Los Santos Civil Security Services

Welcome to LS-CSS. We are providing our clients with well-trained security guards, to guard events, restaurants, hotels, shops etc. Safety first!


You are not connected. Please login or register

Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06]

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:09 am

1. Make possesion of firearm license obligatory for ranks Staff Sergeant+. DENIED
2. All LS-CSS members must have clean criminal record (otherwise namechange). That's also needed factor to obtain firearm license. ACCEPTED
3. Preferably wear body armor while guarding any large events but it shouldn't be a must. PENDING
4. As Brian said: add masked, undercover guard to coordinate actions and gain information. Preferably Captain+. Create a code for him like UC1 (undercover 1,2 etc.) so his name remains unknown for environment (e.g. /r UC1 10-42 [location], over.) DENIED
5. I'm already looking for some house in secluded spot to use it for example as a hideout for client being hunted by killers or something. ACCEPTED
6. Set up password protected ventrilo channel, however don't make fluent english mandatory factor. If someone doesn't want to speak, let him write on /r, just force people to at least listen the channel. PENDING

I'm gonna update it everytime when something constructive comes to my mind.

Feel free to rate and comment the ideas.



Last edited by David_Paxton on Thu Jun 24, 2010 2:08 pm; edited 3 times in total

View user profile

2 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:50 am

- Basically everyone should have a firearm license, due to the fact it's really hard to get promoted from now on.We really need that protection.

- I still disagree with the masked guys, the undercover guys, because some people don't like that. Don't know why.

- Boy armour is a good idea, but we got to have a weapon license first for that.

- The hideout for clients in danger is a good idea. Accepted.

- The ventrilo channel is a good idea also, but we first need to have more members and it's better if we are scripted, because we aren't getting a vent channel without being scripted, I'm sure of that. x.x

View user profile

3 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:12 pm

I can tell you right now that I am not going to apply for a license. Those things are scams, you try to protect yourself, and it gets revoked.

Also, I don't support the clean criminal record thing as ((like myself, people can't always namechange to get a clean one)). Anyone can be rehabilitated.

These of us who are not going to get a license can have batons, or work in the Administration Department.

View user profile

4 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:42 pm

Firearms license is not a scam. You have the right to have a firearm, under certain circumstances. You have to follow the firearm laws.

And you NEED to have a clean criminal record. We aren't hiring anyone without a criminal record. Having a criminal record means you can't be trusted and you will be possibly corrupt.(( Irl they aren't hiring people too with a criminal record at legal businesses like security agencies ))

I'm sorry, but rules are rules.

View user profile

5 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 4:20 pm

Clean criminal record and possession of firearms license is almost crucial since very many attacks are armed ones. And some people sometimes doesn't tend to roleplay. They just open fire.

View user profile

6 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 4:55 pm

David_Paxton wrote:Clean criminal record and possession of firearms license is almost crucial since very many attacks are armed ones. And some people sometimes doesn't tend to roleplay. They just open fire.


True.

View user profile

7 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:04 pm

I am sorry but I must stand at my point here, I know too many people, including myself, who fired back when we were fired upon, and got arrested, and the license revoked. Luckily I am just in the Administration Department, and I don't need a gun to protect myself against all the paperwork.

Concerning criminal record, we must look at what we allow. I would suggest we only keep murderers and thief's out. But stuff like illegal possession of a firearm is something which can almost be called daily life in Los Santos, and my opinion is to just overlook it.

View user profile

8 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:51 pm

(( If we are getting scripted, it could be possible we're getting added to a part of the government Razz ))

View user profile

9 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:57 pm

Laura_John wrote:(( If we are getting scripted, it could be possible we're getting added to a part of the government Razz ))

Not to be pessimistic, but chances of that happening is VERY VERY VERY rare. IRL Security Companies don't get to be part of the government. At most we might become an official faction (only official factions get scripted), but that in itself is not likely to happen in 2010. Prove me wrong, please Very Happy ))

View user profile

10 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:04 pm

Well,the illegal firearm is very ofen and geting a weapon license i think is hard to get and cops always trying to get a escuse to take it out from you,but i agree we should dont let in the murders and the robber's enter. I think who haves criminal record only for ilegal firearm only tryed to protect himself.
And i realy hope we get official Smile

View user profile

11 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:44 pm

Me too. xD

View user profile

12 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:48 pm

Im happy to be mencioned here Very Happy I thought that undercover agents could do a lot good to the corporation and it's normal peolpe dont like it, because they cant know if you are their friend or not when they meet you and want to commit crimes. They dont like it because of this. But the undercover agents could do a lot because if i were a criminal and i saw a uniformed guy coming at me i would run like a crazy man, but if i saw some civilian maybe i would try to rob him, and beeing this supposed civilian an security the criminal would surelly got arrested. But if you dont agree with the idea it's fine by me Very Happy

View user profile

13 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:18 pm

Brian_Gray wrote:Im happy to be mencioned here Very Happy I thought that undercover agents could do a lot good to the corporation and it's normal peolpe dont like it, because they cant know if you are their friend or not when they meet you and want to commit crimes. They dont like it because of this. But the undercover agents could do a lot because if i were a criminal and i saw a uniformed guy coming at me i would run like a crazy man, but if i saw some civilian maybe i would try to rob him, and beeing this supposed civilian an security the criminal would surelly got arrested. But if you dont agree with the idea it's fine by me Very Happy

you got a point, but on the other side the uniform is to scare them of on purpose, preventing them from stealing anything, you see?

View user profile

14 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:29 am

Yes, i get your point Very Happy For me either one is good Very Happy

View user profile

15 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:56 am

Brian_Gray wrote:Yes, i get your point Very Happy For me either one is good Very Happy

We will think about it.

View user profile

16 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:20 pm

From a police officer's point of view here...

You're not going to get your firearm license revoked if it really was self-defense. And while security guards are still civilians, you probably won't get your firearm revoked as long as you use it properly.

And I agree, a criminal record should be an automatic denial. You don't want someone with a record having access to your firearms, records, equipment, etc.

What you should do is make a DFL license mandatory for those that want to advance to Security Guard II. SG I's should only have batons, and SG II+ can carry sidearms. PO I's in the LSPD have restrictions put on them because, they are the most likely to leave or get fired. And until you guys get scripted, your guards will each need their own Premier/Merit/Huntley to patrol in, right?

View user profile

17 Re: Paxton's suggestions [update 22.06] on Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:54 pm

Matt_Pearson wrote:What you should do is make a DFL license mandatory for those that want to advance to Security Guard II. SG I's should only have batons, and SG II+ can carry sidearms. PO I's in the LSPD have restrictions put on them because, they are the most likely to leave or get fired. And until you guys get scripted, your guards will each need their own Premier/Merit/Huntley to patrol in, right?

I was suggesting firearm license obligatory for this rank (SGII) but I guess someone changed that O.o
And yes, everyone needs his own vehicle.

View user profile

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum