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: Police (Weapons) Amendment Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Judicial Union Party
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: March 2533
Description[?]:
| An act to disallow ordinary police from carrying firearms. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The weapons used by police forces.
Old value:: Police officers may only carry standard firearms apart from specially trained firearms units.
Current: Police officers may only carry standard firearms apart from specially trained firearms units.
Proposed: Police officers may only carry non-lethal weapons apart from specially trained firearms units.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:34:44, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | A policeman does not need a pistol to issue a speeding ticket. We should be trying to prevent firefights, not encouraging them by arming our ordinary police. The current law will mean more people are shot by police, and that is obviously something we want to avoid. We have a specially trained firearms unit who are, well, specially trained to shoot. They are experts. If a situation calls for that, then we will have the ability. |
| Date | 13:32:35, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | No. This will leave our civilians and our police at risk. We will not allow that to happen. |
| Date | 20:59:02, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | No, it will not. Police have non-lethal weapons to subdue anyone who they feel is likely to cause a harm. We don't allow the state to execute people through a judicial sentence, why should an extra-judicial execution by the armed police be acceptable? |
| Date | 21:22:49, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | "No, it will not." Yes it will. For heaven's sake JUP. Non-lethal weapons do not have the distance that a crook with a gun has. Why the fuck do you hate civilians and police? |
| Date | 21:24:47, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | Why are you willing to put the lives of our citizens in jeopardy by allowing police issuing speeding tickets to carry firearms? If there is an armed robbery, then the firearms squad would move out to deal with it. |
| Date | 21:59:21, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | Why are you willing to put the lives of our citizens and police in jeopardy by allowing crooks to be the only ones armed with guns? As to the fire arms squad...they won't get their in time you fat piece of shit. |
| Date | 22:01:25, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | Obviously they're going to get there in the same time it takes any other squad of police to get there. |
| Date | 22:09:06, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | I see something escapes you. What makes you think that an armed robber is going to wait around? What makes you think that someone can actually call 911 to call the cops if they are the only person in the store? |
| Date | 22:30:34, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | No, you see, most people don't have guns. Because we have strict gun laws in this nation, there is a short supply of guns. And for good reason, of course. If police don't have guns, there is less impetus for people intending to commit a crime to get guns. And don't say "oh but they'll get them through the black market" because that is plainly not true. Most guns enter the black market through legal purchasers. If we limit the number of legal purchasers, then those incapable of purchasing a gun legally will have much lesser access. As for not being able to signal the police, whether the police have guns or not isn't going to help a bit. And they wouldn't call 911 anyway, that's a rubbish emergency number. |
| Date | 22:33:46, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | "And don't say "oh but they'll get them through the black market" because that is plainly not true." Not true? Boy you are an ignorant bastard aren't you? Not surprising really! I see your education was sorely lacking. |
| Date | 22:37:56, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | Alternatively, instead of forming preconceived (read: wrong) notions on how the world works, you could read some studies by academics, who actually know what they're talking about. |
| Date | 22:55:51, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | Or I can go by...you know...history. Hmmm....academics or history? Which one has more weight! *goes off to ponder the question. |
| Date | 23:05:18, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | Academics interpret history and draw conclusions from it. You, on the other hand, take what you like from a limited section of history, add your own misconceived opinions, and mix them up to try to present an argument that no sensible person with one iota of reason would try to advance. |
| Date | 23:07:58, February 14, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | *yawns* You really do not know anything do you? No I can see that you don't. Its ok. Just believe whatever shit you want. I'm done. |
| Date | 02:52:06, February 15, 2008 CET | From | JDW Tukarali Greens Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | support all this ground was covered the last time this was introduced |
| Date | 14:26:48, February 15, 2008 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Police (Weapons) Amendment Act |
| Message | The Problem JDW is that this leaves our cops defenseless. Do you really want to see more cop funerals because that is precisely what will happen if you, along with JDW, show this high disregard for the safety and wellbeing of our police force. Not to mention the civilian danger which will also increase if this bill passes |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 227 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 273 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| 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: "If sunbeams were weapons of war, we would have had solar energy centuries ago." - George Porter |