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: Military Conduct
Details
Submitted by[?]: Allied Humanists
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: December 3630
Description[?]:
| Article 1 aims to provide the military with necessary ammunition for surprise attacks in the event of an invasion. Restrictions proposed would be: - Non usage in residential or heavily populated areas. - Can only be activated with the knowledge of the Head of State - Can only be used for internal security measures in the event of a State of Emergency, with the knowledge of the Presidium Article 2 we believe is self explanatory as discriminating who can or cannot join our military will eventually dwindle its numbers. Article 3 serves to establish a constabulary as the military is not full time and therefore is unable to enforce internal laws. We also believe this is a means of filling the gap between the 92% and 100% employment of all nations where the bulk of the population is within the parameters set for labour. Article 4 serves as a means to keep the retaliation policy in effect with protecting as many lives as possible by preventing Chernobyl-like happenings in residential or heavily populated areas. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards the use of land mines by the army.
Old value:: The use of land mines is prohibited.
Current: The use of land mines is prohibited.
Proposed: The use of land mines is allowed but restricted.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Discrimination in the military on grounds of race/religion.
Old value:: Candidates must be of a certain race/religion to have any place in the military.
Current: Any adult citizen can serve in the military, discrimination for racial or religious reasons is prohibited.
Proposed: Any adult citizen can serve in the military, discrimination for racial or religious reasons is prohibited.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The nation's policy on the separation of the police and the military.
Old value:: The military acts as a de-facto police force, with powers of arrest.
Current: A civilian police force is in place and the military may be called in to help in serious emergencies.
Proposed: A civilian police force is in place and the military may be called in to help in serious emergencies.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of nuclear weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in retaliation to any attack.
Current: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons on non-civilian areas.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:20:22, February 27, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the Military Conduct |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, since there is only one religion in our republic, it doesn't matter whether or not the military discriminates on religious base. But, then again, any other religion than our state-religion is prohibited, thus we do need discrimination in our military. Admitting someone with another religion than ours in the military, could be considered an act of treason. Land mines should be banned, and they will never be allowed as long as we can prevent that. Ted Murphy P&A chairman vice-President of Lodamun |
| Date | 12:26:30, February 27, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the Military Conduct |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, internal law is being taken care of by hired paramilitary organisations, which act as a police force. We believe these people are employed... Willem Ekelers Minister of Internal Affairs |
| Date | 12:35:21, February 27, 2014 CET | From | Allied Humanists | To | Debating the Military Conduct |
| Message | They are employed, yes, but paramilitaries are coincident with political parties are they not? In which case a constabulary would be permanent as a political party can be disbanded thus leading to the disbandment of its paramilitaries. Austeieen Weinerheim Spokesman, Internal Affairs |
| Date | 12:59:06, February 27, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the Military Conduct |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, indeed every party is entitled to have her own paramilitary troops. Paramilitaries are 'hired' to ensure a solid police-force, what means that apart from party-affiliated paramilitaries, there could also excist Private Military Companies or other organisations that control paramilitaries for rent. If we would want to change the current system, we will need something much more specified and a well-balanced organisation should be elaborated. This operation would involve Internal Affairs, Defence, Finance and any political party in our republic, what requires the consent of all those concerned. Ted Murphy |
| Date | 16:30:33, February 27, 2014 CET | From |  Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Military Conduct |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, My Comrade, Ted Murphy, is correct. Private militia groups are hired for policing, and they are not allowed to use military-grade weapons (according to our law) while on police duty. -- Chandler Huddleson, Justice Minister |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 244 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 355 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: You can view who's online (i.e. been active the last 10 minutes) at the bottom of the menu (either at the top or the side). |
| Random quote: “Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right.” --H.L. Mencken |