NationStates Jolt Archive

We, the undersigned nations,

Respecting the rights of all sentient beings to common and individual freedom,

Recognising the threat of genocide to all nations of the world,

Acknowledging the rights of all sentient beings to engage in shooting sports at their leisure,

Understanding the growing world-wide threat of terror and violent crime,

Recognising, in principle, the right of all sentient beings to keep and bear arms.

1.Decde to regulate or prohibit the possession of weapons of mass destruction,

2. Accept the following definitions of firearms;

a) Grade A firearms: longarms of caliber lighter than .22L, regardless of action type, airguns, shotguns of caliber 20-gauge and lighter, excepting fully-automatic shotguns, airguns of all types. All persons will be allowed to possess those arms, and they will not be considered firearms under the respective laws;

b)Grade B firearms: all rifled arms of caliber up to 14,5 mm except fully-automatic arms, all shotguns, except fully-automatic shotguns;

c)Grade C firearms: all other conventional arms.

3.Will not regulate possession of grade B firearms, excepting as outlined by paragraphs 4 and 5;

4.Will regulate or prohibit possession of grade A and B firearms by the following persons:

a)Those convicted of violent crime or those sentenced to deprivation of arms rights by a court of law;

b)Those ruled mentally incompetent by a court of law or forcibly committed by a mental institution,

c)Those undergoing treatment for substance additiction,

5. Will have the authority to regulate possession and carry firearms of all three grades by children.

6. Will not have the authority to totally prohibit ownership of any conventional arms. However, nations will have the authority to limit the ownership of Grade C arms to those licensed to possess them;

7. Will have the authority to limit the carrying of arms (or, in the case of non-man portable weapons, movement in the respective vehicles) to persons licensed to do so, and to totally prohibit the carrying of arms in government offices and other property;

8. Will limit all licensing procedures under paragraphs 6 and 7 to shall-issue licensing with a waiting period of not more than 6 months;

9 All licenses related to the carrying of arms and their possession under paragraph 6 and 7, are valid in all nations; if a nation does not require licensing, it is to make it possible for it's citizen to obtain, from it's Foreign Ministry, a Travelling Shooter certificate, which would serve as a firearms license under this paragraph.

10. No nation, under any situation will limit exports of grade A and B firearms, except to nations who have declared war on the nation in question or on which a total trade embargo has been imposed.

11. All signatories preserve the right to have arms laws laxer than described in article 4.

12. No signatory will regulate import of conventional weapons for the purchase of those who can legally own them except in the cases definded in paragraph 10.

OMFG, an anagram of W.R.A. is WAR.
OMFG, harharharhar.

I'm sorry. Continue?

"On behalf of the Allied Confederated States, I will sign this document for the cause of keeping the right to bear arms in place in our nation."

James Stuart
President of the Allied Confederated States

Ruhr hereby signs.

Despite being members of the WRA, we wont sign this, as we find it to limiting in firearms sales and ownership.

Despite being members of the WRA, we wont sign this, as we find it to limiting in firearms sales and ownership.

You would note that your nation will still reserve the right to have laxer laws than delineated in the Treaty, as noted in article 11. The treaty is simply an upper limit to how harsh laws may be.

Hell, I'll join the WRA

The Democratic Republic of Alagal signs.

Mirae will not sign this treaty.

Looking at your reasons for signing this treaty objectively, one can come to answers that only ask more questions.

While we have freedom, what correlation is their to possessing weapons?

We see no logical nor rational reason as to why humans deserve the right to bear arms? Surely, would it not be better to eliminate and fight crime and such and therefore eliminate the need for such weapons?

There is no real threat of genocide. Genocide does not mean mass murder, genocide is a form of mass murder against a particular ethnic minority and I fail to see any concrete evidence. Do you have evidence of the mass murder of ethnics?

Shooting sports are indeed pleasurable. But surely one can have more fun spending time with your kids or making love to your wife? And surely the rise of violent video and other leisure games makes the need to handle a weapon redundant? Surely paintball, laserfighting and possible future virtual reality would be just as fun and far more safe.

Prime Minister Alexander Horatio
The Republic of Mirae
Open to diplomatic discussion and ideological, philosophical and intellectual debate

As a counter arguement:

We believe it is not the responsiblity of the state to protect sentients from themselves. We believe that all sentients are responsible for their own actions - or non-actions. Thus we believe that every sentient has the right to protect themselves from others and the state in whatever way they wish.

The responsibility of the state is to provide a unified system for international relations and national defense. We also believe the state is responsible for giving all sentients the same opportunity for learning and success as everyone else. Past that the states responsibility ends and the responsiblities of sentients begin - including the choice of whether to own weapons or not.

And it is also the responsibility of citizens to avoid situations where they would have to defend themselves.

There are no answers nor correct solutions to this debate. The whole issue is submerged beneath several oceans of ideology. This is why we see no need to change our gun-free status.


Prime Minister Alexander Horatio
The Republic of Mirae
Open to diplomatic discussion and ideological, philosophical and intellectual debate

You do realise that statistics show those nations with guns legalised have the highest death-by-gun-crime rates? I believe the two figures I remember are Britain having something like 1,000 deaths by guns, and America having 77,000. I am not sure of the British figure, but I am certain that the last figure was 77,000 Americans killed by gun crime every year.

That's the reason Falastur has laws banning any and every usage of firearms outside of the Military (and Police Armed Response Units)....

You do realise that statistics show those nations with guns legalised have the highest death-by-gun-crime rates? I believe the two figures I remember are Britain having something like 1,000 deaths by guns, and America having 77,000. I am not sure of the British figure, but I am certain that the last figure was 77,000 Americans killed by gun crime every year.

That's the reason Falastur has laws banning any and every usage of firearms outside of the Military (and Police Armed Response Units)....

OOC: even though I've spent many an hour arguing for gun control, and I run a nation that has banned guns, that's a pretty OOC argument.

Having reviewed this document, we find that our own laws are considerably more permissive than the maximums it sets. Every adult citizen in our fair country is a reserve member of its military forces, and as such is required to be certified for at least one weapon (of Class C under the UFT) and keep it either in their homes or physically proximate to them, be in training for such a certification, or posess a waiver excusing them from both states.

We are therefore pleased to lend our support to this endeavour.

---
And it is also the responsibility of citizens to avoid situations where they would have to defend themselves.

Not all such situations are under enough control by the citizen who would be in danger. What if someone were to circumvent ones' alarm system and break into their house? In instances such as these, we prefer to allow our citizens the ability to defend themselves.

However, to each their own.

Kerakh T'havrei
Heriditary President,
The Colony of Nothing in Exile

While we have freedom, what correlation is their to possessing weapons?
We in Allanea define freedom as the right of every adult human being to do whatever they wish as nobody is harmed. That includes owning weapons, as long as you do not harm anybody with them.


We see no logical nor rational reason as to why humans deserve the right to bear arms?

Because they are free.


Surely, would it not be better to eliminate and fight crime and such and therefore eliminate the need for such weapons?

I do not see why you can't fight crime AND allow your citizens to be fee.

There is no real threat of genocide.

Note that Austo-Hungary incident lately.


Shooting sports are indeed pleasurable. But surely one can have more fun spending time with your kids or making love to your wife? And surely the rise of violent video and other leisure games makes the need to handle a weapon redundant? Surely paintball, laserfighting and possible future virtual reality would be just as fun and far more safe.

"Fun" is a subjective notion.

I know it is cliched, but it is true: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

99% of people who buy guns don't intend to commit murder with them.

While we have freedom, what correlation is their to possessing weapons?
We in Allanea define freedom as the right of every adult human being to do whatever they wish as nobody is harmed. That includes owning weapons, as long as you do not harm anybody with them.


Its ok to own guns, just not to use them then?

Its ok to own guns, just not to use them then?

We believe that yes, it's all right for you to own arms, but not to use them to commit arms of aggression against ofthers. If you engage in non-aggressive activity (sports, self-defense, collecting) with your arms, why not?

10. No nation, under any situation will limit exports of grade A and B firearms, except to nations who have declared war on the nation in question.

12. No signatory will regulate import of conventional weapons for the purchase of those who can legally own them.
We will sign if these are rewritten to include(in the first) or exclude(in the second) nations that are under trade embargo's by the signing nation.

We will not sign. While it is true that guns don't kill people, people kill people, it is also true that people with guns kill more people at a much faster rate. Also, what if the nation is full of militant religious fanatics? or has little control over its crime rate? It would not be a good idea for these nations to have overly lax gun laws.

Callisdrun requires every single gun to be registered, much like autos, and if unregistered firearms are found in one's possession, the penalties are most severe... also, it is only legal to own an automatic weapon if one is in the reserves. It is only legal to own any firearms if one person in the household is in the National Guard (different than the reserves.) However, every single adult is in the National Guard, aside from felons, the criminally insane, etc. However, the government doesn't regulate melee weapons at all. Those, after all, are still arms. Battle axes have always been the most popular of these.

Crimmond: done.

Falastur: Proof, please!

Signing this would be redundant. All citizens of Ilek-Vaad enjoy the right to own firearms. Citizens between the ages of 18-58 (The Velite Guard) are in fact provided firearms, uniforms and combat gear by the government.

We also have our own laws categorizing firearms and signing this would make no change.

Minister of Defence, Ilek-Vaad

MS formally signs the document.