[DRAFT] Tightening of Gun Control

[Jarish Inyo]

Jakuso,

It is you that is wrong. Gun control is not an international issue in anyway. It does not requires WA legislation. This is no different then 'telling farmer that they can't use the field two years in a row as the WA knows best and when the WA Preachers say, the world of common sense must obey'. Any nation is capable of deciding what their gun control policy is.

This resolution will not solve this issues of gun violence. Simple fact is that this resolution allows the firearms that are most commonly used in gun violence. All it really does is outlawing automatic weapons. Nations are capable of deciding what firearms, if any, are legal in their nation. And what requirements its citizens need to meet to obtain firearms.

[Imperial City-States]

My question to you Jak , is how is the WA going to force a nuclear capable nation with a very large and well funded armed forces to sit down and surrender their people's freedoms. Unless the WA is willing to go into full scale war in order to try and force nations such as mine to follow such a blatant violation of personal freedoms then they better damn well be prepared to back up what they pass.


In short you can try but you will not succeed

[Hakio]

My question to you Jak , is how is the WA going to force a nuclear capable nation with a very large and well funded armed forces to sit down and surrender their people's freedoms. Unless the WA is willing to go into full scale war in order to try and force nations such as mine to follow such a blatant violation of personal freedoms then they better damn well be prepared to back up what they pass.


In short you can try but you will not succeed

"You're not in the WA, thus, this doesn't affect you in anyway shape or form."

[Imperial City-States]

My question to you Jak , is how is the WA going to force a nuclear capable nation with a very large and well funded armed forces to sit down and surrender their people's freedoms. Unless the WA is willing to go into full scale war in order to try and force nations such as mine to follow such a blatant violation of personal freedoms then they better damn well be prepared to back up what they pass.


In short you can try but you will not succeed

"You're not in the WA, thus, this doesn't affect you in anyway shape or form."

"Respectfully Ambassador while i am not in the World Assembly my nation apart of the international community and thus this directly impacts me. While i would be rather happy with the amount of business a World Assembly ban of firearms would be as that would bring great business to my country. I was simply stating a fact that those within the Assembly tend to ignore. "

[Hirota]

why should any nation let the WA tell them what firearms their citizens can own and what their citizens have to get their chosen firearm?

Maybe you missed the Q&A on what the WA actually does.

[Jarish Inyo]

I didn't miss the Q&A. But the question needs to be asked.

[Defwa]

"You're not in the WA, thus, this doesn't affect you in anyway shape or form."

"Respectfully Ambassador while i am not in the World Assembly my nation apart of the international community and thus this directly impacts me. While i would be rather happy with the amount of business a World Assembly ban of firearms would be as that would bring great business to my country. I was simply stating a fact that those within the Assembly tend to ignore. "

You're not making sense. The WA is not planning on invading you and talking your guns. Why are you here?

[Acharastan]

The Acharian WA delegate looks at this proposal before taking out his revolver and shooting it several times.

Do you have any idea how many angry 'Muricans will hate this?

[Imperial City-States]

"Respectfully Ambassador while i am not in the World Assembly my nation apart of the international community and thus this directly impacts me. While i would be rather happy with the amount of business a World Assembly ban of firearms would be as that would bring great business to my country. I was simply stating a fact that those within the Assembly tend to ignore. "

You're not making sense. The WA is not planning on invading you and talking your guns. Why are you here?

I'm pointing out that Jak's suggesting is completely unreasonable and impossible to enforce.

[Defwa]

You're not making sense. The WA is not planning on invading you and talking your guns. Why are you here?

I'm pointing out that Jak's suggesting is completely unreasonable and impossible to enforce.

Within the WA, everything written in the law is absolutely enforceable. I'm still not sure what you're getting at, mr random nation who broke in and started threatening nuclear war

[Imperial City-States]

I'm pointing out that Jak's suggesting is completely unreasonable and impossible to enforce.

Within the WA, everything written in the law is absolutely enforceable. I'm still not sure what you're getting at, mr random nation who broke in and started threatening nuclear war

I'm not threatening anything , i'm pointing out a simple fact. Logistically and realistically attempting too control firearms or in what Jak suggest out right banning you're simply going to make the illegal market for them sky rocket so you're actually going to increase crime rather dramatically as nations who aren't in the World Assembly will not be obligated to abide by the rules and can actually make a rather large amount of money by selling 'banned' weapons to 'private interest groups ' (terrorist ) and you're still not eliminating the problem.


EDIT: It's like saying the UN can enforce anything , We all know how much of a joke the UN is.

[Hakio]

Within the WA, everything written in the law is absolutely enforceable. I'm still not sure what you're getting at, mr random nation who broke in and started threatening nuclear war

I'm not threatening anything , i'm pointing out a simple fact. Logistically and realistically attempting too control firearms or in what Jak suggest out right banning you're simply going to make the illegal market for them sky rocket so you're actually going to increase crime rather dramatically as nations who aren't in the World Assembly will not be obligated to abide by the rules and can actually make a rather large amount of money by selling 'banned' weapons to 'private interest groups ' (terrorist ) and you're still not eliminating the problem.

"We are not banning guns, we are banning firearms that utilize unnecessary force a person to adequately defend themselves." Sia looks at the Ambassador baffled. "Also, you're arguing that non WA nations will be able to sell the legal guns illegally to terrorists? Did I get that wrong, because you are making absolutely no sense."

[Araraukar]

OOC: Guys, the OP hasn't posted since posting this thread. You might be arguing on an abandoned proposal.

[Imperial City-States]

I'm not threatening anything , i'm pointing out a simple fact. Logistically and realistically attempting too control firearms or in what Jak suggest out right banning you're simply going to make the illegal market for them sky rocket so you're actually going to increase crime rather dramatically as nations who aren't in the World Assembly will not be obligated to abide by the rules and can actually make a rather large amount of money by selling 'banned' weapons to 'private interest groups ' (terrorist ) and you're still not eliminating the problem.

"We are not banning guns, we are banning firearms that utilize unnecessary force a person to adequately defend themselves." Sia looks at the Ambassador baffled. "Also, you're arguing that non WA nations will be able to sell the legal guns illegally to terrorists? Did I get that wrong, because you are making absolutely no sense."

But see the question is who defines what's "unnecessary " ? It is so open to interpretation that it is unreasonable. And actually yes , that is what i'm arguing. If someone approaches with money in hand we're in no situation to deny it to them. They haven't commited a crime on our soil so it isn't our problem.

[Jarish Inyo]

Imperial City-States has a point. Who defines what's unnecessary force? What are people adequately defend themselves from? Is a semi-automatic firearm adequate to defend someone against a criminal with an automatic firearm.

We also have to ask if this resolution would accomplish the stated goal of reducing gun crimes?

[Frisbeeteria]

OOC: Guys, the OP hasn't posted since posting this thread. You might be arguing on an abandoned proposal.

Yeah, I'ma gonna call it abandoned.