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: Reduce Police Arms
Details
Submitted by[?]: Social Democratic Party of Darnussia
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 2072
Description[?]:
| Darnussia should not be a police state, our politce should have reasonable side arms and not ridiculous ones |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The weapons used by police forces.
Old value:: Police officers carry military-grade equipment.
Current: Police officers carry military-grade equipment.
Proposed: Police officers carry standard firearms.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:25:19, June 24, 2005 CET |
From | People's Progressive Party | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | The People's Party back this move to climb down to a civilised society, and not a police state. However, we will be against any bills to ban police firearms entirely |
| Date | 18:43:41, June 24, 2005 CET |
From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | it's got nothing to do with a police state! this is really bothering me how so many people are throwing with words in the wrong context! |
| Date | 20:00:49, June 24, 2005 CET |
From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | i would vote for this if it was an alternative to non-lethal weapons. but it's fine now. It's not that the police uses these weapons all the time, they just CAN use these weapons. |
| Date | 21:52:17, June 24, 2005 CET |
From | Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | Because when I try to show support for a nice medium, it gets voted down.
This bill will be voted down. No nice mediums anymore. |
| Date | 13:52:09, June 25, 2005 CET |
From | Vuloch Ca Korzia | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | This dosn't mean that on call armed squads are banned, it means that the regular officers are not armed with assault rifles. |
| Date | 09:15:25, June 26, 2005 CET |
From | Social Libertarian party | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | Armed squads aren't part of the regular police. That's why there's a police department seperate from anything else. Specailist can still have miltary grade arms, like the military itself. |
| Date | 09:58:30, June 26, 2005 CET |
From | People's Progressive Party | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | Has anyone else noticed the communists usually end up voting with the LBSC? They're so left wing they're become right wing! |
| Date | 12:08:32, June 26, 2005 CET |
From | People's Progressive Party | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | I suggest a coalition between the commies and the right wingers, as you two seem to get along so well and agree on everything. Heck, get married! |
| Date | 16:40:41, June 26, 2005 CET |
From | Progressive Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the Reduce Police Arms | | Message | My opinion is that eventually as you move to the far-ends of the political spectrum, the far right and far left will meet and be the same. Thus, I see the political spectrum as more of a circle or sphere than a line. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 335 |
| no | Total Seats: 415 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The people in your nation don't like inactive parties. When you often abstain from voting for a bill, they will dislike your party and your visibility to the electorate will decrease significantly. Low visibility will means you are likely to lose seats. So keep in mind: voting Yes or No is always better than Abstaining. |
| Random quote: "Hatred is not, and should never be considered as another form of freedom of expression." - Icarion Dadhelus, former Selucian politician |