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: State Powers Act IV (part 1)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Pragmatists
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 2040
Description[?]:
| Our Party has a mandate from the voters to put this issue once again onto the floor. The reason for this bill are already known, to insure the safty of the State and its people from insurection or invasion. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The weapons used by police forces.
Old value:: Police officers carry standard firearms.
Current: Police officers may only carry standard firearms apart from specially trained firearms units.
Proposed: Police officers carry military-grade equipment.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded | From |  Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | We continue to oppose the SDP's militant populist stance, and will oppose this bill as we have opposed previous attempts on this matter. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Progressive Pragmatists | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | Our parties stance is not populist, it is the opposite. |
| Date | not recorded | From | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | Be it populist or not. The programme as worded is ridiculously expensive, unneccesary and patronising. Gun control suceeding, should prevent the need for our constabulary to even require firearms at all. Police don't get to sort shit our by killing people - anyone who believes they do is a criminal - be they pauper or president. The IRP shuns the Secular Democrats fro wasting the Houses' time. ..and opposes the Proposal |
| Date | not recorded | From | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | `nd apologises for the lack of coherency or indeed conssistency in our spelling. The IRP is currently justly stoned ...and fairly drunk |
| Date | not recorded | From | Irkan Tomorrow Cabal | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | [IrTC non-binding seal of approval] |
| Date | not recorded | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | We oppose this, for reasons already explained, and take exception at the stance the SDP is taking on this issue, which we feel borders on establishing a police state. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | The SDP may say what the will on the subject of populism, but their actions speak louder than words. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Progressive Evolution Party | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | Oh, as if Miss Thing! <nay vote incoming> |
| Date | not recorded | From | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | Is it going to be mandatory they carry these weapons? Or are they going to carry them as needed like a bomb squad? I don't know if they should be carrying these weapons out in public frequently. I agree that they are necessary in some instances. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Progressive Pragmatists | To | Debating the State Powers Act IV (part 1) |
| Message | I believe that is up to the policy of the Department of the Interior, which my party controls. All police stations will have access to the new body armor and weapons, but they will only be used in large cities, high crime areas, or places expierencing widespread civil disorder... |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 122 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 125 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 44 |
| Random fact: If you are likely to be logging in to Particracy with the same IP address as another player with an active account, please inform Moderation on the forum. Otherwise your account could be inactivated on suspicion of multi-accounting. |
| Random quote: "Men who have greatness in them don't go in for politics." - Albert Camus |