NationStates Jolt Archive

Please support the possible resolution;

Mbek, member of the Random Ramblings

Could you please post a copy of your proposal here?

The idea of an international criminal list is something my government approves of, but I'd like to glace over your proposal first. There are several Mikitivity criminals that are still at large, and naturally my government is concerned about criminals from other nations crossing our borders (particularly into Aslan canton).

Howie T. Katzman

I'll be nice and post itCategory: Political Stability


Strength: Strong


Proposed by: Mbek

Description: Global crime has become very real throughout this century, and steps must be taken to fight against this greed. I urge UN members to accept that crime is extremely hard to fully put to rest but to ease the workload of our respective police forces.

Tracking these men and women who commit these horrendous acts is a tireless job that can be made easier with tracking and DNA checks.

However, citizens who wish to be put into the system may submit their DNA for tracking and medical purposes. Children under the age of seventeen (17) may only be put in with parental consent. Location and medical history of these citizens who put in DNA and/or fingerprint samples may only be examined by the individuals put down on the registration sheet, doctors, medical examiners, and the respective police forces of each State.

This resolution states that:

ARTICLE ONE:

I. All men or women taken into custody for a crime is required to have DNA and/or fingerprints taken for addition to the global list.

II. Local and Federal officials will have the right to take a fingerprint sample if evidence is found that may link him or her to the crime. DNA may only then be taken with the suspect's explicit consent.

III. States are required to keep a list of criminals that have either committed a felony or more than two (2) misdemeanors.

ARTICLE TWO:

I. Citizens may be put into the registry for tracking and medical information reasons.

II. Citizens under the age of seventeen (17) are only allowed into the system with parental consent.

III. Individuals not specified on the registration sheet are not allowed to look and receive personal data. This excludes the police forces, doctors, and ER surgeons.

OOC: Ooh boy, Hirota's going to be all over you on this one. Damn Americanocentrics.

http://chefbox.com/weblog/images/homer.jpg

:p

Please support the possible resolution;

Mbek, member of the Random Ramblings
Let's have a looksie for ya.


Category: Political Stability
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Mbek
Strong? Maybe significant.

Global crime has become very real throughout this century, and steps must be taken to fight against this greed. I urge UN members to accept that crime is extremely hard to fully put to rest but to ease the workload of our respective police forces.
I question the use of the word greed. Maybe say "scourge" if you must propose something be fought against. Few people like scourges.

I think it's a good sentiment to suggest that crime is extremely hard to end (by the way, say "end" and not "put to rest." You'll want to use concise, precise, accurate language), although I would say impossible, but as I say, that's just the Taoist influence on we Norderians speaking, and I know few people here would take that seriously.

Tracking these men and women who commit these horrendous acts is a tireless job that can be made easier with tracking and DNA checks.
What acts are horrendous? Thus far, you've only said crime, which can be anything from speeding through an intersection to speeding through a pack of nuns and babies. And the job would be "tiring," or "taxing," not "tireless." And if the language in this clause is any indication of what is to come, then I'm going to throw a red flag up at the term "DNA checks."

However, citizens who wish to be put into the system may submit their DNA for tracking and medical purposes. Children under the age of seventeen (17) may only be put in with parental consent. Location and medical history of these citizens who put in DNA and/or fingerprint samples may only be examined by the individuals put down on the registration sheet, doctors, medical examiners, and the respective police forces of each State. This makes me think of the PRA, which, as is, doesn't allow the groups I bolded to do as this suggests without the patient's consent (by the way, should I revive the repeal of PRA?).

This resolution states that:
Someone else will introduce you to the more accepted format soon, I'm too lazy to do it right now.

ARTICLE ONE:

I. All men or women taken into custody for a crime is required to have DNA and/or fingerprints taken for addition to the global list.
Nooooo. That list would be MASSIVE (not due to any contributions from Norderia) simply because everyone from a shoplifter to a tax fraud perpetrator, to a trenchcoat flasher would have to surrender a DNA sample or fingerprints. Granted, the "or" disjunct gives governments the option to not take a DNA sample, but I'm not comfortable with the UN even suggesting that kind of Orwellian concept.

II. Local and Federal officials will have the right to take a fingerprint sample if evidence is found that may link him or her to the crime. DNA may only then be taken with the suspect's explicit consent.
Federal officials only belong in Federal governments. Norderia, for example, is not a Federal government (it's Parliamentary). Second, what do you mean by "take a fingerprint sample?" Furthermore, what do you mean by "officials?"
If the purpose of this clause is to allow officials to remove their DNA or fingerprint from the list, then I certainly say no. If it is to give them the right to add their prints or DNA to the list, then I suspect it's unnecessary, as I doubt there are any nations in the UN that would refuse a person from surrendering their DNA or prints.
Next, is the second sentence in the Clause refering only to officials? If so, then I say bollocks, since not even the government should be able to avert criminal proceedings against them. If it refers to all suspects, then I say bollocks again, because that completely destroys any chance of using a subpoena or warrant to obtain such materials.
Another interpretation I can glean from that clause is that any officials (since the clause doesn't mandate that they be government, or even law enforcement officials) can gather the fingerprints of suspect of a crime. Heck, the secretary of an AAA chapter is a local official. This clause is, altogether, both in need of much rewording, to make its intent understood, and then most likely, in need of striking, as its intent doesn't seem to me to be anything supportable.

III. States are required to keep a list of criminals that have either committed a felony or more than two (2) misdemeanors.
I suspect many nations law enforcements do keep criminal records for the people who have committed crimes already. But beyond that, the words "felony" and "misdemeanor" aren't used by most nations here. And many of the nations have more than 2 levels of criminal activity.


ARTICLE TWO:

I. Citizens may be put into the registry for tracking and medical information reasons.
I'll just say this right off. No. First, tracking of criminals is only permitted in Norderia if probably cause for an imminent repeat offender has been shown, and a warrant to surveillance has been produced by a judge. Second, this proposal is supposed to be about tracking criminals, not medical information.

II. Citizens under the age of seventeen (17) are only allowed into the system with parental consent.
Choosing an arbitrary age number won't fly here.

III. Individuals not specified on the registration sheet are not allowed to look and receive personal data. This excludes the police forces, doctors, and ER surgeons.
What's with all the medical personel? I thought it was DNA samples and fingerprinting. What do medical histories and such have to do with it?

I also don't quite see why "ARTICLE I" and "ARTICLE II" are necessary.

This is a very incomplete, and in places, tangential proposal. And since I don't agree with the concept, I wouldn't support it. I'd be happy to offer technical and grammatical advice and critique though, if you choose to continue drafting.

III. Individuals not specified on the registration sheet are not allowed to look and receive personal data. This excludes the police forces, doctors, and ER surgeons.We would here hope that those 'ER surgeons' are skilled doctors so you need to fix this. As believe you are trying to cover ER Staff and possibly EMTs and such as you already cover any surgeons under doctors.

Also believe that we need to keep criminal listings separate from listings of honest citizens as there are to many possible chances of problems somebody gets confused as to why they in a criminal listing. Or it may be easy for hackers to simply remove a 'check' in a box and a person becomes a criminal in this list when they honest citizens. Keeping separate lists would be better also provide a barrier for abuse of the system by anyone as they would not be able to find data on an honest citizen unless they went into the right listing. One could apply tighter limits on who can get into and why they can on an 'honest citizen list' while lowering the limits on the 'criminal list'... Thus saving time finding known criminals or wanted criminals who may be doing their evil and one needs to catch and stop them.. while protecting honest citizens from anyone abusing their information that may be listed on such a list with this.

Put simply, we loathe this proposal.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadbern bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

Hey, give them an A for effort. At least it's not one of those rambling rants.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/doctor.jpg

OOC: Ooh boy, Hirota's going to be all over you on this one. Damn Americanocentrics.I'll try and restrain myself :)Category: Political Stability
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Mbek<shrugs>Description: Global crime has become very real throughout this century, and steps must be taken to fight against this greed. I urge UN members to accept that crime is extremely hard to fully put to rest but to ease the workload of our respective police forces.I'm not sure it will ease the workload, but m'kay.Tracking these men and women who commit these horrendous acts is a tireless job that can be made easier with tracking and DNA checks.Now, here is the first problem. Define horrendous acts. Some are obvious, mainly because the UN has legislated on them, or that there is a general agreement about what is considered a criminal act. But then you get other acts which might be criminal in nation A which might be considered so horrendous....yet nation B would just shrug it's shoulders.However, citizens who wish to be put into the system may submit their DNA for tracking and medical purposes.[/quote[Citizens, not criminals? Why should innocents be in this?[quote]Children under the age of seventeen (17) may only be put in with parental consent.Age of consent varies in different member states.Location and medical history of these citizens who put in DNA and/or fingerprint samples may only be examined by the individuals put down on the registration sheet, doctors, medical examiners, and the respective police forces of each State.That seems fair enough.
This resolution states that:Whoa, what was the rest of that then? If that was a preamble, it's meant to explain why this resolution is needed.ARTICLE ONE:

I. All men or women taken into custody for a crime is required to have DNA and/or fingerprints taken for addition to the global list.<shrugs>II. Local and Federal officials will have the right to take a fingerprint sample if evidence is found that may link him or her to the crime. DNA may only then be taken with the suspect's explicit consent.Federal officals? <anti-americocentric rant> You might be suprised to learn that there are other forms of government out there in this big ol' world </anti-americocentric rant>III. States are required to keep a list of criminals that have either committed a felony or more than two (2) misdemeanors.See above.
I. Citizens may be put into the registry for tracking and medical information reasons.With or without consent?
II. Citizens under the age of seventeen (17) are only allowed into the system with parental consent.Should include guardians here. And the age might be awkward for some nations.
III. Individuals not specified on the registration sheet are not allowed to look and receive personal data. This excludes the police forces, doctors, and ER surgeons.ER surgeons? This is not some american hospital drama you know.

It's got scope, I feel. Hopefully the author will do more than just use this forum to pimp their proposal, and might actually look at the feedback. But, I doubt it.

One would like to know how a nation with a tiny police force would be able to implement the proposals of this would-be resolution. Member states with miniscule police forces, such as Nyrenios, would not be able to carry out all of the mandates stated in this proposal.

The point?

Can the United Nations support member states with small police forces that cannot carry out the proposal?

OOC: I know, not that my computer will explode or anything if this becomes a resolution and passes, but, well, for realistic-ness-ness...

-ness.

You need definitions. Saying all criminals need to be tested is a very broad catagory. For example in many nations there are speed limits on roads. If someone goes over are they a "criminal"? So I suggest saying something like. All people incarcerated for more then 3 weeks. But then you would have to define incarceration so it does not include soldiers who are working for the government and people in mental hopitals.

With a lot of work, there may be a resolution that could be considered, but for it to get that state the committee must be named "The United Nations Command for Law and Enforcement" or "The United Nations Intelligence Taskforce"

You need definitions. Saying all criminals need to be tested is a very broad catagory. For example in many nations there are speed limits on roads. If someone goes over are they a "criminal"? So I suggest saying something like. All people incarcerated for more then 3 weeks. But then you would have to define incarceration so it does not include soldiers who are working for the government and people in mental hopitals.

I dunno, some people who do some pretty bad things get off with good deals in exchange for testimony and such. Incarceration is also not used in many countries.

Frankly, I don't think this proposal should be carried on anyway, for what it's worth.

Incarceration is also not used in many countries.
what is used instead?

what is used instead?
In Gruenberg, death.

In Norderia, no doubt, "ooh touchy feely rehabilitation ooh".

"ooh"

Kinda funny how Death is cast in a nicer light than rehabilitation.

Yep. Gruenbergers are stone cold porcupines. They eat petrified fire with razor blades for breakfast, and use cacti for toilet paper. Totally hard core.

Actually, many Gruenbergers are sensitive souls who enjoy music, dance, theatre and fine art.

We just also happen to like killing criminals to death.

As to this specific proposal, we are opposed to it, although we'd be open to something more general on sharing "Most Wanted" criminals, and will in general support proposals targetting international crimes and criminals. This, at present, remains something under the jurisdiction of national law enforcement.

~Rono Pyandran
Chief of Staff

Actualy if I had defined a prisioner I actualy would have counted rehabilitation. My nation uses it partialy. About death why would you collect finger-prints or DN A for a person who is going to be killed anyway.

As to this specific proposal, we are opposed to it, although we'd be open to something more general on sharing "Most Wanted" criminals, and will in general support proposals targetting international crimes and criminals. This, at present, remains something under the jurisdiction of national law enforcement.

This proposal in itself I don't think I would support(I don't think it is made well enough) but the general idea of sharing figer-print and DNA information sharing I do.

A global information sharing system beetween police forces would be a good thing. This system would take all figer-print and DNA samples(and other important criminal information like tested guns, toe prints etc) that are done anyway by governments and distribute them to all UN nations. This of course would have to be made properly but If made well I think would be a very good resolution.

Actualy if I had defined a prisioner I actualy would have counted rehabilitation. My nation uses it partialy. About death why would you collect finger-prints or DN A for a person who is going to be killed anyway.
In case they escape, maybe?

In case they escape, maybe?

Also as morbid as this might sound, to verify that the body that comes in after execution might be the same as the body that went into execution. It might not be used in practice, but is probably a good failsafe. *shrug*

My nation uses it partialy. About death why would you collect finger-prints or DN A for a person who is going to be killed anyway.


Also, in case the body that comes in after execution subsequently gets up and walks away...

Also, in case the body that comes in after execution subsequently gets up and walks away...

Zombie! Gah!

http://www.bumpinthenightproductions.com/items/Zombie%204.jpg

Also, in case the body that comes in after execution subsequently gets up and walks away...

We need to bring back the Zombie Fratenization Act from years ago ... and put those necromancers under check!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/zombiehack.jpg

GRR. ARGH.