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: Riot Act, 2104
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative Liberal 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: July 2106
Description[?]:
| The citizens' right to assemble in public - Proposing - the introduction of a Riot Act -will be read out to all demonstrations, strikes etc -If demonstrators turn violent, as with recent anti-capitalist movements, and animal rights protesters, the police shall be allowed to disperse the groups in question. -Allows the police to provide for public safety and the security of the nation, in extreme circumstances. -Police Heavy Handedness can be reported to the Independent Police Complaints Commisiion |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The citizens' right to assemble in public.
Old value:: There are no restrictions on the right of citizens to assemble in groups.
Current: There are no restrictions on the right of citizens to assemble in groups.
Proposed: The police may disperse a group if they believe it poses a potential risk to public safety.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:04:35, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Söhne der Freiheit | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | This bill has our full support. |
| Date | 14:26:27, August 31, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | We of the RLP regretfully concur with this bill, as long as it can be applied only when illegal acts have occurred. If it can be applied any time the authorities think an illegal act may occur, it is a chilling restrictionj on the right of free assembly. |
| Date | 14:29:46, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | It will only be applied AFTER violence breaks out. The Likatonian Police Force would not want to stifle peaceful disturbances. |
| Date | 15:51:50, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | The AAP is a little concerned that the other members are considering bringing to vote, a bill that allows removal of freedom of speech, for no cause greater than "they believe" there might be "a potential risk". There are already laws that allow the police force to reduce assembly AFTER illegal acts have occured... this seems like a draconian invasion of privacy, an infringement of the right to gather, and a blatant incursion on freedom of speech. |
| Date | 22:45:12, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | I agree here withthe AAP - if violence has broken out, the police can arrest the perpetrators, therefore the passing of this law in the modified form would not change anything. I am strongly in favour of freedom of assembly and will vote against this bill. I would remind members of the council of the incident in which the Consul attemped, in a underhand manner, to disperse our party as we were providing political rivalry, using assembly laws similar to those being suggested. Unfortunately there is no documentary evidence of these events as the RP was deleted by the CCU to cover up this disgusting misuse of power. |
| Date | 16:45:23, September 03, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | What? I have clearly stated that, -If demonstrators turn violent, as with recent anti-capitalist movements, and animal rights protesters, the police shall be allowed to disperse the groups in question. -Allows the police to provide for public safety and the security of the nation, in extreme circumstances. -Police Heavy Handedness can be reported to the Independent Police Complaints Commisiion This does not remove Freedom of Speech, this allows the police to tackle rioters, not to disperse peaceful citizens. I fail to see how this is an attack on freedom of speech. Thowing petrol bombs and smashing windows should lead to a protest being stopped by the police. |
| Date | 19:05:53, September 03, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | Response to the CPL: You seem to be missing the thrust of the AAP and LPE arguments - all the positive powers you suggest are ALREADY in place and available to our police forces. All this bill adds, is the right to disperse groups for pretty much arbitrary considerations. The freedom of assembly is already void, in cases of lawlessness... there is no gain from this bill, but much to lose. |
| Date | 19:13:38, September 03, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | To AAP: Where are these laws that are already in place? There is little to use. As mentioned earlier, this bill will only be used to dispell groups that threaten the public safety. It will not be used to deny freedom to speech, its there purely to deny violence and to prevent vigilantes/lynch mobs. |
| Date | 19:21:17, September 03, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | To CPL: Our consitution clearly shows that we have an active, civil police force. We do not need to add the risks of an ADDITIONAL layer of redtape and civil-servant position-padding. Violence is not allowed, whether it be in big groups or no. Vigilante justice is currently not legitimate, whether it be in big groups or no. All this Bill may end up doing, is codifying the 'right' of the government to disturb peaceful gathering. |
| Date | 14:50:07, September 04, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | Its about codifying the police's right to intervene in violent demonstartions. Nothing more nothing less. Yes violence isn't allowed, but the police do need a law behind them so they can prevent violence. |
| Date | 17:33:08, September 04, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Riot Act, 2104 |
| Message | We have decided that the time has come to vote upon this matter. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 102 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 6 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 107 |
| Random fact: Terra, the fictional world in which Particracy is set, consists of 8 continents: Artania, Dovani, Keris, Makon, Majatra, Seleya, Temania and Vascania. |
| Random quote: "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson |