[PASSED] Repeal "First Responder Protection Act"

[Kidlantis]

OOC:In case no one has noticed, the act hasn't passed yet. A miracle can still happen in 3 hours, though I would doubt it and would be dismayed if it happened, as I voted for the act.

[Abacathea]

OOC:In case no one has noticed, the act hasn't passed yet. A miracle can still happen in 3 hours, though I would doubt it and would be dismayed if it happened, as I voted for the act.

4000 no votes in three hours minimum ha, when the regulars start talking like an act has passed around here, borrowing a miracle, they're usually right

[Idantir]

Yes. Agree. Support. Concur. FOR.

We support any and all efforts to repeal that abomination of a resolution. The day that it's done with can't come too soon.

[Tialait]

From the Desk of Argo fifth of the office,

We of the Commonwealth are in full support of any action to repeal an act that requires we spy on our own citizenry. Our full support behind this process, and we wish all the luck to complete this process with no interference.

While the Commonwealth does respect all healthcare workers, we feel as if this act simply went too far, and were dismayed to find it our first vote to be against it, and then to defeat it.

Signed,

Argo V

[Louisistan]

Special Ambassador Max Schneider smiles: Ambassador McGregor, although I share the sentiment, I'm afraid that adding your suggested clause might hurt our chances

As to the question whether this is an international issue: As you all may have noticed, the repeal contains a fluff-clause "HOPING that special protection can be given to first responders through future legislation without violating basic rights," - now this legislation could be national or international. I agree with the notion of The Two Jerseys ans Abacathea that the protection of first responders is not necessarily an international issue - as opposed to the protection of disaster relief workers operating internationally.

As such, we will consider, extending the FIRMLY BELIEVING clause as the Ambassador from The Two Jerseys suggested. However, this might lead to change or removal of the aforementioned fluff clause, to prevent any contradictions within the repeal argument.

Thank you.

//EDIT:
Would it be considered a House of Cards violation if we would include WAR#122 in our argument?

[San Leggera]

It might also be worth noting what was said here in the original resolution's debate.

[Louisistan]

Deputy Ambassador Roland Schulz: We have drawn up yet another draft of this repeal proposal. Again, changes are marked in red.

Repeal "First Responder Protection Act"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GAR #237| Proposed by: Louisistan

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #237: First Responder Protection Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: RECOGNIZING the important role first responders play in medical emergencies and their need for special protection,

ACKNOWLEDGING the laudable intention behind GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act",

HORRIFIED that GAR #237 does not respect basic rights such as the right not to be convicted twice for the same crime as well as the right for due process and trial, thus openly contradicting GAR #37 "Fairness in Criminal Trials",

APPALLED that the resolution bypasses national judiciary by requiring conviction without a trial,

IRRITATED by the micromanaging mandate of camera installations in ambulances,

CONCERNED that the resolution's description calls for "Medical personnel exclusively engaged in the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded and sick" to be "respected and protected in all circumstances", while "all circumstances" might include situations where First Responders may be unnecessary or even disruptive,

FIRMLY BELIEVING that the protection of First Responders is not a Human Right and indeed not an international issue and as such is not subject to oversight or regulation by the World Assembly,

DISAPPOINTED that a resolution was passed into international law by this body with such obvious flaws in both language and logic including - but not limited to -
1. A recursive definition of the term "First Responder",
2. The incorrect phrasing of definitions wherein the term to be defined is used as the subject of the sentence, rendering the definition essentially meaningless in the context of the resolution
3. Definition of a crime (physical abuse) which is not punished and punishment of a crime (assault) that is not defined within the scope of the resolution

SUSPECTING that a great number of nations who have voted for this resolution might have been in violation of GAR #122 "Read the Resolution Act"

HOPING that special protection can be given to first responders through national legislation without violating basic rights,

the WA General Assembly hereby REPEALS GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act" and ORDERS it be stricken from international law.

We are unsure as to whether or not the current draft violates the House of Cards rule (although in our understanding it does not). Maybe one of the more experienced ambassadors could clear this up for us. Otherwise we will have the secretariat review this.

OOC: Can I put links to GAR #122 and GAR #37 in the repeal argument or is that technically/legally not possible?
Also, I'm not sure about the GAR #122 argument, because theoretically it would not be possible with mandatory compliance and all....

[Alqania]

OOC: The House of Cards rule does not apply to repeals, since repeals can't legislate. All you'd be doing is referencing or quoting. On the other hand, the repeal mustn't claim that the target resolution is illegal, as that itself is an illegal repeal argument. For example, the words "openly contradicting [a resolution]" sounds like you're saying the target resolution is illegal for Contradiction, so you might have to reword that a bit vaguer to avoid the repeal being shot down by the mods.

[Flibbleites]

OOC: On the other hand, the repeal mustn't claim that the target resolution is illegal, as that itself is an illegal repeal argument. For example, the words "openly contradicting [a resolution]" sounds like you're saying the target resolution is illegal for Contradiction, so you might have to reword that a bit vaguer to avoid the repeal being shot down by the mods.

This. If I were you, I'd take a cue from Repeal "Max Barry Day" about how to word it.

[Louisistan]

Special Ambassador Max Schneider: I especially like that bit about kicking ambassadors in the nuts. We will, however, bow to the pressure from rules we find insanely insane just so we don't get shot down and rephrase the accusation that GAR #237 is openly contracting GAR #37. However, the record shall reflect that it does. Blatantly!

[Solusira-Animus]

The Free Land of Solusira-Animus is pleased to pledge its support for the repeal of this dangerous resolution.

[The Republic of Equestria]

The Republic of Equestria supports this proposal to repeal the First Responder Protection Act. Investigating crime scenes would be much easier if this act was repealed.

[Welsh Cowboy]

This delegation stands behind this repeal wholeheartedly. This is a shameful resolution that should not be on the books, and we eagerly await a repeal.

Sincerely,
Delegation to the World Assembly,
Republic of Welsh Cowboy

[Louisistan]

Special Ambassador Max Schneider: It has come to our attention that the delegation from Gitchie Manito has submitted a repeal proposal for GAR #237. It seems rather bloggish in nature and he assembly was not consulted beforehand. We will try to reach the delegation, trying to get them to support our repeal proposal.
Furthermore, we have edited the language as suggested by Alqania but are still unsure as to the legality of that current draft. We will submit a GHR to get the secretariat's ruling on some points.

The clerk passes around the new draft

Repeal "First Responder Protection Act"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GAR #237| Proposed by: Louisistan

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #237: First Responder Protection Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: RECOGNIZING the important role first responders play in medical emergencies and their need for special protection,

ACKNOWLEDGING the laudable intention behind GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act",

HORRIFIED that GAR #237 does not respect basic rights such as the right not to be convicted twice for the same crime as well as the right for due process and trial, raising concerns with regard to GAR #37 "Fairness in Criminal Trials",

APPALLED that the resolution bypasses national judiciary by requiring conviction without a trial,

IRRITATED by the micromanaging mandate of camera installations in ambulances,

CONCERNED that the resolution's description calls for "Medical personnel exclusively engaged in the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded and sick" to be "respected and protected in all circumstances", while "all circumstances" might include situations where First Responders may be unnecessary or even disruptive,

FIRMLY BELIEVING that the protection of First Responders is not a Human Right and indeed not an international issue and as such is not subject to oversight or regulation by the World Assembly,

DISAPPOINTED that a resolution was passed into international law by this body with such obvious flaws in both language and logic including - but not limited to -
1. A recursive definition of the term "First Responder",
2. The incorrect phrasing of definitions wherein the term to be defined is used as the subject of the sentence, rendering the definition essentially meaningless in the context of the resolution
3. Definition of a crime (physical abuse) which is not punished and punishment of a crime (assault) that is not defined within the scope of the resolution

SUSPECTING that a great number of nations who have voted for this resolution might have been in violation of GAR #122 "Read the Resolution Act"

HOPING that special protection can be given to first responders through national legislation without violating basic rights,

the WA General Assembly hereby REPEALS GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act" and ORDERS it be stricken from international law.

[Lynndon]

Lynndon fully supports repealing this act, and finds the latest draft to be quite satisfactory, and thanks its colleagues here for acting quickly to repeal this resolution.

[Potted Plants United]

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

"Although we have little experience or need for "first aid" of any sort - though some of our selves do grow leaves that can be used as first aid bandages on small wounds by some animal-based beings - we agree that the target resolution is very faulty in logic and should be removed from the laws. You have our vote when this makes it to that stage."

[Discoveria]

OOC: I think it's a little 'over-written', but am satisfied by the draft.

Repeal "First Responder Protection Act"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GAR #237| Proposed by: Louisistan

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #237: First Responder Protection Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: RECOGNIZING the important role first responders play in medical emergencies and their need for special protection,

ACKNOWLEDGING the laudable intention behind GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act",

HORRIFIED that GAR #237 does not respect basic rights such as the right not to be convicted twice for the same crime as well as the right for due process and trial, raising concerns with regard to GAR #37 "Fairness in Criminal Trials",

APPALLED that the resolution bypasses national judiciary by requiring conviction without a trial,

IRRITATED by the micromanaging mandate of camera installations in ambulances, I would have gone for a more 'professional' word than "IRRITATED". Maybe "REGRETTING that the resolution's micromanaging nature extended to mandating the addition of cameras to ambulances,"

CONCERNED that the resolution's description calls for "Medical personnel exclusively engaged in the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded and sick" to be "respected and protected in all circumstances", while "all circumstances" might include situations where First Responders may be unnecessary or even disruptive,

FIRMLY BELIEVING that the protection of First Responders is not a Human Right and indeed not an international issueand as such is not subject to oversight or regulation by the World Assembly, I'd leave this bit, since in practice the WA may make resolutions in any area. Ending on "not an international issue" should be sufficient to make this point.

DISAPPOINTED that a resolution was passed into international law by this body with such obvious flaws in both language and logic including - but not limited to -
1. A recursive definition of the term "First Responder",
2. The incorrect phrasing of definitions wherein the term to be defined is used as the subject of the sentence, rendering the definition essentially meaningless in the context of the resolution While this is a really obvious problem with the draft, this is a very academic way of putting it. I would have gone for "The incorrect and confusing use of the word "define", making interpretation of the resolution's definitions difficult if not impossible"
3. Definition of a crime (physical abuse) which is not punished and punishment of a crime (assault) that is not defined within the scope of the resolution I don't think the resolution can be faulted for not defining "assault". Assault is a crime that would have a solid definition in any reasonable nation. The first point would be made more strongly as "Failing to properly criminalise the physical -abuse of first responders, due to poorly-chosen wording"

SUSPECTING that a great number of nations who have voted for this resolution might have been in violation of GAR #122 "Read the Resolution Act" I would advise against this as you don't want to shame/anger/guilt voters into voting for the repeal (or do you?). Besides it is a general point that could be thrown into any repeal, not just this one.

HOPING that special protection can be given to first responders through national legislation without violating basic rights,

the WA General Assembly hereby REPEALS GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act" and ORDERS it be stricken from international law.

[Louisistan]

Special Ambassador Max Schneider: Thank you, Ambassador Turing, for your detailed help, we will consider what you've said for the next draft. We have not yet had a response from the secretariat, which we will wait for before publishing a new draft. I think it might take them a few days to get around to it.

Furthermore, the proposal from Gitchie Manito has been removed, although we were not able to reach the delegation. Instead, the delegation from Riojasia has now submitted another proposal. We have contacted the delegation and we are hoping to get their support for our repeal effort.

[The Two Jerseys]

Special Ambassador Max Schneider: Thank you, Ambassador Turing, for your detailed help, we will consider what you've said for the next draft. We have not yet had a response from the secretariat, which we will wait for before publishing a new draft. I think it might take them a few days to get around to it.

Furthermore, the proposal from Gitchie Manito has been removed, although we were not able to reach the delegation. Instead, the delegation from Riojasia has now submitted another proposal. We have contacted the delegation and we are hoping to get their support for our repeal effort.

I swear, do these people even bother to post drafts of their proposals before submitting them? They submit god-awful knee-jerk proposals that get shot down immediately, which prevents decent proposals like ours from getting attention because everyone just says "oh, it's another proposal on that topic" and ignores it!

[Louisistan]

Schneider: Well it's got 4 approvals as of now.... I don't think it'll make it to quorum. But until we hear from the secretariat, there's nothing to do but drink.

A Louisistanian aide, dressed like a head waiter enters the chamber and puts a glass of Scotch down before Schneider. He takes a sip from the glass, then looks around. Any of you guys want anything? Gerome here is gonna run down to the bar.


OOC: Please don't misconstrue Schneider's constant whining about waiting for the secretariat as mine. I know the mods have a lot on their plate, but Max is just an inconsiderate impatient guy who doesn't really care that much about the secretariat's workload ;-)

[Discoveria]

A Louisistanian aide, dressed like a head waiter enters the chamber and puts a glass of Scotch down before Schneider. He takes a sip from the glass, then looks around. Any of you guys want anything? Gerome here is gonna run down to the bar.

"By Science, that would be brilliant," said Matthew. "Thanks to the last few resolutions, I'm beginning to understand why my predecessor defenestrated herself three weeks into the job. Double vodka and orange please."

[Louisistan]

Gerome: Double Vodka and Orange Sir, very well.
Schneider leans back in his chair and smiles. Ah, my dear Mr. Turing - there's the problem! You see, we have an attaché for that defenestration stuff... I mean sure, we have to hire a new one every few weeks but it's worth it. But I sure wish my Deputy would autodefenestrate. But - what're you gonna do, right? - Ah, there's Gerome.
Gerome approaches Ambassador Turing: A double Screwdriver, Sir. He puts down the glass.

[Louisistan]

OOC: I have received a mod ruling. I am not at home over the weekend, so the new draft will most likely come on Monday. If nothing else comes up, I will submit that one.

[Bears Armed]

I understand your viewpoint, and if there were a resolution that would offer protection to humanitarian workers in disaster areas and war zones we would certainly consider it for its own merits

I can certainly remember one being drafted...

[Louisistan]

Special Ambassador Max Schneider: The delegation from Rijosa has again submitted a repeal of GAR #237 and this time has included the contents of this resolution. Although it's not plagiarism per se, since the words are not the same, but we are - quite frankly - pissed! Is a GHR adequate in these circumstances?

We now put before you the (hopefully) final draft of this repeal. If nothing new comes up before tomorrow, we will submit this.

Repeal "First Responder Protection Act"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal | Resolution: GAR #237| Proposed by: Louisistan

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #237: First Responder Protection Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: RECOGNIZING the important role first responders play in medical emergencies and their need for special protection,

ACKNOWLEDGING the laudable intention behind GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act",

HORRIFIED that GAR #237 does not respect basic rights such as the right not to be convicted twice for the same crime as well as the right for due process and trial, raising concerns with regard to GAR #37 "Fairness in Criminal Trials",

APPALLED that the resolution bypasses national judiciary by requiring conviction without a trial,

REGRETTING the micromanaging nature of GAR #237, which extends as far as camera installations in ambulances,

CONCERNED that the resolution's description calls for "Medical personnel exclusively engaged in the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded and sick" to be "respected and protected in all circumstances", while "all circumstances" might include situations where First Responders may be unnecessary or even disruptive,

FIRMLY BELIEVING that the protection of First Responders is not a Human Right and indeed not an international issue,

DISAPPOINTED that a resolution was passed into international law by this body with such obvious flaws in both language and logic including - but not limited to -
1. A recursive definition of the term "First Responder",
2. The incorrect and confusing use of the word "define", making interpretation of the resolution's definitions difficult if not impossible
3. Failing to properly criminalise the physical -abuse of first responders, due to poorly-chosen wording

HOPING that special protection can be given to first responders through national legislation without violating basic rights,

the WA General Assembly hereby REPEALS GAR #237 "First Responder Protection Act"

We have included the secretariat's ruling, that the implication of GAR#122 being violated collides with mandatory compliance.
Furthermore we have included some of Ambassador Turing's most welcome suggestions, although some were reworded by us.

We have also included some advice that came with the secretariat's ruling and have stricken the part "and ORDERS it be stricken from international law." - although we thought it gave a nice personal touch to our repeal.