The Seek and Desire are Not The Same Thing Prime Dictate

[Lüc da Schir]

Jul 16, 2013 22:45:33 GMT -6 Capt. Sir Mick Preston said:

Here, since the ZPT seems to be ignorant where the Laws are posted, let me help

For sure the ZPT is ignorant, it doesn't exist anymore.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

Jul 17, 2013 1:44:16 GMT -6 Lüc da Schir said:

Jul 16, 2013 22:45:33 GMT -6 Capt. Sir Mick Preston said:

Here, since the ZPT seems to be ignorant where the Laws are posted, let me help

For sure the ZPT is ignorant, it doesn't exist anymore.

ZPT was a typo that Sir Preston fixed.

[Deleted]

Repeal, don't repeal it doesn't matter.

The law is inorganic.

And even if the justices hold that it isn't inorganic, the organic law requires a UNANIMOUS vote to impose the penalty of revocation of citizenship. All that has to happen is at least one Justice dissents and the whole house of cards falls apart.

The organic law is incredibly specific in when a citizen's rights don't apply and those are limited to matters of public order. The government's assertions that their interpretation allows for a more restrictive interpretation which favors the rights of the Crown to the detriment of every citizen is one which will not stand up to continued legal scrutiny.

If we repeal the act, it can come back in the future. If the court deems it inorganic, the question is answered and it is gone forever.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

That's a very good point! I had honestly not realized that conflict - you might be found to be guilty and in violation of the law by the court, yet go unpunished because there is no provision for a lesser sentence in case of a court that is not unanimous. And this applies to many other laws, as well, now that I think about it.

Either that provision of the OrgLaw needs to go, or, preferably, we need to revise our statutes so that no law bears only the single possible penalty of expulsion.

[Deleted]

Jul 17, 2013 8:58:42 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

That's a very good point! I had honestly not realized that conflict - you might be found to be guilty and in violation of the law by the court, yet go unpunished because there is no provision for a lesser sentence in case of a court that is not unanimous. And this applies to many other laws, as well, now that I think about it.

Either that provision of the OrgLaw needs to go, or, preferably, we need to revise our statutes so that no law bears only the single possible penalty of expulsion.

Yeah, it's almost as if the Uppermost Cort Justice read up on the law before engaging in an act of civil disobedience.

Of course, given the number of personal PMs and GTalk responses I've received from people accusing me of everything from grandstanding to immaturity and back up to treason, it doesn't appear I was given the benefit of the doubt.

Edit: the OrgLaw also guarantees one the right to either a jury trial or trial by tribunal in criminal proceedings (9th covenant). So I hope and trust the government takes that into consideration in the event they felt my criminal case could be adjudicated by a single magistrate.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

The ZRT is ignorant? Bollocks to that - I'm a firm believer that there are some fantastic minds, far from being ignorant, in each party. It saddens me that Sir Darth Mick doesn't see this.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Jul 17, 2013 10:52:27 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

The ZRT is ignorant? Bollocks to that - I'm a firm believer that there are some fantastic minds, far from being ignorant, in each party. It saddens me that Sir Darth Mick doesn't see this.

Oh, I am sure that many individuals are intelligent, or even brilliant. But when they get together, they start succumbing to the "Hive" thought process, and the party as a whole is ... less than bright.

[Lüc da Schir]

Jul 17, 2013 7:40:01 GMT -6 Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă said:

Jul 17, 2013 1:44:16 GMT -6 Lüc da Schir said:

For sure the ZPT is ignorant, it doesn't exist anymore.

ZPT was a typo that Sir Preston fixed.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

Jul 17, 2013 11:15:12 GMT -6 Lüc da Schir said:

Jul 17, 2013 7:40:01 GMT -6 Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă said:

ZPT was a typo that Sir Preston fixed.

Wow. Let's be rude.

[Lüc da Schir]

Jul 17, 2013 12:35:57 GMT -6 Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă said:

Jul 17, 2013 11:15:12 GMT -6 Lüc da Schir said:

Wow. Let's be rude.

I have some... rather good teachers here in Talossa.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Way to change the topic, Mick. I don't share Admiral Tim's faith that this bogus law will be found unconstitutional, so please try to defend it, or join us in repealing it.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Jul 17, 2013 16:15:23 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

Way to change the topic, Mick. I don't share Admiral Tim's faith that this bogus law will be found unconstitutional, so please try to defend it, or join us in repealing it.

This is why I voted against the first attempt to amend that bill ( And please notice, I did it without rhetoric, accusations, or hyperbole.):

Jan 20, 2013 0:21:20 GMT -6 Capt. Sir Mick Preston said:

This is how, and why I voted:

44RZ24 - Upon reviewing the wording of the Act, I have some concerns as it is written.

Section 2 refers to a "Black List". It is vague as to what would qualify for a Micro-nation to be placed on this list. I wish it would specify what are the triggers to "Black List" a Micro-nation.

Sections 7, 8 and 10 refer to "Offices" held in a Micro-nation. I have a two-fold concern with this. One: "Office" is a very vague term - is it an appointed Office? Elected Office? A governmental office can run the gambit from city council to Leader of the Nation. Two: I feel there might be a conflict of interest if a Citizen of Talossa holds an "Office" in Talossa, and an undefined "Office" in a Micro-nation.

Finally, there are numerous spelling errors in the Act. A spelling error in the wrong place can get an Act thrown out in a Cort case.

Because of all of these concerns, I have no option but to vote : Con.


Address these concerns I had , and I would vote for a change.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Jul 17, 2013 11:14:49 GMT -6 Capt. Sir Mick Preston said:

Jul 17, 2013 10:52:27 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

The ZRT is ignorant? Bollocks to that - I'm a firm believer that there are some fantastic minds, far from being ignorant, in each party. It saddens me that Sir Darth Mick doesn't see this.

Oh, I am sure that many individuals are intelligent, or even brilliant. But when they get together, they start succumbing to the "Hive" thought process, and the party as a whole is ... less than bright.

With all due respect, Mick, if you need to reduce yourself to the level of calling a party stupid to defend your own, it says a lot about the strength of your arguments.

Oh, and Dr. Nordselva, if you're going to call out Luc for being rude, I'm sure you'll have no problems with pointing out the same to Mick.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Jul 18, 2013 4:32:32 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

With all due respect, Mick, if you need to reduce yourself to the level of calling a party stupid to defend your own, it says a lot about the strength of your arguments.

Oh, and Dr. Nordselva, if you're going to call out Luc for being rude, I'm sure you'll have no problems with pointing out the same to Mick.

Please show me where I referenced any party but ZRT.

Thank you.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Jul 18, 2013 6:49:02 GMT -6 Capt. Sir Mick Preston said:

Jul 18, 2013 4:32:32 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

With all due respect, Mick, if you need to reduce yourself to the level of calling a party stupid to defend your own, it says a lot about the strength of your arguments.

Oh, and Dr. Nordselva, if you're going to call out Luc for being rude, I'm sure you'll have no problems with pointing out the same to Mick.

Please show me where I referenced any party but ZRT.

Thank you.

I would appreciate it if you refrain from referring to the political organisation of which I serve as leader for as stupid. Perhaps then we may resume discussing the merits/faults of a policy.