[PASSED] Repeal "Convention on Execution"

[Imperium Anglorum]

Why wouldn't Glen-Rhodes post as--well, you know--Glen-Rhodes?

OOC: Not if they prefer to use the puppet Sandaoguo these days. This is no different than TDSR posting as West Rhetntukentekanenenanland or whatever it was.

OOC: Wasn't it East Renutabikipapaioasteroidland?

[Wallenburg]

Does Barack Obama sound IC to you? Were there quotes around my post? Was my post marked IC?

OOC: You were responding to an IC post and you didn't mark your response OOC.

What IC post?

[Wallenburg]

OOC: Not if they prefer to use the puppet Sandaoguo these days. This is no different than TDSR posting as West Rhetntukentekanenenanland or whatever it was.

OOC: Wasn't it East Renutabikipapaioasteroidland?

OOC: Neither of those nations exist.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Wasn't it East Renutabikipapaioasteroidland?

OOC: Neither of those nations exist.

OOC: Of course not, I wasn't spelling it correctly. I don't know what the correct spelling is. But it was recognized as a TDSR puppet. Nobody insisted he post as Quintessence of Dust to prove it.

[Kaboomlandia]

OOC: Neither of those nations exist.

OOC: Of course not, I wasn't spelling it correctly. I don't know what the correct spelling is. But it was recognized as a TDSR puppet. Nobody insisted he post as Quintessence of Dust to prove it.

OOC: The nation was "Schutzenphalia and West Ruhntuhnkuhnland".

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Sure you are, and I'm Barack Obama.

"Who is this Barack Obama you speak of, ambassador? Is that your name?"

Knock this shit off. This is a debate, not hardcore RP. You either understand the point he was making, or you don't. Distracting everyone with meta nonsense is completely off-point.

[Imperium Anglorum]

"Who is this Barack Obama you speak of, ambassador? Is that your name?"

Knock this shit off. This is a debate, not hardcore RP. You either understand the point he was making, or you don't. Distracting everyone with meta nonsense is completely off-point.

^ This. I want to quote this every time when people pull this crap in the middle of GA threads.

[Potted Plants United]

A large potted plant in a big plantpot with wheels suddenly comes to life, revealing a large leaf curled up to form a cone, from which a somewhat hissing voice can be heard:

"As the subject matter does not apply to our selves - us killing one of our selves would be akin to, say, mister Bell cutting his hair, which he probably should do every now and then - we have decided to not partake this vote. Future legislation on the subject matter will also be a non-issue to our selves, so it is very likely we will excuse our selves from those votes¹ as well."

¹OOC: That doesn't mean I might not vote on them purely for OOC reasons.

[Ovybia]

"Who is this Barack Obama you speak of, ambassador? Is that your name?"

Knock this shit off. This is a debate, not hardcore RP. You either understand the point he was making, or you don't. Distracting everyone with meta nonsense is completely off-point.

Unfortunately for me, it was a failed attempt at humor. I always see others doing this to me and I thought I'd give them a taste of their own medicine. Why did the ball have to drop the one time I try it?

This was all OOC, by the way.

[Europe and Oceania]

Knock this shit off. This is a debate, not hardcore RP. You either understand the point he was making, or you don't. Distracting everyone with meta nonsense is completely off-point.

Unfortunately for me, it was a failed attempt at humor. I always see others doing this to me and I thought I'd give them a taste of their own medicine. Why did the ball have to drop the one time I try it?

This was all OOC, by the way.

lol.

[Railana]

Glad to see this is passing. Best of luck!

Joseph Fulton
Chief Ambassador, Railanan Mission to the World Assembly

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Knock this shit off. This is a debate, not hardcore RP. You either understand the point he was making, or you don't. Distracting everyone with meta nonsense is completely off-point.

Unfortunately for me, it was a failed attempt at humor. I always see others doing this to me and I thought I'd give them a taste of their own medicine. Why did the ball have to drop the one time I try it?

This was all OOC, by the way.

Ah. Cheerfully withdrawn then.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Glad to see this is passing.

Yes, it is. Unfortunately, it's because many nations assume the endgame for this repeal is the removal of restrictions on capital punishment, not imposing more of them.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Glad to see this is passing.

Yes, it is. Unfortunately, it's because many nations assume the endgame for this repeal is the removal of restrictions on capital punishment, not imposing more of them.

May I say for the 1000th time, I agree with Kenny completely?

[Wrapper]

Yes, it is. Unfortunately, it's because many nations assume the endgame for this repeal is the removal of restrictions on capital punishment, not imposing more of them.

May I say for the 1000th time, I agree with Kenny completely?

No.

*sigh*

Okay, we'll allow it. This time.

Kenny is right, of course. You've got both ends of the spectrum teaming up to repeal this. Nearly half of them will be sorely disappointed later. I have a feeling I'm in that camp, but we'll see.

[Crabius]

Aren't this "improvement" of convention will intervene internal affairs of nation in every case when "death sentence is too harsh"? And how will you measure "harshness"?

[Christian Democrats]

Glad to see this is passing.

Yes, it is. Unfortunately, it's because many nations assume the endgame for this repeal is the removal of restrictions on capital punishment, not imposing more of them.

According to Resolution 122, Read the Resolution Act, nations are required to read this proposal before they vote on it. This proposal makes it clear that the final aim is "to limit the crimes to which member states may apply capital punishment."

Aren't this "improvement" of convention will intervene internal affairs of nation in every case when "death sentence is too harsh"? And how will you measure "harshness"?

Repeal proposals can't legislate. A future resolution will have to determine which sorts of executions are permitted and prohibited. There are several replacements being drafted in this forum as we speak. I suspect that they'll be submitted within a few hours of this repeal proposal's passage.

[Rellacrystal]

While the nation of Rellacrystal does not engage in the use of execution, we have decided to vote against this repeal because it denies certain countries the right to follow customs, traditions, etc. or more intense laws.

[Christian Democrats]

While the nation of Rellacrystal does not engage in the use of execution, we have decided to vote against this repeal because it denies certain countries the right to follow customs, traditions, etc. or more intense laws.

Surely, a custom of killing people unjustly ought to be abolished.

[Araraukar]

killing people unjustly

"Unjustly" implies "without justice", yet if someone has had a fair trial and has been found guilty beyond any doubt, and has then been condemned to death, then as they justly die, justice will have been served. If you instead mean "unfairly", if that someone is a murderer, they have already "unfairly" taken a life, and thus have forfeited their own.

Unless you'd also wish to stop anyone killing another in wars too? Those are, are they not, "unjust" deaths as well? Especially as those who die due to the actions of another soldier, are unlikely to have received a fair trial before their death.

[Imperium Anglorum]

While the nation of Rellacrystal does not engage in the use of execution, we have decided to vote against this repeal because it denies certain countries the right to follow customs, traditions, etc. or more intense laws.

Surely, a custom of killing people unjustly ought to be abolished.

Imprisoning murderers is unjust.

[Araraukar]

Imprisoning murderers is unjust.

Even more generally the society having to upkeep someone who has thrown the society's rules aside to commit illegal acts, is unjust. Especially if it was for the rest of their natural lifespan.

[Christian Democrats]

killing people unjustly

"Unjustly" implies "without justice", yet if someone has had a fair trial and has been found guilty beyond any doubt, and has then been condemned to death, then as they justly die, justice will have been served.

It is unjust to impose a disproportionate punishment on someone.

[Imperium Anglorum]

"Unjustly" implies "without justice", yet if someone has had a fair trial and has been found guilty beyond any doubt, and has then been condemned to death, then as they justly die, justice will have been served.

It is unjust to impose a disproportionate punishment on someone.

Exactly. That is why Kant believes murders must be executed.

[Christian Democrats]

It is unjust to impose a disproportionate punishment on someone.

Exactly. That is why Kant believes murders must be executed.

Okay. If you're a Kantian, you should support this repeal and, then, a replacement that bans capital punishment in all cases but murder.