NATION

PASSWORD

Compulsory gun ownership negates no public protest

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
God Fearing Devoted
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 166
Founded: Jul 30, 2017
Iron Fist Consumerists

Compulsory gun ownership negates no public protest

Postby God Fearing Devoted » Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:24 pm

Why would compulsory gun ownership give people the right to public dissent?

User avatar
The United Artherian Federation
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1666
Founded: Jun 14, 2017
Father Knows Best State

Postby The United Artherian Federation » Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:30 pm

Would you want to piss off a bunch of armed citizens?
I wouldn't think so.
Really, you make owning a gun compulsory, so now every Tom, Dick and Nancy owns a SPAS 12 or Browning .50 cal or something, which gives them to power to kick off a civil war if they don't like your policies (e.g. No Public Protest), so most likely behind the scenes a minister (The game) would change that to keep them content.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:38 am

This raises an interesting questioning. Do disabled people fall under the compulsory gun ownership law? Could that be its own issue?
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
Trotterdam
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7392
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:15 am

Australian rePublic wrote:This raises an interesting questioning. Do disabled people fall under the compulsory gun ownership law? Could that be its own issue?
The right of blind people to use guns is an actual debate in at least two US states, so I suppose so.

User avatar
USS Monitor
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 27480
Founded: Jul 01, 2015
19th Century Iron Steamship

Postby USS Monitor » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:19 am

Trotterdam wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:This raises an interesting questioning. Do disabled people fall under the compulsory gun ownership law? Could that be its own issue?
The right of blind people to use guns is an actual debate in at least two US states, so I suppose so.


That's disturbing. I mean... The 2nd amendment exists for a reason, but that's well beyond what it was meant for.
Don't take life so serious... it isn't permanent... RIP Dyakovo and Ashmoria
~~One Stop Rules Shop (OSRS)~~Getting Help (GHR)~~
༄༅། །འགྲོ་བ་མི་རིགས་ག་ར་དབང་ཆ་འདྲ་མཉམ་འབད་སྒྱེཝ་ལས་ག་ར་གིས་གཅིག་གིས་གཅིག་ལུ་སྤུན་ཆའི་དམ་ཚིག་བསྟན་དགོས།

User avatar
Victorious Decepticons
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7932
Founded: Sep 15, 2008
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Victorious Decepticons » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:28 am

The United Artherian Federation wrote:Would you want to piss off a bunch of armed citizens?
I wouldn't think so.
Really, you make owning a gun compulsory, so now every Tom, Dick and Nancy owns a SPAS 12 or Browning .50 cal or something, which gives them to power to kick off a civil war if they don't like your policies (e.g. No Public Protest), so most likely behind the scenes a minister (The game) would change that to keep them content.

That may be how Theoretical Nation handles it, but in Victorious Decepticons canon, attempts at public protest are simply met by superior force and are brutally crushed with a short battle. There certainly is no right to protest here, whether the game thinks so or not!

IRL, if I remember right, Iraq under Hussein had plenty of gun ownership and no right to protest, and no civil war resulted outside of the Kurd areas. I don't remember if it was compulsory gun ownership, but they did have a lot of private firearms.

The game issue and policy need to take braver and/or less rebellious nations into account, and not cancel one in the presence of the other.
No war RPs; no open RPs.

Explosive .50 cal shells vs. Decepticons: REAL, IRL PROOF the Decepticons would laugh at them - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeVTZlNQfPA
Newaswa wrote:What is the greatest threat to your nation?
Vallermoore wrote:The Victorious Decepticons.

Bluquse wrote:Imperialist, aggressive, and genociding aliens or interdimensional beings that would most likely slaughter or enslave us
rather than meet up to have a talk. :(

TurtleShroom wrote:Also, like any sane, civilized nation, we always consider the Victorious Decepticons a clear, present, and obvious threat we must respect, honor, and leave alone in all circumstances. Always fear the Victorious Decepticons.


The Huskar Social Union wrote: ... massive empires of genocidal machines.

User avatar
Prusenreich
Attaché
 
Posts: 97
Founded: Aug 15, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Prusenreich » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:31 am

Really you think some citizens with a gun will shoot down a drone or a tank
Based off a Custom Euiv nation

User avatar
Aclion
Senator
 
Posts: 3574
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Aclion » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:37 am

Well? Are you going to disperse them?

USS Monitor wrote:
Trotterdam wrote:The right of blind people to use guns is an actual debate in at least two US states, so I suppose so.


That's disturbing. I mean... The 2nd amendment exists for a reason, but that's well beyond what it was meant for.

Remember that not all blind people are totally blind. You can be blind and still be a perfectly good shot. (besides with iron sights target shooting the target will be out of focus anyway, while with scopes you can correct for even the worst nearsightedness).
A free society rests on four boxes: The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammo box.
XKI: Recruiter, TITO Knight
TEP: WA Executive Staff member
Forest: Cartographer
Oatland: Caesar, Cartographer

It is the citizen's duty to understand which box to use, and when.

User avatar
Luna Amore
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 11508
Founded: Antiquity
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Luna Amore » Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:20 pm

Is this in response to an issue you answered? If so, it should be in the megathread with nation, issue number and choice selected.
Max: The code changelog says, "Added 'butthole' by mod request"
Lenyo: This dilemma needs an option that Luna would support in RL.

The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is not the eternal Name. The unnamable is the eternally real. Naming is the origin of all particular things. Free from desire, you realize the mystery. Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations. Yet mystery and manifestations arise from the same source. This source is called darkness. Darkness within darkness. The gateway to all understanding

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:50 pm

The United Artherian Federation wrote:Would you want to piss off a bunch of armed citizens?
I wouldn't think so.
Really, you make owning a gun compulsory, so now every Tom, Dick and Nancy owns a SPAS 12 or Browning .50 cal or something, which gives them to power to kick off a civil war if they don't like your policies (e.g. No Public Protest), so most likely behind the scenes a minister (The game) would change that to keep them content.

I don't think guns would've been much of a help at Tiananmen Square...
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:50 pm

Trotterdam wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:This raises an interesting questioning. Do disabled people fall under the compulsory gun ownership law? Could that be its own issue?
The right of blind people to use guns is an actual debate in at least two US states, so I suppose so.

Hiw credible are those sources?
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:51 pm

Aclion wrote:Well? Are you going to disperse them?

USS Monitor wrote:
That's disturbing. I mean... The 2nd amendment exists for a reason, but that's well beyond what it was meant for.

Remember that not all blind people are totally blind. You can be blind and still be a perfectly good shot. (besides with iron sights target shooting the target will be out of focus anyway, while with scopes you can correct for even the worst nearsightedness).

Some of my family members have myopia, so trust me when I tell you this. Nearsightedness =/= blindness
Last edited by Australian rePublic on Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
Trotterdam
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7392
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:19 pm

Australian rePublic wrote:How credible are those sources?
Well, here's a link from an actual newspaper rather than a humor blogger.

It specifically mentions "allowing the legally or completely blind to acquire permits to carry guns in public", too. It goes on to clarify that the only grounds on which a gun permit may be denied are "criminal background or history of mental illness", which blindness clearly does not fall under.

Some interesting quotes:
"I have some reservations about full access for people who are blind," said Patrick Clancy, superintendent of the Iowa Braille and Sight Saving School in Vinton, Iowa. "That's just because shooting requires a lot of vision to be accurate outside of controlled settings with safety courses."
"We don't believe there should be a blanket prohibition on blind people owning or carrying guns," said Chris Danielsen, spokesman for the National Federation of the Blind. "It's certainly true that the blind person or visually impaired person needs to be cautious about using a firearm, but so does everybody else."


Another article clarifies that:
Private gun ownership — even hunting — by visually impaired Iowans is nothing new. But the practice of visually impaired residents legally carrying firearms in public became widely possible thanks to gun permit changes that took effect in Iowa in 2011.
Also:
Polk County officials say they've issued weapons permits to at least three people who can't legally drive


According both articles (though the former quotes the latter on this), gun ownership by blind people is legal in Iowa (the topic of the articles) and Wisconsin, and illegal in Nebraska and South Carolina. Missouri and Minnesota, don't technically impose a vision requirement, but do require you to demonstrate you can shoot and hit a target (that presumably isn't making any sound), which would be difficult for blind people to accomplish.

Mind you, these articles are from 2013, so some of the information may be outdated.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:59 pm

Trotterdam wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:How credible are those sources?
Well, here's a link from an actual newspaper rather than a humor blogger.

It specifically mentions "allowing the legally or completely blind to acquire permits to carry guns in public", too. It goes on to clarify that the only grounds on which a gun permit may be denied are "criminal background or history of mental illness", which blindness clearly does not fall under.

Some interesting quotes:
"I have some reservations about full access for people who are blind," said Patrick Clancy, superintendent of the Iowa Braille and Sight Saving School in Vinton, Iowa. "That's just because shooting requires a lot of vision to be accurate outside of controlled settings with safety courses."
"We don't believe there should be a blanket prohibition on blind people owning or carrying guns," said Chris Danielsen, spokesman for the National Federation of the Blind. "It's certainly true that the blind person or visually impaired person needs to be cautious about using a firearm, but so does everybody else."


Another article clarifies that:
Private gun ownership — even hunting — by visually impaired Iowans is nothing new. But the practice of visually impaired residents legally carrying firearms in public became widely possible thanks to gun permit changes that took effect in Iowa in 2011.
Also:
Polk County officials say they've issued weapons permits to at least three people who can't legally drive


According both articles (though the former quotes the latter on this), gun ownership by blind people is legal in Iowa (the topic of the articles) and Wisconsin, and illegal in Nebraska and South Carolina. Missouri and Minnesota, don't technically impose a vision requirement, but do require you to demonstrate you can shoot and hit a target (that presumably isn't making any sound), which would be difficult for blind people to accomplish.

Mind you, these articles are from 2013, so some of the information may be outdated.

Stupidity at its finest...
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 18455
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Capitalizt

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Fri Mar 22, 2019 5:43 am

Why is noone drafting an Issue on guns for blind people? Seems tailor-made for NS to me.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Mar 22, 2019 5:53 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Why is noone drafting an Issue on guns for blind people? Seems tailor-made for NS to me.

I was thinking of taking it further than blind. Armless, schizophrenia patients, etc. Or is blind taking it far enough?
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
Trotterdam
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7392
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:21 am

An armless person owning a gun would scare me a lot less than a blind person owning a gun.

Being blind doesn't make it any harder for you to shoot a gun, it just makes it harder for you to know what you're shooting at.

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18124
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:12 am

If you ban blind people from even owning guns, then what happens to guns that are family heirlooms? Banning them from owning ammunition for those weapons would suffice.
Last edited by Bears Armed on Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934, 1120, 1152.

User avatar
Trotterdam
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7392
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:26 am

I think the ban (or controversy over lack thereof) is actually on carrying and/or using guns, not owning them. Keeping them in a display case is fine.

#989 already covers the nuance of family heirlooms and other not-intended-for-use guns, so I don't think we need another issue on that subject specific to blind people.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:44 pm

Bears Armed wrote:If you ban blind people from even owning guns, then what happens to guns that are family heirlooms? Banning them from owning ammunition for those weapons would suffice.

I don't actually know what happens with heirlooms in places where guns are banned, after the legal owner dies. What if the ammo is also an heirloom?
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal

User avatar
The Sherpa Empire
Diplomat
 
Posts: 985
Founded: Jan 15, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Sherpa Empire » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:39 pm

Australian rePublic wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:If you ban blind people from even owning guns, then what happens to guns that are family heirlooms? Banning them from owning ammunition for those weapons would suffice.

I don't actually know what happens with heirlooms in places where guns are banned, after the legal owner dies. What if the ammo is also an heirloom?


I think the exact laws vary depending where you are, but it's pretty common for gun laws to treat antiques or "collectibles" differently than modern weapons that people carry around and actually use.
༄༅། །འགྲོ་བ་མི་རིགས་ག་ར་དབང་ཆ་འདྲ་མཉམ་འབད་སྒྱེཝ་ལས་ག་ར་གིས་གཅིག་གིས་གཅིག་ལུ་སྤུན་ཆའི་དམ་ཚིག་བསྟན་དགོས།
Following new legislation in The Sherpa Empire, life is short but human kindness is endless.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15861
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Anarchy

Postby Australian rePublic » Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:32 am

The Sherpa Empire wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:I don't actually know what happens with heirlooms in places where guns are banned, after the legal owner dies. What if the ammo is also an heirloom?


I think the exact laws vary depending where you are, but it's pretty common for gun laws to treat antiques or "collectibles" differently than modern weapons that people carry around and actually use.

You need a licence to collect guns
Disclaimer: In-Character posts are NOT a reflection of the real world Australian government, any government departments, or any Australian states or territories. I have no authority over real world government decisions.
This nation does not reflect my views, as I am trying to unlock banners
From Sydney, NSW. From Greek ancestry. Orthodox Christian
Why stylised as "rePublic"
14 Published Issues
Please sign my petition to transport water across Australia (real life)
Issue Ideas You Can Steal


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads