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: Privacy Bill 2120
Details
Submitted by[?]: Nationalist Freedom 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: June 2121
Description[?]:
| A bill to give more power to law enforcement. |
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: The government has the right to monitor information of individuals without letting them know.
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 | 22:54:05, October 04, 2005 CET | From |  Nationalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Privacy Bill 2120 |
| Message | this bill helps to prevent terrorist attacks. |
| Date | 00:04:57, October 05, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Privacy Bill 2120 |
| Message | I realize the problem with voting against this bill, but it seems wrong and too Big Brother for my tastes. |
| Date | 00:42:01, October 05, 2005 CET | From | Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the Privacy Bill 2120 |
| Message | So much in the proposal is left unclear. I actually believe in "without letting them know" IF they first have to get a judicial order to get the information in the first place. Given the opinion poll data, we'll assume that it requires a court order and vote for it. |
| Date | 04:05:59, October 05, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Privacy Bill 2120 |
| Message | "Given the opinion poll data, we'll assume that it requires a court order and vote for it." - There was a lot of support for the Patriot Act too, but that support went south when they realized it took away their freedoms. i.e. You don't appreciate what you have until you lose it. |
| Date | 05:11:08, October 05, 2005 CET | From | Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the Privacy Bill 2120 |
| Message | I think some provisions of the Patriot Act are wrong, precisely because they don't require a court order. I really believe in the ability to search *with a warrant* but without notification. |
| Date | 02:24:16, October 06, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the Privacy Bill 2120 |
| Message | My reading has changed. Im guessing this would be what the US can do when investigating peoples for many different crimes when necessary. Thus I withdraw my objection as I've never taken issue with that. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 394 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 127 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 78 |
| Random fact: In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity. |
| Random quote: "The basis of a democratic state is liberty." - Aristotle |