So I have had a note for rule 10 and to clarify this post is not a staff report or intending to be a indirect staff report. This is to clarify a situation where I feel like I was stuck minus the fact that I forgot there was something viable. So the situation was that as a MP shortly after/the near end of a riot a MP was being beaten by a marine while they were in crit or appeared to be so. I then went in with my pistol and attempted and killed the marine. Now I forgot first that there were flashbangs at the MP posts, and second I had a thought process. My process was that in real life first if someone is beating your buddy near death you are not going to try to not harm them, you are going to shoot them until they stop. Now I see that maybe I should have aimed for the body so they would not perma. I am at a point of confusion, where if it is a situation like this and say there were no flash bangs or it is the same situation (please tell me in the rulling for both, with ZERO non-lethal options without great risk of dying by marines or just this situation). So I am asking does the part of exceptional circumstances apply to if it is someone else or superior. I wish to know also if I had just stood there and had done nothing over than help them after would I have gotten action against me for that?
Idk
Sounds like it should. IE can be skipped if someone is attacking you while you are near crit, so I think it should extend to other people in the sense that they can defend you. I’ve heard of an person get noted though for shooting a stabber which is extremely stupid imo.
“Let’s punch/stab the stabber while they grievously injure marines.”
What??? Makes no sense in a real world perspective
Uhhh. Shooting someone till they stop is a sorta country specific police situation not to get too political here.
If they’re marked mutineers that’s fine. Otherwise you’re a highly trained officer with a variety of non lethal weaponry on hand that put you at a significant advantage against other humans in melee and ranged combat.
So no use non lethals and cuff the dude. It’s even quicker than shooting them.
And there is a ruling. If you have no non lethals lethals may be used for takedowns.
Here’s the follow up questions which establish if you’re right or wrong 90% of the time:
Why didn’t you have non lethals?
If you just forgot then you’re not doing your job as an MP right.
Why did they go perma after being shot with a pistol?
There’s a MASSIVE window of time to cuff and revive someone when they’re downed via lethals. If you make no attempt to you are just griefing that person.
Even possessing a lethal firearm as an MP outside of specific contexts sounds like your first issue, honestly.
Sidearms are fine. As is responding to lethals with lethals, most of the time. Though only taking one is a red flag, and taking one just so you can use it is iffy.
As lame as it is… most times you are better off just standing there.
IE is just one of those things that is enforced much more rigidly than in the spirit of.
I’m guessing the head came off which is why they were saying they should’ve aimed chest.
Hey it has been at least two months since this has been asked to be updated. Please someone put a verdict.