NationStates

I posted this once, and I want to do so again. I´d like some help to find the problem and solve it, along with adding any suggestions. Thanks.

A)The background search for gun ownership is hardened: Those with probable mental illness must be able to contradict this status with a psychiatrist´s note of approval.

B)The guns and ammo sale is fully controlled by the Secretary of Defense.

C)A person can only own 3 firearms as a maximum, along with 2 magazines (including the one in the gun). In the case of shotguns, a max of 12 shells can be owned.

D) Assault weapons are military-only weapons, including off-duty and retired soldiers, officers and generals.

PARSONS: Who or what is a Secretary of Defence?

Secondarily, pretty much nothing here is defined. What is an assault weapon? What is a magazine? Can they be 1000s of rounds long? Does an artillery-piece count as a gun?

Is this a joke? How would you even define secretary of defense? How on earth would a single person control all gun sales in a country?

I can find nothing to recommend this for passage. The restrictions you list are arbitrary and will do nothing whatsoever useful. Not a thing.

OOC:
As a proponent of extensive and expansive gun-control, this is about the worst possible way you could go about it.

...What if our country doesn't have a Secretary of Defense? In fact, what even counts as that under your definition?
Why is there a restriction on how many firearms a person can own? I'd imagine if someone really wants to go on a mass murder spree, they might have a rifle and pistol on them and some ammo, but not much else other than that.
Magazine restrictions and shell restrictions doesn't seem like it would do much. Besides, the size of said magazines aren't specified.
This needs to be much more well defined.

OOC: fuck no. If this was General, I could go on for days about why this is absurd from a Real Life perspective.

IC: "Fuck no. Our gun laws are a purely domestic issue, and none of the business of the international community."

Turealia wrote:A)The background search for gun ownership is hardened:

"The Wallenburgian government has never conducted investigations of all persons into past ownership of firearms, and I really see no reason to start now."

Those with probable mental illness must be able to contradict this status with a psychiatrist´s note of approval.

"Are you really saying people ought to have to prove they are not mentally ill? This really makes no sense."

B)The guns and ammo sale is fully controlled by the Secretary of Defense.

"Neither the World Assembly nor Wallenburg has a secretary of defense."

C)A person can only own 3 firearms as a maximum, along with 2 magazines (including the one in the gun). In the case of shotguns, a max of 12 shells can be owned.

"These are absolutely idiotic restrictions. I myself own seven different firearms, and I have a small locker full of magazines. And arguably, I effectively own all of the guns used by my staff, so that would add about a couple dozen weapons and hundreds more rounds to my list. Also, what is a 'max'?"

D) Assault weapons are military-only weapons, including off-duty and retired soldiers, officers and generals.

"Ambassador, why on Earth would you call me, a retired major, a weapon?"

OOC: The reason there is no Gun Control proposals is because the only agreement is that there can be none at all. Free advice, don't go here, it won't end well.

IC: Clover laughed loudly upon reading the draft "Arbitrary limits, no actual definitions and does absolutely nothing but remove firearms from honest, law abiding citizens. In addition, domestic weapons control is a purely national, rather than international, matter. I'd suggest using this draft for target practice."

Turealia wrote:
A)The background search for gun ownership is hardened: Those with probable mental illness must be able to contradict this status with a psychiatrist´s note of approval.

Are you trying to cover two different topics with one clause? I am not really seeing a connection. A background check is typically executed to check for criminal offenses. Although yes, I am sure in extreme cases severe mental health issues would qualify, but not every disorder should be treated as a threat to the populace.

B)The guns and ammo sale is fully controlled by the Secretary of Defense.

Who? I'm sorry, Ambassador, but such a title does not exist within the Federation.

C)A person can only own 3 firearms as a maximum, along with 2 magazines (including the one in the gun). In the case of shotguns, a max of 12 shells can be owned.

Unnecessarily restrictive. If you can justify this position with a little more detail, I am all ears but I would recommend letting this go.

D) Assault weapons are military-only weapons, including off-duty and retired soldiers, officers and generals.

Ah, yes. The infamous code words of "assault weapons". What do you feel specifically defines assault weapons? Their look and appearance, or the capability of the weapon?

If you wish to convince other members of this Assembly, you will need to provide a considerable amount of information. I wish you the best of luck.

The Sheika wrote:

B)The guns and ammo sale is fully controlled by the Secretary of Defense.

Who? I'm sorry, Ambassador, but such a title does not exist within the Federation.

OOC: A nation appoints everyone to the post of Secretary of Defense. Because the person with real authority is the War or Defence Secretary.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:

The Sheika wrote:Who? I'm sorry, Ambassador, but such a title does not exist within the Federation.

OOC: A nation appoints everyone to the post of Secretary of Defense. Because the person with real authority is the War or Defence Secretary.

OOC: Hmm, something to think about there.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:

The Sheika wrote:Who? I'm sorry, Ambassador, but such a title does not exist within the Federation.

OOC: A nation appoints everyone to the post of Secretary of Defense. Because the person with real authority is the War or Defence Secretary.

No we call him the Minister of National Defence

The Atmoran Diplomat wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:OOC: A nation appoints everyone to the post of Secretary of Defense. Because the person with real authority is the War or Defence Secretary.

No we call him the Minister of National Defence

OOC:
The Joke

Your Head.

But yeah, no, I really don't know why people don't just use 'relevant national authority' rather than assuming all governments are structured identically.

Tinfect wrote:But yeah, no, I really don't know why people don't just use 'relevant national authority' rather than assuming all governments are structured identically.

OOC: Because 'Murica?

Turealia wrote:Those with probable mental illness must be able to contradict this status with a psychiatrist´s note of approval.

How is it morally right that we assumed people who acted like illness to have illness? Are we asking people to prove that they aren't ill in order to have gun? Really? I mean seriously?

I thank everyone for proving me it was a crappy idea. Thank you for your time

Turealia wrote:I posted this once, and I want to do so again. I´d like some help to find the problem and solve it, along with adding any suggestions. Thanks.

C)A person can only own 3 firearms as a maximum, along with 2 magazines (including the one in the gun). In the case of shotguns, a max of 12 shells can be owned.

Oh good god no. We have NO private gun ownership in our nation, and I am not going to water that down by granting people the legal right to own enough guns to kill all their neighbours thrice over.

No - just.... no.

D) Assault weapons are military-only weapons, including off-duty and retired soldiers, officers and generals.

Again - no. Serving members of our military have guns, but that is because they are a part of the army. Once they leave they return to being private citizens and they do not get to carry around machine guns and RPGs.

No.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:

The Sheika wrote:Who? I'm sorry, Ambassador, but such a title does not exist within the Federation.

OOC: A nation appoints everyone to the post of Secretary of Defense. Because the person with real authority is the War or Defence Secretary.

What if a nation's military is ruled by the leader itself?

Turealia wrote:I thank everyone for proving me it was a crappy idea. Thank you for your time

OC: Don't give up. Keep reading the other resolutions and you'll get the hang of it in no time

Normlpeople wrote:OOC: The reason there is no Gun Control proposals is because the only agreement is that there can be none at all. Free advice, don't go here, it won't end well.

OOC: Surprisingly, there is a Gun Control resolution which is still in the books: GA #235 a.k.a Child Firearm Safety Act.

States of Glory WA Office wrote:

Normlpeople wrote:OOC: The reason there is no Gun Control proposals is because the only agreement is that there can be none at all. Free advice, don't go here, it won't end well.

OOC: Surprisingly, there is a Gun Control resolution which is still in the books: GA #235 a.k.a Child Firearm Safety Act.

OOC: Well, that's the only one people can seem to agree on!