We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: ownership of arms
Details
Submitted by[?]: orgonic party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2405
Description[?]:
ownership of arms must be discouraged and strictly regulated by the laws. An armed citizen is dangerous for himself and the other people. Arms have no deterrent power on crime. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Ownership of guns by private individuals.
Old value:: Individuals are allowed to own firearms as long as they do not have a history of dangerous mental illness or a violent criminality.
Current: Adult individuals are allowed to own and purchase guns freely.
Proposed: Individuals are not permitted to own firearms under any circumstances.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Weapons allowed to private citizens.
Old value:: Citizens may own any type of weapon. They may be carried anywhere except as determined by the property owner.
Current: Citizens may own any type of weapon. They may be carried anywhere except as determined by the property owner.
Proposed: Only certain types of weapons may be owned by the general public, and there are further restrictions on places where they may be carried.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 02:24:30, May 13, 2007 CET | From | Aggressive Sexist Movement | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | As expected from orgonic party. Deeply disagree. This is silly at all, and you aren't even intelligent enough to allow weapons for professionals - who does agree in here must be completely out of mind. |
Date | 03:08:38, May 13, 2007 CET | From | orgonic party | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | since the leader of ASM is so intelligent he should have noticed that we are debating arms allowed to private citizens, not police or army. |
Date | 15:47:16, May 13, 2007 CET | From | Aggressive Sexist Movement | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | What does the orgonic party think this choice was made for: "Adult individuals may not own firearms unless professionally required"? You ignore the existence of private security services such as bodyguard services. Your action also restricts the ancient and manly sports of hunting. |
Date | 15:48:28, May 13, 2007 CET | From | Aggressive Sexist Movement | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | In addition: what about the right of store- and house-owners to protect their property??? |
Date | 21:51:17, May 13, 2007 CET | From | orgonic party | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | bodyguards and vigilantes are not private citizens, if the job is provided by security companies that work after a contract with the government. for hunting, bow and arrows hunting is not a priority, anyway to protect a property with firearms completely diverts from political ideas of orgonic party |
Date | 02:07:02, May 14, 2007 CET | From | Aggressive Sexist Movement | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | Like expected from cowards you still run away from the main question. If you think this regulation affects private people only - we don't even share this opinion, but still - explain why there's an option "Adult individuals may not own firearms unless professionally required"? "Individuals are not permitted to own firearms under any circumstances." - We don't think that you'll get even the weak and compromizing CCU into this one. All you do at the moment is that you simply try to fake the meaning of the law so you don't have to admit that you stepped into dog-crap this time. |
Date | 02:07:37, May 14, 2007 CET | From | Aggressive Sexist Movement | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | AND NOW: GET OUT OF MY PROPERTY!!! (Since the old law is still enacted :P) |
Date | 03:08:08, May 16, 2007 CET | From | Centre Démocratique | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | We are strong proponents of personal liberties, and that includes the right to bear arms. We oppose. |
Date | 15:51:07, May 16, 2007 CET | From | orgonic party | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | Bearing firearms is the prevoius step to use firearms. Owners of guns should have the freedom to strike people that have not any freedom to dodge the bullets. That's supposed to be familiar to christian voters. |
Date | 17:32:25, May 16, 2007 CET | From | Centre Démocratique | To | Debating the ownership of arms |
Message | We do not quite understand the last comment from the orgonic party. As to the previous comments by the ASM about our party being weak and compromising - We have been around for over one hundred and fifty years and we have always supported personal freedoms. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||
yes |
Total Seats: 0 | ||
no | Total Seats: 501 | ||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Dorvik is a nation based on Germanic and old Prussian cultures, it is located on the far north of Artania, making it an almost arctic nation. |
Random quote: "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Tenche Coxe |