic]

It's well established the level of force SEC can use during red alerts and equivalent situations is higher than normal. There was, at that moment, a plasma flood in the halls, a blob in the library, and a bomber still at large. Arresting someone who is marked for arrest is a legitimate arrest. Firing a laser at an unwounded person twice while also asking them to stop voluntarily is less optimal than using a disabler exclusively but it's obviously not an attempt to kill them.

The station was at blue alert with trouble brewing. The halls were not even on fire yet.

Borg from that round contributing a bit. I don't have a strong opinion about the ban one way or another, but since I was involved with some of the supposed mitigating factors...

Beepsky attempted to detain Alex Barber earlier, while people were rallying to fight the Blob; I disabled Beepsky because, well, Blob.

Medbay had been bombed extremely early, as well as minor bombings in other locations. The plasma releases in science, maint, and the main hallways had been going for a while, but the apparent perpetrator had already been caught by the prints they left on the canisters - they were from a roboticist, not Barber. A lot of brief flames broke out throughout the Blob fight, possibly sometimes welder-related(?) but occasionally what looked to be flamethrower-related. No out of control/tritium fires happened for the entire round.

Beyond that context, I did not see the confrontation between the two directly.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Providing context: Using stun weaponry on security (Especially stun weaponry you already had built/stolen rather than the officers own) has frequently been considered lethal escalation/attempted murder and worthy of being immediately killed for years.

[Zybwivcz]

First off thank you for making time to write up this appeal.
Now lets go over why you think you should be unbanned.

It's well established the level of force SEC can use during red alerts and equivalent situations is higher than normal. There was, at that moment, a plasma flood in the halls, a blob in the library, and a bomber still at large. Arresting someone who is marked for arrest is a legitimate arrest. Firing a laser at an unwounded person twice while also asking them to stop voluntarily is less optimal than using a disabler exclusively but it's obviously not an attempt to kill them.

The station was at blue alert with trouble brewing. The halls were not even on fire yet. You weren't arresting them you were firing lethals at them and told them to stop moving. It's obvious to you maybe that it wasn't an attempt on their life but it obviously wasn't to them.

Red alert exceptions on level of force have always applied in what are clearly red alert threats even if no command staff are able/alive enough to literally red alert. The hallways were filling with plasma, seconds earlier someone had yelled in chat about a huge fire in toxins. I was arresting them because they were set to arrest. A recently discovered growing blob the next room over is more than just "trouble brewing". It's an urgent threat to the survival of the station.

An assistant with zero reason to have a stunbaton on him using it to try to stun you after you've been slipped is not "fought back non-lethally". Slipping you and running, even grabbing the dropped gun and running, is "fought back non-lethally". Someone who's been set to arrest using a baton they have no legitimate reason to have trying to stun you with it after they slip you is a prelude to "stunned you then armbladed/esworded/toolboxed/stripped and spaced you" not "fought back non-lethally". Anybody who has any experience as SEC, or in general, realizes that.

This is all hypotheticals.

Hypothetical is insisting that if you're stunbatoned, cuffed, stripped, and dragged into maint it all counts as "nonlethal" until the moment they pull out the esword to decapitate you. It's wildly at odds with how escalation and stunning/disabling weapons have been treated.

If SEC shoots you and yells "halt!" as you are running away the reasonable thing to do to get them to stop shooting is to halt.

If ANYBODY shoots you several times with lethals, even security, and asking you to "Halt!" the reasonable thing to assume is they are trying to kill you. Especially if you were wielding an axe in your offhand you can easily prove to be an intimidating figure.

If you think SEC is trying to just kill you, you don't bother to ask why you're being told to stop when running away, you just keep running. If you manage to slip your pursuer you use that as an opportunity to escape. Shooting twice while verbally warning someone you're trying to arrest is clearly not an attempt to just kill them.

Do I really need to say that a SEC officer holding a melee weapon in one hand they never use on you can't give you an exemption from normal rules regarding escalation?

Whether a mistake or not we can't ignore that you opened up this interaction with LETHAL shots several times and took absolutely no steps to defuse the situation or to amend the mistake. They were only wanted and by your own admission you didn't know why but decided that their status, self-defense, and your paranoia was a justified reason to kill them. While I understand the situation was elevated due to various elements you had plenty of non-lethal methods at your disposal that you willingly chose to ignore and over-escalated the situation at every step.

I am denying this appeal.

The point is I didn't have plenty of nonlethal options at my disposals. Cuffing and dragging them back to the brig and then processing them myself would have meant ignoring a far more urgent and important threat. Cuffing them and leaving them there would have let them just run off while I was trying to deal with the blob. I hadn't been trying to kill them until they opened themselves up to being killed by using the stun baton. That is something I literally said at the moment, that I hadn't been going to kill them until they stunned me.

[Domitius]

The point is I didn't have plenty of nonlethal options at my disposals. Cuffing and dragging them back to the brig and then processing them myself would have meant ignoring a far more urgent and important threat. Cuffing them and leaving them there would have let them just run off while I was trying to deal with the blob. I hadn't been trying to kill them until they opened themselves up to being killed by using the stun baton. That is something I literally said at the moment, that I hadn't been going to kill them until they stunned me.

You showed zero interest in an arrest and had the intent to kill from the first shot with no prior escalation because they were wanted with no idea why.

I have no interest in spending more time on this appeal for clear over-escalation.

[Zybwivcz]

You showed zero interest in an arrest and had the intent to kill from the first shot with no prior escalation because they were wanted with no idea why.

If I had wanted to just kill them I could have used the fully charged laser gun I was carrying to do so. Why would I just shoot twice while warning them to stop and then get close enough to be slipped and stunned instead of just shooting them from safe range until they were down? As part of a devious plan to make it seem like I wasn't trying to kill them?

I have no interest in spending more time on this appeal for clear over-escalation.

If using a stolen stunbaton or similar weapon on SEC doesn't make you valid any longer, can we get a headmin ruling to this effect so it's clear going forward?

[Domitius]

If using a stolen stunbaton or similar weapon on SEC doesn't make you valid any longer, can we get a headmin ruling to this effect so it's clear going forward?

Policy discussion is down a thread in FNR. This ban is for over-escalation with you immediately attempting to kill them when you saw they were wanted.

[terranaut]

If using a stolen stunbaton or similar weapon on SEC doesn't make you valid any longer, can we get a headmin ruling to this effect so it's clear going forward?

Policy discussion is down a thread in FNR. This ban is for over-escalation with you immediately attempting to kill them when you saw they were wanted.

Stunning someone, especially security, has historically been considered intent to kill because you can't really do anything once you're stunned and are completely at the mercy of your opponent, and your only chance to get out of it is third party intervention or your opponent being too incompetent to finish the job. Following a trodden path can hardly be considered over-escalation.

[Cobby]

We explicitly removed the nuance of alert level affecting admin decisions back when Kor was headmin, it really has no backing administratively and it really shouldn’t be brought up as a relevant point in the decision making process. The situation and actions surrounding it are reflected in the Alert level, it isn’t the alert level dictates what situations and actions can occur.

If an action would have been allowed in red alert, it should be allowed in blue. The situation should dictate what is the appropriate action, not an arbitrary response that is limited access by people who for the most part don’t even deal with station conflicts until it’s fubar.

This might be different for MRP but looks like a LRP ban.

[ABearInTheWoods]

We explicitly removed the nuance of alert level affecting admin decisions back when Kor was headmin

There is no such thing.

Admin decisions are, and will always be, based, in part, on how much the action makes sense IC. Alert levels will always effect that.

[Zybwivcz]

Having a stun baton while the armory(and security) is open because of the blob is not acting like an antag.

You can't stun a blob with a stun baton.

When a wanted assistant pulls out a stun baton the reasonable inference to make is not "oh look, a helpful assistant is going to aid the station in fighting the blob". Especially when they got caught running away from the location of the blob.

If using a stolen stunbaton or similar weapon on SEC doesn't make you valid any longer, can we get a headmin ruling to this effect so it's clear going forward?

Policy discussion is down a thread in FNR. This ban is for over-escalation with you immediately attempting to kill them when you saw they were wanted.

I still don't quite understand how shooting them once, stopping to warn them twice, and then shooting them a single extra time, and then getting close to stun then is "immediately attempting to kill". "Immediately attempting to kill" is just emptying a laser gun into them. Which is what I did, but only after they pulled out the baton and stunned me. There's a clear difference.

I'm still confused as to what exactly the ban is supposed to be for. The initial use of the laser(twice) when trying to arrest them? Or killing them after they batoned me? Is it valid escalation as SEC to kill someone with a stolen baton who uses it to disable you?

If the ban is for "over-escalation with you immediately attempting to kill them when you saw they were wanted" because I fired a laser at them wouldn't that apply if I had cuffed and arrested them after managing to stun them with my baton?

[Agux909]

After being the sole initiator of the conflict with lethals you had no right to kill them when they attempted to defend themselves, sec or not. You and only you made a mistake and a non-antag paid the price for it by being effectively round-removed (given circumstances), which is deserving of a day ban.

I'm just trying to clarify given my understanding of the ruling so this shouldn't be peanut.

[Domitius]

After being the sole initiator of the conflict with lethals you had no right to kill them when they attempted to defend themselves, sec or not. You and only you made a mistake and a non-antag paid the price for it by being effectively round-removed (given circumstances), which is deserving of a day ban.

I'm just trying to clarify given my understanding of the ruling so this shouldn't be peanut.

Perfect clarification for what I've been trying to get at, thanks Agux.

I'll be shuffling this appeal off in a couple days unless you have any final objections.

[Cobby]

We explicitly removed the nuance of alert level affecting admin decisions back when Kor was headmin

There is no such thing.

Admin decisions are, and will always be, based, in part, on how much the action makes sense IC. Alert levels will always effect that.

Not to get in the weeds here but that’s exactly why that nuance for admin backing behind alert levels was removed, the situation should justify your actions not some arbitrary alert that is unable to be changed by a large portion of the crew. How many times have you seen

1) a red alert to rush the shuttle despite the red alert text not matching with the situation
2) someone being banned explicitly for doing an action outside of the allowed alert level when it would have otherwise been fine

You might disagree with that but that’s the reason why we have made changes to alert level text, and to bring it back to the appeal in particular is that it really shouldn’t even be brought up as a consideration for affecting the ban. The situation itself should justify the actions, it shouldn’t be ok because captain decided he wanted the shuttle to zoomies (or in this case cba to red alert for something that can take over the station and kill literally everyone).

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... rt#p282951

[sinfulbliss]

We explicitly removed the nuance of alert level affecting admin decisions back when Kor was headmin

There is no such thing.

Admin decisions are, and will always be, based, in part, on how much the action makes sense IC. Alert levels will always effect that.

Not to get in the weeds here but that’s exactly why that nuance for admin backing behind alert levels was removed, the situation should justify your actions not some arbitrary alert that is unable to be changed by a large portion of the crew. How many times have you seen

1) a red alert to rush the shuttle despite the red alert text not matching with the situation
2) someone being banned explicitly for doing an action outside of the allowed alert level when it would have otherwise been fine

You might disagree with that but that’s the reason why we have made changes to alert level text, and to bring it back to the appeal in particular is that it really shouldn’t even be brought up as a consideration for affecting the ban. The situation itself should justify the actions, it shouldn’t be ok because captain decided he wanted the shuttle to zoomies (or in this case cba to red alert for something that can take over the station and kill literally everyone).

Not to peanut-post, but to add to this, this policy I think is incredibly important and extremely valuable. I've played on servers where it was the opposite - the alert level dictated IC justification - and it is quite cumbersome. It is often impractical to adjust the alert level during the chaos that would correspond to red alert. Taking it case-by-case based on the chaos in the round itself, rather than the alert level (which isn't indicative of the chaos in the round, as Cobby mentioned) is a much cleaner way to handle things.

[Zybwivcz]

After being the sole initiator of the conflict with lethals you had no right to kill them when they attempted to defend themselves, sec or not.

If they had pulled out a laser gun of their own and returned fire instead of using a stolen baton this reasoning would be the same. Which, of course, is not IMHO a sensible one.


They got killed because, not only was the station falling to pieces, instead of using the time they gained from slipping me to just escape, they tried to stun me. Anyone at all conversant with how SEC works knows that when the gas mask wearing wanted greyshirt pulls out a stolen stun baton what happens next isn't going to be "nonlethal", nor is it self-defense.