NATION

PASSWORD

[DISCARDED] Ban On The Involuntary Administration Of Drugs

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5583
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:37 am

Youssath wrote:
Morover wrote:"Ambassador, I'll admit that I'm not an expert on hallucinogens from a medical perspective - but please enlighten me on a use of hallucinogens (as defined by this proposal) which will be directly beneficial to an already incapacitated patient. If you can come up with a legitimate gripe, I'll change it."

(OOC: I'm still not convinced of your ketamine argument - it just doesn't fall under the classification of hallucinogen as defined by this proposal.)

"Here's the thing, ambassador. The terminology "hallucinogens" is used to classify, on your own terms, a drug (medical or not) that induces a hallucinogenic effect on the individual. It does not state the purpose of why the hallucinogen is used. Any drugs that can induce any hallucinogenic-like symptoms is considered a hallucinogen based on your own interpretations, regardless of the purpose of why that drug is used in the first place. Ketamine is considered as a hallucinogen because it is used for recreational purposes to get "high" after clubbing (which is true), and its symptoms of double vision, irregular heartbeat, hallucinations, nausea and vomiting all fit the criteria of the consumption of hallucinogens in general. Even though it is also used extensively in medical procedures, it is still classified as a hallucinogen because there are people who still use it recreationally to get some "high" like other hallucinogens out there. Hence, ketamine produces the same outcome as that other hallucinogens and can be classified as a hallucinogen, although used similarly for medical purposes."

"Furthermore, as I have stated before, the lack thereof of consent by an already incapacitated patient does not imply affirmative response at all (no response doesn't mean you have their consent). Combined with the fact that ketamine is a hallucinogen, which is expressly classified under Article One of your proposal (even though you do not recognize ketamine to be a hallucinogen, but your resolution states so), and it will be difficult to administer proper medical procedures towards the patient without violating this resolution here."

"I would like to remind you that there is a difference between the literal interpretation of hallucinogens and the actual usage of them. It seems to me that you hold a negative view on the word of "hallucinogens", thinking that they are all used to get high and for recreational purposes when clearly, it can also be used to describe beneficial drugs that produce hallucinogenic-like effects as a side effect of the drug."

“I believe a rather key aspect of the definition is going unnoticed here: ‘intended to’. The requirement is that a substance must have an intended effect of a hallucinogenic nature, for example in recreational usage. When ketamine is used in a medical setting, the intent is most likely not for the doctors to cause sensory hallucinations, rather it is to provide anaesthesia and relief from pain.

Perhaps it could be clarified in the proposal by putting in ‘primarily intended to’ or possibly ‘exclusively intended to’, but I don’t think there is truly a need for this. In addition, even with the assumption that both of our interpretations are correct, a member nation would most likely still opt to legislate in line with mine, as it is less burdensome. Where there are two equally valid ways of interpreting a resolution, member states normally choose the one requiring the least legislation.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Youssath
Envoy
 
Posts: 208
Founded: Jul 12, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Youssath » Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:21 am

Kenmoria wrote:“I believe a rather key aspect of the definition is going unnoticed here: ‘intended to’. The requirement is that a substance must have an intended effect of a hallucinogenic nature, for example in recreational usage. When ketamine is used in a medical setting, the intent is most likely not for the doctors to cause sensory hallucinations, rather it is to provide anaesthesia and relief from pain.

Perhaps it could be clarified in the proposal by putting in ‘primarily intended to’ or possibly ‘exclusively intended to’, but I don’t think there is truly a need for this. In addition, even with the assumption that both of our interpretations are correct, a member nation would most likely still opt to legislate in line with mine, as it is less burdensome. Where there are two equally valid ways of interpreting a resolution, member states normally choose the one requiring the least legislation.”

"You have probably just summed up everything that was missing in my discussion with the Morovian Ambassador."

"I'm in agreement with the Kenmorian Ambassador here. I personally feel that a clarification of definitions is in order here, given how... short you have taken to define what a hallucinogen is. This is primarily my main argument of voting against this resolution if you ask me, so I do appreciate if greater clarity can be provided towards its definitions in order to bring more validity towards a single literal interpretation you are seeing here."

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14433
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:59 am

Youssath wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:but I don’t think there is truly a need for this.

"I'm in agreement with the Kenmorian Ambassador here.

OOC: So you agree that there's no need for a better definition and are using that as the reason to vote against? :eyebrow:
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Youssath
Envoy
 
Posts: 208
Founded: Jul 12, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Youssath » Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:18 am

Araraukar wrote:
Youssath wrote:"I'm in agreement with the Kenmorian Ambassador here.

OOC: So you agree that there's no need for a better definition and are using that as the reason to vote against? :eyebrow:

The statement before that, ambassador. :P
Last edited by Youssath on Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14433
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:34 am

Youssath wrote:The statement before that, ambassador. :P

OOC: The one where he agrees with the draft's definition being correct and your reading of it to be incorrect by pointing out you're failing to read the "intended to"?
Last edited by Araraukar on Sun Aug 25, 2019 5:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Youssath
Envoy
 
Posts: 208
Founded: Jul 12, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Youssath » Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:49 am

Araraukar wrote:
Youssath wrote:The statement before that, ambassador. :P

OOC: The one where he agrees with the draft's definition being correct and your reading of it to be incorrect by pointing out you're failing to read the "intended to"?

"Perhaps it could be clarified in the proposal by putting in ‘primarily intended to’ or possibly ‘exclusively intended to’". I don't have to agree with the entire sentence, ambassador.

User avatar
Morover
Diplomat
 
Posts: 547
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:59 am

Youssath wrote:
Araraukar wrote:OOC: The one where he agrees with the draft's definition being correct and your reading of it to be incorrect by pointing out you're failing to read the "intended to"?

"Perhaps it could be clarified in the proposal by putting in ‘primarily intended to’ or possibly ‘exclusively intended to’". I don't have to agree with the entire sentence, ambassador.

"Yes, I most certainly could clarify it. Will I? No, I don't think I will. I feel that changing a definition which currently has no legitimate complaints to it other than 'it's too brief!' to be redundant, especially when that change may open more issues than it would solve."

User avatar
Youssath
Envoy
 
Posts: 208
Founded: Jul 12, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Youssath » Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:11 am

Morover wrote:
Youssath wrote:"Perhaps it could be clarified in the proposal by putting in ‘primarily intended to’ or possibly ‘exclusively intended to’". I don't have to agree with the entire sentence, ambassador.

"Yes, I most certainly could clarify it. Will I? No, I don't think I will. I feel that changing a definition which currently has no legitimate complaints to it other than 'it's too brief!' to be redundant, especially when that change may open more issues than it would solve."

"That's saddening to hear, but of course I will respect your decision to retain the definitions as it is. Unfortunately, I won't be voting for this resolution if this is placed in the General Assembly, even though I am supportive for the rest of the resolution, since that was the primary and most glaring concern for this delegation. I hope you won't take it too hard on this."

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 2465
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Wed Aug 28, 2019 1:07 am

OOC: Article 2 is problematic. Possible scenario: patient under local anaesthetic has some sort of reaction or takes some sort of a bad turn during surgery while under local anaesthetic. Surgeons etc shouldn't have to run around a hospital or otherwise leave surgery in such an emergency situation to seek consent to sedate a patient when it may be necessary for the either the survival of the patient, pain relief, or comfort.

Re natural substances. I'm not sure that it's good policy to have member states going around eradicating such natural substances as chamomile on the off chance that someone might ingest it unintentionally.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.

User avatar
Tupolite
Attaché
 
Posts: 74
Founded: Jan 24, 2019
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Tupolite » Wed Aug 28, 2019 1:15 am

Against. The state knows better than any individual what the best practice is, including when administering pharmaceutical drugs.
Last edited by Tupolite on Wed Aug 28, 2019 1:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Political Test Results
Pro: Fascism, Corporativism, National Syndicalism, Palingenetic Nationalism, Integral Nationalism, Military Power, Imperialism, Collectivism, In-Group ("volkisch") Socioeconomic Equality, Cultural Christianity, the concept of the Proletarian Nation
Anti: Classical Liberalism, Liberal Democracy, Marxism-Leninism, Social Democracy, Libertarianism, Capitalism, Anarchism, Free Market, Pacifism, Corporate Consumer Culture, Political Egalitarianism, Feminism, LGBT, Internationalism, Globalism, Corporative Exclusivism, Individualism, Bourgeois Mentality
Ideological Inspirations: Giovanni Gentile, Georges Sorel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche, Gabriele d'Annunzio, Hubert Lagardelle, George Fitzhugh, Giuseppe Mazzini

User avatar
Morover
Diplomat
 
Posts: 547
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Wed Aug 28, 2019 2:04 pm

Bananaistan wrote:OOC: Article 2 is problematic. Possible scenario: patient under local anaesthetic has some sort of reaction or takes some sort of a bad turn during surgery while under local anaesthetic. Surgeons etc shouldn't have to run around a hospital or otherwise leave surgery in such an emergency situation to seek consent to sedate a patient when it may be necessary for the either the survival of the patient, pain relief, or comfort.

Re natural substances. I'm not sure that it's good policy to have member states going around eradicating such natural substances as chamomile on the off chance that someone might ingest it unintentionally.

OOC: Your first issue has been addressed with the inclusion of the following clause: "Further clarifies that, during medical operation which is being performed with the consent of the patient or the patient's next-of-kin, a surgeon may apply an unapproved sedative, so long as it is deemed either medically necessary for the health and wellbeing of the patient, or for the operation to proceed in a safe manner,"

Your second issue has led to me changing the wording of the relevant clause to make it so that only "reasonable threat[s]" need be suppressed.

-

On another note, a hurricane is heading my way, so I'll probably send this out tomorrow afternoon so I can get a campaign before my electricity goes out (which may happen, unfortunately).

User avatar
Maowi
Diplomat
 
Posts: 792
Founded: Jan 07, 2019
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Maowi » Wed Aug 28, 2019 2:43 pm

Morover wrote:On another note, a hurricane is heading my way, so I'll probably send this out tomorrow afternoon so I can get a campaign before my electricity goes out (which may happen, unfortunately).

OOC: Oh, there's no need to worry - Trump'll nuke that hurricane out of your way ...
Good luck and full support.

South Pacific

WA Minister
Customs Minister
Ambassador to Thaecia

--

Europeia

First Minister
Ambassador to the IDU

Former positions:
Minister of Communications
Minister of Recruitment
Deputy Minister of Recruitment
Deputy Minister of Communications
Deputy Councillor of World Assembly Affairs

Awards received:
Order of Dedication
Order of Mercury
Order of the Sapphire Star x3
Golden Pen x2
Silver Pen

--

Author of GAR #457 and GAR #480
Co-author of GAR #479

Factbooks

User avatar
Morover
Diplomat
 
Posts: 547
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:15 am


User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 19161
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:49 am

OOC
I hadn't looked at this for a while.

Wouldn't
Article Two
1. Defines a sedative as any drug in which the main effect gives a tranquilizing, sleep-inducing, or any other effect which may invoke drowsiness,
2. Prohibits all member-states from allowing the intentional sedation of its residents, except with the consent of a medical patient, or, where incapacitated, their legal next-of-kin,
effectively bar everybody except medical patients from consuming alcohol?
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
United States of Americanas
Envoy
 
Posts: 273
Founded: Jan 23, 2017
Left-wing Utopia

Postby United States of Americanas » Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:54 am

While well intentioned I feel this is something best left to each nation to govern.

This seems like it would over complicate surgeries and cause healthcare costs to rise as administrative tasks become even more burdensome.
Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.64

Damn right I’m a liberal democratic socialist. I sit in the ranks of Gandhi.
https://8values.github.io/results.html? ... 8.5&s=88.6

User avatar
United States of Americanas
Envoy
 
Posts: 273
Founded: Jan 23, 2017
Left-wing Utopia

Postby United States of Americanas » Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:55 am

Bears Armed wrote:OOC
I hadn't looked at this for a while.

Wouldn't
Article Two
1. Defines a sedative as any drug in which the main effect gives a tranquilizing, sleep-inducing, or any other effect which may invoke drowsiness,
2. Prohibits all member-states from allowing the intentional sedation of its residents, except with the consent of a medical patient, or, where incapacitated, their legal next-of-kin,
effectively bar everybody except medical patients from consuming alcohol?


I don’t think this bill has anything to do with drugs that a person self administers recreationally on their own accord. This bill is to protect people from being drugged by the government which I approve however I disapprove of the undue restrictions it places on surgeons and physicians who require ability to sedate patients.
Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.64

Damn right I’m a liberal democratic socialist. I sit in the ranks of Gandhi.
https://8values.github.io/results.html? ... 8.5&s=88.6

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5583
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:27 am

United States of Americanas wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC
I hadn't looked at this for a while.

Wouldn't
Article Two
1. Defines a sedative as any drug in which the main effect gives a tranquilizing, sleep-inducing, or any other effect which may invoke drowsiness,
2. Prohibits all member-states from allowing the intentional sedation of its residents, except with the consent of a medical patient, or, where incapacitated, their legal next-of-kin,
effectively bar everybody except medical patients from consuming alcohol?


I don’t think this bill has anything to do with drugs that a person self administers recreationally on their own accord. This bill is to protect people from being drugged by the government which I approve however I disapprove of the undue restrictions it places on surgeons and physicians who require ability to sedate patients.

(OOC: What you are describing is the intended effect, but I agree with Bears Armed that this seems to ban a lot of recreational substances such as Alcohol, since the consumers are not normally medical patients. Morover, I think you ought to withdraw the proposal and fix this.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 19161
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:28 am

United States of Americanas wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC
I hadn't looked at this for a while.

Wouldn't
Article Two
1. Defines a sedative as any drug in which the main effect gives a tranquilizing, sleep-inducing, or any other effect which may invoke drowsiness,
2. Prohibits all member-states from allowing the intentional sedation of its residents, except with the consent of a medical patient, or, where incapacitated, their legal next-of-kin,
effectively bar everybody except medical patients from consuming alcohol?


I don’t think this bill has anything to do with drugs that a person self administers recreationally on their own accord. This bill is to protect people from being drugged by the government which I approve however I disapprove of the undue restrictions it places on surgeons and physicians who require ability to sedate patients.

OOC
Self-administered intentional sedation is still intentional sedation...
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14433
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:35 pm

Bears Armed wrote:OOC
Self-administered intentional sedation is still intentional sedation...

OOC: Well, if you get properly nitpicky, all you need is the permission of a medical patient, any will do. :P
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 19161
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Sun Sep 01, 2019 3:37 am

Araraukar wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC
Self-administered intentional sedation is still intentional sedation...

OOC: Well, if you get properly nitpicky, all you need is the permission of a medical patient, any will do. :P

OOC
True.
^_^
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Youssath
Envoy
 
Posts: 208
Founded: Jul 12, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Youssath » Sun Sep 01, 2019 4:07 am

Bears Armed wrote:OOC
I hadn't looked at this for a while.

Wouldn't
Article Two
1. Defines a sedative as any drug in which the main effect gives a tranquilizing, sleep-inducing, or any other effect which may invoke drowsiness,
2. Prohibits all member-states from allowing the intentional sedation of its residents, except with the consent of a medical patient, or, where incapacitated, their legal next-of-kin,
effectively bar everybody except medical patients from consuming alcohol?

I will disagree with you on that one, bud. Sedatives are defined where the main effects gives sleep-inducing or tranquilizing effects that is related to drowsiness. Drinking alcohol moderately (and responsibly) does not give the main effect of drowsiness (if so, why the hell would anyone want to drink alcohol in a bar just to get sleepy??), and that the proper main effect of alcohol is to alleviate their negative feelings and block out stress receptors in the brain. Drinking too much alcohol, however, will induce drowsiness but it is rather a side effect, not the main effect of the consumption of alcohol. You seem to have misunderstood the meaning of "the main effect" and "side effects" of alcohol in general, and people don't drink alcohol just to feel sleepy (and if they do, I would recommend sleeping pills instead, that would be a sedative).

Just like flu medicine, which often come along with drowsiness effects, saying that flu medicine will be illegal because "drowsiness" happens to be a side-effect upon consumption is preposterous at best, especially when its main effects are to relieve its symptoms and to cure the flu. Flu medicine and alcohol are not sedatives.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5583
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun Sep 01, 2019 5:21 am

Youssath wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC
I hadn't looked at this for a while.

Wouldn't
Article Two
1. Defines a sedative as any drug in which the main effect gives a tranquilizing, sleep-inducing, or any other effect which may invoke drowsiness,
2. Prohibits all member-states from allowing the intentional sedation of its residents, except with the consent of a medical patient, or, where incapacitated, their legal next-of-kin,
effectively bar everybody except medical patients from consuming alcohol?

I will disagree with you on that one, bud. Sedatives are defined where the main effects gives sleep-inducing or tranquilizing effects that is related to drowsiness. Drinking alcohol moderately (and responsibly) does not give the main effect of drowsiness (if so, why the hell would anyone want to drink alcohol in a bar just to get sleepy??), and that the proper main effect of alcohol is to alleviate their negative feelings and block out stress receptors in the brain. Drinking too much alcohol, however, will induce drowsiness but it is rather a side effect, not the main effect of the consumption of alcohol. You seem to have misunderstood the meaning of "the main effect" and "side effects" of alcohol in general, and people don't drink alcohol just to feel sleepy (and if they do, I would recommend sleeping pills instead, that would be a sedative).

Just like flu medicine, which often come along with drowsiness effects, saying that flu medicine will be illegal because "drowsiness" happens to be a side-effect upon consumption is preposterous at best, especially when its main effects are to relieve its symptoms and to cure the flu. Flu medicine and alcohol are not sedatives.

(OOC: I agree with you on the case of alcohol. However, this still bans sleep medication, in which the primary effect is certainly drowsiness, from being used by non-patients. Even going by the most permissible definition, quite a few sleep medications are available over the counter without prescription, so wouldn’t be allowed. A simple fix would be to require the consent of the taker of the substance, rather than a medical patient.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14433
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:55 am

Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: I agree with you on the case of alcohol. However, this still bans sleep medication, in which the primary effect is certainly drowsiness, from being used by non-patients. Even going by the most permissible definition, quite a few sleep medications are available over the counter without prescription, so wouldn’t be allowed. A simple fix would be to require the consent of the taker of the substance, rather than a medical patient.)

OOC: Melatonin comes in mind (at low dose pills it's over the counter here), as its literal intended effect is to induce drowsiness. It's not a sleeping pill, it just helps you hit the "really tired, need to go to bed now" phase. (But if something alarming comes up, like an emergency, you can pull through the phase, just like you can if you're just normally exhausted. That's not really doable with proper sleep medications.)
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Morover
Diplomat
 
Posts: 547
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:18 am

OOC:

Damn, I've been busy. These are some drastic oversights on my part, so I'll take them down now and repost them next weekend. Looks like I won't lose power anyways, so this was a somewhat pointless rush. That's an oversight on my part.

User avatar
Morover
Diplomat
 
Posts: 547
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:08 am

OOC: The primary issue that arose has been fixed. Theoretically, this will be submitted and campaigned for beginning on Tuesday night.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Albaeara, North Jericho

Advertisement

Remove ads