|
Posts: 43
Threads: 10
Likes Given: 21
Likes Recieved: 0 in 0 posts
Joined: Apr 2018
|
Apr 10, 2018, 06:51 PM
The whole debate isn't over the arrest, it is over the breakage of fear rp by your friend and you cutting the first half of the video.
I did not rdm and you have no proof to support your report.
|
|
Doctor Internet
radio_button_checked
Management, Developer, Administrator, Business Adviser, DPO, Security
Posts: 12,549
Threads: 1,763
Likes Given: 422
Likes Recieved: 3471 in 1669 posts
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
35
|
Apr 10, 2018, 06:56 PM
(Apr 10, 2018, 06:51 PM)ItzAspire Wrote: The whole debate isn't over the arrest, it is over the breakage of fear rp by your friend and you cutting the first half of the video.
I did not rdm and you have no proof to support your report.
Your entire argument against the report is based on the fact that "Grub was armed, so I shot him." This is also included in the evidence.
Grub was not armed. I checked logs.
|
|
|
Posts: 43
Threads: 10
Likes Given: 21
Likes Recieved: 0 in 0 posts
Joined: Apr 2018
|
Apr 10, 2018, 07:59 PM
He was suspected to be armed due to the damage I received prior to this.
I really don't think you understand, if I am in fear of my life and someone breaks fear rp whilst I suspect they are armed then obviously in any sane persons head they know they are going to die unless they neutralise them.
You are allowing them to get away with a fear rp breakage and tampering the video to not show the actual incident.
Thus I am requesting a non partial admin who isn't being staff reported to reply.
I personally see multiple mistakes you have made.
You asked me to reply for a question I had already answered.
You refuse to answer in regards to the tampered evidence.
You refuse to ask them to provide the full video which would clarify the situation.
If a non partial admin does not respond then an sa is fine.
To summarise: I did not rdm anyone, you know my reasons for shooting, I never said he was armed just that I suspected it due to being shot prior to the engagement and him matching the description, at the point of him breaking fear rp to run it was made clear to me that it was him.
Post the full video and you will see.
But they won't as he broke fear rp, I had every reason to shoot if I felt my life was in danger.
No rule breakage here.
Have a nice day.
No more responding as you keep going around in a circle.
|
|
Doctor Internet
radio_button_checked
Management, Developer, Administrator, Business Adviser, DPO, Security
Posts: 12,549
Threads: 1,763
Likes Given: 422
Likes Recieved: 3471 in 1669 posts
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
35
|
Apr 10, 2018, 08:12 PM
Player Report Approved.
Player was found to be in breach of rules 1.8, 3.1 and 11.7. Just because you believed that the player was armed, does not make it so; just because a player resisted does not give you the right to go Rambo, and just because they broke a rule does not give you the right to kill them for it.
If your life is actively in danger, such as if he had pulled a weapon, then your killing him would have been valid.
To respond to your points about a lack of full video, it was not required in this case. You admitted to shooting him in the video, stating that "he broke FearRP, so I am within my rights to execute him". You then state in your replies that he was armed, and that's why you opened fire. A check was carried out in the logs, which showed he was not armed.
If you have evidence of any evidence tampering, or FearRP breaches, feel free to post a player report with that evidence.
|
|
