NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] Partisan Politics

A place to spoil daily issues for those who haven't had them yet, snigger at typos, and discuss ideas for new ones.
User avatar
Cretox State
Diplomat
 
Posts: 808
Founded: Nov 04, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

[DRAFT] Partisan Politics

Postby Cretox State » Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:45 pm

Any feedback is appreciated, as always.

Partisan Politics

Validity: Banned guns, and large Black Market.

Description
Earlier today, a group of violent political extremists armed themselves with illicit firearms and tactical armor smuggled in from Dàguó and began marching on the Capitol. Local law enforcement and a SWAT team were unable to stop the perpetrators- that is, until they raided a nearby police precinct for seized military-grade automatics, culminating in a full-on battle right outside your office window.

Option 1
"How are we supposed to protect people from criminals with guns unless we have bigger guns? Or guns at all?" squeals what's got to be the scrawniest sheriff you've ever seen. "I'm talking way bigger. You can't discount the possibility that a perp might someday waltz into your fancy office with a fully automatic organ grinder. It could happen! We need a blank check and access to the best guns money can buy. It's the only way to keep people- and your office- safe."

Effect: the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a badly-trained cop with a ridiculously large gun

Option 2
"Had there been just one good patriot with his own concealed meat-grinding bone-breaking high-capacity peacemaker, he'd have fired up his laser sight and put down them goshdarned animals right dang there!" rants local redneck @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, who's taken to hunting deer by screaming wild conspiracies at them. "If yer givin' them dirty cops big guns, we need even bigger guns to protect ourselves from them cops who want to take our guns! Oh, and to stop them gun crazies."

Effect: citizens are protected by a nationwide system of mutually assured destruction

Option 3
"How do you think stuff like this gets into @@NAME@@ in the first place?" asks your Director of Customs, Border, and Trade Enforcement, slamming an enormous grenade launcher that he somehow managed to sneak past security down on your desk. "And no- it's not because I'm incompetent! If you'd just direct more funding to my department, we could stop incidents like these before they ever happen. That's live ammo, by the way."

Effect: men in dark suits confiscate toy slingshots at ports of entry

Option 4
"I've made millions, perhaps billions dealing against Dàguó," boasts coffee boy Edward Rump, who's either delusional or needs to be arrested for violating his security clearance. "Dàguó's clearly sponsoring this, believe me. This is perhaps the biggest operation in the history of shooting. They're sending people- not their best, believe me- they're sending people to destabilize governments, strong, powerful governments, and it's all a false flag. So many flags. Dàguó needs to be sanctioned, you don't mess with us, you don't, believe me. You just don't."

Effect: the nation employs a "shoot first" approach to foreign affairs
Last edited by Cretox State on Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.

The North Pacific Vice Delegate
Author: 11 GA + 3 SC resolutions, 4 issues, and a lot of drafts

Killer of Stats
Assume OOC

"above the level of needing to be told how English works" - Candlewhisper Archive
"pure legalese" - Araraukar
"barrel of nonsense" - Tinhampton
"Just hurry up and declare a coup" - Honeydewistania
"a joke with no punchline" - Minskiev
"purge me daddy" - Praeceps
GA 496
GA 503 (1st in category)
GA 504
GA 509 (1st in category)
GA 510
GA 512
GA 520
GA 523
GA 527
GA 529
GA 530
GA 535*

SC 318
SC 331
SC 333

Issue 1427
Issue 1433
Issue 1438
Issue 1444

User avatar
Cretox State
Diplomat
 
Posts: 808
Founded: Nov 04, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Cretox State » Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:46 pm

Reserved.

The North Pacific Vice Delegate
Author: 11 GA + 3 SC resolutions, 4 issues, and a lot of drafts

Killer of Stats
Assume OOC

"above the level of needing to be told how English works" - Candlewhisper Archive
"pure legalese" - Araraukar
"barrel of nonsense" - Tinhampton
"Just hurry up and declare a coup" - Honeydewistania
"a joke with no punchline" - Minskiev
"purge me daddy" - Praeceps
GA 496
GA 503 (1st in category)
GA 504
GA 509 (1st in category)
GA 510
GA 512
GA 520
GA 523
GA 527
GA 529
GA 530
GA 535*

SC 318
SC 331
SC 333

Issue 1427
Issue 1433
Issue 1438
Issue 1444

User avatar
Trotterdam
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9182
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Fri Dec 18, 2020 11:53 pm

Is this supposed to be a reversal specifically for the policy of completely banning guns even from government use, rather than the more common situation of just banning guns from civilians?

If so, I do think you're on to a viable idea, since I don't recall there being a specific followup issue to that decision yet. However, I don't think the issue as currently presented works. For one thing, a large group of people all smuggling guns into the nation unnoticed and forming a cohesive army unit is extremely rare. When anything remotely resembling that happens in real life it's in nations that are already falling apart (so militant groups can form slowly without the weak government having the strength to do something about it), not just a sudden surprise attack. And if such a rebel army did form, then putting a few more people with guns in their path, without large-scale military action, isn't going to be particularly effective at stopping them.

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22291
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Thu Jan 14, 2021 3:47 pm

Trotterdam wrote:Is this supposed to be a reversal specifically for the policy of completely banning guns even from government use, rather than the more common situation of just banning guns from civilians?


Yes. There's three tiers at the top end of gun restriction.

Maximum gun restriction prevents even the army from using firearms. Just below that, the army can but police can't. Just below that army and police can, but citizens can't.
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Frieden-und Freudenland
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 2251
Founded: Jul 30, 2015
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Frieden-und Freudenland » Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:41 pm

Cretox State wrote:Any feedback is appreciated, as always.

Partisan Politics

Validity: Banned guns, and large Black Market.

Description
Earlier today, a group of violent political extremists armed themselves with illicit firearms and tactical armor smuggled in from Dàguó and began marching on the Capitol. Local law enforcement and a SWAT team were unable to stop the perpetrators- that is, until they raided a nearby police precinct for seized military-grade automatics, culminating in a full-on battle right outside your office window.


At first I thought this issue was inspired by what happened at the Capitol on January 6, but hey, now I see that you posted this draft on December 19, and did not edit it later, so I have to say the description was eerily prophetic.

I really like this issue, though. :)

For Option 2, I'd suggest the guy emphasize the importance of protecting themselves from these violent groups, not from the police. In a situation where it is the police who are helpless and under-armed, it feels jarring to read an option where someone prospectively complains about being defenseless against the police. Maybe he could say something along the lines of "OK, but how are ordinary citizens like me supposed to protect themselves from this violent mob?"
When I write, I don't have an accent.

My issues

"Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)"
~Walt Whitman

User avatar
Trotterdam
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9182
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:25 pm

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Maximum gun restriction prevents even the army from using firearms. Just below that, the army can but police can't.
Oh, interesting. I didn't know the game distinguishes those two situations.

Frieden-und Freudenland wrote:At first I thought this issue was inspired by what happened at the Capitol on January 6, but hey, now I see that you posted this draft on December 19, and did not edit it later, so I have to say the description was eerily prophetic.
I don't see it as the same situation. While it varies by state, the US in general is not the kind of nation to try very hard to keep guns out of the hands of either its citizens or its police. While there have been criticisms levelled against police doing a poor job of resisting the riot for various reasons, "we don't have enough guns" wasn't one of those reasons.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21817
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Jan 29, 2021 8:17 pm

Option 1's effect is boring. This could be a slippery slope to dictatorship
If you're against political parties who support the CCP, then vote against the Australian Labor Party
The only reason why countries bid to host the games is for tourism. This is why countries plan to boycott the Beijing winter Olympics. By cancelling the 2020/21 Olympics, Japan is defacto recieving the same punishment as China, but Japan did nothing wrong since World War II
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads