[DEFEATED] Repeal Suppress International Piracy;by Cyanbeard

[Nuisance Value]

OOC: Outright noncompliance or refusal to comply is regarded as godmoding here. Even without that, considering the consequences of violating GAR#23 (embargo), I'd definitely say it was not worth it

OOC: Well, yes. The reason I asked is not that I would like to not comply with the ban on slavery, but to ask the more subtle question of whether it's reasonable to assume that an ordinary nation that intends to comply in good faith might be RP-wise vulnerable to real-world style corruption and palm-greasing. The US has laws against drugs as well as slavery, human trafficking, prostitution, and illegal immigration, but it's not like season 2 of The Wire is a ludicrously outlandish fantasy of a mob wonderland where laws magically don't apply.

In other words, can I RP having captured some smuggled people on ships flying WA member flags (even if rarely)? Or is that verboten due to the assumption that the gnomes don't just change the laws, they also leave golems in charge to enforce them? It's a reasonable question to ask, not least because it's been asked above what kind of IC organization, other than the pirates and terrorists themselves, would pssoibly support this repeal? I think this is pertinent to that.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: Well, point of clarification, please: are we to assume that the act of making a WA law renders the outlawed activity non-existent by the simplistic, cable-news-worthy assumption that if there's a law against it, most people aren't doing it? Or could there perhaps be enforcement gaps, bribes, other forms of corruption, that make WA resolutions dependent on how faithfully regular people and their governments are in upholding them (like in reality)?

OOC: While what you've said is much more realistic and conducive to interesting roleplay, the "magical compliance" school of thought has taken hold, wherein it is literally impossible not to have perfect compliance with WA law. This was seen for example during the Repeal ICC debate, where it was actually said, for example:

There is no genocide to try because genocide has been banned by the WA and compliance is mandatory.

There's no genocide because the WA passed a law against it! Well, that was simple. And hey, the WA has also banned rape! Now let's pass some laws against poverty, disease, death, too! Gene Roddenberry eat your fucking heart out!

The rulings given on that repeal - one of which is (?) still being reviewed - seemed to hold that interpretation up, too.

In other words, can I RP having captured some smuggled people on ships flying WA member flags (even if rarely)? Or is that verboten due to the assumption that the gnomes don't just change the laws, they also leave golems in charge to enforce them? It's a reasonable question to ask, not least because it's been asked above what kind of IC organization, other than the pirates and terrorists themselves, would pssoibly support this repeal? I think this is pertinent to that.

Arguments based primarily on RP are weak, because on some level anyone can RP anything. I could just as easily write a roleplay of some pirates attacking some Dark Star tourists out on their yacht and dismembering them, and using that to justify the law, at which point it seems to just become a case of who can concoct the most lurid fantasies.

I wouldn't dismiss such a scenario out of hand if you presented it - though I suspect many other "magical compliance" forum regulars who don't even remember the genesis of the "gnomes" would - but I also don't know that it would help you that much.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

OOC: Outright noncompliance or refusal to comply is regarded as godmoding here. Even without that, considering the consequences of violating GAR#23 (embargo), I'd definitely say it was not worth it

OOC: Well, yes. The reason I asked is not that I would like to not comply with the ban on slavery, but to ask the more subtle question of whether it's reasonable to assume that an ordinary nation that intends to comply in good faith might be RP-wise vulnerable to real-world style corruption and palm-greasing. The US has laws against drugs as well as slavery, human trafficking, prostitution, and illegal immigration, but it's not like season 2 of The Wire is a ludicrously outlandish fantasy of a mob wonderland where laws magically don't apply.

In other words, can I RP having captured some smuggled people on ships flying WA member flags (even if rarely)? Or is that verboten due to the assumption that the gnomes don't just change the laws, they also leave golems in charge to enforce them? It's a reasonable question to ask, not least because it's been asked above what kind of IC organization, other than the pirates and terrorists themselves, would pssoibly support this repeal? I think this is pertinent to that.

OOC: Noncompliance happens in the II and NS forums all the time, and no one there complains about "Godmoding." Defwa meant that for purposes of RPing in this forum, participants are expected to be in compliance with at least the letter of the law; otherwise, there's no point to debating the laws we pass.

However, many participants here use puppets so that they can continue to be in noncompliance with no penalty (whatever the "penalties" for noncompliance may be), and others shamelessly exploit loopholes and/or enforce mandates subversively so that they are functionally in noncompliance, if not completely so. Not to mention all the aforementioned WA members who flaunt their noncompliance all the time in the unrelated RP forums, and the 85% of all NS nations who aren't even members -- so yeah, there's probably plenty of slave ships out there for your nation to liberate.

[The Sotoan Union]

[
If taking the point of view an online nation, how would anyone find it in them to approve of piracy? What nation besides ones with a vested interest in piracy would? From an IC point of view I find it hard to see anyone supporting this resolution. It's only hope rests in OOC humor.

OOC: that assumes that a nation is RPing as a "regular" nation. Not all do.

OOC: If their nation is so different than a "regular" nation that it wouldn't be affected by piracy at all then why would they care? Why would they vote for? Again only nations with a vested interest in piracy would vote for this in an IC standpoint.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: that assumes that a nation is RPing as a "regular" nation. Not all do.

OOC: If their nation is so different than a "regular" nation that it wouldn't be affected by piracy at all then why would they care? Why would they vote for? Again only nations with a vested interest in piracy would vote for this in an IC standpoint.

OOC: or those that profit off of selective pirating of ships. Or anti-WA anarchists. Or pirate nations. Or nations secure in their own naval defence and unwilling to aid other states against piracy. It's not really a huge stretch.

[Normlpeople]

OOC: I once was told the WA operated only on nations. Nations laws are changed by resolutions. While we like to believe every citizen obeys all laws at all times, we know better. Enforcement and prosecution is up to an individual nation. Hence where noncompliance and roleplay come in...

IC: "We have quorum. I was going to oppose this, but received a letter today. It was in an envelope marked only with a skull and crossbones, and contained several gold coins, with the promise of more for the correct vote. I will have to consider my position...."

[The Sotoan Union]

OOC: If their nation is so different than a "regular" nation that it wouldn't be affected by piracy at all then why would they care? Why would they vote for? Again only nations with a vested interest in piracy would vote for this in an IC standpoint.

OOC: or those that profit off of selective pirating of ships. Or anti-WA anarchists. Or pirate nations. Or nations secure in their own naval defence and unwilling to aid other states against piracy. It's not really a huge stretch.

OOC: Those all sound like very regular nations.

But anyways my point is that if many delegates only voted on the resolution because it's funny and gives the WA a break from more serious things, I think OOC problems with it are fine if a lot of support of it is also OOC.

[Defwa]

OOC: My reason for bringing up that resolution and compliance is because it seemed as if he were claiming there were slave ships being endorsed and protected by WA nations. That would be a clear violation of #23 which (if I recall, can't check right now) requires no aid be given to these parties.
Regardless, I'm not sure vigilante sea justice is the answer.

[St Edmundan Antarctic]

OOC
Yes, I do understand that at first glance this proposal is funny, but will people please try to remember what the Piracy concerned actually involves? As I already said above It’s basically organised robbery-with-violence, with assorted woundings and mutilations, murders, abductions for ransom , cases of extortion, incidents of torture, rapes, maroonings, and so on, thrown in… and how “funny”, really, is that?!?

Didn't you just just recently complain about people conflating their OOC preferences with their IC voting? I don't think anyone snickering at this repeal is really endorsing RL crime:

OOC: Yes, I did complain about that. I agree that that people here who find this proposal acceptable probably aren't endorsing the practice of armed robbery in RL, but I do think that some of them are probably being influenced by RL factors (such as not having to worry about piracy -- rather than just, perhaps, other forms of armed robbery -- themselves, and having enjoyed entertainments such as 'Pirates of the Caribbean'...) that might not apply to the IC governments of the nations whom their RPed diplomats at the WA are supposed to represent.

(also OOC)
I'm a bit disappointed that the Mods didn't simply delete this proposal on the grounds that it's a 'joke proposal', without needing a GHR. One can go a fair way with writing proposals from an [unusual] ICV viewpoint -- and yes, of course, I've done a bit of that myself -- but I was officially advised that one of the Bears' proposals (an early draft of 'Access to Sweetness', whose final draft was eventually dropped in favour of 'Promotion of Bee-keeping' instead) was on the borderline of illegality for that reason when it was significantly less silly than this proposal is. Unfortunately that was when we were still on the Jolt forum, though, so I can't provide a link to the post (by Fris, IIRC) concerned.

In other words, can I RP having captured some smuggled people on ships flying WA member flags (even if rarely)?

OOC; Appart from anything else, I'd presume that the same rule of courtesy applies as for any other RP in NS: Get consent from the players of the other nations involved before you post any such claims. And, advance notice to save you the trouble of asking, you will not receive consent to such an RP from me: St Edmund and its associates have been strongly anti-slavery for at least as long as the RL UK has, the navy of Godwinnia (St Edmund's former colonial masters) played a major role in suppressing that trade on the version of Earth where the nation's original lands are located, and it's highly unlikely that anybody from these nations would risk involvement in the trade nowadays.
Oh, and by the way: Dr Sweynsson himself is, as you might be able to guess from his appearance and as people who were around during his previous presence might remember anyway, of mixed ancestry (European [Godwinnian, British, & French], African, & Carib) with some of his own forebears having been victims of that trade...

[Ardchoille]

(also OOC)
I'm a bit disappointed that the Mods didn't simply delete this proposal on the grounds that it's a 'joke proposal', without needing a GHR. ... <snip>

I don't know what motivated the other mods in deciding not to kill this one, but my feeling was that we say in the Rules that Proposals "need not be written like real world international treaties". Further, we accepted both Glog's Repeal of Rights of Minorities and Women (historically) and the current WA HQ. Like this, they had elements of RP, but that RP didn't affect other members or the meaning of the proposal.

Being Captain Obvious here, mods can't kill otherwise legal proposals because we don't like them (and, as someone who shares a house with a Black Sails fanatic, I am fed to the back teeth with pirates!). That said, mod discretion remains for rulings on wording that may be seen as trolling, flaming, etc -- which I'm sure wouldn't have been the case with Bears'.

Public Service Announcement (clearing the decks?) on IC posts: be careful not to slip into something that will look like flaming to reasonable people who don't play the GA. "Scurvy knaves" might not set off any alarms, but "scum" often does.

Yarr, that only be if ye can catch a sloop on a good clip, hearty! Arr...

IC: *offers Letters of Marque to sundry gentleman-adventurers*

[Chester Pearson]

UNITED FEDERATION OF CANADA



IMPERIAL MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

At the behest of Prime Minister Jack Layston, we are pleased to cast our vote of AYE. This resolution was a travesty, and inhibited members from effectively dealing with pirates, the way they should be dealt with. The moment this passes, The Federation will finally do what they should have done a long ago, and sink those bastards without warning.

Warmest regards,

[Universal Socialism]

IC: Secretary of State Xu Gutenburg just looks at the voting charts sheet and drops his paper.

"The other diplomats are actually voting... to not suppress pirates. Time for a speech."

Xu Gutenburg takes the floor and announces his complaints.

"Fellow representatives of the world. On behalf of my nation, The Federal Republic of Universal Socialism, I would like to address the grave concern we have over this repeal to suppress piracy. I would like to think that everyone here knows that pirates are essentially armed criminal gangs that operate on the seas. Unfortunately everyone doesn't seem to remember this, and some wish for these people to be allowed to continue their activities. As Dr Sir Alfred Devereux Sweynsson MD announced earlier, pirates aren't the glorified treasure-digging, rum drinking, heroes they are portrayed to be in pop culture. They get their money by stealing, and usually killing whoever their stealing from, as well as a tendency to commit dozens of other crimes as well. Some of you may argue that some pirates don't target innocent people and go after those committing immoral practices, however among the vast-majority of pirates this is only a small fraction of pirates; presuming they only actually targeted ships that were part of immoral practices such as slave trades. Also we find it disappointing that people would rather rely on a criminal organization that may or may not (and most likely not) only target the people we want them to target, to stop these practices then say; using our national navies. We would also like people to remember that it is the duty of a national government to ensure the well-being of it's people, and that would include keeping their coasts and shipping lanes safe and secure from pirates. While some may not have the same view that national governments must protect their people, there is certainly a financial interest in-doing so. As pirates rob ships and ports, considerable financial losses are dealt to that nation's economy, plus the kidnapping and deaths of a nation's citizens reduces the number of working citizens. All-in-all there is no moral or economic reason to end the suppressing of piracy, and would like all nations voting for this repeal to re-consider their stance."

OOC: I know that most people are voting for this as sort-of a joke, however I do try to keep some seriousness in how my nation operates when I RP. Even in a situation where seriousness probably doesn't fit.

[Frenline Delpha]

Aye, we be running a campaign.
Nae, we be using no stamps. (Scripts be a buccaneer's matey!)
And since we be keen on full disclosure, here be the contents of our discourse with the WA delegates:

Esteemed WA Delegate (be you landlubber or scallywag),

Ahoy!

(Formal english text:)
As a WA Delegate, it is your chosen responsibility to help the downtrodden. Currently, there are few as downtrodden as the lowly pirate. Thanks to GA Resolution #20 "Suppress International Piracy," the pirate lifestyle has almost been exterminated. And it has also put an extreme stress on the resources maritime security services of many nations.
Therefore, I would like to urge you to help repeal GAR #20 by approving my repeal proposal:
http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vie ... 1423225371

(Proper text:)
As WA Old Salt, it be ye duty to aid the scurviest of ye crew. None now be scurvier than a pirate, whose duffel be taken by GA Code #20 "Open sea buccaneers t'swab the poopdeck." Eke, it be plundering nation's naval booties and running them aground.
Avaunt, I beseech ye service in scuttling said code by getting aboard:
http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_vie ... 1423225371

Heave ho and let's have some fun,
Yo ho ho and a bubble of gum!

Back when my region had executive power for the delegate, I recieve said telegram. There is a reason I didn't vote for it to reach the floor. Piracy, in my opinion, is a cowardly, treacherous thing to do. So, per my opinions, I refuse to vote yes on said legislation.

[Hirota]

My government has directed me to vote against this proposed repeal.

[Affiliated South Califan Sprawls]

It’s basically a plea to[/i] “be kinder to the poor pirates”, which totally ignores the facts of what Piracy actually is: It isn’t all just a matter of prancing round in feathered hats, saying things like “Arrah! and “Yarrr…”, drinking rum, and spending gold doubloons as though they grew on trees, it’s basically a form of Armed Robbery — with assorted further crimes of violence, woundings and mutilations, murders, abductions for ransom , cases of extortion, incidents of torture, rapes, maroonings, and so on, thrown in — with the pirates themselves nothing but (to quote an admission by an actual pirate ship’s captain**) “professional thieves and murderers”[i] and I for one find it positively disgusting that this plea has been allowed to reach the floor here.

Yeah, they're almost as bad as a State. Now those we really oughta do something about. ABSTAIN

[The Candy Of Bottles]

A very strong 'Against' from The Kingdom of The Candy of Bottles.

[Philimbesi]

My esteemed colleagues I'm afraid I must rise to vote against this measure simply based on its formatting. Even drowned in whiskey I can't make heads nor tails of it. I've switched to rum to possibly get more in the spirit of the writing and it was indeed the worst five minutes of my life.

Nigel S Youlkin
USP Ambassador to the WA.

[New Russian Directorate]

We're going to repeal the Suppress International Piracy proposal? I will not vote for it; instead I vote AGAINST it. Why? If we vote FOR it, then the pirates will cause more trouble at seas. That proposal would cause piracy to increase and many vessels carrying civilians or materials will be attacked by pirates, who will either kill the hostages or hold them hostage, forcing the nations to pay them. That is the reason why I voted AGAINST it. And if we let this pass, who knows how many lives will be taken hostage?

[Sierra Lyricalia]

At the behest of Prime Minister Jack Layston, we are pleased to cast our vote of AYE. This resolution was a travesty, and inhibited members from effectively dealing with pirates, the way they should be dealt with. The moment this passes, The Federation will finally do what they should have done a long ago, and sink those bastards without warning.

... I'm unclear what part of the target resolution prohibits overt naval action? Unless member states are somewhere enjoined to consider use of weapons as inherently "unreasonable" under the meaning of "reasonably" in paragraphs 4-5, but I think that's a stretch. "Suppressing piracy" is something I think most reasonable nations would consider includes shooting at them.

The only other thing I can think of is that some nations erroneously consider the target resolution's lack of moral approbation toward "Privateers" to be some kind of protection for them, but I see no way to reasonably interpret the resolution that way either.

I remain puzzled.

...pirates aren't the glorified treasure-digging, rum drinking, heroes they are portrayed to be in pop culture.

Indeed. Some of them drink bourbon, vodka, tequila, and probably even beer and wine when they get ahold of it! I'd also be surprised to learn that not a single pirate ship in the world contains a still for making moonshine or bathtub gin. And I'll hazard a guess that most pirates use paper currency or Bytecoins at this point.

They get their money by stealing, and usually killing whoever their stealing from, as well as a tendency to commit dozens of other crimes as well. Some of you may argue that some pirates don't target innocent people and go after those committing immoral practices, however among the vast-majority of pirates this is only a small fraction of pirates; presuming they only actually targeted ships that were part of immoral practices such as slave trades.

Goods produced by slaves are morally worse than goods produced by wage slaves, but this is a difference of degree, not kind. We have a moral obligation to at least consider looking the other way when a stateless gang of criminals attacks the shipping of a gang of criminals who, by virtue of running a state, are off the hook for their perfectly legal crimes. Nothing here is to say that we necessarily would look the other way; this kind of thing tends to have lots of unintended consequences, which sometimes include direct blowback. Those calculations will obviously be made by heads above my pay grade. It could well be that we'll decide upon a policy of continuing the status quo, only by multilateral treaty instead of World Assembly fiat. But we'd be utterly delinquent in our duty to all the world's people if we voted against even having the choice.

...plus the kidnapping and deaths of a nation's citizens reduces the number of working citizens. All-in-all there is no moral or economic reason to end the suppressing of piracy, and would like all nations voting for this repeal to re-consider their stance."

We consider that the Missing Individuals Act continues to require member states to suppress groups (including pirates) who carry out kidnapping or abductions of any kind, and would vehemently oppose any change in that state of affairs. And I know of no nation that brooks direct assault or murder of its citizens.

OOC: I know that most people are voting for this as sort-of a joke, however I do try to keep some seriousness in how my nation operates when I RP. Even in a situation where seriousness probably doesn't fit.

OOC: I, for one, wouldn't have it any other way! OOC I can't think of a single reason to support piracy, but governments... well, there's a tendency for groups of people to act as though every last one of them is a complete bastard.

[Army of Comrade]

YARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!! This issue be very good fer' me internationarrrr piracy business. Avast, my fellow pirate! Off to the high seas!

[Frenline Delpha]

YARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!! This issue be very good fer' me internationarrrr piracy business. Avast, my fellow pirate! Off to the high seas!

Or how about we keep the scum known as pirates where they belong? In international prisons.

[Losthaven]

Losthaven does not support the efforts of pirates to repeal anti-pirate legislation based on a pro-piracy argument. However, we are voting for the repeal because of this line in the resolution:

7. Declares that anybody who is accused of having served knowingly as crew aboard any vehicle being used by international pirates, but who can not be linked to any specific offences, shall be subject to appropriate charges of criminal conspiracy and ‘accessory before the fact’; and that proof of that service shall constitute adequate proof for conviction on those charges, unless they prove that they were forced into that crew on pain of death and served only as a non-combatant in which case courts may be allowed to acquit them;

We understand what this provision is getting at, but it goes about it all wrong. In Losthaven, we rely on juries to decide whether someone is guilty or innocent of an offense, and people are presumed innocent unless they are proven guilty by the government. This provision shifts the burden of proof onto the accused and makes them prove that they are innocent. This is an anathema to our laws. Moreover, the way this provision is written, it takes away the jury's power to acquit and gives it instead to the judge. Presumably, even if the jury found that the state had not proved the charge, the court must convict anyway unless the person "proved" their innocence. This is not acceptable to us.

Accordingly, Losthaven votes FOR.

[Separatist Pirates]

YARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!! This issue be very good fer' me internationarrrr piracy business. Avast, my fellow pirate! Off to the high seas!

Or how about we keep the scum known as pirates where they belong? In international prisons.

Har har, that be only if ye can catch us, an keep yer little dogs away from the gaoler's keys, matey! The seas be as intoxication' as a sultry wench, and a fair score o' buccaneers'd rather slip inter' the locker of old Davey Jones hisself afore bein' clapped in irons!

The Captain brandishes his cutlass and dangles it under the Delphan ambassador's chin, keenly unaware that the Weapon Nullifiers managed to turn the blade to rubber.

Now, hand over yer booty, or suffer rusty razors, angry lobsters, an' all manner o' piratey torment!

[The Candy Of Bottles]

Or how about we keep the scum known as pirates where they belong? In international prisons.

Har har, that be only if ye can catch us, an keep yer little dogs away from the gaoler's keys, matey! The seas be as intoxication' as a sultry wench, and a fair score o' buccaneers'd rather slip inter' the locker of old Davey Jones hisself afore bein' clapped in irons!

The Captain brandishes his cutlass and dangles it under the Delphan ambassador's chin, keenly unaware that the Weapon Nullifiers managed to turn the blade to rubber.

Now, hand over yer booty, or suffer rusty razors, angry lobsters, an' all manner o' piratey torment!

*Tislam hurries over and delivers a knock-out sucker-punch to the pirate captain, then picks him up and throws him out the nearest window.* "Anyone else want to make threats they can't back up?"

[Philimbesi]

Have I been gone so long the ACME Weapon Nullifiers have been done away with?