[DEFEATED] Repeal: “Nuclear Arms Possession Act”

[Frisbeeteria]

I READ RESOLUTIONS

The Organic Vegan Commune of Frustrated Franciscans
Official Delegation to the World Assembly
“We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death!”
Friar John Sanders, OFM Ambassador and WA representative
Friar Tuck Ferguson, OFM Assistant Ambassador
Brother Maynard, TOR Keeper of the Holy Hand-grenade
Friar Cadfail, OFM Friar Superior
Mother Angelica, OSC Secretary and official Reader

Repeal: “Nuclear Arms Possession Act”
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal Resolution: GA# 10 Proposed by: Frustrated Franciscans

Edit: Changed thanks to the wonderful help of the members.

The World Assembly,

Understanding that all nations have the natural right to proper self defense,

Not understanding what the definition of "wrong hands" in the target resolution is meant to be,

Understanding that if nuclear weapons were kept from the "wrong hands", the "Mutual Assured Destruction" principle that supports having a nuclear arsenal would become moot,

Believing that the best way to deal with non member nations is not to engage them in a cold war arms building race,

Hereby repeals GAR #10, Nuclear Arms Possession Act.

The World Assembly,

Understanding the natural right of all nations to proper self defense;

Not really knowing what the proper definition of “wrong hands” is;

Understanding that if nuclear weapons were kept from the “wrong hands” (whatever that means) the “Mutual Assured Destruction” principle that supports nuclear arsenals becomes moot.

Believing that the best way to deal with non member nations is to not engage them in cold war arms building.

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution 10 – Nuclear Arms Possession Act.

GAR 392 states, "Aware that ambiguous references to the 'wrong hands' only leave room for subjective and conflicting perspectives on which nations ought to have the right to possess nuclear weapons, contrary to the principle of existing legislation on that subject," which is the exact terminology used in GA# 10. Therefore for the sake of consistency and precedent it too should be repealed.

"3. REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands."

UPDATE: TEST SUBMISSION submitted Jan 7, 2017

[Tinhampton]

Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly: Friar Sanders, I understand that Ambassador Mondelez of the Nilla Wayfarers beat you to proposing a repeal on NAPA, and both are on the same grounds. However, I will let both hang around and see what occurs. I am against both, but I would prefer this if it did come up to vote.

[Bakhton]

"This needs a lot of work to repeal such an important cornerstone of our World Assembly."

[Separatist Peoples]

"Nope. I prefer dangerous ambiguity to safe consistency on this matter. Ooh! Dangerous Ambiguity would make an awesome band name. Consider it copyrighted."

[Frustrated Franciscans]

"This needs a lot of work to repeal such an important cornerstone of our World Assembly."

"You mean a telegram campaign? If so I would agree. On the other hand, keeping repeals simple for the stupid always works."

[Araraukar]

OOC: To avoid IA stomping against this due to personal preferences, remove italicization of first words of the clauses.

Also will look neater if you leave an empty line between the clauses.

I'd say "good luck" if I had any belief of NAPA ever being repealed...

[Cedoria]

We wish the Ambassador good luck, however, we cannot vote for this proposal, and we have no illusions that many others will do so.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

OOC: To avoid IA stomping against this due to personal preferences, remove italicization of first words of the clauses.

Also will look neater if you leave an empty line between the clauses.

Done.

I'd say "good luck" if I had any belief of NAPA ever being repealed...

I figure it has to be an order of magnitude easier than repealing abortion laws.

(Hey we're called "Frustrated" Franciscans for a reason you know. If I wanted easy to pass resolutions I would pass the baton over to Retired WerePenguins and have Flash BLonde write "think of the children" resolutions.)

[Araraukar]

Not that I believed that this is a sane thing to try, but here's slightly edited version that I think reads smoother:

The World Assembly,

Understanding that all nations have the natural right to proper self defense,

Not understanding what the definition of "wrong hands" in the target resolution is meant to be,

Understanding that if nuclear weapons were kept from the "wrong hands", the "Mutual Assured Destruction" principle that supports having a nuclear arsenal would become moot,

Believing that the best way to deal with non member nations is not to engage them in a cold war arms building race,

Hereby repeals GAR #10, Nuclear Arms Possession Act.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

Thanks, I'll incorporate the changes.

Should I list you as co-author then?
I'll respect you if you say "no" ...

[Araraukar]

Thanks, I'll incorporate the changes.

Should I list you as co-author then?
I'll respect you if you say "no" ...

OOC: Respect or no respect, the answer is "nty".

[Frustrated Franciscans]

So does everyone think I need to write up a replacement proposal before I submit the repeal?

Not being a nation that particularly likes nuclear weapons, I'm probably not the one to write it.

[States of Glory WA Office]

So does everyone think I need to write up a replacement proposal before I submit the repeal?

Not being a nation that particularly likes nuclear weapons, I'm probably not the one to write it.

Barbera: If the replacement does not intend to prohibit or otherwise restrict the possession of nuclear weapons then this repeal is a waste of this august assembly's time.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

Shock and horror that there might be someone who might actually agree with my replacement goals.

Yes, a replacement would restrict.

[States of Glory WA Office]

Shock and horror that there might be someone who might actually agree with my replacement goals.

Barbera: I never stated that we agreed with your goals. I was merely stating an undeniable truth.

Yes, a replacement would restrict.

Barbera: Thank you for clarifying. Now we know to oppose this repeal at all costs.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

The repeal has been submitted for a test run. Telegrams have been sent to those with the authority to approve this proposal ...

Are you the “Wrong Hands?”

GA Resolution #10, “Nuclear Arms Possession Act” attempts to keep nuclear weapons from the “wrong hands” but never actually defines who those wrong hands are. I have a replacement in the forum to ensure that no WA member nation would ever be considered the “wrong hands.” Please consider approving my repeal of this resolution, Repeal: “Nuclear Arms Possession Act”. Let’s have the member nations decide if my argument is valid or not.

Thank you for your kind consideration,
Frustrated Franciscans

[Frustrated Franciscans]

Barbera: Thank you for clarifying. Now we know to oppose this repeal at all costs.

Well you could submit your own replacement. I might even be so polite to open the door and allow your replacement to be on the proposal list before mine.

[Bakhton]

"I support it," says Lara Qzu casually with no intent on passing a replacement. "I have no clue what the SCOB (Supreme Court of Bakhton) will say about it, though."

[Astrolinium]

"Approved, if for no other reason than boredom. Astrolinium does broadly support the goals of nuclear non-proliferation and eventual disarmament, and would be pleased to see a replacement which works towards those."

[Nilla Wayfarers]

You're trying to repeal NAPA without your replacement ready? That's going to end even worse than my resolution, and that's saying something.

[Old Hope]

You're trying to repeal NAPA without your replacement ready? That's going to end even worse than my resolution, and that's saying something.

A replacement would be very simple...

The World Assembly,
[insert here a definition of nuclear arms]
[insert here why nuclear arms are evil]
Convinced that the ends do not justify their means,

mandates member states to ban the possession and manufacturing of nuclear arms.

[Tinhampton]

You're trying to repeal NAPA without your replacement ready? That's going to end even worse than my resolution, and that's saying something.

A replacement would be very simple...

The World Assembly,
[insert here a definition of nuclear arms]
[insert here why nuclear arms are evil]
Convinced that the ends do not justify their means,

mandates member states to ban the possession and manufacturing of nuclear arms.

No secondary action. This would be a blocker.

[Old Hope]

A replacement would be very simple...

The World Assembly,
[insert here a definition of nuclear arms]
[insert here why nuclear arms are evil]
Convinced that the ends do not justify their means,

mandates member states to ban the possession and manufacturing of nuclear arms.

No secondary action. This would be a blocker.

NO, that would NOT be a blocker. A blocker gives rights to member states regarding X to prevent legislation on X. That above does not.
In NAPA, the non-blocker clause is 3, while 2 and 1 are blocker clauses.

[Separatist Peoples]

Ooc: Neither of you are anywhere near right. A blocker is when the WA explicitly restrains itself from legislation. Legislating on a topic isn't a blocker. Claiming that the WA can't legislate on a topic is. This is distinct from restricting members from an action.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

You're trying to repeal NAPA without your replacement ready? That's going to end even worse than my resolution, and that's saying something.

I'm pretty sure I threw up the replacement in the forum before I submitted the repeal. Just not worth cross linking unless it gets enough approvals.

(Which is currently 90 with 101 needed. This is my best proposal ever! And two days still to go!)