Changing Sentencing for Criminal Codex

Todd McCloud · Post by **Todd McCloud** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 12:23 am

2. High crimes will carry a minimum sentence of twelve month regional and forum ban and a maximum sentence of permanent regional and/or forum ban, revocation of citizenship, and/or permanent prohibition of future citizenship.

After reading that particular clause from Section 2 of the Criminal Codex, I believe the law is a little too rigid in many cases and should be treated instead as a case-by-case basis. I mean, I don't even know if I agree with separating things as high crimes, felonies, and misdemeanors. Sure, I think they're crimes, but I mean I'd assume there are degrees of these crimes.

To this end, I'm recommending the following changes to the Criminal Codex:

Section 2,2 wrote:2. High crimes will carry a minimum sentence of twelve month regional and forum ban and a maximum sentence of permanent regional and/or forum ban, revocation of citizenship, and/or permanent prohibition of future citizenship.

Section 3,2 wrote:2. Felony crimes will carry a minimum sentence of one month forum ban and a maximum sentence of twelve month regional and/or forum ban.

Note that there is no minimum limit for Misdemeanor crimes (Section 4,2) so this falls in line with already established precedent. This is nothing unusual; rather, it gives our court system more flexibility to address issues which may not be so black-and-white, or may have unique circumstances. In short, it gives our Pschent flexibility and entrusts them with sentencing they deem necessary.

Ainocra · Post by **Ainocra** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 12:25 am

In light of the recent court cases I agree that the Pschent needs more flexibility in sentencing. I support this amendment

Post by **Lord Ravenclaw** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 12:25 am

I support this. I would appreciate it if the Deshret would please support this amendment. In the space of a week, I've had two of the most controversial cases in Osiran history before me in court, and in many ways I've felt that the legal code has caused me difficulty... I don't think we ever expected to have to use the legal code.

shetef · Post by **shetef** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 12:40 am

I also support this. The minimum sentences were taken from the old KRO Criminal Code when I wrote this (or maybe the Equilism Criminal Codex). In theory it sounded good at the time (when OFO was still young and had to be a bit strict). In practice, it hasn't worked out quite as well as I'd have liked.

Post by **Tim Stark** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 12:56 am

Full support.

North East Somerset · Post by **North East Somerset** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 7:58 am

Yes, this seems sensible.

In principle, I like the idea of precisely defined laws. But in reality, within the constraints of the NS system - the lack of resources, the low quality of lawmaking, the political pressures and lack of independent judiciary, etc - it's simply more practical to have more versatile criminal codes, and trust in the practicality of the people appointed to serve justice. Of course, sometimes, this doesn't work due to corruption or just sheer stupidity - but well, overall I've seen more damage caused by people trying to literally interpret poor laws, than people trying to create a sensible compromise based on more vague laws.

Support.

Revall · Post by **Revall** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 10:20 am

Definitely support.

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 1:44 pm

Seeing as there are several individuals in support, i would like to motion this to a vote.

Ainocra · Post by **Ainocra** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:07 pm

seconded

Vaculatestar · Post by **Vaculatestar** » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:25 pm

I support this amendment.