[GA - Failed] Limitation Of Inhumane Weaponry

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gorundu

I finished my Chinese homework
-
-
-
Pronouns
he/him
TNP Nation
Gorundu
Discord
an_dr_ew
ga.jpg

Limitation Of Inhumane Weaponry
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Mild
Proposed by: The COT Corporation | Onsite Topic
The World Assembly,

LAUDING the current ban on biological weapons, established by this body,

INSPIRED by the resounding support given to similar proposals,

OBSERVING that inhumane weaponry still holds a place in the world,

BELIEVING that weaponry solely designed to maim or cause permanent disability should be regulated,

HEREBY;

1. Defines "maiming" to be the infliction of a permanent major injury or disability, such as loss of a limb or loss of function in sensory organs such as the eyes;

2. Defines "inhumane weaponry" as any weaponry solely designed to maim sapient targets, rather than kill them;

3. Clarifies that the incidental ability to cause such an injury is not by itself sufficient to render a weapon inhumane;

4. Prohibits the use of inhumane weaponry in all situations where lethal force would also be prohibited;

5. Mandates that member nations cease development of, trade in, and funding of inhumane weaponry.

Co-authored by Verdant Haven
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.

Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!
 
Loosely for.

While not overall far-reaching in terms of effect, it certainly doesn't do any harm and I feel it could do some significant good if paired with future resolutions.

My opinion one way or the other is not super strong, however.
 
After looking closer, I’m changing to against (invalid). The definition of “inhuman weaponry” is entirely dependent on intent, which can’t be adequately discerned until after the weapons are sold.

Additionally, murders can be considered incidental, so those are exempt.
 
Last edited:
Tentatively For

Changing to Against
 
Last edited:
I don't see how this proposal would bring any value. Rather than having a restriction on so-called "inhumane weapons", conventions of actions during war would be much better and bring more value. Besides, there is also the argument of how this would disadvantage WA nations over non-WA nations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top