What law do you wish to change/add: Definitions Section (and succeeding laws which use that definition) needs fixing.
Why should this change/addition be made: At present, very few sections use the definition section, as they sporadically use capital letters and all definitions have a capital letter. This means that some words lose their intended meaning.
What is the aim of this change/addition: Legal clarity and to actually use the intended definition, some of these laws haven't been looked at for some time (pre-2016)
Additional Information: The reason that we use the capital is that sometimes the word is taken to mean its natural meaning, this can become problematic when it's written into laws because both can make sense but have wholly different meanings. An example of this in the present system is below:
In the definition of "Possession", it defines Possession as an item which is owned[1], and there are times when this definition is used[2] (despite this, no capital is used, so the definition would not be utilised), however, there are mentions of Possession as being in ownership i.e. Possession of Controlled Substances[3].
Although it is quite clear in these instances, it should be fixed, otherwise, there's no point in using the definitions section.
Why should this change/addition be made: At present, very few sections use the definition section, as they sporadically use capital letters and all definitions have a capital letter. This means that some words lose their intended meaning.
What is the aim of this change/addition: Legal clarity and to actually use the intended definition, some of these laws haven't been looked at for some time (pre-2016)
Additional Information: The reason that we use the capital is that sometimes the word is taken to mean its natural meaning, this can become problematic when it's written into laws because both can make sense but have wholly different meanings. An example of this in the present system is below:
In the definition of "Possession", it defines Possession as an item which is owned[1], and there are times when this definition is used[2] (despite this, no capital is used, so the definition would not be utilised), however, there are mentions of Possession as being in ownership i.e. Possession of Controlled Substances[3].
Although it is quite clear in these instances, it should be fixed, otherwise, there's no point in using the definitions section.
[1]: Definitions Section: Possession is a person’s belongings or an object owned by a person or entity such as the Government of Paralake City.
[2]: Section 2: Right to Self Defence and Necessity: Any person may use a justifiable amount of force proportionate to a threat if they reasonably believe that such force would prevent injury, death or the loss of property or possessions.
[3]: Section 8 offences, e.g. Section 8,1: Possession of Restricted Substances with Intent to Use: Any restricted substance shall be illegal to possess with the intent to use..
[2]: Section 2: Right to Self Defence and Necessity: Any person may use a justifiable amount of force proportionate to a threat if they reasonably believe that such force would prevent injury, death or the loss of property or possessions.
[3]: Section 8 offences, e.g. Section 8,1: Possession of Restricted Substances with Intent to Use: Any restricted substance shall be illegal to possess with the intent to use..
