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: Right to Assemble Revision
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative Party of Telamon
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: April 2044
Description[?]:
| Although for the most part, public demonstrations are safe, there are times, when they can turn violent. Just because we allow Nazi's (as an example) to speak freely, it will not help, if the person speaking is inticing them to attack blacks, jews, hispanics, etc. That is why i propose, that we allow the forceful end to a demonstration, in cases where public safety is at risk. |
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: The police may disperse a group if they believe it poses a potential risk to public safety.
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 | 01:25:23, April 28, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | With you here too, although neither of us have a vote, yet. Good to lay out your positions and maybe we'll have a better chance of passing some of this legislation after the next election. |
| Date | 01:28:05, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | Does that mean i have your approval? =) |
| Date | 03:06:21, April 28, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | This was one of the issues I had thought of addressing as well, so definitely I support you on this change. But like I said, my support is only words right now until we have an election and we win some seats in Parliament. |
| Date | 07:11:47, April 28, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | So you want to restrict people's right to meet in groups. Is three people a group? five? If I have twenty people at my students ball? The only point of such restrictions is that you can prevent people from voicing opinions with which you disagree. The libertarians can obviously not support such a proposal! |
| Date | 07:30:01, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | we must protect the government and what it beleives in. In australia there is riots at the woomera detention center (in the desert of south australia) trying to "voice there opinion" which often turns into an attempt to break down the walls and freeing them. scores of police in riot gear turn up, beat up a couple of hippies, and everyones happy. And if they dont nreak them up and they manage to free the CRIMINALS inside, then they die. Its happed befor and after they escape they just get lost in the desert and die from everything that could kill you (includeing dingos) So you see, the police need to have some power to enforce law and orded, mostly order |
| Date | 07:31:33, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | break* |
| Date | 07:34:34, April 28, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | The police has a right and duty to stop violent riots, when there is a risk that people who are not involved will get hurt. But that does not require them to prevent peaceful gatherings because of a risk that does not even exist yet. |
| Date | 07:35:58, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | YET, but it will occur, so whats wrong with preventing tragedy. You dont wont violent riots to start do you? |
| Date | 07:41:02, April 28, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | I do not want riots that do not occur to be an excuse for limiting free speach. Plus, if there is risk for a riot, but it has not yet started, then police trying to break up the crowd will start it, and so will bring you from risk to certainty. That means it is counterproductive. |
| Date | 07:42:46, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | what is your beleif on the police presence at rallies, or are you also against that? |
| Date | 07:42:48, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Nacionalnogo Progressa | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | Conservators want change all in this country :) |
| Date | 07:48:15, April 28, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | TCP: I am for their precense, but against them stopping the rally when there is no reason for it. That should be pretty obvious. |
| Date | 10:05:29, April 28, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | The Conservative Party seems hell bent on undoing all the great reforms of the past 6 years. We cannot support restrictions on peoples right to assemble. As we have said before, there can still be a police presence and they are able to arrest anyone they see breaking the law, they just can't break up a gathering. |
| Date | 21:33:15, April 28, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party of Telamon | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | Libertarian...looking through your comments, you are a disgrace! You would rather live in a dream world, where there are rules, and you expect people to follow them blindly. Tell you what, i think i shall go incite the people to start mass riots. Too bad you can;t stop me... it is free speech, anything else the people do would not be my concern or responsibility. |
| Date | 11:06:41, April 29, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Right to Assemble Revision |
| Message | Conservative: OOC: I don't understand were you got that idea. But since TCP thinks I'm an anarchist I guess on average you are right;o> As for your riots: Yes, if you incite riots you are responsible and will be put to trial. And tanks for the warning. If your mobs enter my house they die. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 21 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 62 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Don't vote yes on a cabinet coalition that doesn't give you the power that you deserve. |
| Random quote: "A man who has no office to go to - I don't care who he is - is a trial of which you can have no conception." - George Bernard Shaw |