Juvenile Criminal Responsibility and Treatment Bill (Law'd)

[Associate Justice PiT]

My current username references the fact that bacon is tasty. I first created it on a whim because I needed a name for my GameFAQs (video game website) account, in the summer of '02. I was twelve years old so the name was/is understandibly... odd. I've stuck with it all this time because I've never really thought of anything better.

     I used to lurk on GameFAQS all the time. I mostly gave that up when I stopped playing video games so much, though.

[Torie]

10 is fine with me Lewis. I accept it as a friendly amendment to my amendment, and have made the change.

[minionofmidas]

10 is fine with me Lewis. I accept it as a friendly amendment to my amendment, and have made the change.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

[minionofmidas]

10 is fine with me Lewis. I accept it as a friendly amendment to my amendment, and have made the change.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

Silly me. As this wasn't part of the law yet, it's not a friendly amendment in the sense of the law, and Senators who object will just have to reintroduce the former version.

[Torie]

10 is fine with me Lewis. I accept it as a friendly amendment to my amendment, and have made the change.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

Silly me. As this wasn't part of the law yet, it's not a friendly amendment in the sense of the law, and Senators who object will just have to reintroduce the former version.

Wait a minute. When is a friendly amendment then in order? Surely it is prior to a proposed amendment becoming law, no?  Do you mean, that after an amendment has been agreed to, as amending the pending legislation, then an objection to a revision of the amendment  language agreed to  is in order, as opposed to before, and prior to the voting on the amendment starting, the proposer can make changes to the language at will?   That is probably it, isn't it?

[Хahar 🤔]

10 is fine with me Lewis. I accept it as a friendly amendment to my amendment, and have made the change.

Senators have 24 hours to object.

Silly me. As this wasn't part of the law yet, it's not a friendly amendment in the sense of the law, and Senators who object will just have to reintroduce the former version.

Wait a minute. When is a friendly amendment then in order? Surely it is prior to a proposed amendment becoming law, no?  Do you mean, that after an amendment has been agreed to, as amending the pending legislation, then an objection to a revision of the amendment  language agreed to  is in order, as opposed to before, and prior to the voting on the amendment starting, the proposer can make changes to the language at will?   That is probably it, isn't it?

Since what you proposed hasn't been formally incorporated into the text, what Lewis has proposed isn't a friendly amendment, but a change to a proposed amendment.

[minionofmidas]

Exactly. A friendly amendment is an amendment to the bill before the senate, while this was just a change to a pending amendment to said bill, before the amendment came to a vote. Which it is now.

The vote is on the amendment:

Here is my amendment, aka rewrite, of the Bill:

Juvenile Criminal Responsibility and Treatment Act

For in all matters where criminal offenses are matters under the jurisdiction of the federal government of Atlasia:

1. Persons under the age of 10 shall be subject to a separate system of justice known as the Juvenile Justice System. Persons subject to the Juvenile Justice System are referred to herein as “Juveniles.”

2. Persons between the ages of 10 and 14 shall also be subject to the Juvenile Justice System except where it is found by the court by clear and convincing evidence that, having taken into account the child’s age and level of maturity, the person in question did in fact have a substantial understanding of the gravity of the wrong associated with the commission of the offense.

3. The Juvenile Justice System shall involve a judge or a specially appointed master of the judge rather than a jury making a determination as to whether or not the Juvenile in question by clear and convincing evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt, and  with due regard for protecting the rights of the Juvenile to have a fair hearing and with representation of counsel, committed the offense of which the Juvenile is charged, and then with respect to  Juveniles found to have committed such offense, prescribing a program focused on  treatment and rehabilitation rather than punishment (“Prescribed Program of Treatment”) which however may involve some form of detention and restrictions on the  rights of movement and conduct of such Juvenile. The emphasis of the Prescribed Program of Treatment shall be on the protection of the Juvenile from influences detrimental to the Juvenile’s welfare, and causing the Juvenile to form the habits and conscience necessary to become a law abiding individual.

4. When the Juvenile reaches the age of majority, or when the term of the Juveniles Prescribed Program of Treatment expires, whichever is later, the Juvenile’s court record for all acts subject to the Juvenile Justice System shall be expunged.

Please vote aye, nay or abstain.

[Torie]

Aye

[DownWithTheLeft]

Aye

[Sensei]

aye

[minionofmidas]

Nay.


If this amendment passes, I will introduce an amendment to replace section one with

No person under the age of 10 shall be held criminally liable for the commission of any offense under the law.

and to strike the "also" at the beginning of section 2. If it does not, I will introduce an amendment exactly like the one we're currently voting on, except with the changes as outlined.


Current vote count:

Aye 3 (torie, Dwtl, Sensei)
Nay 1 (Lewis)
abstain (yet to vote) 6 (Jas, Al, the Kings, Meeker, Verily)

[Torie]

Nay.


If this amendment passes, I will introduce an amendment to replace section one with

No person under the age of 10 shall be held criminally liable for the commission of any offense under the law.

and to strike the "also" at the beginning of section 2. If it does not, I will introduce an amendment exactly like the one we're currently voting on, except with the changes as outlined.


Current vote count:

Aye 3 (torie, Dwtl, Sensei)
Nay 1 (Lewis)
abstain (yet to vote) 6 (Jas, Al, the Kings, Meeker, Verily)

How do you plan to process under 10's who commit some serious offense Lewis?  Just send them home? I don't understand why the Juvenile Justice System cannot handle them reasonably. The system has a lot of flexibility to take maturity into account.

[Јas]

Abstain

[minionofmidas]

How do you plan to process under 10's who commit some serious offense Lewis?  Just send them home? I don't understand why the Juvenile Justice System cannot handle them reasonably. The system has a lot of flexibility to take maturity into account.

What kind of serious offense are we talking here?
There are regional child protection services.

[Torie]

How do you plan to process under 10's who commit some serious offense Lewis?  Just send them home? I don't understand why the Juvenile Justice System cannot handle them reasonably. The system has a lot of flexibility to take maturity into account.

What kind of serious offense are we talking here?
There are regional child protection services.

How about homicide? It's happened. Or poking someone's eye out maliciously. Or arson.

[minionofmidas]

Or poking someone's eye out maliciously. Or arson.

Because a child is likely to understand such an action.

You should understand that I find *ten* hard to stomach here. Or anything below the age of consent, actually.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

nay

[Torie]

Or poking someone's eye out maliciously. Or arson.

Because a child is likely to understand such an action.

You should understand that I find *ten* hard to stomach here. Or anything below the age of consent, actually.

You still have not explained specifically how under 10 killers should be handled, and why the system in my amendment would not handle them properly. Thanks.

[CultureKing]

aye

[minionofmidas]

Current vote count:

Aye 4 (torie, Dwtl, Sensei, Culture)
Nay 2 (Lewis, Al)
abstain (voted) 1 (Jas)
abstain (yet to vote) 3 (Bacon, Meeker, Verily)

How about homicide?

How likely, exactly, is it that a case with an under 10 (heck, under 15) year old that technically meets a law's definition of "homicide" actually is what you'd call a murder case.
I've just heard too many horror stories about the outcomes of this silly "adult time adult crime idea" (not that your amendment is thatof course) to have any sympathy for the moronic assumptions behind it.
I do know though that Germany's strict cutoff at 14 for any sort of criminal responsibility is problematic. There are 13-year olds with police records as long as your arm. There are 12-year olds on heroin (I've known one. Well, not when she was 12. Nor in fact when she was on heroin.) They're just exceedingly rare. But 9 year olds? Don't be ridiculous.

[minionofmidas]

Oh yah, vote times out in 25 hours.

[Torie]

Current vote count:

Aye 4 (torie, Dwtl, Sensei, Culture)
Nay 2 (Lewis, Al)
abstain (voted) 1 (Jas)
abstain (yet to vote) 3 (Bacon, Meeker, Verily)

How about homicide?

How likely, exactly, is it that a case with an under 10 (heck, under 15) year old that technically meets a law's definition of "homicide" actually is what you'd call a murder case.
I've just heard too many horror stories about the outcomes of this silly "adult time adult crime idea" (not that your amendment is thatof course) to have any sympathy for the moronic assumptions behind it.
I do know though that Germany's strict cutoff at 14 for any sort of criminal responsibility is problematic. There are 13-year olds with police records as long as your arm. There are 12-year olds on heroin (I've known one. Well, not when she was 12. Nor in fact when she was on heroin.) They're just exceedingly rare. But 9 year olds? Don't be ridiculous.

Homicide is a fancy word for kill. It is not a criminal term. Criminal terms for homicide are murder and manslaughter.

[minionofmidas]

Oh. I always took it for as pretty direct translation of German "Tötungsdelikt" - ie all crimes involving the death of a person. Well never mind that.

[minionofmidas]

The amendment passes.

Final vote count:

Aye 4 (torie, Dwtl, Sensei, Culture)
Nay 2 (Lewis, Al)
abstain (voted) 1 (Jas)
abstain (did not vote) 3 (Bacon, Meeker, Verily)

an amendment to replace section one with

No person under the age of 10 shall be held criminally liable for the commission of any offense under the law.

and to strike the "also" at the beginning of section 2.

The vote is on the amendment. Please vote aye, nay or abstain.


Aye.

[Sensei]

aye