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 Protest Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Socialist Alliance
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 2938
Description[?]:
| . |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The citizens' right to assemble in public.
Old value:: The police may disperse a group if they believe it poses a potential risk to public safety.
Current: The police may only disperse a crowd if a state of emergency has been declared.
Proposed: There are no restrictions on the right of citizens to assemble in groups.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:28:54, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Aloria Party (NAP) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | Riot starts? |
| Date | 01:33:21, May 12, 2010 CET | From | Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | If they're not braking any laws then leave it |
| Date | 01:36:21, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Independence Party (PCA) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | We understand this bill to limit the police power to prevent riots from happening, not to stop riots once they've broken out. We think it is better that the police should be able to prevent the outbreak of violence than to have to wait to put it to a stop. That being said, in the spirit of compromise with our new coalition partner, we will vote for this bill. |
| Date | 01:36:48, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Aloria Party (NAP) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | We will not risk the saftey of the people, if law enforcment believes that it is risk to public saftey than it should be broken up. If not, than they can stay and protest. |
| Date | 01:46:27, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Aloria Party (NAP) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | "We think it is better that the police should be able to prevent the outbreak of violence than to have to wait to put it to a stop." This is what you believe but you voted opposite of what you believe. |
| Date | 01:48:18, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Independence Party (PCA) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | SA is our coalition partner. We want to cooperate with them where we can. We voted against enough of their bills that we thought we should vote for one or two in the spirit of compromise. |
| Date | 02:09:07, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Aloria Party (NAP) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | You can do that but, we believe in voting in what we believe. |
| Date | 02:09:28, May 12, 2010 CET | From | NCPA | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | I will vote for SA Policy because we support it, as long as the group are peaceful, dispersing a group may cause a riot if the group are refuse the right to protest |
| Date | 03:50:06, May 12, 2010 CET | From | New Independence Party (PCA) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | We believe in coalition building to achieve our most important values. |
| Date | 01:47:31, May 13, 2010 CET | From | New Aloria Party (NAP) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | NCPA: What if the group is starting to cause a riot? Not a full blown riot but, law enforcment are seeing the signs of a riot building what are they to do? The current law doesn't restrict protesting, the PP stands up for the People but, we have to take in account we can't let something go into a riot if it could have been stopped. |
| Date | 06:17:05, May 13, 2010 CET | From | New Aloria Party (NAP) | To | Debating the Right To Protest Act |
| Message | Assemble in Public Act 2923 will make it so that the police may break up a group of people assembled in public if they believe it poses a potential safety risk for example a riot, car accidents, muggings of people, or even death of people. This is not to restrict the rights of the people do not argue that, this is to make sure they are safe. We have no problem for the people to assemble in public it is a natural right as we see but, if a safety risk is posed than they must be broken up in a non violent matter. http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=287600 This is when we passed it, the NSP voted yes to bring the current law into place. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 102 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 491 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 22 |
| Random fact: Moderation reserves the discretion to declare RP laws invalid if the players supporting them are doing so in an excessively confrontational way. |
| Random quote: "Those looking for ideology in the White House should consider this: for the men who rule our world, rules are for other people." - Naomi Klein |