AWARE that many nations permit and/or encourage their citizens to keep firearms for various lawful purposes, including sport and family protection;
ALSO AWARE that firearms create a risk of serious injury and death not only for home invaders but for family members as well;
WORRIED that children, because of their youth and inexperience, are particularly susceptible to the risk of serious injury and death posed by firearms;
CONVINCED that many of the risks to children posed by firearms could be reduced by simple safety measures;
RESOLVED that member nations have an obligation to ensure that children are protected from the risks posed by firearms kept in their home;
Hereby,
1. DEFINES a "child" for the purposes of this Act as "any individual under the national threshold of majority, or equivalent;"
2. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a firearm to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a firearm;
3. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;
4. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this Act to provide a firearm to a child (or allow a child to access a firearm) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and proper use, and has demonstrated knowledge thereof;
5. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this Act to provide a firearm to a child under proper supervision for the purposes of educating the child in firearm safety and proper use;
6. MANDATES that an individual who lives in the same home as a child, or who may regularly encounter a child, must demonstrate knowledge of proper firearm use and safety before acquiring a firearm; especially, knowledge of how to reduce the risk posed by a firearm to the health and safety of children;
7. AFFIRMS that nothing in this Act affects the ability of member nations to legalize or prohibit firearm ownership through national or international law.
Child Firearm Safety Act A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.
AWARE that many nations permit and/or encourage their citizens to keep firearms for various lawful purposes, including sport and family protection;
ALSO AWARE that firearms create a risk of serious injury and death not only for home invaders but for family members as well;
WORRIED that children, because of their youth and inexperience, are particularly susceptible to the risk of serious injury and death posed by firearms;
CONVINCED that many of the risks to children posed by firearms could be reduced by simple safety measures;
RESOLVED that member nations have an obligation to ensure that children are protected from the risks posed by firearms kept in their home;
Hereby,
1. DEFINES a "child" for the purposes of this Act as "any individual under the national threshold of majority, or equivalent,."
2. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a gun to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a gun;
3. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;
4. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this Act to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use;
5. MANDATES that an individual who lives in the same home as a child, or who may regularly encounter a child, must demonstrate knowledge of firearm safety before acquiring a firearm; especially, knowledge of how to reduce the risk posed by a firearm to the health and safety of children;
6. AFFIRMS that nothing in this Act affects the ability of member nations to legalize or prohibit firearm ownership through national or international law.
Child Firearm Safety Act A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.
AWARE that many nations permit and/or encourage their citizens to keep firearms for various lawful purposes, including sport and family protection;
ALSO AWARE that firearms create a risk of serious injury and death not only for home invaders but for family members as well;
WORRIED that children, because of their youth and inexperience, are particularly susceptible to the risk of serious injury and death posed by firearms;
CONVINCED that many of the risks to children posed by firearms could be reduced by simple safety measures;
RESOLVED that member nations have an obligation to ensure that children are protected from the risks posed by firearms kept in their home;
Hereby,
1. DEFINES a "child" for the purposes of this Act as "an individual who has not yet reached the national age of majority and/or is not yet recognized as an adult in the child's nation of residence."
2. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a gun to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a gun;
3. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;
4. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this Act to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use;
5. MANDATES that an individual who lives in the same home as a child, or who may regularly encounter a child, must demonstrate knowledge of firearm safety before acquiring a firearm; especially, knowledge of how to reduce the risk posed by a firearm to the health and safety of children;
6. AFFIRMS that nothing in this Act affects the ability of member nations to legalize or prohibit firearm ownership through national or international law.
Child Firearm Safety Act A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.
AWARE that many nations permit and/or encourage their citizens to keep firearms for various lawful purposes, including sport and family protection;
ALSO AWARE that firearms create a risk of serious injury and death not only for home invaders but for family members as well;
WORRIED that children, because of their youth and inexperience, are particularly susceptible to the risk of serious injury and death posed by firearms;
CONVINCED that many of the risks to children posed by firearms could be reduced by simple safety measures;
RESOLVED that member nations have an obligation to ensure that children are protected from the risks posed by firearms kept in their home;
Hereby,
1. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a gun to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a gun;
2. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;
3. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use;
4. MANDATES that an individual who lives in the same home as a child, or who may regularly encounter a child, must demonstrate knowledge of firearm safety before acquiring a firearm; especially, knowledge of how to reduce the risk posed by a firearm to the health and safety of children;
5. AFFIRMS that nothing in this act affects the ability of member nations to legalize or prohibit firearm ownership through national or international law.
As a gun control proposal, this will probably need a lot of work before it can attract majority support. I welcome and appreciate comments, suggestions, and criticisms.
Best Regards
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 11:44 am
by Phonencia
If the kids' parents don't give enough of a shit about their kids to A. teach them how to NOT shoot themselves and B. keep guns out of their unsupervised hands
Then I'd say they prolly don't need to have kids. Seriously, this is an issue of common sense and logic, an international law for it is unnecessary. Just do a few public service announcements about the importance of not being a dumbass and NOT teaching your kids about guns and gun safety. Ignorance is weakness.
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:12 pm
by Alqania
Princess Christine was positively surprised by the realisation that she was about to declare support for a proposal coming from the Cowardly Pacifists, so it was in a light tone that she took the floor.
"The Queendom already has in place the educational requirements of this proposal, not only for the persons here referenced but for any and every person desiring gun ownership. While this issue may intuitively not be perceived as very international, we do believe that the right of every child to a safe home environment does trump member states' claims to national sovereignty over gun control. We suspect that getting this proposal passed may prove a rather challenging endeavour, but as currently written, we would certainly give it our vote."
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:25 pm
by Random Rhyme
Against and here is why:
The Proposal is useless. If people are stupid enough to let there Children Posses fire arms, that`s there fault. Another thing, there is no reason for something like this, think if in fact a child got a gun, assuming that they Lock Picked a safe or found where they where, both of which are highy unlikely with Good parents, they then get the gun, they probably don`t know how to turn the safety off. Assuming they can turn the safety off, most people don`t keep loaded guns, and if they do, there usually handguns they carry. Most the time the Ammo is kept seperate from the gun, but let`s assume that the child had the ammo and knew how to load the gun. The Child most likely knows what a gun does, so unless there 2 (Which most two year olds can``t pick up a gun) nothing will happen.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:32 am
by Dagguerro
My only complaint is that this:
3. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use;
Could potentially allow "wriggle room" for people to claim its legal to give children guns, as long as they are trained, even if guns are heavily regulated or banned to the general population. I know this is very minor and should (in theory) be covered by point 5 but still. Plus it could potentially act as a soft blocker on outright banning firearms to children or firearms in general in a future resolution (unlikely as that would be).
Other than that...can't see anything offensive. Although given how heavily regulated guns are in our nation it doesn't really matter to us if this passes or not. For the record would probably vote in favour.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:34 am
by Alqania
"In light of His Excellency Lord Daniel Swift's comments, perhaps the following addition would be prudent", Princess Christine suggested.
3. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this act to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use;
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:20 am
by Dagguerro
That would completely clear it up, yes.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:30 am
by Ainocra
In the star empire all citizens are required to own firearms. All minors are educated at military academies wherein weapons training is a part of the coursework.
So we cannot see that this will have an affect on us one way or the other. However one should define child for the purposes of this draft.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:58 am
by Charles Cerebella
With the addition of Deputy Ambassador Princess Christine's amendment this has my support.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:00 am
by Hungramy
Against.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:07 am
by Brotherhood Steel the 2nd
The Dominon of the Brotherhood Steel the 2nd allows all citizens from the ages 16 and up to be allowed to be in possession of firearms. Since we are a military driven society, all citizens of thw Dominion from an early age are brought up on gun safety and handling techniques. As such, we see no reason there needs to be an international law when it is clearly up to the individual nations' discression on imposing these types of laws.
So therefore, I am against this proposal.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:07 am
by Wind in the Willows
Parents should not be leaving firearms near children in the first place. They should be storing it somewhere were the child cannot access.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:27 am
by Cowardly Pacifists
Alqania wrote:Princess Christine was positively surprised by the realisation that she was about to declare support for a proposal coming from the Cowardly Pacifists,
I welcome your support. I guess I hadn't realized that our relationship with the Queendom had soured so much that the Princess finds herself surprised to support our endeavors.
The changes to CLARIFIES clause requested by Dagguero and Alqania (and supported by Charles Cerebella) have been made.
Ainocra wrote:In the star empire all citizens are required to own firearms. All minors are educated at military academies wherein weapons training is a part of the coursework.
So we cannot see that this will have an affect on us one way or the other. However one should define child for the purposes of this draft.
I added a "DEFINES" clause, but I don't think it's strictly necessary. The plain, ordinary concept of a "child" is good enough for me.
I'm not willing to wade into the age of majority quagmire with this proposal. If the definition becomes a contentious issue, I'll likely just change it to "a child is an individual that fits that description as it is commonly understood in that child's nation of residence." That's really good enough, I think. If nations want to try to loophole this proposal by claiming that they have a wild definition of what a "child" is, I'm happy to let them have their loophole in exchange for the ridicule of the international community.
The only coherent opposition argument I've heard is the traditional Nat Sov refrain that these provisions are too obvious and we don't need international law since most nations already cover this with domestic law. Obviously, I simply deny the premise. I'm not convinced that all nations do have such laws (at least one nation in this debate has said that there's "no good reason" for this proposal because if a kid got a hold of a gun they "probably don't know how to turn the safety off.") (Update: that nation has since dissolved).
Alqania wrote:Princess Christine was positively surprised by the realisation that she was about to declare support for a proposal coming from the Cowardly Pacifists,
I welcome your support. I guess I hadn't realized that our relationship with the Queendom had soured so much that the Princess finds herself surprised to support our endeavors.
The changes to CLARIFIES clause requested by Dagguero and Alqania (and supported by Charles Cerebella) have been made.
Ainocra wrote:In the star empire all citizens are required to own firearms. All minors are educated at military academies wherein weapons training is a part of the coursework.
So we cannot see that this will have an affect on us one way or the other. However one should define child for the purposes of this draft.
I added a "DEFINES" clause, but I don't think it's strictly necessary. The plain, ordinary concept of a "child" is good enough for me.
I'm not willing to wade into the age of majority quagmire with this proposal. If the definition becomes a contentious issue, I'll likely just change it to "a child is an individual that fits that description as it is commonly understood in that child's nation of residence." That's really good enough, I think. If nations want to try to loophole this proposal by claiming that they have a wild definition of what a "child" is, I'm happy to let them have their loophole in exchange for the ridicule of the international community.
The only coherent opposition argument I've heard is the traditional Nat Sov refrain that these provisions are too obvious and we don't need international law since most nations already cover this with domestic law. Obviously, I simply deny the premise. I'm not convinced that all nations do have such laws (at least one nation in this debate has said that there's "no good reason" for this proposal because if a kid got a hold of a gun they "probably don't know how to turn the safety off.") (Update: that nation has since dissolved).
This seems to be more of a National issue, but we would support it anyway as we are all in favour of gun control.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:48 pm
by Phonencia
Wind in the Willows wrote:Parents should not be leaving firearms near children in the first place. They should be storing it somewhere were the child cannot access.
Oooooor (and this is a crazy idea here, I know) they could just teach their kids what guns are, what they do and not to touch them...
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:07 pm
by Cowardly Pacifists
United Federation of Canada wrote:This seems to be more of a National issue, but we would support it anyway as we are all in favour of gun control.
I can sympathize with the Nat Sov principle that gun laws should largely be a matter of national preference. National decisions on firearms have mostly local consequences. It should largely be up to national and local populations to decide what level of gun control (if any) they wish to have in their community. For the most part, nations should be trusted to be capable of deciding for themselves if the benefits of a particular regulatory scheme (or lack thereof) are worth the costs.
However, the protection of children is most certainly an international issue that takes precedence over national preferences; one which this Assembly has seen fit to legislate onmanytimes. I do not think it too much of an imposition to insist on simple rules that will help protect children from the danger of firearms in their home, and I certainly think that protecting children from a leading cause of injury and death is worthy of international attention.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:34 pm
by Sanctaria
Perhaps the Ambassador would care to use "threshold of majority", as my resolution combating child abuse did. Not only would it set a trend, but it seems to be the most agreeable since it encompasses nations that do not use "age" as a method of determining adulthood. It would also make that particular clause shorter.
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:54 pm
by The Dourian Embassy
Sanctaria wrote:Perhaps the Ambassador would care to use "threshold of majority", as my resolution combating child abuse did. Not only would it set a trend, but it seems to be the most agreeable since it encompasses nations that do not use "age" as a method of determining adulthood. It would also make that particular clause shorter.
It's a trend we should probably encourage, I think.
I find myself strangely enough not opposing this.
This isn't strictly necessary as an international law, but I think it's neutral enough and limited enough that I can abstain, or even support it.
Sanctaria wrote:Perhaps the Ambassador would care to use "threshold of majority", as my resolution combating child abuse did. Not only would it set a trend, but it seems to be the most agreeable since it encompasses nations that do not use "age" as a method of determining adulthood. It would also make that particular clause shorter.
It's a trend we should probably encourage, I think.
Indeed.
As for supporting this resolution, my nation encourages restrictive gun laws and has no problem giving it's backing at this time. Provisionally, of course, Ambassador.
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:39 am
by Ainocra
I will have to disagree with you over the scope of this issue.
You are basically trying to tell people how to raise their children which is hardly an international issue.
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:19 am
by Dagguerro
Ainocra wrote:I will have to disagree with you over the scope of this issue.
You are basically trying to tell people how to raise their children which is hardly an international issue.
On the other hand you could take the view that its a child safety issue. Which most definitely IS suitable for regulation by the WA (see also GAR#222).
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:12 am
by Cowardly Pacifists
Ainocra wrote:I will have to disagree with you over the scope of this issue.
You are basically trying to tell people how to raise their children which is hardly an international issue.
Dagguerro is right: this isn't about telling individuals how to raise their children. Under this Act, parents are free to teach their child how to shoot deer or burglars or whatever. Kids just have to demonstrate knowledge about firearm safety first - a minimal regulation when you consider how dangerous a firearm is to a child who doesn't fully understand it yet.
Even if you want to say that giving untrained children access to a gun (negligently or otherwise) is a parenting decision, it is still one of those parenting decisions (like the decision to beat one's child) that the WA should be regulating in the name of improving child welfare.
The Dourian Embassy wrote: It's a trend we should probably encourage, I think.
Indeed.
As for supporting this resolution, my nation encourages restrictive gun laws and has no problem giving it's backing at this time. Provisionally, of course, Ambassador.
I also agree that trending toward "threshold of majority" and away from the historically problematic "age of majority" is a wise move and I've altered the proposal accordingly.
Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:33 am
by Alqania
Princess Christine was in a productive mood.
"A further concern with clause 4 has come up within the Alqanian Permanent Representation, namely that it ought to be clarified that this proposal would not hinder firearm safety education itself. After all, learning how to use a firearm safely may require access to a firearm. Perhaps something along the lines of this could be added?"
4. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this Act to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use, or under proper supervision as part of such education;
As for supporting this resolution, my nation encourages restrictive gun laws and has no problem giving it's backing at this time. Provisionally, of course, Ambassador.
I also agree that trending toward "threshold of majority" and away from the historically problematic "age of majority" is a wise move and I've altered the proposal accordingly.
Glad I could assist.
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:25 am
by Cowardly Pacifists
Alqania wrote:Princess Christine was in a productive mood.
"A further concern with clause 4 has come up within the Alqanian Permanent Representation, namely that it ought to be clarified that this proposal would not hinder firearm safety education itself. After all, learning how to use a firearm safely may require access to a firearm. Perhaps something along the lines of this could be added?"
4. CLARIFIES that notwithstanding the above provisions, it is not unlawful under this Act to provide a gun to a child (or allow a child to access a gun) if that child has received an education in firearm safety and has demonstrated knowledge of firearm safety and proper use, or under proper supervision as part of such education;
I thank the Queendom for their continued interest in this project. I have made the appropriate change, please let me know if the new provision 5 is adequate.
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 11:34 am