Protecting People from explosives Amendment (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Colin makes a good point, if people want to get child porn then there's really no stopping them.

Basically that our prevention won't work 100% of the time is no reason not to at least try.

Sorry, seemed to be an acceptable justification in other policy areas.


And now AngryGreatness and company is not a reference to immigration, though it can be if you would like that

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would support defining low potency explosives.

On the other hand, the argument I saw in the 2005 debate thread about regions handling the matter sounds appealing provided that the Senate can keep its groper nasties of the fan here.

[bore]

It's important to remember that most laws aren't aimed at stopping the completely determined- they're aimed at the much larger group of waverers, who might or might not do it.

For instance, in Britain a common method of suicide is taking a paracetamol overdose, and about ten years ago the british government reduced the maximum size of a paracetamol pack, and related deaths fell by about 40%, equivalent to about 765 lives.

If you really wanted to overdose on paracetamol you could still buy enough by going around different shops, stockpiling etc, or you could try a different method, but most people (thankfully) don't.

[windjammer]

So you're going to let people wear "grenades" in order to protect fireworks?

[Cranberry]

So you're going to let people wear "grenades" in order to protect fireworks?

As I stated, I would be perfectly fine with repealing that whole article

[bore]

There's been no debate for more than 36 hours and I can't see anywhere else this can go so I'm opening a final vote.

Senators, a final vote is now open on this amendment, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain

[windjammer]

AYE

[Bacon King]

Aye

[TNF]

Nay (pro-July 4th)

[bore]

Aye

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Nay (pro-July 4th)

It would make our second amendment verbadem with the U.S. Constituition iirc. How are you constrewing this as an anti-July 4th amendment?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY


Like I said, I would support a restrictive definition of low-potency explosive or replacement with some other terminology.

[Deus Naturae]

Nay

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

AYE

[windjammer]

Nay (pro-July 4th)

Please, develop.  I would love to know how forbidding people to wear dynamites and grenades has anything to do with with July 7th.

---------------------

NAY


Like I said, I would support a restrictive definition of low-potency explosive or replacement with some other terminology.

Yankee, you should know that considering how this is vague, there is nothing that forbides dynamites.
I'm saddened to see you're going to let people basically wearing grenades just in order to protect this crazy part of the constitution.

[Cranberry]

Aye

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Nay

Could you give further clarification as to your nay vote? I'm kinda baffled with why the center-right senators being opposed while it specifically protects the right to keep and bear arms(firearms and low potency explosives) is this an issue of interpretation?

[TNF]

A firework is a low-potency explosive.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

A firework is a low-potency explosive.

Then how does this amendment construe the abrogation of the right to keep and bear arms?

[TNF]

A firework is a low-potency explosive.

Then how does this amendment construe the abrogation of the right to keep and bear arms?

Are you even on this planet right now? I really wonder that when I read your posts here, given that you seem to have never read anything you're arguing about.

[bore]

This closes in about 14 hours JCL

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

A firework is a low-potency explosive.

Then how does this amendment construe the abrogation of the right to keep and bear arms?

The Atlasian language is far less constricting, and does not contain a potentially purpose driven limitation, which many on the left have used to justify gun control. It also allows for the banning of fireworks.

[Deus Naturae]

Nay

Could you give further clarification as to your nay vote? I'm kinda baffled with why the center-right senators being opposed while it specifically protects the right to keep and bear arms(firearms and low potency explosives) is this an issue of interpretation?

The amendment protecting firearms and low-potency explosives is already part of the Constitution. The proposal currently being debated is an attempt to remove the protection for low-potency explosives from the Constitution.

[bore]

By a vote of 6-3 this amendment has passed and is sent to the regions for ratification:

Aye: Bore, Polnut, JCL, Windjammer, Bacon King, Cranberry

Nay: Yankee, TNF, Deus