NationStates Jolt Archive

The below issue is obviously biased. There is no choice for a moderate approach. There really should be a more choices for this issue, such as keeping the right to have arms, but include waiting periods and background checks. Having the only gun freindly choice as an anti media stance is pretty narrow minded, it is apparent that the author of this issue is anti gun and forces moderates to adopt the same, or dismiss the issue.


The strongest voices demand tighter gun controls. "The only way to prevent further atrocities is to take the guns out of the hands of the murderers," says anti-gun campaigner Billy-Bob McAlpin. "There's no justification for them in today's society. We need tighter regulations on who can hold guns, so only our police and military have them."
[Accept]


"That's not all we need," says radical left-wing activist Bill McGuffin. "The government should ban all guns outright--even in the police force. This is an opportunity to make Wabaunsee a totally gun-free state."
[Accept]


"Guns don't kill people, people kill people," says NRA head honcho Buy Dredd. "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Is that what we want? Think, people. The answer isn't to ban guns. It's to crack down on those Hollywood movies and computer games that glamorize violence. They're the real criminals."
[Accept]

So?

You think that that particular issue is the only one that's biased? :lol:

If you dont like it dismiss it, or suggest an issue of your own

i always dismiss that one, too, because there's no option i agree with. but there are other issues that come up where i do the same thing.

I heard this issue is the secrect to creating an anarchy (which is my objective).

I heard this issue is the secrect to creating an anarchy (which is my objective).

I don't think so - I believe an anarchy is a state with high values in personal, business and political freedoms.

(For the record: I banned all guns, and still became an anarchy afterwards, but have been not able to get my Personal Freedoms above 'Superb' ever since that decision. Currently I oscillate between 'Civil Rights Lovefest' and 'Anarchy'. I now simultaneously have the two texts:

"Its compassionate, hard-working, intelligent population of 481 million live in a state of perpetual fear, as a complete breakdown of social order has led to the rise of order through biker gangs."

&

"Crime is well under control, thanks to the all-pervasive police force and progressive social policies in education and welfare."

Which remains somewhat puzzling.)

I heard this issue is the secrect to creating an anarchy (which is my objective).

I don't think so - I believe an anarchy is a state with high values in personal, business and political freedoms.

(For the record: I banned all guns, and still became an anarchy afterwards, but have been not able to get my Personal Freedoms above 'Superb' ever since that decision. Currently I oscillate between 'Civil Rights Lovefest' and 'Anarchy'. I now simultaneously have the two texts:

"Its compassionate, hard-working, intelligent population of 481 million live in a state of perpetual fear, as a complete breakdown of social order has led to the rise of order through biker gangs."

&

"Crime is well under control, thanks to the all-pervasive police force and progressive social policies in education and welfare."

Which remains somewhat puzzling.)

Maybe you society's lack of organs is to blame.

I think this belongs in "Technical".

iMove :arrow: "Technical".

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
NationStates Forum Moderator

Wouldn't option one be the one your looking for? "Tighter regulations on buying guns, only the police and military?" Granted it's a bit extreme, but I don't know if you've noticed that most of the issues don't offer a moderate aproach...

I guess one option could be -

Citizens protection group founder, Art Bartfarthy, chimes in with "The solution is not to disarm the populace, or too allow arms to reach the hands of convicted criminals or mental patients. A balance can be reached by indroducing background checks on potential weapons buyers and require manadory waiting periods for handguns and high power rifles."


Although the calculations for effects of this option may be the same as dismissing the issue. I dont know how exactly the game scores issues. I have been either Capitizit, Corporate Bordello, or Capitalist Paradise for a few months.

What happens when you dismiss an issue? Does any scoring take place?

I think a moderate choice would be the pro-NRA one without the restriction on movie production, which is stupid.

I heard this issue is the secrect to creating an anarchy (which is my objective).
I can create an anarchy for you.

What name do you want the puppet to be?

I heard this issue is the secrect to creating an anarchy (which is my objective).
I can create an anarchy for you.

What name do you want the puppet to be?

caabcdac

This one was started as an "Anarchy", but it's not what we anarchists consider an anarchy. I had to ask someone how to answer the questions to get an Anarchy, and the above is the answer.

Why is my nation so weird?

Everything is exaggerated a little. Well, okay, a lot. Your decisions affect your nation very strongly, so your country might seem like a more extreme version of what you were aiming for. Unless you have radical politics. In which case you probably think nothing's wrong.

I don't agree with any of the options on this issue!

Dismiss it, then. This is the equivalent of ignoring an issue until people stop talking about it and there's not so much pressure to do something. If you were a real government, you'd do this all the time, of course, but in NationStates it's more interesting if you respond to issues by actually making decisions.(Underlined emphasis mine)

I dismiss that issue with my main nation, however, I have others that choose some level of gun-banning. It's not bias on the part of the authors, or some strange conspiracy, it's tongue-in-cheek.

Why is my nation so weird?

Everything is exaggerated a little. Well, okay, a lot. Your decisions affect your nation very strongly, so your country might seem like a more extreme version of what you were aiming for. Unless you have radical politics. In which case you probably think nothing's wrong.

Exect on the economic collapse everything seems prrfectly normal to me. So I am a radical.
:twisted:

[quote=The FAQ]Why is my nation so weird?
some strange conspiracy, it's tongue-in-cheek.


I dont belive its some conspiracy, I just am frustrated that there is not option I can choose that I can agree with. Most other issues I can choose an option. I think there are a couple others I dismiss, but I dont see them often and dont remember them ofhand.

My, um, one of my other nations, Independant Pluto, posted a formula for anarchy in a thread titled "what do you have to do to get an anarchy around here" or something like that. Wrd Benchmark Civil rights and Political freedoms, and a thriving economy.