Code Red Clause

[Vivalas]

 

Okay, so after I was doing some reading about lethal force and police and such, I found some interesting stuff.

 

SWAT 4 is not a definitive legal guide but the part in the tutorial where they teach you ROE is pretty neat, and it makes sense. No shooting people unless they are an active threat, e.g., pointing a gun at you or another person.

 

Now, I supposed actual police doctrine was something along those lines, since, after all, lethal force should be a thing reserved for the most dire of situations; a last resort.

 

Now, I was wondering why in old TV shows cops were always like "Stop, or I'll shoot!", when someone was running from them, and I was like, "Hrm, that seems pretty illegal." So I marked it off as Hollywood being Hollywood, until reading up on it.

 

It turns out, prior to 1985, police (in the US) were allowed to shoot fleeing suspects who were felons or suspected of being felons.

 

"Wow.", I thought. It seemed pretty Gestapo that the police could just shoot you for running, when you weren't even a threat.

 

Now, they changed it to where they can only shoot fleeing suspects if they pose a big threat to society, like they're a serial killer or something, not a jaywalker.

 

 

So, I was thinking of how this could apply to SS13. NT isn't a police state, but they aren't exactly a bunch of "good guys" either.

 

And so I drafted a possible addition to SOP for security on code red/gamma.

 

I am not trying to push this, and am neutral on the subject, I am posting this to get feedback and brainstorm this idea / forsee any possible problems with it.

 

 

CODE RED CLAUSE

 

On alert levels of Code Red or higher, if a security officer observes one of the following:

 

1) A suspect in the process of conducting a moderate or higher level crime.

 

OR

 

2) A wanted person(s) suspected of moderate or higher level crimes.

 

Then the officer is authorized to apply lethal force as necessary to subdue the suspect if they actively resist peaceful attempts at arrest OR attempt to flee.

 

Note that "resisting peaceful attempts at arrest" implies the officer verbally demands the suspect to cease and surrender themselves before hand.

 

If an officer chooses to enact Code Red Clause on a suspect, lethal force should only be applied as necessary to subdue the target. under no circumstances should an officer shoot a suspect while already incapacitated (unless they are a confirmed EOC and other lethal force rules apply as necessary as well.).

 

The officer is then required to secure the suspect and bring them to the brig for processing as well as treatment of their wounds. If a suspect dies due to the negligence of the officer enacting Code Red Clause then the officer will be FULLY RESPONSIBLE for their death, and charges of manslaughter and/or demotion may apply.

 

 

 

 

So yeah, if you act like a shitter on Code Red you kinda deserve a face full of laser, security doesn't have time to deal with you otherwise. This does not allow for officers to willy-nilly gun down people comitting moderate crimes and this by no means a KOS on all criminals on code red. Officers using this can't just leave suspects lying on the floor in crit.

 

Suggestions/thoughts are welcome.

 

 

If your workplace is at code red and you're still being an asshole, I think that the security teams should be allowed to gun you down if you're posing a threat to the crew and station by impeding security, and that's really what this is about.

 

The goal of this clause is to attempt to cut down on the amount of self-antaggery on code red by allowing officer to wave their eguns around and threaten to mean buisness if you resist or continue to be an asshole.

 

[pinatacolada]

 

this... is pretty much the way it already works:

 

• Code Red Situation - situations which would warrant a Code Red, such as: full blown mutinies, hostile boarding parties, and Space Wizards automatically authorise lethal force.

• Non-Lethal Weapons Ineffective - certain targets are impervious to NLWs, such as Mechs, Xenomorphs, Borgs, and Hulks. Lethal force may be used against these targets if they prove hostile.

Severe Personal Risk - sometimes getting close enough to a target to slap the cuffs on will create significant personal risk to the Officer. Deadly force from range is recommended to subdue Wizards and Changelings.

Criminals in hostile environments such as space, fire, or plasma leaks also fall into this category, as do criminals believed to be in possession of high explosives. Ranged lethal force is the only reasonable option in these conditions.

Armed and Dangerous - if a suspect is in possession of weapons, including stun weapons, and you have reasonable suspicion that they will use these against you, lethal force is permitted. Although in the majority of cases it is still preferable to attempt to detain them non-lethally.

Note: Unauthorised personnel in the armory are considered by default to be Armed and Dangerous, maximum force is permitted to subdue such targets.

Multiple Hostiles - it can be extremely difficult to detain multiple hostiles. As a last resort if you are being mobbed you may deploy your baton in a harmful manner to thin the crowd. Generally it is better to retreat and regroup than to stand your ground.

[FlattestGuitar]

 

In real life lethal force is much better at actually stopping runners because the non-lethal options all suck. In spessmen we have long range tasers that are perfectly capable of taking someone down, even at long range.

 

The current set of rules for usage of lethal rounds is perfect, I think. Most people tend to use non-lethals whenever possible anyway, considering they're actually better at subduing most targets.

 

[Shadeykins]

 

Realistically, even on Code Green you can laser the shit out of a hulk if it's bashing walls down.

 

This is primarily because someone who has hulked has provided you with literally no other options for containing them whatsoever.