*Aoife makes her way to the front of the crowd gently.  Feeling the need to find out something that has bothered her for awhile.  She listens to the conversation that ensues, but still can't quite grasp some of what has been said.  With great respect, she begins*

I guess I am confused about something that happened to my mother.  She was a tagged member of Sinfest, and was shot even after an order of protection was issued.  What exactly is the rule?  I never said anything, even though it was discussed at the time, mostly because I was young and naive, but also because I didn't realize exactly what the rule was.  So she should not have been shot?  Or it was ok?  Who exactly has the right to shoot a tagged member of a fallen leader, and why?

"I believe your mother was the Right Hand to Sinfest, yes? This would be why. Typically 99% of the time, the Right Hand goes down with the ship. As you are also held accountable for what your leader does. Sometimes it seems unfair, but that is how things work."

Clarity nodded and then smiled.

"Hopefully, that answers your questions."

There's a level of common sense here. If I'm warring Clarity, and she gets dropped - you're gonna have 10 unsponsored members that (should be) display her tattoo. Because I'm the one making a move, piss on the "tagged protection" - I'm taking down who I want to take down. 

A word of caution to others, though. http://mafiareturns.com/news/uprofile.php?id=280728 gives you an example of a formerly sponsored member who technically isn't displaying a tag -- does that make him eligible to be shot by anyone should his leader go down? Technically, it seems the answer would be yes. But would this be a logical action? No, probably not.

The way I see it is that this rule was put in place for the protection of people after one of the 3 ways we have seen some leaders meet their demise. Those being wack back, one of the infamous Durden gang or those bastard CA's.

With regards to the war situation... You damned right the attacking force is going to be the one to decide who dies and who doesn't. But once the initial take down has taken place and all threats have been neutralised it is standard practice to protect those that are no threat.

So although in war time I don't see this protection rule being considered there are other ways and lets be honest here, more frequent ways in which Crewleaders die. I believe it more geared towards that approach.

Oh, I see.  It was not a war.  But I had never seen it written that way.