|
Repeal "Responsible Arms Trading"; Proposed by Imperium Anglorum
|
|
Topic Started: May 11 2015, 03:44 AM (218 Views)
|
|
Christian Democrats
|
May 11 2015, 03:44 AM
Post #1
|
HMSM James II
- Posts:
- 3,245
- Group:
- Citizens
- Member
- #788
- Joined:
- April 22, 2011
- Nation name:
- James II
|
This proposal reached quorum earlier today, and its vote will start in 15 minutes.
In-game debate thread: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=340747
- Repeal "Responsible Arms Trading"
- Proposed by Imperium Anglorum
Affirming the need for the securitisation of weapons for the peaceful lives of civilians across the world, Recognising that war is an inevitable part of human nature as well as a conflict which can lead to the creation of new nations and the achievement of radical change, and Believing that peace and prosperity are best preserved by the protection of civilians and not overregulation of arms used generally for defence, This august World Assembly; 1. Objects to the definition of armament, as it includes the "parts necessary in their construction or production", which includes items such as wood, metal, brass, and saltpetre, since this is an overly broad definition which includes many resources which are and are not used in armament production; 2. Realises that clause (4) is a piece of boiler-plate filler which does nothing, since it exempts from regulation weapons that are not regulated and only binds future regulations to relax gun control laws for 'recreational purposes only' and tighten said laws in the case of posing 'imminent lawless action', the first of which is irrespective of the violent nature of non-developed countries and the second of which is irrelevant, as any regulation passed would ipso facto make violations 'imminent' and 'lawless'; 3. Objects to the requirement that 'exporters and brokers of armaments within member nations ... register with the relevant governments of the nations in which they operate, as this would mean government oversight over all armament production facilities and endanger the freedoms of civilians who may want to overthrow dictatorships; 4. Decries clause (7), which prohibits the sale of weapons: - if there is a possibility of diversion, which may occur in the chaos of war (e.g. blockades, interception, etc.) and or
- if there is a possibility of use in a 'war of conquest or expropiation', the definition of which is not well defined, and hence, can include cases where nations may wish for payments of war indemnities (thus expropriating wealth), colonies, and or claims of uninhabited territories;
5. Believes that the mandate for the issuance of 'end-user certificates' is irrespective of the chaos of war, which may lead to the capture of war materiel, hence forcing that 'said buyer' might not be the 'final recipient of the product'; and thus; this esteemed World Assembly; 6. Repeals the resolution on Responsible Arms Trading.
Click here to read the original resolution Responsible Arms Trading Category: Global Disarmament Strength: Mild Proposed by: SciongradThe General Assembly, Reaffirming its commitment to international peace and goodwill, Recognizing the extreme hazard to national populations posed by the unregulated trade of weapons and armaments, Hoping to limit the involvement of member nations and their citizens in violence made possible by the aforementioned unregulated trade of weapons and armaments, 1. Defines the term "armament" as military equipment, specifically weapons and ammunition, which possess a practical application in military conflict, including the parts necessary in their construction or production; 2. Defines the term "transfer" as the movement of an armament from one member nation, political subdivisions thereof, or non-state entities associated with a member nation to any other such entity, including non-member nations and non-state entities not associated with any nation; 3. Defines the term "end-user certificate" as an affidavit completed by the buyer of armaments subject to the provisions of this resolution which verifies that said buyer is the final recipient of the product; 4. Assures member nations of the exclusive right to determine purely internal arms trading and firearm policy, excepting those regulations recognized by the terms of this resolution or extant international law, future regulations which seek to prevent firearms from being sold to or used by individuals that pose a danger of performing imminent lawless action, or future resolutions which seek to relax regulations on purchasing firearms for recreational reasons only; 5. Requires all manufacturers, exporters, and brokers of armaments within member nations to register with the relevant governments of the nations in which they operate, and the terms of such a registration shall, at minimum, encompass the provisions of this resolution; 6. Mandates that the export of armaments by any manufacturer, exporter, or broker operating within a member nation shall make the sale of their armaments conditional on the completion of an end-user certificate by the buyer; member nations are strongly urged to implement systems of end-use monitoring to ensure that the end-user certificate is authentic, when possible; 7. Prohibits the sale or transfer of armaments if: - There is reason to suspect that they will be used in contravention of extant World Assembly legislation on human rights,
- There is reason to suspect that they will be diverted from their originally intended recipient, or
- There is reason to suspect they will be used to initiate, or aid the aggressor in, a war of conquest or expropriation;
8. Further prohibits the sale or transfer of armaments to non-member nations with the intent of then transferring them to nations where the aforementioned circumstances apply. Votes For: 10,205 (66%) Votes Against: 5,177 (34%) Implemented: Wed May 6 2015
|
"I was born free and desire to continue so."
|
| |
|
Christian Democrats
|
May 11 2015, 03:44 AM
Post #2
|
HMSM James II
- Posts:
- 3,245
- Group:
- Citizens
- Member
- #788
- Joined:
- April 22, 2011
- Nation name:
- James II
|
I opposed the original resolution, and I favor this repeal proposal.
For.
|
"I was born free and desire to continue so."
|
| |
|
unibot
|
May 11 2015, 03:47 AM
Post #3
|
Chief Propagandist
- Posts:
- 4,205
- Group:
- Former Delegate
- Member
- #650
- Joined:
- December 19, 2009
|
It's nice to see a repeal with strong, legitimate reasoning for once - some of its arguments I brought up earlier, some of them I hadn't noticed originally.
I'm inclined to say for.
|
 Former Delegate of The Rejected Realms Former Editor-In-Chief, Maestro
|
| |
|
Banned: Chester Pearson
|
May 11 2015, 05:45 AM
Post #4
|
Resouluton Author Extraordinaire
- Posts:
- 130
- Group:
- Banned
- Member
- #1,140
- Joined:
- September 28, 2013
- Nation name:
- The UFoC Mission to The Rejected Realms
|
Against
|
The Right Honourable Chester B. Pearson,
Prime Minister, United Federation of Canada
|
| |
|
Opressed Ones
|
May 11 2015, 06:30 AM
Post #5
|
Dedicated
- Posts:
- 385
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,246
- Joined:
- March 31, 2014
- Nation name:
- Old Hope
|
- Quote:
-
[...]the first of which is irrespective of the violent nature of non-developed countries[...]
... Against!
|
|
|
| |
|
Gruenberg
|
May 11 2015, 08:01 AM
Post #6
|
Dedicated
- Posts:
- 270
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #254
- Joined:
- November 28, 2005
|
(Not voting.)
Contains at least 3 Honest Mistake and 1 Grossly Offensive statements. The mods don't seem to be enforcing the Honest Mistake rule anymore, though, so not terribly surprised it wasn't deleted.
|
|
|
| |
|
Sciongrad
|
May 11 2015, 11:36 AM
Post #7
|
Poster
- Posts:
- 41
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,106
- Joined:
- July 13, 2013
- Nation name:
- Sciongrad
|
Against.
|
|
|
| |
|
Kenny
|
May 11 2015, 03:37 PM
Post #8
|
WASC Suicide Bomber
- Posts:
- 113
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #439
- Joined:
- August 17, 2007
- Nation name:
- Omigodtheyclonedkenny
|
AGAINST this piece of shit repeal.
|
|
About us
|
| |
|
Gradea
|
May 12 2015, 03:14 AM
Post #9
|
Loyalist
- Posts:
- 562
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,450
- Joined:
- January 26, 2015
- Nation name:
- Rejected Gradea
|
Aganist.
|

|
| |
|
Sciongrad
|
May 13 2015, 10:44 AM
Post #10
|
Poster
- Posts:
- 41
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #1,106
- Joined:
- July 13, 2013
- Nation name:
- Sciongrad
|
Serious question: what is the delegate's voting policy? Because the vote has been against since the very first day of voting, and he's still in favor.
|
|
|
| |
|
Evolu Tanis
|
May 14 2015, 03:34 AM
Post #11
|
Epistemological Terrorist
- Posts:
- 135
- Group:
- Citizens
- Member
- #1,417
- Joined:
- December 16, 2014
- Nation name:
- Evolu Tanis
|
- Sciongrad
- May 13 2015, 10:44 AM
Serious question: what is the delegate's voting policy? Because the vote has been against since the very first day of voting, and he's still in favor. In at least one past resolution, the discussion here seemed to help drive his eventual vote, though I didn't look at the actual gameside vote tally for any previous vote. If it's straight up reinforcement of the regional tally, then this discussion will have little to no effect, most likely:
Amongst the Rejected Realms residents, voting is currently 52-17 (75% For).
Your Regional WA Delegate, Unibot III, has voted FOR this resolution.
|
Here lies a toppled god. His fall was not a small one. We did but build his pedestal - A narrow and a tall one.
|
| |
|
Kenny
|
May 15 2015, 12:24 AM
Post #12
|
WASC Suicide Bomber
- Posts:
- 113
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #439
- Joined:
- August 17, 2007
- Nation name:
- Omigodtheyclonedkenny
|
He usually switches his vote if the forum thread tilts the other way.
|
|
About us
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|