Pacific Legislature Official Thread

[Gabu]

Aye.

[Gabu]

Aye to all.

[Gabu]

This thread needs to have more publicity.  I didn't even know we were voting on anything.

[Gabu]

Aye.

[Gabu]

Seems like an okay bill to me.

[Gabu]

Aye.

[Gabu]

re:three strikes. I support it, if those strikes are for serious crimes. My suggestion is a "50 point system", with crimes like speeding 5mph over the speed limit worth 1-2 points, and murder 50+, etc. Once at 50 points, they must be imprisoned for life (or a very long period); at 10 they can be for a short period, 20 for a medium length period, 30 for a meduium sentence and must be inprisoned, 40 for a long sentence and must be imprisoned. Points 'expire' after a set period, say 10 years, so that if an 80 year old has accumulated 50 speeding tickets he isn't put away for the rest of his life.

This actually sounds like a pretty good idea at face value, though I haven't examined it thoroughly yet.

[Gabu]

Aye, I suppose.

[Gabu]

-Department of Corrections - $24.2

$24.2?  That might buy lunch for a row of prisoners.

[Gabu]

Out of curiosity, what is "Department of University", anyway, and how are its functions not covered by the Department of Education?

[Gabu]

Out of curiosity, what is "Department of University", anyway, and how are its functions not covered by the Department of Education?

It runs the University system.  All public universities are administered under this department.  The Department also handles all the formerly state government aid and loans to college students, which is a subtantial sum.

This year's budget is a large enough sum to fund the construction of the University of the Pacific Region which is a goal our Region set out to achieve in December of 2004 under Proposition 8.  We can now fund the planning and groundbreaking of that project.

I probably missed something, for which I apologize, but why is it a department unto itself?  Aren't universities part of education?

[Gabu]

So you are arguing to cut the Dempartment of U?

Not "cut", per se, given that I'm not proposing we remove any money from the budget, but I'm asking why the Department of Education can't do what the Department of University does (since, logically speaking, universities are part of education).

[Gabu]

Well, I'd first like to hear why the Department of University was created in the first place.  It seems like kind of specific thing to dedicate an entire department to.  At the very least, the Department of Education should be renamed if we keep the Department of University, given that it will no longer be the only department that covers education.

[Gabu]

Well, I'd first like to hear why the Department of University was created in the first place.  It seems like kind of specific thing to dedicate an entire department to.  At the very least, the Department of Education should be renamed if we keep the Department of University, given that it will no longer be the only department that covers education.

In California, I'm pretty sure the Universities are actually not in the Department of Education.  They are run by the Board of Regents, an independent body.  The Department of Ed in California only deals with primary and secondary schools.  So seperating the two seemed very natural to someone who's home state does in fact seperate the two.

The Department of University on its own has the third largest budget in the Regional government.  It does have a mission that seems specialized on the surface, but its actually quite extensive when you dig deeper.

So, it was the size of the budget and the fact that in California the two things are seperated if memory serves that led to them being two seperate departments.

Well, I'm not really knowledgable about this stuff, it was just something that occurred to me when looking at their two names.

I think that the Department of Education could stand to have its name changed to clear up any confusion people might have about its function if we're going to leave the Department of University, but that's a rather minor thing.

[Gabu]

Aye.

[Gabu]

Bestality Criminalisation Act
1. The abominable act of bestiality, which is defined as gross sexual imposition, sexual assault, or the committing of a deviant sexual act with an animal, shall be illegal throughout the Pacific Region.

2. Persons convicted of bestiality shall be fined a minimum of $500 or a maximum of $2,000 and/or sentenced to a minimum of six months in jail or a maximum of five years in jail.

3. This law should not be interpreted as banning sexual acts between members of the species homo sapiens.

Technically speaking, if section 3 is needed to exclude sexual acts between members of the species homo sapiens from falling under this bill, would it not be the case that this bill will ban sexual acts between all other species (i.e., rabbits will be charged with bestiality for going at it)?

[Gabu]

Aye to both, I suppose.

[Gabu]

OMFG LEGISLATION!!!11111

1. TEH PACIFEC SI TEH BEST REGIONE EVAR

2. TEH OTHAR REGIONES CAN GO JUMP IN A DITCH AND THEN POUR GASOLINE ON THE DITCH AND THEN LIGHT THE DITCH ON FIRE

3. go us

[Gabu]

Naming of the Southeast Initiative

1. The Southeast Region is hereby known in the Pacific as "the Bad Place".

2. All references to the Southeast Region in the past, present, or future, will be altered such that the text "the Southeast Region" is replaced with "the Bad Place".

3. All elected officials in the Pacific are required to refer to the Southeast Region as "the Bad Place".

4. The Pacific is still the best region ever and no one should step to us because we are so awesome.

[Gabu]

The Southeast is t3h 5ux0r Initiative

WHEREAS, the Southeast probably has stuff like lice and E. Coli and other bad stuff that we don't want in our food;
WHEREAS, Southeasterners habitually partake in incest and are like retarded and stuff;
WHEREAS, the stately nature of the Pacific is thus dearly offended by the Southeast Region's modus operandi;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Pacific Region that-

1. The Southeast is the worst region ever and really should take a bath and implement water chlorination or something.

2. All Southeasterners are communists.

3. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

4. The Southeast is not allowed to retaliate for anything because the Pacific is rubber and the Southeast is glue and whatever they do bounces off of us and sticks to them.

[Gabu]

3. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

What?  Are you going to give New Mexico to the Midwest to sever the border?

No.  We're just disavowing all knowledge of there ever being a border.  It no longer exists.

[Gabu]

3. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

What?  Are you going to give New Mexico to the Midwest to sever the border?

No.  We're just disavowing all knowledge of there ever being a border.  It no longer exists.

So the gaping vacuum just past NM's borders is causing all this damn wind here, eh?

Obviously.

[Gabu]

3. The Southeast no longer borders the Pacific via Texas, because that would just be really icky to be that close to the Southeast.

What?  Are you going to give New Mexico to the Midwest to sever the border?

No.  We're just disavowing all knowledge of there ever being a border.  It no longer exists.

So the gaping vacuum just past NM's borders is causing all this damn wind here, eh?

Obviously.

Damnit.

It's the Southeast's fault; we had to put something there.

[Gabu]

Of course in a millitary conflict, an army of southrons led by General Cosmo Kramer would trounce an army of pacificans led by General Gabu.

If you wanted to invade the Pacific, then you would have to go through some other region, because no border between the Pacific and the Southeast exists, you see.

[Gabu]

Of course in a millitary conflict, an army of southrons led by General Cosmo Kramer would trounce an army of pacificans led by General Gabu.

If you wanted to invade the Pacific, then you would have to go through some other region, because no border between the Pacific and the Southeast exists, you see.

How does that happen?  What is in between the Texas-New Mexico border?  There is a border, and I will cross it, with 100,000 men.

No, I'm sorry, but this border you speak of is imaginary.  Have you considered consulting a psychologist for this delusion?  It can't be good for your personal life.