We are still going to inevitably be shot by gangs who will shoot the MOMENT we restrain someone (regardless of if we say it's for ticketing, and if they do shoot us which would be RDM they would get like a 2 minute ban), plus I can also see it going down this way.
> Sir I'm restraining you to check your license
> *checks license*
> You've come back as wanted and now i'm taking you back to PD.
What now? Does me saying that create a dec? Because that isn't a dec, and me restraining them was only for the purpose of ticketing them however - I found other things, does that change the context of the restraint AFTER the fact? I think all in all it's a pointless addition. I think the declaration before knockout was good, but the restraints part makes it far too situational.
Plus, if people were going to complain it was a bias rule and be saying "why are police exempt?". The simple solution is give us a way to check licenses without restraining, that way it would look something like this.
> Sir can I please see your id
> *Checks ID*
> Okay sir you've come back wanted and i will now be taking you into custody
> *restrains them*
THAT order of events there could be considered a hostile action by police from the perspective of a rebel gang and create a dec, but as the rule you've just implemented currently stands, I can restrain someone for the purpose of ticketing them, and then leave after finding out they are wanted with no chance of harm to myself (which if what you're worried about is a bias rule, that's what you have right there).