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 Inquiry Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists
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: May 2593
Description[?]:
Like it says.. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Right to privacy.
Old value:: Individuals have a right to privacy, but the courts can force individuals to give information on certain matters if needed. (also known as Habeas Data).
Current: Individuals have a right to privacy, to keep records and information for themselves.
Proposed: The government has the right to monitor information of individuals without letting them know.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 15:49:21, June 14, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police Inquiry Act |
Message | How disgusting. Why should the government be able to monitor people without warrants? What happened to judicial oversight? |
Date | 16:49:32, June 14, 2008 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Police Inquiry Act |
Message | That's besides the point, the police would still need warrants to tap a phone ot do a house-search. We believe the police should, while conducting an investigation, be able to monitor people or tap their phone without letting them know. What do you expect the police to do? Say "Sorry Mr Suspected Drugdealer, we will now tap your phone".. You cannot gatherinformation that way. If the suspect knows he's being watched, he'll lay low for a while. And the current law is not an alternative. Firstly, there's no way the courts can force anyone to cooperate. And secondly, you cannot expect a suspect will suddenly reveal his evil schemes to the police just like that, like evil superheroes do in comic books. Nobody will testify and give information which would incriminate themselves. |
Date | 00:58:06, June 15, 2008 CET | From | Human Extinction Project | To | Debating the Police Inquiry Act |
Message | This would seriously compromise civil liberties. We cannot support. Professor Horace Werckle (Director of the Human Extinction Project) |
Date | 01:02:12, June 15, 2008 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Police Inquiry Act |
Message | And what about all the people who are not suspects, but are still monitored. By allowing police unlimited jurisdiction, you can be sure they will abuse their power. When the law says "the courts can force individuals to give information", that is not necessarily the individuals directly. This information can come from the phone companies, from banks etc. The current law is the correct balance. |
Date | 14:01:36, June 15, 2008 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Police Inquiry Act |
Message | The law only says "The government has the right to monitor information of individuals without letting them know". This will not turn the government into an abusive facist big brother which controls everybody's life, since normal procedures still apply, those don't change. Police will still need a court order (and a good reason to get one) to do a telephone tap, shadowing suspects, or do a house-search. You're just spreading all kinds of bullshit to confuse people. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||
yes | Total Seats: 194 | |||
no |
Total Seats: 269 | |||
abstain | Total Seats: 37 |
Random fact: "OOC", "IC" and "IG" are commonly-used acronyms in Particracy. "OOC" refers to comments, discussions and actions which are out-of-character, meaning they are done player-to-player rather than party-to-party. "IC" refers to in-character interactions (ie. party-to-party). Similarly, "IG" means in-game, although this term may also simply refer to what happens in the actual game interface, as opposed to on the forum or elsewhere. "RP" just means "role-play". |
Random quote: "In an underdeveloped country, don't drink the water; in a developed country, don't breathe the air." - Changing Times magazine |