One Strike You're Out Act (Tabled)

[minionofmidas]

One Strike You're Out Act

1.) Any citizen convicted of first degree murder shall automatically receive a minimum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
2.) Any citizen convicted of second degree murder shall automatically receive a minimum sentence of fifteen (15) years in prison


Sponsor: Dwtl

[HappyWarrior]

I will vote nay, the current legal system deals with it as it should be dealt with.  In some crimes there are extenuating circumstances.  All crimes are not created equal.

[AndrewTX]

I couldn't picture myself ever voting in favor of this Act. Some people make horrible mistakes, and they should pay for these crimes. But to say that every single person should recieve a minimum of a life sentance is just outrageous.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I couldn't picture myself ever voting in favor of this Act. Some people make horrible mistakes, and they should pay for these crimes. But to say that every single person should recieve a minimum of a life sentance is just outrageous.

Not every person, just those convicted of first degree murder, a rather heinous crime.  BTW, the law passed unanimously in the Dirty South region

[Associate Justice PiT]

I couldn't picture myself ever voting in favor of this Act. Some people make horrible mistakes, and they should pay for these crimes. But to say that every single person should recieve a minimum of a life sentance is just outrageous.

Not every person, just those convicted of first degree murder, a rather heinous crime.  BTW, the law passed unanimously in the Dirty South region

     I would like to point out that any person who would commit premeditated murder against another person is very, very likely not able to function in a modern society.

[Torie]

Is this intended to apply to minors, and supersede in that regard the act which just passed?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Is this intended to apply to minors, and supersede in that regard the act which just passed?

Its not intended to apply to minors and I would have no objection to coutning an amendment to make that more clear as friendly

[Torie]

I think I could possibly support the 1st degree murder  minimum, but second degree murder  covers too large a grab bag of crimes for me to be comfortable in supporting any such minimum sentence for that crime category.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Mindlessly draconian. The second section is especially awful as is the failure, the unacceptable oversight it seems, to take into account age.

At least he leaves free the Judge to decide what "life" means, but that's presumably an oversight as well.

[DownWithTheLeft]

At least he leaves free the Judge to decide what "life" means, but that's presumably an oversight as well.

How in the world could "life" be construed in another way except by an extremely activist judge?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

At least he leaves free the Judge to decide what "life" means, but that's presumably an oversight as well.

How in the world could "life" be construed in another way except by an extremely activist judge?

Generally it translates any sentence with a tariff of around 15 years or more.

[Хahar 🤔]

Why exactly can't a judge, you know, judge?

[Associate Justice PiT]

I think I could possibly support the 1st degree murder  minimum, but second degree murder  covers too large a grab bag of crimes for me to be comfortable in supporting any such minimum sentence for that crime category.

     What if the second section were made more lenient? Say, 5 years to life in prison.

[Torie]

That would be acceptable.

[Хahar 🤔]

What is the purpose of this legislation?

First-degree murder will usually get life as it is.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think I could possibly support the 1st degree murder  minimum, but second degree murder  covers too large a grab bag of crimes for me to be comfortable in supporting any such minimum sentence for that crime category.

     What if the second section were made more lenient? Say, 5 years to life in prison.

A tariff of five seems reasonable, although I wonder whether even that's needed; it's not like Judges are lenient on people up before the beak on violence charges of one sort or another. Rape and sexual abuse generally are different, sadly.

[DownWithTheLeft]

That would be acceptable.

I would more than open to that to get this bill passed

[Sensei]

i will vote nay on this, and i think we have enough votes to get it off of the floor.

cloture, please.

[Associate Justice PiT]

i will vote nay on this, and i think we have enough votes to get it off of the floor.

cloture, please.

     Well sure you do if you try to head off an attempt to amend the bill.

[DownWithTheLeft]

i will vote nay on this, and i think we have enough votes to get it off of the floor.

cloture, please.

     Well sure you do if you try to head off an attempt to amend the bill.

Which is why cloture will fail and here is the proposed amendment:

To change "fifteen (15)" to "five (5)" in Section 2

To add a section 3 reading:
This law will only pertain to defendants charged after their eighteenth (18th) birthday

[Хahar 🤔]

i will vote nay on this, and i think we have enough votes to get it off of the floor.

cloture, please.

     Well sure you do if you try to head off an attempt to amend the bill.

Which is why cloture will fail and here is the proposed amendment:

To change "fifteen (15)" to "five (5)" in Section 2

To add a section 3 reading:
This law will only pertain to defendants charged after their eighteenth (18th) birthday

Again, what's the point fo this legislation?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

i will vote nay on this, and i think we have enough votes to get it off of the floor.

cloture, please.

     Well sure you do if you try to head off an attempt to amend the bill.

Which is why cloture will fail and here is the proposed amendment:

To change "fifteen (15)" to "five (5)" in Section 2

To add a section 3 reading:
This law will only pertain to defendants charged after their eighteenth (18th) birthday

Again, what's the point fo this legislation?

To demonstrate to the electorate that Downy is Tough On Criminals.

[minionofmidas]

Grrr.

Sensei, for getting a bill you consider stupid/moronic/slightly frivolous off the table quickly, please use a tabling motion, not a cloture motion. Cloture is basically for bills that won't go away any other way as people keep debate going on and on and on.

The cloture motion cannot go to a vote (actually, on a most literal reading, it cannot be passed) during the first 72 hours of debate. The amendment, introduced after it, cannot go to a vote until we've dispensed with the cloture motion first. That at least would be a literal reading - maybe I could construe up an interpretation that the too early cloture motion is void or something. Or I could override the rules, acting "in conjunction with" the Vice President, which Sensei could then object to bringing my (our, it would be, actually) decision to a vote...

So yeah. Either way the amendment gets a minimum of 24 hours debate, so it's not pressing right now.

A motion to table, on the other hand, has none of these problems. It can go to a vote immediately irrespective of already introduced amendments (not while they're at vote though. I think), and lasts only 48 hours.

So...

I'm motioning to table. And I urge Sensei to use the 48 hours thus won to withdraw his cloture motion (only relevant if the tabling attempt fails, of course).


The vote is on the motion to table.
Please vote aye, nay or abstain.


Aye.

[Bacon King]

I'd like to note that only the first section is from the bill that passed the Southeaast region.

[HappyWarrior]

Aye