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: Youth Crime
Details
Submitted by[?]: Rationalist Party
Status[?]: passed
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 2093
Description[?]:
| We understand that this bill would not eliminate youth crime, but if children (under 16) are out passed midnight (2400) they should be under adult supervision (parent/guardian) or returned to their parent/guardian promptly. This would also increase the safety of these children, as streets are generally not as safe at night. |
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: Minors may not use streets or public property beyond the curfew time.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:38:53, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Sounds Fair. You have our support. Especially considering, this nation is immensely privatized, they can find plenty of things to do, on their property. ;p |
| Date | 11:58:52, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | No, our youth have just as much of a right to the streets as you do. Ordinary laws will still aplly to them, so there is no need for this. Besides, look at our crime figures. they are relatively low to continue with authoritarian reform, don't you think? I'm rolling back privatisation. : P Besides, who's to say that these people have their own property? In the city, the poor rarely actually own anything. |
| Date | 00:22:03, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Rationalist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | This bill is not aimed at rolling back rights, remember, adults are 16. This bill will reduce youth gangs and aid in keeping kids safe at night. |
| Date | 04:02:20, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Right, so being 15 makes me a criminal if I go outside at nine? Unless I stay in our posh gated community and beat up papa's servants? That's perfectly alright. There should not be discrimination bvased simply on age. I support a national ID card. Any repeat offenders have to stay off the streets. I'm going to go and post that idea on the forum. |
| Date | 05:47:01, August 09, 2005 CET | From |  Federation Under Crazy Killers -- United | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | nine? The bill description says midnight. I'm for this. Children dont need to be out passed that time. If they are, then they are usually causing trouble. |
| Date | 07:02:45, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Ah, I didn't read the bill description. It was nine where I live. But why only youths? Adults are just as likely to commit a crime. |
| Date | 18:21:59, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Rationalist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Adults are much less likely to commit crime (though they tend to commit more severe crimes), also, would you want a six year old wandering the streets at three am? There is no charges for being out late, just that the child is returned to their parents. |
| Date | 19:01:41, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | A six-year old wandering the streets is normally marked as child neglect and returned to their parents or put into a foster care system. These curfew laws restrict the rights of teenagers. I can think of plenty of times that i had a legitimate reason to be out that late during the summer. Not during the school year, mind you. |
| Date | 19:17:05, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Also, many communities are self-policing (especially here) and this really only applies to the poor who live on public property or in the inner city where there are no areas where they can stay after hours. |
| Date | 20:51:09, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Rationalist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Which we have in Telamon. |
| Date | 21:28:16, August 09, 2005 CET | From | Telamon National Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | this is taking away peoples freedom to move about, I will not support this. We can stop minors joining in groups but we should not stop them moving about in 1-2's. |
| Date | 19:19:15, August 10, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Marxist Party | To | Debating the Youth Crime |
| Message | Wow, I'm agreeing with the Nationalist. This is a bad day for socialism.... |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 162 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 63 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 30 |
| Random fact: It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current. |
| Random quote: "The superior man is distressed by the limitations of his ability; he is not distressed by the fact that men do not recognize the ability that he has." - Confucius |