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 and Justice Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Libertarian Party of Aloria
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: September 2250
Description[?]:
| This bill will propose Libertarian reforms to the Military branch and the Justice branch. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of chemical and biological weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Current: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Proposed: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The nation's defence industry.
Old value:: The state owns national defence industries but these exist alongside privately owned defence industries.
Current: The state owns all defence industries.
Proposed: Defence industries are privately owned and not subsidised.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The weapons used by police forces.
Old value:: Police officers may only carry standard firearms apart from specially trained firearms units.
Current: Police officers may only carry non-lethal weapons apart from specially trained firearms units.
Proposed: Police officers may only carry non-lethal weapons apart from specially trained firearms units.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:07:08, July 05, 2006 CET | From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | We would not support this bill in a thousand years. Article 1 is fine. Article 2 we could not oppose more. Capital punishment is a disgrace and no humane nation should employ it. Article 3 is taking the free market too far. As much as I dislike war the state needs to maintain a healthy military. Article 4 is something the DLP has been fighting against for decades. We are not about to turn on this issue now. |
| Date | 19:46:07, July 05, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Aloria | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | So you are saying, that someone could come into your house, brutally rape and murder your entire family, and you would want to see them enjoy the luxuries and protection of our prison system until they live out their natural life? As to article 3, an independent military-industrial complex, free from government subsidies and control could offer us a better, more well rounded military due to competition between the arms companies trying to provide us better weapons, better vehicles, and better supplies then their competitors. I don't see why this would us to have a deficient military. This could also save the state millions from management fees since the MI-Complex is responsible for all the R&D for weapons and supplies as well as manufacturing costs. As to Article 4, we dont' quite understand what you mean. |
| Date | 19:46:30, July 05, 2006 CET | From | Partido Socialista | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | We oppose Article 1. The nation's realm if of great importance to the Social Democrats. We oppose Article 2. We oppose a privatised defence industry and therefore we oppose article 3. We oppose the change to Article 4 We believe that Police officers must carry firearms to defend our selves. We oppose article 5 to protect the lives of the people that risk everything to protect us all! |
| Date | 20:01:43, July 05, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Aloria | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | So lets say, to the Social Democrats, that you are smoking a cigar in public, and a police officer comes up to you and thinks the cigar may have an illegal drug in it. He searces the cigar, and finds nothing. But he thinks you have the drug on you. He asks that you put your hands up, but you were scared, nervous. You reach into your pocket to get out your ID, the cop thinks you are pulling out a gun and shoots you. You die right there. So, you would still support the cop's right to blow your brains out even though it risks the lives of people who had done nothing but react? Or an even worse accident, due to the negligence of the police officer? A police officer can carry all sorts of incapacitating weapons that have all the effectiveness of a firearm, and can allow a criminal to be put into the criminal justice system. If police officers continue to carry guns, street justice by vigilante cops could rule. Don't let that happen. As to article 1, have the ASDP seen the movie Dr. Strangelove? Or the song 99 Luftballoons? And you still support first strike capabilities? Anyone who knows that a mere mistake in our computers could cause us to launch an attack on an innocent nation or people. But however, we will remove our death penalty provision |
| Date | 02:39:34, July 06, 2006 CET | From | Partido Socialista | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | The Libertarian Party of Alori just made almost 10 assumptions to back their argument. And the worst one of these assumptions? The fact that Libertarians are telling us that we shouldn't trust our police. That we shouldn't trust the people that put their lives at stake every day in order to make us be and feel safe. The Social Democrats will not agree to leave our policemen unprotected in the field just because Libertarian defeatists are trying to convince us that everything will always go wrong. Aloria's policemen and policewomen deserve nothing less than our trust! I trust the leadership of our country not to use weapons of mass destruction unless provoked. However, the very reason why we have them , which is to deter, will be negated if we legislate against using them. If another nation knows that they can strike first, they'll be able to do so knowing that they'll destroy our capabilities to respond with a first strike. The Social Democrats are deeply concerned by the danger of WMD but will not support clause I of this bill. |
| Date | 04:59:23, July 06, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party of Aloria | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | And why should we throw our trust with the people in power? Power corrupts, and if we give the police firearms, they become just as dangerous as the murderers and criminals on the streets. That leads to even more bloodshed. And it seems that the Social Democrats don't mind that the police could become thugs, or could shoot someone dead based on suspicion, when they know that non-lethal and effective alternatives are at the Police's disposal. And speaking of people making assumptions, the Social Democrats assume that some large international cabal of nations is watching us, waiting for us to declare a no first strike policy and just pound us with everything but the nuclear, chemical, or biological sink. Star Wars is more realistic than your little fantasy good sir. The police abusing their power is FAR MORE LIKELY than someone hitting us with a first strike weapon. |
| Date | 23:43:20, July 06, 2006 CET | From | Patriotic Front | To | Debating the Military and Justice Bill |
| Message | We oppose each and every word of this bill. It is an affront to Aloria that it is even considered. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 279 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow real-life brand names (eg. Coca Cola, McDonalds, Microsoft). However, in the case of military equipment brand names it is permitted to use simple number-letter combinations (eg. T-90 and F-22) borrowed from real life, and also simple generic names, like those of animals (eg. Leopard and Jaguar). |
| Random quote: "When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other in order that the people may require a leader." - Plato |