NATION

PASSWORD

[draft] Repeal: "Child Firearm Safety Act"

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

[draft] Repeal: "Child Firearm Safety Act"

Postby Morover » Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:49 am

WHEREAS the passage of Resolution 235, “Child Firearm Safety Act” was legitimate and well-intentioned;

WHEREAS despite these positive intentions, it remains utterly nonsensical to prevent children from being given firearms in cases of utmost emergency;

WHEREAS the resolution in question may in fact harm children in nations that has incredibly lax gun laws, and an intruder with a firearm may enter a house, leaving children nigh-defenseless if they have not “received an education in firearm safety and proper use”;

WHEREAS it is odd to specifically restrict children’s access to firearms while, due to the diverse nature of nations within the World Assembly, far more dangerous and harmful weapons may fall into children’s hands, and may cause far more widespread damage;

WHEREAS it is the duty of this assembly to protect as many people as possible, including children;

WHEREAS the target remains extraordinarily vague at times through phraseology such as "an individual... who may regularly encounter a child", "proper use [of a firearm]" and "reasonable", all of which guts the effectiveness of this proposal in all nations who will try to maliciously avoid the spirit of the proposal;

WHEREAS this resolution does not adequately demonstrate that the benefits of the resolution outweigh the drawbacks;

WHEREAS even without these issues, it is a bad use of the World Assembly's resources to be regulating the use of firearms by children when this issue can be effectively tackled by individual member nations, and that the creation of Resolution 235 makes it so that non-compliance measures must be put in place by the World Assembly over a relatively inconsequential issue, when taken on the global scale;

BE IT RESOLVED this World Assembly does hereby repeal Resolution 235, “Child Firearm Safety Act”.

The first proposal I ever drafted was a repeal of GAR235, but this is a better version methinks. Should be quick and easy, I'm trying not to get burnt out but I still have lots of stamps. I wrote this in like 10 minutes without too much thought so please let me know what I did wrong. Love y'all <3
Last edited by Morover on Thu Aug 18, 2022 12:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Tinhampton
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10794
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Tinhampton » Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:52 am

Support, mostly because I remember reading a proposal of the same name by Greater Cesnica about a year ago and thought it was pretty cool.
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 319,372): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382, SC#385*, GA#597, GA#607
Other achievements: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; possibly very controversial; *author of the most popular WA resolution ever
Who am I, really? 46yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate; currently reading nothing much

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:53 am

Tinhampton wrote:Support, mostly because I remember reading a proposal of the same name by Greater Cesnica about a year ago and thought it was pretty cool.

Thanks for the support - you reminded me about Cesnica's proposal (which I totally forgot about tbh), so hopefully I'm not stepping on their toes.
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Wayneactia
Senator
 
Posts: 3574
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wayneactia » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:00 am

WHEREAS the resolution in question may in fact harm children in nations that has incredibly lax gun laws, and an intruder may enter a house with a firearm, leaving children nigh-defenseless if they have not “received an education in firearm safety and proper use”;

Calling this a stretch would be the understatement of the century. Any responsible gun owner would have their firearms locked up so children can't get access to them.....
Sarcasm dispensed moderately.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac

wait

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:03 am

Wayneactia wrote:
WHEREAS the resolution in question may in fact harm children in nations that has incredibly lax gun laws, and an intruder may enter a house with a firearm, leaving children nigh-defenseless if they have not “received an education in firearm safety and proper use”;

Calling this a stretch would be the understatement of the century. Any responsible gun owner would have their firearms locked up so children can't get access to them.....

Call it a stretch all you want but your comment does not address this clause in the slightest
Last edited by Morover on Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Wayneactia
Senator
 
Posts: 3574
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wayneactia » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:10 am

Morover wrote:
Wayneactia wrote:
WHEREAS the resolution in question may in fact harm children in nations that has incredibly lax gun laws, and an intruder may enter a house with a firearm, leaving children nigh-defenseless if they have not “received an education in firearm safety and proper use”;

Calling this a stretch would be the understatement of the century. Any responsible gun owner would have their firearms locked up so children can't get access to them.....

Call it a stretch all you want but your comment does not address this clause in the slightest

Maybe so, but these clauses sure do....
2. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a firearm to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a firearm;

3. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;
Sarcasm dispensed moderately.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac

wait

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:14 am

Wayneactia wrote:
Morover wrote:Call it a stretch all you want but your comment does not address this clause in the slightest

Maybe so, but these clauses sure do....
2. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a firearm to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a firearm;

3. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;

Maybe you’re misunderstanding my clause - my point is the opposite of what you’re saying. Uneducated children having no access to firearms under all circumstances is harmful where literally anyone else can have access to them.
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16807
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:16 am

"The repeal arguments are flimsy, but repeals of WA gun control laws will always have the full weight of my political support behind them. Gun laws are a domestic concern and a domestic concern only."

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Bananaistan
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3371
Founded: Apr 20, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bananaistan » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:18 am

OOC: Please link to the target in the OP.
Delegation of the People's Republic of Bananaistan to the World Assembly
Head of delegation and the Permanent Representative: Comrade Ambassador Theodorus "Ted" Hornwood
General Assistant and Head of Security: Comrade Watchman Brian of Tarth
There was the Pope and John F. Kennedy and Jack Charlton and the three of them were staring me in the face.
Ideological Bulwark #281
THIS

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22118
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:21 am

"Ambassador, you do not increase a child's safety by handing them a firearm with no training on how to use it. It is the most likely outcome that they will harm themselves or some innocent bystander. The requirement for training is suitable."
I want to improve.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Arbiter for The East Pacific

User avatar
Wayneactia
Senator
 
Posts: 3574
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wayneactia » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:33 am

Morover wrote:
Wayneactia wrote:Maybe so, but these clauses sure do....
2. DECLARES that it is unlawful for an individual to intentionally provide a firearm to a child, or to negligently allow a child to access a firearm;

3. REQUIRES that any firearm kept or stored in the home of a child be secured in a reasonable manner to eliminate the risk of injury or death to the child;

Maybe you’re misunderstanding my clause - my point is the opposite of what you’re saying. Uneducated children having no access to firearms under all circumstances is harmful where literally anyone else can have access to them.

I can read as well as anyone else thanks. You are making the assertion that EVERY house has a gun present in it. Pretty much every state, even the one with the most lax gun laws requires firearms to be kept out of unsupervised children's hands. I understand that since R v. W was overturned, apparently laws don't actually mean what they say, but I would like to think the World Assembly has a bit more class than the United States Supreme Court.....
Sarcasm dispensed moderately.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac

wait

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:35 am

Wallenburg wrote:"Ambassador, you do not increase a child's safety by handing them a firearm with no training on how to use it. It is the most likely outcome that they will harm themselves or some innocent bystander. The requirement for training is suitable."

“In most circumstances we agree, but the fact that there’s no clause
for emergency situations causes harm. Perhaps a policy such as the one in place would work as part of comprehensive gun legislation, but it does not work in a vacuum.”

I’ll add the link to target when I get back to my computer
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:37 am

Wayneactia wrote:
Morover wrote:Maybe you’re misunderstanding my clause - my point is the opposite of what you’re saying. Uneducated children having no access to firearms under all circumstances is harmful where literally anyone else can have access to them.

I can read as well as anyone else thanks. You are making the assertion that EVERY house has a gun present in it. Pretty much every state, even the one with the most lax gun laws requires firearms to be kept out of unsupervised children's hands. I understand that since R v. W was overturned, apparently laws don't actually mean what they say, but I would like to think the World Assembly has a bit more class than the United States Supreme Court.....

I’m not saying you can’t read, I’m saying you’rw interpreting that clause incorrectly - perhaps it could be clearer and I’ll make it clearer in a moment. That’s not referring to houses with firearms in it, that intruders enter - it’s referring to intruders with firearms entering a house. Sure, not every house will have a firearm for the child to defend themselves with, but if an intruder is directly threatening a child, they should have the same right to self defense as anyone else.

On phone, sorry for typos
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Princess Rainbow Sparkles
Envoy
 
Posts: 330
Founded: Nov 08, 2021
Mother Knows Best State

Postby Princess Rainbow Sparkles » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:45 am

This repeal draft is full of bad and disingenuous arguments. Shameful.

User avatar
Wayneactia
Senator
 
Posts: 3574
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wayneactia » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:45 am

Morover wrote:
Wayneactia wrote:I can read as well as anyone else thanks. You are making the assertion that EVERY house has a gun present in it. Pretty much every state, even the one with the most lax gun laws requires firearms to be kept out of unsupervised children's hands. I understand that since R v. W was overturned, apparently laws don't actually mean what they say, but I would like to think the World Assembly has a bit more class than the United States Supreme Court.....

I’m not saying you can’t read, I’m saying you’rw interpreting that clause incorrectly - perhaps it could be clearer and I’ll make it clearer in a moment. That’s not referring to houses with firearms in it, that intruders enter - it’s referring to intruders with firearms entering a house. Sure, not every house will have a firearm for the child to defend themselves with, but if an intruder is directly threatening a child, they should have the same right to self defense as anyone else.

On phone, sorry for typos

Are you referring to the child taking away the intruders gun and shooting them? If the intruder isn't following the law, what the hell makes you think the child would in a life threatening situation? Reasonable nation theory is still a thing isn't it?
Sarcasm dispensed moderately.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac

wait

User avatar
Wallenburg
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22118
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Wallenburg » Wed Jun 29, 2022 11:23 am

Personal gun ownership is already a terrible way for preventing or counteracting home invasion, putting those guns in the hands of kids who have no idea how to use them is even worse. Your arguments are no good here.
I want to improve.
grestin went through the MKULTRA program and he has more of a free will than wallenburg does - Imperial Idaho
Kiu Ghesik wrote:harris' interpretation of bidenism and subsequent establishment of a bidenist vanguard party to root out malarkey and revisionist elements in society was revisionist in and of itself and should never have been implemented.

King of Snark, Minister of World Assembly Affairs, Arbiter for The East Pacific

User avatar
Fachumonn
Diplomat
 
Posts: 993
Founded: Apr 11, 2021
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fachumonn » Wed Jun 29, 2022 11:40 am

Morover wrote:
Tinhampton wrote:Support, mostly because I remember reading a proposal of the same name by Greater Cesnica about a year ago and thought it was pretty cool.

Thanks for the support - you reminded me about Cesnica's proposal (which I totally forgot about tbh), so hopefully I'm not stepping on their toes.

Cesnica hasn't been too active in a while. I wouldn't worry about it that much.


WA Ambassador: The People | Pronouns: He/Him/His/They/Them/Their | RL Ideology: Libertarian Socialism/Anarcho-Communism | GP Alignment: Independent, Leans Defender

User avatar
Juansonia
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 125
Founded: Apr 01, 2022
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Juansonia » Wed Jun 29, 2022 12:07 pm

"Resolution 235 allows for these requirements to not apply to children who have been instructed in the safe and proper use of firearms. In addition, there is nothing in said resolution that requires such education and application be in the form of formal instruction, nor is there anything that prohibits an untrained child using a firearm which was acquired by disarming an assailant. There is nothing stopping a child's parents from teaching him the basics and letting him demonstrate knowledge in the woods near their uncle's backyard, which would satisfy article IV. Therefore, this resolution does not, in fact, ban children from using firearms. Rather, it imposes a training requirement that is easy for any parents and their children to fulfill. None of Morover's argument for repeal stands, and it seems that this shot didn't even hit the target resolution."
- Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia


MT, Stats are funded by think-tanks of varying ideologies (accuracy may vary, don't assume that they are canon)
Space Squid wrote:
Kannap wrote:You bring up a good point. We should find ways to incorporate the other six deadly sins into the fabric of Pride month
Each sin should get it's own month.

Right now, Pride gets June, and Greed, Envy, and Gluttony have to share Thanksgiving/Black Friday through Christmas, Sloth gets one day in September, and Lust gets one day in February.

It's not equitable at all.

User avatar
Wayneactia
Senator
 
Posts: 3574
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wayneactia » Wed Jun 29, 2022 1:21 pm

Juansonia wrote:"Resolution 235 allows for these requirements to not apply to children who have been instructed in the safe and proper use of firearms. In addition, there is nothing in said resolution that requires such education and application be in the form of formal instruction, nor is there anything that prohibits an untrained child using a firearm which was acquired by disarming an assailant. There is nothing stopping a child's parents from teaching him the basics and letting him demonstrate knowledge in the woods near their uncle's backyard, which would satisfy article IV. Therefore, this resolution does not, in fact, ban children from using firearms. Rather, it imposes a training requirement that is easy for any parents and their children to fulfill. None of Morover's argument for repeal stands, and it seems that this shot didn't even hit the target resolution."
- Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

"The equivalent of shooting at someone and hitting the person behind you instead...."

Wayne
Sarcasm dispensed moderately.
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac

wait

User avatar
Anne of Cleves in TNP
Envoy
 
Posts: 310
Founded: Aug 12, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Anne of Cleves in TNP » Thu Jun 30, 2022 5:12 am

“Ambassador, I get that the intention of this repeal is self-defense for children. However, if should be their parent defending them using a gun, not the child using it in self-defense. First of all, it is the parent’s utmost responsibility to defend the child. Therefore, if a parent just sits back and watches the child defend him/herself, well, that’s just very lazy parenting. Second, children are not as fully developed in intelligence compared to adults, thus either they could accidentally harm someone/themselves without training. Or, when giving training, the child will take a much longer time to learn how to master shooting. And third, if the child does kill someone, he/she can be tried in an adult court later in life. I believe these three points are sufficient to shut this repeal down.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire
Last edited by Anne of Cleves in TNP on Fri Aug 19, 2022 8:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
IC Name: The Clevesian Empire
Capital: New Cleves
Leader: Empress Anne of Cleves III
Failed WA Proposals: “Repeal: Comfortable Pillows for All Protocol”
IC WA Ambassador: Ms. Charlotte Schafer
“Give me a proposal, I’ll give you some criticism.”
[RIP Technoblade]

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16807
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Thu Jun 30, 2022 8:52 am

Anne of Cleves in TNP wrote:“Ambassador, I get that the intention of this repeal is self-defense for children. However, if should be their parent defending them using a gun, not the child using it in self-defense. First of all, it is the parent’s utmost responsibility to defend the child. Therefore, if a parent just sits back and watches the child defend him/herself, well, that’s just very lazy parenting. Second, children are not as fully developed in intelligence compared to adults, thus either they could accidentally harm someone/themselves without training. Or, when giving training, the child will take a much longer time to learn how to master shooting. And third, if the child does kill someone, he/she can be tried in an adult court later in life. I believe these three points are sufficient to shut this repeal down.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

"That last point seems very wrong for any legal system not designed to be psychotic, ambassador."

His Worshipfulness Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
The Orwell Society
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1680
Founded: Apr 16, 2022
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby The Orwell Society » Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:21 am

OOC: Can you use the word "WHEREAS" any more? It seems a tad bit too redundant for my liking, and almost tips the scales on whether or not I want to support this draft in its current state. However, I do support in concept and believe that a replacement resolution should be much more pax in its procedures.

IC:
"We do not support this repeal, not one bit. Children, as well as all non-military and in-law enforcement should be refrained from owning, purchasing, and handling firearms.
-The Orwellian Delegation
Last edited by The Orwell Society on Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
•  Ideology is either radical centrist or authoritarian social democrat. Which one, I may never know.
•  Ffteen year old guy living in the US.
•  Nerdy nerd
•  Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sildoria
•  Aspiring WA author
•  Semi-experienced gameplayer and cards trader

this
this

User avatar
Morover
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1552
Founded: Oct 14, 2018
Libertarian Police State

Postby Morover » Mon Aug 01, 2022 12:38 pm

"My delegation has updated this draft, clarifying a few of the problem clauses and adding in a clause commenting on the relative vagueness of language leading to malicious nations likely avoiding the substantive spirit of the target."
World Assembly Author
ns.morover@gmail.com

User avatar
Heavens Reach
Envoy
 
Posts: 309
Founded: May 08, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Heavens Reach » Mon Aug 01, 2022 5:15 pm

Morover wrote:WHEREAS the resolution in question may in fact harm children in nations that has incredibly lax gun laws, and an intruder with a firearm may enter a house, leaving children nigh-defenseless if they have not “received an education in firearm safety and proper use"


OOC: the number one cause of death of children in the US is firearms :p
Last edited by Heavens Reach on Mon Aug 01, 2022 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ambassador to the People of Heaven's Reach
(Constitutional Socialist Democracy)
(He/Him/His)
Post-Bacc Research Fellow | Neuroscience, Psychology, Physics

User avatar
Honeydewistania
Minister
 
Posts: 3499
Founded: Jun 09, 2017
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Honeydewistania » Mon Aug 01, 2022 5:21 pm

Support for repeal but not for these arguments. Children not educated in gun safety should not be given guns to prevent home intrusions.

We would support a repeal on the basis that the target stifles arm manufacturing sales.

-Benji


she/her
Represented by Benji Schubert Hepperle in the WA


[the] ice age [is] coming

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads