NationStates Jolt Archive


Modified ideas for changing the country

Multiland
17-12-2006, 20:53
This is a modified version (based on feedback) of some of my ideas for changing the country of England if I was Prime Minister.

What's your view on these?

Note: Where a number has a letter next to it (eg. '7a'), the letter means 'amendment'. They're just SOME ideas. Please provide reasons for responses, thanks.

Naturally I can't please all of the people all of the time, so whilst all points of feedback have been read and considered, not all ideas have been modified or deleted based on feedback.

SEXUAL VIOLENCE

1. Introduce the following sentences for rape:
(a) First offence: 20 years, 10 years for pleading guilty early
(b) Second offence: Life imprisonment
1a. Modify the Sexual Offences Act to define rape as ‘a forced sexual act where person A (the perpetrator) causes person B (the victim) to engage in sexual intercourse with person A against person B’s consent, regardless of the genders of those involved. ‘Sexual intercourse’ to be defined as ‘any act which involves penetration of the vagina or anus with the penis’
1b. Make it no longer illegal for a 16-year-old to have sex with a person who is only a few years younger (will no longer be classed as Statutory Rape if consensual)
1c. Change legislation so that, if new evidence is found, a person can be tried again for the same offence
2. Create a sexual violence awareness campaign (start with one for female victims, then one for male victims)
3. Relax the rules that need to be met before a sexual violence case can go to trial:
(a) No need for two collaborating pieces of evidence
(b) Where a person has claimed to have been raped by their spouse and their spouse admits to sex but claims it was consensual and there is no evidence suggesting the truth or falsity of this, the case must go to trial – otherwise the law against spousal rape become pointless as the accused can simply claim it was consensual and avoid trial in every case
4. Make it easier for victims to report sexual violence and to have a fair trial:
(a) Sexual history to be disallowed (except for previous false accusations)
(b) Jury to be made up of 50% men and 50% women
(c) Foreman of the jury to be selected based on nothing more than impartiality and based on having no previous sexual violence (this definition to include rape) accusations against him/her
(d) Specialist prosecutors to be used
(e) Provide training for a senior member of each police force (who is then to pass it on to the rest of the team) about dealing with sexual violence attacks, to include training relating to both male and female sexual violence

YOUTH-RELATED CRIMES

5. Throwing bricks at a bus will result first in a caution plus a formal warning about what will happen it the incident or a similar incident reoccurs, then one week in a police cell – both to be coupled with a “Knowledge and Action” campaign (KAC) to find out why teenagers are behaving badly and to take action: KAC Headquarters to be informed of all brick-throwing-at-buses-related arrests.
6. Build more police cells
7. Build more prisons
7a. Riding/driving an off-road motor vehicle on the road will result in a formal warning (including notification that a repeat incident will result in the following) then a repeat incident will result in immediate confiscation of the vehicle
7b. Riding/driving on public land, a motor vehicle that has been designed for use on private land, will result in a formal warning (including notification that a repeat incident will result in the following) then a repeat incident will result in immediate confiscation of the vehicle
7c. Deliberate intimidation to result in a caution then community service then a few days in a police cell
7d. Antisocial Behaviour Orders (‘ASBO’s) to be scrapped – they perhaps work brilliantly for the area where they are enforced, but the problem is effectively just moved on to a different area – could be moved on to YOUR area. They are also seen as worthy of ‘street cred’ (but Dispersal Orders to be kept)


HEALTH

8. Consult with the Royal College of Nursing and with individual nurses
9. Provide more funding specifically allocated for specific expenditure (e.g. medical supplies, beds, etc.)
10. Get rid of targets
11. Speak to individual patients about the quality of care received
12. Re-open hospitals, refurbish them
12a Make further decisions based on the above consultations

ENVIRONMENT

13. Set a specific date for companies to only be using as much packaging as is necessary to seal a product and to maintain the freshness of the product
14. ALL forms of energy to be seriously considered, but only the safest environmentally-friendly method will be used – this almost certainly rules out nuclear due to safety issues, but it will still be seriously considered
15. More bicycle lanes to be created
16. All bicycles lanes, where possible, to be separate from bus lanes
17. Recycling bins with clear information to be introduced into every major city

ANIMAL WELFARE

18. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) will be required to investigate every report of animal suffering, unless there is good evidence that the report is a hoax
19. The RSPCA must press for charges (and prosecuted if the person is charged) where a person is discovered to be guilty (or likely to be guilty) of causing animal suffering
20. Maximum sentence for causing animal suffering to be 3 years imprisonment (plus lifetime ban on keeping animals, plus £10,000 fine) and minimum sentence for causing severe suffering to be 1½ years plus lifetime ban on keeping animals plus £500 fine. Breach of a ban to result in further 2 years imprisonment.
21. RSPCA and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and other animal welfare organisations to work more closely together
22. Law to make killing of a healthy animal illegal (currently seems to be legal for certain organisations to kill a healthy animal), save for food which is in common consumption in the UK (beef, pork, etc.) and save for halting severe suffering where medical attention would be unable to do so
23. Extra space required for farm animals
24. Sufficient access to the outside environment required for farm animals, provided in such a way that animals do not have to compete to gain access
25. Illegal to inject animals with drugs unless necessary for medical purposes or for genuine health reasons
26. Foxhunting to be made completely illegal
27. Vegetarian and vegan awareness campaigns, in that order

SOCIAL WELFARE

28. Social Services management to be retrained (who are then to pass the training onto lower-level staff)
29. Social Services around the country must share important information relating to cases of harm and potential cases of harm (in a confidential manner), so long as it does not compromise the safe carrying out of their duties
30. Each care home and foster home to have at least 5 random spontaneous inspections each year, and must include private talks with residents (children / elderly people)
31. Police forces around the country must share important information relating to cases of harm and potential cases of harm (in a confidential manner), so long as it does not compromise the safe carrying out of their duties
32. Police, Social Services, and National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) to work together
33. More specialist beds to be created for under-16s runaways, plus clear advertising of such places
34. More beds for homeless people in general, plus clear advertising of assistance available to homeless people
35. More beds for those suffering from, or who are at risk from domestic violence – separate facilities for males and females.
36. More gender-specific support for male victims of domestic violence / sexual violence
37. More gender specific support for female victims of sexual violence

GENERAL

38. Where a person is arrested for committing a crime, their mental capacity is to be seriously considered if there is evidence that they have a mental disorder. Where evidence clearly suggests that the crime was committed due to the mental disorder, the sentence is to be reduced to one week imprisonment for serious crimes and Community Service for other crimes. At the discretion of the victim, the perpetrator may receive no punishment whatsoever.

FUNDING: Funding for 27 to be sourced solely from personal income, not taxpayers.

Funding for other numbers to be sourced from:
• Money saved by not introducing an I.D. Card scheme (there is one in Spain, it didn’t prevent the Madrid train attack and there is no real evidence that an I.D. Card does anything more than allows a government to spy on law-abiding citizens – people have sneaked into the UK without I.D., an I.D. Card scheme won’t prevent people sneaking in – and someone who wants to blow people up does not need idea, they simply set off a bomb in a street)
• Lotto Money
• Money diverted from agriculture spending
• Money diverted from defence spending without affecting the UK’s security by bringing troops back from places where they are no longer needed
• Money gained from recovering the majority of the millions of unpaid fines that exist
• Money that is already specifically allocated for each of the above categories – see http://budget2006.treasury.gov.uk/page_09.html
• Personal income

NOTES: The reason for a female-specific sexual violence campaign before a male-specific campaign is because there are still many people who see rape of women as being acceptable in certain circumstances, hence the need for a campaign – however, there are many people who see it as wrong, hence it would likely be a shorter campaign than a male-specific campaign. Once it has been ingrained that rape of females is wrong under any circumstances, a campaign will begin showing the effects of male-on-male and female-on-male rape.

ASBOs do not criminalise behaviour. They are given in response to behaviour that is already criminal, and basically say “do not do this thing that is already illegal or you will be punished for it”. They also move people from one area to another, moving the problem around. If you have suddenly received loads of criminals in your area, there is a good chance they have been moved to your area because of ASBOs banning them from their previous area. They are also seen as a ‘must-have’, a kind of accessory that encourages people to commit crimes.

The benefit to the country for vegetarian and vegan campaigns is valid (but I will not explain as this will likely turn into a for/against vegetarianism/veganism debate) but even if such campaigns would not benefit the country, that is, in my opinion, irrelevant as it would be paid for out of personal funds instead of tax.

I don’t think I’d be able to announce putting taxes up for the rich, as they unfortunately have a lot of power and I would need to become Prime Minister before I could strip them of it, and putting up their taxes alone may mean they refuse to vote for me.

For the purpose of these ideas, ‘police cells’ means the cells in police stations, ‘prisons’ means purpose built prison facilities designed to house people long-term.
RLI Rides Again
17-12-2006, 20:57
Fixed sentences are bad.
Multiland
17-12-2006, 21:01
Fixed sentences are bad.

But necessary in the UK unfortunately, as otherwise, as has happened far too many times, judges who are extremely out of touch with society give ridiculous sentences such as 6 months imprisonment for repeated rape of a 6 year old child
RLI Rides Again
17-12-2006, 21:01
But necessary in the UK unfortunately, as otherwise, as has happened far too many times, judges who are extremely out of touch with society give ridiculous sentences such as 6 months imprisonment for repeated rape of a 6 year old child

Really? Do you have a link to that case?
Multiland
17-12-2006, 21:05
Really? Do you have a link to that case?

Not right now but I have a link to an equally ridiculous sentence (2 and a half years for sickening sex acts on a TWELVE-WEEK-OLD baby). http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article799552.ece (In the UK, prisoners often only serve half their sentence)
RLI Rides Again
17-12-2006, 21:09
Not right now but I have a link to an equally ridiculous sentence (2 and a half years for sickening sex acts on a TWELVE-WEEK-OLD baby). http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article799552.ece (In the UK, prisoners often only serve half their sentence)

The link says he got a minimum of 8 years (6 plus 2 on appeal). :confused:

It's standard practice to give accomplices frequently get far more lenient sentences than the actual criminal, who got about 16 years in this case.

EDIT: got to go now, back later
Multiland
17-12-2006, 21:16
The link says he got a minimum of 8 years (6 plus 2 on appeal). :confused:

It's standard practice to give accomplices frequently get far more lenient sentences than the actual criminal, who got about 16 years in this case.

EDIT: got to go now, back later

They were BOTH directly and deliberately involved in the sexual offences. The judge gave a lower sentence to French because she was 'led on' - which is like saying that if Person A tells Person B to murder someone, and Person B decides to do it our of their own free will, he/she should get a lower sentence because they were "led on"!

French was given five years but could be out after half of that - 2 and a half years.

and I don't know where you plucked the "16 years" figure from - Webster got supposed life (which often does not mean actual life and actually just means the minimum laid down, which in this case is 8 years on appeal, which means he is likely to be out after just 4 years - 4 years for performing brutal sexual acts on a kid who's not even half a year old, sickening).
Call to power
17-12-2006, 21:27
4 years for performing brutal sexual acts on a kid who's not even half a year old, sickening).

you do know that:

1) he won't be let out if he is still considered a danger to society
2) he will get help in prison
3) 4 years is a very long time
Multiland
17-12-2006, 21:35
you do know that:

1) he won't be let out if he is still considered a danger to society
2) he will get help in prison
3) 4 years is a very long time

I know of those theories, and I know the following:

1) Sex offenders have been let out of prison numerous times before, who have then gone on to re-offend
2) Due to 1, obviously the 'help' offered doesn't work
3) 4 years is a very short time for what the child suffered. By the time the child is 4 years old, the man who hurt her so much will likely be out of prison. By the time she's 2 and a half, the woman who hurt her so much will likely be free. 4 years is NOTHING for destroying a person's life - are you saying taht 4 years is reasonable for murder too? Both destroys life, one causes continuous suffering for a long time (often for life) even AFTER the act has been comitted.
Call to power
17-12-2006, 21:45
1) Sex offenders have been let out of prison numerous times before, who have then gone on to re-offend

re-offending is allot rarer than the Sun will have you believe

2) Due to 1, obviously the 'help' offered doesn't work

so your going to lock someone in a cage for a few years and expect them to change to someone from la la happy land (again burn Sun newspapers)

3) 4 years is a very short time for what the child suffered. By the time the child is 4 years old, the man who hurt her so much will likely be out of prison. By the time she's 2 and a half, the woman who hurt her so much will likely be free. 4 years is NOTHING for destroying a person's life - are you saying taht 4 years is reasonable for murder too? Both destroys life, one causes continuous suffering for a long time (often for life) even AFTER the act has been comitted.

were not in the business of retribution I will have to inform you justice is about protecting society (and seriously stop reading the sun and the mirror in fact stay away from news altogether)
RLI Rides Again
17-12-2006, 21:48
They were BOTH directly and deliberately involved in the sexual offences. The judge gave a lower sentence to French because she was 'led on' - which is like saying that if Person A tells Person B to murder someone, and Person B decides to do it our of their own free will, he/she should get a lower sentence because they were "led on"!

French was given five years but could be out after half of that - 2 and a half years.

and I don't know where you plucked the "16 years" figure from - Webster got supposed life (which often does not mean actual life and actually just means the minimum laid down, which in this case is 8 years on appeal, which means he is likely to be out after just 4 years - 4 years for performing brutal sexual acts on a kid who's not even half a year old, sickening).

Surely 'a minimum of eight years' means eight years before there's a chance to appeal for parole, or have I got completely the wrong end of the stick?
New Burmesia
17-12-2006, 21:50
This is a modified version (based on feedback) of some of my ideas for changing the country of England if I was Prime Minister.
There's, at least legally, no country called England, let alone a Prime Minister of England.

Thought I'd point that out.:D
Multiland
17-12-2006, 21:58
There's, at least legally, no country called England, let alone a Prime Minister of England.

Thought I'd point that out.:D

There is a country called England. Legally there is no Prime Minister of England though, but Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland already have some legal differences (eg. slapping kids is illegal in Scotland) so I didn't want to get muddled up with their laws for the time being.

so your going to lock someone in a cage for a few years and expect them to change to someone from la la happy land (again burn Sun newspapers)

No - which is why I would have them locked up for a LOT of years, with the possibility of a much worse sentence if they re-offend, thus providing some form of deterrent.

were not in the business of retribution I will have to inform you justice is about protecting society (and seriously stop reading the sun and the mirror in fact stay away from news altogether)

True, but considering what has happened to the victim, its important to TRY to ensure taht they feel that justice has been done, and it is important to ensure that the person can't leave prison after a really short amount of time to attack the person again (and threaten further attacks if the victim reports them, safe in the knowledge that they will likely again be released after a short amount of time - that's not justice, it's 'all criminals should have every single right respected over the safety of the public bullshit')

Surely 'a minimum of eight years' means eight years before there's a chance to appeal for parole, or have I got completely the wrong end of the stick?

You're right - but as stated, parole is too often granted for violent offenders. I think I'll submit an FOI Act request to find out the exact number - who's best to send it to?
New Burmesia
17-12-2006, 22:10
There is a country called England. Legally there is no Prime Minister of England though, but Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland already have some legal differences (eg. slapping kids is illegal in Scotland) so I didn't want to get muddled up with their laws for the time being.
I said legally.
Multiland
17-12-2006, 22:12
I said legally.

Good for you. :)

And yes there is.
Call to power
17-12-2006, 22:14
No - which is why I would have them locked up for a LOT of years, with the possibility of a much worse sentence if they re-offend, thus providing some form of deterrent.

deterrent hasn't worked and it never will do we have been to the stage where you could be hung for everything and back again seriously we teach this in school where the fuck have you been?


True, but considering what has happened to the victim, its important to TRY to ensure taht they feel that justice has been done,

no its not its only important for them to feel the system works

and it is important to ensure that the person can't leave prison after a really short amount of time to attack the person again

lol yes criminals run mafia like organizations that track down and kill people :rolleyes:


it's 'all criminals should have every single right respected over the safety of the public bullshit')

where did you hear that one a BNP meeting maybe?

You're right - but as stated, parole is too often granted for violent offenders.

oh noez teh ebil men on probation will get me!!!!

I think I'll submit an FOI Act request to find out the exact number - who's best to send it to?

HM prison service

Here are some fun filled sites to do they helped me with my GCSE and they can help you too!:

http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/revision/crime.shtml
http://www.activehistory.co.uk/Miscellaneous/menus/GCSE/Crime_and_Punishment.htm
http://www.thinkhistory.btinternet.co.uk/gcsepolicing.htm (you will like that one its on the police!)
Call to power
17-12-2006, 22:15
Good for you. :)

And yes there is.

please point out the sovereign nation of England (yes I used to tease Scottish people about this) legally the U.K is divided into states we call them country because of tradition
The Mindset
17-12-2006, 22:20
1a. Modify the Sexual Offences Act to define rape as ‘a forced sexual act where person A (the perpetrator) causes person B (the victim) to engage in sexual intercourse with person A against person B’s consent, regardless of the genders of those involved. ‘Sexual intercourse’ to be defined as ‘any act which involves penetration of the vagina or anus with the penis’

So lesbians can't rape each other then, no? Your system sucks.
Multiland
18-12-2006, 10:39
So lesbians can't rape each other then, no? Your system sucks.

Good point. I'll change it and respond to the other stuff later.
Greater Valia
18-12-2006, 10:52
Throwing bricks at a bus will result first in a caution plus a formal warning about what will happen it the incident or a similar incident reoccurs, then one week in a police cell – both to be coupled with a “Knowledge and Action” campaign (KAC) to find out why teenagers are behaving badly and to take action: KAC Headquarters to be informed of all brick-throwing-at-buses-related arrests.

I found it interesting that "throwing bricks at a bus" was specifically mentioned. Tell me, is this sort of thing a problem where you live?
Multiland
18-12-2006, 10:54
I found it interesting that "throwing bricks at a bus" was specifically mentioned. Tell me, is this sort of thing a problem where you live?

two words: Visit. Salford.
New Burmesia
18-12-2006, 12:04
Good for you. :)

And yes there is.
No there isn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England#Politics
http://www.thecep.org.uk/questions.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Union_1707
http://www.englishconstitutionalconvention.com/
Compulsive Depression
18-12-2006, 12:10
I think your suggestions are unnecessarily complicated and also overly specific.

I don't like basing things on accusations. I can accuse you of raping my sister right here, but it doesn't mean anything.
I also don't like the idea of taking people to trial without much evidence. You don't want to reach the point where anyone can accuse anyone of raping them for giggles/vengeance and then it's up to a jury whether they get convicted or not.

Vegetarian and vegan awareness campaigns are a waste of time; everybody's aware of them. We know what they are. And nobody goes around force-feeding veal and foie gras to vegans. So why?

I also strongly disagree with you about fox-hunting, and nuclear power's the best we've got at the moment.

So, in short, you wouldn't get my vote ;)
Myseneum
18-12-2006, 14:56
This is a modified version (based on feedback) of some of my ideas for changing the country of England if I was Prime Minister.

Still taking my vast personal wealth and numerous corporate holdings out of England to a nation that hold personal liberties and freedom to a higher standard.

England can't tax what it doesn't have.

The benefit to the country for vegetarian and vegan campaigns is valid (but I will not explain as this will likely turn into a for/against vegetarianism/veganism debate)

Too late.

It is not government's affair to promote any such social program, regardless of its - in this case, zero - value.

I wonder why it is that humans have canine teeth?

Must be for especially tough bits of bark...

I don’t think I’d be able to announce putting taxes up for the rich, as they unfortunately have a lot of power and I would need to become Prime Minister before I could strip them of it, and putting up their taxes alone may mean they refuse to vote for me.

Yes, the true path to enlightened government - hidden agendas; secrets held back from the people; campaigns run on lies.

What did the rich do to deserve this singular punishment? Is success a crime in your dreamworld?
Peepelonia
18-12-2006, 15:00
But necessary in the UK unfortunately, as otherwise, as has happened far too many times, judges who are extremely out of touch with society give ridiculous sentences such as 6 months imprisonment for repeated rape of a 6 year old child

Shit man, Judges arte sooooo out of touch with modern Britain any way. I was at a trial a while back just sitting in the public gallery, the judge must have been about 70, and the trial was about stolen xmas pudding, heh a lorry load of the,

Anyhow during the course of the tirla the judge had to have expl;ained to him what certian swear words that popped up in the evidance meant. Shit in including the phrase fuck off. I mean fuck off?, it sorta says it all by itself.
Multiland
18-12-2006, 18:58
Still taking my vast personal wealth and numerous corporate holdings out of England to a nation that hold personal liberties and freedom to a higher standard.

England can't tax what it doesn't have.



Too late.

It is not government's affair to promote any such social program, regardless of its - in this case, zero - value.

I wonder why it is that humans have canine teeth?

Must be for especially tough bits of bark...



Yes, the true path to enlightened government - hidden agendas; secrets held back from the people; campaigns run on lies.

What did the rich do to deserve this singular punishment? Is success a crime in your dreamworld?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!

NOTE TO BLIND AND IGNORANT PEOPLE: WE DO NOT HAVE CANINE TEETH! IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME, TRY BITING INTO A LIVE LION WITHOUT THE USE OF TOOLS!
The Mindset
18-12-2006, 19:04
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!

NOTE TO BLIND AND IGNORANT PEOPLE: WE DO NOT HAVE CANINE TEETH! IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME, TRY BITING INTO A LIVE LION WITHOUT THE USE OF TOOLS!

Sorry baby, but we do. Claiming otherwise is simply claiming ignorance to further your cause. We in fact have two separate sets of canine teeth: the maxillary and the mandibular canines.
Multiland
22-12-2006, 15:32
Sorry baby, but we do. Claiming otherwise is simply claiming ignorance to further your cause. We in fact have two separate sets of canine teeth: the maxillary and the mandibular canines.


canine: adjective relating to or resembling a dog (Oxford English Dictionary)

We are not designed to eat meat no matter how much you want to believe it, as being designed to eat meat would mean we'd easily be able to kill animals such as cows without weapons or any other man-made implement - for example, we'd be able to kill them with our teeth. Lions kill their prey by biting their throats - you try that on a cow it'll probably stamp on you.

We do NOT have canine teeth.
The Pictish Revival
22-12-2006, 15:54
canine: adjective relating to or resembling a dog (Oxford English Dictionary)

Yes, they're known as canine teeth because they resemble a dog's teeth.


We are not designed to eat meat no matter how much you want to believe it, as being designed to eat meat would mean we'd easily be able to kill animals such as cows without weapons or any other man-made implement.

Poodles are carnivorous. How easily can they kill cows?
Greyenivol Colony
22-12-2006, 16:16
But necessary in the UK unfortunately, as otherwise, as has happened far too many times, judges who are extremely out of touch with society give ridiculous sentences such as 6 months imprisonment for repeated rape of a 6 year old child

Judges aren't MEANT to be in touch with society, they are meant to be in touch with the LAW!

Besides, there is no "country of England"...
Greyenivol Colony
22-12-2006, 16:27
Shit man, Judges arte sooooo out of touch with modern Britain any way. I was at a trial a while back just sitting in the public gallery, the judge must have been about 70, and the trial was about stolen xmas pudding, heh a lorry load of the,

Anyhow during the course of the tirla the judge had to have expl;ained to him what certian swear words that popped up in the evidance meant. Shit in including the phrase fuck off. I mean fuck off?, it sorta says it all by itself.

Umm, judges have to ask that for the record. Someone reading the law case in 2563 might not know what 'fuck off' means.