Debate: Northeast Capital Punishment Abolishment Act

[Hatman 🍁]

WHEREAS in any decent civil and humane society, the act of the state killing individuals for any reason is not only frowned upon, but condemned and
WHEREAS the Northeast is a decent civil and humane society that believes that the state should not kill its people and
WHEREAS the Northeast feels life in prison without parole is a more appropraite punishment for murderers,

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1) No authority of the Government of the Northeast shall willingly kill a person, except in times of emergency, or without consent of the person.
2) Prisonors may not consent to death, unless some condition deems it necessary in accordance with the Northeast Euthanasia Proposition. The stat shall not pay to euthanize its prisonors.
3) In states in the Northeast region where capital punishment is a legal punishment, capital punishment shall be replaced with life in prison without the possibility of parole.
4) All Northeast citizens currently sentenced to death anywhere in the region shall be commuted to life in prison without the possibility of parole upon the passage of this act.

[bullmoose88]

I move to postpone the question on passage indefinitely.

[Hatman 🍁]

I move to postpone the question on passage indefinitely.

May I ask why?

By the way, I have changed section one.

[bullmoose88]

Unfortunately, I think there is a use for the death penalty. The legislation, while well intended, simply ignores the fact that either some people have violated the social contract to such a degree that the DP is the only acceptable punishment, or that other people are such a danger to society that the DP is the only way to protect the Northeast.

(Oh yeah...I'm from PA...we still use it, gotta go with my state on this one).

[Hatman 🍁]

Well, you're free to oppose this act of course. However, if there is a part of the act that anyone has a problem with, please feel free to request it be amended, keeping it mind it should not change the purpose of the act.

[bullmoose88]

Well, you're free to oppose this act of course. However, if there is a part of the act that anyone has a problem with, please feel free to request it be amended, keeping it mind it should not change the purpose of the act.

Except...Amending a bill to change its purpose is allowable, with one exception...

I cannot amend a bill calling for the purchase of 12 chairs to call for 12 chairs not be bought.

There are policy alternatives I'd like to explore with this, but that is a different question.

I simply want to get an idea where the region stands with outright banning the DP....and go from there.

[Hatman 🍁]

I amended it once again.

[Hatman 🍁]

Amended once again.

[bullmoose88]

Point of information...

Is the sponsor allowed to amend his submission at will?

[Ebowed]

Clause 1 of this misnamed act is far too broad and ambiguous to be taken seriously.

Additionally, I fear that the allowance of these consentual "euthanizations" of prisoners will lead to all sorts of dirty practices in the prisons.  States that do not have the death penalty, such as Vermont, Massachusetts, Maine, and Rhode Island, will suddenly have prisoners being euthanized ("consentually"), when before, there were no killings in those states' fine prisons.  If the state does not pay for these executions-- I'm sorry, euthanizations-- who does?  It's not like the prisoner himself has the money to pay for it, as his food and clothing is already paid for by the state.  Are we expecting the relatives of this criminal to hand over the cash to have the guy euthanized?

Gutting clauses 1 and 2 with "All forms of capital punishment are hereby abolished in the Northeast region" would be much more simple, more to the point, and the bill would be accurately named, too.

[Hatman 🍁]

Point of information...

Is the sponsor allowed to amend his submission at will?

You're the judge

[bullmoose88]

Point of information...

Is the sponsor allowed to amend his submission at will?

You're the judge

Yeah, but I'm not the parliamentarian as it were.

[MAS117]

Point of information...

Is the sponsor allowed to amend his submission at will?

I've always amended it at will, unless it was a compelety new wording. We usually vote on final passage of a bill or amendment Judge.

[MAS117]

Although its never been done up to this point, I motion to table the bill.

[KEmperor]

Although its never been done up to this point, I motion to table the bill.

Seconded.

[Speed of Sound]

I like this bill. We need to get rid of the death penalty ASAP.

[MAS117]

I would like to point out to the presiding officer that there was a motion to table this bill, and a second, so therefore it needs to be put to a vote. Thank you.

[Hatman 🍁]

Alright MAS, I will put this up to vote at midnight tonight. My apologies for not being available last night.

[MAS117]

Alright MAS, I will put this up to vote at midnight tonight. My apologies for not being available last night.

Thank you Governor.

[Joe Republic]

I'm surprised that so many Northeasterners are still keen to give awful criminals an easy way out for their crimes.

[KEmperor]

I'm surprised that so many Northeasterners are still keen to give awful criminals an easy way out for their crimes.

I know, I but we will have to tackle parole reform later.

[Joe Republic]

I realize you were (partly) joking there.  But as this bill means that all current prisoners on Death Row will have no chance of parole, my point still stands.