Proposed Offence Punishment Review / Revamp

[Hepps]

Brief Summary:

Certain punishments are a bit harsh for the type of city this is and feels like it is providing a 'double jeopardy' of punishments - https://sites.google.com/view/lscourts/policies/legislation?authuser=0

Detailed Suggestion:

I think the community would benefit from a review/revamp of the following offences to avoid the fun being ripped out.  I will put an example below;

Person on a bike is drug dealing in one of the dealing spots, police arrive, suspect makes off driving the wrong way up the wrong lane of travel for about 20 yards (not much traffic around, and not driving at extremely high speeds) then goes off road, pursuit lasts around 15 seconds after suspect hits a tree; immediately arrested for failing to stop for police [max 23 months] and dangerous driving [max 45 months].

Following search, found with 2 units of cocaine on person leading to search of bike which found 100 units of cocaine and a knife in bike storage; arrested for PWITS [max 180 months!!!] and due to previous offences further arrested for bladed article in public [max 45 months].  

Max sentence for all these offences were: 293 months - everyone in the city does dangerous driving in some capacity, whether that is public sector with blue lights or otherwise. 

Solicitors were called to represent resulting in the custody process lasting an hour - some good discussions and RP where happening.  Due to time in custody and previous criminal history, sentence was reduced to 190 months (which I believe isn't supposed to happen but is a good gesture from Police to suspect).  Whilst 190 months isn't that long in comparison to the more severe offences, and probably the types of offences you would not want to see often in this type of city (murder, hostage taking/kidnapping etc), the type of offences committed were more or less the normal day for a low-level crim.  The crim is already losing the time spent to make and bag the drugs or money spent on buying them ready to sell from a production member;  the street value being worth £70,000 - I believe a fine could have also been imposed which have added more misery to a low-level crim.

Suggested Sentences Changes

To put into context; IMO the most severe MDA offence would be production - I suggest this stays as max 180 months, then supply - I suggest max 140 months, then PWITS - reduced to max 100 months, and go downwards from there.

In the statistics I have access to it is clear that blades in public and dangerous driving are majorly represented in the top three favourite offences.

Change Dangerous Driving to driving offences 'only occasions which result in a collision of vehicles; either by suspect or other road users attempting to move out of the way', or words similar.

Change blades and offensive weapons in public to 'only weapons which are directly in possession / on person or has been reported as being in connection with an offence', or words similar.

Any offence committed upon an Emergency worker in any capacity should be increased to discourage those types of offences.

The Pros:

Changes to dangerous driving and bladed article in public definitions would give a bit more flexibility to both Cops and 'Robbers' in the city; allowing them to carry 'offensive weapons' in boots unless used in the commission of an offence or liked to such activity  and accepting the level of driving in the city can be poor at times but unless it results in an accident it isn't any lower than the normal standard of driving.

Maintain the fun element of the Crim and the Police side - by leaving the feeling of being smashed by Police, low-level crims might actually decide to not bother - resulting in less work for the Police to respond to.

The Cons:

It could encourage more people to commit crime, specifically this type of crime - but that could be a positive as Police will potentially have more work, expecially in quiet times?

Does this suggestion change balance on the server ?

I don't think so.

Some people may think this is a whinge, it is most definitely not - it was only 100 units of cocaine and after cleaning tables an hour or so in prison.  The suspect has lost far more over the past few days

 

[Guest]

The problem you have is people are more scared of driving licence points and fines than going to prison. For most people they just log off when they are there and play a different character. There is a meta at the moment to run riot all night then turn yourself in just before you want to sleep, complete your sentence will you sleep and carry on the same when you play next. 

Also taking into account that the PNC covers the MAX sentence not what should be dished out to everyone, for example for those offences the PNC say 20 points can be issued to a driving licence but we would never hand out more than 6 in 1 instance without speaking to SGT + to justify it. And the punishments given out depend on the circumstances around that incident, the previous offending history of the person and their general attitude.

I believe a fine could have also been imposed which have added more misery to a low-level crim.

If you try to give someone a large fine for anything they literally just refuse it and end up going to prison anyway or they pay later don't then RPU come for their cars 2 weeks later. adding to the scrap meta is unfair

Change Dangerous Driving to driving offences 'only occasions which result in a collision of vehicles; either by suspect or other road users attempting to move out of the way', or words similar.

So if someone is a good driver but goes on a 15 minute chase at silly speeds, on the wrong side of the road. But hits no one we wouldn’t be able to charge them with Dangerous driving? just like the real RTA its up to the discression of the officer. thats why there is a court system to dispute if you feel it was the wrong charge.

Change blades and offensive weapons in public to 'only weapons which are directly in possession / on person or has been reported as being in connection with an offence', or words similar.

With the weapon in the bike it is directly accessible and in your possession. The RP behind it is a two way streak, if you just have a knife and you can justify it ”I was fishing” , “I’m having a BBQ on the beach” then sure. But if you are failing to stop for the police with drugs on you it's kind of hard to defend. or it will result in people saying oh well the knife left my car so it couldn't have been me with no way for the police to prove it

accepting the level of driving in the city can be poor at times but unless it results in an accident it isn't any lower than the normal standard of driving.

It becomes very difficult. Where do you draw the line? A redlight or two most police won’t have stopped you, but if you blow past a police car at 100 + what do you expect to happen? most officers just hand out warnings for these offences anyway. unless the person is of interest EG known for a poor driving history etc

IMO any changes to the charges in the server need to be across the board and actually make people serve their sentence whilst online. And the issue of points to licence should be standardised. And the abilty to reject a fine be removed. that way people could be given smaller sentences or fines and the police would still feel like they are actually being punished

 

[Unknown]

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd5Fe-uzAzqT_VbCoimzRjNg-JsQyb9G8DznZgmUGn1yayRuQ/viewform

Here you go....

 

[Hepps]

The problem you have is people are more scared of driving licence points and fines than going to prison. For most people they just log off when they are there and play a different character. There is a meta at the moment to run riot all night then turn yourself in just before you want to sleep, complete your sentence will you sleep and carry on the same when you play next. 

Also taking into account that the PNC covers the MAX sentence not what should be dished out to everyone, for example for those offences the PNC say 20 points can be issued to a driving licence but we would never hand out more than 6 in 1 instance without speaking to SGT + to justify it. And the punishments given out depend on the circumstances around that incident, the previous offending history of the person and their general attitude.

If you try to give someone a large fine for anything they literally just refuse it and end up going to prison anyway or they pay later don't then RPU come for their cars 2 weeks later. adding to the scrap meta is unfair

So if someone is a good driver but goes on a 15 minute chase at silly speeds, on the wrong side of the road. But hits no one we wouldn’t be able to charge them with Dangerous driving? just like the real RTA its up to the discression of the officer. thats why there is a court system to dispute if you feel it was the wrong charge.

With the weapon in the bike it is directly accessible and in your possession. The RP behind it is a two way streak, if you just have a knife and you can justify it ”I was fishing” , “I’m having a BBQ on the beach” then sure. But if you are failing to stop for the police with drugs on you it's kind of hard to defend. or it will result in people saying oh well the knife left my car so it couldn't have been me with no way for the police to prove it

It becomes very difficult. Where do you draw the line? A redlight or two most police won’t have stopped you, but if you blow past a police car at 100 + what do you expect to happen? most officers just hand out warnings for these offences anyway. unless the person is of interest EG known for a poor driving history etc

IMO any changes to the charges in the server need to be across the board and actually make people serve their sentence whilst online. And the issue of points to licence should be standardised. And the abilty to reject a fine be removed. that way people could be given smaller sentences or fines and the police would still feel like they are actually being punished

Good points mate, and the licence points I totally missed off.  Think I may have received 2 for that short incident, which again might need a bit more clarity on when they should be given and for what.

Agreed a more standardized approach sounds ideal, however there might always be that objective element.

I agree the refusal should be removed, it should just put them in negative on their banks if they don’t have the money, or you have the opportunity to scrap their car after a certain period of time.  I’ve had about 50k in tickets in the past week and managed to pay them all off within the week.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd5Fe-uzAzqT_VbCoimzRjNg-JsQyb9G8DznZgmUGn1yayRuQ/viewform

Here you go....

Thanks for sharing mate, not sure I’m looking to add new legislation, I was more hoping a review might be carried out of some of the current legislation.

 

[Hektor Armstrong]

Going to say this from the POV of a solicitor. 

If I am perfectly honest, sentences within the legislation in the city are fairly light. Legislation is directly from British legislation, picking and choosing which legislation to change the meaning of would not work.

Sentences can be heavily reduced by cleaning tables, making a 120-month sentence into merely half an hour if you clean tables. As well as this, sentences can be served while offline which means you don't even have to sit in prison while serving your sentence. 

I will cover your quoted sentences and my opinion on them;

Failure to Stop for Police - Road Traffic Act 1988 - Failure to stop for the police is a very serious offense, it puts you, the police, and the public at risk. I personally feel 23 months is too lenient. 

Dangerous Driving - Road Traffic Act 1988 - Same as above

Possession with intent to supply Class A drugs - Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 - In real-life law, Supplying class A drugs can result in life imprisonment or an unlimited fine. Class A drugs are the most dangerous form of drugs which can have dangerous side effects for those who take them, ensuring there is a strict penalty for those who supply it helps crack down on the usage of the drugs. Therefore I think this sentence is fairly reasonable/lenient. 

Offense of having an article with a blade or point in a public place - Criminal Justice Act 1988 - I don't really know where you got 123 months maximum from, the maximum for this specific charge is 45 months, which is fairly lenient considering the damage a knife can do.





In my opinion, sentencing from police officers is quite light. The only form of sentencing powers I feel should be changed is in regards to Judges however they are usually reasonable with their sentencing. The link given above is also to suggest changes/updates towards legislation so you are better of using that. 

 

[Hepps]

I used the below table, but must have misread the table for the Bladed article - my apologies for that.  The total sentence still ended up at 190 months, which may have looked alot different if another officer was sentencing - whilst neither officer is wrong, I was suggesting changes which may support more consistency.

https://sites.google.com/view/lscourts/policies/legislation?authuser=0

Whilst this city should mirror the UK, we have to remember it is still a game and needs to be fun for all sides.  Giving life for low-level, in city terms, crime would be unreasonable.  I for one would not be 'creating work/RP' for Police if I was facing life in jail - it wouldn't be worth the effort.  Essentially you would have more in prison than on the streets, which isn't a good balance to have IMO.

By allowing people to sleep during sentencing removes the RP element of prisoners.  Like what Josh said about those looking to get locked up before they were due to go to sleep.

 

[Hektor Armstrong]

I dont feel that PWITS Class A should be life, I was just referencing the severity of it in real life. 


RP Element within prison would also be reduced if sentences are reduced as you've suggested here. You're in jail for less time, less punishment, why not fuck about while in there cause you'll be out soon?

 

[Hepps]

Which is worse; production, supply or PWITs in real life?  Currently they all have 180 months in the city.

I was suggesting 80 months drop - 8 minutes in real-time.  Not a massive amount, but is when your sentence is over 120 months and you're choosing to try and RP it out with nobody else around (possibly due to time of day, but also maybe because of people sleeping instead of serving).

It was a suggestion as I was trying to figure out why such a long time for such a relatively 'minor' offence, then I noticed a bit of an inbalance.  Perhaps I am wrong and all the 'smaller' offences need to be increased to catch up the 180 months sentencing.

 

[Hektor Armstrong]

Thats 80 Months in real time, not 8

 

[Hepps]

So if someone is a good driver but goes on a 15 minute chase at silly speeds, on the wrong side of the road. But hits no one we wouldn’t be able to charge them with Dangerous driving? just like the real RTA its up to the discression of the officer. thats why there is a court system to dispute if you feel it was the wrong charge.

What I was trying to suggest was to have more clarity in the definition so it's not thrown into literally every incident.  Perhaps a length of time a pursuit surpasses or the amount of time spent on the road, with the obvious addtions of amount of people/road users in the vicinity etc

Thats 80 Months in real time, not 8

I'm sorry but I'm not following that mate.  My point was 80 months in the city is the equivalent to 8 minutes in real-time, obviously reducing the sentence reduces the real-time spent inside.  It's fairly minimal in the grand scheme of things, however brings forth the balance of the offence's sentencing - if that makes sense.

What I think you may have missed was the first question;
Which is worse; production, supply or PWITs in real life?  Currently they all have 180 months in the city.

 

[Lugi]

What I was trying to suggest was to have more clarity in the definition so it's not thrown into literally every incident.  Perhaps a length of time a pursuit surpasses or the amount of time spent on the road, with the obvious addtions of amount of people/road users in the vicinity etc

If we work of the legal definition of dangerous driving as set out in the road traffic act (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/2A) I don't think it needs to be any clearer than it is. The reason it is "thrown" into every incident is that the threshold is almost always met for the offence.

 

[Hektor Armstrong]

80 months in the city is the equivalent to 8 minutes in real-time

i mispelt, but its 80 minutes. 1 month is 1 minute 

 

[Hepps]

If we work of the legal definition of dangerous driving as set out in the road traffic act (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/2A) I don't think it needs to be any clearer than it is. The reason it is "thrown" into every incident is that the threshold is almost always met for the offence.

Agreed mate, but the issue being is that pushes almost every single driver into that category due to the type of driving habits.  You won't get many driving offences making off at the legal speed limit, apart from when on a Faggio Sport - the fastest bike in the city 

(a)the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver
For me we would need to understand what is expected of a competent and careful driver in this city - maybe it's because the standard of driving in the city does not match anywhere near real-life UK standards.

i mispelt, but its 80 minutes. 1 month is 1 minute 

Sorry, yes you're right - I'm being special!  Ok so fairly significant drop then; 1hr 20mins.  Ok so thats the numbers out the way, maybe I need to re-learn colours next
I still think the sentencing structure to MDA offences need to be reconfigured - if PWITS needs to be 180 months, production and supply need to be pushed up and all other offences to catch up with it; example failing to stop, dangerous driving, bladed article in public etc.

You will be glad to read, I will shut up now unless any more specific replies come in.