NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] Poach Shots

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
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22822
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

[DRAFT] Poach Shots

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Mon Nov 29, 2021 1:44 pm

Similar to #986 this one, but centred more around reasonable use of force for park wardens rather than the poaching itself. Do you think this stands alone well enough, or would work better as a follow up to 986?

TITLE:
Poach Shots

VALIDITY:
At least some private gun ownership allowed

DESCRIPTION:
The critically endangered Purple @@DEMONYM@@ Rhino is on the brink of extinction thanks to the actions of ivory poachers, and now national park guards resorting to lethal force to deter these criminals.

OPTION 1
"The poachers are shooting to kill at our violet-hued charges, so it only makes sense for us to reply in kind," argues rifle-toting gamekeeper Ged Doff-Myland. "These poachers are selfish at heart, putting their illegal profits over environmental preservation. Self-preservation, on the other hand, is a great motivator in getting them to stay away. And hey, you know what would be an even better deterrent? Machine guns! Can we have some, please?"

OUTCOME:
the national parks are no man's land

OPTION 2
"Look, conservation is important, but what we're talking about here is conferring the right to act as judge, jury and executioner on a group of trigger-happy park rangers who aren't part of the military or the police," complains human rights activist Howie S. Capes, who is recovering from a mysteriously acquired bullet wound to his left leg. "Stats show that last year the gamekeepers killed three times as many people as the poachers killed humans, which seems to me to be a disproportionate response. They shouldn't be allowed guns, but should instead just be given cameras and notepads to capture evidence and scribble down pertinent details. I can't see any reason why we can't balance animal rights with due process."

OUTCOME:
the pen may be mightier than the sword but it's no match for a Remington Sendero SF II

OPTION 3
"Way I see it, the problem is that the rhinos can't defend themselves," muses your brother, insightful as always as he cleans his interdental gaps with an ivory toothpick. "If you got the geneticist boffins into breeding bulletproof rhinos, with amped-up aggression and double the speed then maybe, just maybe, they'd have a fighting chance."

OUTCOME:
scientists are always working on increased charging speeds
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Trotterdam
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9599
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Mon Nov 29, 2021 4:53 pm

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Similar to #986 this one, but centred more around reasonable use of force for park wardens rather than the poaching itself. Do you think this stands alone well enough, or would work better as a follow up to 986?
The only problem here is that #986 option 4 already authorizes lethal force, meaning that the question is already sort of addressed, even if it's as an afterthought.

Anyway, what this draft is missing is a serial comma. But also why the rangers feel the need to use lethal force. Do they feel they lack the means to properly arrest people, despite being sanctioned law enforcement agents who should probably be trained and equipped for that sort of thing? Do they feel that apprehending poachers is too dangerous because they're armed themselves and prone to fighting back? Or did they actually try to order the poachers to surrender first, but things devolved into a shootout nine times out of ten anyway?


Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bonobiana, PhilTech

Advertisement

Remove ads