NSG Senate Coffee Shop [NSG Senate]

[The Republic of Lanos]

You're already saying that we don't have any control. Yet I don't see any clashes with the police and armed forces versus these guys.

Senator, I point to you the controversy over the Internal Security Act and the proposed gun bills. Both of them were met with great opposition from parties with paramilitaries, and threats were made of "resistance", promising that the government would have to "come and get it [referring to guns]".

No clashes have occurred, but they have been threatened.

Which is why we need to stop fighting. Because:

Are you willing to become a criminal, senator?

Isn't going to help anything.

[Mishmahig]

I object to your tone, Senator.

I object to paramilitaries and people with military grade weaponry senator.

So do I, Senator, but you must agree that insults do nothing but inflame the situation, and lower the possibility of compromise and/or discussion.

[Finium]

I think we need a period of Détente, the authoritarians scale back the power of their organisations and we tone down the rhetoric.

I second this. We cannot afford to have this rip us apart.

Besides, we have other, more important laws to pass first.

Would you agree to the following?

THE FINIAN PEACE PLEDGE
*****
To limit the role of violence in the Aurentinian Senate

WE, THE SENATORS OF AURENTINIA, duly elected by the people to represent their interests and sustain a unified nation of peace, security and liberty, do hereby reject violence as means for political power.
WE reject party created, funded or operated militarized forces.
WE reject our right to carry weapons into the national capitol.
WE reject violent politicians and will refuse to compromise with parties that maintain an armed militia as a political act.

[The Realm of God]

I think we need a period of Détente, the authoritarians scale back the power of their organisations and we tone down the rhetoric.

I second this. We cannot afford to have this rip us apart.

Besides, we have other, more important laws to pass first.

Scale it back to 1500 people, and we will cease discussion or the issue, as a show of good faith.

[Unicario]

You're already saying that we don't have any control. Yet I don't see any clashes with the police and armed forces versus these guys.

Senator, I point to you the controversy over the Internal Security Act and the proposed gun bills. Both of them were met with great opposition from parties with paramilitaries, and threats were made of "resistance", promising that the government would have to "come and get it [referring to guns]".

No clashes have occurred, but they have been threatened.

You should understand, Senator, that people like having guns. It's not as if they want them to destroy democracy and seize power, they just want them to feel safe, knowing that if the unlikely situation arrives that they need to defend their country without the help of the police or army, they can do so, or even protect their property and land.

Restrictive gun laws and banning paramilitaries will just cause more insecurity and more upset against the current government. There needs to be some level of compromise, even if it's 1000 people just for a ceremonial purpose. Perhaps with talking it out and discussions, you can work the paramilitaries down to an unthreatening number and maybe even dissolve them, but this will only work if you have the support of those who possess the paramilitaries.

Forcing them into submission will just make them more resistant and ornery. Democracy requires compromise, and compromise requires diplomacy.

[Greater Pokarnia]

I'm not sure which leftist parties have paramilitaries other than the Communist and USLP, but I'd like it to be noted that our militia was only formed in response to the far right forming paramilitaries (especially when one of them openly declared that their mission was to "fight communists") before any attempts to imply we are of equal blame to them. I'm not sure what one would expect of us when our political opponents form a paramilitary whose mission statement is to fight us.

And now that both sides have agreed not to use said paramilitaries on each other, there is little point to that, yes?

I don't know about you, but to me the mere fact that a paramilitary was formed with the intention of fighting us and is still under the same leadership (which is still very anti-communist) as it originally was is fairly threatening, regardless of what they've now promised to do. I can't speak for my comrades, but I'd be opposed to our party disbanding its militia until our opponents disband their paramilitaries.

[Hathradic States]

I second this. We cannot afford to have this rip us apart.

Besides, we have other, more important laws to pass first.

Would you agree to the following?

THE FINIAN PEACE PLEDGE
*****
To limit the role of violence in the Aurentinian Senate

WE, THE SENATORS OF AURENTINIA, duly elected by the people to represent their interests and sustain a unified nation of peace, security and liberty, do hereby reject violence as means for political power.
WE reject party created, funded or operated militarized forces.
WE reject our right to carry weapons and will not bring weapons into the national capitol.
WE reject violent politicians and will refuse to compromise with parties that maintain an armed militia as a political act.

No.
No.
No.

[Unicario]

I second this. We cannot afford to have this rip us apart.

Besides, we have other, more important laws to pass first.

Scale it back to 1500 people, and we will cease discussion or the issue, as a show of good faith.

Let it be noted that Chairman Hath proposed this, and the anti-paramilitary lobby rejected it.

[Geilinor]

Then the paramilitaries should be nonpartisan. Being a wing of a political party makes a paramilitary partisan.

Maybe the other parties should raise their own paramilitaries, so we are on equal footing?

We aren't that overzealous. I don't think my party would support a paramilitary. Nor the Progressive-Conservatives or the Totally Rad Party.

[Mishmahig]

And now that both sides have agreed not to use said paramilitaries on each other, there is little point to that, yes?

I don't know about you, but to me the mere fact that a paramilitary was formed with the intention of fighting us and is still under the same leadership (which is still very anti-communist) as it originally was is fairly threatening, regardless of what they've now promised to do. I can't speak for my comrades, but I'd be opposed to our party disbanding its militia until our opponents disband their paramilitaries.

Yet when the Senate attempts to disband all paramilitaries, we are met with opposition from both sides.

[Ceannairceach]

Then the paramilitaries should be nonpartisan. Being a wing of a political party makes a paramilitary partisan.

Maybe the other parties should raise their own paramilitaries, so we are on equal footing?

Why, so we can devolve into a state of anarchic gang warfare, where the party with the biggest army rules? No, Senator, I prefer our democracy to that chaotic pipe nightmare.

[Hathradic States]

I second this. We cannot afford to have this rip us apart.

Besides, we have other, more important laws to pass first.

Scale it back to 1500 people, and we will cease discussion or the issue, as a show of good faith.

Agreed.

OOC: You have to await for Arc to get on for our factbook to show it.

[Finium]

Would you agree to the following?

THE FINIAN PEACE PLEDGE
*****
To limit the role of violence in the Aurentinian Senate

WE, THE SENATORS OF AURENTINIA, duly elected by the people to represent their interests and sustain a unified nation of peace, security and liberty, do hereby reject violence as means for political power.
WE reject party created, funded or operated militarized forces.
WE reject our right to carry weapons and will not bring weapons into the national capitol.
WE reject violent politicians and will refuse to compromise with parties that maintain an armed militia as a political act.

No.
No.
No.

Do you feel threatened by the senate that you serve in? Do you find yourself afraid that you will be killed or assaulted by the senate you serve in? Are you terrified that the senate you serve in is actively plotting your downfall?

[Greater Pokarnia]

I don't know about you, but to me the mere fact that a paramilitary was formed with the intention of fighting us and is still under the same leadership (which is still very anti-communist) as it originally was is fairly threatening, regardless of what they've now promised to do. I can't speak for my comrades, but I'd be opposed to our party disbanding its militia until our opponents disband their paramilitaries.

Yet when the Senate attempts to disband all paramilitaries, we are met with opposition from both sides.

While I'm conflicted about the infringement of the right to assembly that the ISA would bring, I do believe that the disbanding of paramilitaries is a good thing and I will vote yes on the ISA.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Scale it back to 1500 people, and we will cease discussion or the issue, as a show of good faith.

Agreed.

OOC: You have to await for Arc to get on for our factbook to show it.

Compromise has been reached.

There is a God.

[Costa Alegria]

You're already saying that we don't have any control. Yet I don't see any clashes with the police and armed forces versus these guys.

We don't. The only reason there hasn't been any clashes is that no one wants to find out what happens lest they piss the state off.

We are attempting compromise, Lanos. However, it seems as if a bulk of the anti-paramilitary group will not compromise.

I haven't seen any compromise anywhere from you.

Agreed. Because I'm getting tired of being called a criminal and terrorist indirectly for supporting any number of things by members of my own party.

No one is calling you a terrorist Lanos. I suggest you stop being so melodramatic. No one is falling for that no more.

[Zweite Alaje]

Maybe the other parties should raise their own paramilitaries, so we are on equal footing?

We aren't that overzealous. I don't think my party would support a paramilitary. Nor the Progressive-Conservatives or the Totally Rad Party.

That is unfortunate. As usual the liberals refuse to be pragmatic.

[Hathradic States]

No.
No.
No.

Do you feel threatened by the senate that you serve in? Do you find yourself afraid that you will be killed or assaulted by the senate you serve in? Are you terrified that the senate you serve in is actively plotting your downfall?

Many have opposed our party since it's creation, Senator. One such party is now the largest party in the Senate. We have every reason to fear them.

However, we have agreed to Realm of God's compromise.

[Ceannairceach]

Agreed.

OOC: You have to await for Arc to get on for our factbook to show it.

Compromise has been reached.

There is a God.

No, it hasn't. I don't believe that TROG has been given the authority to negotiate on behalf of the Progress Coalition, nor the PC, nor the anti-paramilitary movement in general.

[The Realm of God]

Scale it back to 1500 people, and we will cease discussion or the issue, as a show of good faith.

Agreed.

OOC: You have to await for Arc to get on for our factbook to show it.

I now ask this arguement to cease as Hath has kept his end of the bargain. The first step towards Détente has been achieved and I ask for the cooperation of my fellow senators.

[The Republic of Lanos]

I suggest you stop being so melodramatic. No one is falling for that no more.

Are you willing to become a criminal, senator?

I would ask that you do the same, senator.

[Geilinor]

Senator, I point to you the controversy over the Internal Security Act and the proposed gun bills. Both of them were met with great opposition from parties with paramilitaries, and threats were made of "resistance", promising that the government would have to "come and get it [referring to guns]".

No clashes have occurred, but they have been threatened.

You should understand, Senator, that people like having guns. It's not as if they want them to destroy democracy and seize power, they just want them to feel safe, knowing that if the unlikely situation arrives that they need to defend their country without the help of the police or army, they can do so, or even protect their property and land.

Threats were made along the lines of, "If you want to restrict our guns, you'll have to come for them. We're prepared to fight for them and we might use them against you."

[Hathradic States]

We are attempting compromise, Lanos. However, it seems as if a bulk of the anti-paramilitary group will not compromise.

I haven't seen any compromise anywhere from you.

Yes, because cutting back by 90% clearly isn't a compromise.

[Unicario]

You should understand, Senator, that people like having guns. It's not as if they want them to destroy democracy and seize power, they just want them to feel safe, knowing that if the unlikely situation arrives that they need to defend their country without the help of the police or army, they can do so, or even protect their property and land.

Threats were made along the lines of, "If you want to restrict our guns, you'll have to come for them. We're prepared to fight for them and we might use them against you."

Do you believe every threat ever made?

[Finium]

Do you feel threatened by the senate that you serve in? Do you find yourself afraid that you will be killed or assaulted by the senate you serve in? Are you terrified that the senate you serve in is actively plotting your downfall?

Many have opposed our party since it's creation, Senator. One such party is now the largest party in the Senate. We have every reason to fear them.

However, we have agreed to Realm of God's compromise.

Have they threatened you, or have they opposed your politics? If they have threatened your existence, then I fully support your military, but if they have only opposed you policies, then you are creating a force to use violence for political purposes.