NationStates Jolt Archive

I was listening to the BBC World Service the other day and through a report there, along with some independent investigation, I [re]discovered gun amnesties: places for someone to turn in an illegal (or legal) firearm without fear of prosecution (or violence, etc.).

I am interested in writing a resolution about this, endorsing and creating gun amnesties, that is. The data I've found suggests that these amnesties help regulate guns and increase safety in a region. They are surprisingly effective to my knowledge.

Of course, there are questions that need to be raised as far as scope and application of this. I have a few that perhaps anyone who wishes can join in on.

For this future proposal,

1) Should there be [at least] one amnesty created in each member nation?

2) Should there be an international amnesty created?

3) What are some needed guidelines as far as the structure of amnesties, if any?

4) What would be guidelines of conduct or security around gun amnesties?

5) Should there be other gun-safety efforts combined?

6) Should there be required education campaigns (or a UN-wide one) about gun safety?

7) Is A "Gun Amnesty" the correct term?

8) What would be the most appropriate category?

9) What should it preamble about guns (this of course will vary according to what it in effect does)?

10) Should there be some sort of a committee formed, and what would it address?

11) Should amnesties strictly concern illegal guns?

12) Should there be anything required to be done with the guns?

13) Are there any other comments, concerns, or questions?



My initial responses:

For this future proposal,

1) Should there be [at least] one amnesty created in each member nation?
I believe at least one, yes.

2) Should there be an international amnesty created?
I'm unsure. If I can review the Universal Library Coalition and how it effects a Universal Library, perhaps I can see how plausible an international amnesty would be. Perhaps there should be a requirement to negotiate with neighbors to establish a regional amnesty. This would also raise the question of customs and how exactly the gun owners would get these guns out of the country (since they are illegal)

3) What are some needed guidelines as far as the structure of amnesties, if any?
I thought amnesty structure is fairly irrelevant, initially. as long as a facility can adequately fulfill the requirements set up in #4, it's adequate. Perhaps accessibility should be an issue.

4) What would be guidelines of conduct or security around gun amnesties?
Obviously, there need to be ways for citizens to bring guns to the amnesty without being arrested or gunned down. There needs to be security to a certain degree, but whether they're armed with weapons themselves seems up to the nation. There need to be officials well-trained in handling guns and in conflict resolution. There needs to be privacy and confidentiality. There need to be judicial rules to not admit evidence illegally acquired via amnesty.

5) Should there be other gun-safety efforts combined?
Perhaps, but I feel that levels of gun control and registration should be left up to individual nations. Perhaps the most basic regulations should be mandated. If there are other gun controls included, I'm certain this belongs under "Gun Control" category, which will be addressed in #8.

6) Should there be required education campaigns (or a UN-wide one) about gun safety?
I think this is definitely warranted. I especially like the UN-wide model. For such a program, of course, there're the usual questions: funding? location? personnel?

7) Is A "Gun Amnesty" the correct term?
Is it?

8) What would be the most appropriate category?
If it is merely setting up a gun amnesty I could see it possibly being argued social justice (as giving the disadvantaged the right to turn themselves in for illegal weapons without prosecution), human rights (the right for all to turn in guns without prosecution), gun control (for obvious reasons), international security (for the elimination of weapons making regions safer), and political stability (because of the decreased possibility of internal violence/coup/etc.)

Just because it could be argued as such, doesn't mean it is really applicable in all of these. I'm just a little apprehensive to affect the stats of UN nations so with a "gun control" proposal.

9) What should it preamble about guns (this of course will vary according to what it in effect does)?
Obviously varying with category and content, I think it should include how good amnesties can be and the securing of the right all have to turn in their guns, illegal or not.

10) Should there be some sort of a committee formed, and what would it address?
If there's a committee formed I think it would address the UN-wide education program and the location/particulars of individual amnesties in UN nations. That way, unseen problems could be solved and nations aren't ruled by a document blind to their individual needs. Also possible is oversight to make certain that nations do not violate the requirements for gun disposal

11) Should amnesties strictly concern illegal guns?

I don't think so. I think there is advantage to any gun turned in being accepted.

12) Should there be anything required to be done with the guns?

Perhaps. Perhaps there should be a Regional or UN-wide gun-destruction center(s). If anything is required to be done, I think it should be the destruction or decommissioning of the guns.

13) Are there any other comments, concerns, or questions?

Good question, are there?


Responses don't have to answer all the questions or contribute a huge portion to the discussion. Any response is welcomed.

if this is set out as guidelines, and people remember that they are guidelines only, this could be good. the only problem is, that for illegal firearms it would have to be a once off thing. we cant exactly have criminals coming back over and over again.

there is no act permitting or preventing people from owning guns. there is no gun control in effect. therefore, is there such a thing as an illegal firearm?

there is no act permitting or preventing people from owning guns. there is no gun control in effect. therefore, is there such a thing as an illegal firearm?
what is and isnt deemed illegal is determined by the individual nations.

Here are some links to a brief search for information regarding Gun Amnesty I conducted in Real Life (a very brief search--I'd appreciate any more information):

http://www.suntimes.co.za/zones/sundaytimesNEW/newsst/newsst1110201029.aspx

http://www.getgunsoffthestreets.co.uk/qa.htm

http://www.bedfordhomewatch.co.uk/news_gun_amnesty.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2986179.stm



there is no act permitting or preventing people from owning guns. there is no gun control in effect. therefore, is there such a thing as an illegal firearm?


what is and isnt deemed illegal is determined by the individual nations.

Absolutely. The idea is to allow more and more citizens to more freely from "outlaw" to "upstanding member of society" by allowing, at certain times and certain places, everyone to turn in illegal weapons without prosecution. This, in theory, helps stem accidental deaths from weapons, hurts the black market small arms trade, and allows governments to go after criminals more judiciously (since then there's less of a chance of a everyday person being 'accidentally' caught with an illegal firearm).

One of the possibilities of the proposal is to include very basic and universally acceptable gun regulations, perhaps even relegating these gun regulations as mere guidelines, or phased-in requirements.

Vastiva is for this - provided it does not become an underhanded method of attempting to outlaw firearms. We like our firearms, and prefer having the right to bear arms.

Vastiva is for this - provided it does not become an underhanded method of attempting to outlaw firearms. We like our firearms, and prefer having the right to bear arms.

Good point. For one, I think I can make certain there are lines which say things like "SECURES, still, the right for individual member nations to allow their citizens to carry weapons," and so on. Yeah, there'll need to be some sort of balance in this. If it feels too lopsided in future (like I've forgotten this point of yours) please remind me of this, that this is not a proposal outlawing firearms.

What we need is not gun control but more guns. You should add in every man woman and child MUST own at least 2 firearms. Bang bang. :sniper:

What we need is not gun control but more guns. You should add in every man woman and child MUST own at least 2 firearms. Bang bang. :sniper: maybe not kids MUST, but at least can
:sniper: :mp5:

Good point. For one, I think I can make certain there are lines which say things like "SECURES, still, the right for individual member nations to allow their citizens to carry weapons," and so on. Yeah, there'll need to be some sort of balance in this. If it feels too lopsided in future (like I've forgotten this point of yours) please remind me of this, that this is not a proposal outlawing firearms.

If that is kept in mind for this proposal, I'll try to get someone to support it.

Are the police going to pay for guns turned in?
We do that here. Helps boost the numbers dramatically.

And are ballistics tests on the guns ruled out? We don't want this being used as a way for the mobs to destroy the evidence.

Are the police going to pay for guns turned in?
We do that here. Helps boost the numbers dramatically.

And are ballistics tests on the guns ruled out? We don't want this being used as a way for the mobs to destroy the evidence.

Excellent points. I initially think that in the end it would be allowed for nations to perform ballistics tests on the guns if they wanted to. But this also deals with the question of what is done with the weapons once they are turned in. If it is required that the guns be destroyed then there would need to be measures allowing nations to hold onto weapons they believe to be used in a crime (other than possession of an illegal firearm). I think this would be reasonable. This is all very preliminary, but I like the idea that ballistics tests could be run, and I'm still favoring at least strongly encouraging nations to destroy the weapons turned in.

I think that payment for the guns by police would have to be a national decision, as I'm not sure a lot of nations would go for it. I can probably rustle up some language which secures it as a national decision in a three or four days when I start trying to develop the first draft.

What we need is not gun control but more guns. You should add in every man woman and child MUST own at least 2 firearms. Bang bang. :sniper:
we whole heartedly disagree with this notion, especially when it goes agaisnt the topic being discussed. while we agree that it is each nations right to determine their own gun laws, we also agree to guidlines for things like the subject matter of this discussion. although, we might add, there should be only one time they can hand in illegal firearms, but no such restriction on legal ones. the only time there should be flexability is if they have many wepons to hand in, thus they must return immediatly after with the rest of the weapons that they couldnt bring at that point in time.

we whole heartedly disagree with this notion, especially when it goes agaisnt the topic being discussed. while we agree that it is each nations right to determine their own gun laws, we also agree to guidlines for things like the subject matter of this discussion. although, we might add, there should be only one time they can hand in illegal firearms, but no such restriction on legal ones. the only time there should be flexability is if they have many wepons to hand in, thus they must return immediatly after with the rest of the weapons that they couldnt bring at that point in time.


Yeah, this isn't about to be a proposal which regulates or de-regulates guns. Mandatying gun ownership, or disallowing it, is out. Though, there many need to be provisions to minimize cost for those nations which don't allow their citizens to carry guns.

And I like the ideas you've presented. Most gun amnesties that I've heard of occur at a set time, so it makes sense that gun amnesties not be indefinite safe houses for those carrying illegal guns. Also the flexibility of having to carry large amounts of guns. That'll be taken into consideration--it'll probably make it in the draft, anyway.

I'd agree with the intent.


1) Should there be [at least] one amnesty created in each member nation?


Hmm, somewhat in agreement. However, I would limit such creation to states in possession of gun control laws in the first place. If a state had no gun control, the creation of an amnesty would be non-productive. Since the amnesty program would, literally, be doing nothing but wasting resources.


2) Should there be an international amnesty created?


I'd more inclined to affirm the creation of one. This would allow for the safe removal of firearms that are in transit between states.


3) What are some needed guidelines as far as the structure of amnesties, if any?

Well, since we are reffering to the surrender of illegal arms, I would suggest possibly the creation of a database and balastics testing of the firearms, so that data can be supplied to law-enforcement in the determination of whether or not such weapons had been used in the commission of a crime.


4) What would be guidelines of conduct or security around gun amnesties?


Very important. Obviously those with such programs would not want illegal weapons leaking into the populace. Possibly connect such programs (once a gun has been found legally clean) to a system by which the weapons may be safely destroyed (and materials recycled). And high levels of security around storage lockers for pending weapons.


5) Should there be other gun-safety efforts combined?


I'd say no, not directly, maybe, however, connect it to an endorsement of states to impliment other gun-safty programs.


6) Should there be required education campaigns (or a UN-wide one) about gun safety?

Unsure on this one, I am inclined towards no...


7) Is A "Gun Amnesty" the correct term?


Yes.


8) What would be the most appropriate category?


Since the program is to assist in the safe disposal of such, possibly Social Justice? Since it is protecting people turning in and disposing. Though it would likely fit with Gun-Control in a "weak" sense.


9) What should it preamble about guns (this of course will vary according to what it in effect does)?

Maybe the pre-amble should be geared more towards people than guns. Since the intent of Gun Amnesty is two-fold, and its benefits are more towards individuals disposing, than gun-control in general.


10) Should there be some sort of a committee formed, and what would it address?

Given the pending guideline changes (even though still in draft), I'd avoid the creation of a committee.


11) Should amnesties strictly concern illegal guns?


I'd say no. Allow its openess, by state descision to the disposal of all guns. Such could assist in law-enforcement as well.


12) Should there be anything required to be done with the guns?


Mandatory recycling of illegal weapons, possible re-sale for legal ones (should such be allowed).


13) Are there any other comments, concerns, or questions?


No...


there is no act permitting or preventing people from owning guns. there is no gun control in effect. therefore, is there such a thing as an illegal firearm?


Internationally, there is none, but nationally there is amongst some states.

I believe the intent here is more of a social-justice aspect. Protecting individuals who, comming into the possession of a firearm which is illegal, (nationally or internationally), to be able to turn them in, without fear of general prosecution merely for posession. (Obviously not if the firearm was used in a crime).

1) Should there be [at least] one amnesty created in each member nation?

I'd say yes, but in nations without gun control laws, we could encourage the establishment of weapon disposal centres.

2) Should there be an international amnesty created?

Not sure what purpose this would serve.

5) Should there be other gun-safety efforts combined?

6) Should there be required education campaigns (or a UN-wide one) about gun safety?

I would leave those for separate proposals

8) What would be the most appropriate category?

I think you'll probably see the mods asking that it be gun control, in the same way that medical marijuana proposals are supposed to come under recreational drugs.

10) Should there be some sort of a committee formed, and what would it address?

I don't think there's a need for one, as long as this is only dealing with amnesties.

11) Should amnesties strictly concern illegal guns?

No. I think it ought to be open to any weapon, including non-projectile weapons such as swords and electric-shock-proddy things (riot prods? Not sure those are called).

12) Should there be anything required to be done with the guns?

Mostly recycling, museum display for some rare items. If a weapon is of a type not familiar to law enforcement (an issue relevant to NS, where many nations are FT), I'd say it would be a good idea to allow examination of it so police and possibly military can be prepared to see it used against them. I wouldn't advocate allowing any guns back into civilian circulation, as this would seem to defeat the point.

13) Are there any other comments, concerns, or questions?

I would be in favour of avoiding restrictive laws about using evidence obtained from amnesties. Ballistics testing in particular seems a good idea.

As for incentives for handing in weapons, I agree that this should be an issue decided locally to maximise effectiveness without being too costly.

These are great responses. I'll leave this up until the weekend. Then I'll see if I can put all this great advice together in a first draft.

Still, a gun control or registration act must pass in order for amnesty to be necessary. I am preparing to submit such an accord, perhaps if it passes we can get this, or something like this, passed as well.

Still, a gun control or registration act must pass in order for amnesty to be necessary. I am preparing to submit such an accord, perhaps if it passes we can get this, or something like this, passed as well.
not necessarily. the majority of UN nations believe gun control is a national issue. this is just giving guidelines for the handing over of firearms that are either illegal in that particular nation, or are legal and the owner feels that they have no further use for them. therefore we believe you misunderstood the nature of this proposal.

I agree with the representative from Lynx. The root purpose of the Gun Amnesty program is two-fold. Firstly, it provides guidelines for the storage and handling of illegal firearms; secondly it provides a means to citizens, after having come into possession, or when possession is declared illegal, to have a safe path towards handing over without being prosecuted in the process.

It deals more with "guidelines" to nations with gun-control laws in place, than as gun-control legislation in and of itself.

to add to Tekania, it also provides a place for people who have legal firearms to dispose of them if they wish to, and that applies to nations where a) there is no restriction on what guns are illegal, or b) it is a requirement to own and/or be in possesion of a gun, this latter being that owning/possesing one gun should be neccesary to fullfill this requirement