[PASSED] Right of Emigration

[The Distributed Republic of Papoon]

Breathing is now a criminal offence in the Flood, the punishment for which is not being allowed to leave the Flood.

Our hearty congratulations to the author for a job well done. Chalk another mark up for the good guys.

Thbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbt.

If this is "good guy" legislation, then "bad guys" have nothing to fear. [Jerks thumb at Luveria.] Excuse please. Is nervous tic.

[Luveria]

Our hearty congratulations to the author for a job well done. Chalk another mark up for the good guys.

Thbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbt.

If this is "good guy" legislation, then "bad guys" have nothing to fear. [Jerks thumb at Luveria.] Excuse please. Is nervous tic.

I was voting in favour of it until I realized there are legitimate ways around it like selling the area around the border to a private corporation. Now all I can hope for is that this someday gets repealed and replaced with a proposal I can't find a way around.

[Mousebumples]

Congrats to Aba on the passage of this resolution!

[Voltzenkrad]

DOWN WITH THIS FEEL GOOD RESOLUTION WITH MULTIPLE LOOPHOLES AND IS EXTREMELY USELESS

[The Republic of Lanos]

I first thought of the inane loopholes when I saw this proposal.

Breathing is now a criminal offence in the Flood, the punishment for which is not being allowed to leave the Flood.

This is now one of those loopholes.

[Luveria]

I first thought of the inane loopholes when I saw this proposal.

Breathing is now a criminal offence in the Flood, the punishment for which is not being allowed to leave the Flood.

This is now one of those loopholes.

LuvCorp is already working on completing their contract of constructing a barbed wire fence with a concrete wall and a minefield within a 500 meter length going entirely around the country just before the border. It is private corporate property so trespassing will be treated as a criminal offence.

[Elke and Elba]

I first thought of the inane loopholes when I saw this proposal.

Breathing is now a criminal offence in the Flood, the punishment for which is not being allowed to leave the Flood.

This is now one of those loopholes.

I withdrew my vote last minute because I just realised - holy freak, what if a stateless person went into the airport (which meant he left the country after getting his stateless or whatever WA-issued passport stamped), and he couldn't return to the country of origin/go to other countries because he failed to meet entry requirements?

[Separatist Peoples]

Our hearty congratulations to the author for a job well done. Chalk another mark up for the good guys.

Thbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbt.

If this is "good guy" legislation, then "bad guys" have nothing to fear. [Jerks thumb at Luveria.] Excuse please. Is nervous tic.

Its unfortunate, but, honestly, theres no way we can legislate to avoid that without stamping out private property laws on a wide scale. Or forcing public transit access to certain nations. No, in NS, there will always be a way to keep citizens in. Odd, though, that the tinpot dictators can't see that letting the unhappy ones out, even in limited form, purifies their pool of loyalty to draw from without upsetting the people like a purge would.

[The Republic of Lanos]

I first thought of the inane loopholes when I saw this proposal.


This is now one of those loopholes.

LuvCorp is already working on completing their contract of constructing a barbed wire fence with a concrete wall and a minefield within a 500 meter length going entirely around the country just before the border. It is private corporate property so trespassing will be treated as a criminal offence.

Yet another, more epic, loophole.

Did anyone think of this or did they all feel good about it without realizing the consequences?

[Luveria]

LuvCorp is already working on completing their contract of constructing a barbed wire fence with a concrete wall and a minefield within a 500 meter length going entirely around the country just before the border. It is private corporate property so trespassing will be treated as a criminal offence.

Yet another, more epic, loophole.

Did anyone think of this or did they all feel good about it without realizing the consequences?

I made a factbook explaining in detail how to accomplish it.

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=luve ... /id=208034

I have gone over WA laws, and there is nothing preventing this as I am technically not "circumventing" the resolution in any way, as emigration remains entirely legal.

[Voltzenkrad]

Someone please repeal this.

[Separatist Peoples]

Someone please repeal this.

Go for it. Get drafting.

[Abacathea]

Someone please repeal this.

Personally, I encourage you to do so as you've been one of the most vocal opponents of it since it came up, citing ludicrous scenarios to back up loopholes that could only be effected by breaching other WA laws.

Furthermore, your theory of buying up all the land around your nation is nonsensical,

a: it requires vast amounts of money and the assumption that the individuals who own the land would be willing to sell it you.

b: unless you're planning on buying public roads as well, your plan has a massive loophole in it, furthermore, unless you're an entirely landlocked nation, you planning on buying up water ways too? Good luck with that. Also, if you're a landlocked nation, how are goods/services going to be provided if the roads for 500 miles surrounding the borders are going to be privatized? If you don't prosecute everyone who uses them, milkmen and all, then fairness in criminal trials trumps. As does a number of other WA resolutions.

You've been barking like an unmuzzled dog the whole way throughout this debate, now either roll over and lie down, or bite. If you're that plexed by this resolution, repeal it, or fail to comply with it. But really, your loud shouting is just becoming annoying at this point, and I'm only sorry I wasn't around more to smack you on the nose.

I first thought of the inane loopholes when I saw this proposal.


This is now one of those loopholes.

I withdrew my vote last minute because I just realised - holy freak, what if a stateless person went into the airport (which meant he left the country after getting his stateless or whatever WA-issued passport stamped), and he couldn't return to the country of origin/go to other countries because he failed to meet entry requirements?

That's nowt to do with this resolution, at all. This resolution merely states that it's not affecting current border entry requirements, it never edited/amended them at all. So even without this resolution, that's still a viable scenario.

Congrats to Aba on the passage of this resolution!

Thank you Mousey, and to Seperatist Peoples and The Dark Star Republic, all of whom not only supported me and helped me refine this to passing standards, but also actively engaged in the debate while I was gone on my behalf, including pointing out to the flying nation that they're already in breach of a Decriminalization of suicide as it stands.

[Luveria]

Someone please repeal this.

Personally, I encourage you to do so as you've been one of the most vocal opponents of it since it came up, citing ludicrous scenarios to back up loopholes that could only be effected by breaching other WA laws.

Furthermore, your theory of buying up all the land around your nation is nonsensical,

a: it requires vast amounts of money and the assumption that the individuals who own the land would be willing to sell it you.

b: unless you're planning on buying public roads as well, your plan has a massive loophole in it, furthermore, unless you're an entirely landlocked nation, you planning on buying up water ways too? Good luck with that. Also, if you're a landlocked nation, how are goods/services going to be provided if the roads for 500 miles surrounding the borders are going to be privatized? If you don't prosecute everyone who uses them, milkmen and all, then fairness in criminal trials trumps. As does a number of other WA resolutions.

You've been barking like an unmuzzled dog the whole way throughout this debate, now either roll over and lie down, or bite. If you're that plexed by this resolution, repeal it, or fail to comply with it. But really, your loud shouting is just becoming annoying at this point, and I'm only sorry I wasn't around more to smack you on the nose.

Ahem.

Nations like United Dalaran don't care if they run their entire economy into the ground to keep people entrapped, as that is exactly what United Dalaran has done by crashing their economy through spending all their money on a massive wall around their entire country and cutting themselves off from international commerce.

The 500 meters wide length of land shortly before the Luverian border was state owned and has been sold at an extremely low price through a no-bid contract to a certain private corporation.

As for roads, the roads and services in Luveria were already privatized quite a while ago. That makes the roads already having been private property and thus subject to the whims of their owner(s).

You have yet to point out how the above method is infeasible or illegal according to the below part of the resolution when trespassing on private property makes it unavoidable;

(d) The recipient nation or the nation of origin having probable cause to believe that the individual is traveling for the purpose of committing a crime,

[Abacathea]

Actually if your sole argument hinges on this, then it's falling apart on itself.

Lets examine shall we;

(d) The recipient nation or the nation of origin having probable cause to believe that the individual is traveling for the purpose of committing a crime,

You'll find IRL I know criminal law quite well, but we'll keep this IC for the moment. Probable cause was the best possible term to use here couple with "purpose".

If I'm going abroad, and I happen to commit a crime ie; trespassing on private property whilst there, or speeding. That is simply an event that occurred while I was there. If I was going abroad for the purpose and intent of speeding/trespassing, that is an entirely different kettle of fish ambassador. That was a previous mens rea with an actus reus. A previously established guilty mindset, coupled with the eventual guilty act. Both of which are required to make the probable cause and purpose stick, coupled with the evidence you'd have to support your probable cause in the first place.

Now, if you're treating your citizens like animals, detaining them illegally, and doing your utmost to prevent them from leaving as you yourself state, then YOU the state are at fault here for effectively attempting to circumvent this act. By your citizens crossing these lands to escape, 1: the above doesn't come into consideration, because they're not going abroad to commit a crime, they're doing it on your soil, which if anything holds a flimsy argument for section B of this act but not D as you've quoted above, and 2; there's no mens rea ie: no guilty mindset, they're following WA law, which succeeds yours, to leave the nation, is there a guilty act? Yes but we'll come to that in a moment. Essentially, this leaves YOU open to condemnation by the Security Council for specifically and openly doing your damnedest to defy WA law.

Now to my second part, WA law requires fairness in criminal trials, and of that aspect we come back to our guilty mindset, guilty act. Most if not all reasonable governments usually have this system of judicial process (ooc: it's the world used one) except little tinpot dictatorships like yours. (tinpot is actually being too generous a descriptor but still) you could make a case for section B of this act, ie an established arrest warrant, or ongoing legal proceedings even, however, if you again enforce this on all members of your populous, once again it's YOU very clearly at fault and the international spotlight once again falls on your head.

You see, these were never going to be one hundred percent watertight, considering past tech, future tech etc... someone was always going to have some inane way of getting past it, but they were designed that if someone attempted, like yourself, to do their best to circumvent it, it would be extremely obvious to the international community exactly what you were at and thus dealable with via the accepted channels, whereas previously, this didn't exist. We're not stupid, at least 95% of us anyway.

The act itself, if any nation is anyway reasonable, establishes a baseline and platform for nations to work off and with, and if not, makes it very obvious when nations are being arseholes, look at the lengths you've had to go to circumvent it after all. Previously, you wouldn't of even had to do that.

I count this as a successful endeavor and not the fluffy feel good nonsense you and others have referred to it as. And if we still disagree after here, get drafting, I look forward to tearing it apart on the floor

[Oaledonia]

Nope, I don't care too much if it's repealed or not. Still, I have to stay for regional control.

[Bananaistan]

Nope, I don't care too much if it's repealed or not. Still, I have to stay for regional control.

A convincing argument, WP Sir.

[Oaledonia]

Nope, I don't care too much if it's repealed or not. Still, I have to stay for regional control.

A convincing argument, WP Sir.

I don't care about the witty remarks. I joined because the game bars non-WA members from the obvious spot of WA delegate. I'm not following this ICly, for population protection. Want to make comments? I don't care. Call me a bad player? I'll live with it. Do whatever? I wont loose sleep.

[Bananaistan]

Why not just leave the debate to the rest of us then? It would be better than responding to a well thought out and coherent post with a disdainful "nope".

[Oaledonia]

Why not just leave the debate to the rest of us then? It would be better than responding to a well thought out and coherent post with a disdainful "nope".

I don't think I've broken any rules, so I'll post as I please.

[Abacathea]

Why not just leave the debate to the rest of us then? It would be better than responding to a well thought out and coherent post with a disdainful "nope".

I don't think I've broken any rules, so I'll post as I please.

Nope just kind of interesting that the author of this is being so condescending towards my resolution.

[Oaledonia]

I don't think I've broken any rules, so I'll post as I please.

Nope just kind of interesting that the author of this is being so condescending towards my resolution.

Opinions change, you of all people should know this.

[Abacathea]

Nope just kind of interesting that the author of this is being so condescending towards my resolution.

Opinions change, you of all people should know this.

I'm not sure why me of all people specifically, if there's something I'm forgetting, please do point it out to me (we'll move it to TGs though ). That said, you do still make a fair point, opinions and stances do change and from that I agree to respect your stance even if mine differs.

[The Distributed Republic of Papoon]

Here is how silly this resolution is.

Let us say your country has done some very bad things, like torture prisoners, kill civilians in war and spy on friendly nations. Let's say a citizen of yours leaks documents proving this and you want to keep him in your country at all costs.

He tries to leave.

Well, it's a matter of a few seconds work to charge him with treason, information piracy and stealing state secrets, isn't it?

Or you could, say, pay a person of the appropriate sex to say your target is a rapist.

Finally, you could just have a doctor from your state-run health care system claim that he is insane.

You now have all the legal ammunition necessary to keep him from going anywhere and the World Assembly's hands are tied.

I know that these are just hypothetical cases which we've never yet seen occur in the world, but they don't seem too far-fetched to me.

If a state wants to stop an individual from leaving, there are plenty of plausible crimes they can be charged with. And once that happens, this resolution has no teeth at all.

So no, even though we voted for the resolution, Papoon won't be joining in the general back-slapping and hand-jobbing of Abacathea. Let us see Abacathea write a resolution that decisively affects a real problem and then we will commence with the congratulations.

[Separatist Peoples]

Here is how silly this resolution is.

Let us say your country has done some very bad things, like torture prisoners, kill civilians in war and spy on friendly nations. Let's say a citizen of yours leaks documents proving this and you want to keep him in your country at all costs.

He tries to leave.

Well, it's a matter of a few seconds work to charge him with treason, information piracy and stealing state secrets, isn't it?

Or you could, say, pay a person of the appropriate sex to say your target is a rapist.

Finally, you could just have a doctor from your state-run health care system claim that he is insane.

You now have all the legal ammunition necessary to keep him from going anywhere and the World Assembly's hands are tied.

I know that these are just hypothetical cases which we've never yet seen occur in the world, but they don't seem too far-fetched to me.

If a state wants to stop an individual from leaving, there are plenty of plausible crimes they can be charged with. And once that happens, this resolution has no teeth at all.

So no, even though we voted for the resolution, Papoon won't be joining in the general back-slapping and hand-jobbing of Abacathea. Let us see Abacathea write a resolution that decisively affects a real problem and then we will commence with the congratulations.

The first two are illegal, and therefore technically impossible for nations to do intentionally. As for access to intelligence issues, that is a matter of national security, a violation of such is a crime. So yes, you could try to stop them for that.

Involuntary medical detainment and false judicial procedures are equally prohibited by previous legislation, to the best of my knowledge. Since compliance is mandatory, and your laws are changed automatically, these are equally nonissues.

As the Abacathean delegate has pointed out, it is impossible to stop the levels of abuse you are citing. Nations will always find a way around this through one sort of bullshit or another. Fortunately, this resolution, in conjunction with those previously passed (because no resolution exists in a vacuum), closes off the vast majority of avenues of abuse.