Petition for F.C.C.4§25 to Consider Consent

Petition for F.C.C.4§25 to Consider Consent


Pursuant to BOR.II, “citizens shall also maintain the right to petition the government without fear of retaliation.”
Pursuant to Clonemep v. Clonemep et al., 6.F.S.C. 4 (2022), “it shall be
presumed that the legislative intent of Congress shall be that any executive or
legislative official may be petitioned to do anything, and that such petitioned
officials must respond as soon as practically possible; furthermore, it shall be
presumed there is no limit on petitions towards an entity on any issue, or who may
make them, or how many one can make.”

It it therefore that I, a citizen of the State of Firestone empowered by Bill of Rights Section II, exercise my right to petition Congress of the State of Firestone to AMEND “A Bill to Protect Drivers from Annoying Citizens” to allow for the so called crime of “Insurance Fraud” to NOT be enforced against individuals assuming the operator of the vehicle (in this case, referring to the victim of “Insurance Fraud”) has consented for such.

My reason is as follows: Passing the act as is will allow “Insurance Fraud” to be charged to ANY individual simply for standing on top of the hood of a vehicle while there is an operator in the driver’s seat. This is… well, flawed for several reasons. Making it a crime to stand on the hood of a vehicle while a driver is inside the vehicle AND the driver is okay with it should NOT be a criminal offense for obvious reasons: it doesn’t violate any moderation guidelines (assuming the vehicle isn’t moving, and it isn’t the responsibility of the State to make laws with these guidelines in mind anyways - this keeps in mind the separation of moderation and government within the State of Firestone), it is the vehicle owner’s property and making it a crime for something that a property owner may wish to permit is a little overstepping, and there are already several crimes that cover this exact offense (Disorderly Conduct, Obstruction of Traffic, Trespassing on Private Property (if you order someone to step off the hood of your vehicle), and more…)

Generally, the main issue presented here is that EVEN IF the vehicle is:

  • Not in motion;
  • The driver is okay with it and;
  • the “offender” has no malice

This would STILL be a crime. Imagine if you stand in front of a vehicle with an operator of a vehicle who has consented for you to stand there (even if the vehicle is PARKED) and the vehicle is not in motion and you go to jail for 5 minutes. That’s incredulous. Imagine if it’s even your OWN vehicle, you stand on top of the hood, and a whitelisted individual gets in the driver’s seat. Congratulations, you just committed a misdemeanor. It’s very important to take intent of the actor and consent of the operator into mind, and this act fails to consider either of those.

This bill has good intentions, and could definitely be useful however it is missing important considerations and becomes a violation of liberties to a certain extent. I hope that a legislative official will take this petition in mind, respond, and further act on this petition and amend the act to account for consent AT LEAST.

I am of course not asking that every single official responds to this petition, however simply asking that at least one congress member responds, acknowledges that they have received this petition, and make an effort to have an amendment that fulfills the requests of this petition to be passed.

6 Likes

Amen support brother (I did not read it)

2 Likes

(Ftr I am aware that this hasn’t passed yet but thought I would send this before it becomes an issue in an actual dispute)

2 Likes

Good petition.

I am supporting in my official capacity as Secretary of Commerce, state official.

2 Likes

Adding onto this, it means if you (as a pedestrian) get rammed and end up on top of someone’s car, you could be arrested. I also personally think it’s not worth making it a unique criminal offence, if someone is standing on a vehicle just cuff them off and if they keep doing it surely they can be arrested for failure to comply?

2 Likes

make a vote with only the yes option on ur post next time dummy

1 Like

The bill you cited in the petition was withdrawn, and another version was put into its place.

see: A Bill to Protect Drivers from Annoying Citizens
I believe that this version is also going to be amended while in session, but I don’t know exact information.

further… if I’m gonna be honest, it’s much simpler to reach out to the legislator who chief sponsored the bill opposed to making a petition

1 Like

woops

1 Like

I cba to read allat, can you give me a tl;dr

1 Like

Tl;dr “Insurance Fraud” makes it so that any individual who purposefully and deliberately stands in front of, jumps on top of, or otherwise hinders a vehicle either actively in motion or actively being occupied by a driver of said vehicle, shall be guilty of Insurance Fraud. Unintended legal repercussions could occur if the act (as it currently stands) is failed to be amended to consider malice or consent (of the vehicle operator)

1 Like

oh ok ty

1 Like

NO MEANS NO!

MY BODY MY CHOICE!

ALL MEN SUCK

(i didn’t read any of this just hoping im right)

5 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.