We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Public Curfews Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Centre Party of Gaduridos
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2088
Description[?]:
| Although the national government should not be in the business of setting curfews (except possibly during times of extreme national emergency), we need to empower local governments to set such regulations on what their youth are allowed to do at night as make sense to their local circumstances. Therefore, any local or state government is authorized to enact curfews, subject to the following limitations. 1) No curfew can start earlier than 10:00 pm without the express consent of the federal Minister of Justice. 2) Penalties for violating curfew will consist of fines similar to those for minor infractions such as speeding tickets, and cannot include jail time of any sort without the express consent of the federal Minister of Justice. 3) Local governments must review their curfew laws, if they exist, every year to ensure they are still needed. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Curfew policy (curfew time to be determined in the bill description).
Old value:: No curfew policies may be established.
Current: The national government may impose curfews, but only if a state of emergency has been declared.
Proposed: Local governments may set curfews, but national government does not.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:02:03, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Centre Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | This is intended to allow areas with serious youth crime or vandalism problems to help get those issues under control. The bill sets clear limits on the extent of curfews. I would welcome comments on potential improvements to the bill before moving to a vote. |
| Date | 04:37:36, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Totalitarian Party | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | Agree. |
| Date | 10:35:27, July 30, 2005 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | We desagree totally with this bill. This is horrible restricting freedoms of our people to leave there homes. This must not pass! |
| Date | 16:04:07, July 30, 2005 CET | From | National Democratic Party | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | We also disagree with this bill |
| Date | 22:48:08, July 30, 2005 CET | From | People's Progressive Party | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | We agree with the bill. It does not force curfews on anyone but simply defines what kind of curfews local governments can and cannot implement if they should choose to do so. Perhaps defining the curfew violation specifically as a crime for which the violator is simply fined and amount determined by the locality instead of any type of minor crime, will make this seem less restrictive. |
| Date | 03:27:25, July 31, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Centre Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | Thank you, PPP, for your thoughtful suggestion. We have amended the bill to take it into account. Thank you also for your words of support. I would like to stress that the idea of this bill is not punitive or intended to take away rights. We do not envision curfews being enacted in very many cities - we just think they should be an option for local governments to debate. I hope the other parties can see that this is a very limited bill, with built-in safeguards to prevent an excessive incursion into civil rights. I am moving this bill to vote now, so that we can all register our votes on it before the next elections. I hope some of you will reconsider your opposition. |
| Date | 03:47:38, July 31, 2005 CET | From | Feudal Party | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | As ambassador for the recently formed Feudal Party, it is my duty to outline and rationalise our stance and perspective on this issue. The Bill's 'allowance' for the enforcement of curfews, is an important step toward the safeguard of our populace. Its inception will allow the government to more easily implement such curfews in cases of national emergency, without upsetting our people due to unfamiliarity. Additionally, it will allow for the regulation and swift address of any issues that could be assuaged by a curfew, allowing us to act rather than scramble to pass a bill that will ensure the security of the innocent in an unexpected situation (i.e, the case of riots, etc). 'Prevention is better than Cure.' Jacque LeFaucheur - The Feudal Party |
| Date | 06:07:43, August 01, 2005 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Public Curfews Act |
| Message | This also goes against our bill of rights. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 111 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 182 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 42 |
| Random fact: The grey space in the east is populated by the forum-based countries, known in-game as the former colonies or the "Third World". These countries are managed by the Third World Coordinator but players can request control of individual countries in the Third World Control Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=8302 |
| Random quote: "In any country there must be people who have to die. They are the sacrifices any nation has to make to achieve law and order." - Idi Amin |