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: Childrens Public Safety Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Constitutional Monarchy 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: September 2413
Description[?]:
| Due to the recent events in Gaduridos, where 8 children were shot dead in school, we the Whig Party believe that we must tighten weapon usage. We have nothing against people who use the weapons for harmless activities, Shooting for example. We do not however want it to be our children who are shot dead in lessons. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Weapon concealment.
Old value:: People must first obtain a permit in order to carry concealed weapons.
Current: People must first obtain a permit in order to carry concealed weapons.
Proposed: Where weapons are carried, this must be done openly.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Ownership of guns by private individuals.
Old value:: Adult individuals are allowed to own and purchase guns freely.
Current: Adult individuals may own guns under strict license conditions.
Proposed: Adult individuals may own guns under strict license conditions.
Article 3
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: Only certain types of weapons may be owned by the general public, and there are further restrictions on places where they may be carried.
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 | 17:45:32, May 29, 2007 CET |
From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | We disagree, guns promote crime, take away guns, take away gun crime, and thus lower the chances of a gun massicre in our schools! We do not want to see our children dead on world news! |
| Date | 03:06:25, May 30, 2007 CET |
From | Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | Actually, countries with strict gun control are still vunerable to tragedies like this...
The only people gun control really benefits are tyrants. |
| Date | 13:57:07, May 30, 2007 CET |
From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | There is nothing to be gained from allowing people to carry guns. Why would you need a gun if you were not going to use one? you can argue defense, but defense against who? other gun holders, if they were restricted there would be no need. I think there is a major disagreement here... i do not want to see Beluzian children shot dead. |
| Date | 23:25:40, May 30, 2007 CET |
From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | we will have to agree to disagree... i have stated my thoughts on the matter, as have you. I take your points, i think that if you make the weapons harder to posses, then less criminals will get them. I know that it wont stop all gun crime, but i strongly think that it will reduce it by default. Less weapons, less crooks with weapons, therefore less gun related crime. |
| Date | 18:59:11, May 31, 2007 CET |
From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | I disagree. with both of you, I realise that not every gun holder will use it against a person. But it only takes one person with one gun to kill, potentially hundreds. I agree that police should have guns, they are the ones who enforce the law not the general public. |
| Date | 02:11:16, June 05, 2007 CET |
From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | Taking any ideology to it's extreme defies common sense. Even Liberals like J. S. Mill would restrict Liberty where the potential for harm is great, through strict regulation.
Law and Order and a state monopoly on violence must precede liberty. |
| Date | 04:47:39, June 05, 2007 CET |
From | Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | I'm afraid you have it backwards... Liberty, the rights to which all men are endowed, must always take precedence over the rights of the state. |
| Date | 20:42:01, June 06, 2007 CET |
From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | In the "state of nature" prior to the state, no man can be free becauseo f the "war of all, against all"- this is where liberal ideology has it's strongest roots - in the contract tradition of Locke, Hobbes, Rawls etc.
The state must have a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. |
| Date | 22:36:51, June 07, 2007 CET |
From | United Workers Union | To | Debating the Childrens Public Safety Act | | Message | "The children must be armed and drilled?! that is the most absurd thing i have ever heard, we vote yes to these much needed restrictions |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 336 |
| no | Total Seats: 414 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Any RP law granting extraordinary "emergency powers" or dictator-like powers to a government must be passed by at least a 2/3rds majority, but (like all RP laws) may always be overturned by a simple majority vote of the legislature. |
| Random quote: "Poetry is about the grief; politics is about the grievance." - Robert Frost |