NationStates Jolt Archive

In case any of you are wondering, I will tell you strait out, this is a thread about gun laws. But, before you think "Oh my God, not another poorly written gun proposal.", look at it. It is not your run of the mill proposal. I have well though it out and the proposal clearly outlines what I want to do. You can check it out/Vote for it to reach quorum at http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_proposal1/match=A%20Full%20Gun%20Resolution. Thanks.

For way too long people have been trying to increase or decrease the gun laws in the world. There are hundreds of proposals but no one proposal outlines what can actually be done. Sure we could ban them but how?

This proposal is not about the banning of guns, not at all. But rather to restrict gun use to people who actually use guns for something other than self-defense, such as hunting.
The details are outlined below:

1. Police and other law enforcement officials may carry weapons. This is necessary if we still want to keep countries crime rates relatively low. All police need to have background checks.

2. All civilian weapons must have licenses. As it is, some countries allow almost anyone to just waltz in and buy a gun, without any resistance.

3. Mandatory background checks must be done, with a mandatory 30 day hold on the gun. You obviously don't want criminals running around with guns. The background check will verify that the person buying the gun is not a criminal. The hold would discourage criminals from buying weapons because of the delay.

4. Gun Shows will be required to obtain licenses and there will be a limit on how many may be held in a country in a given year.

5. Only hunters and police will be able to obtain shotguns.

6. Only one (1) GUN per person. In some cities, guns out number people 4 to 1.

Please join in this effort to lower crime and promote good morals worldwide. Every year more and more people are killed in gun related homicides. With this we can help to bring this number down and promote good morals around the world.

1. A "weapon" can be anything. I don't think anyone says that the police can't have weapons.

2. "Weapon" and "gun" are different. How do you define what a gun is? Basically it's a tube used to launch a projectile... Crayons and pencils make good weapons in a pinch.

4. Ah gun shows. What business does the UN have in saying what we can and cannot sell in our countries? This is just a way for you to dictate control over our industries.

5. What do you mean by "obtain"? Are you going to make it physically impossible for everyone else to get a shotgun by breaking their arms? In addition to that, if they seriously want to get something, it's nearly impossible to stop them.

6. One gun per person, eh? What about giving guns to children and babies in order to have more guns in the house? Last time I checked, there were hundreds of different "guns" for different purposes.

This is also another attempt to restrict the industries in our nations. First it is guns then something else. This one contradicts #4. How can you have a gun show if you can't have guns to sell? How can companies own guns to sell if they have more guns than they have employees? Perhaps then they can sell gun parts, but then how many parts does it take before it is classified as a gun?

Please join in this effort to lower crime and promote good morals

Who are we to dictate morality on the world?

Who are we to dictate morality on the world?
We're the UN! We can do whatever we want! Moral dictation is our right!
[/annoyingly moralistic prigism]


UN Delegates, just don't approve "Oh my God, not another poorly written gun proposal." and it'll go away in a few days like all the others.

Can we make them go away?

I will never support stripping gun rights from people.

1. A "weapon" can be anything. I don't think anyone says that the police can't have weapons.

2. "Weapon" and "gun" are different. How do you define what a gun is? Basically it's a tube used to launch a projectile... Crayons and pencils make good weapons in a pinch.

4. Ah gun shows. What business does the UN have in saying what we can and cannot sell in our countries? This is just a way for you to dictate control over our industries.

5. What do you mean by "obtain"? Are you going to make it physically impossible for everyone else to get a shotgun by breaking their arms? In addition to that, if they seriously want to get something, it's nearly impossible to stop them.

6. One gun per person, eh? What about giving guns to children and babies in order to have more guns in the house? Last time I checked, there were hundreds of different "guns" for different purposes.

This is also another attempt to restrict the industries in our nations. First it is guns then something else. This one contradicts #4. How can you have a gun show if you can't have guns to sell? How can companies own guns to sell if they have more guns than they have employees? Perhaps then they can sell gun parts, but then how many parts does it take before it is classified as a gun?
1. Well if no one questions it there wont be that big of a problem.
2. I'm sorry I should have been more clear on this I agree.
4(you skipped 3). We're the UN! We can do whatever we want! Moral dictation is our right!
5. I know that guns will be everywhere, and that this will not stop people from obtaining them, but it could help.
6. I'm sorry, I should have been more clear here too. If it makes any diference I meant non-minors.
6b. You just answered your own question.

If you don't like it, don't vote for it. I wont make the mistake again.

1. A "weapon" can be anything. I don't think anyone says that the police can't have weapons.

2. "Weapon" and "gun" are different. How do you define what a gun is? Basically it's a tube used to launch a projectile... Crayons and pencils make good weapons in a pinch.

4. Ah gun shows. What business does the UN have in saying what we can and cannot sell in our countries? This is just a way for you to dictate control over our industries.

5. What do you mean by "obtain"? Are you going to make it physically impossible for everyone else to get a shotgun by breaking their arms? In addition to that, if they seriously want to get something, it's nearly impossible to stop them.

6. One gun per person, eh? What about giving guns to children and babies in order to have more guns in the house? Last time I checked, there were hundreds of different "guns" for different purposes.

This is also another attempt to restrict the industries in our nations. First it is guns then something else. This one contradicts #4. How can you have a gun show if you can't have guns to sell? How can companies own guns to sell if they have more guns than they have employees? Perhaps then they can sell gun parts, but then how many parts does it take before it is classified as a gun?
1. Well if no one questions it there wont be that big of a problem.
2. I'm sorry I should have been more clear on this I agree.
4(you skipped 3). We're the UN! We can do whatever we want! Moral dictation is our right!
5. I know that guns will be everywhere, and that this will not stop people from obtaining them, but it could help.
6. I'm sorry, I should have been more clear here too. If it makes any diference I meant non-minors.
6b. You just answered your own question.

If you don't like it, don't vote for it. I wont make the mistake again.

1. A "weapon" can be anything. I don't think anyone says that the police can't have weapons.

2. "Weapon" and "gun" are different. How do you define what a gun is? Basically it's a tube used to launch a projectile... Crayons and pencils make good weapons in a pinch.

4. Ah gun shows. What business does the UN have in saying what we can and cannot sell in our countries? This is just a way for you to dictate control over our industries.

5. What do you mean by "obtain"? Are you going to make it physically impossible for everyone else to get a shotgun by breaking their arms? In addition to that, if they seriously want to get something, it's nearly impossible to stop them.

6. One gun per person, eh? What about giving guns to children and babies in order to have more guns in the house? Last time I checked, there were hundreds of different "guns" for different purposes.

This is also another attempt to restrict the industries in our nations. First it is guns then something else. This one contradicts #4. How can you have a gun show if you can't have guns to sell? How can companies own guns to sell if they have more guns than they have employees? Perhaps then they can sell gun parts, but then how many parts does it take before it is classified as a gun?
1. Well if no one questions it there wont be that big of a problem.
2. I'm sorry I should have been more clear on this I agree.
4(you skipped 3). We're the UN! We can do whatever we want! Moral dictation is our right!
5. I know that guns will be everywhere, and that this will not stop people from obtaining them, but it could help.
6. I'm sorry, I should have been more clear here too. If it makes any diference I meant non-minors.
6b. You just answered your own question.

If you don't like it, don't vote for it. I wont make the mistake again.

Personally, I'm from Texas. Guns what ever their make or model, can and should be used for home defence. Isralie government, and Swedan also have it so that weapons are easilly accessed, and training is available, if you be citizen, law inforcement, or military. I also do not think that the UN should regulate such matters. I feel that this is something that should be regulated, nation by nation. Armed citizens, can be part of a nations defense, in some countries and in some countries armed citizens can be a dangerous thing and lead to genocide.

A nation by nation case. Not a UN matter

The Rogue Nation of Greenspoint has found through experience that when guns are restricted, crime goes up. To quote the cliche'd pro-gun ad "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them!"

Greenspoint cannot support any proposal that infringes upon, regulates, restricts or documents an individual's gun ownership.

James Moehlman
Asst. Manager ico U.N. Affairs
Greenspoint

Upon reviewing your proposal, I have encoutnered a few problems.

You state that these new condidtions will help, "...lower crime and promote good morals..." Gun control increases crime. If a criminal really wants to murder, he/she will wait the whole 30 days. Also, only allowing one gun per person will increse crime. The criminal will have one gun, and then another from his partner-in-crime. You will have one; not a good posistion to be in. Also, you state, "As it is, some countries allow almost anyone to just waltz in and buy a gun, without any resistance." Is that really bad? If anyone can have a gun, then there will be resistance against the criminals. I admit, we shouldn't put guns in the hands of criminals, but they are going to get some guns somehow.

The Republic of Mavlandia and our sister nation, The Democratic Republic of Mavland refuse to accept your proposal.

1. Well if no one questions it there wont be that big of a problem.
2. I'm sorry I should have been more clear on this I agree.
4(you skipped 3). We're the UN! We can do whatever we want! Moral dictation is our right!
5. I know that guns will be everywhere, and that this will not stop people from obtaining them, but it could help.
6. I'm sorry, I should have been more clear here too. If it makes any diference I meant non-minors.
6b. You just answered your own question.

If you don't like it, don't vote for it. I wont make the mistake again.

3. Background checks are okay but what happens if they do a background check, find out that the person is a "criminal", and still give them a gun? I doubt arms smugglers are going to do background checks. Besides, the police have enough guns to steal.

I see it as an attempt to regulate industries in other nations. It would set a damaging precedent.

Personally, I'm from Texas. Guns what ever their make or model, can and should be used for home defence. Isralie government, and Swedan also have it so that weapons are easilly accessed, and training is available, if you be citizen, law inforcement, or military. I also do not think that the UN should regulate such matters. I feel that this is something that should be regulated, nation by nation. Armed citizens, can be part of a nations defense, in some countries and in some countries armed citizens can be a dangerous thing and lead to genocide.

A nation by nation case. Not a UN matter
I'm from Texas too. Dallas is the city I was referring to when I said that guns outnumber people four to one.

Where I live cows out number people but I don't go banning cows. Cows can be dangerous too.

Catholic Europe does not and will not support a proposal which allows the average person to own a gun.