NationStates Jolt Archive


Police funding issues: Police weaponry

Themlight
29-03-2006, 19:20
After a recent increase in violent crime, the @@NAME@@ Police Force is demanding improved weaponry and body armor to be issued to every officer on the force. Several respected people have offered their ideas for the matter.

The Debate

1. "We need to increase spending in non lethal weaponry like tazers." says ex police patrolman turned Senate @@RANDOMNAME@@, "When i was on vacation, I saw very little crime, and all police i saw were armed with tazers. I hear that in rare situations they can do damage to people with heart conditions, but then that will make them think twice about commiting a crime in the first place. Plus, tazers are cheaper then other non lethal weaponry and safer then pistols."
[effect]Crime is reduced, but their is an decrease in hospital beds due to patents suffering reactions to the tazer shocks.

2. "Tazers? Ha, just what we need, police armed with often dangerous weaponry." exlamins Dr. @@RANDOMNAME@@, the head of @@NAME@@'s Advanced Research Institue, "What we need is more research into ADS Microwave Pistols, they may be expensive, but they do not cause perminant when used. Their may be some problems if ADS hits a targets eyes, but we've never tested that theory."
[effect]Crime is severly reduced, but their is an increase in eye injuries.

3. "Those are the worst idea I've ever heard!" clamors @@RANDOMNAME@@, The @@NAME@@ police comisioner. "Guns with car batterys attached? Portable microwaves as weapons? Hah! In my days on patrol, things were different. People respected the man on the beat. Now, it's a bunch of ill manered thugs who see the police as a joke. If we gave the patrol officer permission to use his or her batrons against trouble makers, the police might regain that lost respect. What's a few head injuries here and their when it would save our nation thousands in @@CURRENCY@@. As our forefathers said, @@SLOGAN@@"
[effect]Police funds are decreased, and crime is reduced. Severe head trauma is the number one cause of injury treated at the hospitals
Emperor Matthuis
30-03-2006, 11:04
After a recent increase in violent crime, the @@NAME@@ Police Force is demanding improved weaponry and body armor to be issued to every officer on the force. Several respected people have offered their ideas for the matter.

The Debate

1. "We need to increase spending in non lethal weaponry like tazers." says ex police patrolman turned Senate @@RANDOMNAME@@, "When i was on vacation, I saw very little crime, and all police i saw were armed with tazers. I hear that in rare situations they can do damage to people with heart conditions, but then that will make them think twice about commiting a crime in the first place. Plus, tazers are cheaper then other non lethal weaponry and safer then pistols."
[effect]Crime is reduced, but their is an decrease in hospital beds due to patents suffering reactions to the tazer shocks.

2. "Tazers? Ha, just what we need, police armed with often dangerous weaponry." exlamins Dr. @@RANDOMNAME@@, the head of @@NAME@@'s Advanced Research Institue, "What we need is more research into ADS Microwave Pistols, they may be expensive, but they do not cause perminant when used. Their may be some problems if ADS hits a targets eyes, but we've never tested that theory."
[effect]Crime is severly reduced, but their is an increase in eye injuries.

3. "Those are the worst idea I've ever heard!" clamors @@RANDOMNAME@@, The @@NAME@@ police comisioner. "Guns with car batterys attached? Portable microwaves as weapons? Hah! In my days on patrol, things were different. People respected the man on the beat. Now, it's a bunch of ill manered thugs who see the police as a joke. If we gave the patrol officer permission to use his or her batrons against trouble makers, the police might regain that lost respect. What's a few head injuries here and their when it would save our nation thousands in @@CURRENCY@@. As our forefathers said, @@SLOGAN@@"
[effect]Police funds are decreased, and crime is reduced. Severe head trauma is the number one cause of injury treated at the hospitals

Firstly I would remove the word several in the description as there are only 3 options. Also it mentions that they want armour in the description but then there is no mention of it in any of the options. I'm also not sure whether having the motto in the last issue makes any sense? It might work if it was a patriot but a Police Commissioner? (which by yhe way you spelt wrong)

However I thought it was a reasonably good issue but wasn't sure whether it was too similiar to issue #98, which on a very similiar topic.
Swilatia
30-03-2006, 13:25
poorly written. I thin your mistaking the effect section (what is added to your nationpage for choosing a option) for the stats section (How the choice actually affescts your Nations Statistics.
Themlight
30-03-2006, 16:06
Firstly I would remove the word several in the description as there are only 3 options. Also it mentions that they want armour in the description but then there is no mention of it in any of the options. I'm also not sure whether having the motto in the last issue makes any sense? It might work if it was a patriot but a Police Commissioner? (which by yhe way you spelt wrong)

However I thought it was a reasonably good issue but wasn't sure whether it was too similiar to issue #98, which on a very similiar topic.

I was thinking of my own nations motto when i wrote that, which is "We came, we saw, we kicked their ass!"

About spelling, can't be helped if i don't have a spell checker can it? Well, i could look it up, but i'm too lazy. This whole issue thing is due to the fact that the proposal i wrote for the UN, a one i spent weeks working on, was deemed illegal, without a good explanation other then "Read the rules." *squark* "read the rules" *squark* "Polly wants a cracker!"
Gruenberg
30-03-2006, 20:50
I was thinking of my own nations motto when i wrote that, which is "We came, we saw, we kicked their ass!"

About spelling, can't be helped if i don't have a spell checker can it? Well, i could look it up, but i'm too lazy. This whole issue thing is due to the fact that the proposal i wrote for the UN, a one i spent weeks working on, was deemed illegal, without a good explanation other then "Read the rules." *squark* "read the rules" *squark* "Polly wants a cracker!"
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10527783&postcount=2
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10527835&postcount=3
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10562270&postcount=11
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10573425&postcount=13
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10573507&postcount=15
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10583611&postcount=24
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10583626&postcount=25
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10630686&postcount=33
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10632797&postcount=40
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10633714&postcount=45
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10644820&postcount=55
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10647882&postcount=58
Themlight
30-03-2006, 23:11
are you friggin stalking me or something?
St Edmund
01-04-2006, 12:49
How about adding a fourth option, proposed by an ageing hippy, to disarm the police completely?
Themlight
01-04-2006, 18:50
nice idea that last one.