| Return Create A Forum - Home | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| NeoConfederate States fo AMerica | |
| https://ncsa.createaforum.com | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| ***************************************************** | |
| Return to: Capitol Building | |
| ***************************************************** | |
| #Post#: 8487-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: The Carolina Alliance Date: August 28, 2015, 3:28 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| I'm all in favor of this bill. It will definitely improve our | |
| problematic land to people ratio. I do agree that the colony | |
| size limit should be revised, so that there's enough colonies | |
| for everybody. | |
| #Post#: 8488-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Neexus63 Date: August 28, 2015, 5:48 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| A bill to allow the establishment of colonies outside of the | |
| NCSA borders. | |
| Recognizing Each state's own sovereignty and right to own land | |
| inside the NCSA borders without contention. | |
| [b]Realizing That colonial expansion is currently deemed | |
| illegal. | |
| Further Realizing That colonial expansion would allow some to | |
| gain an upper hand upon other states economically. | |
| Congress Hereby Mandates the following | |
| (1) The Expansion into territories, north and south, for | |
| economical and militaristic purposes. | |
| (2) The following regions will be allowed to be expanded into, | |
| by agreement with the Congress of the NCSA: | |
| (a) Cuba, West Indies, Bahamas | |
| (b) Philippine Islands | |
| (c) Australia | |
| (d) African Islands and Territories | |
| (e) Canadian Territories | |
| (f) Antarctica | |
| (g) Coastal South America and Mexico | |
| (3) A form must be filed by the state in Congress and approved | |
| in order to moderate colonial expansion, as to not inflict upon | |
| a state's rights and sovereignty, but as to avoid cruel | |
| domination over the lands, such forms shall follow as this. | |
| *We the people of ^enter state name here^, hereby decree the | |
| ownership of the ^Island or specific territory^ for ^economic, | |
| militaristic, multiple^ purposes. We shall comply to the laws of | |
| the state and comply to the colonial laws of the NCSA. We shall | |
| not wage war against fellow state's colonies, but rather work | |
| peacefully together in a league of friendship.* | |
| (4) All Expansions shall be within a 40,000 sq mile limit given | |
| how much land a state currently owns within the NCSA borders. | |
| (a) If a state owns less than the 64,040 sq mile limit | |
| within the border, they may have more than a 40,000 limit in | |
| order to make up for land due to land lock. | |
| (b) That all state's may only have a total land | |
| occupation limit of 104,040 sq miles. [/b] | |
| OOC: You can't just make a bill declaring something legal if | |
| there is already a law against it. You would have two separate | |
| opposing laws! You need to either amend the Map Rules or repeal | |
| it and make a new one. | |
| http://ncsa.createaforum.com/office-of-the-president/(bill-ooc)-land-claim-act-… | |
| #Post#: 8493-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Columbia Confederates Date: August 28, 2015, 6:35 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: Actually it is done all the time in Congress today where | |
| new laws are passed and automatically replace other laws. But | |
| you're right I'd need to add something in to acknowledge it. | |
| #Post#: 8494-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Caos Date: August 28, 2015, 6:36 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: But that's not how it's done here, Columbia. | |
| #Post#: 8497-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Columbia Confederates Date: August 28, 2015, 6:39 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: Of course it's not...well let me know when their is a | |
| specific piece of legislation or the Constitution which claims | |
| laws can be overturned, which they can. | |
| #Post#: 8498-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Caos Date: August 28, 2015, 6:40 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: We use a different form of government. Specifically, I | |
| believe it's Robert's Rules. | |
| #Post#: 8499-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Neexus63 Date: August 28, 2015, 6:43 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: How? Can you explain how by passing a law, it overturns a | |
| previous law which it comes in conflict in? | |
| #Post#: 8500-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Columbia Confederates Date: August 28, 2015, 6:45 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: No I just said that I should add in an acknowledgment of | |
| the previous law. If you add in the acknowledgment of the | |
| previous law it can in essence turn it over. Of course unless | |
| you'd rather have a whole session dedicated to a vote on whether | |
| or not to overturn that law. But your right, this law currently | |
| can't so it needs to be edited. | |
| #Post#: 8508-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Columbia Confederates Date: August 29, 2015, 11:56 am | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: The Land Claim Act 2015 doesn't forbid expansion or | |
| colonies. Section 1 declares how much a state can hold so say | |
| the state of Columbia and my current borders. That's referring | |
| to state's not colonies. Section 2 refers to Islands and water | |
| spacing of STATES again not colonies. Section 3 states that no | |
| state can take land away from another state through force or war | |
| but through peace. Section 4 says that the Secretary of Interior | |
| approves state land claims. This doesn't contradict that law at | |
| all. In fact I include that all colonies will be monitored, | |
| contained, and allowed only through and by congress. | |
| #Post#: 8517-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: [IC Bill] Colonial and Imperialistic Expansion | |
| By: Caos Date: August 29, 2015, 3:28 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| OOC: Yes, it actually contradicts it INCREDIBLY. | |
| [quote]A State may role play one additional expansion in | |
| addition to its free expansion. This expansion is limited to | |
| 16,010 sq mi (41,465.5 km2).[/quote] | |
| That is the last expansion you can make. Expansions are also | |
| limited by: [quote] All territory that is owned by a single | |
| state must be contiguous, and may not be separated by another | |
| state, unclaimed land, or any body of water larger than Lake | |
| Superior.[/quote] | |
| This literally means that you cannot claim territory that is | |
| farther away than the longest part of Lake Superior. As such, | |
| you cannot claim a colony ANYWHERE. If you're landlocked, you're | |
| doomed. You can't expand beyond your boundaries, or your | |
| expansion. | |
| And if it is illegal? | |
| [quote]If a state is found to have more land than is legally | |
| acceptable, it may be taken to court in order to settle the | |
| discrepancy.[/quote] | |
| ***************************************************** | |
| Previous Page | |
| Next Page |