NationStates Jolt Archive

The People of the Democratic Republic of Tajiri_San propose that Executions in the main to protect the innocent who maybe convicted only for other evidence to come to light after the sentance has been carried out, a recent study found a third of deathrow inmates was infact innocent.
Further more this resolution would introduce a full life tariff into law to replace the death penalty.
However Armed Police would still have the right to shoot and kill suspects that were posing a threat to them, their colleges or the public.

Two words

Good Luck

this is simply the basic foundation for the proposal and will not be what is to be submitted to the UN but what do you feel is wrong with it? also what catagory does it come under, Human rights or social justice?
or do you mean 'good luck' because there are a few repeals in the pipeline affecting torture legislation?

nah - I mean good luck because it's one of the "suicide" categories - it is next to impossible to get a Capital Punishment resolution to quarom.

It would be human rights. While there's a much higher percentage of the lower class that gets the death penalty, its main purpose is to protect the "right to life" and right to justice (not to mention, concerns about errors made in criminal cases and the criminal punishment's well documented discrimination against - in particular - blacks) - rather than to help the poor from getting persecuted with a higher percentage of deaths due to death row

I would love to see capital punishment banned - but.....good luck

Human rights: strong.
The People of the Democratic Republic of Tajiri_San Notes with deep REGRET that despite the best efforts of Goverments, their Judicial systems and Law enforcement agencies that occasionally an innocent person or persons may still be convicted in error for a crime that they have not commited only for other evidence to come to light after the sentance has been carried out.

If a custodial sentence is passed then a wrongfully convicted person may be freed from prison and perhaps compensated financially. However if convicted of an offence punishable by Death and the evidence exonerating them is found AFTER the sentance is carried out then there is no way to undo the sentance or compensate the wrongfully convicted person.

Therefore this legislation REQUIRES that all member nations which currently carry out executions cease doing so with IMMEDIATE effect.

Further more this resolution would introduce a full life tariff into law to replace the death penalty in member nations which currently have the death penalty
.
However Armed Police would still have the right to use deadly force on suspects that are posing an immediate threat to them, their colleges or memebers of the public in the course of their duty which we praise them for carrying out.

This is more like what the final draft will be like

No the death penalty serves its purpose, why should tax payers have their money spent keeping these scumbags alive.

because some of them are not scumbags.

Agreed. It would cost a fortune to keep murderers alive.. whats the point? An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth.

:gundge:

the point is to protect the innocent from being executed for something they didn't do.

The innocent dont get executed Taj San, they dont put some to death unless there is DNA evidence or 100% proof.. if there is any doubt then they dont do it.

:gundge:

Although there is no mention of this in the draft i was inspired to draft it as i remembered reading about a university in America doing a study looking at the cases of inmates and finding that something like a third of people on death row in america may infact be innocent.

their colleges or memebers of the public in the course of their duty which we praise them for carrying out.

firstly it's "members" - typos win you no friends

secondly "we praise" is far too strong. Should people be praised for killing people? What about trigger happy officers or the policemen that fail to identify themselves?

thirdly - why do you specifically mention colleges? (OOC - this is a world simulation, you could just as easily mention courts, supermarkets, offices, public toilets, gondolas....... see my point?)

I agree though that the death penalty has no place in civilised society, and no human being is beyond help (even if that means getting helped while being confined to work camps for the rest of their lives - who said having prisoners has to be a drain on society when it could be boon...:D)

thirdly - why do you specifically mention colleges? (OOC - this is a world simulation, you could just as easily mention courts, supermarkets, offices, public toilets, gondolas....... see my point?)He means "colleagues." Again I would note, deficient spelling won't win you any friends.

I would also request that we all STOP IMPOSING OUR VALUES ON ALL MEMBER STATES.

I meant colleagues not colleges, typo number 2 i will change it in a moment.

As for praising them for doing their duty, I mean the ones that do it well in difficult circumstances, such as being in a position where you may need to make a decision that could cost someone their life not the trigger happy ones that just shoot at will.



Human rights: strong.
The People of the Democratic Republic of Tajiri_San Notes with deep REGRET that despite the best efforts of Goverments, their Judicial systems and Law enforcement agencies that occasionally an innocent person or persons may still be convicted in error for a crime that they have not commited only for other evidence to come to light after the sentence has been carried out.

If a custodial sentence is passed then a wrongfully convicted person(s) may be freed from prison and perhaps compensated financially. However if convicted of an offence punishable by Death and the evidence exonerating them is found AFTER the sentance is carried out then there is no way to undo the sentance or compensate the wrongfully convicted person.

Therefore this legislation REQUIRES that all member nations which currently carry out executions cease doing so with IMMEDIATE effect.

Further more this resolution would introduce a full life tariff into law to replace the death penalty in member nations which currently have the death penalty
.
However Armed Police would still have the right to use deadly force on suspects that are posing an immediate threat to them, their colleagues or members of the public in the course of their duty which we praise them for carrying out under what can be very difficult circumstances.
Thats the second draft, though i may take out the part praising the police before the final draft which may be put up as soon as tomorrow, certainly in a few days.

For the record - they've determined that it costs more to put someone on death row than it does to leave them in jail.

can you suggest a way to put that into the proposal please?

We the Palentine have the death penalty on the books and execute those who are found guilty and sentenced to the punisment. We would oppose this ban as it infringes on our soverign right to punish criminals as we see fit. However if this would ever come to pass, can we work the murdering SOB's to death by hard labor in the hellholes we call prison in the Palentine. Or to we have to be nice and let them live their lives in comfort.

Senator Horatio Sulla,
UN Ambassador
HOly Empire of the Palentine

We believe that the Death penalty is immoral.



It says, Thou Shall not kill.


Not, Thou Shall not kill Unless Society says so.

Actually Palentine, i am thinking of doing a further additin to the proposal to allow life prisoners to work and give back to society... but not to death

Oh great, another resolution trying to ban the death penalty. It's been tried before (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Ban_of_Death_Penalty_%28failed%29) and failed, and I doubt that this idea will ever pass.

Oh and before I forget, The Rogue Nation of Flibbleites will oppose this proposal ass we feel that this is a issue best left up to the individual nations to decide upon, as such we play this card.
http://bak42.notworksafe.com/images/NationStates/UNCards/nationalsovereighty.jpg

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Human rights: strong.
The People of the Democratic Republic of Tajiri_San Notes with deep REGRET that despite the best efforts of Goverments, their Judicial systems and Law enforcement agencies that occasionally an innocent person or persons may still be convicted in error for a crime that they have not commited only for other evidence to come to light after the sentence has been carried out.

If a custodial sentence is passed then a wrongfully convicted person(s) may be freed from prison and perhaps compensated financially. However if convicted of an offence punishable by Death and the evidence exonerating them is found AFTER the sentence is carried out then there is no way to undo the sentence or compensate the wrongfully convicted person.

Therefore this legislation REQUIRES that all member nations which currently carry out executions cease doing so with IMMEDIATE effect.

This resolution would also introduce a full life tariff into law to replace the death penalty in member nations which currently have the death penalty.

Furthermore this legislation would allow member nations to put their prison population to work doing menial tasks to help the communities they had previously harmed with their crimes.

We also believe this legislation would help improve the economic health of all nations that have the death penalty in their laws as it has been shown executing people costs more than imprisonment does.

However Armed Police would still have the right to use deadly force on suspects that are posing an immediate threat to them, their colleagues or members of the public in the course of their duty which we praise them for carrying out under what can be very difficult circumstances.

This is the third draft of the proposal now, any changes needed?

Personally, I'd like to see you round file this idea, but I doubt that that's going to happen. :D

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

anyone have any REAL suggestions, not insults?

because some of them are not scumbags.

You on earlier reference to 1 in 3 are found not to have done that crime.. Thus we will end up keeping the other two not set free in a prison not letting them swing on a good rope from a strong tree then their remains feed the sharks unless their family elect to bury them.. Also how many of the ones found not guilty of murder and are released have been later caught and this time are guilty.... Not enough to say 1 in 3 are not guilty so they are later free. We already see rehab programs fail, as they are established to bring criminals back into society as productive.. thus avoid long prison terms for persons doing certain crimes... yet they get out and are right back at old habits.. many times doing worse crimes as they are rehabed by those hardened criminals that should have been hung not locked up.



Furthermore this legislation would allow member nations to put their prison population to work doing menial tasks to help the communities they had previously harmed with their crimes.


Can we send them to your nation to work as we don't have enough jobs for our honest family supporting citizens to work at.. We promise all you will get to do these so called menial tasks is chicken theives, jaywalkers, dog kickers, rose stompers, and such as them.. No rapest, murders, arsonists, or old ladies who try to make you eat liver...

Waterana has no prisons. All our criminals are rehabilitated and our crime rate is well under control. I think that shows rehablitation does work and/or our intensive education, and welfare system plus a well funded police force combined mean our people don't need to resort to crime on a large scale.

We do have the death penalty on the books as the people demaded it in an issue but it has never been used, and probably never will. Heck we don't have the facilities to carry out a death sentence if we wanted to. We also believe in justice not vengence, which is what I feel the death penalty really is.

Thats going to be your main problem with trying to blanket ban the death penalty on all nations. We all have different justice systems and ways and means of carrying out sentences. I also think that what another nation does with its criminals is really its own business. They don't tell us how to deal with our baddies and we don't feel that in the case of fairly tried convicted felons we have the right to tell them.

When a kid, I used to ask my father, "Why don't they experiment with convicts instead of simply and quickly executing them?"
He replied, "The motive of convicting anyone, especially to be executed, is not to punish the guilty, but to protect the innocent!!"

Hence, normally a case is dissected and bissected thoroughly before the execution sentence is given. If given, it can be appealed in a higher court where a more conservative approach is used.

Hence, I don't feel the neccessity of this resolution.

A better resolution would be to enforce the guillotine or cyanide as the method of execution with the objective that the convict bears as less pain as possible.

Well that was my two cents, hope it got some ideas running :)

You on earlier reference to 1 in 3 are found not to have done that crime.. Thus we will end up keeping the other two not set free in a prison not letting them swing on a good rope from a strong tree then their remains feed the sharks unless their family elect to bury them.. Also how many of the ones found not guilty of murder and are released have been later caught and this time are guilty.... Not enough to say 1 in 3 are not guilty so they are later free. We already see rehab programs fail, as they are established to bring criminals back into society as productive.. thus avoid long prison terms for persons doing certain crimes... yet they get out and are right back at old habits.. many times doing worse crimes as they are rehabed by those hardened criminals that should have been hung not locked up.
As noted in the proposal it has been found to be cheaper to keep a prisoner in Jail than to execute that person, also who is to say that someone who goes to prison wrongly will commit an offence after their release? As for failed rehab programs why do they fail, surely resarching why and improving them with training or staffing increases would be a good step?? Also why not use electronic tagging and conditions in their parole to combat them going to certain places or meeting with certain undesirable persons after their release?


Can we send them to your nation to work as we don't have enough jobs for our honest family supporting citizens to work at.. We promise all you will get to do these so called menial tasks is chicken theives, jaywalkers, dog kickers, rose stompers, and such as them.. No rapest, murders, arsonists, or old ladies who try to make you eat liver...
Menial tasks to be carried out by prisoners would be at the discretion of individual nations and do not need to be outside of prison, if prisoners are to be rehabilitated but not considered to be able to be trusted outside of prison at that time then they could be taught to make belts or wallets or car licence plates or any number of simple tasks, only once they had been suitable evaluated to be able to be taken out to work under guard should that happen, then they could be used to suppliment manual labour by perhaps cleaning trash from or cutting the grass of verves by the side of public highways, or perhaps cleaning graffiti, thus enabling government workers to do more important and skilled tasks.

Waterana has no prisons. All our criminals are rehabilitated and our crime rate is well under control. I think that shows rehablitation does work and/or our intensive education, and welfare system plus a well funded police force combined mean our people don't need to resort to crime on a large scale.

We do have the death penalty on the books as the people demaded it in an issue but it has never been used, and probably never will. Heck we don't have the facilities to carry out a death sentence if we wanted to. We also believe in justice not vengence, which is what I feel the death penalty really is.

Thats going to be your main problem with trying to blanket ban the death penalty on all nations. We all have different justice systems and ways and means of carrying out sentences. I also think that what another nation does with its criminals is really its own business. They don't tell us how to deal with our baddies and we don't feel that in the case of fairly tried convicted felons we have the right to tell them.

I also Believe in Punishment and Rehabilitation to better people rather than Vengance and feel that really Vengance has no place in the UN which is why i think that standardizing some parts of criminal law within the UN is a good idea.

The Most Serene Republic of Love and esterel will support this resolution, as we think that death penalty is very bad exemple

if some administrations have the right to condemn people to death then other groups of people or administrations, will assert they too can punish people to death, we think this can lead to terrorism

When a kid, I used to ask my father, "Why don't they experiment with convicts instead of simply and quickly executing them?"
He replied, "The motive of convicting anyone, especially to be executed, is not to punish the guilty, but to protect the innocent!!"

Yes - because the innocent are at more danger or hurt in any way further by these people being locked up over them being executed :rolleyes:

The reason they aren't experimented on is because they are still human and still have a few rights - even if their right to life is revoked (their right to humane treatment is protected - including by UN law). Ever wondered why they swab the injection point with alcohol?

Hence, normally a case is dissected and bissected thoroughly before the execution sentence is given. If given, it can be appealed in a higher court where a more conservative approach is used.

Or after it goes through all these repeal courts (which, I note, make the cost of executing the prisoner more expensive than leaving them to rot in prison), they are still found to be innocent several years after they're executed

Hence, I don't feel the neccessity of this resolution.

A better resolution would be to enforce the guillotine or cyanide as the method of execution with the objective that the convict bears as less pain as possible.

Actually - that's not a bad idea

Well that was my two cents, hope it got some ideas running :)

As noted in the proposal it has been found to be cheaper to keep a prisoner in Jail than to execute that person, also who is to say that someone who goes to prison wrongly will commit an offence after their release? As for failed rehab programs why do they fail, surely resarching why and improving them with training or staffing increases would be a good step?? Also why not use electronic tagging and conditions in their parole to combat them going to certain places or meeting with certain undesirable persons after their release?

You will have to tell me how it cheaper to keep a person in prison for say 10 years over hanging him in a single day. Consider he has healty needs, needs shelter, needs food, and some Rights Activists want them to have Color TVs.. They get better sometimes over what honest citizens might get... Example we were going to hang two murder-rapest but our Right to Health Union has stopped that because some doctor examined them and says they have bad livers and need transplants. Now we have to not only find them one but pay for it.. This will result under the donor system they may get one then we can bring them back and hang them unless they are found to need a heart, kidney, or other organ.. Then we keep putting in parts to make the healthy so we can hang them. They raped and killed people who didn't have a chance to get a new body part so that they may live. So HOW CAN IT BE CHEAPER TO KEEP THEM... locked up.. --- Because if you believe your own quacks many have brain defects or genetic mutations that lead them to crime thus they can't be rehabed, and so far no medical procedure short of hanging has been found to cure them... Electronics can be beaten or fail then they get 'lost' and go back to crimes... Those systems are in place and we have seen to many tracking systems fail...


Menial tasks to be carried out by prisoners would be at the discretion of individual nations and do not need to be outside of prison, if prisoners are to be rehabilitated but not considered to be able to be trusted outside of prison at that time then they could be taught to make belts or wallets or car licence plates or any number of simple tasks, only once they had been suitable evaluated to be able to be taken out to work under guard should that happen, then they could be used to suppliment manual labour by perhaps cleaning trash from or cutting the grass of verves by the side of public highways, or perhaps cleaning graffiti, thus enabling government workers to do more important and skilled tasks.

You from way it was worded implied they would be let back into society thus but I'm glad you leave that up to my government to decide what we do with them. As a menial task.. We will simply assigned them the task of cleaning out the shark tanks at our national zoo. If many of the repeats could be taught they would have been taught and now we would have them back for killing endangered animals for belts because all the legal ones have been killed off because we teach and release all our criminals to make belts.. Also that will take jobs from honest citizens who have to earn their posting as Metalers and Leatherers. Highways go through polulated areas were kids play and people live.. More cost of guards to watch them buses to move them, we have enough problems with buses moving school kids.. as they cost so we use funds for school buses to buy new prison buses when we need new school buses or ones for the public... makes no sense.. wasted money from honest citizens who PAY TAXES but get nothing in return..

OOC: Some years ago had a man on death row they said could not be fried until he got a heart transplant.. They put him on all sorts of things to keep him alive until he got a new heart. Six months he waited before he got heart then they fried him a week later.. May be stupid to you but this man killed nine people cold blooded no chance of him being not quilty of them. and there might have been more that he killed they could not prove all they tried him for was those nine they knew he did and could prove it. He should have be killed but it took four years of trials and waiting after a jury said he was guitly to get him fried.

IC--#2--- You asked if we know why rehab fails and you gave the best reason it fails here......

if prisoners are to be rehabilitated but not considered to be able to be trusted outside of prison at that time then they could be taught to make belts or wallets or car licence plates or any number of simple tasks,

So you plan to take the murders and rapers and teach them to make belts and car tags and that will help them be rehabed... These for the most part are mental cases with some genetic defect and can't be rehabed.. You don't even trust them to learn to do real jobs, so you want to just hide them away and make honest citizens victums again, paying for their upkeep.. while themselves strugling to make it outside prison.. No wonder some nations prisons are full folks feel more at home their than on streets.. they can get free shelter, food, and health care... and only have to make a few belts a day or car tags maybe if weather is right go out and cut some grass.. Bet you want them to smoke the grass to mellow them out....

most of your concerns seem to center on the idea of prisoners escaping or equipment failing... if that is truely your concern may i suggest that you train your police force better to enforce orders and maintan the equipment used.

because some of them are not scumbags.

Name one who isn't. Given the incredibly LONG appeals process in our incredibly backlogged judicial system, by the time any are executed, we can be sure that 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 percent of them are, in fact, guilty and are earning their just desserts.

Name one who isn't. Given the incredibly LONG appeals process in our incredibly backlogged judicial system, by the time any are executed, we can be sure that 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 percent of them are, in fact, guilty and are earning their just desserts.
I was not involved in the study but i'm sure if you did a search you would probably find it or a news story relating to it, I remember it was a University in the USA though and that most of the cases were actually fairly old.

Forgottenlands, I acknowledge your status as an experienced member in NationStates. My opinions on your reply below...

Yes - because the innocent are at more danger or hurt in any way further by these people being locked up over them being executed :rolleyes:

Didn't exactly understand what you meant to say.



The reason they aren't experimented on is because they are still human and still have a few rights - even if their right to life is revoked (their right to humane treatment is protected - including by UN law). Ever wondered why they swab the injection point with alcohol?
I do understand that. I did say that I had asked that question when I was a little kid. Anyway, Why do they swab the injection point with alcohol? Where I live, they hang people to death. So don't know much about Execution by the Needle.



Or after it goes through all these repeal courts (which, I note, make the cost of executing the prisoner more expensive than leaving them to rot in prison), they are still found to be innocent several years after they're executed
When you are found guilty, but are not sentenced to death, you can still appeal in a higher court. So there is no question about execution or normal prision sentence there, IMO!! And how many cases do you know where the judgement has gone wrong. Maybe it is so where you live, but here the death sentence in the first place is quite rare, whether it is a wrong judgement, is another question.



Actually - that's not a bad idea
Thank You, I'll make sure to propose it soon.

Not work 'em to death by hard labor?!! Give them menial jobs to do? Let them pay back society? :rolleyes: The reason they are locked up is because the dirtbags have proven they cannot live in civillized society! Prison in the Palentine is a punishment. If my government can't make the murdering or raping thug dance Danny Deever, then they will not be doing menial labor. They'll be doing hard work to let them know that there are consequences for murder, and rape. As for allowing them to give back to the comuninity they hurt, well in the Palentine the citizens are armed and for the most part law abiding. They don't cotton to murderers and rapists. I don't think my government could gaurentee the safety of the perps if they showed up, out of prison, doing menial jobs. And if they have to do menial labor I guess my country will have to define menial labor(making little ones out of big ones).

Senator Horatio Sulla
UN Ambassador
Holy Empire of the Palentine

If my country thought it could get away with it, we would practice the branding of a convicted felon on the face so all decent law abiding citizens would know that the person was a felon.

Forgottenlands, I acknowledge your status as an experienced member in NationStates. My opinions on your reply below...

Oh, sweet! Thanks for the recognition

Didn't exactly understand what you meant to say.

I was being sarcastic. Why would putting one to death make the innocent any safer than if we kept him alive and behind bars for life?

I do understand that. I did say that I had asked that question when I was a little kid. Anyway, Why do they swab the injection point with alcohol? Where I live, they hang people to death. So don't know much about Execution by the Needle.

The purpose is to prevent infection - officially. Now, the interesting thing is just because you inject the poison, doesn't mean this guy is dead yet. They have an antidote sitting in the room - just in case the sentance is overruled. This way, on the small chance you get your sentance pushed back by whoever has the authority for whatever reason (new DNA evidence coming forth, etc - not sure if that has ever happened while they were on their death bed), you are protected from the insignificant chance of getting infected by microorganisms. So basically, it's to prevent that one person of several million that are executed in the next century from getting an infection after the governer (or whoever) phones to say he should be revived.....yeah.

When you are found guilty, but are not sentenced to death, you can still appeal in a higher court. So there is no question about execution or normal prision sentence there, IMO!!

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you talking about costs? The cost is greater for execution because the number of repeals the average person will take is much higher - and court fees are much greater than just keeping them locked up.

And how many cases do you know where the judgement has gone wrong. Maybe it is so where you live, but here the death sentence in the first place is quite rare, whether it is a wrong judgement, is another question.

Real life: with the advent of DNA testing, they overturned countless murder convictions in the US - but these people were already dead (and a new person was put up charged with the same murder someone already died for). Even DNA testing is faulty in many cases for just bad luck can get your DNA on the wrong piece of material and you had nothing to do with the death or whatever of someone else. When we can actually read a person's mind - then, and only then, will we truly be 100% sure that this person did the crime. We may be certain, but there is always a possibility of error.

Thank You, I'll make sure to propose it soon.

Excellent - a new proposal writer for the masses.

most of your concerns seem to center on the idea of prisoners escaping or equipment failing... if that is truely your concern may i suggest that you train your police force better to enforce orders and maintan the equipment used.


Yes they do and your suggest again shows me why it's not cost effective to keep them in prison... As we spend funds on training and equipment... in effect on those who may rob our honest citizens who feel that every time we want to hire more prison guards or ever build a new one we are the theives taking from them. Educating children early one to make a better life for themselves and give them something to keep them out of a prison takes funding... if you spend it on prisons then they will fill them..

OOC: Did just do a Forest Gump.. or was it Field of Dreams...I hated that movie..

Oh, sweet! Thanks for the recognition

.
.
.


OOC: (for this thread)

Interesting information there. Anyway, I looked over some of the existing resolutions and thought that resolution #13 is outdated and should be replaced. I started a thread for the same...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=438539

Can you please, look through it and comment. How do you send Private Messages through the Jolt Forum anyway.

BTW, I also thought of adding giving better treatment to prisioners as an article in that Swift Justice resolution. But not sure if I will actually write a proposal for it ;)!

And if they have to do menial labor I guess my country will have to define menial labor(making little ones out of big ones).
.


Noble Sir,

I don't think that our national zoo's sharks would like to have them as you say make little ones out of big ones... They earn their keep because they are big bad...

Here we would define menial labor as cleaning out these shark tanks at our national zoo.. as apposed to making belts out of endanger animal hides and car tags out of some element best used for nukes or has been banned for use in most natios due to the nature of the element..

Now I do believe that menial would under one of them titles of our laws include moving nuke fuel rods to a waste site.. Since we have not conformed protective clothing to accomidate their chains they would have to work without them. As we just don't have funds to special fit them with such as we have already spent that on such for the guards who will watch them...

OOC: (for this thread)

Interesting information there. Anyway, I looked over some of the existing resolutions and thought that resolution #13 is outdated and should be replaced. I started a thread for the same...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=438539

Can you please, look through it and comment. How do you send Private Messages through the Jolt Forum anyway.

Oh, crap - I was going to get to that thread earlier - forgot about it.

I'll get to it later today.

I have now submitted an updated version of the proposal to be voted on, though I am not confident I hope that justice will prevail and the proposition will atleast get to the second stage.

You have my vote. :D

You have my vote. :D
You have my gratitude.

Although there is no mention of this in the draft i was inspired to draft it as i remembered reading about a university in America doing a study looking at the cases of inmates and finding that something like a third of people on death row in america may infact be innocent.


This was some student in an American University doing a study for a report he needed to do to get a grade. Thus it's not accurate of may not have all the facts related to each individual involved in the study. As many of these so called University Studies later come under fire by other students wanting a grade doing one to disprove them. Given time your study will be found false and lacking enough proof that 1 in 3 on D-R are not guilty. Also go look at some of the other studies done on those on D-R many will clearly say a majority of them can't be rehabed or cured or whatever so they should never be allowed back into society. We can find studies to support any cause but we must also look at the studies that don't support our cause.. Which study is right... The one got an A or the one got an F.. Also consider that the professors grading them have their own papers out on certain issue often if you oppose the norm when you write and take away from a professor you move grade wise to an F... no matter how your paper is done and how close to truth it may be it has to fit the norm... not dispute your professor.... that's university life for real..

This was some student in an American University doing a study for a report he needed to do to get a grade. Thus it's not accurate of may not have all the facts related to each individual involved in the study. As many of these so called University Studies later come under fire by other students wanting a grade doing one to disprove them. Given time your study will be found false and lacking enough proof that 1 in 3 on D-R are not guilty. Also go look at some of the other studies done on those on D-R many will clearly say a majority of them can't be rehabed or cured or whatever so they should never be allowed back into society. We can find studies to support any cause but we must also look at the studies that don't support our cause.. Which study is right... The one got an A or the one got an F.. Also consider that the professors grading them have their own papers out on certain issue often if you oppose the norm when you write and take away from a professor you move grade wise to an F... no matter how your paper is done and how close to truth it may be it has to fit the norm... not dispute your professor.... that's university life for real..

*rolls eyes

Published studies are people doing these studies as their job. They are called "professers". Very rarely do you ever see something published that was written by a student.

I have now submitted an updated version of the proposal to be voted on, though I am not confident I hope that justice will prevail and the proposition will atleast get to the second stage.
You probably won't make quorum the first time around anyways, most proposals need multiple submissions to reach quorum (the current record for most times submitted is 15 held by Enn's Habeas Corpus (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=72))
Trust me on this after all.
http://bak42.notworksafe.com/images/NationStates/UNCards/resolutionauthorcard.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=108)

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

The Community of Espes agrees to the banning of the death penalty in all United Nation member states. We believe that in a perfect society all life should be given an equal chance to live in happiness. However due to the restraints forced upon human by different factors of this imperfect society, all life are not equal nor given an equal chance to live in happiness. This has resulted in many effects which limits the human's potential. Crime is one of such unfortunate effects. Crimes are often committed by human who were given an unfair chance at a happy life. Criminals who have committed great atrocities should be, at the most, given a life sentence in prison and undergo psychological treatment. The criminal would have to work in prison, and have no right to leave the prison, this shall be the criminal's punishment. A portion of the labours of the criminal in prison shall go to the victim's family, or in the case that the victim having no family, to the government. We believe that the death sentence is immoral and illogical. The murder of a human means one less capable or potentially capable life that could help and ease the lives of other life. The execution of the criminal purely of emotional revenge, deterent for future potential criminals, or "they are not worth the tax dollars", is simply an illogical and immoral decision. With the loss of one life in society, the criminal should repay what one has done by giving the rest of the criminal's life to society through labours. If the victim was 20 years old, then the victim had the potential of around 40 to 50 years more of contribution to society. The criminal will have to repay that by labouring the rest of one's life to try to equal that 40 to 50 years of contribution. Though what the victim's contribution in the 40 to 50 years that was lost could never be fully known or equalled by the criminal, the criminal labouring in prison could only contribute positively. Afterall a criminal working is still working. By executing the criminal, society looses the potential of two capable or potentially capable humanpower.

The Community of Espes sincerely hopes that this become a resolution, be passed and be implemented in all UN member states and nation states cherishing life.


-the Community of Espes-

The Dominion of Sandpie belives in an eye for an eye. Punishment ALWAYS matchs the crime, in some cases this is capital punishment.

If the victim was 20 years old, then the victim had the potential of around 40 to 50 years more of contribution to society. The criminal will have to repay that by labouring the rest of one's life to try to equal that 40 to 50 years of contribution. Though what the victim's contribution in the 40 to 50 years that was lost could never be fully known or equalled by the criminal, the criminal labouring in prison could only contribute positively. -


So let me get this right you want a victums (family are victums when one is killed) of crime to end up paying to keep the person that did the crime against them..... For 40 or 50 years a victum can't work, walk, play, do the basic things people do because; some criminal assaulted them or may have killed their parents of loved ones. Now you want the victum to pay; to let this criminal repay.. Taking funds from them; making them again a victum of the criminal because they have to work an extra hour to earn the tax buck to keep this criminal around so he can repay them for assaulting or raping them or killing their main support person; causing them to have work extra hard to even survive; then pay taxes to keep these criminals in prison for rest of there lives.

Then the victum needs medical care but can't afford it or get it because some criminal has a right to medical care; so criminal gets it so criminal can be working to repay the victums of criminal's crime.. Victum screwed again by the criminal.. how does it end..... Capital Punishment..

I feel like this... If you do a crime and say are 55 and the sentence puts you past the expectent life (80) span you fry or hang.. as why keep a dead man in prison to victomize his victums again or their family again... and again... and again... The only ones benifit keeping criminals around or movie makers, lawyers, and in the case of private prisons systems those who run them.. Oh! and all the Head Shrinks can't work on honest citizens because they lost license to work in public because they bad... quacks...

Thus if a guy is 20 and he does crimes that get him 80 years total he's done.. fried or swinging or just goes to sleep.. or for those gun lover shot.... Also make the laws we have work to deter crimes not reward them...

The Free Land of CTerryland is very much against capital punishment. However we fail to see how this is any of the UN's bloody business, and believe this infringes on nations' personal sovereignty. If this passes this just shows the UN is getting too big for its boots.

If the victim was 20 years old, then the victim had the potential of around 40 to 50 years more of contribution to society. The criminal will have to repay that by labouring the rest of one's life to try to equal that 40 to 50 years of contribution. Though what the victim's contribution in the 40 to 50 years that was lost could never be fully known or equalled by the criminal, the criminal labouring in prison could only contribute positively. -


I think I didn't make it clear. If the victim was for example 20 years old. That means the one who got killed was 20 years old, which means the victim would probably have about 40 or 50 more years worth of contribution to society before the victim retires. This is what society lost when the victim was killed, 40 to 50 years worth of humanpower. Now if you execute the criminal (killer), and say the killer was also around 20 years old, that means you loose not only 40 years of humanpower, but twice that! Society looses two humanpower.

However you put the killer in jail for life, which means that the killer cannot come out of the jail and go around killing people and giving negative contributions to society. Rather the killer in jail has to be forced to work in jail, he work for his own survival within jail, as well as repayments to the victim's family. This means a small part of the killer's labours in jail goes to his own survival in jail, this means the most basic essentials such as a cell room, an electric light, food and water... the rest of the labour of the criminal goes to the victim's family as repayment. The criminal basically becomes the supporter of the victim's family.

Now if you execute the criminal, and say the victim that was killed was a family's main source of income, that means the victim's family goes into depression and looses their main source of income. Leaving only the government to give payments to the victim's family. However if you put the criminal in jail, the criminal will have to work the rest of his life for the support of the family of the victim that the criminal killed.

Do you see my logic here? I hope it is clearer now.

They say an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, indeed, revenge solves nothing, hating the hated only brews more hate. Star Wars and Martin Luther King says it better. In my opinion, revenge is one of the most low animal instincts, holding onto that emotion can only make your life more miserable rather than lifting pressure from your chest.


-the Community of Espes-

This proposal still requires 108 approvals before midnight tonight, plese help this proposal go through.

You probably won't make quorum the first time around anyways, most proposals need multiple submissions to reach quorum (the current record for most times submitted is 15 held by Enn's Habeas Corpus (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=72))
Trust me on this after all.
http://bak42.notworksafe.com/images/NationStates/UNCards/resolutionauthorcard.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=108)

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

In that case i hope i can rely on the more experienced UN members to aid me in making what I feel is an important proposal a success in the future (hopefully after less than 15 submissions).

Now if you execute the criminal (killer), and say the killer was also around 20 years old, that means you loose not only 40 years of humanpower, but twice that! Society looses two humanpower.-


Society doesn't want evil in it's mist to make victums out of it's honest citizens... Thus they build prisons to lock them away... Then hire others to keep them in that prison and others to see that they have some form of normal life..

What might a doctor do to a citizen who needs care if he were not caring for one in prison...
What might that guard do to stop the next raper or killer if he were not trying to keep those already caught looked up...

manpower missused to keep criminals making victums out of honest citizens again and again... because it will be the honest citizens who lose to keep them locked up..

The only reason it may cost to keep people on death row is criminals have more legal rights than their victums... do.. thus the victums are screwed again paying lawyers to make sure the criminals rights a upheld..

Honest citizens lose every time a criminal is not given the right punishment to fit the crime... Somebody said 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' if you read on it say 'An eye for and eye' so what now do we do... make honest citizens victums again and again of criminals that have taken and eye or life.... We can not let a resolution pass that would make honest citizen victums of criminals over and over again...

You keep ignoring the focus of the Bill which is to protect the innocent from being killed in error if evidence that proves them innocent is not found until after their sentence is carried out.

In that case i hope i can rely on the more experienced UN members to aid me in making what I feel is an important proposal a success in the future (hopefully after less than 15 submissions).
You want advice, two words, telegram campaign. Telegramming the delegates is pretty much the only way any proposals get up for vote.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Yeah i did contact someone about that but they were too busy on another TG campaign

It was suggested to do a telegram campaign to gain support for this proposal.... Well I wanted to see if it would work but to stop it.. So I just sent this out to all who have voted for this so far...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are voting for the resolution to ban executions because you believe that 'Thy Shalt Not Kill' Then ask yourself when is it right to kill.

Here the intent of the resolution is to prevent wrongfull exeuctions while it warrants them. Where we can't try in a court of law a person or hand down a sentence of death, this same resolution says police can gun down people in the streets if they feel they are a threat, without a trail.

We'll just try them later when your family member or you are dead. Then they will be put in a prison for the rest of their lives and we will be paying for them all that time without our family member...

Read the proposal again look at what it does... Makes you a victum forever of the criminal, and now the police should they feel you are a threat.

'Thy Shalt Not Kill' unless you piss the police off and they execute you to protect themselves or others... or Thy Shalt Not Kill....period'.
This proposal does not stop killing it just promotes it and makes it legal for police to do it openly...

You can withdraw your support for this bill and then let those who have proposed it know... You read it 'Thy Shalt Not Kill....period' no exception not even for police as killing is wrong...period
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This will show you two things... telagram campains can be effective.. and that there is one flaw in this resolution that some may not be aware of..


The intent from what I have seen debated here is to prevent wrongfull executions.. The section that gives the police an open right to kill if they feel a treat will result in more wrongfull executions... As how many police are on trail or in prison for not following the laws even executing citizens in the line of duty... This was not considered yet here you grant them the right to execute a person without a trial and twelve juries to hear the evidence.

As stated 'Thy Shalt Not Kill' ends there.. police need to follow this rule also.. as there should be no reason for them to fear for their own life or the lives of those they are swore to protect because 'Thy Shalt Not Kill'.. Think about it.. you promote exactly what you wanted to stop within the proposal onlt now you guarentee police to live under the care of those they were sworn to protect. The same would be for the military rebels who come in and genocide a nation.. We just lock them up... and hope they don't get free ever again...

So we shall see....2005/08/21 @ 1900 EDT was when I finished sending them out to those you have support from... 30 so far who I sent this to...

If someone clearly has a gun or a bomb and is inent of killing a large number of people do you not think that the use of deadly force is not justified? put it this way, would you rather have one person who is intenton gunning down or blowing up as many people as possible die or 10 innocent people who could have been stopped if the first person was killed. both would be regretable but its obvious which would be preferable overall.

The Principality of Ynys Dywyll will not support this resolution. There is no reason why our citizens should be forced to spend their tax monies keeping duly convicted murderers alive, housed, and fed. Criminals abrogate their rights when they commit their crimes, and should be punished severely, not sent on a holiday (albeit a working one). Frankly, this resolution is far too liberal in its current state. We will however support the establishment of guidelines that could be applied when utilizing the death penalty.

Why do so few people get the point of this resolution. It is not meant to help the guilty but insted help protect the innocent who have been convicted wrongly of a crime.

My nation wishes to know how one can tell the difference between the wrongly and justly convicted. surely you will not take a convicted murderer (or worse) at their word? given the chance, i'm sure many a prisoner on death row would say they didn't do it if they knew it would get them out.

My nation wishes to know how one can tell the difference between the wrongly and justly convicted. surely you will not take a convicted murderer (or worse) at their word? given the chance, i'm sure many a prisoner on death row would say they didn't do it if they knew it would get them out.
Indeed. There will always be miscarriages of justice and many will sadly go unnoticed. The only way you can truly guarantee you are not killing an innocent man is to ban Capital Punishment completely. While the Free Land of CTerryland is against capital punishment we do not feel that it is an issue that the UN should step in on.

Now alternatively you can try to prevent innocent death in this way, for example you could make it so that convicted murderers on death row are allowed a certain amount of appeals. The Free Land of CTerryland would happily support such a resolution.

while the nation of Bimmovia is in favor of capital punishment as a deterrent measure, it agrees with CTerryland that this is a matter that does not require international regulation.

You keep ignoring the focus of the Bill which is to protect the innocent from being killed in error if evidence that proves them innocent is not found until after their sentence is carried out.


Then where was the presentation of evidence in a court when a police officer shot down a person coming out of a store... because he saw that person had a gun in his hand and felt threatened by him.. thus in a split second he shot and killed.. The owner closing up at midnight taking his rifle home rather than leave it in the store...

In a court there is control and evidence gets presented if it's no complete or missing then a person is still dead.. The very court system that will try that police officer for killing an innocent person... has tried those on death row and had more than a split second to decide to sentence that person to death.

Then you can argue evidence lost falsely made up and all for a criminal but so can you for police... who collect that evidence in the first place. They are not perfect why give them more liberty to be imperfect... knowing that they will not be put to death if they kill without thought.. or without hearing all the evidence in a case...

You remove a persons right to fair trail when the police can openly shot them first.. As they get no trail the police officer does and he enters the same faulty system that anyone might enter when they do a crime..

Correct the system not take away those punishments they may hand down... Thus there will be no dought a person is guilty when he swings... or fries or goes to sleep or is shot... or slapped on the hand and told not to do it again...

My nation wishes to know how one can tell the difference between the wrongly and justly convicted. surely you will not take a convicted murderer (or worse) at their word? given the chance, i'm sure many a prisoner on death row would say they didn't do it if they knew it would get them out.
In the study(RL) that has inspired this bill the evidence was uncovered by police or possibly private investigators, regretably i am not certain where i would find the text of this study.

Then where was the presentation of evidence in a court when a police officer shot down a person coming out of a store... because he saw that person had a gun in his hand and felt threatened by him.. thus in a split second he shot and killed.. The owner closing up at midnight taking his rifle home rather than leave it in the store...

In a court there is control and evidence gets presented if it's no complete or missing then a person is still dead.. The very court system that will try that police officer for killing an innocent person... has tried those on death row and had more than a split second to decide to sentence that person to death.

Then you can argue evidence lost falsely made up and all for a criminal but so can you for police... who collect that evidence in the first place. They are not perfect why give them more liberty to be imperfect... knowing that they will not be put to death if they kill without thought.. or without hearing all the evidence in a case...

You remove a persons right to fair trail when the police can openly shot them first.. As they get no trail the police officer does and he enters the same faulty system that anyone might enter when they do a crime..

Correct the system not take away those punishments they may hand down... Thus there will be no dought a person is guilty when he swings... or fries or goes to sleep or is shot... or slapped on the hand and told not to do it again...

I would hardly call being locked in prison for the rest of your life a 'slap on the wrist' also the effect of capital punishment on crime rates is not thought to be great, infact i would wager that the violent crime rate in america where many states have the death penalty is comparitively higher than places like Britain where the death penalty has been abolished for something in the order of 40 to 50 years.

I would hardly call being locked in prison for the rest of your life a 'slap on the wrist' also the effect of capital punishment on crime rates is not thought to be great, infact i would wager that the violent crime rate in america where many states have the death penalty is comparitively higher than places like Britain where the death penalty has been abolished for something in the order of 40 to 50 years.


The crime rate in any area is effected by many things besides punishment for those crimes. Freedoms of the individuals to move around open the door to crimes... all sorts of things besides punishments..

As for any study one can probably find another study that counters the first one.. Also studies on how many times a police officer killed and it was not justified..

On the cost to hold one for execution why does it cost more to say keep them on death row or for life.. in the same prison.. The only difference is legal appeals.. and in most areas they have them in any event regardless of the crimes..

Removing punishment is not a solution to stop legal systems from not doing things proper... either in the collection of evidence or the presentation of that evidence... if the system has faults then fix the system don't work around the faults... If a car has a flat you have two choices... 1) Put on a new good tire 2) Fix the one that went flat.... You don't drive on... a flat tire.. or no tire...

How do you send Private Messages through the Jolt Forum anyway.

You don't have access to the PM function.

I don't either.

The Mods do, however.

oh well the proposal is no longer on the list :(

Also the only reason for someone being shot by especially trained armed units (I am not saying that police should have a pistol as standard issue) and as such they would only be used to respond to cases where a person was clearly armed, not following police instructions and threatening the public or police with injury or death, they would not just shoot someone that was coming out of their place of business with their gun.

I would hardly call being locked in prison for the rest of your life a 'slap on the wrist' also the effect of capital punishment on crime rates is not thought to be great, infact i would wager that the violent crime rate in america where many states have the death penalty is comparitively higher than places like Britain where the death penalty has been abolished for something in the order of 40 to 50 years.


'Slap on the wrist' is not meant to be Life in Prison... It's any level of punishment...... The courts should be fixed so that nobody is punished is they are not guilty of a crime at any level... How many people are in for life that may years from now be found not guilty... Your entire argument says the legal system is flawed.... You want to take away they punishment because they are flawed..


Take guns from police as they are flawed or have you nort been living in a real world outside NS...... English Police killed a man they though had a gun... He was punished for being in the wrong place at wrong time... Cops only had a split second they shot he is dead... Wrongful execution... without a trail, no evidence presented to stop his execution... He's dead now... police abused their authority this man didn't get a trial.. no evidence was present until after his death and he was innocent. Why are you not taking guns from police rahter than giving them an open right to kill if they feel threatened... Execute those who threaten them....

Also one had said something about placeing a person in prison then Forcing then to work and reply society.. Why will they work, you can't do a thing to them.... If you take away shelter and food and medical care some group will be at your doors crying abuse of his rights. He will laugh at you and do nothing.. no reason to.. You can't let him be abuse society won't let you... Bleeding Idiots won't let you.. If this man had raped and killed a member of your family how would you feel... It'd easy in role play to say one thing but to feel the pain in real life of one lost to some criminal... is real and hurts... Then to see this person live and drain the system at your expense making you a victum again and again and again because they have rights... these criminals... what about the rights of honest citiens just trying to survive.. how many time do they become victums of criminals that have rights. Fix the legal system don't break it down...

Police and a military need weapons but they must be trained when and how to use them and know that if they abuse them against honest citizen they will become criminals and be punished to the highest level they can be for the crimes they do... They will not be allowed to continue to make victums of honest citizens... again and again

Zeldon I didn't understand your post in reply to mine about the criminals being locked up in prison, secured by people who work in prisons, then how do they victimised the victims again and again? This bill is not about "thou shalt not kill" ("thou shalt not kill" is a bad translation from the Hebrew which actually says "thou shalt not murder"). This bill is about protecting the rights of the innocents who have been placed upon the death row. That means people (the criminals) who have been caught and are awaiting penalty or the lack thereof from the (imperfect) justice system with the possibility of execution. This bill is to take that execution away because of the imperfectness of the justice system which often sentences innocents to punishments otherwise undeserved.

If you believe that there should be the death penalty, then you must agree that every person convicted and given the death penalty are truely the criminals for which they were, that they are not innocent and that all varying degrees of criminal offenses(a person killing 1, a person killing 50) all equal to one solution, the death penalty. This would also mean that you have to have a perfect justice system which convicts the right criminals 100% of the time. I don't think any justice system in the world can boast this perfection. Most of the time it is all about how good the lawyer is. Consider this, if a person can sue McDonalds and get thousands simply because the coffee cap doesn't have a lable labeling that it is hot, that same justice system convicts criminals and puts them on the death row! How screwed up this justice system of yours is! There are many innocents who are punished, and many true criminals who gets away. The same justice system that has double jeopardy and allowed OJ Simpson to get away with murder, is sentencing people, innocent or not, to the lethal injection chamber these very moments. Face it the justice system is far from perfection, it has become more of an industry for lawyers who work it as if it was a corporation, the constitution is bendable, semantics change, interpretations differ, and with the help of a good lawyer and some green cash, the criminal can basically get away with anything. If there is some universal truth to humanity, it is that innocents and the poor almost always receive unjust and unequal treatments from society. As long as the justice system isn't perfect, harbouring the possibility of wrongly convicting someone innocent for execution, then capital punishment should not be carried out. You may say most that are convicted of capital punishment are truely criminals, and the justice system handles with great scrutiny over cases where execution is a possible penalty, however you must admit that there are those few who are truely innocent and are placed upon the death row. Then would it be right for these innocents to be killed by the justice system which promises to defend those very innocents and uphold their justices for? Basically every punishment, even torture can be in some way or another repaid if at some latter date the criminal is proven innocent. However you cannot bring back an innocent's life if they have been executed. In my opinion I see capital punishment as some kind of end game, it is like nuclear weapons. At first you build nuclear weapons because you thought it would help defend your security, but instead nuclear weapons doesn't bring the world more secure, it brews insecurity, and other nations will want to build their own nuclear weapons. When a more advanced weapon becomes developped in one nation, other nations would want to catch-up and develop their own weapon of the same calibre if not greater. It addes to the fuel and prevents very little. The death penalty doesn't teach anything to the criminal, after all the criminal can't learn or change if the criminal is dead. At the most it would be revenge for the victim who has probably been murdered, and the victim's families... The death penalty could show someone that if you commit murder you will be executed as well, and think that in this way homocidal rates might drop. However homocidal rates have not dropped and capital punishment have been going on for thousands of years. When a criminal commits murder, most of the time, the criminal knows very well that one will get the death penalty, but commits it nevertheless. They don't fear loosing their lives when they are killing someone, they might feel it afterwards when they are on trial. It is like a brave soldier on the front lines, they feel no fear for death, they are overwhelmed with patriotism and objectives, dying doesn't deter them, rather it almost fuels them the fact that they will die a heroe's death and be martyred. The criminal committing murder is much of the same, call it insanity if you will, but from whatever bad experiences in the criminal's life, the criminal at the moment of committing the murder, has little or no fear of receiving the death penalty, rather it almost fuels them to kill. Not only that, when they kill one they realise that they have passed the point of no return, and they might as well kill 10 or 100. This is the so called deterrent to homocides the death penalty makes!

I sincerely hope that there will be an end to the death penalty on NS and in RL, in all the nations of this world.

-the Community of Espes-

OOC: Like Forgottenlands said right back at the start of the thread, good luck. You'll need it to get anywhere near quorum.

IC: Enn is extremely unlikely to support this resolution at any time for national sovereignty reasons.
In addition to that, while we are legally a Duumvirate we are even less likely to support such an act, as it would require Lady Faren being convinced against every instinct in her body. Something Chief Justice Loreni has never been able to do. As to after the elections, when Enn becomes a Triumvirate again, who can say.

then how do they victimised the victims again and again?

By taxes that provide them with shelter, food, medical care, as well as free legal services for all those repeals they might get a right to. Thus a family of a person killed by a murderer is burdened by those taxes.. Becoming a victum in that they have to pay for the killer of their lost one over and over again. As they are victums of the system that keeps them alive and gives them excess rights.. I person charger with murder who goes to trial and is found guilty needs to be punished as soon after sentence is given as possible, to prevent them from being a burden on society and making victums of all citizens who pay taxes and thus would suppert that crimal in prison.

Then tax funds are taken from other functions and used in the prison system, thus services a state provides to honest citizens a cut to cover prison cost, or up goest taxes and citizens again a victum paying these higher taxes. Add meadical care for them and we not only take a doctor out of the civilian system and use them in the prison system we end up paying from all medical care given a criminal. While many honest citizens struggle to get qualified and proper medical care because there are no doctors, they can't afford a treatment, or there is no place to go for it because funds go to the prison system. Add contries that have children starving and food is going to feed ciminals because some group protests not feeding muderers and rapers as cruel, so you have to give them food taken from starving children or citizens.

The Grand Duchy of Olwe is vehemently against this resolution. Not only does it trample all over national sovereignty rights, but it makes me sick to my stomach to think that people are such pansies in this day and age that they can't bear to see criminals punished properly. Executions in Olwe are slow, painful and public, and we will leave the UN if we have to in order for this to remain so.

The death penalty is philisophically indefensible. It is an institute of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; devoid of logic or sense. If an innocent individual is executed, they cannot be resurrected if subsequently cleared. This penalty disproportionately affects minorities and the poor, it is thus inherently discriminatory.

Compadria supports this and any other attempt to end capital punishment.

"The Grand Duchy of Olwe is vehemently against this resolution. Not only does it trample all over national sovereignty rights, but it makes me sick to my stomach to think that people are such pansies in this day and age that they can't bear to see criminals punished properly. Executions in Olwe are slow, painful and public, and we will leave the UN if we have to in order for this to remain so."

Where sir is your humanity? Where sir is your sense of the need for real justice? Through rehabilitation and making the prisoner re-pay the debt he owes society for his mercy through labour and hard work for the time until he has redeemed his guilt, then you will have real justice. But murder in the name of civilisation? I think not.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Long live civilised Compadria!

Where sir is your humanity? Where sir is your sense of the need for real justice?

My sense of the need for real justice directs me to dismember those who break the law. But "justice" has always been a very objective term, and I can understand where you're coming from (even if I don't agree).

Through rehabilitation and making the prisoner re-pay the debt he owes society for his mercy through labour and hard work...

Let's leave the labour and hard work out of this. It's capitalist propaganda, and it's one more reason I can't bring myself to even marginally support this resolution.

But murder in the name of civilisation?

Not murder. Just a proper deterrent. The last execution carried out in Olwe was over three years ago. This is because nobody dares to commit crimes that carry the death penalty -- they've seen what happened to those who went before. They realize their actions have consequences, so they behave. Just out of curiosity, how's your slap on the wrist policy working out?

Long live civilised Compadria!

I certainly hope so... despite our disagreement on this particular issue, it seems like you've got yourself a good nation.

Piñata Frost
Grand Duke of Olwe

I am grateful for your praise, Olwe and can see that you too have yourself a fine country and one worthy of membership. Yet still, I am dismayed that you let yourself fall into the trap of believing that simply preventing the crime solves the problem.

"Not murder. Just a proper deterrent. The last execution carried out in Olwe was over three years ago. This is because nobody dares to commit crimes that carry the death penalty -- they've seen what happened to those who went before. They realize their actions have consequences, so they behave. Just out of curiosity, how's your slap on the wrist policy working out?"

Fear is not a proper deterrant, at the first sign of instability, there will be violence once again and the end result will be even more draconian law enforcement and punishment. Solving the root causes of violent crime and other such acts is key to halting the crime phenomonen. Merely punishing those who committ such offences, will not solve the underlying issue. And with regards to our "slap on the wrist policy", it is working well with crime relatively low and law enforcement satisfied.

"Let's leave the labour and hard work out of this. It's capitalist propaganda, and it's one more reason I can't bring myself to even marginally support this resolution."

How is labour and hard work, as part of the rehabilitation of the criminal and punishment for the crime, "capitalist propaganda". It is productive and effective; helping ensure that the prisoner is made to appreciate his loss of liberty and contribute to the society he has harmed with his prior actions.

I hope that you come round to seeing my point of view, but failing that, I can only say that I will support this resolution to the hilt.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby

Fear is not a proper deterrant, at the first sign of instability, there will be violence once again and the end result will be even more draconian law enforcement and punishment. Solving the root causes of violent crime and other such acts is key to halting the crime phenomonen. Merely punishing those who committ such offences, will not solve the underlying issue.

I sincerely hope you're at least a little bit wrong... because if you're right, then we've screwed up pretty badly and may have dark times ahead of us (the "first sign of instability" you mentioned could be the invasion of Olwe that is currently taking place).

And with regards to our "slap on the wrist policy", it is working well with crime relatively low and law enforcement satisfied.

I'm relieved to hear that. I greatly respect and admire nations who can make such a thing work, but we tried it here at first and found it to be less than satisfactory.

How is labour and hard work, as part of the rehabilitation of the criminal and punishment for the crime, "capitalist propaganda". It is productive and effective

Productive and effective. The only more capitalist word than that is efficient. That's why I thought it was capitalist propaganda, because of the way in which it was worded and the general distaste for hard work and labour in Olwe (we do work, occasionally even hard, but we play a lot harder).

helping ensure that the prisoner is made to appreciate his loss of liberty...

I'd be pretty pissed off and looking for someone to lash out at if I lost my liberty... it'd hurt my chances for rehabilitation more than it'd help it. Hopefully, such things don't happen in Compadria. Successful rehabilitation of criminals is a very noble goal, and I applaud you for your efforts, but it's also a very difficult goal to see through to its logical conclusion, due to any number of factors (such as uncooperative prisoners).

I hope that you come round to seeing my point of view, but failing that, I can only say that I will support this resolution to the hilt.

I would expect nothing less from a man of conviction and honour such as yourself. This has been an interesting debate, but I suppose (even though there's obviously middle ground to be found, since we seem to have a mutual respect for each other), that we might just have to agree to disagree. Good luck if and when this comes to a vote, though.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Thank you. Just out of curiosity, how do other national leaders react to that, though? I mean, there are talking beasts in Olwe, so I've actually had an otter bless me before, but I imagine that other people might find that a bit unusual.

I would agree wholeheartedly that this has been an interesting debate, I'm also glad that it has been conducted in such a cordial fashion. It really makes a difference from the usual, "you're wrong", "no, you're wrong" sort of arguments one gets round here. I think that agreeing to disagree is the best option under the circumstances and certainly in future middle ground will be found; coming from a like minded state such as yours, I would agree no less.

I applaud your willingness to recognise the merits of some of my suggestions and in turn I feel it is only appropriate to aknowledge that many of your scepticisms about them are well founded and to a certain extent justified. I admire people of conviction and I can see that you yourself are one; I may not agree with your views on this issue, but I respect greatly you're reasoned defence of them.

I am horrified to here of the invasion being conducted upon you; we give you our full moral support, which alas is the only support we can offer as we have no permanant armed services on duty.

With regards to your question on the 'otters', greeting, I can only say that most seem not to find it out of the ordinary (which says something about the wildlife in their countries probably!). The only response i've ever received about it, was one during the "Freedom of Conscience" Debate, a month ago. A delegate called "Omigodtheykilledkenny" replied to my salutation with:

"The blessings of your otters are not needed. Our corporate sponsors care for us".

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I feel like no one reads through my posts...

The death penalty have been going on since the days of Hammurabi, and logically, claiming the deterrent to homocides that it is, then there should be virtually no homocides in the nations of today that still has capital punishment. Instead homocides are still rampant. It deters very little and almost acts as fuel for someone to kill. The students at the high school who took a gun to school and killed many, after they killed the first one they knew that they were pretty much going to end up receiving the death penalty, so they might as well have some more fun and kill 100 instead of 1, and then might as well pull the trigger on himself. This is your so-called deterrent to homocides by instituting capital punishment!

Zeldon, I said that the victims' family (provided the victim had a family) would not be supporting the criminal in jail, rather the criminal has to work in prison to support oneself and the victim's family. If you execute the criminal who is going to take care of the victim's family? The taxpayers? That tax argument is such an illogical one. For example a family of four, one father, one mother, one son, one daughter. The father or perhaps both parents (main source of income) murdered by the criminal, if you kill off the criminal (not to mention you would need execution facilities, at the very least a bullet), now who is going to support the others in the family? It goes back to the government, which gets money from the taxpayers!

Criminals locked up in prison has much less people actually working to lock the prisoners up (guards less than guarded). When a criminal is in prison, the criminal works! This is so obvious, how is this a capitalist propaganda? What do you think prisoners do in prison sit around all day? They work their behinds off, no pay and bad food. Ever heard of the labour camps of many nations (that weren't even capitalists)? In Russia prison is basically sending you to the middle of Siberia and you have to work your behinds off to get a tiny morsel of food. Prison is all about hard labours.

Capital punishment doesn't make sense economically (tax-wise), or even revenge-wise, an execution is but an instant, and what's more you barely feel it and then you are dead. The criminal might have committed rape and then torturd the victim in an underground cell with no food and water, and eventually killed the victim. That compared to the lethal injection, I would take the lethal injection any day! however you keep the criminal locked up, tortured in prison, hard labours yielding little or no fruits. Execution is torture for an instant, prison is torture for life.

Zeldon you talked about after conviction by the justice system, the penalty should be carried out on the criminal as soon as possible. Then what if the criminal was innocent? What if the convicted was simply dirt poor and can't afford a good lawyer, or the lawyer wasn't pursuasive enough? You must agree that the justice system is perfect and convicts the right criminals 100% of the time, but this is far from true. Overall I feel that you value some tax money above the value of a life (honest life or not).


-the Community of Espes-