Not quite, this particular paragraph was identical in the cold war era but the other paragraphs, mainly defining when it is in effect and when not, were changed. This made the law applicable since January 1st of this year.
So previously this rule was only applicable during war or "conflicting times" and now it always is.
The government can and will change that law when they decide it is needed. Just because they are not enforcing it right now doesn’t mean they can’t find you guilty at a later date.
You should never need permission from the government to travel.
Then what is the point of doing any of thi, oh other than tracking the citizens movements and to set the ball rolling on more draconian shit down the line
Do you have a source that says the government has to grant your request? I tried scouring the law and it seems true but I struggle with the lingo.
Also the changes that were last made to the law seem to explicitly differentiate between war and none war situation as to which paragraphs are applied so they could have applied that paragraph only to situations of war. So I still think a Discussion and some scrutiny is warrented here as to why we "kept" this rule.
Sorry, last time I checked the Discussion got started with the article in fr on the 03.04. (Friday) which wasn't a week ago but just before the weekend. And the discussion doesn't seem "finished" to me.
Also as I commented at the comment mentioned by you they could have exempted article 3 from situations outside of "war". Or they could have updated/changed it all together.
36 Comments
Vittelius@feddit.org · 44 pts · 152d
Tudsamfa@lemmy.world · 39 pts · 151d
-- Frog in the pot
Vittelius@feddit.org · -6 pts · 151d
Except the provision in question was copy pasted from an old law where it existed for decades without any change.
I find the tendency on Lemmy to see a conspiracy in every law concerning.
Criticise the law for what it does (there is enough here for it) and be wary of potential abuse. But sometimes warm water is just warm water.
Tudsamfa@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 151d
It existed for decades in times of war and tension.
It is something completely different that they want us to ask for permission in times of peace, which they changed this year.
mrbutterscotch@feddit.org · 2 pts · 150d
I am against this law, just to clarify. But I would argue we live in times of war and tension today. We have a war in europe right now.
GardenGeek@europe.pub · 24 pts · 152d
Also this isn't a new law but a remain of the cold war era.
parson0@startrek.website · 5 pts · 151d
Not quite, this particular paragraph was identical in the cold war era but the other paragraphs, mainly defining when it is in effect and when not, were changed. This made the law applicable since January 1st of this year. So previously this rule was only applicable during war or "conflicting times" and now it always is.
GardenGeek@europe.pub · 2 pts · 150d
Thank you for the correction! I didn't know that.
parson0@startrek.website · 2 pts · 151d
nosuchanon@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 151d
The government can and will change that law when they decide it is needed. Just because they are not enforcing it right now doesn’t mean they can’t find you guilty at a later date.
You should never need permission from the government to travel.
drmoose@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 151d
Seems like the law doesn't apply here not that it's not enforced. If war does come similar law will be passed ether way.
I'd agree with you though from philosophical pov - the government should never be allowed to contain you even if you're dodging the draft.
Michal@programming.dev · 15 pts · 151d
It's an extra hurdle to jump through, and it's sexist.
BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 151d
Then what is the point of doing any of thi, oh other than tracking the citizens movements and to set the ball rolling on more draconian shit down the line
somenonewho@feddit.org · 4 pts · 151d
Do you have a source that says the government has to grant your request? I tried scouring the law and it seems true but I struggle with the lingo.
Also the changes that were last made to the law seem to explicitly differentiate between war and none war situation as to which paragraphs are applied so they could have applied that paragraph only to situations of war. So I still think a Discussion and some scrutiny is warrented here as to why we "kept" this rule.
Vittelius@feddit.org · 2 pts · 151d
https://www.dw.com/en/german-men-need-military-permit-for-extended-stays-abroad/a-76662677
theacharnian@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 151d
In other words, meaningless paperwork just to keep the population disciplined. Germans 🙄.
smeg@infosec.pub · 18 pts · 152d
Stop voting for right wing parties, folks
carrylex@lemmy.world · -16 pts · 152d
That decision was not done by right wing parties.
somenonewho@feddit.org · 18 pts · 151d
Last time I checked CDU was a right wing party? And the sPD will do most of their bidding to be in power
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · -3 pts · 151d
Ehhhhh CDU is center right. They're very far from parties like AFD.
athatet@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 151d
Center right is still right wing. I mean, it’s right there in the name.
Miaou@jlai.lu · 8 pts · 151d
They're not center at all, stop normalising Nazis.
carrylex@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 151d
Zacryon@feddit.org · 12 pts · 151d
CDU is a center-right party. In recent times even more right.
Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 151d
Doesn't the CDU have the relative majority right now? That is a right-wing party.
perestroika@slrpnk.net · 13 pts · 152d
In this case, I would advise them to simply ignore the law, or protest to have it revoked. It does not make sense.
carrylex@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 152d
Article is irrelevant - we had this discussion in Germany 1 week ago.
TL;DR See comment below.
somenonewho@feddit.org · 4 pts · 151d
Sorry, last time I checked the Discussion got started with the article in fr on the 03.04. (Friday) which wasn't a week ago but just before the weekend. And the discussion doesn't seem "finished" to me.
Also as I commented at the comment mentioned by you they could have exempted article 3 from situations outside of "war". Or they could have updated/changed it all together.
troed@fedia.io · -48 pts · 152d
"When Russia attacks I want someone else to defend me"
comrade_twisty@feddit.org · 46 pts · 152d
I will absolutely defend Germany when Russia attacks, but I will not fight any of Americas and Israels wars!
NABDad@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 152d
Not even against America and Israel?
troed@fedia.io · -34 pts · 152d
What a beautiful strawman you built there.
setsubyou@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 152d
No, they want to leave Germany instead of making someone defend them there.
silverneedle@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 152d
I hope to leave people like you behind when someone attacks:)
marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today · -25 pts · 152d
Deckname@discuss.tchncs.de · 9 pts · 152d
Yet.
marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today · -10 pts · 152d
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 151d
maybe you don't know, but Europe does not consist solely of Germany. there are a few more countries to the "right" on the map.
Gladaed@feddit.org · 0 pts · 151d
Depends on how exclusionary you define Europe.
If the "lesser white people" are Europeans you are wrong. The Baltics must be free.