[GA - Failed] Corporal Punishment Ban

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hulldom

Hulldom

Winter Kingdom
-
-
Pronouns
He/Him/His
TNP Nation
Boston Castle
Discord
seathestarlesssky
ga.jpg

Corporal Punishment Ban
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Tinhampton | Onsite Topic​
Recognising corporal punishment to be a form of violence which is disproportionately carried out against children, and

Believing that this body should prohibit such forms of violence...

The General Assembly hereby:

  1. defines "corporal punishment" as causing physical harm or pain to any person in order to penalise any person, where such punishment is delivered without the consent of either the person harmed or the person intended to be penalised,
  2. requires members to outlaw corporal punishment, regardless of where it occurs, and to abolish all defences to the same,
  3. mandates that:
    • all schools in member states inform all of their pupils about Articles a and b, as well as the maximum penalty established for corporal punishment by law, prominently and (where possible) on a regular basis, and
    • members regularly raise awareness about Articles a and b among all people whose employment requires them to regularly and intentionally interact with children,
  4. clarifies that this resolution does not affect:
    • the use of force in self-defence, while defending others, in the course of organised armed conflict, during sexual activity by consenting adults, or while arresting a suspected criminal, nor
    • any requirement for any person to engage in reasonable physical activity that does not harm any other person as a condition of their being employed at any institution or a student at any primary or secondary school (including, but not limited to, new military recruits being required to complete a fitness course at a training camp as a condition of remaining a member of the military they serve in), and
  5. urges members to promote non-violent ways of raising children.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
[TR][TD]For[/TD][TD]Against[/TD][TD] Abstain [/TD][TD] Present [/TD][/TR][TR][TD]4[/TD][TD]10[/TD][TD]0[/TD][TD]1[/TD][/TR][TD][TD][/td][/td]
[TD][TD][/td][/td]
Corporal Punishment Ban was defeated 8,212 votes to 6,038 (42.4% support).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IFV - Against - Please upvote!
Overview
"Corporal Punishment Ban" aims to outlaw the non-consensual punitive infliction of physical harm on any person, with exceptions for mandatory physical activity, defense, warfare, the arrest of suspected criminals, and consensual sexual activity. The proposal also includes awareness-raising provisions.

Recommendation
Banning the corporal punishment of minors is certainly a noble pursuit and one which this proposal executes competently enough. However, the resolution's banning of punitive infliction of physical harm or pain without consent on any person, albeit with exceptions, vastly exceeds the law's stated purpose in a misleading manner. It does not logically follow that a proposal setting out to protect children would ban the penalization of adults as well, especially in situations where such penalization can be beneficial, such as punishment for certain offenses such as vandalism. The proposal's extensive list of exceptions makes this overreach even more apparent. Notably, the resolution permits the excessive use of force during the arrest of criminal suspects, essentially permitting police brutality during arrests. Such an exception is disturbing, and by itself gives sufficient reason to oppose this proposal.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends voting Against the at-vote General Assembly proposal, "Corporal Punishment Ban".
Recommendation written by Greater Cesnica and Cretox State, with input from Imperium Anglorum, Honeydewistania, and Jedinsto.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't see anything wrong with this. Allowing corporal punishment is what enabled horrors such as the Graduated Electronic Decelerator (which was only banned in 2020) to be used in schools. Although I am using an extreme case, I think it exemplifies what we'll be preventing by its passing. Since the passage of this resolution effectively outlaws that and other such instances of disciplinary abuse, I will therefore vote For.
 
Actually Against [Non-WA] on this one. I think Tin has the right idea here, but the mandate in (a) is ridiculously broad and even though the introductory clauses have no bearing on the proposal, if your proposal is to focus on children (as is stated! and is as especially evident via (c)), focus on children. Additionally, I don’t see how either (d)(I) or (d)(II) deals with corporal punishment at all.

I want to vote for this because it’s definitely a great idea, but the execution of the idea is poor.
 
Jedinsto is correct.

RE Hulldom's other concern: People usually associate corporal punishment with the punishment of children so that is the theme I have chosen to roll with here :P
 
Last edited:
I think I'm gonna choose to go Present on this one. Not because I'm against it, simply because the motive of where a ban of corporal punishment could be taken is far and broad in its nature. So, my final choice is Present.
 
Strongly against. I don't see anything wrong with beating the living daylights out of duly convicted criminals. Also the resolution is badly worded to confuse between caning vandals (say Singapore) vs caning school kids.

As an aside, I am starting to conclude that the WA voting population is largely to the left of AOC.
 
simone_republic:
Strongly against. I don't see anything wrong with beating the living daylights out of duly convicted criminals. Also the resolution is badly worded to confuse between caning vandals (say Singapore) vs caning school kids.
Click to expand...
Everyone deserves human decency.
simone_republic:
As an aside, I am starting to conclude that the WA voting population is largely to the left of AOC.
Click to expand...
You are probably correct :P
 
Tinhampton:
Jedinsto is correct.

RE Hulldom's other concern: People usually associate corporal punishment with the punishment of children so that is the theme I have chosen to roll with here :P
Click to expand...
I was more thinking about beating thugs and gangsters in prisons. I think whether children frequently encounter corporal punishment is actually different between countries and cultures.
 
simone_republic:
I said "duly convicted" in my original comment and that includes exhausting all appeals and making an assumption on having a fair trial and a competent court.
Click to expand...
Ok but even so, there's this thing called "decency" and "human rights"
EDIT: And even if all appeals are exhausted, etc, the system won't be perfect.

And also changing my vote to against, due to different issues apparent in the resolution like allowing police brutality.
 
Last edited:
Yes,
Greater Cesnica:
No such thing as a 100% fool-proof conviction rate.
Click to expand...
But are you willing to let the 9x% or whatever % of duly convicted criminals walk free? Or with the mere punishment of sitting in a cell? This is like Willie Horton here. I will stop here because I don't want a Twitter style flame war.
 
Comfed:
It’s not walking free.

Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t know that being deprived of liberty and being forced to live in a concrete cell for years was a fun and happy time.
Of the incredibly racist attack ad? Ok
Click to expand...
I believe living in a concrete cell is not adequate punishment for some crimes but I will stop here as I don't want a Twitter flame war on this forum.
 
Comfed:
It’s not walking free.

Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t know that being deprived of liberty and being forced to live in a concrete cell for years was a fun and happy time.
Of the incredibly racist attack ad? Ok
Click to expand...
Willie Horton in the sense of a criminal walking about free and going on a rampage, it's not related to race.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top