San Andreas Police Department | Q&A

[Huntsman]

You could, but I would say straight head to someone who can really assist you rather then trying it. Because you know guilty person will never agree he is guilty.

He will if we put the evidence right infront of the person ;P

[J. Jones]

He will if we put the evidence right infront of the person ;P

If someone has their badge out, they don't have to pay a fine etc unless issued by someone with authority, such as a Captain (for example) and then they could just drive off. This was said somewhere by an old Chief.

[Huntsman]

He will if we put the evidence right infront of the person ;P

If someone has their badge out, they don't have to pay a fine etc unless issued by someone with authority, such as a Captain (for example) and then they could just drive off. This was said somewhere by an old Chief.

If they're not in C3 situation, and are not responding to anything, they must obey the traffic laws just as everyone else. If they would not listen to us, then they would definatly listen to the guy with the authority with all the evidence provided infront of them.

[J. Jones]

If they're not in C3 situation, and are not responding to anything, they must obey the traffic laws just as everyone else. If they would not listen to us, then they would definatly listen to the guy with the authority with all the evidence provided infront of them.

What you are saying is true; they still wouldn't have to pay a fine (for example) if an ARPD officer pulled him over. This was the rule a while ago, I'm pretty sure it's still the same.

[Anthrax]

So I see theres been a big fuzz about this and I have one question about this, due to the fact that I just got reported for "reckless driving" by =AV=Monkey, that is invalid in my opinion..

So I guess (depending on how my case ends) every officer breaching traffic laws are to be reported, with evidance, and no warnings before reporting(as I wasnt warned)? because I find that honestly pretty silly

[Huntsman]

So I see theres been a big fuzz about this and I have one question about this, due to the fact that I just got reported for "reckless driving" by =AV=Monkey, that is invalid in my opinion..

So I guess (depending on how my case ends) every officer breaching traffic laws are to be reported, with evidance, and no warnings before reporting(as I wasnt warned)? because I find that honestly pretty silly

This is where it gets confusing. They say to report officers that are driving recklessly or not obeying traffic laws but still, there used to be a point somewhere in the report rules, saying not to "report people for such farts like speeding and etc". Cant find that point now though.

[Pingster]

The thing is, officers can easily say "Got a private call about a situation" as a reason for sirens+speeding. And that's often legit, I myself have called people I know are active, as 911 call can be missed or often ignored. So best bet is to report them to the authorities.

[Francisco Martinez]

Do NOT start arguing or start long discussions. We will give an answer to clear situations to prevent the misunderstanding of police work and also minimize the numbers of reports on Units.[/b][/color]

Only Captain and Above gives answer

Signed
-Dpt Chief Pancher

[PulseEffect]

If you give yourself to protect citizens and you end up driving and be a danger to regular drivers why should you be in the SAPD?

[Plam Knight]

Honestly I start to wonder is this topic useful or its a place for people to trow shit other people ?
Reckless driving is not allowed for anyone, while it is a traffic violation, police officers require to step on it from time to time to provide best response.
Honestly you want us to be ultimately strict about things as long as it doesn't involve you.
Okay then we will punish every officer for every little traffic violation, but from now on applications will be denied on spot for slightest mistake, ARPD officers even slightly stepping off the boundaries will be copbanned as harash as possible on the spot and etc.. If you want to be pain in the ass for people, then you should experience it how nice it is for yourself.

I gave a clear answer what you need to do if there is an issue, you decided to ignore that and turn in it in to shit storm, then face your own consequences.

[Huntsman]

Honestly I start to wonder is this topic useful or its a place for people to trow shit other people ?
Reckless driving is not allowed for anyone, while it is a traffic violation, police officers require to step on it from time to time to provide best response.
Honestly you want us to be ultimately strict about things as long as it doesn't involve you.
Okay then we will punish every officer for every little traffic violation, but from now on applications will be denied on spot for slightest mistake, ARPD officers even slightly stepping off the boundaries will be copbanned as harash as possible on the spot and etc.. If you want to be pain in the ass for people, then you should experience it how nice it is for yourself.

I gave a clear answer what you need to do if there is an issue, you decided to ignore that and turn in it in to shit storm, then face your own consequences.

Can i ask you, where do you see us throwing shit on people? We basically are asking you to get an actual answer on what we should do with people violating the traffic laws. You told us to report them to authorities, and then someone brang up a question should we use report section, or use PM or something like that. Then i stated that it's confusing since some time ago there were said that we should not report minor violations like reckless driving. We did not shit on anyone.

[[Rstar]Paul]

Note for all -

Anyone who dares to answer a question or start to argue in this topic will only risk themselves being admonished

[Marcus Ferreira]

I don't know if it was Paul or anybody, but whoever invented button on the divisions forum to return to main forums is a genius- good job.

On the topic: Since there are many new rules and so on, I would like to hear an direct answer:
1. Are ARPD(not SAPD) Officers allowed to use non- SAPD owned cars(civilian ones)
2. If yes, should we pullover them if they are speeding in it?
3. Is arriving to the crime scene with such car allowed(since criminal can take it for own usage) or considered as aiding to criminal while on duty?

4.

Your weapon is only to be used when necessary, such as covering another officer or defending someones life. It should not be used to simply intimidate someone. (Eg. Don't point your weapon at a random civilian telling them to move off the road)

I know that the procedures can't predict anything, but: what if we are telling person to remain in the car- person gets out and starts approaching towards us? Such person can easy take out weapon and open fire, can we or can't we take out our weapon in such case?

5.

Swimming suspect - A warning must be issued that if they do not surrender, they will be fired upon. If they continue to evade, use of lethal force (all weapons) is granted.

Can the warning procedure be skipped if the suspect is to far away and he's swimming away from us?(not in shout or megaphone range)?

6.

Drive-by'able vehicle list (From cruiser):

What about motorbike? Same list applies?

7.

Unsuspections will not be given for things such as a fine being paid, server related reasons (Eg. Events and killbugs) or murder (This includes self defense resulting in death)

Constitution:
 

Act XIX: Defence of propriety and belonging is authorized. Any destruction of private propriety or any damages caused to it is of criminal resort. However if a citizen kills another citizen while defending his propriety, he shall be trialed for use of unreasonable violence. Depending on the outcome he shall serve a prison sentence or be cleared of crime.

So, what we should do if person killed another while defending own property or own life while on own property?

[Sushi]

1. Yes, ARPD Officers are still allowed to use non-SAPD vehicles (I will speak to Gandalf about possibly changing this in the future)
2. Yes, you can pullover them if they are speeding, just like you can speak to those who are breaking traffic laws constantly without reason in a police vehicle.
3. No, it is not considered aiding unless they are purposely giving the vehicle to the suspect, it is up to the officers on scene to make sure things like this doesn't happen (Will speak to Gandalf about it, like 1)
4. If the person starts approaching you and has disobeyed the order to remain in the vehicle and is unarmed, usage of LTL is allowed, if the situation persists and you feel as though your life is being threatened, attempt to roleplay drawing your pistol and proceed as need be. (This means that if they continue to approach you with what seems like hostile intent, you can draw your weapon at your own discretion, this may be questioned later on if you are reported)
5. Yes, if the suspect clearly shows no intent to surrender whilst swimming away, the immediate use of lethal force is granted.
6. For now, the same list applies for the motorbike.
7. Investigate as needed, I will add an addendum to the regulations to add this in. The situation has to be properly investigated, with as many witnesses and only hard evidence that it was in self defense will lead to an unsuspection.

[Marcus Ferreira]

Thank you, that explains it all.

[Huntsman]

Any further updates are hereby on hold, due to RS5 endangerment of being ineffective.

Signed,
Deputy Chief Plam Knight
Deputy Chief Kelvin 'Sushi' Gould
Chief of Police Paul Hernandez

What are the possible endangerments? Can you please ellaborate? What's going on?

[Plam Knight]

Any further updates are hereby on hold, due to RS5 endangerment of being ineffective.

Signed,
Deputy Chief Plam Knight
Deputy Chief Kelvin 'Sushi' Gould
Chief of Police Paul Hernandez

What are the possible endangerments? Can you please ellaborate? What's going on?

What it means is that we obtained information of how RS5 will be shaped for us and while we understand it word wise we are yet to see it on field.
And if we rush to make more updates currently, without witnessing RS5's praticial base, the updates might be rather ineffective and more time will be spend pulling them back.

[Huntsman]

Thank you for clearing things up.

[Janar]

When I was a Lieutenant, we had a rule, that certain rank and above (I think it was Sergeant or Lt.) were not allowed to commit any major crimes off duty.
Does such thing still exist?

[Plam Knight]

Yes its in the local command+ board.