At Vote:Repeal "Child Firearm Safety Act" [Complete] [Complete]

Abacathea

Abacathea

TNPer
Repeal "Child Firearm Safety Act"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.


Category: Repeal

Resolution: GA#235

Proposed by: The Last Homely House​

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #235: Child Firearm Safety Act (Category: Gun Control; Decision: Tighten) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: CONGRATULATING the efforts made by GA#235,

CONCERNED the measures taken by GA#235 are unspecific and inadequate for proper safety,

REALIZING the definition of a minor is inefficient for its purpose and can be easily changeable by a nation so that a majority age could be as low as they wish or a minority race may be unable to wield a gun,

HIGHLIGHTS a "reasonable manner" for the storage of a gun is not clearly defined and is open for broad interpretation,

SHOCKED that a child is not allowed to receive a gun because they can only receive a gun after demonstrating knowledge of proper usage and would have to receive the gun before demonstrating their knowledge, thus making it impossible for a child to demonstrate their knowledge,

BELIEVING an individual should not need to demonstrate their knowledge of the use of a gun if they wish to attain the gun for emergency purposes and has no intent of using the gun,

HEREBY repeals GA#235.

CO-AUTHOR Saveyou Island
 
mowa-seal.png


MINISTERIAL REVIEW;

​

The ministry, finding the bulk of it's objections at the time of drafting to be unresolved, will be utilizing the same arguments here in it's recommendation on behalf of the region;

REALIZING the definition of a minor is inefficient for its purpose and can be easily changeable by a nation so that a majority age could be as low as they wish or a minority race may be unable to wield a gun,
Click to expand...

This is not as susceptible to abuse as the author is implying, realistically any nation who is unreasonable enough to reduce the age of minority to a ridiculous threshold such as this for the purposes of this act are obviously forgetting the implications it would have in terms of sexual legislation and so forth, so there's a house of cards in the consequences described here, thus I suspect not as likely to happen as the author claims.

SHOCKED that a child is not allowed to receive a gun because they can only receive a gun after demonstrating knowledge of proper usage and would have to receive the gun before demonstrating their knowledge, thus making it impossible for a child to demonstrate their knowledge
Click to expand...

This is one of the most ridiculous arguments of the entire proposal, and we'll draw your attention to the start of the sentence simply to back this up "SHOCKED THAT A CHILD IS NOT ALLOWED TO RECEIVE A GUN". While we'd be happy to leave that sit there and speak for itself, the reality is the author is deliberately misrepresenting the need for theoretical knowledge and so forth before a minor is allowed near a live firearm.

BELIEVING an individual should not need to demonstrate their knowledge of the use of a gun if they wish to attain the gun for emergency purposes and has no intent of using the gun
Click to expand...

This again we find to be too much, that's the equivalent of saying one shouldn't need to have insurance for owning a car for emergency purposes because there's no intent there to use it. Unless, you know... there's an emergency??

MINISTERIAL SUGGESTION;​

In light of the above, the ministry is issuing a firm suggested vote of AGAINST on this proposal. The arguments the ministry have made here were echoed at the time of drafting by a multitude of nations including the minister and were ignored ultimately leading to this very flawed proposal now in the queue.

As per usual, this is a suggested vote only, please vote FOR, AGAINST or ABSTAIN below;.
 
This repeal seems to be be bartered off the premise of a replacement which may never come. That said the co-author has drawn up a replacement they state they only "might" persue but is flawed in almost the exact same ways they claim the initial is. Will observe this for a while before reviewing as this looks like it might developed interestingly.

I can see the co author though running their credibility into the ground over this though.
 
The replacement is obviously just for show, and I doubt they'll actually try to pass it.

Not that I'd want to see a replacement on this particular issue. Yet the repeal's arguments are so fallacious that I am in the odd position of opposing the original resolution, the repeal, and the replacement.
 
If I may, I occasionally reside in Mordor and so occasionally converse with the author(s) of this particular resolution, it is my understanding from those conversations that they do genuinely intend to pursue a replacement to the repealed resolution, however as to whether the replacement as it stands would pass or would be a better resolution than the original, I am less confident.
 
TBH, I personally don't support a replacement as I generally feel that this category should be left alone. (The only other resolution to pass in the GA, in this category, was later my first repeal.)

I'll never say "never," when it comes to supporting a proposal in this category, but ... I'd call my support unlikely, to say the least. But, then again, I said the same thing about the Recreational Drug Use category once, and then I wrote a resolution there, myself. :P
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
If I may, I occasionally reside in Mordor and so occasionally converse with the author(s) of this particular resolution, it is my understanding from those conversations that they do genuinely intend to pursue a replacement to the repealed resolution, however as to whether the replacement as it stands would pass or would be a better resolution than the original, I am less confident.
Click to expand...
I think that's reasonably fair of an assessment Zyv, that said, my objections to this draft which I noted on the forum, were never addressed short of being dismissed, which will ultimately be making the core of my assessment when it comes to it. I can safely say the ministry will be standing against this when the time comes.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top