[DEFEATED] Don't Shoot Strangers Act

[Gastash]

It would help if I knew why firing a warning shot is unacceptable in these circumstances.

OOC: You're the one forbidding hostile actions. Shooting tends to be taken as a hostile action, especially if you don't know if you're being shot at (and just missed).

You've been telling me to allow member nations to actually shoot at them, without any prior warning, so long as they're within the member nation's borders. I'm not sure why they can't fire a warning shot first.

[Araraukar]

OOC: You're the one forbidding hostile actions. Shooting tends to be taken as a hostile action, especially if you don't know if you're being shot at (and just missed).

You've been telling me to allow member nations to actually shoot at them, without any prior warning, so long as they're within the member nation's borders. I'm not sure why they can't fire a warning shot first.

OOC: And I keep asking you for a realistic non-space-faring-FT-nations situation where it might actually happen that you could possibly stumble into another nation and have no idea there is a nation there. Think RL. Israel might not want to recognize Palestine as an independent nation, but they don't try to claim there aren't people there who do claim it to be a nation. Or take Russia, which has always had a fairly vague idea of where exactly its borders lie; they knew they'd start a war when they sent an army into Ukraine. The army crossing the border was considered all on its own an act of war by Ukraine, even before any shots were fired.

In some rainforest jungle you might not be aware there are people there, but you can't be unaware of there being a nation there, because world maps aren't exactly hard to come by, and anyone with normal intelligence is going to be able to name the nations neighbouring their own.

[Gastash]

OOC: And I keep asking you for a realistic non-space-faring-FT-nations situation where it might actually happen that you could possibly stumble into another nation and have no idea there is a nation there.

A rebel faction loses a civil war and scatters, or a country is bombed into oblivion. Everyone thinks they're dead, until years later when they're rediscovered in the wilderness. Or, what if the moon was inhabited? That's a first contact waiting at your doorstep, no FT required.

In those circumstances, where the nations are meeting for the very first time, why should you be allowed to shoot at them before you learn anything about them, without sending a warning signal first?

[Araraukar]

A rebel faction loses a civil war and scatters

OOC: Faction =/= nation.

or a country is bombed into oblivion.

This doesn't actually mean what you think it means, or else both UK and Germany would've ceased to exist in WW2.

Everyone thinks they're dead, until years later when they're rediscovered in the wilderness.

A people =/= nation.

Or, what if the moon was inhabited? That's a first contact waiting at your doorstep, no FT required.

Before spaceflight we had telescopes for centuries and radio for decades. If there was any kind of civilization there that we could interact in any meaningful way, we'd have "found" them long before we actually went there. Actually, that scenario just reinforces the whole "you're not going to be unaware of going into someone else's territory" thing.

In those circumstances, where the nations are meeting for the very first time, why should you be allowed to shoot at them before you learn anything about them, without sending a warning signal first?

If there was a civilization on the Moon, and they'd shot at our moonlanders, I'd have totally understood it. Home invasion and all that. But likewise, if Moon people landed unannounced anywhere on Earth... well, one word: Roswell. In the best case scenario they'd get locked up (possibly dissected) and certainly would vanish into some kind of top secret military base never to be heard of ever again...

But if you seriously want to write this for starfaring peeps, then write it for starfaring peeps.

Reason I keep bringing up the "only have it apply when the member nation you're wanting to legislate on is outside of their own borders" is because 1. people don't like uninvited visitors, not as individuals, not as nations, and if you stop fighting that, you'll have a much easier time to pass this, and 2. IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE, especially given that you can't legislate on non-member nations, so you're in essence giving non-member nations the first strike ability here, what with requiring hostile actions before the member nation can shoot at the invasion forces. And I just don't see that being something that can be passed. Like at all.

If the main application is going to be space travel, then the WA nation's peeps would be outside of their own borders anyway, so it's not like you're making a huge sacrifice of ideals with writing that into it to begin with. You're fighting a losing battle here. Don't die on this hill.

[Gastash]

Edit 8: Added "acquiring a threatening position within the entity's national borders" to the list of hostile actions.

The wording is intended to allow member nations to fire upon unknown entities coming near their planet/border station immediately, but prevent them from claiming any stretch of space as their sovereign territory and shooting everything they see. It is, as always, open to further edits.

[Tinfect]

Recognizing that even the heart of the most intrepid explorer harbors a primal fear of the unknown;

Jasot Rehlan, Military Oversight representative of the Imperium of Tinfect and relevant official for this sort of thing stepped forward. From where, exactly, isn't known, but she certainly stepped forward. "Ambassador, if they're afraid of their work, they aren't suited to the task. And, try leave your cultural assumptions out of international law."

Realizing that there is nothing more unknown than the first encounter between two peoples;

"Dramatic exaggeration isn't needed in law."

Concluding, therefore, that neither side of such an encounter can claim foreknowledge of the other side having hostile intent;

"This depends on what you mean by first encounter; first contact, or first observation. Assuming there's been any kind of observation before contact, as is usually the case, the Imperium is fully able to determine hostility. For the latter, or, in cases in which both are true, the Imperium finds it better to assume hostility than allow a massacre."

Asserting that the vast majority of explorers and other such border dwellers do not exist in a constant state of maliciousness;

"Clearly your Government doesn't have much experience on the subject matter."

Damning any so-called "preemptive strike" exhibited by either side to be an act of the aforementioned primal fear;

"Or, justified precaution, or border enforcement; this 'primal fear' theory of yours doesn't hold up to so much as a stiff breeze. The Imperium is not about to give foreigners a pass for violating the border just because we don't know who they are. Again, keep your cultural assumptions to yourself; the people of the Imperium don't share your propensity to jump at shadows."

Affirming that, as a civilized body, this august assembly should strive to promote acts of logic and reason;

"Then you don't have any problem with the Imperium enforcing it's laws?"

Declaring that logic and reason would prohibit an unprovoked attack without any knowledge of the consequences;

"Ambassador, 'logic and reason', is not 'whatever agrees with my position'. If you can't take action without prophetic knowledge, one wonders how your Government gets anything done at all."

Proclaiming that first impressions matter;

"If they're considered a legal military target from the outset, they aren't making a good first impression."

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, "an act of hostility" towards an entity as any of the following:
entering an area that the entity has issued clear, universal warning signals to not enter; or

"And what, exactly counts as universal? If we're first meeting, presumably we don't speak their language and they don't speak ours. The Imperium marks its territory as best we can; it's not exactly possible to put up a sign every meter along the border. That doesn't make it acceptable to violate our border; ignorance of the law is no excuse, and all that."

acquiring a threatening position within the entity's national borders;

"You mean, any position within our borders? A foreign entity holding a position within the Imperial territories is itself a hostile act, if we're being charitable; if we're being serious, it's an act of war. The Imperium will not put its citizens at risk because a foreign incursion isn't 'threatening' enough."

Prohibits member nations from committing an act of hostility towards another nation during the nations' initial encounter if the encountered nation has not committed an act of hostility.

"Given the lax definitions of hostility in this Legislation, you're putting lives at risk. The Imperium-" She was cut off by an alert chime from a tablet. "That, shouldn't happen, one moment."
When she looked up from the tablet, her expression was very different. "The Imperium... won't support this draft, or any further variation upon it." With that, she left in quite a hurry.

OOC:
Read the signature if you're confused.

[Gastash]

Recognizing that even the heart of the most intrepid explorer harbors a primal fear of the unknown;

Jasot Rehlan, Military Oversight representative of the Imperium of Tinfect and relevant official for this sort of thing stepped forward. From where, exactly, isn't known, but she certainly stepped forward. "Ambassador, if they're afraid of their work, they aren't suited to the task."

"The point is that everyone holds a bit of fear inside."

"And, try leave your cultural assumptions out of international law."

"It is not in the law. It is in the preamble."

Realizing that there is nothing more unknown than the first encounter between two peoples;

"Dramatic exaggeration isn't needed in law."

"Neither are preambles."

Concluding, therefore, that neither side of such an encounter can claim foreknowledge of the other side having hostile intent;

"This depends on what you mean by first encounter; first contact, or first observation. Assuming there's been any kind of observation before contact, as is usually the case, the Imperium is fully able to determine hostility."

"May I ask how you make such determinations? I would like to put it in the proposal."

For the latter, or, in cases in which both are true, the Imperium finds it better to assume hostility than allow a massacre."

"This proposal does not prevent you from assuming hostility. It prevents you from immediately attacking."

Asserting that the vast majority of explorers and other such border dwellers do not exist in a constant state of maliciousness;

"Clearly your Government doesn't have much experience on the subject matter."

"That is insulting and untrue. Every government has experience with borders."

Damning any so-called "preemptive strike" exhibited by either side to be an act of the aforementioned primal fear;

"Or, justified precaution, or border enforcement; this 'primal fear' theory of yours doesn't hold up to so much as a stiff breeze. The Imperium is not about to give foreigners a pass for violating the border just because we don't know who they are. Again, keep your cultural assumptions to yourself; the people of the Imperium don't share your propensity to jump at shadows."

"You are advocating for the deaths of everyone you don't recognize, and you accuse me of jumping at shadows?"

OOC: I'm trying to stop the proposal from applying in the member nations' territory. The wording might not be perfect, but I certainly don't want what you think I want.

Affirming that, as a civilized body, this august assembly should strive to promote acts of logic and reason;

"Then you don't have any problem with the Imperium enforcing it's laws?"

"That is correct."

Declaring that logic and reason would prohibit an unprovoked attack without any knowledge of the consequences;

"Ambassador, 'logic and reason', is not 'whatever agrees with my position'. If you can't take action without prophetic knowledge, one wonders how your Government gets anything done at all."

"You yourself said that it is easy to determine whether an entity is hostile. I merely request that you make that determination before firing."

Proclaiming that first impressions matter;

"If they're considered a legal military target from the outset, they aren't making a good first impression."

"That is correct."

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, "an act of hostility" towards an entity as any of the following:
entering an area that the entity has issued clear, universal warning signals to not enter; or

"And what, exactly counts as universal? If we're first meeting, presumably we don't speak their language and they don't speak ours. The Imperium marks its territory as best we can; it's not exactly possible to put up a sign every meter along the border. That doesn't make it acceptable to violate our border; ignorance of the law is no excuse, and all that."

"This clause came from Ambassador Bell's suggestion of a 'warning shot' to deter hostiles."

acquiring a threatening position within the entity's national borders;

"You mean, any position within our borders?"

"Yes, that is exactly what I mean."

"'threatening' enough."

"Notice how I did not define the word 'threatening'. I expect most nations will consider any incursion upon their borders as a threat."

Prohibits member nations from committing an act of hostility towards another nation during the nations' initial encounter if the encountered nation has not committed an act of hostility.

"Given the lax definitions of hostility in this Legislation, you're putting lives at risk. The Imperium-" She was cut off by an alert chime from a tablet. "That, shouldn't happen, one moment."
When she looked up from the tablet, her expression was very different. "The Imperium... won't support this draft, or any further variation upon it." With that, she left in quite a hurry.

"Unconditional opposition because of poor wording? That doesn't make any..." Azaven trails off as he realizes the Imperial ambassador has left the room.

"Timing," he mutters to himself, "I've never had the trick of it."

[Gastash]

Edit 9: Replaced the reasoning section of the OP with a disclaimer that the proposal shouldn't apply within the member nation's borders, as that seems to be of greater concern.

[Liberimery]

If it doesn’t apply in member nations boarders the there are two conditions where it does apply: when a member state is invading another nation or a member state enters unclaimed territory. In the first case, it’s an action of war and the second case it’s non judicable because the territory in question is not a party to this August Assembly at the time of incident and thus the aggrieved is not party to the claims in this proposal.

[Gastash]

If it doesn’t apply in member nations boarders the there are two conditions where it does apply: when a member state is invading another nation or a member state enters unclaimed territory. In the first case, it’s an action of war

"It is more likely that the member nation will approach the border rather than invade it, once they realize there's people on the other side."

and the second case it’s non judicable because the territory in question is not a party to this August Assembly at the time of incident and thus the aggrieved is not party to the claims in this proposal.

"That isn't true; there are several resolutions that legislate in unclaimed territory. International Salvage Laws is an example of a resolution that only applies outside of borders."

[Araraukar]

and the second case it’s non judicable because the territory in question is not a party to this August Assembly at the time of incident and thus the aggrieved is not party to the claims in this proposal.

"That isn't true; there are several resolutions that legislate in unclaimed territory."

"The World Assembly can legislate on the actions of member nations and their people when they are outside of their own borders. And restricting this to that function would be perfectly acceptable. Trying to legislate what nations can do inside their own borders, is where it goes too far."

[Gastash]

Trying to legislate what nations can do inside their own borders, is where it goes too far."

"It doesn't do that anymore, thanks to clause 1(d)."

[Araraukar]

"It doesn't do that anymore, thanks to clause 1(d)."

"Perhaps you could explain how exactly you deduce that from "acquiring a threatening position within the entity's national borders"? Notice the words "a threatening position"."

[Gastash]

"It doesn't do that anymore, thanks to clause 1(d)."

"Perhaps you could explain how exactly you deduce that from "acquiring a threatening position within the entity's national borders"? Notice the words "a threatening position"."

"If I took out the 'threatening', member nations could claim whatever stretch of space their exploratory vessel happens to be in as their territory."

[Araraukar]

"If I took out the 'threatening', member nations could claim whatever stretch of space their exploratory vessel happens to be in as their territory."

OOC: Which is exactly how most overseas colonies were claimed in RL on Earth...

IC: "Which part of "outside their own borders" is so difficult to comprehend? A nation, even a space nation, has borders that it wants to protect. When they are inside their borders, they should be allowed to defend their borders. If they go outside of them - even to look for more space to claim - they are still outside their borders. You might want to add a definition about what counts as national border, if you think a space nation honestly didn't know where its borders lay. If they tried to claim some other space nation's turf, well, if you don't limit the other nation from defending its own turf, it could take care of the situation on its own."

[Gastash]

Edit 10: Replaced "acquiring a threatening position" with "violating" the entity's national borders in 1(d). Changed the order of the definitions (1(d) is now 1(c)). Added a clarification clause to prevent the territory-claiming loophole.

Edit 11: Replaced "purposes" with "purpose".

Edit 12: Changed the spacing.

[Gastash]

"I interpret the silence to mean unanimous, unconditional support."

[Kenmoria]

"I interpret the silence to mean unanimous, unconditional support."

“That’s an interesting way of interpreting a lack of response. I, for one, have concerns with clause 3, as it appears to suggest that the World Assembly is prohibiting claiming territory for certain purposes. In which case, I ask how it is possible for the WA to ascertain why a member nation did a certain course of action.”

[Araraukar]

"I interpret the silence to mean unanimous, unconditional support."

OOC: What it actually means is "more interesting things going on". Sorry, but you know how it works.

Well, that, and the beast called Real Life getting in the way...

[Gastash]

"I ask how it is possible for the WA to ascertain why a member nation did a certain course of action.”

"If they plant a flag right after they see another nation, then start shooting."

"I interpret the silence to mean unanimous, unconditional support."

OOC: What it actually means is "more interesting things going on". Sorry, but you know how it works.

Yeah... yeah, I know.

[Morover]

"In clause one, you say that 'an act of hostility' can be inflicted upon '[any] entity', yet in clause two you only specify that nations may not have an act of hostility inflicted upon them. I do believe that this is dismissive of sovereign groups that don't quite constitute 'nations' - such as a group of traveling merchants, or the like. I would like to support this proposal but this seems like an oversight."

"Furthermore, do you have any examples of how this proposal would work in regard to nations with disputed borders. Specifically, when one side of the disputed border has met a foreign entity and has offered some sort of pseudo-alliance and allowed them to enter their territory - and, specifically, the disputed territory - and the other nation involved in the territorial dispute fires upon them. While this is an awfully specific situation, I feel that this sort of proposal should have some sort of clarification for situations just like and similar to it."

[Gastash]

"In clause one, you say that 'an act of hostility' can be inflicted upon '[any] entity', yet in clause two you only specify that nations may not have an act of hostility inflicted upon them. I do believe that this is dismissive of sovereign groups that don't quite constitute 'nations' - such as a group of traveling merchants, or the like. I would like to support this proposal but this seems like an oversight."

"I have changed 'nation' to 'entity', although I suspect doing so risks further complications."

"when one side of the disputed border has met a foreign entity"

"If they have already encountered each other then it is not a first contact and the proposal does not apply."

[Morover]

"when one side of the disputed border has met a foreign entity"

"If they have already encountered each other then it is not a first contact and the proposal does not apply."

"No, I mean whenever there is a territorial dispute between two nations and one nation has encountered the foreign entity and the other has not. Again, it's a very specific situation, but I would like some clarification on it."

[Gastash]

"If they have already encountered each other then it is not a first contact and the proposal does not apply."

"No, I mean whenever there is a territorial dispute between two nations and one nation has encountered the foreign entity and the other has not. Again, it's a very specific situation, but I would like some clarification on it."

"In that case, the member nation is free to interpret 'national territory' as the disputed territory it has claimed."

[Morover]

"No, I mean whenever there is a territorial dispute between two nations and one nation has encountered the foreign entity and the other has not. Again, it's a very specific situation, but I would like some clarification on it."

"In that case, the member nation is free to interpret 'national territory' as the disputed territory it has claimed."

"Thank you for your clarification, ambassador."