NationStates Jolt Archive

I would ask, fine delegates, for just a moment of your time.

I would like you to look at our world’s attitude to guns. It would appear to most that we love them. Our films endorse them, fascist propaganda glorifies their use and they are the first thing every self respecting citizen of a certain super power reaches for in every minor disagreement.

It is time we faced the facts, more people would be alive if guns were outlawed completely. Before you give me the ‘Guns don’t kill people, people kill people’ crap, think about it, the gun helps.

There is simply no need for a citizen of a country with a good law enforcement agency to carry a gun.

Full stop.

I beg of you to think about the lives that would be saved, the families that would still be together and the overall crime that would be stopped if stricter gun laws were brought in.

How many more will have to die before you realize?


So I propose the Following:

I. No person shall own, sell, carry, use or seek to obtain any firearm of any kind unless they are a member of the a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency.

II. No person shall bring a firearm into a UN member country without the permission of the government of the importing and exporting Nations.

III. All firearms under civilian ownership must be handed in to an official amnesty point 28 days after this resolution's implementation.

IV. All citizens of member states must realize that being a member of the a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency does not entitle them to a firearm, it simply makes it legal to do so.

V. All officers of a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency must not carry firearms whilst off duty or on a leave of absence without the permission of a senior member of government.

VI. No nation will allow more that 5% of a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency to carry a firearm whilst off duty without the permission of the UN.

VII. No member of a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency will carry a firearm without due cause or without proper qualifications and license.



I need two nations to endorse my nation and then I will formally submit my proposal, please support this comman sence!

No. All this 'common sense' stuff is getting out of hand. My people are warriors, and have the right to choose FOR THEMSELVES if they want weaponry or not. It is not the place of the government to micro-manage their lives.

I would not support this act on the basis that it would restrict the police as to the use of their guns.

Great, arm the Gestapo and take away the people's right to defend themselves from criminals and oppressors. Great idea.

I don't agree. In Florida, citizens have been allowed to carry concealed weapons since 1987. Since that time, the murder rate in Florida dropped 21% while the national rate has risen 12%. I think people should be able to protect themselves with weapons. What BETTER way to stop a criminal in their tracks then to fight fire with fire and pull a gun on them?

Guns are useful and they rock whaen it comes to warfare, plus what about the right to bear arms? :twisted:

What do you mean the right to bear arms?

Why should ANYONE have the right to pull to trigger on a fellow man and end thier life???

You say 'Right to Bear Arms'
I hear 'Right to shoot up a High School'

What do you mean the right to bear arms?

Why should ANYONE have the right to pull to trigger on a fellow man and end thier life???

You say 'Right to Bear Arms'
I hear 'Right to shoot up a High School'

No the right to bear arms is very different from the right to commit murder. Only one in FIVE HUNDRED people use guns irresponsibly.

Swizerland has almost 100% gun ownership... and minimal violent crime.

It is my firmest belief that there is NO corrleation between gun ownership and crime rate, either way! But owning guns allows you to defend yourself... from criminals as well as keeping the government in check.

This does not fall within the mandate of the United Nations. Gun regulation is clearly within the mandate of a domestic body.

This does not fall within the mandate of the United Nations. Gun regulation is clearly within the mandate of a domestic body.

Well....in Nationstates... a UN proposal category is gun regulation... so, um, by implication then... guns do fall under NSUN jurisdiction.

Stop this bickering and open your eyes. People are dying because you think guns are 'cool'. Ban the gun, save lives.

Can you honestly not think of any other way to keep the government in check but to arm the entire population?

Stop this bickering and open your eyes. People are dying because you think guns are 'cool'. Band the gun, save lives.

One of two things will happen when you ban guns:

-Only outlaws will have guns
-Only the government will have guns

Caught between the Mafia and the Gestapo, what is an ordinary law-abiding citizen to do?

Stop this bickering and open your eyes. People are dying because you think guns are 'cool'. Ban the gun, save lives.

People are dying because you can't be bothered to teach them not to act in destructive ways. And because you repeatedly forgive them when they do, rather than removing them from the general populace permanently.

If they will shoot you for a jacket, they'll just as soon club you to death for it.


Can you honestly not think of any other way to keep the government in check but to arm the entire population?

I'm waiting to hear your ironclad solution to the dilemma. Myself, I've found that the only other rational solution is to make myself Dictator. I can't trust the Left OR the Right not to go mad, eventually. They're both full of nutballs who would just love to crush any independent thought which disagrees with theirs.

No the right to bear arms is very different from the right to commit murder. Only one in FIVE HUNDRED people use guns irresponsibly.

So if there was a nation of 1.066 billion people, there would be OVER TWO MILLION PEOPLE using guns irresponsibly! No wonder "The Global Market" has a major crime problem.

The Nation of Beable is willing to send a multi-national peacekeeping force into The Global Market to help you with your massive irresponsible gun usage and crime problems. Certainly you're going to have to do SOMETHING about the 2,132,000 TGM citizens who are, by your own admission, using guns irresponsibly. Naturally, you would have to defray some of the costs of this humanitarian venture, possibly by supplying a Big Screen TeeVee to each of the Freedom-Loving (and TeeVee Loving) citizens of the region of Kibonia.

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the CHILDREN?

No the right to bear arms is very different from the right to commit murder. Only one in FIVE HUNDRED people use guns irresponsibly.

So if there was a nation of 1.066 billion people, there would be OVER TWO MILLION PEOPLE using guns irresponsibly! No wonder "The Global Market" has a major crime problem.

The Nation of Beable is willing to send a multi-national peacekeeping force into The Global Market to help you with your massive irresponsible gun usage and crime problems. Certainly you're going to have to do SOMETHING about the 2,132,000 TGM citizens who are, by your own admission, using guns irresponsibly. Naturally, you would have to defray some of the costs of this humanitarian venture, possibly by supplying a Big Screen TeeVee to each of the Freedom-Loving (and TeeVee Loving) citizens of the region of Kibonia.

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the CHILDREN?

Peacekeeping? Good luck! (You'll need it)

<chuckles evilly at the thought of anti-gun nuts getting gunned down :twisted: >

Anyway, if you want to take my guns away, come and get them.

Just because somethin' ain't legal don't mean that it doesn't happen.

Ya follow?

-Prez Billy Bob Hicklee

Swizerland has almost 100% gun ownership... and minimal violent crime.
Swiss men are part of the Swiss Militia and have a rifle and ammunition issued to them. The rifle and ammunition must be accounted for at all times though. Also, for hand guns, people who want to purchase them must under go a background check, receive a permit to purchase the gun and must register their guns with the government. Switzerland sounds more like an example of how strict gun laws prevent crime more than gun ownership.

We can't quite agree with this proposal. Ursoria is a land with a great many wilderness areas--rugged mountains and beautiful forests. Many of our people hunt and fish, and those are often the ones most committed to preserving the environment. We haven't written anything as foolish as the "Second Amendment" into our constitution, but we have stopped short of banning firearms altogether. Some of our cities do ban them within their city limits, though, and we require that those who purchase firearms take a course in their safe and responsible use.

Probably our position won't satisfy the zealots on either side of this issue, but it's about the best we feel we can do.

Guns should be regulated, not banned.

Has it occured to you that it is criminals who use guns for illegal things and, as far as criminals are concerned, they don't actually care what damn law you pass, they're still going to ignore it all the same.

Blackley already imposes gun laws to stop them falling into the wrongs hands as best we can. Of course the police force and army carry such weapons, it has been judged they need them.

-Maitias Tomas
-President

In developed nations, gun ownership should be no more a right than big-screen Tee-Vee ownership. Idumea supports a total ban on guns not used for hunting, and strong regulation on hunting weaponry. Individual gun ownership as an impediment to "the gestapo" is a ridiculous idea in modern nation states. In Democracies, the vote is the individual's most powerful weapon against government intrusion. If we continue fighting fire with fire all we're going to get is a roasted marshmellow for a planet. As Bugs Bunny used to say, "You're gonna hurt someone with that old shotgun!"

If they can take away your guns, there's nothing to stop them from taking away your vote. Don't forget, Hitler and Saddam were both elected.



Remember, gun laws take guns away from law-abiding citizens. They do not take them away from criminals.

If they can take away your guns, there's nothing to stop them from taking away your vote. Don't forget, Hitler and Saddam were both elected.


Remember, guns take guns away from law-abiding citizens. They do not take them away from criminals.

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for exam- ple in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand....The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the entire cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"

--Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

We don't support this... at all. Ban them in your own nation and leave us be. Concern yourself with your own nation. Look at Carpage... our economy is great. If you don't like guns, don't force it on me, but then again, there are loopholes everywhere.

My dad owns 4 guns and hes never committed a gun crime nor have any gun owners I know.Although I agree it is to easy to get a gun.

In developed nations, gun ownership should be no more a right than big-screen Tee-Vee ownership.

I'm going to scream.


Ok I'm done.

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the CHILDREN?

Ok. When a murderer breaks into a house and tries to kill a mans daughter with a gun he bought across the boarder from a non-UN nation, I'll let her father have a gun so he can blow the criminals head away instead of having to resort to futile pleading or death himself if he tried to attack the criminal unarmed.

Happy now? I have thought of the children.

If they can take away your guns, there's nothing to stop them from taking away your vote. Don't forget, Hitler and Saddam were both elected.

The right-wing of the Supreme Court has already taken the vote away from the American people, and they support the privledge to bear arms.

guns are bad no one not in the law enforcemnent has need for guns not used for hunting you have ekos's and the region of Armando's vote

In my country everyone knows how to use a gun and our violent crime is low. You can take away their guns but you can't give them common sense. If you want a REAL gun law, then I'll write one up as soon as I get enough endorsements for a proposal.

guns are bad no one not in the law enforcemnent has need for guns not used for hunting you have ekos's and the region of Armando's vote

Moron...tell me, what do I do when someone comes after me with a gun?

Banning guns won't get rid of all of them, nor will it eliminate the knowledge of how to make a firearm, nor will it prevent someone from discovering how to make a firearm on his own.

Anyone who supports this is by definition a nitwit.

guns are bad no one not in the law enforcemnent has need for guns not used for hunting you have ekos's and the region of Armando's vote

Moron...tell me, what do I do when someone comes after me with a gun?

Banning guns won't get rid of all of them, nor will it eliminate the knowledge of how to make a firearm, nor will it prevent someone from discovering how to make a firearm on his own.

Anyone who supports this is by definition a nitwit.

... and trapped between the Mafia and the Gestapo, what is an ordinary citizen to do ...?

Gun control has so far been enormously successful in our nation's history. Notice the poise with which the British redcoats manage to seize a vital store of colonial arms at Concord, thus preventing the breakout of the American Revolution. See how our government’s brilliant weapons legislation in the 1910s managed to prevent organized crime from getting a hold of high-grade weapons superior to those used by the police. Then, see how we banned assault rifles in 1994, preventing a dangerous sniper in the Washington DC area from acquiring an AK-74, and a scoped one at that. Observe how, with great skill, we managed to keep guns out of the hands of deluded teenagers thus preventing them from committing several shooting sprees.

I would ask, fine delegates, for just a moment of your time.

I would like you to look at our world’s attitude to guns. It would appear to most that we love them. Our films endorse them, fascist propaganda glorifies their use and they are the first thing every self respecting citizen of a certain super power reaches for in every minor disagreement.

It is time we faced the facts, more people would be alive if guns were outlawed completely. Before you give me the ‘Guns don’t kill people, people kill people’ crap, think about it, the gun helps.

There is simply no need for a citizen of a country with a good law enforcement agency to carry a gun.

Full stop.

I beg of you to think about the lives that would be saved, the families that would still be together and the overall crime that would be stopped if stricter gun laws were brought in.

How many more will have to die before you realize?


So I propose the Following:

I. No person shall own, sell, carry, use or seek to obtain any firearm of any kind unless they are a member of the a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency.

II. No person shall bring a firearm into a UN member country without the permission of the government of the importing and exporting Nations.

III. All firearms under civilian ownership must be handed in to an official amnesty point 28 days after this resolution's implementation.

IV. All citizens of member states must realize that being a member of the a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency does not entitle them to a firearm, it simply makes it legal to do so.

V. All officers of a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency must not carry firearms whilst off duty or on a leave of absence without the permission of a senior member of government.

VI. No nation will allow more that 5% of a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency to carry a firearm whilst off duty without the permission of the UN.

VII. No member of a Nation's recognized Defense or Law Enforcement agency will carry a firearm without due cause or without proper qualifications and license.



I need two nations to endorse my nation and then I will formally submit my proposal, please support this comman sence!

Delegate, you have something to say about guns, take it up with the owners of the guns.

In developed nations, gun ownership should be no more a right than big-screen Tee-Vee ownership.

I'm going to scream.


I think we like it when you scream. :wink:

All we're saying is that guns are products, manufactured by corporations for a profit. All the gun laws on the books save one have been written by the NRA for the benefit of those corporate profits - most have the effect of protecting domestic arms manufacturers from international competition. What a strange coincidence, eh?

Putting aside whether or not they should be banned for the moment, if you want one, buy one - like any other product. Why should gun manufactures be immunized against foreign competition, or accorded less regulation than, say, the toy manufacturing industry (true statement). Why do you have to insist on ownership as a right?

The whole "right to bear arms" thing is an obsolete notion - in modern nations, how can you possibly imagine that an armed populace can act as a deterent to a government intent on facism, gestapo tactics, etc.? "The people" are going to stand against the might of a modern military. That's the basic idea, right? That's a ridiculous notion on so many levels. For one thing, it assumes "the People" and the government have different agendas. Facism generally isn't an outcome of decisions made by the select few running the government, but the result of a collective attitudinal movement within a country toward facism. Which includes "the People."

If the entire population of Nazi Germany had been well armed, instead of spitting on the Jews as they were herded past or throwing rocks, "the People" would have been taking pot shots from their windows. To imagine that the Holocaust could have been prevented, as someone suggested earlier in this thread, by an armed Jewish population, is so wishful and naive that it makes us sad. Many Jews did have hidden caches of weapons - using them brought what must have seemed like the weight of the universe to come crashing down on them.

So keep screaming - it strikes us as an appropriate reaction from folks who cannot articulate their argument; we might go so far as to say it is the intellectual equivelant of gun ownership and usage.

There is no need for international legislation on this topic.
Enact local laws, and let others do the same (or not, as they see fit, which should be none of your business).