NSG Senate Coffee Shop [NSG Senate]

[Unicario]

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ISA.

I'M TALKING ABOUT AFTER THE ISA.

Then you rely on the government having a system of checks and balances to ensure that such tyranny by majority will never occur.

That, however, requires input, cooperation, and compromise, from both sides.

A liberal senator already admitted to tyranny by majority...

[Costa Alegria]

You can read, right? Party Security Force.

You can call it that but that doesn't stop it being what it is. A paramilitary.

[Greater Pokarnia]

They should be dismantled. Though we now our opponents have promised not to attack other parties their threats of openly fighting the police should anybody attempt to dismantle their paramilitaries... well, it doesn't reassure me at least that they'll keep that promise forever, to say the least. I can't speak for the rest of my party though, and if they deem it reasonable to disband the Spartacus League while other parties maintain their forces I'll go along with it. Nonetheless the Spartacus League is hardly a paramilitary. It's essentially just a bunch of workers with rifles.

That's a paramilitary, senator.

Perhaps, but it's really more easily related to a security force, and the Spartacus League is not paid. It's just meant to meet security basics for the party and it will comply with any laws passed and has no intention of acting as vigilantes or resisting the police.

[Mishmahig]

Then you rely on the government having a system of checks and balances to ensure that such tyranny by majority will never occur.

That, however, requires input, cooperation, and compromise, from both sides.

A liberal senator already admitted to tyranny by majority...

I know, Senator. Which is why it is of utmost importance that we institute these checks and balances before things go too far.

[Unicario]

A liberal senator already admitted to tyranny by majority...

I know, Senator. Which is why it is of utmost importance that we institute these checks and balances before things go too far.

Quite, unfortunately, I'm not the leader of the NIFP, so my agreeing to your words is worthless.

[Costa Alegria]

The Internal Security Act would not ban political ideology. It would only ban paramilitary forces.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ISA.

I'M TALKING ABOUT AFTER THE ISA.

And what in all that is holy convinced you that the government would ban political ideologies? Hmm?

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we shouldn't allow these groups of people with paramilitaries. Paranoia.

[Unicario]

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ISA.

I'M TALKING ABOUT AFTER THE ISA.

And what in all that is holy convinced you that the government would ban political ideologies? Hmm?

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we shouldn't allow these groups of people with paramilitaries. Paranoia.

Senator Costa, in the kindest words possible, shut up.

I am no example of fucking paranoia in paramilitaries. I'm taking examples from most modern democracies, which enforce a very narrow, moderate spectrum, and ban radical parties.

I am merely concerned that there will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP, I'm not paranoid, I'm a concerned citizen voicing my issues.

So please stop putting words in my mouth.

[The Republic of Lanos]

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ISA.

I'M TALKING ABOUT AFTER THE ISA.

And what in all that is holy convinced you that the government would ban political ideologies? Hmm?

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we shouldn't allow these groups of people with paramilitaries. Paranoia.

Senator, you're not helping your cause or anyone else's by using things like this.

[Hathradic States]

Partisan Arms Limitation Talks

RECOGNIZING that large paramilitaries are a threat to our nation
ACKNOWLEDGING that mass disarmament would serve only to inflame those in command of said paramilitaries

Section 1. On Paramilitaries
1a. A paramilitary is hereby defined as an armed force of more than one Hundred men
1b. A paramilitary that is attached to a political body, which is defined as any body with members in the Senate, cannot exceed more than One Thousand and Five Hundred people
1c. A paramilitary cannot use armored vehicles with weapons with a bore diameter larger than One-Half of an inch
1d. A paramilitary cannot posses weapons which fire in fully automatic, which is defined as the ability to fire more than three rounds with one trigger pull
1e. A paramilitary cannot posses chemical or biological weapons

[Shrillland]

In any case, let us move on to issues of moment. This will be decided later on.

[The Realm of God]

Partisan Arms Limitation Talks

RECOGNIZING that large paramilitaries are a threat to our nation
ACKNOWLEDGING that mass disarmament would serve only to inflame those in command of said paramilitaries

Section 1. On Paramilitaries
1a. A paramilitary is hereby defined as an armed force of more than one Hundred men
1b. A paramilitary that is attached to a political body, which is defined as any body with members in the Senate, cannot exceed more than One Thousand and Five Hundred people
1c. A paramilitary cannot use armored vehicles with weapons with a bore diameter larger than One-Half of an inch
1d. A paramilitary cannot posses weapons which fire in fully automatic, which is defined as the ability to fire more than three rounds with one trigger pull
1e. A paramilitary cannot posses chemical or biological weapons

Support.

[Greater Pokarnia]

I am no example of fucking paranoia in paramilitaries. I'm taking examples from most modern democracies, which enforce a very narrow, moderate spectrum, and ban radical parties.

I am merely concerned that there will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP, I'm not paranoid, I'm a concerned citizen voicing my issues.

I will oppose any bill banning parties or ideologies, if that helps ease your concerns any.

[Greater Pokarnia]

Support.

Also support.

[Geilinor]

And what in all that is holy convinced you that the government would ban political ideologies? Hmm?

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we shouldn't allow these groups of people with paramilitaries. Paranoia.

Senator Costa, in the kindest words possible, shut up.

I am no example of fucking paranoia in paramilitaries. I'm taking examples from most modern democracies, which enforce a very narrow, moderate spectrum, and ban radical parties.

I am merely concerned that there will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP, I'm not paranoid, I'm a concerned citizen voicing my issues.

So please stop putting words in my mouth.

There will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP. We will establish a strong democracy with a good system of checks and balances that does not ban any political parties. Perhaps we should pass legislation that does those things first, then come back to paramilitaries.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Partisan Arms Limitation Talks

RECOGNIZING that large paramilitaries are a threat to our nation
ACKNOWLEDGING that mass disarmament would serve only to inflame those in command of said paramilitaries

Section 1. On Paramilitaries
1a. A paramilitary is hereby defined as an armed force of more than one Hundred men
1b. A paramilitary that is attached to a political body, which is defined as any body with members in the Senate, cannot exceed more than One Thousand and Five Hundred people
1c. A paramilitary cannot use armored vehicles with weapons with a bore diameter larger than One-Half of an inch
1d. A paramilitary cannot posses weapons which fire in fully automatic, which is defined as the ability to fire more than three rounds with one trigger pull
1e. A paramilitary cannot posses chemical or biological weapons

Support.

[Geilinor]

I am no example of fucking paranoia in paramilitaries. I'm taking examples from most modern democracies, which enforce a very narrow, moderate spectrum, and ban radical parties.

I am merely concerned that there will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP, I'm not paranoid, I'm a concerned citizen voicing my issues.

I will oppose any bill banning parties or ideologies, if that helps ease your concerns any.

I will do the same. If that doesn't ease concerns, I will voice my support for the Partisan Arms Limitation Talks.

[Costa Alegria]

Senator Costa, in the kindest words possible, shut up.

Why senator? Are you getting a little frustrated? Scared? Paranoid?

I am no example of fucking paranoia in paramilitaries.

Clearly. Of course, your concern regarding that the government seeks to ban your party or any others for that matter not to mention all the other "concerns" you have would not in no way be an example of someone who is seeing boogeymen where none exist.

I'm taking examples from most modern democracies, which enforce a very narrow, moderate spectrum, and ban radical parties.

And? Had we adopted said stance, we would have banned your party and any on the opposite side of the spectrum a long, long time ago. As they currently have representation and are able to vote and propose legislation, I have no idea why you would think something like this.

I am merely concerned that there will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP, I'm not paranoid, I'm a concerned citizen voicing my issues.

And your concerns are misplaced, senator. The government has no intentions on banning political parties. This senator has no intentions on banning political parties, no matter how full of characters they may be.

So please stop putting words in my mouth.

Considering my opposition did exactly that, I'd sincerely hope you aren't being serious when you say this.

Senator, you're not helping your cause or anyone else's by using things like this.

Why? It's paranoia, is it not? This, if anything, serves to reinforce my proposal for the disbandment of paramilitaries.

[Aeken]

You guys are getting pretty heated now. I suggest dropping it.

[Othelos]

Senator Costa, in the kindest words possible, shut up.

Why senator? Are you getting a little frustrated? Scared? Paranoid?

I am no example of fucking paranoia in paramilitaries.

Clearly. Of course, your concern regarding that the government seeks to ban your party or any others for that matter not to mention all the other "concerns" you have would not in no way be an example of someone who is seeing boogeymen where none exist.

I'm taking examples from most modern democracies, which enforce a very narrow, moderate spectrum, and ban radical parties.

And? Had we adopted said stance, we would have banned your party and any on the opposite side of the spectrum a long, long time ago. As they currently have representation and are able to vote and propose legislation, I have no idea why you would think something like this.

I am merely concerned that there will not be an attempt to outlaw the NIFP, I'm not paranoid, I'm a concerned citizen voicing my issues.

And your concerns are misplaced, senator. The government has no intentions on banning political parties. This senator has no intentions on banning political parties, no matter how full of characters they may be.

So please stop putting words in my mouth.

Considering my opposition did exactly that, I'd sincerely hope you aren't being serious when you say this.

Senator, you're not helping your cause or anyone else's by using things like this.

Why? It's paranoia, is it not? This, if anything, serves to reinforce my proposal for the disbandment of paramilitaries.

You seriously need to chill out.

[Costa Alegria]

You guys are getting pretty heated now. I suggest dropping it.

I will when the opposition stops misrepresenting what I say.

[The Republic of Lanos]

You guys are getting pretty heated now. I suggest dropping it.

I will when the opposition stops misrepresenting what I say.

Calling them paranoid isn't going to help shut them up.

[Costa Alegria]

You seriously need to chill out.

That's not even me being angry. That's me being...advantageous.

[DuThaal Craftworld]

I will oppose any bill banning parties or ideologies, if that helps ease your concerns any.

I will do the same. If that doesn't ease concerns, I will voice my support for the Partisan Arms Limitation Talks.

Why, if I may, is such a talk necessary? Are citizens not entitled the right of self defense? And, if they choose to group together and 'represent' a political party, is this evil? Is the right to self defense and organization not a personal, inalienable truth?

[Othelos]

You seriously need to chill out.

That's not even me being angry. That's me being...advantageous.

Your attitude is pissing the other side off, and your actions effect all of us, not just yourself. Cut it out.

[Costa Alegria]

Why, if I may, is such a talk necessary? Are citizens not entitled the right of self defense? And, if they choose to group together and 'represent' a political party, is this evil? Is the right to self defense and organization not a personal, inalienable truth?

The two are not mutual. And I doubt that your "self defence" is just that.