NATION

PASSWORD

[Draft] Repeal GA349: To Prevent Dangerous Debris

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Radicalania
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 198
Founded: Dec 19, 2016
Democratic Socialists

Postby Radicalania » Sun Jul 19, 2020 4:30 pm

Depending on how the latest draft is taken on the "replacement" (currently looking more like strengthening) , this may be abandoned soon (which is a shame cos I do think that the legislation is not good for several reasons listed above)
Posts on this account represent Martyn Kiryu and only Martyn Kiryu unless specified.

"Ask for work. If they don't give you work, ask for bread. If they don't give you work or bread, then take bread"-Emma Golding, Anarchism and Other Essays
ALL Cats Are Beautiful
"Martyn, I thought you quit?
-Everyone, 2019, 2021, 2023

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1557
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Morover » Sun Jul 19, 2020 6:14 pm

"I've left necessary criticism below using my red pen - though I worry, for my normal writing utensil has been misplaced. I'll go searching for that, later."
Radicalania wrote:The General Assembly

Aware that the problem of space debris as is of great importance to spacefaring nations;

Applauding the attempt of GA349 to reduce the amount of space debris presenting an immediate hazard;

Observing debris as being mockingly defined as debris, which is an unsuitable definition; Non-issue. Humor is fine, which is exactly what it is, and debris is self-explanatory enough

Noting this act fails to properly address debris which is not in orbit of a celestial body, and actively encourages nations to make this worse; How?

Believing that by allowing vessels to fire debris into space as long as it is not in orbit will cause further issues, should that debris collide with another planet or ship; Issues such as what? If any inter-terrestrial captain who has received their credentials cannot avoid basic debris, perhaps they should not have credentials at all.

Concerned that this act does not prevent space debris at all, and in fact allows for creation of vessels which contribute to a junk orbit; Note that the resolution is not seeking to end space debris - it's seeking to limit space debris from contributing to dangerous conditions. If you wish to prevent space debris itself, write a supplementary resolution. It doesn't require repeal of this.

Alarmed that by allowing vessels to land in "unclaimed undeveloped territory, or the territory of nations that consent to the collision or landing", that they are putting lives at risk; This is a non-sequitur. I seriously don't understand what you're getting at, here.

Disgusted that nations entering space are not encouraged to clean up after themselves, but are enabled by this resolution to contribute to the growing problem of space debris; I have no idea how you drew this conclusion from the resolution.

Knowing that World Assembly Nations can and should do more to rid planets of this problem;

Hereby repeals GA349.

"Firmly against. I believe that there is room for repeal of 349, but I do not think the arguments made here are convincing or even sensical at all."
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

Previous

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JFKFC

Advertisement

Remove ads