NationStates Jolt Archive

Dear delegates I have produced this proposal. Its on page 12 of the proposals and I need you to support it. But I need Your thoughts....I'm looking forward to it.


Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: The Irish Brotherhood

Description: The Life Sentance should be handed down to all citizens who deliberatly and maliciously carry out these major crimes listed below:

1. MURDER (Unless it is proven to be carried out in self defence or truly an accident.)
= The life sentence cannot be passed upon a person who has carried out a "Crime of Passion". An example of this would be if a man found out that another man was sleeping with his wife and he kills either of them, he cannot be sentenced, or if a murderer rapes and murders a little girl and the father decides to take the law into his own hands, this is a "Crime of Passion".
= The "Crime of Passion" cases must be proven at trial.

2. PAEDOPHILLIA (or any sexual action against a child)
= As the age of consent differs from country to country, the laws will be changed to fit every nations needs.
= If a citizen is visiting another nation, they MUST abide by the age of consent rules that are active in that nation
= Paedophiles will recieve rehabilitation while in prison, so if they are released, they will be fit to intergrate into society.

3. RAPE
= Quite simply, if a citizen of either sex is found guilty of raping another citizen of either sex, life sentence will be implemented.
= Once again, Rapists will be given rehabilitaion while in prison.

6. DEATHS BY DANGEROUS DRIVING
= If a civilian is proven to be driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or driving without due care and attention etc. and they kill somebody, this citizen should be handed down the life sentence.

- Life Sentences should range from 18 years - No release at all. This will be determined by the presiding jury.
- If the judge in charge of the case decides that the jury's judgement is too harsh or not harsh enough, he can officialy complain to the government who, in due time, will decide the fate of the criminal.

That sounds like a nice justice system, but I think it wouldn't work so well in my anarchic nation.


National Sovereignty - It's Like That "Tolerance" Crap on a National Level

Why should this be an international issue?

Description: The Life Sentance should be handed down to all citizens who deliberatly and maliciously carry out these major crimes listed below:

1. MURDER (Unless it is proven to be carried out in self defence or truly an accident.)
= The life sentence cannot be passed upon a person who has carried out a "Crime of Passion". An example of this would be if a man found out that another man was sleeping with his wife and he kills either of them, he cannot be sentenced, or if a murderer rapes and murders a little girl and the father decides to take the law into his own hands, this is a "Crime of Passion".
= The "Crime of Passion" cases must be proven at trial. I had problems with this "crime of passion" thing.
if someone steal CD's from you (or just forget to give back), and you get anger and kill him will it be Passion?
if someone shot rapist and accidently miss and kill 3 pessangers, will you free him away?
if someone decide to kill his un loyal wife by biolicigal bomb in the car and half of the city damaged will he be innocent?
if he will kill 4 months after he knew she aren't loyal, is it still passion?
may I let all my angerholic murders get out from the prison, because they are just made "crime of passion?
and most important: why should I jail the for more than 18 years, when I could continue with fast rehiblition and get loyal citizens and unknown crime?
3. RAPE
= Quite simply, if a citizen of either sex is found guilty of raping another citizen of either sex, life sentence will be implemented.
= Once again, Rapists will be given rehabilitaion while in prison. first, I would be glad to do why you think gays shouldn't enjoy from the right not have benn rapped?
second, it would be better if determine better the crime (without using the word "to rape", "raping", and such)
6. DEATHS BY DANGEROUS DRIVING
= If a civilian is proven to be driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or driving without due care and attention etc. and they kill somebody, this citizen should be handed down the life sentence. tell me how you take care to those cases: -truck driver with sensible amount of alcohol in his blood kill uncautious driver with no seat-belt (or kid who ran to the road without warning or drunk driver).
- driver killed person because of bad road construction, or error in the signs or the terrafic lights.
-driver talked in the phone and killed driver who stop without warning.
- Life Sentences should range from 18 years - No release at all. This will be determined by the presiding jury.
- If the judge in charge of the case decides that the jury's judgement is too harsh or not harsh enough, he can officialy complain to the government who, in due time, will decide the fate of the criminal.
- not all the countries has jury.
- jail persons for that long period could be too much expensive, and unlike rehibilition this money can't return.
- I don't think that goverments should decide about things that connected to the law. this is violation of the division of power (democratic principal, although maybe not in the NSUN).

Agreed with TH. The ins and outs of a justice system is best worked out in the society it is attached to. For example Murder is considered less of a crime then, say, rape here because we value control of our bodies over life.

Giordano,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World,
Delegate to The Order of The Valiant States

Why should this be an international issue?

WHY SHOULD ANY OF THE LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN FORCED UPON MY NATION BE INTERNATIONAL ISSUES?????

Dear delegates I have produced this proposal. Its on page 12 of the proposals and I need you to support it. But I need Your thoughts....I'm looking forward to it.

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: The Irish Brotherhood

Description: The Life Sentance should be handed down to all citizens who deliberatly and maliciously carry out these major crimes listed below:


What do you mean by "The Life Sentance"


1. MURDER (Unless it is proven to be carried out in self defence or truly an accident.)
= The life sentence cannot be passed upon a person who has carried out a "Crime of Passion". An example of this would be if a man found out that another man was sleeping with his wife and he kills either of them, he cannot be sentenced, or if a murderer rapes and murders a little girl and the father decides to take the law into his own hands, this is a "Crime of Passion".
= The "Crime of Passion" cases must be proven at trial.


I would not class the second one as a crime of passion. A crime of revenge, yes, but the implication (to me at least) is that a crime of passion is done in the heat of the moment, with little or no thought behind it. If the father has made the decision to get revenge, it is then cold-blooded, calculated murder, and should be treated as such.
The first example I would accept as a crime of passion if he caught the wife in bed with the other man. But if he finds out down the pub one night, then decides to kill either of them it goes back to being pre-meditated murder which has to be a crime.

In any event - you are preventing people using the death penalty with this resolution. If you have to hand down a life sentence, you can't execute them. So I think that would prove a problem for quite a few nations (mine included, even though we don't ever, ever execute people)


2. PAEDOPHILLIA (or any sexual action against a child)
= As the age of consent differs from country to country, the laws will be changed to fit every nations needs.
= If a citizen is visiting another nation, they MUST abide by the age of consent rules that are active in that nation
= Paedophiles will recieve rehabilitation while in prison, so if they are released, they will be fit to intergrate into society.


This doesn't indicate what counts as a sexual action. Some people consider stroking someone's hair to be pretty sexual (in the right context). And it doesn't indicate at what age this kicks in, so two children fooling around could both be sent to jail for life.
Further - what if someone is one day over the age of consent, and someone one day under it? I agree that the person who is under the age of consent is a child, and the person who is over it should be punished in some way, but this would including kissing, heavy petting and so forth. So pretty much every kid over about the age of ten in TilEnca would now be in jail.


3. RAPE
= Quite simply, if a citizen of either sex is found guilty of raping another citizen of either sex, life sentence will be implemented.
= Once again, Rapists will be given rehabilitaion while in prison.


I am undecided about this. Which, given the amount of comments on the other points, makes it the best one!


6. DEATHS BY DANGEROUS DRIVING
= If a civilian is proven to be driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or driving without due care and attention etc. and they kill somebody, this citizen should be handed down the life sentence.


No. Because in almost every case it would be an accident. While the driver should be punished for bad judgement, they should not be treated on the same level as someone who set out ot kill someone deliberately.
(If it can be shown that the person driving the car was using the car to kill somebody, then yes - it's murder and should be treated as such. Otherwise it's death by dangerous driving, and not the same)


- Life Sentences should range from 18 years - No release at all. This will be determined by the presiding jury.
- If the judge in charge of the case decides that the jury's judgement is too harsh or not harsh enough, he can officialy complain to the government who, in due time, will decide the fate of the criminal.

Feel free to ignore my first question (I should read the whole thing by the way).

And - no. The government has NO place in deciding the fate of criminals. Justice has to be unbiased and independent, not subject to the wills of whoever is currently in charge.

WHY SHOULD ANY OF THE LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN FORCED UPON MY NATION BE INTERNATIONAL ISSUES?????

Your caps lock key seems to be over-reactive.

Actually most of the resolutions passed have an international aspect to them; human rights, dealings between nations, free trade, recognition of different legal statuses, et cetera.

Your resolution has no raison d'être on an international level. Not to mention that the resolution is extremely poorly written vis-a-vis gradation, as it removes any distinction between different degrees of the crimes.

WHY SHOULD ANY OF THE LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN FORCED UPON MY NATION BE INTERNATIONAL ISSUES?????
Democracy.

Rose,
Acting UN representative,
The Black New World

We execute drunk drivers and pedophiles and rapists are castrated.

Murder can many times be an involved issue. We also allow people to settle matters on the field of honor. Sometimes they die.

Because certain matters can be fairly complex, I don't see how an international crime bill which covers so many different crimes can possibly work.

Mandatory sentences work very well on paper, but their implementation is inevitably problematic. Another issue best left to the individual nations.

Uhm, you do realise that with this resolution you are saying, that as far as severity goes, impaired driving = pedophilia = first-degree murder = sexual assault? The clear illogicality should jump at you, I hope.

A nation's justice system has to reflect the nation's needs. For instance, we see pedophilia differently from other crimes and the sentence for it almost always involves mental health professionals, while, because of our beer-drinking culture, punishments for drunk driving are relatively steep. You can't just blanket a Criminal Code onto the entire world, especially not onto one as diverse as this particular one.

These are my thoughts on the issue. It sounds good in theroy, but if put into affect in the world it would most likely fail for a number of reasons the first being that you have left somethings very unclear, such as a crime of passion and in what instences this would apply. The second reason would be that imposing laws on the whole of the rule based on what one nation thinks isn't going to work. Each of our nations is diffrent and we revel in the fact if we put all these rules on a nation it won't work. When it comes to deciding how to change the law fro each nation it would just get more complicated but the idea was good. Thank you for listening to me, and sorry for the typing errors.

The kingdom of Le Livre

Well it looks like my proposal is going to fail. Ah well! But the Irish Brotherhood will never stop imposing itself on the UN. We won't stop until we have brainwashed you all...............Mwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa! ;)

Uhmm..... okay then.

At least he is honest :}

Thanks. We in the Irish Brotherhood are always honest. Well, as honest in political terms... :)

Dear delegates I have produced this proposal. Its on page 12 of the proposals and I need you to support it. But I need Your thoughts....I'm looking forward to it.

You shouldn't be...

Description: The Life Sentance should be handed down to all citizens who deliberatly and maliciously carry out these major crimes listed below:

Better be good.

1. MURDER (Unless it is proven to be carried out in self defence or truly an accident.)
= The life sentence cannot be passed upon a person who has carried out a "Crime of Passion". An example of this would be if a man found out that another man was sleeping with his wife and he kills either of them, he cannot be sentenced, or if a murderer rapes and murders a little girl and the father decides to take the law into his own hands, this is a "Crime of Passion".
= The "Crime of Passion" cases must be proven at trial.

Tell me: Can you ever bring a man back to life after you kill him? My nation can't. My justice system works on restitution, not retribution or rehabilitation. Thus, this is an offense that is punishable by death because they cannot make restitution.

2. PAEDOPHILLIA (or any sexual action against a child)
= As the age of consent differs from country to country, the laws will be changed to fit every nations needs.
= If a citizen is visiting another nation, they MUST abide by the age of consent rules that are active in that nation
= Paedophiles will recieve rehabilitation while in prison, so if they are released, they will be fit to intergrate into society.

Tell me: Can you ever make a child a virgin again? Can you ever reverse the emotional problems? No? Didn't think so.

3. RAPE
= Quite simply, if a citizen of either sex is found guilty of raping another citizen of either sex, life sentence will be implemented.
= Once again, Rapists will be given rehabilitaion while in prison.

Can you ever undo the rape? No? Didn't think so.

Look, this entire thing is a waste of my time. I must oppose it because it works contrary to my justice system and sets limits on people that, in effect, cannot undo what they have done and cannot make restitution. And we've found rehabilitation to be a worthless waste of money.

You shouldn't be...



Better be good.



Tell me: Can you ever bring a man back to life after you kill him? My nation can't. My justice system works on restitution, not retribution or rehabilitation. Thus, this is an offense that is punishable by death because they cannot make restitution.



Tell me: Can you ever make a child a virgin again? Can you ever reverse the emotional problems? No? Didn't think so.



Can you ever undo the rape? No? Didn't think so.

Look, this entire thing is a waste of my time. I must oppose it because it works contrary to my justice system and sets limits on people that, in effect, cannot undo what they have done and cannot make restitution. And we've found rehabilitation to be a worthless waste of money.


For your information DemonLordEnigma, as you may remember, a few months ago I forwarded a proposal to implement the death penalty on all these crimes. And as I recall you did not support me on that one either. It failed. So all I'm trying to achieve in this proposal is to make sure that ALL these crimes are treated with life sentences. Have you ever heard of taking one step back to take two steps forward? Alot of these crimes that I have listed are not treated as life sentences in some countries. All I was trying to achieve, without imposing the death penalty on everybody, was to make sure that these criminals, in some way, get what the deserve. So don't lecture me on my morals. I'm a huge supporter of the death sentence. But I've found out that in this world you need to sacrafice certain beliefs to achieve your final goal.

Thank you,

Tomás Ó Maoléagain, President of The Irish Brotherhood

The problem is that this proposal would, in effect, ban the use of the death penalty in all nations. Which a great number of people will take issue with :}

All I was trying to achieve, without imposing the death penalty on everybody, was to make sure that these criminals, in some way, get what the deserve.

...and I take it you consider yourself to be the sole arbiter of what these criminals deserve?

It seems I have two options, let it slide or take offence at your presumption, not to mention the implied insult that my nation's justice system is somehow inadequate or unfair because we don't put drunk drivers or pedophiles in jail for life. I guess I'll be nice, but don't keep this up. This idea didn't get anywhere the last time. Further repeats and variations on the theme are just going to annoy people.

You yourself said the idea was the same as that other one, so it's clear that you don't seem to realise that it's not the severity of what you're imposing that we don't like, it's the idea itself.

For your information DemonLordEnigma, as you may remember, a few months ago I forwarded a proposal to implement the death penalty on all these crimes. And as I recall you did not support me on that one either. It failed.

I didn't support it because of the strife it would cause. I'm a supporter of the death penalty myself, but understand this is an issue which does not work for everyone. It is the idea of universal punishments that is opposed.

So all I'm trying to achieve in this proposal is to make sure that ALL these crimes are treated with life sentences. Have you ever heard of taking one step back to take two steps forward?

Have you bothered to read the large variety of posts on the issue and notice that I will fight to the bitter end to protect my right to execute criminals?

Alot of these crimes that I have listed are not treated as life sentences in some countries. All I was trying to achieve, without imposing the death penalty on everybody, was to make sure that these criminals, in some way, get what the deserve.

What they deserve is not useful to decide internationally, as the severity of what those crimes deserve depends on the legal system. There is too much variety involved for this to be an issue to decide for the entire UN.

So don't lecture me on my morals. I'm a huge supporter of the death sentence. But I've found out that in this world you need to sacrafice certain beliefs to achieve your final goal.

Sometimes the only goal you need to sacrifice is the one that causes you the most grief. The final goal in this case is something you may want to abandon.