Policing the Police Act of 2014 (Redraft passed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 16, 2024, 04:54:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Policing the Police Act of 2014 (Redraft passed) (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Policing the Police Act of 2014 (Redraft passed)  (Read 18530 times)
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« on: March 18, 2015, 12:23:38 PM »

I don't know that having police chiefs and commissioners elected is a good idea. It's just as likely to cause problems as it is to solve them. Otherwise, I think this is a very good bill.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2015, 05:38:01 PM »

I offer an amendment to remove Section 4.1 and 4.2 of this bill.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2015, 12:47:53 PM »
« Edited: March 19, 2015, 03:13:18 PM by Lief 🐋 »

Aye

If this amendment passes, I don't really have that many strong objections to the rest of this bill and would be willing to support it. I would hope that Senators are willing to put aside any partisan disagreements to pass this important legislation, so that we can put a check on the increasingly violent, discriminatory and out of control police culture in our country. The relations between the police and the communities they are meant to serve are reminiscent of apartheid South Africa in parts of our country, and this sort of legislation is desperately needed.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2015, 10:52:15 AM »

NAY

Police unions are terrible and should be abolished.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2015, 03:31:39 PM »

I cannot support Senator Cris's amendment. It would completely neuter this bill.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2015, 04:09:19 PM »

NAY

Some of these changes are okay, but a lot of them are really bad. There is no point in establishing police oversight councils if we thoroughly neuter them like this amendment would. The changes to section 3 especially are incredibly egregious; what is the point of civilian oversight if a majority of police officers can just vote to ignore it? What is the point of civilian oversight if those civilians are close relatives of police officers?

Getting rid of the entrapment provision doesn't make any sense to me either. Why are we condoning police departments engaging in entrapment?
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2015, 05:18:58 PM »

I object as well. The only remaining language in the bill that I would support removing is 4.3: while the idea behind it is an important one, in practice I think it would be unworkable unfortunately.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2015, 06:40:48 PM »

NAY
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2015, 01:05:04 PM »

The purpose of unions is to protect and empower workers. Police unions are reactionary organizations that exist to protect and empower enemies of workers. Unions are not an end, in and of themselves, but a means towards worker empowerment. If they are being used to protect the harassers of workers, then I don't see much point in them.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2015, 04:06:04 PM »

I would rather pass nothing at all than pass this current version implicitly endorsing entrapment.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #10 on: March 29, 2015, 07:41:23 PM »

Aye
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2015, 09:59:39 AM »

I object to the amendment. Why are we removing the oversight councils??
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2015, 12:36:44 PM »

NAY

I'm okay with the change to 4.1, but removing the oversight councils entirely makes this legislation mostly pointless.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2015, 08:56:56 PM »

Alright, that's good. I'm glad that we're not taking some sort of oversight mechanism completely off the table.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #14 on: April 03, 2015, 11:12:06 AM »

Nay

I continue to be disturbed by what some of my dear colleagues think the police should be able to get away with.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2015, 12:54:04 PM »

Nazis are free to hold their rallies or meetings or whatever. But the government has a legitimate interest in making sure that its police officers are not ideological extremists who believe that certain classes of people are inherently inferior.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #16 on: April 06, 2015, 10:35:57 AM »

This thing really is getting to a very risky place.

So, no one is going to address my concerns as whether or not this body has the right to be as prescriptive as this Bill is?



If local police departments don't want to follow these very reasonable rules, they are free to reject federal funding entirely.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2015, 10:09:55 AM »

This preserves the rights of the people in many ways, so it does not run afoul of Art. 1, Sec. 6, Clause 7.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #18 on: April 08, 2015, 01:16:53 PM »

The Senate should concern itself with passing the best legislation it can. If someone wants to challenge it after it becomes law, I have full confidence in our justice department to defend it.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #19 on: April 10, 2015, 12:07:37 PM »

I object. I would support something like this amended in addition to the currently existing bill, but not this wholesale rewriting.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #20 on: April 11, 2015, 11:57:21 AM »

Can we please keep this slippery slope fallacy nonsense out of the senate chamber? If you want to grandstand against an imaginary strawman bill that bans left handed police officers, feel free to introduce a bill doing that so you can vote against it.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #21 on: April 11, 2015, 01:35:03 PM »

NAY
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #22 on: April 13, 2015, 10:24:33 AM »

I object.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #23 on: April 13, 2015, 05:22:36 PM »

Nay
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,988


« Reply #24 on: April 15, 2015, 03:10:01 PM »

I will support this amendment. I'd like to commend Comrade Blair for drafting it, and I think it is very close to being something that I could support. It's certainly a huge improvement over what this bill has presently become.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.037 seconds with 12 queries.