[PASSED] Law Enforcement Education

[Wrapper]

Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with this proposal; it was submitted and campaigned for, and has achieved quorum. I'll invite the author to defend the proposal shortly.

Law Enforcement Education

A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security

Strength: Significant

Proposed by: Happy People Land

Description: The purpose of this resolution is to increase the education of both the police and the public on how to maintain a trusting relationship to lower crime and increase safety.

RECOGNIZING The growing distrust of law enforcement by the general public

WORRIED That due to this distrust citizens are less likely to contact and cooperate with law enforcement hence increasing crime

UNDERSTANDING That by educating both the public and the police on how to maintain a healthy and mutual relationship we would resolve this issue

NOTING That the World Assembly supports global stability and the protection of citizens. By educating both the public and the police we will lower crime and increase safety.

ACKNOWLEDGING That this is a two way issue, the public needs to be educated on how to respect the police and in turn the police need to be educated on how to respect the rights of the public.

GRACIOUS For the hard working law enforcement agencies and responsible law abiding citizens

HEREBY Creates a program to lower crime and increase safety by educating law enforcement and the public

1) All law enforcement agencies in participation World Assembly Nations are required to hold public meetings to discuss issues with the public in order to increase understanding and cooperation.

2) Funds will be needed to create educational programs for law enforcement officers so that they will be trained to deal with the public in a responsible and respectful manner.

3) All law enforcement officers will be required to take the above stated educational program.

This Resolution will increase funding to law enforcement agencies to better educate both members of law enforcement and the public on how to maintain respectful relations. By educating the public and law enforcement agencies we will reduce crime and increase safety by encouraging citizens to cooperate with police and teaching law enforcement to be respectful of citizens rights.

Discuss.

[New Dukaine]

Not really into clause 5

The public needs to be educated on how to treat the police with respect? So while I'm being arrested I have to say, "Well howdy to you too!"? I'm against. Don't ask me

[Happy People Land]

Thank you for evaluating my proposal, I hope we can come to the agreement that it will benift all participating WA nations by lowering crime and increasing security.

[Happy People Land]

No that's not what I had intended, It does not force you to be respectful, rather it teaches the public how not to be disrespectful. It is not mandatory for the public just for the law enforcement. If the public was interested in participating however, they would be instructed how to protest peacefully without becoming a riot, and would be informed on when it is legal to resist arrest and when it is not.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Looking forward to campaigning against this monstrosity."

[Happy People Land]

I would like to hear your disagreements with this proposal

[Separatist Peoples]

I would like to hear your disagreements with this proposal

"It's not an international issue, for one. What my police do doesn't affect your nation. Moreover, it requires meetings with the public. Meetings. Is this the fucking Girl Scouts? The police are actors of the state, and are not necessarily beholden to the people, especially in autocratic states. For anything more authoritarian than a direct democracy, this under mines the command structure of police and the government. Additionally, the cost incurred for holding public meetings with all enforcement officers, including our federal agents and specialized agents like our Air Marshals, our park rangers, and specialized divisions like insurance fraud investigators, would bankrupt a nation. It was also not effectively drafted here, which means nobody had the opportunity to point out a potential strength violation.

"This needs to be removed from queue or defeated at vote, or you will singlehandedly tank the World Assembly's collective law enforcement divisions for a problem that doesn't necessarily exist in our nations."

[The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper]

"Looking forward to campaigning against this monstrosity."

ARI: Oh, Benjamin, a "monstrosity"? Really? It can't be all that bad. Let's have a look, shall we? We'll just pick out bits and pieces that interest us and skip over the boring bits. Erm, no offense, of course, to the Shiny Happy People ambassador. (His assistant whispers into his ear.) Happy People Land, yes. Moving on.

Category: International Security

Strength: Significant

Erm. You call this an "education" proposal and yet you use "International Security" as the category? Well. We'll come back to that later.

Description: The purpose of this resolution is to increase the education of both the police and the public on how to maintain a trusting relationship to lower crime and increase safety.

Now, see, normally we don't have "purpose" clauses in World Assembly resolutions. Waste of characters, that is. But, whatever, we'll let that go.

RECOGNIZING The growing distrust of law enforcement by the general public

The... distrust? Of law enforcement? Erm. Dare I say, not in our nation. One could argue, not in a great many nations. If this is an issue in your nation, perhaps you should do something about it at a national level, yes?

UNDERSTANDING That by educating both the public and the police on how to maintain a healthy and mutual relationship we would resolve this issue

Stop right there. You're advocating that we educate everyone on how to maintain healthy interpersonal relationships. Erm. If that's the case then why stop with law enforcement? Perhaps we should do so with doctors, and politicians, and lawyers-- umm, no, on second thought, never mind the lawyers. Moving on.

NOTING That the World Assembly supports global stability and the protection of citizens. By educating both the public and the police we will lower crime and increase safety.

Well now, for the most part, you're just repeating yourself.

ACKNOWLEDGING That this is a two way issue, the public needs to be educated on how to respect the police and in turn the police need to be educated on how to respect the rights of the public.

Well now, for the most part, you're just repeating yourself. Again. There do seem to be a lot of blah-blah clauses in this preamble here. Let's skip to the active clauses.

1) All law enforcement agencies in participation World Assembly Nations are required to hold public meetings to discuss issues with the public in order to increase understanding and cooperation.

All law enforcement agencies? Ah. Now we see why you chose "International Security". This is going to cause police budgets to skyrocket. (His assistant whispers in his ear; the ambassador nods.) Or not. Since, you know, you don't mention how long or how often these meetings must be. Perhaps if we hold a five-minute meeting once every ten years, would that do?

2) Funds will be needed to create educational programs for law enforcement officers so that they will be trained to deal with the public in a responsible and respectful manner.

3) All law enforcement officers will be required to take the above stated educational program.

Well. Again, a five-minute course that says, "treat your citizens as you would treat your grandmamma" would once again fit the requirement. And, really, since the cost of compliance will be so low, one could argue that a "Mild" strength would be more apropos. For most police departments the budget increase would be a drop in a basket. (The assistant whispers again.) Bucket. Whatever.

This Resolution will increase funding to law enforcement agencies to better educate both members of law enforcement and the public on how to maintain respectful relations. By educating the public and law enforcement agencies we will reduce crime and increase safety by encouraging citizens to cooperate with police and teaching law enforcement to be respectful of citizens rights.

Well now, for the most part, you're just repeating yourself. Again.

So. "Monstrosity" is perhaps a bit of hyperbole. We'd call this, erm, not-ready-for-prime-time, let's say. And that's being polite. There is way too much fluff in this as written, the actionable clauses don't give enough detail and make compliance quite easy, yet quite ineffectual, and, really, this is not an international issue.

Your campaign got this to quorum, but we doubt very much it will go far, as flawed as it is. Thank you for joining us, Ambassador, but be prepared for this to go down in flames when it comes to vote.

[Arcdurus]

We see no reason for this legislation to pass at all. In larger cities, public meetings such as those described in this resolution would be difficult, if not possible to implement effectively. Furthermore, this is hardly an international issue. Most nations are capable of keeping their own police in line. We for example, removed the human element completely. As police work in our country is handled by Police Drones driven by semi-sentient AIs, this resolution would do nothing for us aside from putting a drain on our budget that taxpayers would have to fill.

Opposed.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Counter-campaign begun."

[Happy People Land]

To respond to your comments regarding to no time limit on the educational program and meeting times the incline is present to allow different nations with different levels of this issue to act proportional. For example your region may not need more than a 5 minute discussion, or it might need a week long training course. As far as your concerns for the funding that this will require, once again that depends on the extent that each individual nation wants to deal with this issue. The community meetings had no requirements for the very reason to give you the leniency you are asking for. The price and effectiveness of this proposal are all dependent on how each individual nation that uses them.

[Imperium Anglorum]

To respond to your comments regarding to no time limit on the educational program and meeting times the incline is present to allow different nations with different levels of this issue to act proportional. For example your region may not need more than a 5 minute discussion, or it might need a week long training course. As far as your concerns for the funding that this will require, once again that depends on the extent that each individual nation wants to deal with this issue. The community meetings had no requirements for the very reason to give you the leniency you are asking for. The price and effectiveness of this proposal are all dependent on how each individual nation that uses them.

OOC: That's such a squirrel. I mean, if Gov walks up and says 'do costly policy', they should mean 'do costly policy', not 'oh, haha, do it for one minute'. When Gov walks up and says 'do a draft', it does not mean 'do a draft for 2 minutes'.

First. Regions, from the perspective of the General Assembly, do not exist.

Second. I see no need for the World Assembly to correct a problem that doesn't exist outside of an OOC country called America.

Third. Either your resolution does something and it's legal. Or your resolution doesn't do anything and it's illegal. Tell us which and stick to it.

[Happy People Land]

It absolutely does something, but the extent of that something has some leniency from nation to nation.

[Tinfect]

It absolutely does something, but the extent of that something has some leniency from nation to nation.

OOC:
Actually, it only has one active clause, and, its effectively optional. These meetings could literally be about half a second long, and consist of someone going to a Podium, coughing, and walking off the stage. Since there is no Mandate to repeat them, you'd only need to do it twice, maybe, to fulfill the plurality.

And this Educational Program of yours, is never actually created. You recognize that someone needs to pay for them, and that Police need to attend them, but it never actually mandates their creation, or what those classes would entail.

[Grays Harbor]

Thank you for evaluating my proposal, I hope we can come to the agreement that it will benift all participating WA nations by lowering crime and increasing security.

Just how does this lower crime? As has been pointed out by others, it really does nothing but mouth empty platitudes, making unsubstantiated pronouncements.

[The Sheika]

I am sorry, but I keep reading over the proposal and fail to see how this is an international issue. Perhaps there is a problem with law enforcement and the public in your nation, but the Federation does not have any such problems. If you wish to set this up in your own nation, so be it, but how this is an international remains to be seen.

[Araraukar]

OOC: GHR filed for category violation; IS requires military spending boost as well, this travesty doesn't do jack about military-anything.

...looking it over, it looks like possible strength violation too, but the category requirement failure was more obvious.

EDIT: Considering the seriously fast Voice-of-Mod TG reply that they're looking at it, I'd say adding another GA mod was a good thing. Now let's see if you guys can also act on it in time.

[Imperium Anglorum]

OOC: GHR filed for category violation; IS requires military spending boost as well, this travesty doesn't do jack about military-anything.

...looking it over, it looks like possible strength violation too, but the category requirement failure was more obvious.

EDIT: Considering the seriously fast Voice-of-Mod TG reply that they're looking at it, I'd say adding another GA mod was a good thing. Now let's see if you guys can also act on it in time.

Yea, I don't see how it can fit in IS either.

[Happy People Land]

I hadn't even thought of any of these issues before you brought them to mind. I entrust that the WA will vote on this based on what they think is best. You have personally persuaded me that this proposal has it's flaws. I was wondering if anyone would be interested in helping me to create a replacement proposal regarding International Trade and having nothing to do with this one. I would remove my proposal from the floor, but the people who advertised it used their own stamps to support it and they wish for me to follow this proposal through.

[Separatist Peoples]

I hadn't even thought of any of these issues before you brought them to mind. I entrust that the WA will vote on this based on what they think is best. You have personally persuaded me that this proposal has it's flaws. I was wondering if anyone would be interested in helping me to create a replacement proposal regarding International Trade and having nothing to do with this one. I would remove my proposal from the floor, but the people who advertised it used their own stamps to support it and they wish for me to follow this proposal through.

OOC: Or you could file a GHR, have it removed so you don't get penalized for an illegal proposal, and start from scratch.

[Happy People Land]

What is a GHR and what are the penalties for an illegal proposal

[Sciongrad]

What is a GHR and what are the penalties for an illegal proposal

OOC: A GHR is a "Getting Help Request" which you can send here. Typically the penalty for a mild offense like a category violation is a warning. Three warnings will get you ejected from the WA, though.

[Wrapper]

Ruling of the Secretariat

The active clauses in this proposal specify that this affects law enforcement and not just the police. Given that the military gets involved in law enforcement in many nations and in several different ways (e.g. military police, martial law, paramilitary law enforcement organizations, a national guard during a state of emergency, a coast guard enforcing maritime law), then any training requirements imposed under this resolution would be imposed on a portion of a nation's military as well, thus affecting military spending. Given a previous ruling that states that the connection between what a proposal does and police/military spending "doesn't always have to be explicitly stated in the proposal," as written this fits into the International Security category. There is no category violation.

[Excidium Planetis]

"I would add my thoughts on this resolution here, but I believe I have already expressed them all in my repeal draft." Ambassador Cornelia Schultz remarks.

"I encourage the author to, if they really believe in a replacement resolution, begin drafting one now in a place open for discussion. Whether it fails at vote or passes, I have confidence it will not remain in force for very long."

[Araraukar]

"I would add my thoughts on this resolution here, but I believe I have already expressed them all in my repeal draft." Ambassador Cornelia Schultz remarks.

OOC: It's bad form to pimp your proposal on someone else's thread.

To the Author: I'm asking you, please, file a Getting Help Request to pull this out of the quorum line, to make it better, to address all the issues that were pointed out in this thread, and then resubmit and hopefully pass it.

To mods: Does your ruling address the strength issue as well, or do I need to file a separate GHR for that?