HB 27-04: Sticking a Middle Finger to Big Brother Act (Passed)

[Poirot]

I don't know if the regions should have some space to make laws on curfews. Do regions already have laws on curfews. I guess 1b. repeals even regional laws on the topic. Could we get section 1 to apply to the federal level only?

I was a bit confused with section 1c. but with MB's explanation I think I forgot the definition in 1a. It's outside of a state of emergency. I propose to add the specification in 1c. I also propose to change the spelling of section 1 title, unless there is more than one way to write curfew. This is an amendment:
 

Sticking a Middle Finger to Big Brother Act

Be it enacted in both houses of Congress assembled,

Section 1. Cur-phewCurfew
a. "Curfew laws" are defined as all laws prohibiting people of any age group, or in general, from being in public areas during a certain time (usually at night), outside of a state of emergency as declared by either the President or local authorities.
b. All existing curfew laws in Atlasia are hereby repealed.
c. No jurisdiction may implement curfew laws outside of a state of emergency in the future.
d. All persons cited for violating curfew laws shall have their records expunged.

Section 2. Saving Face
a. A "facial recognition camera" is any camera which includes a feature to recognize a person's face.
b. All facial recognition cameras, with the following exceptions, are hereby banned in the Republic of Atlasia.
  i. Smartphones, tablets, and other personal, mobile devices not permanently mounted to a surface shall be exempt from this law.
c. Owners of such devices shall have until July 1, 2021 to dispose of them.
d. Manufacturers of such devices shall immediately cease production of all such devices.
e. Any person or entity found in violation of parts 2c and 2d may be fined an amount not to exceed $5,000, and shall have such device confiscated.

[Poirot]

Aye on the amendment
(leaving aside the constituionality issue raised) If we expunge records for curfew might as well do it for lockdown.

[Poirot]

aye
Not overjoyed to cross an entire section after clarifying it. There is a constitutional issue and there don't seem to be appetite to just make section 1 about federal cases.

[Poirot]

aye
I decided to vote aye but I don't like the penalty for police. Police should follow the law without having a penalty for not doing it.

[Poirot]

I don't know how the face recognition works. The bill removes the camera. I'm wondering if the face recognition is a unit with the camera. Could we ban the software, application from selling to the public but leave the physical cameras to people who have bought them, or it's not possible to separate the two.

[Poirot]

Nay
I don't agree with 100%, I'm not even sure of the need for 50%.

[Poirot]

aye
I'm uneasy with giving financial penalty to police. It should follow the law not because there is a potential penalty.

[Poirot]

The federal agencies could use facial recognition for security. Could be for spotting terrorists at airports. That is different from a camera in a store.

[Poirot]

The threat of a penalty if police doesn't follow the law was removed earlier. Police should comply because it's the law, the use of a threat could be seen as the House viewing all police as rogue.

[Poirot]

We don't put in all bills a financial threat to force police to do something.
If a police department somewhere doesn't comply you can take legal action.
Cutting half of funding would penalize the community.

[Poirot]

nay
The sentence was removed earlier so it is "unnecessary stalling" and there are pages of debate already.

[Poirot]

nay
The sentence was removed earlier so it is "unnecessary stalling" and there are pages of debate already.

It’s our goal to bring the sentence back and then pass the bill. It’s not stalling because I’m literally sponsoring it, that doesn’t make any sense.

It was a reference to another bill. I don't know what is stalling exactly, maybe when there are a few pages of debate you can't propose amendments anymore.

[Poirot]

Nay
because of the major funding threat that was added in the end after it was removed earlier.