What's new
Roleplay UK

Join the UK's biggest roleplay community on FiveM and experience endless new roleplay opportunities!

'Drug Dealing' / RDM

Pawk Bun

Member
The whole drug dealing situation is getting ridiculously out of hand. The updated rules state that if you are dealing drugs then you can shoot in defence, as this is roleplay - this makes sense.

However, when multiple helicopters are landing in Kavala constantly, everybody seems to think it's perfectly fine to kill police officers when they are not even near the drug dealer (their intentions may be to visit the drug dealer but at that stage, they were not physically 'dealing drugs', rather in 'possession'.

For example: a helicopter lands on a rooftop. I go up to investigate and instantly get shot by an armed rebel. In my eyes that is RDM as they were not physically dealing drugs, merely in "POSSESSION". The fact of the matter is, we have no idea if they have drugs or not, and they definitely were not "DEALING".

So, if a rebel shoots a police officer in a city (elsewhere from the drug dealer), they can just say "I had drugs on me" - that is in no way the same as dealing which is what the rules specifically state. Another problem relating to this is the new life rule. If the officer deems a rebel shooting at them elsewhere from the dealer, in their eyes it would be classed as RDM in which the NLR does not apply so they will go back to attempt to kill/arrest the rebel. This then leads to the rebels shouting and screaming that the NLR has been broken = anger on both sides.

Some clarification on the matter would be greatly appreciated.

 
Just be smart about it as you can shoot down helicopters in the green zone. Also, rebel clothing, rebel guns and rebel vehicles are illegal so maybe scout them from an advantage point then call in back up and set up an ambush. 

Maybe those new units could respond to suspected drug deals as they have a similar standard of weaponry.

 
The thing is, the helicopters are constantly in and out of the city so maybe a limit on the number of drug deals per day or something would help with that.

But then if a bunch of armed rebels are shooting in the green zones, wouldn't that be classed as an attack on the city? At which point does this rule come into play?

cf52d2ecbf.jpg


 
As always, every rule brings a new loophole, it seems.

The drug-mule player will of course argue that he was defending himself, because if you had reached him, he would've been tased or restrained, and then the drugs would've been discovered, and he would've faced a large loss. In essence, this is still what would've occurred even if he had only been discovered in the church, at the exact point of transaction. It's 'cheaper' for the mule to kill you than it is to risk a prosecution.

Clearly though, for the cops, this is a nightmare. It means that every vehicle of any kind within walking distance of a drug dealer is a potential drugs carriage piloted by a trigger-happy murderer who will kill you as soon as look at you. Not nice.

If we implement a 'drug-mules cannot defend themselves' rule (and/or with an 'unless they are within x feet of the dealer' caveat), then of course, we'll hear nothing but whines from the drug-mules who will now get nicked each time they do the long walk to the dealer, and we will be basically back to square one, except the cops will be happy and the civs won't be.

If we implement some kind of 'protocol' as to how a drug-mule is meant to respond when challenged, next to his drug-filled wagon or chopper, then the end-result is still that most likely, the drug-mule will get busted, and lose a lot of cash, and I'll hear nothing but whines about that too.

I think a modicum of common-sense is called for here.

If a cop sees a chopper (or gets reports of one) landing nearby a large town, the assumption must be that the pilot or passengers are 'up to no good'. Most likely, they'll be dealing, and armed. That surely has to be the presumption? Why else would they be breaking the no-fly law, or risking drawing attention? There's clearly been some kind of risk vs reward calculation going on in the mind of the pilot to make such an obvious 'show-out' worth their while... so it most likely is going to be drugs, isn't it?

So, given that, surely the rule *must* be 'approach with extreme caution'. If you stroll up in a cop wagon with the blues-and-twos running, and a druggy sees you, he knows what's coming. His capture and prosecution. So he's going to switch to defend mode, isn't he? He's not going to hide away and let you crush his chopper and confiscate all his drugs, without a fight, is he? We can hardly blame him - for him, the 'roleplay' is already well-established... it's the cop who is out of the picture, and doesn't know (yet)... but that's not the druggy's fault, is it?

Similarly, if cops approach a situation like this on their own, they are likely doomed. Such vehicles as HEMTTs or helicopters in or near the edges of town simply scream 'drug-run' to me, so waltzing up and saying "hello, hello, hello, what's going on here?" is likely to NOT get a "golly gee copper, you've got me bang to rights and no mistake, it's a fair cop, I'll come quietly" sort of 1950s black-and-white movie response.

Nope. Instead, the cops should immediately switch into an observation mode. Have one cop (or more) tail the suspect and confirm that he has left the vehicle and see if he heads to the drug dealer (watching out for indirect or double-back routes). Have another cop (or two) check the area around the vehicle thoroughly. If the vehicle is clear of suspects, move in to search it. Don't crush it immediately, but search it and remove the contraband IF SAFE TO DO SO. Identify the owner. Work with the tailing team to confirm the description of the person walking to the dealer matches the ID on file for the vehicle owner (i.e. nametag match, in OOC terms, but RPed this way is fine). Then, unobserved, see if you can confirm whether he has a weapon out, or on his back. If he has, you may have to tase him very quickly after a verbal warning, or perhaps even without one. Either way, you approach him from behind. You may even prefer to just leap out from behind a wall and restrain him instantly. Those are all fair game, in my view. In essence, you minimise the opportunity for him to spot you and kill you (because he certainly will, given half a chance).

He may cry 'you didn't say anything, you didn't roleplay', but in that case, my response would be 'Bollocks. You marched into Kavala with a haversack full of drugs, and were seen, identified and followed. RP is established.' If a player is prepared to take that risk, but not take the chance of being caught, he's mad. And certainly, as we've seen, if he has the chance NOT to be caught, he'll take it, even if it means killing the cop.

It's a bit like real life in this respect, really. I've seen New York cops routinely unclip their holster and cover their weapon when dealing with a TRAFFIC STOP. And only last week, in my sleepy, normally-quiet home city of Bath, a whole HOUSE was deliberately burned down by a couple of guys who'd turned it into cannabis factory. We're not sure whether they were rumbled by cops and were destroying evidence, or whether they were a rival gang putting a stop to any competition on their patch, but either way, the poor bastards who lived in the adjacent terraced house next door, and who lost EVERYTHING, probably don't really care about the reasons. They're just lucky to be alive.

Cops need to be cautious. If there is the slightest chance that drugs are involved, then it probably follows that a lot of money is at stake, hence there will likely be weapons about, and people who'll use them to stop themselves getting caught. Be on your guard. The days of Dixon of Dock Green and Z-Cars are long gone.

 
To clarify the 'attacks on city' rule... a drug-deal would not be classed as that, if it was the primary intention to deal drugs.7

By 'attacks on city' we really mean the old '20 rebels charging into Kavala to wantonly kill cops and civvies and take the castle' (or some other location-based objective). An all-out 'attack', siege, area-denial, territory-grab type of encounter.

Strictly speaking, drug-deals are *supposed* to be low-key affairs, because only a fool would draw attention to their dealing and risk loosing several million quid's worth of gear and/or getting killed. Obviously, once the shooting starts, it's a different story, but usually, the focus then is on getting away, not gaining territory, so it's still not really classed as an 'attack on the city'.

I appreciate there is still scope for abuse, and we'll watch that... but in principle, no. This rules doesn't apply to drug-deals. We won't be having any 'deal limits' rules, because they make no sense. As long as there are people smoking, the Reverend will happily take stocks and pay for them, day or night. He has limitless funds, because he has virtually limitless sales and profit potential, so enforcing some kind of 'two deals per day' rule would be nonsense, really.

 
Ed, not sure if you would take this into consideration. But maybe a move in the drug dealer would help stop some of the complaints that keep happening. They is a church around the bottom of the castle in kavala, a little away from the normally hussle and bussle of kavala, would help cut down the vdm attempts, you can't land a load of choppers right outside of it and its alittle more corned when police want to engage.

Police also could use police boats to help catch drug dealers / shoot escaping choppers. 

Just my 2 cents. 

 
Last edited:
With great respect to you, Kryptic, it wouldn't change a thing. The outcomes and the problems would still be the same, in terms of people being killed, not liking it, and complaining.

That's not to say I'm not listening, because I am - and I strive to make sure there is some degree of playability to all the scenarios we set up (within the limits of what's possible in ARMA3, what can be auto-detected vs what has to be manually enforced, and the numerous ways that people surprise us with their inventive ways to reinterpret scenarios and find loopholes in the rules).

But the whole point of the Revd in Kavala is that he is 'city central'. He pays big bucks (1.5 times the going rate for drugs) precisely because he is in a busy city centre, patrolled by cops more than is healthy for business, and a hard man to keep supplied, who has a busy, demanding clientele of many Kavala resident drug-users.

Thus it makes no sense to put him off the beaten path... that's his entire attraction. We already have 'lower grade' dealers who pay less (sometimes a LOT less) because they are easy meat. The Revd is hard work, and his presence causes a lot of grief for everyone - even the mules! But he is sometimes worth the risk (for everyone but the cops, of course).

The cops need to wise up a bit, and stop treating him and his suppliers like they are naughty boys playing football on the grass outside the old people's home. They are armed killers, most of them. They work in teams. They survey the areas before even commencing their dealings. They stage lookouts and snipers. They are in radio-contact with each other. This is a MULTI-MILLION POUND operation we're talking about... not just some long-haired hippy flogging baggies of homegrown from his bedroom.

Maybe, for example, some civilians might be tempted to report more obvious gangland drug-running if they knew there was a reward? Maybe even an inside-job, or an infiltration, is called for, to get the drop on the gangs? Certainly, the patrolling of these areas needs to be stepped up (but I would stop short of out-and-out camping outside the church door). There'd be nothing wrong with some members of the cop-force spending much more time on office rooftops or in helicopters with infra-red LOOKING for people who are in the process of setting up on other rooftops or hilltops, because their presence is a sure sign that something is going down, and it's probably going to be a deal.

The cop's life is a tough one. A VERY tough one. That's why some people are attracted to it (or so I thought). They are bound up by rules and laws over and above the server rules, and they aren't allowed to just go on the offensive willy-nilly. They have Rules of Engagement, whereas the drug-dealing rebel scum have none, by comparison. So the need for self-protection, teamwork, strategy and tactics is PARAMOUNT, if the cops are going to win an encounter. Too often, the encounter is over when the first cop is killed, because he was the ONLY cop involved, and had no support or backup, and wasn't working in a team. My sympathies to his wife and family, but that kind of cop is a dead cop waiting to happen. I'm just as guilty of it myself, sometimes, but have nobody to blame but myself, if I get killed for being Cop Rambo.

 
I agree that choppers landing in Kavala around the drug dealer is a big clue that they are dealing, what I feel is a loophole is that many civs/rebels are using the "I have drugs, my intent is to deal and so If a cop approaches me I can shoot" mentality. Even, as I and many have experienced, if they are a fair few clicks from the dealer, on foot with no clue that they even have drugs on them. When you simply pull up to someone to ask why they are maybe stopped in the middle of the road in the middle of nowhere and they open fire because they have drugs I feel that they have slightly abused the rule. That is a situation that can easily be roleplayed, even if you are roleplaying an asshole.

Also bare in mind that police aren't supposed to search a vehicle unless they have a legitimate reason to believe they have drugs etc. I personally only do it if I see them coming out of a drug area etc

 
Just want to add that I understand from the rebels point of view as well. But still, at least try to roleplay when it's not obvious you are doing drugs.

 
Back
Top