Turn on thread page Beta

B1346 - Police Act (Amendment) bill 2018 watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    What is this?/I'm confused
    Hi there. If you're confused as to what is going on here then you are probably new to this section of TSR. This is a Model House of Commons, a forum where we emulate the structure of the Real Life House of Commons as an excuse to debate politics.

    If you are seeing this and you want to get involved in the debate, please feel free. You do not need to join a party, get approval or join any group to get stuck in right away. If you enjoy it and you do want to join a party then you can do so here. If you have any questions or need any help please message me. I am the current speaker of the house and part of my role involves offering impartial advice to new members so I will always be happy to answer what questions you have. Alternatively, you can read the new members guide to get advice on a wide range of issues.

    Note: Please refrain from making comments about how we spend our free time. It is our free time to spend.


    B1346 - Police Act (Amendment) bill 2018, Joecphillips seconded by mobbsy91A
    BILL TO
    Make assault on cops and the public equal

    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-Repeal
    (1) Remove from section 89(1) of the Police Act 1996:

    2- Citation and commencement
    (1) This Act extends to the United Kingdom.
    (2) The provisions of this Act come into force on Royal Assent
    (3) This Act may be referred to as the Police Act (Amendment) Act 2018
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    What's this, notes on strike again?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    Errrrrr, please provide evidence of the seconding?!??!?!?!

    (Was I drunk?!)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Errrrrr, please provide evidence of the seconding?!??!?!?!

    (Was I drunk?!)
    You were drunk and you did say you would
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    What's this, notes on strike again?
    Yes, one of the arguments against my last bill was that emergency service workers don’t deserve extra protection and this applies only to one section of the emergency services and not the public so why do they deserve extra protection?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I will, of course, will not be voting for this as I voted for the bill that Joe created.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Tommy1boy)
    I will, of course, will not be voting for this as I voted for the bill that Joe created.
    So write a bill that firemen also get it.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Here's a link to the relevant provision, I'll do Joe's job for him: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/89

    I don't see the point in removing this.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CatusStarbright)
    Here's a link to the relevant provision, I'll do Joe's job for him: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/16/section/89

    I don't see the point in removing this.
    Consistency
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    No. There need to be additional punishments for attacks on police to discourage people from assaulting them, given that they risk their lives to protect us.
    • Aston Villa FC Supporter
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Aston Villa FC Supporter
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saunders16)
    What's this, notes on strike again?
    Indeed, it’s annoying to try to figure out what the point of the bill and whether it would make any difference.
    I’ll abstain here, I honestly don’t what we’re doing here.
    Joe did Mobbsy give you proper consent? You know he’s drunk half the time ?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CountBrandenburg)
    Indeed, it’s annoying to try to figure out what the point of the bill and whether it would make any difference.
    I’ll abstain here, I honestly don’t what we’re doing here.
    Joe did Mobbsy give you proper consent? You know he’s drunk half the time ?
    Drunken consent is still consent.

    Equalising the law between police and the lay person, just because it doesn’t have a notes section doesn’t mean there isn’t a section that says what the bill does that’s what the “A BILL TO” section is for
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I see this bill was created in response to Joe's emergency services bill. :rolleyes:
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Joep95)
    Drunken consent is still consent.

    Equalising the law between police and the lay person, just because it doesn’t have a notes section doesn’t mean there isn’t a section that says what the bill does that’s what the “A BILL TO” section is for
    No drunken consent isn't consent
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    No drunken consent isn't consent
    R v Bree says otherwise.

    "[W]hen someone who has had a lot to drink is in fact consenting to intercourse, then that is what she is doing, consenting: equally, if after taking drink, she is not consenting, then by definition intercourse is taking place without her consent." (R v Bree [2007] EWCA Crim 256 [a])

    In this case replace intercourse with seconding.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Joep95)
    Yes, one of the arguments against my last bill was that emergency service workers don’t deserve extra protection and this applies only to one section of the emergency services and not the public so why do they deserve extra protection?
    I do not believe that emergency service workers do not need protecting; I believe that your bill was badly written, atrociously justified and excessive in what it attempted to achieve. Once again, I look forward to voting against this if it goes to a vote.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    There is very little information here in this bill. However, the law does not need changing so I will be voting Nay.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    "Cops"

    Slang in Bills? Gg.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I just googled the jail term for assault as I was curious to know what the sentencing disparity is, and the hit I got was for Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988:
    Common assault and battery shall be summary offences and a person guilty of either of them shall be liable to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both.
    Section 89(1) of the Police Act 1996:
    Any person who assaults a constable in the execution of his duty, or a person assisting a constable in the execution of his duty, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.
    What exactly is this bill equalising?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    No. There need to be additional punishments for attacks on police to discourage people from assaulting them, given that they risk their lives to protect us.
    I concur.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
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: March 18, 2018
The home of Results and Clearing

955

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?

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

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