NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the proposal I recently submitted.

Discuss more in-depth here.


A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.


Category: Gun Control


Decision: Relax


Proposed by: Koltien

Description: Acknowledges that gun control is ineffective.

Reason #1: Criminals do not abide by these rules, and purchase guns, via the black market or through arms dealers, leaving the law abiding citizens defenseless, and criminals armed.

Reason #2: Restricting gun control decreases civil rights, which leads to anarchy. Of course, this would lead to the overthrowing of the WA, who, abiding by their own laws, would have no weaponry with which to defend themselves, lest be called hypocrites.

Resolution: Relax all current gun laws. Certain laws need be left, however. A minimum age of 18 must be enforced, and those with criminal records must be restricted from the purchase of firearms.

Outcome: A world where people will be able to defend themselves from attackers or aggressors, which, if all follows according to plan, will decrease crime altogether, as criminals will live in fear of being killed while committing a crime.

Any one nation's policy on such matters is unlikely to have direct effects on any other nation. That being so, what makes international legislation on the topic appropriate?

Wouldn't that apply to every proposition ever put forth, and therefore make the WA useless?

Kind of a pointless question on your part unless you have more to add to it.

Wouldn't that apply to every proposition ever put forth, and therefore make the WA useless?

Principles of Diplomatic Immunity. International trade. Setting limits on how wars may be fought (e.g. by setting minimum standards for the treatment of PoWs; e.g.ii by banning bio-weapons). Extradition. International cooperation in various other fields of activity, such as scientific research.
There's PLENTY of scope for proposals that would affect interactions between nations...

We in Desh-Shrik feel the right to bear arms, the right to bare arms, the right to arm bears, and similar rights should be decided at a national level. It's not that they're not a valid WA subject, it's just that we feel it's easier to do it nationally, and that it would also work in the benefit of nations which need to ban weapons at certain times when neccesary, etc.

And we also believe the ambassador from Koltien is a bit confused. It's civil freedoms that lead to anarchy, not restrictions on them. Anarchy is the state of lawlessness where everyone is free to do whatever they want. If laws governed every part of their lives and they had no freedom it would be the opposite of anarchy, it would be a dull, boring, and possibly unfair dictatorship.

-High Council Member M. Stuart
16th of August, 18:48

We of Draco Romanus feel that the ambassador from Desh-Shrik is confused. Decrease of Freedom to any extreme leads to revolt and an overthrow of government by the unhappy and freedom-starved citizens.

I meant anarchy in the sense of chaos, not lack of government.

I believe many factors could lead to anarchy, and relaxing gun control in a way deals with civil freedoms.

Actually a lot.

In fact, it is a civil freedom.

Not having civil freedom to do what one wishes leads to resentment and rebelling against the oppressor.

Well I guess that depends on the person, as the majority of people would be to scared to fight the system.

So yeah, it leads to an unhappy existence.

But like I said, it isn't completely relaxing laws on gun ownership, laws will still be enforced, just less.

And as a side not: If you believe it should be decided at a national level, don't you think it should be removed from the WA proposal ballot?

And as a side not: If you believe it should be decided at a national level, don't you think it should be removed from the WA proposal ballot?

It's been considered, actually, but we decided not to. UN, and later WA, members have shot down every single proposal on this subject for almost six years now. We figure that's enough of a deterrent. If someone actually writes a Gun Control proposal that is clear, coherent, and international in scope, it could still pass.

We in Desh-Shrik feel the right to bear arms, the right to bare arms, the right to arm bears, and similar rights should be decided at a national level. It's not that they're not a valid WA subject, it's just that we feel it's easier to do it nationally, and that it would also work in the benefit of nations which need to ban weapons at certain times when neccesary, etc.

And we also believe the ambassador from Koltien is a bit confused. It's civil freedoms that lead to anarchy, not restrictions on them. Anarchy is the state of lawlessness where everyone is free to do whatever they want. If laws governed every part of their lives and they had no freedom it would be the opposite of anarchy, it would be a dull, boring, and possibly unfair dictatorship.

-High Council Member M. Stuart
16th of August, 18:48

Hear hear!

Anarchy for all!