New Crime & Punishment Will Be Broken If You Fly with CRIMES OFF
- Thread starter Nightshady
- Start date
Are you kidding me?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide
Check the examples
Please go support my suggestion in the suggestions thread that says exactly this! Thank you!
Well, if you're talking US law then I have no idea. Hell, even guns are legal over there. The UK system is rather different. There is no "justifiable homicide" in UK law.
Working as intended as far as I can tell.
There are two main reasons to turn Report Crimes off:
- You are engaging in competitive PvP against others who also have it turned off.
- You don't want Security to turn up because you are engaged in illegal activities.
In both cases, it's turned off because you do not want legal protection. Do so at your own risk or turn it on.
There are two main reasons to turn Report Crimes off:
- You are engaging in competitive PvP against others who also have it turned off.
- You don't want Security to turn up because you are engaged in illegal activities.
In both cases, it's turned off because you do not want legal protection. Do so at your own risk or turn it on.
From your link:
"To rule a justifiable homicide, one must objectively prove to a trier of fact, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the victim intended to commit violence."
"In many states, given a case of self-defense, the defendant is expected to obey a duty to retreat if it is possible to do so."
Also: http://www.attorneys.com/homicide/will-i-still-go-to-jail-if-my-homicide-case-involved-self-defense
Excerpt: (emphasis added)
"If someone tries to violently harm you or your family, you have the right to fight back to protect yourself. However, when your fighting back leads to the death of your attacker, you may be charged with a homicide. This can be scary for you if you were just trying to defend yourself against someone else's aggression. However, if you can prove in a court of law that the force you used was necessary to repel the aggression, you may not have to go to jail."
And the proof a Commander would have would be leaving "Report Crimes Against Me" on...
Last edited:
Flawed logic.
A cannot legally defend, becuase A forgoed this legal right by having RCAM switched off. A can still defend, but the police will arrive and find that A has Wanted status because A attacked a clean ship with RCAM switched on.
Last edited:
It's a bad analogy. Murder = Killing someone pre-meditated The 'in defense' cannot be used.
ManSlaughter = killing by accident. If in self-defence and use of force is deemed to be proportional, then it becomes not guilty of manslaughter. If proportionality cannot be proven, then manslaughter is the result.
Player A interdicts and kills player B = Murder
Player B defends and kills Player A = manslaughter. (proportionality would say that player B possibly should have stopped when Player A was no longer a threat. This is where the burden of proof is required to prove response was appropriate.
Enter house to steal and kill owner = murder
Defend house and self from intruder and kill intruder = manslaughter. Again, there is an onus to prove proportionality of response.
o7
Fine. How about th last paragraph of 'Explanation', has nothing ot do with guns...
Justifiable homicide is a legal, gray area. There is no clear legal standard for a homicide to be considered justifiable. The circumstances under which it is justified are usually considered to be that the defendant had no alternative method of self-defense or defense of another than to kill the attacker.[3]
In the case described in the OP, he would definitely have been killed. Running away is not relevant due to the wording "alternative method of self-defense", because running away is not any more guaranteed a way to defend yourself than killing your attacker (they may run faster than you).
WHAT basic constitutional right to self defense in the ED universe? YOU DON'T HAVE ONE. Under which particular "constitution" are you claiming it? Newsflash, whichever one it is it doesn't apply in the ED universe. You have the right to attack ships with a bounty on them. They get that bounty placed when a crime with such a penalty is reported. This does NOT imply a "right" of self defense.
Now, you couldbe arguing that the fictional society in ED really should follow the constitutional conventions of your political system of choice but that would be pretty daft, wouldn't it?
I'll say it again to underscore the point. In the ED universe you do not have an implicit right, "constitutional" or otherwise, to defend yourself if your attacker has not acquired a bounty by their actions being reported.
Sorry mate, it's your logic that is flawed.
Whomever fires first is the instigator, regardless of who has report crimes on/off. What you're basically saying is; a player with crimes off, has no rights? Really?
Shooting you in order to kill you clearly justifies MEASURED and APPROPRIATE (which is definitely in the bounds of the OP, he was shot by spaceships with lasers, he shot back with his own legally owned spaceship with lasers) self defense.
*facepalm* This thread gets sillier and sillier.
Forget. Real. Life.
This is a dystopian virtual game world with a very easy to understand, logical, and working law system.
The perceived problem is only because a tiny subset of the player base doesn't want cops to appear during times of pew-pew against another player.
There is no problem with the game. The problem lies with those players not accepting the game's working law system.
But you do in reality, so under any logical game system or one that's analogous with reality, self defense is definitely an implied right and it is in Elite as well. Not to mention, the point here is what makes a video game fair and fun. CnP was introduced to punish commanders specifically doing this. Now that there is a circumstance that can make the VICTIM pay huge fines and bounties for defending themselves, it needs changing.
Last edited:
And with crime reporting turned off, he no longer has the means to prove it.
In reality or any REAL justice system, he would have (court), but since that isn't possible in Elite, an alternative solution is needed.
No. Real life is relevant because it sets a person's expectatoins.
I ask you again if you would defend yourself from someone trying to kill you if you had forgotten your mobile phone somewhere and couldn't report it (lol, like if that would be a way to get out of it, but let's suspend disbelief to posit YOUR scenario)? You can't run away (or the attacker is faster), and you can't report it. You are about to get stabbed in the heart, but you have your own knife and see an opportunity to strike first. What do you do? Your life is at stake and your choice is do nothing and be killed or kill your attacker. What do you do (apart from spend the next few years of your life in court, cos that isn't relevant to a video game justice system)? Do you kill your attacker or let him kill you? According to you (because you forgot your mobile phone somewhere), you have no choice but to let him kill you. RIP Genar.
Last edited:
I'm sorry, I don't understand: how reporting criminal activities against myself hides the fact I'm doing something illegal?
I thought it only meant I don't report players/NPC firing upon me, while any other illegal activity against said players/NPCs done by me would be reported by their own active RCAM.
Hauling illegal cargo would also be reported by authorities performing scan.
So what is it that I am hiding by turning RCAM off?
The legal system in E|D should not be compared to real life. That is just plain silly. When a Commander can have his/her ship destroyed simply for blocking a single landing pad, drawing a comparison with any current governing body is beyond the pale.
A Commander in E|D has no natural rights. Both because he/she is virtual, and because that's the conditions of the day, in space, in the game, that's set thousands of years in the future. Commanders have to follow the rules of the game. Changing the rules of the game is fine. Not taking responsibility for your in-game decisions is not. There are no laws, there are only rules. Learn the rules.
A Commander in E|D has no natural rights. Both because he/she is virtual, and because that's the conditions of the day, in space, in the game, that's set thousands of years in the future. Commanders have to follow the rules of the game. Changing the rules of the game is fine. Not taking responsibility for your in-game decisions is not. There are no laws, there are only rules. Learn the rules.
Of course it should otherwise why don't we have rewards for seal clubbing? Why don't FD start a weekly thing and give 100m credits to the PvPer with the strongest ship who killed the most newbies in a week?
Cos anarchy and unfairness does not for a fun system of law or even video game, make. As I said above, real life is very relevant as it sets expectations. We don't expect police to just start shooting us, because we have n expectation inherited from real life, tha tthe police are there to protect us. If the police behaved like bandits, there would be complaints, no? So why did FD code police in the game to be analogous with police in real life? Please try to remember this is a game, it is supposed to be analogous to real life in terms that make the game meet expectations of players and be fun and fair, not cruel and unusual. This case CERTAINLY covers that mission statement.
Last edited: