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: The Self-Regarding Harm Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Bloc Liberté
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 3942
Description[?]:
| This bill aims to amend the prohibitive smoking laws of this nation so that they may reflect the spirit of liberty which Rildanor not only deserves, but needs. True freedom is the freedom to make bad decisions! |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards smoking.
Old value:: Smoking is only allowed in private homes and clubs.
Current: Smoking is legal everywhere, at the discretion of the property owner, but is illegal in government-owned buildings.
Proposed: Smoking is legal everywhere, at the discretion of the property owner, and is legal in government-owned buildings.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sale of tobacco products.
Old value:: The sale of tobacco products is prohibited.
Current: There are certain restrictions on the sale of tobacco and only adults may purchase tobacco.
Proposed: The sale of tobacco products is regulated by local governments
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:17:45, November 22, 2015 CET | From |  Front Canrillaise | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | What of the freedom from the bad decisions of other people? |
| Date | 13:10:38, November 22, 2015 CET | From | Bloc Liberté | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | Nobody is forcing you to enter the private property of an individual who wishes to permit smoking in their establishment. Those who do not wish to smoke or have smokers in their establishment may prohibit as they see fit; the important thing is that the property owner gets to decide. |
| Date | 20:09:31, November 22, 2015 CET | From | Front Canrillaise | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | Your explanation doesn't account for government-owned buildings. |
| Date | 22:37:44, November 22, 2015 CET | From | Bloc Liberté | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | Governments are supposed to representative of all, they cannot do so by banning members of their society for their halls. |
| Date | 04:35:21, November 23, 2015 CET | From | Front Canrillaise | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | By that logic, shouldn't governments also represent those that do not partake in such activities or are adversely affected by it? |
| Date | 13:05:51, November 23, 2015 CET | From | Bloc Liberté | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | And they shall. NA seems to think that this will lead to there being nowhere in government halls where one might escape smoke. That would only be so if everyone is to smoke, and if every was to smoke then there would be no problem anyway. When you walk along the publicly owned street, do you complain when you cannot stand in the exact same spot as anyone else? I should think you recognise that you are never free to act thus, so too is the case here. |
| Date | 04:09:36, November 24, 2015 CET | From | Front Canrillaise | To | Debating the The Self-Regarding Harm Bill |
| Message | Perhaps the BA is not fully aware of the lingering odours resulting from such activities, especially in enclosed public spaces. Much also remains to be said of the adverse health effects and economic consequences of this "freedom". |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 54 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 46 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life places should not be referenced in Particracy. |
| Random quote: "A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless." - Antonin Scalia |