Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B1110 - treason and terroism (amendment) bill 2017 Watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Proposer: The Honourable SoggyCabbages MP (LAB)
    Seconder: The Right Honourable QuamQuam123 MP (LAB)



    TREASON AND TERROISM (AMENDMENT) BILL 2017

    A Bill to add to the punishments for individuals convicted for Treason and High Treason


    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1 - Citation, Extent and Commencement

    (1) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom.
    (2) This Act will come into force following Royal Assent.
    (3) This Act will be cited as the Treason and Terroism (Amendment) Act 2016.

    2: Amendment of Section 6

    to be added:

    (5) Any prisoner convicted will incurr a total loss of suffrage.

    3: Amendment of Section 9

    to be added:

    (5) Any prisoner convicted will incurr a total loss of suffrage.

    Notes

    Spoiler:
    Show


    Anyone convicted of such a heinous crime as Treason or High Treason does not deserve the right to vote. Currently in real life individuals convicted of Treason lose all suffrage apart from in local elections. This amendment introduces the loss of suffrage with no exceptions.

    #DestroyTheHaters

    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Ugly formatting and structure, pointless policy and can't spell 'terrorism' despite referring to a previous Act that uses the correct spelling in the title.

    Is this a joke?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    This bill should do absolutely nothing as traitors should be being executed, or at the very least for you softies true life.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Ugly formatting and structure, pointless policy and can't spell 'terrorism' despite referring to a previous Act that uses the correct spelling in the title.

    Is this a joke?
    It's obviously an overlooked spelling mistake you plum, stop being so facetious.

    Regarding the formatting, I wasn't aware that's what the point of the house was, to debate how things look. Would you like me to border my next bill with flowers to make it look pretty for you?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Ugly formatting and structure, pointless policy and can't spell 'terrorism' despite referring to a previous Act that uses the correct spelling in the title.

    Is this a joke?
    PRSOM, did Quamquam123 and SoggyCabbages really submit this?
    If not who did?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    You can't vote from the dirt. Scrap this amendment and bring back the death penalty.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I assume this is a poor attempt to parody a libertarian bill, considering QQ is the seconder (despite you not even needing one.)

    Difference being, we can actually spell.

    Starting to think it's become soggy sauerkraut...
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoggyCabbages)
    It's obviously an overlooked spelling mistake you plum, stop being so facetious.

    Regarding the formatting, I wasn't aware that's what the point of the house was, to debate how things look. Would you like me to border my next bill with flowers to make it look pretty for you?
    There's so little substantive content in this bill (and I did refer to the content) that there isn't much else to talk about except the obvious laziness of its writing.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)
    I assume this is a poor attempt to parody a libertarian bill, considering QQ is the seconder (despite you not even needing one.)

    Difference being, we can actually spell.

    Starting to think it's become soggy sauerkraut...
    It's not a parody
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Meh.

    Where's the field and the proper formatting at though?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)
    I assume this is a poor attempt to parody a libertarian bill, considering QQ is the seconder (despite you not even needing one.)

    Difference being, we can actually spell.

    Starting to think it's become soggy sauerkraut...
    It's not a parody bill at all mate.

    QQ agreeing with decided he wanted to second it.

    The spelling is obviously a lolz but if that's really what people would rather talk about, rather than the bill, then that's pathetic.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Aye
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with removing the right to vote of those convicted, however, all prisoners should be disenfranchised as part of their punishment.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    nay
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. All prisoners should be able to vote.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I agree with removing the right to vote of those convicted, however, all prisoners should be disenfranchised as part of their punishment.
    You mean they should remain disenfranchised, or did I miss the left pushing through some legislation to enfranchise them?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I agree with removing the right to vote of those convicted, however, all prisoners should be disenfranchised as part of their punishment.
    Only for the duration of their punishment though. Once you've spent the conviction you're free to return to the civilized world.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Misspelt incur.

    Would've been an aye otherwise

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Abstain

    This bill looks like a joke to me poor formating and it looks kinda rushed.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Ugly formatting and structure, pointless policy and can't spell 'terrorism' despite referring to a previous Act that uses the correct spelling in the title.

    Is this a joke?

    Didn't you know about this bill? They are your fellow party members after all :holmes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Just bring back the death penalty
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 31, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.