Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: March 5476
Next month in: 00:09:59
Server time: 03:50:00, April 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): albaniansunited | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Weapons Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: 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: August 2621

Description[?]:

We believe the private citizen should be allowed to own any type of weapon, and seeing as these are weapons that are able to be carried, we assume this does not include vehicles such as tanks or other large-scale military equipment, which we believe should be designated to deserted areas.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date21:36:57, August 13, 2008 CET
FromSons of Liberty
ToDebating the Weapons Act
MessageWhen we proposed this a few years back, we were not fortunate enough to have our allies in the right of bearing arms in the TCP. We are glad that a sensible party on this matter is back in the Lexate.

Date14:02:49, August 14, 2008 CET
FromDranland First Party (CC)
ToDebating the Weapons Act
MessageWe have decided to support this, though we have rejected it in the past. This is due to a general shift in the party regarding the fundamental right to bear arms.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
   

Total Seats: 140

no
  

Total Seats: 79

abstain
  

Total Seats: 46


Random fact: If you want to know how many players there are in Particracy right now, check out the Game Statistics buried at the bottom of the World Map screen.

Random quote: "Those who are responsible for the national security must be the sole judges of what the national security requires. It would be obviously undesirable that such matters should be made the subject of evidence in a court of law or otherwise discussed in public." - Unattributed member of the the House of Lords on the removal of trade union rights

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 48