Silly and/or Illegal GA Proposals. zOMG!

[The Dark Star Republic]

You are wrong.

[Defwa]

Can there be a rule against reciting slogans and false truisms?

[The Sheika]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: the_united_zones_of_the_west_1414650568

More Guns, Less Crime
A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.


Category: Gun Control

Decision: Relax

Proposed by: The United Zones of the West

Description: NOTING that gun control is already very tight,

FINDING statistics that more guns equates to less crime,

REALIZING more guns means less crime may sound absurd,

REMEMBERING not everything works in a direct proportion manner,

KNOWING that if every single person had the chance to defend themselves, there would be less crime,

ACKNOWLEDGING the fact that even if guns were outlawed, criminals would still acquire weapons,

SEEING that guns do not in themselves kill people,

AFFIRMING shooting guns at shooting ranges are very fun if done safely,

HEREBY requires nations to:

1. ALLOW all law-abiding, mentally stable citizens the chance to own and maintain arms to protect and defend both themselves and their family.

2. ALLOW at least a single weapon in a citizen's home or on their person.

3. LOOSEN gun laws restricting the ownership or maintaining of arms.

Approvals: 12 (The United Zones of the West, Imperial Eagle, Chester Pearson, Imperial Virmir, United Islands of Sootopolis, Aitheria, Liberated Global Overstate, Swaggiliciousness, Isles of the United Armed Forces, Iklonia, Regica, Nordenwald)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 53 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 2 days 21 hours

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we already have a resolution that covers this?

I wish they would have proposed it in the forum so it could at least be debated before being submitted. One, it would have given delegates a chance to explain why this proposal is not such a good idea, and two, if there any illegalities they could have been cleared up prior to submission. But alas, it was submitted without any debate.

[Chester Pearson]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: the_united_zones_of_the_west_1414650568

More Guns, Less Crime
A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.


Category: Gun Control

Decision: Relax

Proposed by: The United Zones of the West

Description: NOTING that gun control is already very tight,

FINDING statistics that more guns equates to less crime,

REALIZING more guns means less crime may sound absurd,

REMEMBERING not everything works in a direct proportion manner,

KNOWING that if every single person had the chance to defend themselves, there would be less crime,

ACKNOWLEDGING the fact that even if guns were outlawed, criminals would still acquire weapons,

SEEING that guns do not in themselves kill people,

AFFIRMING shooting guns at shooting ranges are very fun if done safely,

HEREBY requires nations to:

1. ALLOW all law-abiding, mentally stable citizens the chance to own and maintain arms to protect and defend both themselves and their family.

2. ALLOW at least a single weapon in a citizen's home or on their person.

3. LOOSEN gun laws restricting the ownership or maintaining of arms.

Approvals: 12 (The United Zones of the West, Imperial Eagle, Chester Pearson, Imperial Virmir, United Islands of Sootopolis, Aitheria, Liberated Global Overstate, Swaggiliciousness, Isles of the United Armed Forces, Iklonia, Regica, Nordenwald)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 53 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 2 days 21 hours

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we already have a resolution that covers this?

I wish they would have proposed it in the forum so it could at least be debated before being submitted. One, it would have given delegates a chance to explain why this proposal is not such a good idea, and two, if there any illegalities they could have been cleared up prior to submission. But alas, it was submitted without any debate.

Would you care to point out the illegalities to me? I am pretty knowledgeable in WA law, and it looks perfectly legal to me. Now when the mods to their daily sweep of the queue, don't be too surprised if someones finger arbitrarily slips, and this one gets nuked....

[Normlpeople]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: evexia_1414708007
Emergency Zombie Task Force

A resolution to modify universal standards of healthcare.


Category: Health


Area of Effect: International Aid


Proposed by: Evexia

Description: The World Assembly,

Frightened by the recent international zombie outbreak,

Shocked regarding the lack of a unified international agency to combat said outbreak,

Horrified about the loss of life that could occur,

Disappointed at the immature bickering over which path should be taken to quell the outbreak,

Hereby,
a. Defines a zombie as any flesh-eating human who has no control over said condition,

b. Establishes the Emergency Zombie Task Force as a means of halting the zombie menace through intrenational research and aid, and

c. Shall allow the World Assembly to disband the Task Force whenever it sees fit.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 65 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 5 hours

The first of many i'm sure. Could be read as committee only, goes nowhere/does nothing, WA army, or contradiction of the CoCR by race discrimination.

[The Dark Star Republic]

The first of many i'm sure.

Yup.

Proper Zombie Disposal
A resolution to modify universal standards of healthcare.
Category: Health | Area of Effect: Healthcare | Proposed by: Larrylykinsland

Description: CONCERNED: That buried Zombies may contaminate ground water and then reinfect the population.
BELIEVING: That burned zombies will no longer serve as a threat.
NOTING: That the hazardous material may remain in the air. Because of this all personnel and the shelter the bodies were burned in will be thoroughly decontaminated.
NOTING: That the ashes will need to be disposed of. Therefore they will be stored in underground vaults.

[Unibot III]

I challenge the authors here to get a proper, legal Zombie outbreak GA Resolution up to vote.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Yes, because that would be really original and hilarious.

[Chester Pearson]

I challenge the authors here to get a proper, legal Zombie outbreak GA Resolution up to vote.

Douria did it. Once.....

[Normlpeople]

I challenge the authors here to get a proper, legal Zombie outbreak GA Resolution up to vote.

You may get your chance to see it, the piece of trash I posted earlier has somehow made quorum.

[Chester Pearson]

I challenge the authors here to get a proper, legal Zombie outbreak GA Resolution up to vote.

You may get your chance to see it, the piece of trash I posted earlier has somehow made quorum.

Never underestimate the value of a good campaign....

[Chester Pearson]

I challenge the authors here to get a proper, legal Zombie outbreak GA Resolution up to vote.

You may get your chance to see it, the piece of trash I posted earlier has somehow made quorum.

At last check I managed to campaign it to 102 approvals before they yanked it. Just curious if they are going to explain why a quorated proposal was yanked, and how many mods were involved in that decision.....

[The Dark Star Republic]

It does seem obviously illegal: MetaGaming, category, and "committee only". I sent in a GHR about the latter.

[Chester Pearson]

It does seem obviously illegal: MetaGaming, category, and "committee only". I sent in a GHR about the latter.

I know it was illegal as well. That doesn't change the fact they just nuked a quorated proposal wirh absolutely no explanation.....

[The Two Jerseys]

It does seem obviously illegal: MetaGaming, category, and "committee only". I sent in a GHR about the latter.

I know it was illegal as well. That doesn't change the fact they just nuked a quorated proposal wirh absolutely no explanation.....

I'm still waiting on the explanation of why Safe Medicine was pulled.

[Chester Pearson]

I know it was illegal as well. That doesn't change the fact they just nuked a quorated proposal wirh absolutely no explanation.....

I'm still waiting on the explanation of why Safe Medicine was pulled.

It seems were not good enough for explanations anymore. It is easier to just say nothing when you fuck up, than admit you did something wrong I have learned....

[The Dark Star Republic]

Damn Chester, remind me never to piss you off :Z

I'm still waiting on the explanation of why Safe Medicine was pulled.

Me three. As I said, I even specifically asked for them to provide a comment, whether the proposal was ruled legal or not, in the GHR. The weird thing is, though, I bet the TG they sent the author on deleting the proposal encouraged them to draft on the forums; it's part of the standard boilerplate.

[Chester Pearson]

Damn Chester, remind me never to piss you off :Z

It's a legitimate bitch. Yes the proposal was illegal, but it had 102 approvals, and was just swept under the rug, without an explanation. If the mod that killed it knew why it was illegal (and I have serious doubts about that they actually knew why it was illegal), they should have TG'ed the player. Would it really be that fucking hard to post an explanation here? Unless of course someones finger accidentally slipped again....

Do I expect a mod response to this? Not really. That would be admitting something, and we all know they won't be doing that anytime soon. Not after the last boondoggle, which I still haven't received an actually apology on, lest we count the cookie cutter explanation I got.

It would have been hilarious if it made it to the floor though....

[The Two Jerseys]

Damn Chester, remind me never to piss you off :Z

It's a legitimate bitch. Yes the proposal was illegal, but it had 102 approvals, and was just swept under the rug, without an explanation. If the mod that killed it knew why it was illegal (and I have serious doubts about that they actually knew why it was illegal), they should have TG'ed the player. Would it really be that fucking hard to post an explanation here? Unless of course someones finger accidentally slipped again....

Do I expect a mod response to this? Not really. That would be admitting something, and we all know they won't be doing that anytime soon. Not after the last boondoggle, which I still haven't received an actually apology on, lest we count the cookie cutter explanation I got.

It would have been hilarious if it made it to the floor though....

Here's the closest I could find to actual precedents:

viewtopic.php?p=13707773#p13707773
viewtopic.php?p=13781056#p13781056
viewtopic.php?p=17280893#p17280893

[Lower Columbia]

Leglize All Drugs
A resolution to ban, legalize, or encourage recreational drugs.

Category: Recreational Drug Use | Decision: Legalize | Proposed by: Kovarus

Description: 10 Reasons To Legalize All Drugs

1: Address the real issues
For too long policy makers have used prohibition as a smoke screen to avoid addressing the social and economic factors that lead people to use drugs. Most illegal and legal drug use is recreational. Poverty and despair are at the root of most problematic drug use and it is only by addressing these underlying causes that we can hope to significantly decrease the number of problematic users.

2: Eliminate the criminal market place
The market for drugs is demand-led and millions of people demand illegal drugs. Making the production, supply and use of some drugs illegal creates a vacuum into which organized crime moves. The profits are worth billions of pounds. Legalization forces organized crime from the drugs trade, starves them of income and enables us to regulate and control the market (i.e. prescription, licensing, laws on sales to minors, advertising regulations etc.)

3: Massively reduce crime
The price of illegal drugs is determined by a demand-led, unregulated market. Using illegal drugs is very expensive. This means that some dependent users resort to stealing to raise funds (accounting for 50% of UK property crime - estimated at £2 billion a year).

4: Drug users are a majority
Recent research shows that nearly half of all 15-16 year olds have used an illegal drug. Up to one and a half million people use ecstasy every weekend. Amongst young people, illegal drug use is seen as normal. Intensifying the 'war on drugs' is not reducing demand. In Holland, where cannabis laws are far less harsh, drug usage is amongst the lowest in Europe.

5: Provide access to truthful information and education
A wealth of disinformation about drugs and drug use is given to us by ignorant and prejudiced policy-makers and media who peddle myths upon lies for their own ends. This creates many of the risks and dangers associated with drug use.

6: Make all drug use safer
Prohibition has led to the stigmatization and marginalization of drug users. Countries that operate ultra-prohibitionist policies have very high rates of HIV infection amongst injecting users. Hepatitis C rates amongst users in the UK are increasing substantially.

7: Restore our rights and responsibilities
Prohibition unnecessarily criminalizes millions of otherwise law-abiding people. It removes the responsibility for distribution of drugs from policy makers and hands it over to unregulated, sometimes violent dealers.

8: Race and Drugs
Black people are over ten times more likely to be imprisoned for drug offenses than whites. Arrests for drug offences are notoriously discretionary allowing enforcement to easily target a particular ethnic group. Prohibition has fostered this stereotyping of black people.

9: Global Implications
The illegal drugs market makes up 8% of all world trade (around £300 billion a year). Whole countries are run under the corrupting influence of drug cartels. Prohibition also enables developed countries to wield vast political power over producer nations under the auspices of drug control programs.

10: Prohibition doesn't work
There is no evidence to show that prohibition is succeeding. The question we must ask ourselves is, "What are the benefits of criminalizing any drug?" If, after examining all the available evidence, we find that the costs outweigh the benefits, then we must seek an alternative policy.

No operative clause, plagiarized (original text is taken 100% from an essay which is on a variety of other sites, including this one).

[The Sheika]

Would you care to point out the illegalities to me? I am pretty knowledgeable in WA law, and it looks perfectly legal to me. Now when the mods to their daily sweep of the queue, don't be too surprised if someones finger arbitrarily slips, and this one gets nuked....

I apologize for my delayed response, life tends to throw curve balls at the worst time. All that aside however, I do admit that I should have been more specific. When I had mentioned illegalities, I was not stating that the submitted proposal itself had anything illegal about it, my comment was more in general about any proposal that is submitted.

[Defwa]

Gambling Restrictions

A resolution to legalize or outlaw gambling.


Category: Gambling


Legalize/Outlaw: Outlaw


Proposed by: New Carolina Repoublic

Description: Understanding that children in some nations are allowed to gamble.

Proposing that there be a age limit on gambling.

Banning gambling under the age of 18.

Defining that minorities should not gamble legaly.

Defining that illegal gambling have punishments of jail time.

Hoping that children don't form gambling addictions or issues.

Noting that habits formed early in life are the hardest to break.

Wishing that all WA nations restrict minority gamblimg.

Approvals: 12 (Kalifati Arab shqiptar, Chester Pearson, Rumching, Rights and Peace, Nordenwald, Misplaced States, Tzahi, Orion Union, GRO II, St nevis and kitts, The Archiepelago, Regica)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 54 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 2 days

Weird arrangment of active and preamble clauses.
Also distinctly racist.

[The Dark Star Republic]

I think the "racism" is confusing the terms minor and minority.

[Krankor]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: tommylandinia_1415285286
Repeal "Nuclear Arms Possession Act"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal


Resolution: GA#10


Proposed by: Tommylandinia

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #10: Nuclear Arms Possession Act (Category: International Security; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: REALIZING that non WA members might not be hostile
ACKNOWLEDGING the fact that only WA members are required to comply with WA resolutions,
ACKNOWLEDGING weapons with nuclear capabilities are not the only way out
1.DECLARES nuclear weapons are a liability
2. REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands.
3. DECLARES that nations must have a maximum amount of weapons per population

Um...doesn't the description kinda exceed the limitations of a repeal?

[Defwa]

It would also be illegal as a replacement with its duplication and do-nothing clauses