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: Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Capitalist Delegation
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2571
Description[?]:
| It has been brought to our attention in a recent news broadcast that the COM party maintains a private militia, and we are outraged by this. Any party commanding a personal body of armed subordinates is a threat to representative democracy, and should not be allowed to participate in our country's parliament. The COM party has faithfully served Telamon for nearly 80 years, so we do not find it necessary to make a motion for their expulsion, but we see reasonable grounds to demand the immediate decommissioning of their private militia. Article I The COM Party shall promptly and permanently disband all militant bodies under their direct and/or indirect control which do not answer immediately to the government of Telamon. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 07:54:56, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | Absurd. If a private group of citizens chose to band together for their protection and never use offensive force then on what grounds are we to disband them. Considering our party has our own dedicated faction of gun nuts and others who are very serious about defense we find the suggestion that their existence is a threat to democracy is absurd; they're the very last line of defense for democracy. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 08:33:57, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | Perhaps we are simply naive on the issue. Perhaps parties should all be allowed to command private armies after all. There is absolutely no reason to believe that party heads, or perhaps a more appropriate title would be warlords, would use militant groups under their personal command to exert undue influence, orin a more extreme case, lead coups. Such practices carry no threat of causing violent factionalism or civil wars. Yes, in fact, it should be made mandatory for all parties to erect, train, and arm fanatical followings. Never mind that our country has a national army to deal with matters of national security, individual parties can deal with the matter more competently than a national government. On a more serious note, let me inform you exactly on what grounds we have to disband private armies: because an army under the discretionary command of a single party head who answers to no one is accountable for nothing, and so is subject to commit any crime. Our own national army answers to the government, who is held accountable by the people. Tell me, if you or Mr. Evars gave orders to your militants which directly conflicted with Telamonian law, who would hold you accountable? Your party is a private organization, so the people cannot vote you out. You have an army at your command, so the local police certainly can't arrest you. The standing army of Telamon is small, and would surely endure heavy casualties in dealing with the militia of a party as influential as yours. Perhaps they would even fail in their efforts were you to gain more traction. So tell me Mr. Nozick, how is a militia under the command of your party or under the command of the COM party the last line of defense for representative democracy? An army under your command is not the last line of defense for anything other than your party's interests. The last line of defense for democracy and freedom is an armed citizenry, not an armed party militia. The only thing absurd we see here is your logic behind arguing that militant parties are not a threat to a free people. As a final word, I would remind you that we are not discussing citizens banding together for personal protection. We are talking about parties assembling and arming fanatical followers to do their bidding. The difference may not always be clear cut, but it is vital to the future of liberty and freedom that we recognize it. Parties must not be allowed to organize or maintain privately controlled armed bodies. James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
| Date | 17:54:13, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | Accountability? If these private organizations have broken some law then take them to court and get an injunction filed. And if a party choses to rebel then will they rebel whether or not they're allowed to train together or not; a well-trained militia is hardly a pre-condition for a rogue party. And you want to know how my militia is your last line of defense; if another country invades and somehow beats through our defenses and that of our allies then do you know who will be the ones forming the organized resistance on the ground? My... our militia. If you can nail our militia or that of COM's on some violation of law, say obstruction of justice, then feel free to bring it forward in a court of law. But the bill would violate the rights of people to contract, to free association, and to assembly. This bill is an egregious assault on the rights of the people. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 20:38:23, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Ordo Malleus (COM) | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | The DCD implies that the our party wishes to overthrow the government of our great nation. I call that a slur of the worst kind and will be asking for Mr. Lott to be censured for his uncalled for slander of this party. I remind all that this party, and the great PM Raxney, have served Telamon faithfully for almost a century. We have always placed Telamon first even to the detriment of our party's political gains. The private organization commonly known as the COM Militia is nothing more than a group of private citizens who are former military or police personnel that are private bodyguards. They are trained and licensed to operate the equipment they use and they do so on private property. This government, which condones Murder and claims to sanctify individual rights now desires to trample the rights of their political opponents. I ask you all is this anything but politically motivated? Why is COM the only party named in the bill when other parties, including those friendly to DCD, have private organizations similar to the COM Militia? Those parties have had such organizations for some time and it has been publicly known. One need only look at the paper or pick up a book to see it is so. We applaud the TACP for their comments and the INF for their support on this bill. How dare the DCD try to abridge the rights of Lironans. How dare they. This is completely uncalled for, unnecessary, and to use a term the DCD understands it is UNPOPULAR. We are law-abiding citizens who love Telamon and have served her faithfully for decades. I'll give you, Mr. Lott, my gun when you take it from my cold, dead hands! -Roger Evars COM Deputy Chairman |
| Date | 22:28:31, May 04, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | The DCD made no such slanders against the COM party, but only cited hypothetical situations as reasons for a necessary decommission of party militia. We do not suppose it beyond the realm of any party to fully utilize the full potential of all its power. This government has stood up against the atrocities of torture and enslavement while her political opponents silently condoned them, so we will not stand for any such outrageous accusation that we stand to trample individual rights. You accuse our party of condoning murder, but we dismiss this as a distortion of the issue and would instead say that your party opposes women's rights. Your party was named in the bill because your party was the only party we were aware maintained a private militia. Had we known the TACP maintained a private militant body prior to sending this bill to vote, we would have extended this bill to include all parties employing private armies. Your party's accusations that our comments are politically motivated is uncalled for, insulting, and clearly incorrect. One but needs to read the exchange of dialogue between my own party and the TACP to understand that we feel just as indignant regarding their operation of a private militia as we do towards the COM party doing so. We made no attempts to limit the rights of private citizens to assemble or to own firearms, but we have no shame in admitting that we made a motion to demilitarize the political parties of Telamon. Furthermore, the erroneous accusation that we do what is POPULAR can be clearly disproven by our voting record. We have voted against our political allies and opponents alike, voting solely in the fashion we believe most constructive to the future of Telamon. We are outraged, Deputy Chairman Evars, that you would accuse our party of slandering your own when the only slanders made during the discussion of this resolution was on the part of your party against mine. Party militias are a threat to liberty. They can be used to intimidate, extort, and overthrow. Government officials can be protected by official government security details, negating the necessity of private armies. So why, Mr. Evars, Mr. Nozick, do your parties feel it is necessary to maintain personally commanded armed bodies? James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
| Date | 01:01:58, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | My party maintains a militia because the members of our party wish us to have one. The members who have voluntarily joined enjoyed the camaraderie and responsibility they feel the position brings. I can't speak for COM's organization, but ours is not a standing military, but a group of volunteers who in their free time choose to come together to drill and to practice shooting. Mr. Lott has done nothing but throw hypothetical situations out and hope they resonate. We ask him to address these two hypothetical situations then. 1) A foreign power has invaded and successfully defeated our military; would he and his party prefer that we be occupied with scattered resistance or would be preferred a trained organization striking back against this invasive force? 2) Mr Lott said "They [party militias] can be used to intimidate, extort, and overthrow." Guns can be used to threaten, maim, and murder. Is Mr. Lott's party suddenly in favor of banning guns because they can be used to do terrible things as well? Mr. Lott needs to come up with better reasons that mere hypothetical scenarios if he's going to try and pass legislation banning people from peacefully assembling. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 02:23:48, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | To answer your hypothetical questions 1) A scattered guerrilla resistance would clearly be more effective in the event that the organized army of Telamon was defeated. Any foe who has methodically smashed our national army would be even more likely to smash an organized militia, and so our best chance at defeating such an enemy would be by a decentralized insurgency fueled only by the patriotism of our citizens. 2) This is not a hypothetical situation, but rather another attempt to distort the issue and falsely depict the DCD as being anti-guns, anti-individual rights, and anti-freedom. We do not take falsehoods spoken against our party lightly, Mr. Nozick, and we would suggest you proceed carefully with your word choices. We find it slightly confusing that you would dismiss our use of hypothetical situations as insufficient reason to support our resolution immediately after using hypothesis as part of your reason to vote against it. We are irritated by the fact that we must constantly reiterate that this resolution is not a violation of the people's right to assemble or a violation of the people's right to bear arms. The maintenance of militant bodies which are trained, armed, and commanded by political parties is a serious threat to the peoples right to elect and choose their own government. James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
| Date | 04:34:26, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | We were merely using hypothetical situations to match your own; that hypothetically these militias could be good or bad and it is not their existence, but their actions which are key to determining their morality. Things are not inherently good or bad; whether they be party militias or guns, they are good or bad depending on how they are used. We do not outlaw guns, but instead punish those responsible for using them with ill intent and we should not outlaw militias of any stripe, but instead bring to justice any who break the laws of our fair land if they use those militias inappropriately. If the leadership of the DCD cannot see the obvious parallels between the gun and the party militia in the analogy we have proposed then we suggest they're being willfully obtuse or simply lacking in certain attributes we would expect the leader of a political party to have. We're sorry if this offends Mr. Lott, but we are merely speaking the truth as it exists. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 05:10:45, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | Firstly, we did not challenge the parallels between gun regulation and this resolution we have brought before parliament. We simply pointed out that your comparison was not a hypothetical situation, as you claimed it was, and pointed out that it served only to distort the issue. Your utter failure to correctly interpret the language we used leaves me questioning why I even continue with this discussion. Secondly, now that it has been brought up, I would care to point out IN THIS STATEMENT that there in fact is no parallel between gun laws and this resolution, ans this resolution pays no attention to the regulation, restriction, or confiscation of any armaments. Given that this is an indisputable fact, it is ironic that you would accuse myself of being willfully obtuse, Mr. Nozick. Your personal attacks on myself and my colleagues do not phase my party or me. We take the groundless name calling as a sign that you are running thin on substantial or well supported arguments. The situations which we hypothesize are based on the history of human nature, especially relating to the exercising of power. It is well documented that political parties who have militant groups under their command can and will succumb to the temptation to use the extra power granted to them by virtue of commanding a body of armed subordinates. The statement that "Things are not inherently good or bad" is overly simplistic, and does not properly apply to this situation. It is true that a political party with its own militia is not "inherently bad," and has just as much of a chance of being ideologically "correct" as any other party. However, that is not the question here. What is also true is that a political party which funds and commands a personal militia is inherently bad for the preservation of liberty and representative democracy. Perhaps a party with the ability to physically impose its will is a positive asset in a society which strives towards tyranny, but the Republic of Telamon is a free nation, and should not have to feel occupied by the organizations which are intended to represent them. James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
| Date | 05:58:35, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | We apologize for describing one of our questions as hypothetical when it was not and the subsequent befuddlement of Mr. Lott that it apparently caused. That being said Mr. Lott continues to confuse the issue we were raising; this is indeed not a gun rights issue, but the same PRINCIPLE applies. Let me rewrite your last paragraph... "The situations which we hypothesize are based on the history of human nature, especially relating to the exercising of power. It is well documented that people who have guns can and will succumb to the temptation to use the extra power granted to them by virtue of having firearms. The statement that "Things are not inherently good or bad" is overly simplistic, and does not properly apply to this situation. It is true that a gun is not "inherently bad," and has just as much of a chance of being ideologically "correct" as any other tool. However, that is not the question here. What is also true is that a person who posses firearms is inherently bad for the preservation of liberty and representative democracy. Perhaps a person with the ability to physically impose his will is a positive asset in a society which strives towards tyranny, but the Republic of Telamon is a free nation, and should not have to feel threatened by its own citizenry." The DCD, we would assume from their support of gun rights, would reject such the preceding paragraph as false. YET, they use the exact same logic when calling for this ban on private militias. It's intellectually and logically inconsistent. Ironically, the DCD called out the former LSD for being philosophically inconsistent and yet here they stand with the exact same problem. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 07:00:49, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | These are two different issues which deal with two separate sectors (private citizens vs. government affiliated organizations), so we would disagree that the same logic has to apply and dismiss the claim of idealogical conflict. We certainly don't believe that the definition of philosophical consistency requires that a single statement be able to be ad-libbed to accurately depict a party's position on any issue. We stubbornly stand by the belief that parties who hold seats in parliament should not fund the assemblance of militant bodies. We have made our reasoning very clear, very consistent, and we have done so many times over. We regret that parliament does not support the protection of liberty, but we will look to readdress this problem in the distant future. James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
| Date | 17:22:28, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | These militias are not government affiliated; TACP is a private organization made up of private citizens and thus your contention that the situations we outlined are not analgous because one group is government affiliated fall flat. These organizations exist to protect liberty from groups both foreign and domestic. So far we've seen no evidence that these organizations have caused actual harm, but if the DCD and other agents of the state continue to harass private organizations and try to take away their right to assemble as they see fit then individuals or organizations might be driven to take action and cause the very thing the DCD purports to be against, violence. If these militias are indeed snarling wolves as Mr. Lott would have us believe then perhaps it is unwise to goad them. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 18:46:52, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | You threaten the government of Telamon, Mr. Nozick? |
| Date | 18:55:43, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | As it stands? No. If the government insists on trying to stamp out the rights of free individuals to associate with whom they please and assemble where and when they please then it remains an option. Don't tread on me. Sic semper tyrannis. The tree of liberty must occasionally be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants.. and all that jazz. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 20:07:55, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | We have no problem with private citizens associating with you, but we take issue with you providing the funding by which to arm them. The fact that an attempted overthrow of the Telamonian government even remains an option in the eyes of your militia is exactly the grounds on which we move to disband it. James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
| Date | 21:35:02, May 05, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | We don't fund our militia, all the materials are paid for by the volunteers themselves we merely organize those who are already interested and usually have most of what they need already. And overthrow of any government must always be an option lest the government become unjust and tyrannical. Just because we have good government now doesn't mean we will in the future. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 02:45:58, May 06, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | And do these citizens earn a wage or a salary for bearing arms in the name of your party? |
| Date | 03:39:52, May 06, 2008 CET | From | Telamon Minarchist Party | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | No, it's a part-time, volunteer endeavor. Leonard Nozick Comandante Telamon Anarcho-Capitalist Party's Militia |
| Date | 05:29:04, May 06, 2008 CET | From | Democratic Capitalist Delegation | To | Debating the Resolution Demanding the Decommission of Party Militia |
| Message | Then we take no issue with your militia. James Lott Chairman Democratic Capitalist Delegation |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 189 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 271 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 41 |
| Random fact: All role-play must respect the established cultural background in Culturally Protected nations. |
| Random quote: "Nature provides a free lunch, but only if we control our appetites." - William Ruckelshaus |