Space Law revisited

If any, which laws are unreasonable to enforce?

  • B&E/ B&E, Restricted

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
  • Poll closed .


On occaision, myself and others have commented that Space Law does not properly reflect the crime and punishment system that our community expects to be held to. For this reason, I will be gaining feedback on which parts of Space Law players are unsatisfied with and then I will look at writing a new guideline to reflect suggested changes.

Please vote on what laws you believe are not suitable to enforce and leave a comment if you want to raise an issue that can not be explained with a vote.

Due to forum limitations, I am not able to list all of the crimes individually, so they are grouped by code. I have also noticed while making my own comment, that my poll missed code 5xx which just has a single crime, 503 Possession of explosives. It is not possible to add an 11th option.

A detailed description of each Law can be found here:
Last edited:


I personally request the following changes:

Remove code 301 "Assault, Deadly Weapon" and change code 302 "Assault, Officer" to 301
> Assault in this community almost invariably results in murder, so in the few times a victim survives, it hardly matters what weapon they were attacked with. Also cleans up code x02

Remove code 401 "Murder" and change code 403 "Attempted murder" to 401.
> Attempted murder is already an 4xx so there's no distinction in punishment. Also cleans up code x03

Abolish code x02
> code 202 "pickpocketing" is theft, covered by 208. Code 302 has been moved to 301. Code 402 "Sexual assault" is to be resolved with admin intervention.

Abolish code x03
> nobody cares about or enforces code 203 "Drug Distribution". Code 303 "Manslaughter" can possibly be merged with code x07 which handles workplace hazards. Code 403 has been moved to 401.

Remove code 104 "Possession of drugs"
> literally nobody cares or enforces this.

Merge the definition of code 305 "Possession, Explosives" into the definition of 304 "Possession, Restricted Weapons"
Abolish code x05
> cleans up code x05

Remove code 306 "Inciting a riot" and change code 206 "Rioting" to 306.
> AuStation security forces tend to be understaffed and easily overwhelmed; this change gives the officers more time-out with rioters in cells so that they can round up other rioters with more peace. Rarely does the security team have enough manpower to properly investigate the source of a riot.

Remove code 108 "Petty Theft"
> this refers to theft of tools that nobody would ever miss, such as paper bins and wrenches etc. The codebase supports fines, so where possible this should be the first resort rather than jail time.

Remove code 209 "Tresspass"
> this invariably implies B&E, but also since Major Tresspass is a crime, regular tresspass would be into areas that nobody truly cares about like Sci Desk and Medbay.

Merge code 309 "Major Tresspass" into the definition of 310 "B&E, Restricted"
Abolish x09
> make tresspassing into a restricted area literally the same crime as breaking in - the punishments were the same anyway and it isn't neccessary to prove who created the entry in the first place. Cleans up code x09

Abolish code x11
> code 111 "Discriminitive Language" and code 311 "Dereliction of duty", when as a serious offence deserving punishment, are in the realm of admin intervention. Code 211 "Insubordination", if required, may be merged into code 603 "Rioting". Code 411 "Enemy of Corp", if required, may be merged into code 407 "Grand Sabotage" or instated as code 410, where code x10 handles B&E.
Last edited:

Dingo Dongler

I think the consensus on drug possession is that only shitsec enforces it. Nanotrasen wouldn't be above employees taking performance enhancements, anyways.


I wonder whether Nanotrasen would still want something about drug possession in though, but specify it as a discretionary thing for when shitsec really want someone to be guilty of something but don't have anything stronger to pin on them. Something you'd whack the clown with for being annoying, but ignore the HoP doing as long as they're not fucking around too much.

Kinda like how a cop will get you for a joint just because he can't prove you've done anything else wrong, but ScoMo can take disco biccies all night and pass a bunch of budget cuts and the cops are all (y).

Or is that overthinking space law, since shitsec do what they want anyway?


I wonder whether Nanotrasen would still want something about drug possession in though, but specify it as a discretionary thing for when shitsec really want someone to be guilty of something but don't have anything stronger to pin on them.
That is a valid point, that I may agree with if you're insistent. Do you believe that this is the kind of treatment that players (real people at home, not NT employees) should expect during their interactions with sec? The main purpose of this thread is to identify what parts of spacelaw should be written out because they do not meet player expectations.


I'm unsure; it's the sort of treatment *I'D* like to see, but I know that a lot of people think Sec is already powerful (and arseholish) enough as it is.