NationStates Jolt Archive

Brothers and Sisters,

Let us give our medics tasers. to stop this:

:rolleyes: :mp5:

Please support the UN resolution in the UN proposal list. And make this:

:eek: :sniper:

a thing of history!

Liff-Tang

Brothers and Sisters,

Let us give our members intelligence and/or common sense. To stop this:
Brothers and Sisters,

Let us give our medics tasers. to stop this:

:rolleyes: :mp5:

Please support the UN resolution in the UN proposal list. And make this:

:eek: :sniper:

a thing of history!

Liff-Tang

The Democratic States of Kelman backs this bill.

Emoticons For All
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights Strength: Mild Proposed by: Everybody

The United Nations,

RECOGNISING that, from its humble roots as three ASCII characters, the humble smiley has proliferated into billions of small and annoying images scattered throughout the Internet,

COGNIZANT that these are here to stay, and that while there are emoticons there will always be some who will use them;

TROUBLED by the increasing tendency of people to express themselves with these at the expense of actual conversation,

FURTHER ALARMED by the very real possibility that people will start making UN proposals just for the sake of getting to use emoticons,

HOPING that a partial satiation of this unholy lust will quell the rising tide of pointlessness,

INSTATES a UN document containing the following emoticons: :) :mad: :( :upyours: :eek: :mp5: :gundge: :cool: :p

Hear, hear. The Federated States of Sophista offer there whole-hearted support of the suggested emoticon legislation. Also, we think giving tasers to medics would endanger their status as non-combatants, and possibly cause them to no longer fall under the protection of the Wolfish Convention in that regard.

Emoticons For All
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights Strength: Mild Proposed by: Everybody

The United Nations,

RECOGNISING that, from its humble roots as three ASCII characters, the humble smiley has proliferated into billions of small and annoying images scattered throughout the Internet,

COGNIZANT that these are here to stay, and that while there are emoticons there will always be some who will use them;

TROUBLED by the increasing tendency of people to express themselves with these at the expense of actual conversation,

FURTHER ALARMED by the very real possibility that people will start making UN proposals just for the sake of getting to use emoticons,

HOPING that a partial satiation of this unholy lust will quell the rising tide of pointlessness,

INSTATES a UN document containing the following emoticons: :) :mad: :( :upyours: :eek: :mp5: :gundge: :cool: :pThe Democratic Republic of Azuna fully supports this bill.

Emoticons For All
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights Strength: Mild Proposed by: Everybody

The United Nations,

RECOGNISING that, from its humble roots as three ASCII characters, the humble smiley has proliferated into billions of small and annoying images scattered throughout the Internet,

COGNIZANT that these are here to stay, and that while there are emoticons there will always be some who will use them;

TROUBLED by the increasing tendency of people to express themselves with these at the expense of actual conversation,

FURTHER ALARMED by the very real possibility that people will start making UN proposals just for the sake of getting to use emoticons,

HOPING that a partial satiation of this unholy lust will quell the rising tide of pointlessness,

INSTATES a UN document containing the following emoticons: :) :mad: :( :upyours: :eek: :mp5: :gundge: :cool: :p

The Council of Enn fully supports this bill.

The Republic of the Golden Simatar does not support this bill. Tasers are effectivly weapons and will be viewed as such by the other forces. Medics are meant to wear armbands and markings showing the Red Cross or Red Cresanct etc. Giving them weapons will put them in the line of fire and medics will be shot, not because of an accident, but on purpose because they are armed. When the medics go down, more men will die because medics are the only ones on the front lines with the training to help a person get stable enough to move to a Battalion Aid Station, MASH unit, or field hospital farther back.

This is something for the armies of thier respective nations to decide. Not the UN.

His Majesty the King's Government of Denbighshire cannot make a statement regarding support for the proposal at hand until a Draft Resolution is written specifically outlining the purposes for said proposal and stating how the intent of the proposal is to be achieved. The King's Government is open to the idea proposed by the gentleman from Liff-Tang, but is unable to definitively support his position until such time as a Draft Resolution is submitted for our review.

*While he is walking back to his office, Delegate Robert Anderson's phone rings*

"Hello? Oh hey honey... just walking back to the office. You know, sometimes this institution makes me proud as hell to be a part of it, and other times my time is wasted more than a anti-gun banner at an NRA convention."

The Republic of the Golden Simatar does not support this bill. Tasers are effectivly weapons and will be viewed as such by the other forces. Medics are meant to wear armbands and markings showing the Red Cross or Red Cresanct etc. Giving them weapons will put them in the line of fire and medics will be shot, not because of an accident, but on purpose because they are armed. When the medics go down, more men will die because medics are the only ones on the front lines with the training to help a person get stable enough to move to a Battalion Aid Station, MASH unit, or field hospital farther back.

This is something for the armies of thier respective nations to decide. Not the UN.

Are you some kinda war nut? I'm talking about domestic medics.

Are you some kinda war nut? I'm talking about domestic medics.
This is the UN. If you're not talking about international issues, then don't bother creating a resolution. Domestic issues are for your nation to decide, not the UN.


By the way, use of smilies in proposals, while not illegal, is widely frowned upon.

Emoticons For All
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.
Category: Human Rights Strength: Mild Proposed by: Everybody

The United Nations,

RECOGNISING that, from its humble roots as three ASCII characters, the humble smiley has proliferated into billions of small and annoying images scattered throughout the Internet,

COGNIZANT that these are here to stay, and that while there are emoticons there will always be some who will use them;

TROUBLED by the increasing tendency of people to express themselves with these at the expense of actual conversation,

FURTHER ALARMED by the very real possibility that people will start making UN proposals just for the sake of getting to use emoticons,

HOPING that a partial satiation of this unholy lust will quell the rising tide of pointlessness,

INSTATES a UN document containing the following emoticons: :) :mad: :( :upyours: :eek: :mp5: :gundge: :cool: :p


*spews pepsi all over his keyboard*

The best part: "Proposed by: Everybody".

This beats my UN Resolution Mad Lib form from April hands down!

-M
p.s. yeah I know, I'm use emoticons all the time -- but not to caveman talk!

By the way, use of smilies in proposals, while not illegal, is widely frowned upon.

Shouldn't that read:

"BTW, use of :) in proposals, while not illegal, is widely :( upon."

Can't you just imagine the next " :upyours: Depleted Uranium ! " proposal, ?

[QUOTE=Frisbeeteria]This is the UN.

Not it isn't. This is a forum. Live in the real world.

This is the UN.

Not it isn't. This is a forum. Live in the real world.
This is Nationstates. Live in the pretend world.

"Domestic issues are for your nation to decide, not the UN."

No, think you'll find that domestic isssues are the main thing the UN talk about...

Is it possible to talk in this forum without bad-mouthing everybody except yourself...

Is it possible to talk in this forum without bad-mouthing everybody except yourself...
I should obviously take lessons from you.


Lemme see ... 2 for 2 negative posts so far. Yup. Long history of tolerance on your part.

I should obviously take lessons from you.


Lemme see ... 2 for 2 negative posts so far. Yup. Long history of tolerance on your part.

I think you'll find you've done 4 for 4.

Do you think you're amusing?

You appear mean...

Poor Liff-Tang

You appear mean...I AM mean. And I'm very good at it.

Perhaps you should look over some of my other 978 posts before you leap to conclusions. I'm just as supportive of well written proposals as I am derisive of poorly written ones. The Conglomerated Oligarchy of Frisbeeteria is a collective of Corporate States. This is roleplay. Would you expect us to be tolerant of foolishness?

How is defending those who save citizens lives foolish?

I'm going to stop being childish... but I don't understand your logic...

How is defending those who save citizens lives foolish?

I'm going to stop being childish...


The problems with the proposal:

1) It was it was poorly written.

2) It is founded on a one size fits all belief for a domestic problem.

Honestly, I think the author(s) should go to the "Got Issues" forum and consider writing a daily issue. There are number guides to writing UN proposals / resolutions, and it is clear that the author(s) of this proposal didn't look at them. I honestly believe that is why a number of us do not take this proposal seriously.

Did you look at the proposal in the UN?

Did you look at the proposal in the UN?
As it happens, I did. Did you? It's not in queue anymore, at least not that I could find.

In addition to the poor way it was presented here on the forums, I found it ideologically unsound. Every EMT and Paramedic I know prefers to go unarmed. Pulling a weapon of any sort has the potential to escalate. A taser with a range of feet is no match for a pistol with a range of tens of yards. The only true hope for safety is either by police protection or by the traditional and (usually) time-honored respect towards the neutrality of medical people.

Also, I consider domestic medics to be a national issue. While it might be nice to have every medic covered, the nations have every right to do just that. Since this is in fact the UN, we attempt to cover aspects that can't be covered by domestic law, such as medics on the battlefield. Since the author specifically excluded them in a later comment, I made mention of that fact. Without the intent of an international aspect in the resolution, this proposal became unworthy of consideration by this body, in my opinion.

Since virtually all of this is covered in one way or another by the FAQ, stickies, or existing topics, I blew off Young Master Liff-Tang in a couple of sentences. In-character. Since you appear to be fairly new, I'm explaining all this in great detail for your benefit. As this happens about 30 times a week, I don't usually go into all the friggin' detail. I just say, 'read the FAQ and the stickies.' Because if you haven't read the rules before you start criticizing the process, why the hell should I pay you the slightest bit of attention?

Sincerely,
MJ Donovan, CEO Emeritus, Frisbeeteria.

Did you look at the proposal in the UN?

*Blink*

My apologies! :)

I *thought* I saw it in this thread, but in fact, I did not. I confused this proposal for the first post, which was poorly written.

Would you care to post a copy of the proposal here? Usually proposal authors post a copy of their draft here, so as to prevent this sort of misunderstanding from occurring.

I will state that the idea of tasers still *sounds* like it would be ideally suited for the daily issues, but I would be happy to read the proposal.

Again my apologies.

*Blink*

My apologies! :)

I *thought* I saw it in this thread, but in fact, I did not. I confused this proposal for the first post, which was poorly written.

Would you care to post a copy of the proposal here? Usually proposal authors post a copy of their draft here, so as to prevent this sort of misunderstanding from occurring.

I will state that the idea of tasers still *sounds* like it would be ideally suited for the daily issues, but I would be happy to read the proposal.

Again my apologies.

I thank you for your politeness and your advice.
I HEARBY WITHDRAW THIS PROPOSAL FROM DISCUSSION. I ACCEPT THE STUPIDITY OF IT, SO ANY COMPLAINTS NOW ARE THEREFORE WHINGES.

And That Means You Freebeetaria.

i was thinking we should start giving medics mp5's instead of a stupid taser.