Mideast Assembly Thread

[Peter]

In addition, putting pets down during old age would be criminalized, while abandonment is not, so we would see a lot of sick dogs wandering the streets it seems.

I disagree - that doesn't fit the definition of animal cruelty here as it is not a "malicious killing".

Parliamentary Procedure requires that I first call a vote on Dan's amendment then Bayh '10s amendment, but I think it best if Bayh submits his amendment as friendly and Dan withdraws his amendment. Please do this soon because otherwise pointless votes will be required.

[Devilman88]

I withdraw my amendment.

[tmthforu94]

I would like to bring this up as an Amendment to the current bill on the table.

The Animal Protection Act
The Mideast Region recognizes that it is our duty to protect Animals. Therefore, the following shall be enforced:

1. The Mideast recognizes animal cruelty as the following:
a. Neglect
b. Malicious killing
c. Beatings
d. Animal Fighting ie Dog fight, cock fight.

2. The Mideast doesn't recognizes the following as animal cruelty:
a. Hunting for food or sport
b. Killing Animals for food.
c. Killing any rodents or insects.

3. Any person under the age of 18, who is found guilty of animal abuse is required to undergo psychological evaluation to determine if the child needs individual or family counseling. If found sane said person shall serve a maximum of 2 years in juvenile jail and/or 2,500 dollars fine.
a. Parents or Guardians of said person under 18, are liable for all cost for the evaluation/counseling/fine.

4. If a person over the age of 18 commits animal abuse, said person shall serve a minimum of 30 days in jail and a maximum of 5 years in jail and/or 5,000 dollars fine.

I accept this amendment as friendly.

[Peter]

The Animal Protection Act
The Mideast Region recognizes that it is our duty to protect Animals. Therefore, the following shall be enforced:

1. The Mideast recognizes animal cruelty as the following:
a. Neglect
b. Malicious killing
c. Beatings
d. Animal Fighting ie Dog fight, cock fight.

2. The Mideast doesn't recognizes the following as animal cruelty:
a. Hunting for food or sport
b. Killing Animals for food.
c. Killing any rodents or insects.

3. Any person under the age of 18, who is found guilty of animal abuse is required to undergo psychological evaluation to determine if the child needs individual or family counseling. If found sane said person shall serve a maximum of 2 years in juvenile jail and/or 2,500 dollars fine.
a. Parents or Guardians of said person under 18, are liable for all cost for the evaluation/counseling/fine.

4. If a person over the age of 18 commits animal abuse, said person shall serve a minimum of 30 days in jail and a maximum of 5 years in jail and/or 5,000 dollars fine.

The above amendment was accepted as friendly and without objection is now the substance of the bill.

There have been 24 hours without debate, and so this bill is called to a vote.

[tmthforu94]

Aye on "The Animal Protection Act".

[Devilman88]

Aye on the bill.

[Peter]

Aye.
The Ayes have it. The Ayes have it.
The bill is submitted to the Governor for his signature or veto.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Aye.
The Ayes have it. The Ayes have it.
The bill is submitted to the Governor for his signature or veto.

The legislation has been signed.

[Purple State]

C'mon, new members, get your act together! Get some legislation on the floor.

[tmthforu94]

C'mon, new members, get your act together! Get some legislation on the floor.

I spent another 30 minutes this morning brainstorming. I have a few ideas, but I'm not sure which one to go with.

[Vepres]

C'mon, new members, get your act together! Get some legislation on the floor.

I spent another 30 minutes this morning brainstorming. I have a few ideas, but I'm not sure which one to go with.

Just propose one and see where it goes.

[tmthforu94]

The Public Smoking Act
1. It shall be illegal for any citizen of the Mideast to smoke in a public area.
2. If a person is found guilty of smoking in public areas, that person shall face a fine up to five thousand dollars.

[Peter]

I interpret this as Dan's resignation from the Assembly. The Governor is directed to fill the vacancy.

I am in favour of the new bill and will bring it to the floor once we have a 3rd member.

[tmthforu94]

I interpret this as Dan's resignation from the Assembly. The Governor is directed to fill the vacancy.

I am in favour of the new bill and will bring it to the floor once we have a 3rd member.

He probably meant for that, but he didn't specifically say. And, wouldn't have have to go this to resign, which he didn't do?
I'll ask him. Hopefully this will be resolved quickly.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

The Public Smoking Act
1. It shall be illegal for any citizen of the Mideast to smoke in a public area.
2. If a person is found guilty of smoking in public areas, that person shall face a fine up to five thousand dollars.

5000$ does sound very harsh. The maximum fine should probably be much lower, otherwise it's a great law.

[tmthforu94]

The Public Smoking Act
1. It shall be illegal for any citizen of the Mideast to smoke in a public area.
2. If a person is found guilty of smoking in public areas, that person shall face a fine up to five thousand dollars.

5000$ does sound very harsh. The maximum fine should probably be much lower, otherwise it's a great law.

That's the maximum. It doesn't necessarily mean anyone who is guilty will pay $5,000.00. If someone had done it several times before, then the judge would have the option of going up to five thousand, which would be very severe, and likely put a stop to it.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well that's true, people with $5000 fines are not likely to afford any my cigaretts.

[Badger]

As all Mideast citizens are not automatically members of the Assembly (apparently unlike other regions, but OK), I am writing this letter to my representatives regarding the proposed anti-public smoking bill.

I'm a lifelong nonsmoker who is painfully aware of both the health and nuisance effects of secondhand smoke. I've rarely been prouder of my parents when, after smoking a couple packs a week since their late teens, they together successfully gave up smoking cold turkey and have been clean for about 20 years. I have enjoyed the effect of public anti-smoking laws in cities I've visited. I believe the complained loss of business by some bar and restaurant owners is overstated and offset by nonsmoking patrons being more willing to patronize such establishments. In my own experience there is at least one bar/restaurant in Columbus I used to avoid despite the decent food and beer because the place was in a perpetual fog cloud of tobacco smoke. Since Columbus passed it's anti-public smoking ordinance, however, the place is actually enjoyable to go to and I spend money there I never would have otherwise (and it never appears any less crowded than before the smoking ban).

I believe an anti-public smoking ban would be a great thing for Mideastern citizens and communities. That said, I absolutely oppose this proposed bill and urge it's defeat.

The issue is simple: For even a strong anti-smoking advocate such as myself, and many others like me, a maximum $5000 fine is VASTLY excessive. Do not assume that "judicial discretion" will ensure that such penalties will only be imposed on the worst repeat offenders. It is a truism that if a law permits a maximum penalty, some judges will impose it regularly regardless of circumstances. Even a fine of $3000 or $2000 for someone with a 2 or three prior convictions is patently excessive. For comparison's sake, the proposed maximum fine is almost twice the maximum Ohio permits for a 3rd DUI conviction in 6 years!

Simply put, relying on 'judicial discretion' to avoid unjust imposition of a poorly crafted law is a fool's errand. I would respectfully recommend amending the bill to allow a maximum fine of at most a tenth that proposed ($500--still rather steep, but acceptable and allowing for serious deterrent to repeat offenders). If there is need to ensure the bill has 'teeth' perhaps a minimum mandatory fine of $100 should also be mandated, as this would also avoid some judges who place their own personal distaste for the law over the will of the legislature from habitually imposing nominal penalties (e.g. $1 fine) or even no fine at all.

Another thought just hit me: With such a high maximum potential fine of $5000, the right to a jury trial would probably attach, even without a potential jail sentence. Instead of resolving such cases with a relatively quick and simple bench trial (i.e. trial to a judge or magistrate), the additional clogging of judicial dockets with much longer jury trials is in no one's best interest.

With such reasonable amendments, I would wholeheartedly support such anti-public smoking legislation.

Thank you all for your consideration and anticipated support.

Signed on behalf of many Mideastern nonsmokers,
A Voter

[tmthforu94]

Thank you, voter. I greatly appreciate your concern on this bill, and I'm glad you spoke up.
The reason I put such a maximum fine is in special circumstances. For example, if someone continued to broke the law and smoked in public, the option of fining up to five thousand dollars would be optional. I don't support a fine of five thousand dollars every time. That's just so the judge will have a high ceiling, for special circumstances.

However, I do appreciate your concern, and I think it's important that we give as much power to the people as we can. Other people have also spoken that the maximum is harsh. Therefore, I will make a compromise, and will amend my own bill.

The Public Smoking Act
1. It shall be illegal for any citizen of the Mideast to smoke in a public area.
2. If a person is found guilty of smoking in public areas, that person shall face a fine up to two thousand dollars.

[Purple State]

Why not something equivalent to a traffic ticket? $2,000 for smoking indoors? I would think speeding far above the speed limit would be a harsher penalty.

[Badger]

Why not something equivalent to a traffic ticket? $2,000 for smoking indoors? I would think speeding far above the speed limit would be a harsher penalty.

I concur. At the risk of sounding inflexible I suggested $500 as a round number which absolutely at the highest end of remotely reasonable. And even that's pushing the envelope.

Using Ohio as a comparison, $2000 is still more than the maximum fine permitted for a 2nd DUI in 6 years. It's also close to the maximum permitted ($2500) for many felony offenses including:

Domestic Violence with a prior DV conviction

Possession of Cocaine or Heroin(!)

Assault on a Police Officer (not mere resisting arrest; actually slugging a cop).

Again, LOVE the idea, but the fine proposed here, even as modified, is just plain extreme.

[HappyWarrior]

I don't support any such ban.  I think people should have the right to decide if they want to smoke.  It's up to the restaurants or other establishments to make their own decisions otherwise.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I don't support any such ban.  I think people should have the right to decide if they want to smoke.  It's up to the restaurants or other establishments to make their own decisions otherwise.

What are we defining as public place?  Restaurants? city sidewalks? anywhere outside of your own home?

[Purple State]

I don't support any such ban.  I think people should have the right to decide if they want to smoke.  It's up to the restaurants or other establishments to make their own decisions otherwise.

I also agree with this. I was just focusing on the fine before, but why the hell are we banning smoking?

*Hat Tip: Brandon stuck us in the national spotlight, check it out!

[Peter]

There are now 2 vacancies in the Mideast Assembly.

I urge the Governor to fill these vacancies. I would simply state that I can pass bills, have them vetoed, and then override vetoes on my own at the moment