Advertisement
by Dramancass » Tue Sep 11, 2018 11:28 pm
by Thyerata » Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:02 am
Xanthal wrote:Hamstan wrote:"I, Oscar Hamer, representative of the Confederacy of Hamstan, here in the presence of these witnesses, do hereby state Hamstan's intentions to draft a repeal for GA #438, therefore rescinding GA #375 back into international law, believing that both the resolution at vote, as well as GA #438, violate national sovereignty. With the passing of GA #438, there are now no international laws governing capital punishment. This will not stand. Should this resolution fail, the assembly should do what is just and strike down GA #438 as well."
OOC: Can't repeal repeals, though it might be funny if we could.
by The Palentine » Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:34 am
Dramancass wrote:The Empire of Dramancass appeals to all member nations of the World Assembly to reject this proposed ban on capital punishment. It is the hope of Emperor Jadus and the people of Dramancass that the member nations of the World Assembly shall see reason and recognize this resolution as a clear violation against national sovereignty, and an attempt by certain member nations to impose their personal convictions (religious or otherwise) on the World Assembly in its entirety. If this resolution is passed, the Empire of Dramancass shall withdrawal from the World Assembly in protest. Our Supreme Majesty, Emperor Jadus, petitions all member nations who value sovereignty and independence to follow suit should this resolution be passed.
by The Sect Meces » Wed Sep 12, 2018 2:29 am
by The Earth Systems Alliance » Wed Sep 12, 2018 2:54 am
by The Sect Meces » Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:00 am
The Earth Systems Alliance wrote:"Why is this still being debated?",sighs Ambassador Irons.
"The Capital Punishment is a necessity and those nations who dare call others who practice it "barbarians" they are mere pretenders whose criminals are still running lose and are afraid to arrest them cause "muh feelings"."says the Ambassador, ironically.
"Some lives need to be taken, because these people are irredeemable. They are traitors, rapists, murderers. One may wonder, when does this end. I answer them when there is no more crime, when people can live without fear and not lose their parents to some thug with a gun. I have read stories on other nations that don't have the Capital Punishment, and it sickens me that those people are ruled by indecision and cowardice. The Capital Punishment serves as a means of example. That if a citizen breaks the law by committing one of the aforementioned crimes, neither the state nor the honest tax payer will house them in a prison cell."
He cracks a little smile
"When Earth united under the Alliance, monarchs and corrupt officials tried to stop this. When they were revealed, the world uproared. The monarchs and the corrupt officials were presented before a court. Some said we should execute them, that their greed and lust cost the lives of millions. Instead, we put them to work. They built with their own hands roads, homes, bridges. And they begged for the Capital Punishment. They redeemed themselves, so we granted it to them. Now, the Alliance has come a long way from being a corrupt state. There were those of the royals who didn't work. They were killed, they served their purpose as messengers. They were criminals, traitors of the people and the Republic. And they were treated as such. They had become a threat, and they were dealt with. To those nations that support the Ban, I tell this: your will is weak, because it can't take a strong decision against criminals. But when a deviant, for example, rapes and kills your family, will you still be pro-ban?"
by Separatist Peoples » Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:41 am
by Arasi Luvasa » Wed Sep 12, 2018 4:55 am
The Earth Systems Alliance wrote:"Why is this still being debated?",sighs Ambassador Irons.
"The Capital Punishment is a necessity and those nations who dare call others who practice it "barbarians" they are mere pretenders whose criminals are still running lose and are afraid to arrest them cause "muh feelings"."says the Ambassador, ironically.
"Some lives need to be taken, because these people are irredeemable. They are traitors, rapists, murderers. One may wonder, when does this end. I answer them when there is no more crime, when people can live without fear and not lose their parents to some thug with a gun. I have read stories on other nations that don't have the Capital Punishment, and it sickens me that those people are ruled by indecision and cowardice.
by Ruskland-Preuben » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:10 am
Arasi Luvasa wrote:The Earth Systems Alliance wrote:"Why is this still being debated?",sighs Ambassador Irons.
"The Capital Punishment is a necessity and those nations who dare call others who practice it "barbarians" they are mere pretenders whose criminals are still running lose and are afraid to arrest them cause "muh feelings"."says the Ambassador, ironically.
"Some lives need to be taken, because these people are irredeemable. They are traitors, rapists, murderers. One may wonder, when does this end. I answer them when there is no more crime, when people can live without fear and not lose their parents to some thug with a gun. I have read stories on other nations that don't have the Capital Punishment, and it sickens me that those people are ruled by indecision and cowardice.
"I am sorry, but what criminals? Our criminals are all imprisoned unless you are insinuating that you have a very low bar before individuals are convicted. We simply realize that capital punishment does little to deter crime but also abhor the infringement of the most basic of human rights. We are not God and therefore we cannot know, without error, whether an individual is actually guilty. By your own words, you have suggested you are more than happy to kill many innocents just to ensure that you kill off what you perceive to be the most heinous of crimes. Ad we have made no suggestion that we hesitate to arrest individuals, that is simply a fabrication on your part with so substantive foundation. Being unwilling to kill a man is very different from being unwilling to take him off the streets to rehabilitate him and protect other citizens." The archbishop says glaring at the ambassador. "Besides crime will almost certainly always exist, or at least until the end-of-days. Our unwillingness to execute however is not cowardice or indecision. We have chosen to value human rights and by that merit, we cannot take another life as a punitive measure, this notably is different from killing an individual to save a life that is being directly threatened at that very second. We are not against the second of these situations, merely the first. Furthermore, it sickens us that you are so bloodthirsty that you cannot see the value in protecting the innocent from execution. Regardless of the strength of your court system, there will undoubtedly be innocents who fall through the cracks and you show no regard for these lives or the people who were close to that innocent."
by Leifar » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:22 am
To the honourable World Assembly,
Capital Punishment, as we describe and define it, is execution during time of imprisonment. But what if the definition is different for another nation, with different vocabulary. What if Capital Punishment, for a nation, means death in prison in general? If that nation classifies the death as Capital Punishment, does that not mean we are, outright, banning imprisonment? I raise this question do we truly need to have prisons, if majority of deaths happen there?
With this, I leave you adue,
Garnet Rose
by Demiurges » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:26 am
Arasi Luvasa wrote:The Earth Systems Alliance wrote:"Why is this still being debated?",sighs Ambassador Irons.
"The Capital Punishment is a necessity and those nations who dare call others who practice it "barbarians" they are mere pretenders whose criminals are still running lose and are afraid to arrest them cause "muh feelings"."says the Ambassador, ironically.
"Some lives need to be taken, because these people are irredeemable. They are traitors, rapists, murderers. One may wonder, when does this end. I answer them when there is no more crime, when people can live without fear and not lose their parents to some thug with a gun. I have read stories on other nations that don't have the Capital Punishment, and it sickens me that those people are ruled by indecision and cowardice.
"I am sorry, but what criminals? Our criminals are all imprisoned unless you are insinuating that you have a very low bar before individuals are convicted. We simply realize that capital punishment does little to deter crime but also abhor the infringement of the most basic of human rights. We are not God and therefore we cannot know, without error, whether an individual is actually guilty. By your own words you have suggested you are more than happy to kill many innocents just to ensure that you kill off what you perceive to be the most heinous of crimes. Ad we have made no suggestion that we hesitate to arrest individuals, that is simply a fabrication on your part with so substantive foundation. Being unwilling to kill a man is very different from being unwilling to take him off the streets to rehabilitate him and protect other citizens." The archbishop says glaring at the ambassador. "Besides crime will almost certainly always exist, or at least until the end-of-days. Our unwillingness to execute however is not cowardice or indecision. We have chosen to value human rights and by that merit we cannot take another life as a punitive measure, this notably is different from killing an individual to save a life that is being directly threatened at that very second. We are not against the second of these situations, merely the first. Furthermore it sickens us that you are so bloodthirsty that you cannot see the value in protecting the innocent from execution. Regardless of the strength of your court system, there will undoubtedly be innocents who fall through the cracks and you show no regard for these lives or the people who were close to that innocent."
by Durzan » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:35 am
Demiurges wrote:Arasi Luvasa wrote:
"I am sorry, but what criminals? Our criminals are all imprisoned unless you are insinuating that you have a very low bar before individuals are convicted. We simply realize that capital punishment does little to deter crime but also abhor the infringement of the most basic of human rights. We are not God and therefore we cannot know, without error, whether an individual is actually guilty. By your own words you have suggested you are more than happy to kill many innocents just to ensure that you kill off what you perceive to be the most heinous of crimes. Ad we have made no suggestion that we hesitate to arrest individuals, that is simply a fabrication on your part with so substantive foundation. Being unwilling to kill a man is very different from being unwilling to take him off the streets to rehabilitate him and protect other citizens." The archbishop says glaring at the ambassador. "Besides crime will almost certainly always exist, or at least until the end-of-days. Our unwillingness to execute however is not cowardice or indecision. We have chosen to value human rights and by that merit we cannot take another life as a punitive measure, this notably is different from killing an individual to save a life that is being directly threatened at that very second. We are not against the second of these situations, merely the first. Furthermore it sickens us that you are so bloodthirsty that you cannot see the value in protecting the innocent from execution. Regardless of the strength of your court system, there will undoubtedly be innocents who fall through the cracks and you show no regard for these lives or the people who were close to that innocent."
Well congratulations, you imprison the worst scum humanity has to offer, on VALUABLE TAX PAYER DOLLAR NO LESS, letting them live the remainder of their lives in an overall content existence. Care to argue to the contrary? Unless your prisons are proper internment camps, they are getting a minimum of two square meals a day, do not have to work to pay for room and board, have functioning bathing and medical facilities (again paid for by your TAX PAYERS MONEY that could be allocated elsewhere) just because you feel like you have taken the 'moral high ground'. You argue that Capital Punishment causes innocent blood to be shed, but how many pedophiles who have raped pre-schoolers, or traitors who have leaked government secrets to not only the media but your political and military enemies, or mass murderers who have body counts larger than most men and women in your armed services even during wartime, or mayhaps even serial rapists who have left countless men and women with their own human rights violated to the most base of degrees have slipped through YOUR justice system when they were infact guilty and you were too afraid to pull the trigger? Many people who try to take your little moral high ground often say 'an eye for an eye makes the world blind', however with this proposal, the World Assembly is trying to impose and force their own views on many nations own sovereignty. We in Demiurges, honestly do not intend to make a proposal forcing other nations to surrender their sovereignty of their justice systems to our ideals, much as the idea appeals to us. HOWEVER, we expect that these Leftist ideals not be shoved upon nations who have no desire to play 'nice' with our criminals simply because the World Assembly deems justice too great a luxury to be dealt upon irredeemable scum!
by Nuclear Wastelands » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:41 am
by Illemenia » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:44 am
by Jocospor » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:51 am
by Ardiveds » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:12 am
by West Phoenicia » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:41 am
by Kenmoria » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:41 am
Nuclear Wastelands wrote:"The Wastelands will never follow this doctrine if it is passed. We will do as we so will please if it does."
-The sole Survivor
by Deosdora » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:48 am
by Arasi Luvasa » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:52 am
Deosdora wrote:The Great Emperor of the Holy Empire of Deosdora sits on his chair, drinking the most expensive of wines.
"Capital Punishment is something necessary. Why? Because there are people who do not deserve to live. People who have committed heinous crimes. I will not waste the money my citizens worked hard for and payed as taxes to keep those scums alive. If anything, capital punishment is a form of mercy. Because if there were no capital punishment, barren islands will be full, prisoners will go and starve. Catch my drift?"
by SVR2200 » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:08 am
by Blackledge » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:11 am
Kenmoria wrote:Nuclear Wastelands wrote:"The Wastelands will never follow this doctrine if it is passed. We will do as we so will please if it does."
-The sole Survivor
(OOC: Once again, the ACA (Administrative Compliance Act) exists which will fine any nation that does not comply with a GA resolution. This is a moot point as this proposal looks set to, unfortunately from my point of view, fail at the vote, but it’s still important to not just ignore WA law. There are ways of noncomplying well, but just using Nat-Sov isn’t one of them.)
by Kenmoria » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:30 am
Blackledge wrote:Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: Once again, the ACA (Administrative Compliance Act) exists which will fine any nation that does not comply with a GA resolution. This is a moot point as this proposal looks set to, unfortunately from my point of view, fail at the vote, but it’s still important to not just ignore WA law. There are ways of noncomplying well, but just using Nat-Sov isn’t one of them.)
(OOC: Reviewing ACA, it is rather toothless. Short of actually expelling a non-compliant state, there's nothing the WA can do to force compliance.)
by Blackledge » Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:17 am
Kenmoria wrote:Blackledge wrote:(OOC: Reviewing ACA, it is rather toothless. Short of actually expelling a non-compliant state, there's nothing the WA can do to force compliance.)
(OOC: It’s the best possible resolution given that it would be illegal to expel a member from the WA or punish the man with anything gameplay wise due to the game mechanics rule. The WA may not be able to force compliance, but it is poor role playing to ignore GA resolutions without a good response to the challenges the ACA brings.)
by Separatist Peoples » Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:21 am
Blackledge wrote:Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: It’s the best possible resolution given that it would be illegal to expel a member from the WA or punish the man with anything gameplay wise due to the game mechanics rule. The WA may not be able to force compliance, but it is poor role playing to ignore GA resolutions without a good response to the challenges the ACA brings.)
(OOC: Thing is, the challenges really aren't all that much. The GAO has no way to enforce payment of fines levied by the IAO. The only real meat to the resolution is getting other WA states to enforce sanctions, and given the sheer size of the WA and the diversity of its member-states there's no real way of making sure the right states (if any) are imposing sanctions. Some nations are even autarkies, so there's no pressure there. If roleplay takes into account that the WA can't force members out, then that's about it for consequences. The fines can stack up, but GAO can't enforce them, nations can't be expelled, and a violator may not have any sanctioners or even be in a position where sanctions matter. *shrugs*)
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement