Regarding procedure regarding executions

[starmute]

Currently there is nothing in the rules about a security officer determining if a captured player should be executed/permabriged/given a jail sentence . While I understand we're playing it a bit loose I think "don't be a dick" is very subjective and a little too "loose".

Click for our current policy

Spoiler:

https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Rules#Secu ... Precedents

Security Policy/Precedents

• Rule 1 of the main rules apply to security. The only exception is that security is generally considered to be armed with non-lethal methods to control a situation. Therefore, where reasonably possible, security is expected to use non-lethal methods first in a conflict before escalating to lethal methods.
• Rule 4 of the main rules also apply to security. Security are not exceptions to the rule where non-antagonists can do anything they want, as per rule 4, to antagonists.
• The 'act like an antag, get treated like one' part of Rule 4 of the main rules also apply to security. Stunning an officer repeatedly, using lethal or restricted weapons on them, disrupting the arrests or sentences of dangerous criminals, or damaging the brig, are examples of behavior that may make you valid for security under Rule 4. Make sure players deserve it when you treat them as an antag, when in doubt, err on the side of caution as poor behavior on the part of security will not be tolerated.
• For arrested players, timed sentences up to a total of 10 minutes, buckle-cuffing, and stripping, are considered IC issues and are not actionable by admins. Brig sentences totaling more than 10 minutes can be adminhelped, as can be gulag or perma sentences or a pattern of illegitimate punishment. However, security should refrain from confiscating items not related to any crimes, especially important department-specific items like hard suits. Obvious exceptions to this are things like radio headsets, if players use it to harass security over the radio while being arrested.
• Don’t kill asimov borgs for trying to stop harm, unless they are being excessively disruptive, for example, locking down all of security despite only one security staff member causing harm.
• While it is up to the discretion of the security player, lethal force may be used on a mob of players trying to force entry into the brig. Additionally, lethal force may be used immediately on anyone trying to enter the armoury, is in the armoury, or is leaving it

Click for a shortened list of things that I believe would be better to add to executions from a previous rule-set

Spoiler:

• Executions are to be authorized by the captain or acting captain, if available. If neither are available, it is up to the HoS or acting HoS. If security are in agreement that the captain is a condom, they may skip to the HoS, but whoever that is will be held accountable if they authorize shitty executions without understanding fully the crimes.
• Captain, Acting Captain, Head of Security, or, in their absence, Warden permission is required to permabrig someone. You do not NEED the captain if the HoS is available.

Its my belief that those two previous things led to a more rich security experience and I would like to bring them back if possible. I'd like to hear others opinions on this (both pro and con)

Thank you very much for your time and opinions.

[lumipharon]

We've had some pretty shitty ban discussions when someone has executed turbomurderbonerMCgee without getting the permission from the captain who's fucked off into space/the gateway etc.

I think we're fine without the old policy tbh, as it assumes active and competent superior officers, and actually being able to communicate with them etc.

[imblyings]

It makes no sense for an officer to have to wait for a possibly incompetent, uninformed, or even compromised superior if they are perfectly capable of making the necessary judgement and action already. What makes even less sense is if if validhunter mcgray can beat a traitors skull in without a bwoink or care in the world, why should a job with far more stress and responsibility have to wait for permission.

At the end of the day, an execution is the act of stopping someone from playing in the round and reduced to it's most basic components, a justifiable rationale for doing so should either be valid/not valid or been a massive dick/hasn't been a massive dick. Having to defer to the judgement of someone else is superfluous at best, if it can already be determined that someone was either of the two.

[DemonFiren]

It makes no sense for an officer to have to wait for a possibly incompetent, uninformed, or even compromised superior if they are perfectly capable of making the necessary judgement and action already. What makes even less sense is if if validhunter mcgray can beat a traitors skull in without a bwoink or care in the world, why should a job with far more stress and responsibility have to wait for permission.

At the end of the day, an execution is the act of stopping someone from playing in the round and reduced to it's most basic components, a justifiable rationale for doing so should either be valid/not valid or been a massive dick/hasn't been a massive dick. Having to defer to the judgement of someone else is superfluous at best, if it can already be determined that someone was either of the two.

Yeah, but for the love of God at least make officers report it to their superiors so there's no pile-up of dead bodies nobody knows the origin of.

[Lumbermancer]

What makes even less sense is if if validhunter mcgray can beat a traitors skull in without a bwoink or care in the world, why should a job with far more stress and responsibility have to wait for permission.

Because muh RP. Because that's the thing that makes Sec more than just greyshirts wearing redshirts. That said, if your superiors are dead or otherwise not present, and you suspect they won't be coming back anytime soon, you can perform execution yourself. But it's always better to put the delinquent in perma.

In the cases like this, I actually started to verbally announce reason and justification for summary execution. For the record. And for fun.

[TheNightingale]

I'm not a fan of the 'valid/not valid' mindset. If someone deserves execution, it's because either they're impossible to contain safely (e.g. a hostile wizard or changeling) or they've been unspeakably bad (e.g. reading WGW, going on a murder spree). Just emagging EVA and taking a jetpack doesn't make you valid for execution, I'd like to think - after all, Central prefers to interrogate alive, captured traitors, not dead ones. Validhunter McGray should be held to higher standards; the station Security force can't execute captured criminals, and validhunting greyshirts shouldn't be able to either. In-combat executions (you're fighting a gang in Medical, and they have uzis and medkits - shoot to kill) are okay, but here I'd say Security should get some leeway; civilians shouldn't be attacking non-hostile antagonists at all (report them to Security, who can interrogate them and brig them for possession of contraband), and attacking a non-hostile antagonist, then killing them when they fight back, is unacceptable.

[CPTANT]

Can we also be more lenient on the Captain for executing people?

Because if captains are banned for executing people screaming Centcom should burn and how they wish they were a rebel during an open rebellion than something is seriously wrong.

[imblyings]

>report to superiors for information sharing purposes

that's an issue of competence, we don't set policy telling security officers to stand around with their baton and taser out so assistants can steal them as much as we really should

>Because muh RP

goes both ways. If you want to RP a security force requiring authorization from heads, go play HoS and communicate that to your officers. If they don't listen and go execute people by themselves, handle it IC. You have the freedom to do that and policy won't ever infringe upon that. But policy will also never infringe upon officers deciding to execute without authorization.

>nightingale

There is a third component of sportsmanship but this doesn't factor into the 'should sec need authorization to execute' argument. No one should execute the tired old stereotype I keep on dragging out of a clown doing magic tricks with tc items, with or without authorization, I'm not arguing that.

If you want validhunter mcgrey to be held to a higher standard, you're going to have to hold murderboner mcesword to a higher standard, you can't do just one. The rest of the stuff you're saying is fine if headmins want to implement on Basil seeing as basil mostly works off those different customs already. Good luck implementing those customs on Sybil, which see-saw between a want for """"low"""" rules and weekly policy threads on how x or y or z shouldn't be ok, and who'd react in a hostile manner to antags being changed anyway re: the sudden worry showed by players regarding murderboners and rule 0.

[imblyings]

Can we also be more lenient on the Captain for executing people?

Because if captains are banned for executing people screaming Centcom should burn and how they wish they were a rebel during an open rebellion than something is seriously wrong.

case by case

[Incomptinence]

If you are going to gate executions totally to head/warden authorisation even in their absence you have to allow them to be perma'd instead. They have to go somewhere if they will just pick up random tool and try to kill and stuff again. People will keep getting their antaging on buck naked with no chance of success they just don't vanish off in smiley rainbows because you refuse to perma or kill them.

[CPTANT]

Can we also be more lenient on the Captain for executing people?

Because if captains are banned for executing people screaming Centcom should burn and how they wish they were a rebel during an open rebellion than something is seriously wrong.

case by case

Case by case is still subjected to policy.

Being more lenient would be very desirable, especially when the line is draw between "ok fine, IC" and "BAN HE"

Actually lenient probably not the best word, not twisting every edge case into an OOC issue would be a better description.

The way it is now makes the role of captain shit to play.

[oranges]

dunno what you guys have done but sac was on earlier complaining that sec was just murdering everyone these days

[Malkevin]

Last time we discussed this the general consensus was that legitimate executions were not an OOC issue for anyone to perform, it was agreed that unauthorised executions were only an IC issue.

I don't see any need to change this.

dunno what you guys have done but sac was on earlier complaining that sec was just murdering everyone these days

I have no idea, its like the IC guidelines suddenly disappeared one day!

[starmute]

The general consensus is this is a bad idea.

Thanks for your opinions!

Mind locking this and classifying it as junk? Thank you.

[oranges]

Last time we discussed this the general consensus was that legitimate executions were not an OOC issue for anyone to perform, it was agreed that unauthorised executions were only an IC issue.

I don't see any need to change this.

dunno what you guys have done but sac was on earlier complaining that sec was just murdering everyone these days

I have no idea, its like the IC guidelines suddenly disappeared one day!

he's been banned since earlier than that was the case, so I doubt it's that.