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: Gun Control
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Democrats
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 2836
Description[?]:
| Due to the latest recent atrocities we feel it is time to control the gun culture that is so clearly out of control. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Weapon concealment.
Old value:: Any legal weapon may be concealed when carried.
Current: Local governments may set and enforce concealed carry laws.
Proposed: People must first obtain a permit in order to carry concealed weapons.
Article 2
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 may own guns under strict license conditions.
Proposed: Adult individuals may own guns under strict license conditions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 10:45:13, October 20, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | Murders and other firearm-related atrocities are often used as a pretext for tightening gun control, but this ignores the root of the problem, which isn't the availability to legally own firearms, but the individuals who use them for illegal purposes - or, in this case, a terrorist organization. Guns are simply a means to committing crimes, rather than an end in themselves. If guns were not available to criminals - which is inconcievable, as criminals will always manage to find ways of obtaining weapons whether they are legal or not - they would merely use other weapons to commit their crimes. Furthermore, it is not yet known whether the firearms used in the attack in question were legally or illegally owned. Instead of finding and punishing the criminal behind the trigger, the DPR would prefer to punish the law-abiding, gun-owning public who are guilty of nothing. This is clearly fallacious. |
| Date | 11:00:33, October 20, 2009 CET | From | People's Party of Rutania | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | The PPR do not see how this change would "punish the law-abiding". The honest, law-abiding citizen has nothing to fear from this legislation. We fully support this bill. |
| Date | 12:07:28, October 20, 2009 CET | From | United Democrats | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | As the PPR stated, this legislation is not limiting the usage of gun ownership in any way... for law-abiding citizens. It is merely placing stricter legislation on who can own and use a gun. It seems ridiculous that guns are not licensed and that any citizen can obtain one. The law-abiding citizens of Rutania have no reason to oppose this legislation as it will have no impact on them. Regarding the RHP's final point, unfortunately it appears that no weapons were recovered from the incident. But if a weapon had been found there would be no way of ascertaining how, where and when it was bought due to there being no license or any form of paperwork necessary. As our citizens mourn the loss of many of their friends and family, while taking part in a peaceful protest, we stand up and say rid this country of its gun culture and perhaps if this legislation was passed sooner, this terrorist attack in the name of the RHP, would never of occurred. |
| Date | 13:07:14, October 20, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | We remind the DPR that under current legislation there is already a system in place to prevent convicted criminals from obtaining firearms legally, meaning they could only have obtained these firearms illegally if they had previous criminal records. The 'strict license conditions' proposed by the DPR will make no difference to a criminal's ability to obtain a firearm relative to current policy, but will make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to own firearms legally. What possible benefit, then, will this legislation bring? Regardless of whether strict license conditions are imposed, or even whether guns are banned entirely, criminals will commit violent crimes using illegally obtained firearms or other weapons. Criminals will obviously have no qualms breaking the law to obtain guns, and even if guns are unavailable to them their compulsion to attack others will not simply dissappear. The focus of our justice system should be the punishment of criminals and the prevention of their crimes, rather than mere attempts to control the tools they use in committing them. The DPR are merely using the tragic events of earlier this week as a pretext to further their own anti-gun agenda - this legislation is nothing but political opportunism at its worst. |
| Date | 14:20:59, October 20, 2009 CET | From | United Democrats | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | The RHP use the term 'anti-gun agenda' as a derogatory comment towards the DPR, we find this amusing. The sole purpose of a gun is to shoot living creatures in order to debilitate them or kill them. How this type of object is allowed to be carried and concealed amazes us. The purpose of this legislation is not to stop criminals obtaining guns, but to stop unbalanced people from using these to commit a crime. We aim to stop first time offenders before they can commit a gun related offence. As stated before, people who own a gun for legitimate reasons (the only reasons we can think of are hunting and self-defence) have nothing to fear from this legislation. |
| Date | 16:26:15, October 20, 2009 CET | From | Liberal Democratic Party | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | We would only support a bill that would ban guns completely. We intend to propose this. |
| Date | 17:14:37, October 20, 2009 CET | From | United Democrats | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | In a perfect world we would ban all guns, but there is a relative freedom of gun ownership in Rutania and who are we to ban guns completely? This would also mean a complete overhaul of the police force in which we are unwilling to take. Baby-steps is what is needed. |
| Date | 17:33:08, October 20, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Restoration Party | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | We are afraid we cannot support this bill. We somewhat echo the sentiments of the RHP, but our principle is that people kill people, not guns. If you take away guns then they'll just use knives or something else. |
| Date | 17:37:33, October 20, 2009 CET | From | United Democrats | To | Debating the Gun Control |
| Message | It is a lot harder to kill someone with a knife than a gun. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 90 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 215 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols. |
| Random quote: "You have all the characteristics of a popular politician: a horrible voice, bad breeding, and a vulgar manner." Aristophanes (450 BC - 388 BC), Knights, 424 B.C. |