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: An Act to Affirm the Right to Bear Arms II
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Conservative Party
Status[?]: passed
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: June 2564
Description[?]:
An Act to Affirm the Right to Bear Arms of all citizens and protect the right to personal security. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Weapons allowed to private citizens.
Old value:: Only certain types of weapons may be owned by the general public, and there are further restrictions on places where they may be carried.
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: Citizens may own any type of weapons, but certain types are restricted to designated places.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribeVoting
Vote | Seats | |||||
yes |
Total Seats: 211 | |||||
no | Total Seats: 54 | |||||
abstain | Total Seats: 35 |
Random fact: By default the head of government is the ultimate authority within a national government. In general terms, heads of government are expected to consult with cabinet colleagues (including those from other parties) before making significant decisions but they remain responsible for government action. |
Random quote: "A democracy that does not allow limits is not a democracy. Just as a limitless freedom is not freedom, but prevarication. Indeed, any theory of freedom worthy of this name is first of all a limit theory. If we extend the unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not willing to defend a tolerant society against the attacks of the intolerants, then the tolerants will be destroyed and the tolerance with them! Because, I ask to myself and ask you, given a certain system that we call democratic, which is today the best possible system to allow everyone to live freely and to be able to express their own thoughts, how can the same system admit attacks against its integrity? How can a system refuse the principle of the self-preservation? For this reason, to suppress the apologetics of thalerrism, it's for this reason that the exaltation of exegetes, principles, facts or methods of Thallerism and its anti-democratic aims does not constitute a violation of the freedom of manifestation of thought, but, on the contrary, the celebration of that freedom. The protection of the first premise on which a modern democratic system is based. And this premise must be safeguarded also and above all against itself and its abuses." ~ Malik Astori, Leadership of Liberty and Progress (Istalia) |