[DEFEATED] Insta-Repeal "Drug Decriminalization Act"

[Aeisonia]

I would 100% support this

[Abacathea]

Only two short clauses arguing against the mandates and the rest attacking the preamble? I’m sure you can do better

Clauses added attacking one of the problematic definitions which I believe to be significant and the failure of the proposal to address a key component of the issue

Additionally it wouldn't ordinarily be par for the course for me to spend much time on a preamble at all however, the preamble is what sets up the basis for what follows and I believe in this instance to be significant in terms of what voters expect from the resolution and why.

[Abacathea]

Your "gotcha" seems very premature considering you appear to be looking at this through the lense of an American (I presume owing to your references to states) and not beyond it.



Respectfully and equally factually corruption in Law Enforcement is often rooted far beyond the organization and more to the individual(s) perpetuating said corruption. This proposal currently at vote is weaponizing the currentl RL topical nature of current american law enforcement politic to stir emotions in favor of its IG agenda and I don't subscribe to it.

"A state is a state is a state, ambassador. Whether it subsumes itself in some silly confederacy - such an alliance being, itself, a state - or acts on its own makes no difference. A state, or country, or nation, or government, or whatever term you want to use, which outlaws something its people are willing to spend lots of money on, is going to be vulnerable to a certain amount of corruption. I don't subscribe to the Murrkin method of governance, and frankly no one should. It's not parochial for the World Assembly to acknowledge that trade in illegal drugs is one major funding source of corruption in security forces, no matter what method of governance you subscribe to."

"The state" is "the government." If someone said "The American state has enacted policies..." that's very clearly the federal government. Actually, by reference to books and radio, I was attempting to invoke Warsaw Pact states (countries), including the USSR, which often had rampant corruption among their various security apparatus. While you can reasonably make the OOC inference that the target is primarily coming from a North American point of view (I believe the author is Canadian?), that doesn't somehow automatically invalidate its arguments for the rest of the planet. Police corruption is a worldwide problem, and just because the rate is above zero in Portugal and Amsterdam doesn't mean illegal drug money is a negligible source.

It's telling that of the 27 occurrences of the letter string "drug" on the Wikipedia page for police corruption only three are in specific reference to the United States (one under the country heading, one as a general reference to the so-called "war on drugs," and one in the references list).

Your point regarding the fictional nation of Murrika is noted Ambassador, that notwithstanding police corruption (and I think it actually reinforces my point that we find ourselves devolving into this line of thought with regards to the target resolution) should be addressed then by specific legislation, not shoehorned into a proposal to decriminalize something because there is evidence that the two share some cause and effect.

A person once told me, a person is smart, people are dumb. The same cannot be said for corruption in a police force or any powerful established body, people are smart, a person can be dumb. To rationalize international legislation over persons who make bad choices and do not represent the overall is frightening to me.

I do not doubt, under any circumstances that there [i]are bad, corrupt and frankly fucking inept police officers out there. I do however know for a fact, without any doubt whatsoever, that they are not representative of the majority. That the average narcotics/drugs units in police forces worldwide are not festering dens of corruption infiltrated by the black market with officers on the take left right and center.

[Adezku]

"If you don't mind my asking, Ambassador, can you elaborate on this so-called 'destabilizing' effect view you have?"

"Does uncontrolled use of drugs, narcotics, and other addictive substances not lead to exactly that - addiction? This continual need, Ambassador, leads to the user of such substances to waste money and time in acquiring such substances--whereas such could be more productively invested in their duties to themselves, their family, and their country. If such duties go unfulfilled en-masse, it destabilises the nation through unfulfilled services resulting in public disorder, crime, and a potential health-crisis by way of overdoses if the affected nation has not adequately funded their medical services," The Adezkan ambassador furrows his brow. "This, of course, is intolerable. As such, instead of trying to normalise drug use as is done through such acts as the Drug Decriminalisation Act and other such legislation, the member states of the World Assembly should try to do the opposite: ensure that the use of drugs is a criminal offence and punish the criminals accordingly,"

The Baron Makarovich smiles politely and gives a single nod. "I trust this has answered your question, Ambassador?"

[Greater Cesnica]

Lamenting that clause 3a, sweepingly and broadly mandates the decriminalization of drugs for the purpose of "simple possession" without any consideration towards mitigating factors eg; The quantity of a controlled drug in a persons possession, nature of the adverse effects or addictive nature of said controlled drug or classification of the drug in question,

"Ambassador, for the purposes of my intent when I was co-authoring this resolution with my esteemed colleagues from Honeydewistania, I did not wish to draw any differentiation between the differences classes and categories of drugs. For, the societal evils that manifest upon the criminalization of substance abuse victims are not limited to those using so-called "soft" drugs, as opposed to so-called "hard" drugs.

Naturally, I am opposed to this repeal in its entirety, but I specifically wanted to make my position perfectly clear on that one particular point."

[Untecna]

"If you don't mind my asking, Ambassador, can you elaborate on this so-called 'destabilizing' effect view you have?"

"Does uncontrolled use of drugs, narcotics, and other addictive substances not lead to exactly that - addiction? This continual need, Ambassador, leads to the user of such substances to waste money and time in acquiring such substances--whereas such could be more productively invested in their duties to themselves, their family, and their country. If such duties go unfulfilled en-masse, it destabilises the nation through unfulfilled services resulting in public disorder, crime, and a potential health-crisis by way of overdoses if the affected nation has not adequately funded their medical services," The Adezkan ambassador furrows his brow. "This, of course, is intolerable. As such, instead of trying to normalise drug use as is done through such acts as the Drug Decriminalisation Act and other such legislation, the member states of the World Assembly should try to do the opposite: ensure that the use of drugs is a criminal offence and punish the criminals accordingly,"

The Baron Makarovich smiles politely and gives a single nod. "I trust this has answered your question, Ambassador?"

"Yes, yes, it does. I disagree, however. It should be the right of the citizens, the people, to decide what they wish with their bodies and health, not the state's or the international community. You'd find that even if you do legalize something, or even decriminalize it, not everyone will become addicted; only some will, and those tend to be the same people as before legalization or decriminalization. In terms of health you can simply provide free universal healthcare like any smart nation. In terms of crime, have a large and capable police force, maybe even using military if you must.

The opinions of the international community may differ, Ambassador, but the passing of the DDA will signal a new age of civil rights to come."

[Gonswanza]

"Given the legal status of drugs in Gonswanza, I see no real reason to support or discourage this draft... However, without a noteworthy replacement and a hostile intent to repeal via attacking the preamble (and two clauses, as mentioned before) without criticizing the main body of the resolution, this seems more likely to fall on deaf ears before being pushed forwards by ignorant parties goaded into supporting it without reading through the legal documents in question. Alas, while I'd enjoy holding a neutral opinion, to be frank, I will have to say that I am not in support of this document. Rather, it simply presents itself as an invitation for multiple shorthand "blockers" to pop up should it pass, going back and forth either in support of legalization or in support of criminalizing drugs that may or may not include pharmaceuticals, alcohol and/or tobacco per the terms of said blockers which will then throw local laws for a loop. Adding to that, the decriminalization act is intended to offer a mild alternative, rather than forcing nations from lifting their prohibition, as a suggestion on the path of legalization without causing a legal trainwreck at all levels."

-President Mawar Al-Sherbak.

[Abacathea]

"Given the legal status of drugs in Gonswanza, I see no real reason to support or discourage this draft... However, without a noteworthy replacement and a hostile intent to repeal via attacking the preamble (and two clauses, as mentioned before) without criticizing the main body of the resolution, this seems more likely to fall on deaf ears before being pushed forwards by ignorant parties goaded into supporting it without reading through the legal documents in question. Alas, while I'd enjoy holding a neutral opinion, to be frank, I will have to say that I am not in support of this document. Rather, it simply presents itself as an invitation for multiple shorthand "blockers" to pop up should it pass, going back and forth either in support of legalization or in support of criminalizing drugs that may or may not include pharmaceuticals, alcohol and/or tobacco per the terms of said blockers which will then throw local laws for a loop. Adding to that, the decriminalization act is intended to offer a mild alternative, rather than forcing nations from lifting their prohibition, as a suggestion on the path of legalization without causing a legal trainwreck at all levels."

-President Mawar Al-Sherbak.

Mr President, I'm going to assume that you only read the comments as opposed to the draft, because you'd note had you read the draft in its current form it no longer simply addresses two clauses. Given that you didn't take the time to read the entire proposal, I have accordingly opted not to read your comment any further than that.

"Yes, yes, it does. I disagree, however. It should be the right of the citizens, the people, to decide what they wish with their bodies and health, not the state's or the international community. You'd find that even if you do legalize something, or even decriminalize it, not everyone will become addicted; only some will, and those tend to be the same people as before legalization or decriminalization. In terms of health you can simply provide free universal healthcare like any smart nation. In terms of crime, have a large and capable police force, maybe even using military if you must.

The opinions of the international community may differ, Ambassador, but the passing of the DDA will signal a new age of civil rights to come."

If the passing of the DDA is that significant to your civil rights why not enact it domestically and call it a day? Its certainly no excuse to shoehorn an unsuitable bill through the General Assembly Ambassador.

"Ambassador, for the purposes of my intent when I was co-authoring this resolution with my esteemed colleagues from Honeydewistania, I did not wish to draw any differentiation between the differences classes and categories of drugs. For, the societal evils that manifest upon the criminalization of substance abuse victims are not limited to those using so-called "soft" drugs, as opposed to so-called "hard" drugs.

Naturally, I am opposed to this repeal in its entirety, but I specifically wanted to make my position perfectly clear on that one particular point.

Ambassador, you are yet to convince me any more that all drugs are equally evil than you are to convince me that a bill purporting to be about drug decriminalization is going to fix the many evils you associate with it. Especially considering the evils you appear to be focused on with your proposal are perceived corruption whilst making no effort to address any root issues surrounding drugs themselves such as addiction, welfare, poverty, crime etc...

Your position is noted, ours is very much transparent.

[Greater Cesnica]

Ambassador, you are yet to convince me any more that all drugs are equally evil than you are to convince me that a bill purporting to be about drug decriminalization is going to fix the many evils you associate with it. Especially considering the evils you appear to be focused on with your proposal are perceived corruption whilst making no effort to address any root issues surrounding drugs themselves such as addiction, welfare, poverty, crime etc...

Your position is noted, ours is very much transparent.

"A draft focusing on addiction will be introduced later today by my esteemed colleagues from Morover. Our Delegation is co-authoring the draft with theirs."

[Untecna]

"Yes, yes, it does. I disagree, however. It should be the right of the citizens, the people, to decide what they wish with their bodies and health, not the state's or the international community. You'd find that even if you do legalize something, or even decriminalize it, not everyone will become addicted; only some will, and those tend to be the same people as before legalization or decriminalization. In terms of health you can simply provide free universal healthcare like any smart nation. In terms of crime, have a large and capable police force, maybe even using military if you must.

The opinions of the international community may differ, Ambassador, but the passing of the DDA will signal a new age of civil rights to come."

If the passing of the DDA is that significant to your civil rights why not enact it domestically and call it a day? Its certainly no excuse to shoehorn an unsuitable bill through the General Assembly Ambassador.

"Because, Ambassador, we already have. We decriminalized and legalized drugs. Of course, with fair regulation, but who wouldn't? The international community should stand to do the same."

[Untecna]

OOC: No support.
IC: "No support. Untecna wishes for the decriminalization of drugs to pass."

[Doge Land]

It's one thing to insta-repeal a resolution that barely passes. But there's a lot of people voting FOR. So my question is, why (insta-)repeal it if people like the proposal?

[Greater Cesnica]

It's one thing to insta-repeal a resolution that barely passes. But there's a lot of people voting FOR. So my question is, why (insta-)repeal it if people like the proposal?

"The authoring delegation is opposed to the notion of drug decriminalization in the first place and seems to be rather offended by the notion that the state, and more specifically law enforcement have a proven track record across member states of abusing drug laws to target disenfranchised populations. It's only natural that they'd want to repeal the resolution- I myself don't particularly fault them for attempting to do so."

[Bananaistan]

It's one thing to insta-repeal a resolution that barely passes. But there's a lot of people voting FOR. So my question is, why (insta-)repeal it if people like the proposal?

"The authoring delegation is opposed to the notion of drug decriminalization in the first place and seems to be rather offended by the notion that the state, and more specifically law enforcement have a proven track record across member states of abusing drug laws to target disenfranchised populations. It's only natural that they'd want to repeal the resolution- I myself don't particularly fault them for attempting to do so."

"It's hard to see how there are any disenfranchised populations or law enforcement abuse in any compliant member state considering the provisions of the many civil rights and justice resolutions already on the books. The authors are correct to be offended by the notion."

[Godular]

Zodiac bangs a gavel on his podium, then wonders for a moment where the gavel came from since he had an inflatable mallet before.

"I would like to introduce a motion to change the name of this proposal! I hereby demand it be named 'The Drug Re-Criminalization Act'!"

[WayNeacTia]

Zodiac bangs a gavel on his podium, then wonders for a moment where the gavel came from since he had an inflatable mallet before.

"I would like to introduce a motion to change the name of this proposal! I hereby demand it be named 'The Drug Re-Criminalization Act'!"

So potheads are criminals?

[Godular]

Zodiac bangs a gavel on his podium, then wonders for a moment where the gavel came from since he had an inflatable mallet before.

"I would like to introduce a motion to change the name of this proposal! I hereby demand it be named 'The Drug Re-Criminalization Act'!"

So potheads are criminals?

"That seems a tad discriminatory to those who make hats of cookware."

[Abacathea]

It's one thing to insta-repeal a resolution that barely passes. But there's a lot of people voting FOR. So my question is, why (insta-)repeal it if people like the proposal?

"The authoring delegation is opposed to the notion of drug decriminalization in the first place and seems to be rather offended by the notion that the state, and more specifically law enforcement have a proven track record across member states of abusing drug laws to target disenfranchised populations. It's only natural that they'd want to repeal the resolution- I myself don't particularly fault them for attempting to do so."

Ambassador, if I may, I would like to state right now, that i wish you no ill will and there is no bad blood I hope between our delegacies first and foremost.

That said you’ve reinforced my point in a lot of ways with this comment. This legislation was never about tackling the root causes of drugs and the issues drug use presents which would have been a more laudable goal, instead it addresses drugs to “stick it to the man” so to speak. It will fix no problems for drug users, it will not reduce police interactions because the status of drugs is not legal, just not unlawful. Ergo drugs even in quantities consistent with simple possession will still be probable cause to investigate an individual for drug trafficking etc. What you’ve created is a political statement in the guise of an honorable goal, and you are correct, we do not share that view.

[Greater Cesnica]

Ambassador, if I may, I would like to state right now, that i wish you no ill will and there is no bad blood I hope between our delegacies first and foremost.

"I do indeed reciprocate this notion."

That said you’ve reinforced my point in a lot of ways with this comment. This legislation was never about tackling the root causes of drugs and the issues drug use presents which would have been a more laudable goal, instead it addresses drugs to “stick it to the man” so to speak. It will fix no problems for drug users, it will not reduce police interactions because the status of drugs is not legal, just not unlawful. Ergo drugs even in quantities consistent with simple possession will still be probable cause to investigate an individual for drug trafficking etc. What you’ve created is a political statement in the guise of an honorable goal, and you are correct, we do not share that view.

"We have reiterated this point multiple times, but I will make it once more: rehabilitation and tackling addiction is an issue that belongs within its own resolution. My colleagues from Morover are co-authoring this resolution with our delegation, and shall shortly be disseminated amongst the various delegations of the General Assembly shortly. Drug decriminalization is not a political statement; it is a tangible benefit to the masses."

[Bears Armed]

Zodiac bangs a gavel on his podium, then wonders for a moment where the gavel came from since he had an inflatable mallet before.

"I would like to introduce a motion to change the name of this proposal! I hereby demand it be named 'The Drug Re-Criminalization Act'!"

OOC: The game's coding automatically sets the title of any Repeal proposal as Repeal "Name of Target Resolution", and the author can not change this.

____________________________________________________________________

"a tangible benefit to the masses."

"masses"?! I'm fairly sure that in most nations only a minority of the population uses illegal drugs.
Or are you admitting that your own proposal will encourage more people to use drugs, and saying that you consider this to be a good thing?

[Sandaoguo]

Maybe I'm very late to this, but when did mentioning the author of a resolution become legal in a repeal? Repeals are supposed to be about the resolution text, not who wrote it.

[Bears Armed]

Maybe I'm very late to this, but when did mentioning the author of a resolution become legal in a repeal? Repeals are supposed to be about the resolution text, not who wrote it.

Good point, even though the clauses in question are complaining specifically about the opinions expressed by the author in the resolution rather than about any other aspect of their nations or [perceived] OOC details.

[Abacathea]

Maybe I'm very late to this, but when did mentioning the author of a resolution become legal in a repeal? Repeals are supposed to be about the resolution text, not who wrote it.

Good point, even though the clauses in question are complaining specifically about the opinions expressed by the author in the resolution rather than about any other aspect of their nations or [perceived] OOC details.

I had considered the way I wrote it to be legal but given this has been raised I would ask for a legality check to see if that is the case please.

[Greater Cesnica]

"masses"?! I'm fairly sure that in most nations only a minority of the population uses illegal drugs.
Or are you admitting that your own proposal will encourage more people to use drugs, and saying that you consider this to be a good thing?

"The criminalization of drugs and those that use them leads to consequences that extend far beyond merely drug users. The repression of disenfranchised populations under the guise of seeking to eradicate drug use and possession of drugs, high incarceration rates, the waste of a nation's expenditure- all can be curbed through the decriminalization of drug possession."

[Bears Armed]

"masses"?! I'm fairly sure that in most nations only a minority of the population uses illegal drugs.
Or are you admitting that your own proposal will encourage more people to use drugs, and saying that you consider this to be a good thing?

"The criminalization of drugs and those that use them leads to consequences that extend far beyond merely drug users. The repression of disenfranchised populations under the guise of seeking to eradicate drug use and possession of drugs, high incarceration rates, the waste of a nation's expenditure- all can be curbed through the decriminalization of drug possession."

OOC: How many more times do people have to point this out to you? NS =/= USA.

high incarceration rates, the waste of a nation's expenditure- all can be curbed through the decriminalization of drug possession.

OOC: So either create a proposal abolishing incarceration for everything or repeal the ban on executions and then create a proposal imposing the death penalty -- without the 20-30 years of appeals that the RL USA's system allows -- for ALL crimes. Either of those would be even more effective at saving nations' money... [/sarcasm]