/tg/Station 13

New thread since head admins keep dodging this question.

As security, what is the appropriate course of action if the brig is rendered unusable?

For example, if the brig was bombed to hell, what should you do if you catch the bomber? Someone who is committing assault? Theft? A simple break-and-enter? What happens if you have a brig but you can't bring them there because you're in space/there is no gravity? What options are available to security officers that won't get them banned?


My opinion: historically, we've allowed security to execute people in space because of how impossible it is to actually brig them. The difficulty of getting a cuffed prisoner onto the station, especially one likely still armed (but you can't strip them or you'll kill them) on to the station, is too much to ask from anyone, really. This should be extended to cases where there is no usable brig. Not saying that every crime should be an instant execution, but the the requirements to execute someone should be relaxed to properly deal with threats.

Ikarrus wrote:New thread since head admins keep dodging this question.

As security, what is the appropriate course of action if the brig is rendered unusable?

Apparently this from the general attitude towards them lately. Their hands are tied more than the criminals'.

I believe the correct response is to request a jobchange to assistant.

Honestly it depends on the severity of the crime of the perp.

If its a low level crime, such as petty theft or minor assault, then just release them with a stern warning that any further aggravations will come with a very harsh punishment.

If its a high level crime, such as murder, grand sabotage or repeated criminal activities, then either drag them to the escape shuttle's brig, or if that's unfeasible/unavailable then execute them. There's no need to overly burden yourself with someone who really wants to kill you and has already done great damage.

In theory the destruction of the brig would present itself as a extraordinary enough situation to allow for a execution.

One of the other threads about Security suggested an in-field arrest, cablecuffing someone and buckling them to a chair. That way it's essentially a three minute sentence. Obvious downsides include people uncuffing them and fucking with you, but if the brig is gone, it's kind of all in the air by that point.

Yeah but that's really for a low level crime, which is fair.

But the main concern that is seemingly being raised is what to do with higher level criminals that can't just be released or put in a unsecure room.

I was having a look through the 'use of deadly force' section of space law, and I think this falls under the idea of being a code red situation.

However there are certain circumstances where deadly force is permissible:
Code Red Situation - situations which would warrant a Code Red, such as: full blown mutinies, hostile boarding parties, and Space Wizards automatically authorise lethal force.
Note: The Alert Status is not required to be elevated to Code Red as in most of these scenarios the Chain of Command will be too damaged or otherwise occupied to raise the Alert Level.

Now, code red isn't just having a lot of bad people on the station. It's also:

Code Red - Immediate Threat[edit]
Maximum alert level. There is an immediate threat to the station or severe damage. Martial Law is in effect.

Being able to detain people is clearly relevant under space law, as the 'multiple hostiles' section of 'deadly force' in space law states:

Multiple Hostiles - it can be extremely difficult to detain multiple hostiles. As a last resort if you are being mobbed you may deploy your baton in a harmful manner to thin the crowd. Generally it is better to retreat and regroup than stand your ground.

As such, I think if you cannot detain them, they represent a genuine danger to the station (and not just stealing a hand teleporter), and they threaten the crew by being left alive, an execution is not unreasonable. This is applicable if they're a bomber, if they've just murdered a bunch of people, if they appear to have been sabotaging the station successfully, all sorts of crimes. So long as you're sure, I don't see any problem with it in the law. (Obviously you need to attempt to get the necessary permissions if telecoms is still working, which is atypical but not impossible).

Breaking and entering? Petty theft? I think by the time the brig has been destroyed those aren't normally a huge problem, you can typically just confiscate items, let them go, kick them out of wherever they broke into. In theory the security departmental outposts can be used for holding a single person for an amount of time if you think it's really necessary, but generally I think when the station's problems have escalated to that level it's either a capital crime or it's not a huge issue and you can let the crew deal out their own justice while removing any contraband.

Just a point of view.

Bombing or otherwise annihilating the brig is an annoying move that is basically win win with all the anti sec nonsense going on.

If engineering was similarly beleaguered half the station would be eaten alive.

Unleashing THE LAW would be suitable making it riskier for some chumps and maybe an effect you would want to provoke as antagonist. Above stuff like petty theft people should start dying to officers, you hated the law so much you blew it up? Enjoy frontier justice you gremlins.

Also fitting because someone just tried to kill as many officers as they could, this is basically the reason rev or nuke ops gives officers more freedom applied to other shitty situations.

Would be a interesting idea to expand Security's "lethal" capabilities if the brig is severally damaged/destroyed to act as a counterweight to antagonists from destroying the brig in the first place.

Is the shuttle coming? If it is, I'd move them to escape holding area, and await evacuation there. If it isn't it depends on severity of the crime. In case of theft or break and enter, I'd tase&cuff, confiscate weapons and items, and give them thorough search which would constitute brig time, and I would release them with a warning. Bomber, traitor? I'd ask over radio for ap ermission to execute, I would accept such permission from HoS, if Captain wouldn't answer, and Warden, if neither Captain and HoS would. If no one would answer, I would assume chain of command has been broken, and assume position of acting HoS myself. If coms were down, I would carry out summary execution by the law of valid.

Can we get a poll to this thread ikaruss?

I feel it would be enlightening.

I'm glad this thread was made because it's something that should've been discussed a while back.

My views on this are pretty concise: Minor crimes usually don't warrant arrest anyways, and if the Brig/station is bombed beyond use/there are multiple confirmed hostiles, you probably shouldn't even be bothering with people commiting minor crimes. Major crimes that are endangering the rest of the crew should be dealt with very harshly.

I think it's important to remember that Security is there not to enforce the law but to ensure the safety of the crew and station. Law is just a handy means and guildine to facilitate protection.

Law is what separates us from animals and clowns.

Just repeating here for the sake of it being repeated, but if the brig is literally destroyed to the point where it's unusable, your job as security is to ensure that as many crew members get safely onto the shuttle as you can manage. If someone is sabotaging this in any way then they get killed. Looting, etc is no longer a concern in a clear "GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE!" situation.

I feel that during a crisis minor crimes should be ignored if they aren't actively working against the crew. So like that dude stealing engineers supplies that they are using to seal of a breach? kill that dude, some guy breaking into somewhere or taking unimportant items? ignore that guy
If he is committing serious crimes when everything is fucked you should be allowed to kill him.

Why am I now thinking about like... security allowing the brig to be bombed so they can then use that to oppress the station? I know that's ludicrous, but I could see it happening.

Regardless, I Do agree that once the shit hits the fan and the brig is gone, Minor crimes are irrelevant, and saboteurs and people that are actually a threat who'd otherwise get long sentences, or perma, should be dealt with lethally as able.

ThanatosRa wrote:Why am I now thinking about like... security allowing the brig to be bombed so they can then use that to oppress the station? I know that's ludicrous, but I could see it happening.

False flag terrorism in SS13. The brig was an inside job.

If the brig has gone and you're arresting someone for a minor crime you need to pull your head from your arse and get your priorities straight.
It would be like the national guard bothering with the pot smoking youths at the skate park when they've been called in for martial law.

I run by Fortress Law, if I have no brig to put you in you get a hammering instead, one twat with a baton per minute of sentence earned

Ikarrus wrote:

ThanatosRa wrote:Why am I now thinking about like... security allowing the brig to be bombed so they can then use that to oppress the station? I know that's ludicrous, but I could see it happening.

False flag terrorism in SS13. The brig was an inside job.

Plasma can't melt metal girders

Nobody is arguing security should be allowed to baton a man to death for shoe theft after the brig gets eaten by space godzilla. only serious violent shit.

And yet somehow, someone who fails to carry the proper amount of handcuffs is perfectly valid in killing their ward.
I'm just saying that there is a disparity that was invented for one guy in one situation and now we have this thread and two more just like it.

A lot of this is currently allowed under Red Alert. If the brig is gone red alert really SHOULD be called. The problem is, red alert is cumbersome to activate, no one ever thinks of it, and if the brig is bombed the mechanisms and/or people to call it might be out of commission.

This is more a code than a policy solution, but maybe some sort of panic button in the brig, probably with HoS (and Captain) access, that automatically activates Red Alert upon sensing extensive damae or being itself damaged?

Code red isn't hard to trigger, people just suck at it/don't think about it often enough. I'd 90% of my rounds as a head/captain end in code red. Surely there's a better policy way to encourage code red, even if it's just a subtle centcom voice in the head kinda thing.

bandit wrote:A lot of this is currently allowed under Red Alert. If the brig is gone red alert really SHOULD be called. The problem is, red alert is cumbersome to activate, no one ever thinks of it, and if the brig is bombed the mechanisms and/or people to call it might be out of commission.

This is more a code than a policy solution, but maybe some sort of panic button in the brig, probably with HoS (and Captain) access, that automatically activates Red Alert upon sensing extensive damae or being itself damaged?

Space Law != Security Policy

What I added to space law was true at the time I wrote it, but as time has shown again and again its that server policy drifts from our accepted standards unless its written down (and written down fully, lest manipulative twats use the opportunity of new written rules to weasel their own personal agendas into it - as we saw from certain people after TLE wrote the expanded ruleset we have today.)

Atlanta-Ned wrote:Code red isn't hard to trigger, people just suck at it/don't think about it often enough. I'd 90% of my rounds as a head/captain end in code red. Surely there's a better policy way to encourage code red, even if it's just a subtle centcom voice in the head kinda thing.

It's still kind of a pain in the ass and in a crisis situation I'd like to think that your heads of staff have better things to be doing than standing in their offices to swipe.

There should be a station crisis mode wherin automated systems detect a certain ammount of damage and automatically declare martial law and call the shuttle.

bandit wrote:A lot of this is currently allowed under Red Alert. If the brig is gone red alert really SHOULD be called. The problem is, red alert is cumbersome to activate, no one ever thinks of it, and if the brig is bombed the mechanisms and/or people to call it might be out of commission.

This is more a code than a policy solution, but maybe some sort of panic button in the brig, probably with HoS (and Captain) access, that automatically activates Red Alert upon sensing extensive damae or being itself damaged?

Worth pointing out that at least in space law, red alert doesn't have to be called for security to consider it a red alert situation. I know it's not server policy that's not the same thing as being concrete server policy, but it does allow some in character justification. Here's the relevant bit in Space Law:

However there are certain circumstances where deadly force is permissible:
Code Red Situation - situations which would warrant a Code Red, such as: full blown mutinies, hostile boarding parties, and Space Wizards automatically authorise lethal force.
Note: The Alert Status is not required to be elevated to Code Red as in most of these scenarios the Chain of Command will be too damaged or otherwise occupied to raise the Alert Level.

That's what Space Law currently says, but admin enforcement, in practice, is... not that. Hence the existence of this thread.

Sticky considers this an edge case with the suggestion you simply don't ask the HoS for permission to kill people when arresting them
I feel there should be a specific rule which allows you to do whatever in case of the brig being destroyed to a reasonable extent
HG hasn't given his opinion yet.

So basically don't ask the HoS, then you can't be held responsible for disobeying him/her
Better to ask forgiveness than permission eh?

All the speculation on everyone's part does nothing. Maybe Sticky should stop dodging the question and post in the thread?

I'm not the sole authority on this.

In my opinion, I think edge cases (Where the brig is ruined, you have someone arrested, and the HoS who is still alive absolutely doesn't want them dead) can be resolved with improvisation (straightjacket), making the HoS physically take them and responsibility for them, or just leaving them somewhere.

Not every situation in the game needs an absolute, correct and efficient solution. If your brig is bombed and your HoS doesn't want to start killing people left and right, and you can't find anywhere to put them, and you have no straightjackets, and you can't get the HoS or whoever to take your prisoner, then yeah maybe you just lose. You still listen to the HoS. The station is more his responsibility than yours and if he wants that dude loose or tied up in a medbay recovery room or whatever, it's his call to make.

Also guys I've said this across three threads and discussed this multiple times with headmins how many times are you going to say I'm dodging questions.

Stickymayhem wrote: you just lose

Well we got our answer.

I've always been under the impression that field executions are permissible under a Code Red situation where the brig is destroyed/inoperable.

Honestly I think some effort should be made to have Engineering repair the damage or build a temp brig in the construction area. I like the idea of field arrests in small cases, but I really think there should be much more leeway when it comes to executions without a brig.

Case by case etc.

You could repair the brig, in the meantime toss people in evidence storage, or weldlock them into lockers. Make sure you release them when their time is up, or just wait until they resist out (1 for cuffs, 3 for locker bursting).

Hell, you could build a few cryo pods and keep people in lockdown in those.

If you honestly need the brig to detain people you can't think creatively.

Hell, the gulag is also an option assuming it isn't blown to shit.

Weldering someone into a locker still mean they will get out.
Cryo pods don't lock, and why the fuck do you have time to build cryopods, as a sec officer, while holding a detained shitter, while the station is bombed to fuck?

This is not for some fuck breaking windows, this is for people that need to be perma'd or executed.

so ask if you can adn then do it, otherwise it's on the HoS' head, so just leave them to be dealt with by the HoS

Vekter wrote:I've always been under the impression that field executions are permissible under a Code Red situation where the brig is destroyed/inoperable.

Honestly I think some effort should be made to have Engineering repair the damage or build a temp brig in the construction area. I like the idea of field arrests in small cases, but I really think there should be much more leeway when it comes to executions without a brig.

Case by case etc.

Clearly, the "case by case" has worked so well.

rdght91 wrote:

Vekter wrote:I've always been under the impression that field executions are permissible under a Code Red situation where the brig is destroyed/inoperable.

Honestly I think some effort should be made to have Engineering repair the damage or build a temp brig in the construction area. I like the idea of field arrests in small cases, but I really think there should be much more leeway when it comes to executions without a brig.

Case by case etc.

Clearly, the "case by case" has worked so well.

Right, because you got banned once and have a massive chip on your shoulder.

Everything gets handled case by case because there's too many variables and too many shitters who want to toe the line.

Vekter wrote:

rdght91 wrote:

Vekter wrote:I've always been under the impression that field executions are permissible under a Code Red situation where the brig is destroyed/inoperable.

Honestly I think some effort should be made to have Engineering repair the damage or build a temp brig in the construction area. I like the idea of field arrests in small cases, but I really think there should be much more leeway when it comes to executions without a brig.

Case by case etc.

Clearly, the "case by case" has worked so well.

Right, because you got banned once and have a massive chip on your shoulder.

Everything gets handled case by case because there's too many variables and too many shitters who want to toe the line.

How do I have a massive chip on my shoulder and what does that have to do with my point? The whole reason I retracted my admin complaint was because I didn't want to be a "anti-admin" figure simply because of what happened, you can at least cut me a small break there. This thread isn't about me, it's about the policy, though it's nice to know that I'm a "shitter who toes the line" for killing someone you guys told me I could kill. But I digress.

You and sticky have both called me a shitler now for... I'm not sure. No one else seems to think what happened was out of line and nobody is clear on the policy. Still.

So, I've been active on all of the headmin discussions on this, and I was the one who got asked to look over the ban that prompted this discussion.

This is basically the closest thing to a fair middle ground the headmins have reached so far:

If he hadn't had asked, it would have been fine.

Execution policy allows for execution without approval in certain circumstances, and this might have qualified (no idea how destroyed brig was, there is a big line between all the windows busted and the doors emagged open level of broken (where you can still get to the gulag and perma) and all of that side of the station is space), but that all goes out the window the moment you ask, and get told no.

Pax was still the hos, and nobody would have been arguing that if he had said yes, the execution shouldn't have been considered authorized because the hos also said once over radio that they were fucking off to space, and that so and so was in charge while they were gone.

Are you really saying the best course of action is to silently execute prisoners without the HoS/captain knowing so you don't get bwoinked?

MrStonedOne wrote:So, I've been active on all of the headmin discussions on this, and I was the one who got asked to look over the ban that prompted this discussion.

This is basically the closest thing to a fair middle ground the headmins have reached so far:

If he hadn't had asked, it would have been fine.

Execution policy allows for execution without approval in certain circumstances, and this might have qualified (no idea how destroyed brig was, there is a big line between all the windows busted and the doors emagged open level of broken (where you can still get to the gulag and perma) and all of that side of the station is space), but that all goes out the window the moment you ask, and get told no.

Pax was still the hos, and nobody would have been arguing that if he had said yes, the execution shouldn't have been considered authorized because the hos also said once over radio that they were fucking off to space, and that so and so was in charge while they were gone.

I honestly do not believe that he would not have gotten in trouble for not asking. You're saying he got in trouble for following the rules?

And that still does not answer what exactly he was expected to do with the guy, in the middle of code delta, with fires and rogue borgs and a medbay in open revolt, and no fucking brig. If he'd somehow figured out a way to permanently trap the guy, how would that be functionally different from spacing him?

Shouldn't "edge cases" err on the side of not banning people? We're all here to have fun, not enforce strict rules of conduct for an imaginary police force.

What would you have done as that officer, after Pax said no (and of course he said no, nobody wants to catch a ban for another players actions)?

lumipharon wrote:Are you really saying the best course of action is to silently execute prisoners without the HoS/captain knowing so you don't get bwoinked?

Would be the best course of action for the admins because they could ban you on an easy rule instead of having to muddle through making a judgement call

Actually, its pretty relevant that it was Pax, since he's on indefinite final warning or something, so he's never going to allow an execution for anything less than "caught with an open uplink, a bomb, and two swords".

What situation is there when a HOS is denying a valid execution for meta reasons "I'll get permabanned again if this officer is bullshitting"?

Also I must remind everyone that the HoS was offstation at the time and ceded away his authority to someone else. By all intents and purposes the HoS's word was irrelevant.

Also I really dislike the idea being tossed around that we should encourage Officers to not tell their superiors about operational details, that's a shitty resolution and will only have massive negative repercussions for security in the long run.

MrStonedOne wrote:If he hadn't had asked, it would have been fine.

If what he did was fine on its own, but it stopped being fine the moment he asked up the chain of command, then he's literally being banned for trying to follow the chain of command.

There were any number of other things the current HoS could have said that would have been reasonable commands. "Permission granted to execute" would've been fine, sure. "I'm granting you acting HoS authority until I return, you can explain yourself to Centcomm" also would've been great. "Explain the situation further" would have been okay too, since maybe they could try to find an intermediate solution together. But flatly denying permission for any execution to take place was in essence telling the officer that he had to either babysit a griefer all round or else allow himself to get ambushed and killed by a known hostile the next time he came to the medbay.

The "victim" here was banned for griefing, which should mean that "ruining his fun" is not an offense. This case sets the precedent that a security officer can be banned for failing to follow an unreasonable command, even when failing to follow that command doesn't ruin the fun of any decent players, and that's completely terrible.

If what he did was fine on its own, but it stopped being fine the moment he asked up the chain of command, then he's literally being banned for trying to follow the chain of command.

He got banned for following the chain of command, not liking the answer, than deciding to ignore the chain of command.

And mind you, this isn't "a murderer is on the loose", this is "a guy tried to attack me"

TRIED to attack him. Key word there, with a non ranged 'technically non lethal' (this best kind of non lethal) weapon that has a delay and a warning message.

MrStonedOne wrote:

If what he did was fine on its own, but it stopped being fine the moment he asked up the chain of command, then he's literally being banned for trying to follow the chain of command.

He got banned for following the chain of command, not liking the answer, than deciding to ignore the chain of command.

And mind you, this isn't "a murderer is on the loose", this is "a guy tried to attack me"

TRIED to attack him. Key word there, with a non ranged 'technically non lethal' (this best kind of non lethal) weapon that has a delay and a warning message.

But isn't ignoring the chain of command justified in certain situations? Otherwise the captain and anybody above a certain rank could never be arrested because "im ur boss chain of command lol". It seems like he tried to follow the chain of command, got rejected, and then had to make a call he felt was best. It's not like he had a ton of options besides babysitting the guy and dragging him around all shift with him. He couldn't even talk it over with the HoS further as he left the station for space. So, he's left in medbay with what is a hostile guy, no brig to put him in, and no real guidance from a superior. And, as others said, even if he managed to lock him away somewhere, how's that different than just killing him? Especially when the guy showed hostile intent. All it takes is one little disarm and any stuns you have can be turned against you and that monkey SE is going right into him and it's game over. And for all he knew, with the way he was acting that very well could have been a guy who murdered someone. Not many non-antags rush at people with a monkey SE given it'd get you banned.

It just doesn't seem like this guy killed him to be a dick. It's not like he fucked with him all round and looked for any excuse to murder the guy. It was just what he did when he was put under pressure in an extremely hostile situation. Doesn't that come into account at all? I don't see how banning him for making a tough call under those circumstances really does anything to improve his playstyle or correct some wrong. If he had done it silently without the HoS's consent, that's not even TRYING to do the right thing. Would that be a better action to support in security? Bans should be done to correct wrong behavior. I'm not seeing how he did this with any malicious intent here that warranted a ban. If anything by saying if he didn't ask it'd be fine, that just promotes him to silently take out people who are a risk rather than even trying to do the right thing. And I don't see how that's in any way a style of play that should be promoted. Because then any notion of chain of command goes right out the window and you have people doing shit behind each other's backs constantly because that's easier than doing the right thing because having to make your own judgment call catches you a ban.

MrStonedOne wrote:So, I've been active on all of the headmin discussions on this, and I was the one who got asked to look over the ban that prompted this discussion.

This is basically the closest thing to a fair middle ground the headmins have reached so far:

If he hadn't had asked, it would have been fine.

Execution policy allows for execution without approval in certain circumstances, and this might have qualified (no idea how destroyed brig was, there is a big line between all the windows busted and the doors emagged open level of broken (where you can still get to the gulag and perma) and all of that side of the station is space), but that all goes out the window the moment you ask, and get told no.

Pax was still the hos, and nobody would have been arguing that if he had said yes, the execution shouldn't have been considered authorized because the hos also said once over radio that they were fucking off to space, and that so and so was in charge while they were gone.

It really isn't in any sort of agreement. I think a specific exception for this is needed at the very least sticky does not and HG hasn't commented

The execution policy is something different that still hasn't been resolved but it would make the interactions between HoS and Sec IC with the HoS allowed to punish his sec officer for going against him but not banning the security officer for going against him.

Steelpoint wrote:Also I must remind everyone that the HoS was offstation at the time and ceded away his authority to someone else. By all intents and purposes the HoS's word was irrelevant.

Who did he cede authority to? A Warden? Someone?

I think it's pretty obscene to ban someone for failing to follow the chain of command when there is literally no other situation on this server where people care about it, beyond some vague arguments about rights of succession to captaincy. If, as I've been led to believe, the HoS either never passed on his authority or passed it on to someone who at the time was incapacitated/not reachable by PDA/Security channel... The Officer should've been in the clear to make his own judgement calls within the obvious reasonable bounds of the server rules. At least, that's my take on it.

It's dumb to enforce chain of command technicality in bans when it literally does not matter almost universally elsewhere on the server.