Talk:SAFE Act Amendment, 644

Amendment: Stability and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act, 644 Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/19/2023 10:30 AM @Assembly Member Tabled by Chancellor John Edwards, MGA, KWP as Chancellor. Amendment: Stability and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act, 644 This Amendment seeks to update current law to better clarify who can be detained for terrorism-related crimes in Kodiak. https://kodiak.wiki/wiki/Amendment:_Stability_and_Freedom_Enhancement_(SAFE)_Act,_644 Proposed by John Edwards, MGA, KWP. Voting is presently set for 2 February 2023 Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/19/2023 10:31 AM Debate is opened on this Amendment. Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/19/2023 3:42 PM my main question/concern, this allows for domestic surveillance of those under suspicion. is that approved by a judge? what makes them suspicious in the first place? I worry this may be a little too patriot-act(y) John Edwards [KWP] — 01/19/2023 8:50 PM All surveillance still needs to be approved by a judge. As to what makes them suspicious, my first thought would be working for or with known militia members. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/19/2023 8:58 PM This bill will make Kodiak a police state. Arrest him with only suspicion in evidence? Install surveillance for the same reasons? The maximum that should be allowed to the police without strong evidence is with the full and unambiguous permission of the suspect to politely ask him about the issues of interest and, with the permission of the suspect, to conduct a search of him. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/19/2023 9:06 PM To be clear arrests cannot be made with only suspicion. Surveillance can only occur with judicial approval. Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/19/2023 9:07 PM but who is to say that judges are to be trusted? Tom Westbrook — 01/19/2023 9:08 PM Are not all arrests made under suspicion? To arrest someone under anything else implies they are tried and found guilty for their charge does it not? Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 01/19/2023 9:10 PM I suppose suspicion and without evidence are also nuances. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/19/2023 9:11 PM 2.7 - Authorizes the CTS the power to detain and question citizens of the Republic suspected of terrorism, espionage and/or treason. 2.8 - Authorizes the CTS to conduct domestic surveillance of individuals of interest suspected of charges relating to terrorism, espionage and/or treason. 'suspected' Tom Westbrook — 01/19/2023 9:11 PM Yes because the alternative is convicted Unless you are suggesting police cannot arrest a person until after they face trial? The amendment continues to describe means of obtaining warrants to perform these arrests and surveillance, warrants that must be obtained like any other warrant by making a case before a judge Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/19/2023 9:14 PM Charges are not conducted on suspicion. On suspicion, they only collect evidence, according to which they can later accuse and then arrest a person. Otherwise, the police may break into every house 'on suspicion'. Tom Westbrook — 01/19/2023 9:17 PM I would like to see where in our legal code you have drawn this from. The need for the police to obtain a warrant to search someone’s home is enshrined into the constitution A person can only be suspected of a crime until tried for it John Edwards [KWP] — 01/19/2023 9:21 PM How would you word it? Tom Westbrook — 01/19/2023 9:21 PM Well a person wouldn’t be suspected of a crime if there is no evidence to support that suspicion Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/19/2023 9:23 PM I didn't understand. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/19/2023 9:25 PM In this case, this bill contradicts other laws. Somewhere in 2-3 hours I will finish reading the Kodiak legislation and find confirmation of my words. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/19/2023 11:38 PM Bear in mind that these are extenuating circumstances, we have suffered multiple terrorist attacks in recent weeks, downed aircraft, bombed buildings. CTS was restricted to terrorists only and made no provision for accessories and collusion. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 12:13 AM I can name an example at least an example of a state that has become a dictatorship under the pretext of 'fighting terrorism'. Russia. Don't repeat its mistakes. Patrick Barber — 01/20/2023 12:17 AM what policies do you suggest may bridge the gap between existing law and the present issues with right-wing sectarian violence and terrorism in the republic? To me it makes sense to empower a specialised police unit with the same arrest powers as other wider national police. Detain is not the same as arrest - and nothing in the bill authorises arrest without judicial warrant (all terrorism arrests require a charge) Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 12:24 AM In order to answer the first question, I need to know more about recent events. What are the political views of the terrorists? What is their age composition? What is their national composition and do they attach importance to it? In what territory and for how long did they live? What do the terrorists want from us? I will give an answer to the second part after I have thoroughly familiarized myself with the structure of the Kodiak police and court. Patrick Barber — 01/20/2023 12:30 AM The overarching movement is known as "the Militias" as they all tend to be similarly named to Kodiak Militia. McNeil is the most respected of all the leaders and while most of the cells operate independent of one another, McNeil's is the largest and the others tend to help him with his aims The Kodiak Militia, run by "Colonel" Layton McNeil, is a far right religious nationalist organisation that was built in response to the re-liberalising of Kodiak political structures. The population of Kodiak leaned further and further to the traditional conservative over the course of the Epidemic, and also more and more suspicious of the global order during the quarantine. The Militia would prefer to overthrow the government and replace it with a strong religiously-minded leader (like McNeil) who would implement strong social and political limitations. They see anyone left of Germany-style Christian Democrats as communist liars, and murdered President (and former Chancellor) Ulrykk von Guelerlaand for compromising with the left to enact economic reforms. In the last 6 months, they have sent multiple parcel bombs addressed to politicians (including the President @Patrick Barber and Chief Justice @Martang B. Eðeltreow (Mengtian)) ultimately killing a number of innocent postal workers. The Chief Justice's house has been bombed and destroyed in a different incident. A car bomb went off targeting Minister @Símôn Kalimeno (NUP) and killing two aides. They've also hijacked and crashed a regional jet killing its entire ~60 passengers and crew. Recently they have declared that anyone attempting to vote in the election will be targeted for violence and also issued multiple threats against Kalimeno's life in particular. Areas of support are in mostly rural regional areas across the entire nation while operations tend to target urban centres, and they consist of mostly young and middle aged unemployed or underemployed men. They have existed since the rebuilding of the democratic structures in 628. They likely have hundreds of thousands of 'supporters' but only 2 to 3 thousand are actively engaged in terrorism. I hope that helps answer your questions You can see more in the 🐦｜tweeter by searching for posts made by @The Republican Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 12:36 AM Thank you for explaining the situation. I will outline my action plan in the 'lobby' so as not to clog up the chat. Patrick Barber — 01/20/2023 12:39 AM I think it would be acceptable and appropriate to add it to this discussion - especially so it can be permanently archived in the wiki Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 12:40 AM Yes Patrick Barber — 01/20/2023 12:47 AM OOC: If you have any other questions feel free to let me know - telling the story is the best part! Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 3:48 AM I will begin to state my point of view. I will immediately note that there is simply no simple solution that will destroy terrorism. This problem requires complex, versatile measures concerning both economics and politics. I will warn you that I use several messages to explain my position. Of course, you can answer them ahead of time, but I will simply ignore them until I finish writing. And I remember that I promised to find confirmation of my words in the legislation of Kodiak. I'll do it later. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 4:03 AM 1) To begin with, it is worth noting that we are lucky with a form of terrorism. We are not dealing with half-students who have nothing much to lose (the December uprising in Russia), but middle-aged people who undoubtedly have some kind of earnings. I will comment on the impact of having young people on the situation below. But I will not be distracted by this now. We also know that conservatism is born in groups of the population who have definitely got out of poverty and have quite stable earnings; but at the same time, the situation of these people may worsen due to some fluctuations in the market. Ie, the portrait of our average 'terrorist' is a middle-aged man earning not much more than a subsistence level minimum. But there are two inconsistencies. First, middle-aged people do not engage in terrorism. It is more common for the NCD to organize strikes and build barricades. The second discrepancy is that terrorists do not live in rural areas. Even the most radical far-right conservatives in the countryside will not go to the state with bombs. They will prefer to simply sabotage any government decisions and ignore the law (to make sure of this, you can read about villages in backward states of different times). But someone sent the bombs, didn't they? And I will explain this phenomenon in the second paragraph. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 4:12 AM 2) Now we need to remember that young people also belong to a terrorist organization. It looks like there aren't many of them. Even a group of fanatically minded 50 bangs would have been enough to stage a coup d'etat. Moreover, they would be led by a person familiar with military affairs. But there is no coup d'etat even on the horizon. It means that there are very few young people in this organization. Let's remember that there are only 2-3 thousand actively involved in terrorism. Either this estimate is greatly overestimated, or most of the 2-3 thousand simply finance terrorism, and only a few are actively engaged in this. Let us recall that the financial situation of our radical enemies is very precarious. There may be a lot of Storoniks, but the number is less than the number of residents of Kodiak, so they cannot have a serious impact on the situation. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 4:23 AM 3) I have some bad news. The terrorists have gone from single explosions to mass terror. On the one hand, it shows their growing strength. On the other hand, their support among the population should begin to fall. This may speak of the radicalization of terrorists, but it may also speak of their weakening, which forces them to act now, while they have at least some strength left. But I can't find any confirmation or refutation of this. Therefore, we will consider the worst case for us: the terrorists have become radicalized.

I will make a small generalization of the previous two points. We are dealing with an organization, of which only a few directly carry out terrorist organizations. The rest (2-3 thousand people) finance the organization. The terrorists have sympathizers for them, but they most likely do not help them in any way and their number is small compared to the entire population of Kodiak. Moreover, support is falling due to acts of mass terror and the threat of its use. Now we know who we're dealing with. We can begin to find a solution to our problem. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 4:35 AM As I said earlier, there is no simple solution to the problem of terrorism in the spirit of "arresting everyone" or "taking away the costs of the police." One fact plays for us - there are few radicals themselves who are ready to commit terrorist acts. Two facts are playing against us. The first is that terrorists are radicalized, although this is not critical. But what is really bad is the second fact: the elections are approaching. It takes at least three years for a perfect solution, and we don't have half a year. Based on this, I propose the following measures to accelerate terrorism from Kodiak: 1) We need to introduce a curfew. This measure is legitimate (if it is prescribed in our legislation). A person can be arrested for violating it, and if there are inconsistencies in his answers during his interrogation, the police can get on the trail of terrorists. This medot is almost useless, but it is also almost free. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 4:48 AM 2) In modern times there are many methods of finding various substances, including explosives. And the spread of these particles from parcels with explosives/drugs/other contraband has been relatively recently revealed. Unfortunately, I do not know if there are sensors that capture these particles (but if you are interested, I will read this question in more detail). But Kodiak's engineers have time to create even a primitive sensor. If you think that nothing comes out of a closed box, then you are deeply mistaken: the boxes have more slots than you think. This is effective, but given that the terrorists have switched to mass terror, it may not help ordinary residents of Kodiak. At least we will get rid of surprises in the packages. And if engineers try, then such sensors can be installed at the entrances and exits to public places. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 4:57 AM 3) I'll start with a joke: if a student does not find a job after graduation, then he either gets drunk or acquires political views. And now closer to reality and the question that interests us. They don't just become terrorists. They are only people who have nothing to lose. So, we need absolutely everyone to have a vital income and even a little more. To do this, we need to get money from somewhere. I think we can limit immigration so as not to spend money on migrants. We can introduce an additional tax on the rich, who, naturally, will not like it, but difficult times require difficult decisions. It would not hurt to introduce a card system of food distribution in the most distressed areas. You can also cut other government spending (I don't want to offend anyone, but here I say hello to bicycles). These measures will not allow the ranks of terrorists to be replenished, but they will do nothing with the existing ones and those who finance them. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 5:26 AM 4) Today I was thinking: what does the non-standard situation look like. And after thinking and searching a little on the Internet, it seems to me that this is similar to the events in South America. Conservatives led by the general and his army will seize power. I could not find anything more similar to our situation, so I will start from what is there. In this case, nothing threatens us - our enemy does not have an army. A coup d'etat is not worth waiting for, then we will not achieve the end of terror without special measures. I suggest the following. First of all, we will challenge them to a debate. At first glance, this will not give us anything. But for people who support terrorism, it means a lot. For them, this means their recognition as a political force with which they are negotiating. And they don't shoot at diplomats. Next, we will invite the representative from the terrorist to attend the meetings of the Assembly, to travel with its members (of course, after hourly checks for weapons and explosives). Then we will start negotiations with them, but in return we will demand a cease-fire. They will agree - after all, as I noted, most of them have something to lose, so the terrorists will prefer not to take risks and take chances to integrate into the system. Then the final step - we allow their party and offer not just to participate in the elections, but also to start public campaigning. It may seem dangerous for, but the number of our enemies is much smaller than the number of our allies, so they will get a minimum of seats in the self-government bodies and the Assembly. At this point, the movement will fade away - the vast majority of terrorists will decide that they have achieved their goal, although not completely. Their party will weaken, and after a safe time for us after this event, we announce early elections. Terrorists, because of the weakening of their organization, lose elections, demoracy triumphs. You can call me naive. But it was in this way that in 1906 they dealt with the revolution of the almost 200 million Russian Empire, which was absolutely covered with the fire of the revolution. It wasn't some marginals who were on strike - everyone was on strike. Nicholas II made a cunning move - he created a parliament. Revolutionaries, and even desperate terrorists decided to enter parliament. Nicholas even gave the parliament the opportunity to pass several laws. But when the revolutionaries stopped the strikes (after all, why fight against the state if you are the state?), Nicholas dissolved and reformed the parliament in such a way that it became a pure fiction. As a result, the revolution was stopped, and the rebels received nothing. 5) I can't offer anything else for a quick solution to the problem. I can only advise the rapid and decisive development of the economy, mainly the state sector, which can be developed the fastest. So, I have finished and am ready to listen carefully to objections and suggestions or, perhaps, evidence of the effectiveness of my measures. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 5:49 AM I forgot to add: we also need a nationally free system of psychological assistance. Some terrorists are just mentally ill. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 6:54 AM Fascinating insights. That's going to take a little bit to digest and think on. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 8:48 AM You are concerned about allowing the arrest of terrorists creating a police state and your solution to that is to impose a curfew? It certainly isn’t free to do so (policing costs for night shifts and the cost of the liberties of the people) and will feed directly into the motivations of the militias. This runs the risk of further radicalising people. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 8:48 AM I agree on tighter controls for postal services. I believe this has been previously discussed in the lobby following the attack on the chief justice’s home, I’m not sure if any legislation (primary or otherwise) is being drafted to implement it. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 8:49 AM How do you reason that limiting immigration will save us money? Whatever means we put in place to limit immigration will cost additional funds short of entirely closing our borders. Plus increasing the threshold for entry into Kodiak will only increase the numbers of illegal migrants - which also cost money to find and house until they can apply for asylum or be deported. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 8:51 AM Why would we legitimise them by engaging in negotiations with them. This sets a dangerous precedent. Any disgruntled group would then be incentivised to perform acts of terror to facilitate discussions with the government in order to gain concessions. This isn’t feasible.

OOC: I don’t think we’re supposed to reference irl things in this channel buuuuttt… You speak about the Russian Empire as a shining example of this system working - but you cannot forget that only 12 years after this scheme the entire Russian empire came toppling down after the 1917 revolution. Additionally the Russian Empire as a politician entity is not the same as Kodiak, we have no absolute monarch and inviting extremists to play in our democracy is the first step towards extremism. Absolute tolerance is not an effective defence against extremism Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 9:01 AM The curfew will not require a lot of funds. Remember that the police are already on duty at night. Besides, we don't need to place a policeman on every corner - we have cameras. And as for the restriction of rights, curfews are imposed even in the most democratic countries. In fact, this is a restriction of people's rights, but: a) Almost no one perceives this as a restriction of rights b) Curfew cannot be somehow turned against people, unlike the arrest of people 'on suspicion'. You need to choose the lesser of two evils. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 9:03 AM all people are arrested on suspicion that is how arrests work The police suspect someone of a crime, appeal to the judge with evidence of suspicion and then the judge grants them a warrant to arrest the person Patrick Barber — 01/20/2023 9:06 AM Some arrests are predicated on the performance of a crime in the presence of an officer or detainment pursuant to information such as arresting a drunk driver (no warrant) or arresting a thief caught by a shopkeeper (no warrant) Though continued imprisonment usually requires charges and indictment on offence very quickly. Sometimes as quickly as 72 hours so a major question would be - what is the extent to which a citizen may be imprisoned without charge? what do we do with prisoners upon whom a charge will be laid, but a formal indictment has not been made? Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 9:09 AM These are questions not within the scope of this amendment imo Patrick Barber — 01/20/2023 9:10 AM I think that's a fair assessment Reifyrm Visdvk [I] — 01/20/2023 9:12 AM Those are good questions, that I unfortunately am not knowledgeable enough to have an answer to. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 9:12 AM On this point, out immigration is already virtually zero, and what immigration we do have is designed to plug holes in our workforce. I would be hesitant to put a hold on a solution to another desperate problem. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 9:16 AM But these are issues that fall into the area of interest of the citizens of Kodiak. I believe that it is impossible to arrest without proof. But there is an exception: if the crime was committed in front of the police or the police were called during the crime, then the arrest will be logical. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 9:17 AM Arrests require a warrant To obtain a warrant there must be evidence brought before a judge I’m not sure where you think people are being arrested without reasonable suspicion? Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 9:18 AM Thank you for the information. In this case, I was wrong: restricting immigration is meaningless and disastrous. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 9:20 AM I support this amendment, it is important that terrorism is outlined as an offence as previously the felony act only provided option for these terrorists to be arrested under treason or sedition charges without heavy judicial oversight Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 9:23 AM If this bill is passed, then Kodiak will become such a place. Everything that concerns the interaction of the authorities and citizens should be spelled out in the legislation as clearly as day. There should be no, even small loopholes. You're trying to do the opposite. Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 9:29 AM Surely the member can see that this isn’t within the scope of this amendment nor the Act it is being applied to? If this is of such concern to the member, surely large volumes of our legal code present the same issue. Currently these things are regulated by the courts but if the member feels this is insufficient perhaps they should sponsor their own bill to rectify this. I would also like to refute that I am working to create a police state in Kodiak and would direct the member to my Bill of Kodiak Universal Rights which is within the docket Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 9:33 AM We won't need to negotiate a second time. By the second time, we will have destroyed all the prerequisites for the emergence of terrorism and it will be possible to deal with terrorists as with ordinary criminals. But now we need to do something about the existing terrorism. As for the evidence, I cannot agree with you in any way. Otherwise, where are you going to get the evidence from? What prevents me from saying that I see terrorists through walls, that I am immortal and can move faster than light and all criminals will be in prison in five minutes with my help. And the example of the Russian Empire is successful. After all, Nikolai managed to completely suppress the revolution, which is what we need. Only we do it in the name of democracy, which will benefit us all, and Nicholas did it for the sake of the monarchy, for which he later paid. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 9:39 AM I'm happy to discuss loopholes and how we can close them without abandoning the bill. The additions to the law still require approval from the judiciary, which is, by design, an independent body, to prevent corruption. The intention of the bill is to expand the capabilities of the CTS to counter the current terrorist threat. We have fought hard against police state policies and have no intention of creating one now. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 9:48 AM You give freedom with one hand, and put on a chain with the other. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 9:54 AM Except there are 2 dogs and one is intent on attacking the other (not a great continuation of the analogy but it'sthe best i could come with). John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 10:11 AM Back to the proposal for a moment, you've stated that a curfew is almost useless but almost free.

The problem I see with it is it targets all citizens, whereas I would prefer to target just the terrorists if possible. Not having experienced a curfew I couldn't really comment from experience, but I can't imagine it would garner much support from the general populace and restricts their rights in a way that feels "police state", precisely what we are trying to avoid. I can't really see this working.

Boosting general income is desirable but will take time we don't have.

As for recognition, my gut tells me it's not a road we want to go down but I'm looking into the history of it some more before I commit to a standpoint on it.

The issue of financing the militias comes into play with the expansion of the bill where CTS would be able to investigate and charge those who finance terrorism (whereas the current law only targets the terrorists themselves). Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 01/20/2023 10:59 AM Drastic and broad actions such as a curfew are exactly what the Kodiak Militia wants. This will anger and inconvenience the general populace and the Kodiak Militia has proven their capabilities of operating without being caught. There is little evidence they don’t have the capabilities of escaping a curfew. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 11:22 AM Plus the difficulty of enforcing it in rural areas Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/20/2023 1:04 PM It would never happen. Símôn Kalimeno (NUP) — 01/20/2023 1:20 PM I don’t see a way how a curfew could be enforced or how it would help in any way. I’m still partial to digital tracking of suspected terrorists and accomplices, I see that as one of the only viable ways to get close to neutralizing any of the terrorists. Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/20/2023 1:59 PM which brings us back to the civil rights issues Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 01/20/2023 2:33 PM If we are going to conduct domestic surveillance on suspects, why would it hurt to track them on social media? Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 01/20/2023 2:34 PM Social media is public info, that’s not exactly breaching privacy so it shouldn’t violate any civil rights. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 01/20/2023 2:37 PM Anyone can search up what someone posts Tom Westbrook — 01/20/2023 2:38 PM It would only breach privacy if we demanded access to private accounts from tech companies I agree that public information is public Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 01/20/2023 2:52 PM It may have already been answered, but does “conduct domestic surveillance” include the internet? Wire tapping? I think it needs to be more specific. Símôn Kalimeno (NUP) — 01/20/2023 3:19 PM Why are we still worried about privacy when in the past few months we’ve had many major terrorist attacked that have killed dozens of people? Privacy should be the last issue on the plate at the moment. Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/20/2023 3:28 PM a citizens right to privacy should be the first issue, always. Símôn Kalimeno (NUP) — 01/20/2023 3:28 PM Their privacy is paramount over their own lives? Klaus Mikaelson OP — 01/20/2023 3:29 PM if they don't have a sense of privacy, what kind of life do that have? Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 01/20/2023 3:43 PM If the Kodiak Militia is disbanded or destroyed will this bill regress to its less expansive version? John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 3:51 PM Anyone can raise an amendment after the event. I would note that these laws are in line with most modern countries. Aiding and abetting a crime is considered a crime in and of itself in most nations, that's the only change that's been made here. Everything else is in line with our existing law code. You can't conduct surveillance on someone, regardless of which crime they've commited, without all the checks that were already in place.

What parts would you seek to remove? Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 01/20/2023 3:53 PM Oh no I'm just wondering whether this will be a permanent expansion of the CTS's authority or a temporary reaction to the Kodiak Militia's activities. I don't have problems with the current content of the bill itself. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/20/2023 3:58 PM Making it temporary adds a timeframe that we cannot know. At this stage it would be a permanent expansion. We can always seek to redefine the CTS powers in the future if needs be but I suspect that domestic terrorism will be an issue until we can deal with the root of the problem. That is going to take time and a long term approach. We've made a start, but it's a slow growing bud. Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 01/20/2023 3:59 PM Alright, thanks for clarifying Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 11:56 PM I disagree. Firstly, I repeat that the introduction of a curfew is not equal to the establishment of a police state, since the curfew cannot be somehow aggravated. And the full powers of the police can be expanded at any time. Think of France in 2015 and 2020. A curfew was imposed in this state at that time. But this did not make France less democratic, but only protected its citizens. You rightly reproach me with the fact that the curfew is aimed at all citizens, not just terrorists. But we cannot target only terrorists. If we could do this, the Special Forces department would have solved our problem long ago. I agree, it is necessary to introduce criminal liability for the financing of terrorism. It's even strange that we haven't paid attention to it yet. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/20/2023 11:59 PM It's easy to go unnoticed when you blend in with the crowd at night. It's impossible to go unnoticed when you're alone on the street. In my opinion, the militia will be opposed to the curfew, not for it. Because this measure will cause little harm to ordinary citizens, and at the same time will greatly affect their mobility. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/21/2023 12:03 AM And we don't need to catch them in the countryside. In rural areas there are only those who finance terrorism. Those who directly plant bombs are in cities where cameras, police and where we will be waiting for terrorists. Tom Westbrook — 01/21/2023 7:00 AM Again, why are we discussing other policies under this bill? You should bring a curfew bill before the assembly and that can be debated there Patrick Barber — 01/22/2023 6:20 AM Seeing that this discussion appears to have run course, I will suggest I start the vote in 24 hours unless a new issues comes up. Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/22/2023 8:21 AM As promised, I read the Kodiak legislation. And to my great regret, I did not find confirmation of my words. As it turned out, we are allowed to arrest citizens on charges of espionage or terrorism. But our legislation does not prescribe the procedure for arrest for other criminal offenses. But for now, let's omit this fact. Based on the current situation, I demand that the following paragraph appear in the bill: "If CTS is unable to show a person arrested on suspicion of terrorism or espionage proof of his guilt within 72 hours after his detention, then the arrested person must be released from arrest." Tom Westbrook — 01/22/2023 8:22 AM This feels unnecessarily specific to include within this bill Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/22/2023 8:25 AM But a suspect can spend an eternity in custody after being arrested, and this is unfair. If the suspect is really guilty, then the evidence of his guilt is almost guaranteed to be found within 72 hours. If not, then you can let him go. Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 01/22/2023 8:30 AM I agree it is not just to continue to detain someone if no charges can be pressed (speaking of arrests in general). I think what Mr Westbrook is getting at is - shouldn't this be a part of our entire justice system and not just for a subset of it? Of course that does mean another amendment in another bill. Can be worth doing it right however. John Edwards [KWP] — 01/22/2023 8:39 AM I can see where the concern lies so I'm willing to include it if needs be. We might be better off adding this to general policing but that will have to happen in a separate amendment and not in time for the vote on this amendment. I would happily support an amendment on this for our general law enforcement. Tom Westbrook — 01/22/2023 8:39 AM I think adding such an amendment to this law would complicate our law code and make it harder to understand and apply Immanuel von Zeppelin — 01/22/2023 8:44 AM Good. I am not demanding a change in this law now. I will take responsibility to create an amendment to the police law. Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 01/22/2023 8:50 AM I look forward to it! John Edwards [KWP] — 01/22/2023 11:16 PM Fresh eyes often pick up things we've missed over time. Patrick Barber — 01/23/2023 10:11 PM Seeing that nothing requiring changes within this bill has arisen, I shall begin the vote presently. EasyPoll BOT — 01/23/2023 10:12 PM Question Do you approve of the Amendment to the SAFE Act?

Choices 🇦 Aye 🇧 Nay 🇨 Abstain

Final Result 🇦 ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░░░ [8 • 67%] 🇧 ▓▓░░░░░░░░ [2 • 17%] 🇨 ▓▓░░░░░░░░ [2 • 17%] 12 users voted

Settings
 * alarm_clock: Poll already ended (13 hours ago)
 * spy: Anonymous Poll
 * one: allowed choice


 * lock: No other votes allowed

Allowed roles: @Assembly Member Poll ID: f57c0beb Patrick Barber — 01/23/2023 10:12 PM @Assembly Member The poll has been called. Debate is suspended. The vote shall remain active for 72 hours. The proposal is linked in the pinned post. Please vote within that time. Thank you Klaus Mikaelson OP — Today at 10:18 AM @Assembly Member with 8 votes in favor, 2 against and 2 abstaining, this Amendment is declared passed. This thread will be archived in 24 hours.