[PASSED] Preventing the Execution of Innocents

[Cornlind]

I heard that the same person did this one and the last one but changed a few things so I think we should all vote NO I said NO NO NO

[Kenmoria]

They r more than welcome to not endorse the delegate if they want. It decrease their WA vote power when the delegate votes against the majority but the issue is awareness of WA membersand the multiple functions a delegate serves like leading a region

[OOC: Except that some regions require all members to endorse the delegate.]

(OOC: Then just leave the region. Also, particularly in very controversial and high-stakes proposals such as this one, the experience and presumable knowledge a delegate of a GCR or large UCR would be helpful.

I heard that the same person did this one and the last one but changed a few things so I think we should all vote NO I said NO NO NO

United Massachusetts authored the last proposal, and Imperium Anglorum did this one. That said, IA co-authored the prior one, so the point does stand. However, that doesn’t mean the proposal is bad solely for this, it could be seen as a positive that this is the latest in a series of iterative drafts.

Well shit, it looks like this is gonna pass. :/

I wouldn’t worry, there’s a repeal currently being drafted and the GA masses seem to like repealing things quite a lot, so I’m sure this torment won’t be over very soon. :) )

[Ardiveds]

Looks like this is gonna pass. I can already foresee the bureaucratic sh*tstorm on the horizon. I hope the repeal comes soon.

[Dulveus]

Why don't you just go ahead and write all my laws for me while you're at it?
Also: "Subject to World Assembly legislation, member nations are permitted to sentence and carry out capital punishment within their jurisdictions."
This is why I have voted against this resolution.

[Ghost Land]

Why don't you just go ahead and write all my laws for me while you're at it?
Also: "Subject to World Assembly legislation, member nations are permitted to sentence and carry out capital punishment within their jurisdictions."
This is why I have voted against this resolution.

I agree. Next thing you know every single aspect of our nations is going to be dictated by the WA. Part of the fun of NationStates is making your own psychotic dictatorship where people can be executed for taking an odd number of fries, darn it!

[Afra Radna-viane]

Why don't you just go ahead and write all my laws for me while you're at it?
Also: "Subject to World Assembly legislation, member nations are permitted to sentence and carry out capital punishment within their jurisdictions."
This is why I have voted against this resolution.

I agree. Next thing you know every single aspect of our nations is going to be dictated by the WA. Part of the fun of NationStates is making your own psychotic dictatorship where people can be executed for taking an odd number of fries, darn it!

"But you need not be part of this Assembly. I am not, and for the moment we are quite happy to be so."

[Kenmoria]

Why don't you just go ahead and write all my laws for me while you're at it?
Also: "Subject to World Assembly legislation, member nations are permitted to sentence and carry out capital punishment within their jurisdictions."
This is why I have voted against this resolution.

I agree. Next thing you know every single aspect of our nations is going to be dictated by the WA. Part of the fun of NationStates is making your own psychotic dictatorship where people can be executed for taking an odd number of fries, darn it!

(OOC: That is when one doesn’t join the WA, as it is not very well suited to psychotic dictatorships where you can be executed for taking an odd number of fries. Or, just create a World Assembly puppet state.)

[Oberghtap]

(OOC: This is my first in character post so if I post something in character that seems to miss the point please feel free to say so in character.)

As a member of this assembly, such as it is, I feel it is my duty to vote against this proposal. If it passes, what is to say that the WA will not dictate other laws? What is to say that they will not dictate how to run a nation's economy? I stand on the principle that if you commit a crime, no matter what the crime is, you must answer for it with a punishment commensurate to the crime and of course that means a fair trial. If they are found guilty then the sentence will be carried out but If that means putting one to death because they committed a capital offense then so be it. If you rob a bank, you serve jail time. If you graffiti a wall you must clean it. What is society going to be like if there is no system of law to protect it? It will become a lawless, anarchic, apocalypse is what it will be. That is why, in keeping with my principles, I will be voting no on this proposal.

(OOC: Sorry about this. I am new to this and hopefully I have not offended anyone with this.)

[Afra Radna-viane]

(OOC: This is my first in character post so if I post something in character that seems to miss the point please feel free to say so in character.)

As a member of this assembly, such as it is, I feel it is my duty to vote against this proposal. If it passes, what is to say that the WA will not dictate other laws? What is to say that they will not dictate how to run a nation's economy? I stand on the principle that if you commit a crime, no matter what the crime is, you must answer for it with a punishment commensurate to the crime and of course that means a fair trial. If they are found guilty then the sentence will be carried out but If that means putting one to death because they committed a capital offense then so be it. If you rob a bank, you serve jail time. If you graffiti a wall you must clean it. What is society going to be like if there is no system of law to protect it? It will become a lawless, anarchic, apocalypse is what it will be. That is why, in keeping with my principles, I will be voting no on this proposal.

(OOC: Sorry about this. I am new to this and hopefully I have not offended anyone with this.)

"I do not see how any of that supports your argument? This law does not argue against punishing criminals."

[Ghost Land]

I agree. Next thing you know every single aspect of our nations is going to be dictated by the WA. Part of the fun of NationStates is making your own psychotic dictatorship where people can be executed for taking an odd number of fries, darn it!

(OOC: That is when one doesn’t join the WA, as it is not very well suited to psychotic dictatorships where you can be executed for taking an odd number of fries. Or, just create a World Assembly puppet state.)

I agree. Next thing you know every single aspect of our nations is going to be dictated by the WA. Part of the fun of NationStates is making your own psychotic dictatorship where people can be executed for taking an odd number of fries, darn it!

"But you need not be part of this Assembly. I am not, and for the moment we are quite happy to be so."

Good point - that's part of why I joined the WA under my main nation, which I'm running in accordance with my own views, as opposed to my forum account, which I plan to rotate among four old puppets every three months.

[Uncastania]

Eh, I might have already leaven my point, but it seems that I'm partially a bit too drunk, so please excuse my possible double posting.

Nay, we revere the right (C'mon, English isn't my 1.st language) to execute proven evil doers. Hail Hydr... uh, never mind about that.

[Nova Trieste]

"It is one case per a million a year. If there is a case involving thirteen individuals, then all thirteen would be executed but it would only register as one case."

"Oh, that's sound more reasonable. But just to be sure, the WA Capital Divison will have jurisdiction over both military and civil investigations?"

"Gentelmen, I don't want to nag you but I don't want to have my questions left unanswered neither."

[Afra Radna-viane]

"As it makes no mention of a divide, it stands to reason that as long as execution is slotted to be the 'punishment' for a crime then so shall the division have jurisdiction. This would likely be true regardless of the nations internal jurisdictions."

[Crawland]

I personally believe that capital punishment should be legal. If a person is convicted of a serious or heinous crime they should be executed. My belief is based on an old philosophy an eye for an eye in this case a life for a life. I am completely up for a debate and I have an open mind on this topic. My decision as of now is to vote against this resolution. I believe this should be up to the nation not the World Assembly.

[Battlion]

I personally believe that capital punishment should be legal. If a person is convicted of a serious or heinous crime they should be executed. My belief is based on an old philosophy an eye for an eye in this case a life for a life. I am completely up for a debate and I have an open mind on this topic. My decision as of now is to vote against this resolution. I believe this should be up to the nation not the World Assembly.

“This proposal does not make capital punishment, illegal.”

[Nagatoshi]

As this proposal is clearly headed to pass, I have this to declare: The authoritarian nature of this proposal goes outside the jurisdiction of the World Assembly. The nature of this document to become so entrenched in the national politics of every nation here will ultimately make the World Assembly into the World Government. As such, Nagatoshi has found itself unable to support the World Assembly any longer and therefore withdraws from the organization.

Though we do not encourage other nations to do the same, the nature of the last two proposals show a decline in the democratic and free nature that the World Assembly was originally supposed to support. The very fact that the same nation proposed a restriction on capital punishment right after the proposal of a ban on the action is simply a veil of the motives of said nation. Any supporters that switched sides from Against to For simply ignore the in depth text right in front of them rather due to it 'sounding nicer' rather than really delving into the hidden motives this text supplies. An eventual downfall of individualism in the World Assembly will occur, and I will not stand for it.

Nagatoshi now removes itself from the World assembly to keep its sovereignty and personal freedoms not controlled by a corrupt council where decisions are decided in the hands of a few rather than the many. Thank you, and good luck with your dictators.

[Xanthal]

Yeah, yeah. Don't let the doorknob hit you Ambassador.

[Crawland]

I personally believe that capital punishment should be legal. If a person is convicted of a serious or heinous crime they should be executed. My belief is based on an old philosophy an eye for an eye in this case a life for a life. I am completely up for a debate and I have an open mind on this topic. My decision as of now is to vote against this resolution. I believe this should be up to the nation not the World Assembly.

“This proposal does not make capital punishment, illegal.”

Thank you for pointing this out I intended to change that but obviously forgot it should not say illegal but I believe the WA is over reaching its jurisdiction but there's nothing i can do about it

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

As this proposal is clearly headed to pass, I have this to declare: The authoritarian nature of this proposal goes outside the jurisdiction of the World Assembly. The nature of this document to become so entrenched in the national politics of every nation here will ultimately make the World Assembly into the World Government. As such, Nagatoshi has found itself unable to support the World Assembly any longer and therefore withdraws from the organization.

Though we do not encourage other nations to do the same, the nature of the last two proposals show a decline in the democratic and free nature that the World Assembly was originally supposed to support. The very fact that the same nation proposed a restriction on capital punishment right after the proposal of a ban on the action is simply a veil of the motives of said nation. Any supporters that switched sides from Against to For simply ignore the in depth text right in front of them rather due to it 'sounding nicer' rather than really delving into the hidden motives this text supplies. An eventual downfall of individualism in the World Assembly will occur, and I will not stand for it.

Nagatoshi now removes itself from the World assembly to keep its sovereignty and personal freedoms not controlled by a corrupt council where decisions are decided in the hands of a few rather than the many. Thank you, and good luck with your dictators.

Bye ambassador we don't need you

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Preventing the Execution of Innocents was passed 9,244 votes to 8,475.

[Oberghtap]

(OOC: This is my first in character post so if I post something in character that seems to miss the point please feel free to say so in character.)

As a member of this assembly, such as it is, I feel it is my duty to vote against this proposal. If it passes, what is to say that the WA will not dictate other laws? What is to say that they will not dictate how to run a nation's economy? I stand on the principle that if you commit a crime, no matter what the crime is, you must answer for it with a punishment commensurate to the crime and of course that means a fair trial. If they are found guilty then the sentence will be carried out but If that means putting one to death because they committed a capital offense then so be it. If you rob a bank, you serve jail time. If you graffiti a wall you must clean it. What is society going to be like if there is no system of law to protect it? It will become a lawless, anarchic, apocalypse is what it will be. That is why, in keeping with my principles, I will be voting no on this proposal.

(OOC: Sorry about this. I am new to this and hopefully I have not offended anyone with this.)

"I do not see how any of that supports your argument? This law does not argue against punishing criminals."

I see. I may have misunderstood or missed some facts. I am new to the WA as a voting and debating member so I am trying my best. I thank you for calling out my misunderstandings.

[Kenmoria]

Preventing the Execution of Innocents was passed 9,244 votes to 8,475.

(OOC: I admit I’m suprised, I thought the Nat-sov crowd would halt any attempts to ban capital punishment, but it seem that the WA is ready for bigger, stronger, better proposals that do have some impact beyond recommendations and weak mandates. Well done to IA for doing something that will definitely annoy ambassadors for years to come.)

[Tel Maresh]

Nations need to realise when you endorse you are allowing that super delegate to place their vote where they choose. Even though a number who endorsed this super delegate voted against the proposal when they were an individual. If you're going to let your super delegate vote than that should be it.

I actually had not read this anywhere (yet--still new to WA), so I am grateful to have it explained so simply. Since I am an active WA member, I will be withdrawing my regional endorsement. I can see how regional endorsement could be used judiciously for nations that do not wish to actively participate in the WA, but yes, doubling up the vote seems ridiculous, at best.

As this proposal is clearly headed to pass, I have this to declare: The authoritarian nature of this proposal goes outside the jurisdiction of the World Assembly. The nature of this document to become so entrenched in the national politics of every nation here will ultimately make the World Assembly into the World Government. As such, Nagatoshi has found itself unable to support the World Assembly any longer and therefore withdraws from the organization.

Though we do not encourage other nations to do the same, the nature of the last two proposals show a decline in the democratic and free nature that the World Assembly was originally supposed to support. The very fact that the same nation proposed a restriction on capital punishment right after the proposal of a ban on the action is simply a veil of the motives of said nation. Any supporters that switched sides from Against to For simply ignore the in depth text right in front of them rather due to it 'sounding nicer' rather than really delving into the hidden motives this text supplies. An eventual downfall of individualism in the World Assembly will occur, and I will not stand for it.

Nagatoshi now removes itself from the World assembly to keep its sovereignty and personal freedoms not controlled by a corrupt council where decisions are decided in the hands of a few rather than the many. Thank you, and good luck with your dictators.

As a nation which did switch their vote between the two proposals, but in the opposite direction (from "for" an outright ban to "against" this over-reaching drivel), I wish you luck on your further journeys, but also hope that you will reconsider, since the only way to keep democracy is to participate in it.

[True Spain]

"Very, very sad. The multiple errors of this rushed attempt at a legitimate proposal have been outlined numerous times in this very chamber, but it seems that my fellow delegates have quite the low bar for approving resolutions. I wonder how many of them actually read in depth this proposal. However, that does not matter now. The influence of regional delegates have turned this mess into an actual binding resolution. We will be doing our best to comply with it, but will also naturally use its loopholes to make our statement on the matter. A repeal is in order, and it frankly cannot come soon enough. Hopefully better drafted than this resolution, of course."

[Bears Armed Mission]

"Fortunately, the fact that this Mission is staffed by carefully-selected personnel means that capital cases are reasonably unlikely to occur among urrs anyhows. If any such cases do occur, however, the fact that as our 'population' is only 200 or thereabouts we would only be allowed to submit one case to this WA agency for validation every five millennia might pose a slight problem..."

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly
for
The High Council of Clans,
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed.