Kluys Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 So we have space law in place for our security force to use I suggest switching to corporate policy, This because space law as it stands allows for security to stack sentences up to weird long ones (45 minutes for a few petty crimes) Corporate policy (courtesey of Hairy voodoo, Necaladun and Me) Is mostly the same with a few adjustments. Firstly there is the name which although I didn't come up with it seems much more like something nanotrasen would set up aboard their stations. Secondly there are a few change law wise a full transcript of the wikicode can be found here http://pastebin.com/ARkML3bf there are maximum total sentences on petty and medium crimes which also led to a change in repeated offenses. A very basic summary of this is that a criminal that only has minor crimes on their record can only be incarcerated for 15 minutes total. Medium crimes have similair rules but a higher maximum sentence of 30 minutes total. repeated offenses can be treated as breaking a law of the crime level above the repeated offenses commited, Therefor someone who commits multiple minor crimes after being brigged before can get a maximum stacked sentence of 30 minutes even though they only comitted minor crimes. Other changes furthermore law 116 "failure to follow security protocol" has been added as well as law 308 '''unauthorized or unlawfull execution''' These two laws would allow for security members to detain eachoter when shitcurity happens lastly there was a rework of law 113 and a slight rewrite of the intro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kluys Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 I have tested the maximum sentence thing for a round today as HoS and it seems that it does pretty well at keeping both security players and players who get incarcerated happy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacemanspark Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I like everything here except the law 116. I'd be very careful about that. I can see really scary Head of Security's abusing this, or an officer getting upset at another officer and arresting them for this. If written correctly, though, it could be a very good tool in getting rid of shitsec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox McCloud Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 This has been something that has been discussed off and on, internally for a while--hopefully we can reach a decision soonish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacemanspark Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Law 116 or Corporate policy in general? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xperia15 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I don't feel really happy with law 116. It would make me not trust my fellow sec members anymore when playing a security role as they can abuse it to get revenge on me for something. It will also ruin the buddy feeling in security as I can no longer trust them anymore. Same goes that the HoS can use thus as a excuse to just jail sec members he does not like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox McCloud Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Law 116 or Corporate policy in general? Space Law, in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kluys Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 Law 116 would mean that a security member who isn't following security protocol ( http://nanotrasen.se/wiki/index.php/Guide_to_Security ) can be brigged, if its followed there is no risk in this case. note that violent crimes still allow you to stun someone immidiately etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streaky Haddock Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I want in on the lawmaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadApple797 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 the HoS can use thus as a excuse to just jail sec members he does not like. Welcome to the world of anyone-except-security Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fj45 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Still suffers from another big issue with bay spess law: Stupid charges that mean an officer can brig you over almost anything. Such as 105 (should just be "To be intentionally and publicly unclothed.") 106 107 109 ect.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadApple797 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 I saw a guy get fat once and his clothes burst off in bar. He was immediately arrested for public exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts