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: Stop to Police State
Details
Submitted by[?]: New Democratic 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: April 3758
Description[?]:
| Dear Presidium, we, RPF propose to change legislations in justice and reduce the rights of the police to intervene in the privacy of our citizens. --- Kathrine Rorie Justice spokesman of RPF |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Legality of judicial physical punishment
Old value:: Judicial corporal punishment (eg. caning or flogging) is legal.
Current: All forms of physical punishment are illegal.
Proposed: All forms of physical punishment are illegal.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Police searches.
Old value:: The police can search a person or their property without restrictions.
Current: The police cannot search a person or their property without their consent unless the police have obtained a warrant from a court or have reasonable grounds to suspect that a crime was committed.
Proposed: The police cannot search a person or their property without their consent unless the police have obtained a warrant from a court or in cases of imminent danger.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:47:08, November 12, 2014 CET | From |  Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, The specific wording of the bill description includes what the author says is an intention to "reduce the rights of the police" - now why would we want to reduce the rights of our police? Police deserve rights. -- George Huddleson, GNRG Spokesman on Justice |
| Date | 20:50:04, November 12, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, this looks like a Hosian coup to us. Paul Murphy-Spaak Jr. LNC chairman vice-President of Lodamun |
| Date | 20:52:43, November 12, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Jokes aside, we support the direction of this bill but not the specific articles. We believe that the involvement of the courts will make things inefficient. -- Andre Fertig, Chairman of the GNRG |
| Date | 20:54:20, November 12, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, LNC cannot support such bills for obvious reasons. Paul Murphy-Spaak Jr. |
| Date | 21:48:36, November 12, 2014 CET | From | Social Libermuns Party | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, This bill has our full support. Article 1 in particular has been a long time coming. We would prefer if Article 2 would let police searches happen under "reasonable grounds", but the SLP are happy prevent possible abuses of power in law enforcement. ~ Rowan Argall SLP Leader |
| Date | 01:12:37, November 13, 2014 CET | From | Conservative Monarchist Alliance | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, We strongly support Article 1. Judicial corporal punishment should have no place in today's Lodamun. Whilst we are sympathetic to the intentions behind Article 2, we feel the threat of terrorism means we need to give the police some leeway when it comes to searches. We would prefer an option that allowed the police to search a person or a property in cases where they had "reasonable grounds to suspect that a crime was committed". Helmut Schmitz Social Affairs spokesman |
| Date | 02:03:03, November 13, 2014 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Huddleson (GNRG), yes, Police deserve rights, but not too big rights. We have to stop that police can enters in any citizen's home without a permit. If we don't change the legislation, we will build a police state with big powers of police department. and Mr. Argall (SLP) and Mr. Schmitz (CMA) thanks for your support. About article 2 and the terrorism threat '...or in cases of imminent danger.' I think there is included the cases of terrorism. Thanks, Kathrine Rorie Justice spokesman of RPF |
| Date | 10:55:05, November 13, 2014 CET | From | People of Freedom (P.F) | To | Debating the Stop to Police State |
| Message | Mr. Speaker. We support the abolishment of crimes against our own people. Encouraging our people to torture eachother should be illegal. We are foe promoting the best in people. Not the worst. Raven Valentinn JDP Deputy Party |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 402 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 152 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 45 |
| Random fact: Any RP law granting extraordinary "emergency powers" or dictator-like powers to a government must be passed by at least a 2/3rds majority, but (like all RP laws) may always be overturned by a simple majority vote of the legislature. |
| Random quote: "In an underdeveloped country, don't drink the water; in a developed country, don't breathe the air." - Changing Times magazine |