Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Vigilantism , escalation and very low roleplaying.
#10
(09-26-2025, 08:30 PM)JORJ949 Wrote: I always prioritise brigging these people over the antag, they're easier to catch (because they won't have staffy mcstafferson getting in the way, unlike the antag i was trying to detain) and they'll either get so annoyed they blatantly break the rules to get banned or they'll realise not to pull this.

What law would you charge em under then?
I guess Vigilantism 
They will claim of course SELF DEFENSE. I actually had a situation where a staffy was ready to fight and security was ready, the moment the door opened he ran in starting beating up an antag in the name of SELF DEFENSE. I told that one off saying: You ain't self defending, you are starting an attack wich escalted.

Or Escalation of a dangerous situation?
Or neglect? Or ignoring lawful orders from an officer on duty? (This one makes sense if you say STAND BACK!)

Just curious under what law you charge em under or rule.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Vigilantism , escalation and very low roleplaying. - by Kotlol - Yesterday, 04:42 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)