Mideast Assembly Thread

[afleitch]

I have a proposal for a basic idea for an act the we might want to enact. I believe that we are overextending ourselves to criminals and not providing enough help for the victims of a crime. In the Constitution, the Bill of Rights is littered with protection for the accused. We must extend the same courtesy to those who are victimized. Normally, people do not receive government support when they are robbed and/or physically assaulted, even after the attacker is put in jail. We should extend a plan to help the victimized.
Normally, I do not encourage the enlargement of the government, but in this case, I feel for the people who have been victimized, and I want to put into effect a bill that provides states support for those families who have been victimized within the state's jurisdiction.

What type of help are you talking about?

Monetary help to cover for damage to their lives and possessions.

That's exactly the scheme that I work for. Unfortunately as a civil servant I genuinely have to be careful of my position on public forums, so I may not be able to contribute much in public to this idea other than give general guidance on what our scheme does and who it awards monies too which is public domain.

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

I have a proposal for a basic idea for an act the we might want to enact. I believe that we are overextending ourselves to criminals and not providing enough help for the victims of a crime. In the Constitution, the Bill of Rights is littered with protection for the accused. We must extend the same courtesy to those who are victimized. Normally, people do not receive government support when they are robbed and/or physically assaulted, even after the attacker is put in jail. We should extend a plan to help the victimized.
Normally, I do not encourage the enlargement of the government, but in this case, I feel for the people who have been victimized, and I want to put into effect a bill that provides states support for those families who have been victimized within the state's jurisdiction.

What type of help are you talking about?

Monetary help to cover for damage to their lives and possessions.

That's exactly the scheme that I work for. Unfortunately as a civil servant I genuinely have to be careful of my position on public forums, so I may not be able to contribute much in public to this idea other than give general guidance on what our scheme does and who it awards monies too which is public domain.

Of course. Do I have enougfh support for this idea at this stage for it to be presented to the people of the Mideast as a formal bill?

[Purple State]

I have a proposal for a basic idea for an act the we might want to enact. I believe that we are overextending ourselves to criminals and not providing enough help for the victims of a crime. In the Constitution, the Bill of Rights is littered with protection for the accused. We must extend the same courtesy to those who are victimized. Normally, people do not receive government support when they are robbed and/or physically assaulted, even after the attacker is put in jail. We should extend a plan to help the victimized.
Normally, I do not encourage the enlargement of the government, but in this case, I feel for the people who have been victimized, and I want to put into effect a bill that provides states support for those families who have been victimized within the state's jurisdiction.

What type of help are you talking about?

Monetary help to cover for damage to their lives and possessions.

That's exactly the scheme that I work for. Unfortunately as a civil servant I genuinely have to be careful of my position on public forums, so I may not be able to contribute much in public to this idea other than give general guidance on what our scheme does and who it awards monies too which is public domain.

Of course. Do I have enougfh support for this idea at this stage for it to be presented to the people of the Mideast as a formal bill?

If you want to write something up I'd be happy to bring it forward and work on it with the Assembly.

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

I have a proposal for a basic idea for an act the we might want to enact. I believe that we are overextending ourselves to criminals and not providing enough help for the victims of a crime. In the Constitution, the Bill of Rights is littered with protection for the accused. We must extend the same courtesy to those who are victimized. Normally, people do not receive government support when they are robbed and/or physically assaulted, even after the attacker is put in jail. We should extend a plan to help the victimized.
Normally, I do not encourage the enlargement of the government, but in this case, I feel for the people who have been victimized, and I want to put into effect a bill that provides states support for those families who have been victimized within the state's jurisdiction.

What type of help are you talking about?

Monetary help to cover for damage to their lives and possessions.

That's exactly the scheme that I work for. Unfortunately as a civil servant I genuinely have to be careful of my position on public forums, so I may not be able to contribute much in public to this idea other than give general guidance on what our scheme does and who it awards monies too which is public domain.

Of course. Do I have enougfh support for this idea at this stage for it to be presented to the people of the Mideast as a formal bill?

If you want to write something up I'd be happy to bring it forward and work on it with the Assembly.

Section 1
Should a person be found guilty of a crime, victims of said crime shall be compensated by the proper tier of regional government.
Section 2
Victims will be compensated for:
     1. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     2. Medical treatment/rehabilitation.
     3. Loss of material possessions. Value of said possessions will be evaluated by either the victim's insurance provider, or, if inapplicable, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
Section 3
The aforementioned proper tier of the government is defined as the jurisdiction of the court in which the decision of the innocence of the suspect is decided. The body of government that pertains to the jurisdiction of said court will cover the expenses of these processes.

[Purple State]

I will bring the bill proposed by Persepolis to the floor for debate.

Is Section 3 saying that the judiciary should pay for the reimbursements? We can just put it on the regional tab. We should also find some way to pay for it. Citizens should all contribute to the safety and protection of the entire region. Perhaps an increase of the sales tax (what is the current sales tax? I can't seem to find it) on guns from its current level to 15%.

[Devilman88]

I will bring the bill proposed by Persepolis to the floor for debate.

Is Section 3 saying that the judiciary should pay for the reimbursements? We can just put it on the regional tab. We should also find some way to pay for it. Citizens should all contribute to the safety and protection of the entire region. Perhaps an increase of the sales tax (what is the current sales tax? I can't seem to find it) on guns from its current level to 15%.

You could increase the sales tax on guns by 10% and cut the money we give to prison by half.

[Purple State]

I will bring the bill proposed by Persepolis to the floor for debate.

Is Section 3 saying that the judiciary should pay for the reimbursements? We can just put it on the regional tab. We should also find some way to pay for it. Citizens should all contribute to the safety and protection of the entire region. Perhaps an increase of the sales tax (what is the current sales tax? I can't seem to find it) on guns from its current level to 15%.

You could increase the sales tax on guns by 10% and cut the money we give to prison by half.

Cutting prison funding would only hurt us in the long run. Prisons need proper funding to function, to properly imprison inmates, etc.

[Devilman88]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In Section 2, it says " . Loss of material possessions. Value of said possessions will be evaluated by either the victim's insurance provider, or, if inapplicable, an independent insurance company employed by the region."

Doesn't most homeowners insurance already cover that?

[Purple State]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In Section 2, it says " . Loss of material possessions. Value of said possessions will be evaluated by either the victim's insurance provider, or, if inapplicable, an independent insurance company employed by the region."

Doesn't most homeowners insurance already cover that?

It can vary. I do think we should add something to ensure that we aren't double-paying people. Perhaps this:

3. Loss of material possessions. Value of said possessions will be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.

[Devilman88]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In Section 2, it says " . Loss of material possessions. Value of said possessions will be evaluated by either the victim's insurance provider, or, if inapplicable, an independent insurance company employed by the region."

Doesn't most homeowners insurance already cover that?

It can vary. I do think we should add something to ensure that we aren't double-paying people. Perhaps this:

3. Loss of material possessions. Value of said possessions will be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.

That sounds much better. We don't want to double-pay people.

[Devilman88]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also in Section 2, I believe that number 2 should read: " Medical treatment/rehabilitation up to but not exceeding two years from when the said person was found guilty'

I believe I did the wording right.

[Purple State]

So how is this:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
3. Compensation shall be determined by the Judge upon sentencing of the convicted person responsible for the damages.

[Devilman88]

That sounds great!

[Peter]

Clause 3 - what if nobody is ever found guilty of the crime? This is especially true if, for example, a bank robber kills an innocent bystander before being killed by a SWAT team himself. Nobody will ever be sentenced, but there is doubtless a case for compensation under the spirit of this act.

I would have to recommend that compensation is determined by some tribunal, part of whose remit it is to determine that the injury is the result of some crime.

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

Clause 3 - what if nobody is ever found guilty of the crime? This is especially true if, for example, a bank robber kills an innocent bystander before being killed by a SWAT team himself. Nobody will ever be sentenced, but there is doubtless a case for compensation under the spirit of this act.

I would have to recommend that compensation is determined by some tribunal, part of whose remit it is to determine that the injury is the result of some crime.

True. That situation never struck me.

I will bring the bill proposed by Persepolis to the floor for debate.

Is Section 3 saying that the judiciary should pay for the reimbursements? We can just put it on the regional tab. We should also find some way to pay for it. Citizens should all contribute to the safety and protection of the entire region. Perhaps an increase of the sales tax (what is the current sales tax? I can't seem to find it) on guns from its current level to 15%.

You could increase the sales tax on guns by 10% and cut the money we give to prison by half.

Cutting prison funding would only hurt us in the long run. Prisons need proper funding to function, to properly imprison inmates, etc.

Actually, I would much rather cut prison funding than raise taxes. In fact, to raise money, I suggest we cut prison spending by 25%. Right now, in the US anyway, $60,000 is spent per inmate. Instead of providing such monetary support for criminals, it would be much wiser to spend that money toward helping the victims of a crime.

I agree with all the changes that have been made to the bill so far.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I don't understand the purpose of this.  Why wouldn't we just settle compensation stuff like this in civil court, where the victim takes the guilty party to court for a civil case.

I just don't see the need to spend government money on this, unless we set up a government system as compensation of last resort.

[afleitch]

I don't understand the purpose of this.  Why wouldn't we just settle compensation stuff like this in civil court, where the victim takes the guilty party to court for a civil case.

I just don't see the need to spend government money on this, unless we set up a government system as compensation of last resort.

The UK has operated a compensation scheme for 45 years. It operates in such a way that court costs and any monies awarded through a civil claim are deducted from the final award. It is to be extended to include a 'victims fund' where the state forces the criminal to compensate the victim.

It's not an expensive system to run and it particularly compensates children who are victims of sexual abuse because the monies are held in trust and are not eaten up by legal fees or mis-spent by guardians. Claims can be made for children on their behalf by parents, guardians and social servies if they are moved into care because of the abuse.

[Purple State]

I don't understand the purpose of this.  Why wouldn't we just settle compensation stuff like this in civil court, where the victim takes the guilty party to court for a civil case.

I just don't see the need to spend government money on this, unless we set up a government system as compensation of last resort.

That's why we have a clause indicating that if claims can be obtained in another way that must happen first. I am actually wondering what case could not be taken to civil court that this would cover? Could anyone explain this?

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

I don't understand the purpose of this.  Why wouldn't we just settle compensation stuff like this in civil court, where the victim takes the guilty party to court for a civil case.

I just don't see the need to spend government money on this, unless we set up a government system as compensation of last resort.

That's why we have a clause indicating that if claims can be obtained in another way that must happen first. I am actually wondering what case could not be taken to civil court that this would cover? Could anyone explain this?

Oftentimes, people who suffer the injuries of the crime are not necessarily covered under the strictest form of the law. Very often, a criminal is not taken to civil court because the charges are too trivial, or the courts want to avoid double jeopardy. The victims go uncompensated, and the felons go to jail. The government just sits there.

[Purple State]

Updated version:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government under the conditions set forth by this Act.
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
3. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
4. Compensation shall be determined by an independent council of three justices, who shall judge the nature of the crime, whether all other plausible alternatives have been attempted and what amount shall be paid to the victim. This amount shall be calculated as the amount determined less amounts already received through alternative means.

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

Updated version:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government under the conditions set forth by this Act.
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
3. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
4. Compensation shall be determined by an independent council of three justices, who shall judge the nature of the crime, whether all other plausible alternatives have been attempted and what amount shall be paid to the victim. This amount shall be calculated as the amount determined less amounts already received through alternative means.

That's good. We probably need to agree on our economic plan to make it legitimate. I say, as I have said before, no new taxes. We cut prison spending to meet the shortfall. In fact, we should cut the prison spending of the criminal who caused this monetary damage in th first place.

[Purple State]

Updated version:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government under the conditions set forth by this Act.
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
3. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
4. Compensation shall be determined by an independent council of three justices, who shall judge the nature of the crime, whether all other plausible alternatives have been attempted and what amount shall be paid to the victim. This amount shall be calculated as the amount determined less amounts already received through alternative means.

That's good. We probably need to agree on our economic plan to make it legitimate. I say, as I have said before, no new taxes. We cut prison spending to meet the shortfall. In fact, we should cut the prison spending of the criminal who caused this monetary damage in th first place.

The problem is prison spending isn't laid out per prisoner. It goes to the prison to function. Cutting prison funding really hurts the prison more, decreasing guards or guard pay, which increases the likelihood of escape.

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

Updated version:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government under the conditions set forth by this Act.
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
3. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
4. Compensation shall be determined by an independent council of three justices, who shall judge the nature of the crime, whether all other plausible alternatives have been attempted and what amount shall be paid to the victim. This amount shall be calculated as the amount determined less amounts already received through alternative means.

That's good. We probably need to agree on our economic plan to make it legitimate. I say, as I have said before, no new taxes. We cut prison spending to meet the shortfall. In fact, we should cut the prison spending of the criminal who caused this monetary damage in th first place.

The problem is prison spending isn't laid out per prisoner. It goes to the prison to function. Cutting prison funding really hurts the prison more, decreasing guards or guard pay, which increases the likelihood of escape.

Decrease prisoner services, not guard pay. Lower library visits. Some correctional facilities have a bookmobile come weekly. It will save the city money and the prison money to discontinue this service. Obviously, I don't know all the services prisoners get, but we should cut it to the bare minimum.

[Devilman88]

Updated version:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government under the conditions set forth by this Act.
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
3. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
4. Compensation shall be determined by an independent council of three justices, who shall judge the nature of the crime, whether all other plausible alternatives have been attempted and what amount shall be paid to the victim. This amount shall be calculated as the amount determined less amounts already received through alternative means.

That's good. We probably need to agree on our economic plan to make it legitimate. I say, as I have said before, no new taxes. We cut prison spending to meet the shortfall. In fact, we should cut the prison spending of the criminal who caused this monetary damage in th first place.

The problem is prison spending isn't laid out per prisoner. It goes to the prison to function. Cutting prison funding really hurts the prison more, decreasing guards or guard pay, which increases the likelihood of escape.

Decrease prisoner services, not guard pay. Lower library visits. Some correctional facilities have a bookmobile come weekly. It will save the city money and the prison money to discontinue this service. Obviously, I don't know all the services prisoners get, but we should cut it to the bare minimum.

I believe it would have to be both decrease in prison spending and raise taxes on gun sales. Prison do need money to keep everything running right and I am don't want any law suit against the government over how well the prison are ran.

[Fine...I Made This More Civil]

Updated version:

The Mideast Victim Compensation Act

1. Any person victim of a crime committed in the Mideast shall be compensated by the regional Government under the conditions set forth by this Act.
2. Victims will be compensated for:
     a. Loss of life of a member of the immediate family.
     b. Approved medical treatment/rehabilitation for a period not exceeding two years from the beginning of treatment.
     c. Loss of material possessions, the value of which shall be evaluated by the victim's insurance provider or, if none is provided, an independent insurance company employed by the region.
3. No person shall be reimbursed by the region if there exists a plausible alternative method to receive compensation for the crime.
4. Compensation shall be determined by an independent council of three justices, who shall judge the nature of the crime, whether all other plausible alternatives have been attempted and what amount shall be paid to the victim. This amount shall be calculated as the amount determined less amounts already received through alternative means.

That's good. We probably need to agree on our economic plan to make it legitimate. I say, as I have said before, no new taxes. We cut prison spending to meet the shortfall. In fact, we should cut the prison spending of the criminal who caused this monetary damage in th first place.

The problem is prison spending isn't laid out per prisoner. It goes to the prison to function. Cutting prison funding really hurts the prison more, decreasing guards or guard pay, which increases the likelihood of escape.

Decrease prisoner services, not guard pay. Lower library visits. Some correctional facilities have a bookmobile come weekly. It will save the city money and the prison money to discontinue this service. Obviously, I don't know all the services prisoners get, but we should cut it to the bare minimum.

I believe it would have to be both decrease in prison spending and raise taxes on gun sales. Prison do need money to keep everything running right and I am don't want any law suit against the government over how well the prison are ran.

A lawsuit from who? A felon? I want more rights after I killed that lady!