Bill: Rejected A.M.I.R U.B.E.R E.A.T.S Act

How do you vote?

  • Rep: Aye

    Votes: 1 9.1%

  • Rep: Nay

    Votes: 10 90.9%

  • Rep: Abstain

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Sen: Aye

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Sen: Nay

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Sen: Abstain

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    11
  • Poll closed .
Plura72

Plura72

Former Representative
Supporter
Oakridge Resident
5th Anniversary Change Maker Popular in the Polls Statesman
Plura72
Plura72
Attorney
Joined
Jan 7, 2025
Messages
223
A
BILL
To

Ammend the Criminal Code Act​

The people of the Commonwealth of Redmont, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law:

1 - Short Title and Enactment

(1) This Act may be cited as the 'Act for the Management and Investigation of Restricted Unauthorized Breaches, Entry, and Retrieval: Enhancing Accountability in Technology and Security Act.' or 'A.M.I.R U.B.E.R E.A.T.S Act'

(2) This Act shall be enacted immediately upon its signage.

(3) This Act has been authored by Plura72.

(4) This Act has been co-sponsored by Senator Inknet.
2 - Reasons
(1) We need cybersecurity Protection
(2) A lot of financial Insitutions have bots whom of which may be exploited to gain unathorized access to admin details causing bank runs.

3 - Amendments

(26) Unathorized breach of a system

Offence Type: Indictable

Penalty: Various options.
(a) 60 minutes of imprisonment and up to 100 penalty units;

A person commits an offence if the person:
(a) Knowingly Invades and or Degradates a system within a discord bot or company tool for personal benefit
 
Last edited:
Nay, but this is kind of complicated. First, the compromising of a tool is difficult to define and this bill does not define it well. It is unclear what it means to invade or degrade a system. Secondly, personal benefit is incredibly vague. It could be argued that if someone is given a screenshot of a discord bot message, they have 'invaded' upon private information and the acquisition of said information is a form of personal benefit. Third, the bill name is atrocious.
 
Nay. If people are hacking others, that goes well outside the scope of roleplay. I do not want to set a precedent that it is fair game enough where people might try it and think the only consequence would be in-game.
 
echoing both multi and Girlfail, I see no reason as to why we should regulate something that is arguably illegal IRL.
 
also the name is dumb
 
Nay, I agree with the reasons brought upon by my colleagues. Legitimizing hacking as a form of interaction with the server is completely out of line. The bill is also written hastily and vaguely with no proper definitions to allow us to enforce this in any meaningful way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top