Silly and/or Illegal GA Proposals. zOMG!

[The Lanthanides]

I mean, it could be argued, but don't you think copyright hinders free trade? (I mean, it's a necessity, but you can't exactly call copyright the furtherment of free trade.)

[The Dark Star Republic]

I mean, it could be argued, but don't you think copyright hinders free trade? (I mean, it's a necessity, but you can't exactly call copyright the furtherment of free trade.)

What is the purpose of this argument? The WA law on copyright is filed under Free Trade. Every single intellectual property law the WA or NSUN has ever passed has been filed under Free Trade. Unless you want to have them all retroactively declared illegal, there's no case here.

[The Lanthanides]

There is no purpose to this argument; we're merely arguing whether this law should be categorized as "Protective Tariffs" or "Free Trade". Anyway...

Recreational Drug Use Legalize
A resolution to ban, legalize, or encourage recreational drugs.
Category: Recreational Drug Use
Decision: Legalize
Proposed by: Irelandzia

Description: Legalize the use of recreational drugs because it makes the people more happy and laid back which prevents crime like in my nation there is no crime what-so-ever because i legalized it. A place without crime is a better place to live in with your family without worry of them being in any trouble or hurt.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 89 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 10 hours

"My nation" isn't the WA. Someone needs to nuke this.

[Kaboomlandia]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: schalovaihoff_1427493234

Repeal "Nuclear Arms Possession Act"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#10

Proposed by: Schalovaihoff

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: URGES the construction,possession and use of nuclear arms to be null void. Further more stating the use construction and etc of this arms can be extremely and potentially dangerous
1.the use of these nuclear weapons needs to (doesn't have to be) ratified in order for the national security of everyone to be strengthen
RECOMMENDS instead of using nuclear arms as a means to protect ourselves we use diplomatic resources
UNDERSTANDS nations may still use nuclear arms if they don't feel the need to follow law but repeal may lessen that
ACKNOWLEDGING we may need resources in order to defend ourselves but also need none members to feel comfortable and less hostile toward WA members (as some non members are hostile and do outnumber WA members )
REQUIRES nations are still allowed to posses nuclear weapons but still must follow guidelines of protection of weapons
1 protect weapons from being taken or used wrongly
2 nations don't use weapons foolishly such as it should be a last resource (although nations don't have to follow this but are strongly recommend )

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 88 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 5 hours

Does a complete lack of punctuation and bad grammar make it illegal?
Anyway, the bolded part is a metagaming violation.

[Flibbleites]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: schalovaihoff_1427493234

Repeal "Nuclear Arms Possession Act"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#10

Proposed by: Schalovaihoff

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: URGES the construction,possession and use of nuclear arms to be null void. Further more stating the use construction and etc of this arms can be extremely and potentially dangerous
1.the use of these nuclear weapons needs to (doesn't have to be) ratified in order for the national security of everyone to be strengthen
RECOMMENDS instead of using nuclear arms as a means to protect ourselves we use diplomatic resources
UNDERSTANDS nations may still use nuclear arms if they don't feel the need to follow law but repeal may lessen that
ACKNOWLEDGING we may need resources in order to defend ourselves but also need none members to feel comfortable and less hostile toward WA members (as some non members are hostile and do outnumber WA members )
REQUIRES nations are still allowed to posses nuclear weapons but still must follow guidelines of protection of weapons
1 protect weapons from being taken or used wrongly
2 nations don't use weapons foolishly such as it should be a last resource (although nations don't have to follow this but are strongly recommend )

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 88 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 5 hours

Does a complete lack of punctuation and bad grammar make it illegal?
Anyway, the bolded part is a metagaming violation.

No, but the fact that's it's still attempting to legislate in a repeal does make it illegal.

[Kaboomlandia]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: schalovaihoff_1427493234

Repeal "Nuclear Arms Possession Act"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#10

Proposed by: Schalovaihoff

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: URGES the construction,possession and use of nuclear arms to be null void. Further more stating the use construction and etc of this arms can be extremely and potentially dangerous
1.the use of these nuclear weapons needs to (doesn't have to be) ratified in order for the national security of everyone to be strengthen
RECOMMENDS instead of using nuclear arms as a means to protect ourselves we use diplomatic resources
UNDERSTANDS nations may still use nuclear arms if they don't feel the need to follow law but repeal may lessen that
ACKNOWLEDGING we may need resources in order to defend ourselves but also need none members to feel comfortable and less hostile toward WA members (as some non members are hostile and do outnumber WA members )
REQUIRES nations are still allowed to posses nuclear weapons but still must follow guidelines of protection of weapons
1 protect weapons from being taken or used wrongly
2 nations don't use weapons foolishly such as it should be a last resource (although nations don't have to follow this but are strongly recommend )

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 88 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 5 hours

Does a complete lack of punctuation and bad grammar make it illegal?
Anyway, the bolded part is a metagaming violation.

No, but the fact that's it's still attempting to legislate in a repeal does make it illegal.

Ah, that's the one I keep forgetting about. Glad you caught it though.
EDIT: Also the second time the author has tried to repeal this within 24 hours.

[Imperium Anglorum]

It's still not metagaming.

[Nurkama]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: irelandzia_1427475120

Recreational Drug Use Legalize

A resolution to ban, legalize, or encourage recreational drugs.


Category: Recreational Drug Use

Decision: Legalize

Proposed by: Irelandzia

Description: Legalize the use of recreational drugs because it makes the people more happy and laid back which prevents crime like in my nation there is no crime what-so-ever because i legalized it. A place without crime is a better place to live in with your family without worry of them being in any trouble or hurt.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 88 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 3 hours


This is awful.

[The Lanthanides]

Is the dang thing still up? I thought it would be LONG gone by now.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Is the dang thing still up? I thought it would be LONG gone by now.

If a proposal urgently "needs" to be removed - which is only ever really if it's about to hit quorum and there's nothing at vote (although the advent of the Discard obviates the need for intervention even here) or that it is so grossly offensive that it needs to be removed from sight before people see it - then submit a GHR.

For a routine proposal like this - there are poorly written drug proposals submitted every week, seemingly, which is one argument for removing the category, as has been discussed elsewhere - there is no "need". Despite their complete inactivity on the forums, the mods are very active gameside, and typically run sweeps every day or thereabouts.

[The Lanthanides]

If a proposal urgently "needs" to be removed - which is only ever really if it's about to hit quorum and there's nothing at vote (although the advent of the Discard obviates the need for intervention even here) or that it is so grossly offensive that it needs to be removed from sight before people see it - then submit a GHR.

For a routine proposal like this - there are poorly written drug proposals submitted every week, seemingly, which is one argument for removing the category, as has been discussed elsewhere - there is no "need". Despite their complete inactivity on the forums, the mods are very active gameside, and typically run sweeps every day or thereabouts.

Is it possible that the vast majority of people submitting drug proposals are on drugs at the time of submission? It would explain their low quality.

[Kaboomlandia]

If a proposal urgently "needs" to be removed - which is only ever really if it's about to hit quorum and there's nothing at vote (although the advent of the Discard obviates the need for intervention even here) or that it is so grossly offensive that it needs to be removed from sight before people see it - then submit a GHR.

For a routine proposal like this - there are poorly written drug proposals submitted every week, seemingly, which is one argument for removing the category, as has been discussed elsewhere - there is no "need". Despite their complete inactivity on the forums, the mods are very active gameside, and typically run sweeps every day or thereabouts.

Is it possible that the vast majority of people submitting drug proposals are on drugs at the time of submission? It would explain their low quality.

Could explain why there has only been a single resolution (repealed or not) ever passed in this category.

[Nurkama]

Is it possible that the vast majority of people submitting drug proposals are on drugs at the time of submission? It would explain their low quality.

Could explain why there has only been a single resolution (repealed or not) ever passed in this category.

Yep.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Could explain why there has only been a single resolution (repealed or not) ever passed in this category.

There've been three: UN Drug Act, Ban International Trafficking, and Essential Medications Act.

[Bears Armed Mission]

Limitations on Tabacco
A resolution to modify universal standards of healthcare.

Category: Health
Area of Effect: Healthcare
Proposed by: Merlin Hinson

Description: For years tobacco and similar products have been wreaking havoc on the lungs of society. Tobacco cigarettes are very popular and are also very dangerous. In the nation of Merlin Hinson, over 30% of the deaths are caused by heart disease. Together as the World Assembly, we can help lower that. Think of all the people that lives are affected by the deadly forces of tobacco.

*Acknowledging* - Tobacco is a very dangerous substance and causes many illnesses and deaths.

*Proposal* - Outlaw Tobacco and related products. This does not apply to other drugs; marijuana and alcohol, that depends on the nation's own legislature.

Approvals: 2 (Boram, Dharma negara)
Status: Lacking Support (requires 87 more approvals)
Voting Ends: in 3 days 6 hours

Wrong category (probably, at least at present), branding, and it's arguable whether the *Proposal* line actually counts as an operative clause.... Oh, and also the spelling mistake in its title, of course.

[The Dark Star Republic]

For years tobacco and similar products have been wreaking havoc on the lungs of society.

Did this line strike anyone else as inexplicably hilarious?

Definitely branding, not sure I agree on the other counts though.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

I agree about the category. It's only proposing outlawing a drug; it doesn't necessarily involve increased healthcare spending.

[Kaboomlandia]

What was the "Modify or repeal commendation act" dinged for?

[Flibbleites]

What was the "Modify or repeal commendation act" dinged for?

Attempting to change the rules of the game via a GA proposal.

[Kaboomlandia]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: dominion_of_compassion_1427598732

Repeal "Reducing Problem Gambling"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#123

Proposed by: Dominion Of Compassion

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #123: Reducing Problem Gambling (Category: Education and Creativity; Area of Effect: Educational) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: To begin with, only the negatives (very unlikely negatives, as gambling addiction is far less prevalent than other addictions). Gambling can be used in good ways, such as:
-mandatory lotteries to fund government projects, taking pressure and taxes off of corporations and individual income.
-allow anoutlet for entertainment and adrenaline rush in a safe, controlled, potentially helpful environment.
-stimulate government economy, assuming all casinos and other gambling outlets are completely and totally government owned,no exceptions, and all proceeds go straight to government usage; completley excluding paying executives and other government officials and/or agencies.
-the proceeds can be given to charity and humanitarian organizations, voluntarily or compulsory.
- not to mention, there is no such thing as "reducing problem gambling"; that cannot be defined by the government, but should be left up to the individual(s) to take use of the designated "help" facilities if they deem they need to.
-freedom to gamble as people please also opens up the job market: as more casinos and racing stadiums open, jobs, and the economy, will flourish

Approvals: 3 (The Arkam Asylum, Liberated Global Overstate, Czechelslovikivokistan)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 86 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 2 days 13 hours

No "REPEALS" clause.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: the_communist_papal_state_1427604386

Repeal "Sexual Privacy Act"

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#16

Proposed by: The Communist Papal State

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #16: Sexual Privacy Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument:

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #16: Sexual Privacy Act (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Issues:

Article 3, A:

"No Nation shall enact legislation prohibiting, criminalizing or otherwise regulating sexual acts between consenting individuals when practiced in the privacy of the home, or otherwise away from public exposure."

Complication:

This Article essentially provides a loophole that allows crimes to committed during sexual acts.

Article 3, B:

"Each Nation can define an age of consent. Should a Nation fail to define an age of consent, the age of majority in use in said Nation shall apply. Should a Nation fail to establish an age of majority, the individual will be considered above the age of consent for the purposes of the previous paragraph if he/she has entered puberty."

Complication:

This Article allows each Nation to create their own age of consent that can be easily abused by either being too young or old.

Article 4, A:

"No Nation shall establish an age of consent according to gender of the participating individuals or the nature of the sexual act."

Complication: This Article also shields individuals from being prosecuted for a crime because it is committed during a sexual act.

Approvals: 2 (The Communist Papal State, Czechelslovikivokistan)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 87 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days

No "REPEALS" clause.

[Bananaistan]

Uggh. I'd love to see a proper repeal without a repeals clause get to vote so we could get a firm ruling on why the blasted repeal clause is actually needed. It seems completely unreasonable that it is required just because the practice has been that passed repeals include such a clause considering the very first line in all of these can easily be taken as such a clause.

[Kaboomlandia]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL
ID: withoutadoubtmaynnaise_1427654675

Rights To More Than Just Men

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights

Strength: Strong

Proposed by: WithOutADoubtMaynnaise

Description: Rights Should Be Given To More Than Just The Human Race. Every Animal Should Have The Same Rights.

Every Nation Should Give Every Right A Human Has To Animals Of All Kind.

If Your Nation Has Freedom Of Speech Then Give It To Them!
If Everybody Can Vote In Your Nation Then Let Animals Vote In The Same Election. Your Dog Or Cat Has Opinions Too Then Why Not Let Them Express It.

Do The Right Thing Instead Of Every Man Being Equal We Shall Chant, "Every Being On Earth Is Equal".

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 89 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 3 days 8 hours

Hasn't the WA already legislated animal rights?
"Bloody stupid" can't be used for everything, but it defines this one nicely.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Hasn't the WA already legislated animal rights?

No.

[Ainocra]

There have been a few attempts but they tend to get shot down at vote.

Carnivores like me are largely responsible

[Kaboomlandia]

Still an optionality or ideological ban (if everybody can vote then let animals vote in the same election).
The misuse of capital letters is annoying.