I hate this idea...

You line up to shoot an IA, or in a different case a rulebreaker in your crew. And instead of hitting him, you shoot at a GF of a city.....

that and there would be the biggest shitstorm of abuse of this as well. The newest craze would be:

"oh shit he died? musta been that weird assed wack system. As I would NEVER, EVER! shoot at a crewleader!"

I dont like this idea at all. It would be so stupid if you were in a war with another family, and instead of shooting your target, you shot someone in there crew, then your open for an easy shot, cuz you couldn't aim the gun right!

Now, i understand how you say people get shot in crossfires, so to some extent, I guess it could work. But usually, as you would notice, it is Civilians that get shot. Not other family members, or anything.

So if this random thing was to happen, then it should hit a Civ, and no one Thug and Up.

I dont like this idea at all. It would be so stupid if you were in a war with another family, and instead of shooting your target, you shot someone in there crew, then your open for an easy shot, cuz you couldn't aim the gun right!

Sorry I meant *Your*crew, not *there* crew

I agree, this sounds like the problems it would cause would out number any interesting twist it would bring to the game.

I wouldnt see how this would work with IA's. It would be sad if you were just building your gun and then you end up shooting someone who is sponsered. It could bring war.

If you were to introduce this, it is almost like random wacking. Going for someone and hope for the best?

I'm sorry, this is a horrid idea.

Could do wars and fights.

The idea has potential.

The witness statements would have to be revised for this though.

You witnessed XXXX attempt to shoot at XXXX killing/missing XXXX in the crossfire

You attempted to wack XXXX killing/missing  XXXX in the crossfire

Of course just because you missed some one, does not mean you automatically hit someone else. Also, after the shot passes over the first person it could become more liable for a miss. Like after the shot passed the first person, the other shot could only represent 1/4 or less of the shooters wack ability.

It could be made to be exceptionally rare, rarer than wackbacks, maybe the chance of it happening could be rank dependent also. I would say this because it could represent the persons intelligence/experience, like not to shoot when somebody is behind another person.

Or it could act as a medium between You miss your target and lose your gun and Your gun  explodes in your hand causing death. I always thought that the jump between losing your gun and dying was a little extreme, this could even that out a little. You shoot another person, it's worse than losing your gun, but it is better than dying. It also adds more realism in the game, not just from being hit, but from you accidentally shooting another person.Yeah, maybe once in a blue moon some random person might die, but this is a dangerous business.

Things considered:

Whispers. Maybe it could be generic in the case of accidental shootings, like "Wrong place wrong time" some form of validation would be needed to prevent abuse. Or maybe the whisper could just carry over.

Wackback:  I'm not too sure if it should be allowed a second time.

Treatment: Being an uncontrollable event, should it be considered a threat to someone's life? I think it would depend on the situation, was the person shooting when he was at a low rank, could the person have ever made the shot reliably?

Rules: The bullet would not hit the same person twice. Maybe the second person, if missed on, would only have 1 hour protection, equal to the risk. Since the person shot at two people instead of one, the timer could be two hours then. 

Like mentioned before hand, it would be very rare.

I have 2 ideas for chosing the second victim

If someone has you listed as a contact, and you have them listed...then each of you, when in the same city could get crossfire killed. It could be a great way to make your contact list people you actually trust...

If you attempt to wack someone who is in the process of a multi user crime, anyone in the crime with them can get crossifre killed. This would definitely make it an extremely rare instance....

another thought could be a multi kill if they are in a multi user...but that might be pushing an already farfetch'd idea.

Maybe the leaders can implement this - if any of their members miss, they have to HQ a member at random!

I don't really see the point of it..