Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 27, 2020, 12:22:38 pm
News: 2020 Mock/Endorsements for Presidential Primaries are now open.

  Atlas Forum
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Gustaf, Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  LC 4.4: Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act (Tabled)
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: LC 4.4: Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act (Tabled)  (Read 499 times)
OneJ
OneJ_
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,351
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -2.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 17, 2019, 03:35:00 pm »
« edited: October 13, 2019, 11:42:10 am by Speaker OneJ »

Quote
Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act

SECTION I: NAME

1. This bill may be cited as the Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act.
2. This bill may, in short, be cited as the Lincoln Assault Weapon Ban Act.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

2. Any weapon that is purchased, sold, or possessed may not have a folding or collapsible stock, a bayonet lug, a threaded barrel, a grenade launcher, or a barrel shroud.

SECTION III: AUTOMATIC WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of fully automatic weapons, also known as Title II weapons under the National Firearms Act.

SECTION IV: LEGAL LIABILITIES FOR GUN MANUFACTURERS

1. Gun manufacturers may be sued if their weapons are used in violent crimes, by family members, close friends, and/or legal counsel of family members or close friends of gun violence victims.

2. Manufacturers may be sued for up to $15 million.

3. These cases will be be submitted to, heard, and ruled on by Lincoln's regional Justice.

SECTION V: GUN TAX

1. There shall be a 15% additional tax imposed on all shotguns

2. There shall be a 30% additional tax imposed on all handguns and pistols

3. There shall be a 50% additional tax imposed on all other firearms, that are legal to purchase, under this bill.

SECTION VI: TIMING

1. This bill shall take effect, one week after being signed by the Governor.


Sponsor: None

The debating period has commenced. Debate shall not last any less than 72 hours. Are there any Councilors who would like to volunteer to sponsor this bill on behalf of S019?
Logged
DKrol
dkrolga
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,733


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2019, 04:49:45 pm »

I support this bill. We need to stop the sale of these horrible weapons of war.
Logged
JGibson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,412
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.00, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2019, 05:40:50 pm »

I share my fellow Council member DKrol's feelings on this. We need to pass this bill ASAP!
Logged
VPeanut
Peanut
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,711
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2019, 08:00:45 pm »

I favor the spirit of this (and will sign it when/if it gets to my desk) but I think we need to further clarify some points.

What is an assault weapon? The bill says "include", but we need to be as specific and certain as possible as to what construes one. I'd also like it if we could specify in Point IV.2 that "in the cases stated under Point IV.1 of this bill", just to be as concise on the language as possible.

Also I question the need for Point IV.3 to be in the bill considering we don't want to overwork our Justice and we must also acknowledge the existence of lower regional civil and/or criminal courts and court cases. Something along the lines of "in the Lincoln judicial system" would be better I think.

Clear these few points up, and I would be on board with this bill.
Logged
Representative fhtagn
fhtagn
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,902
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2019, 08:07:39 pm »

Does anyone in favor of this actually understand how semiautomatic firearms work? Does anyone understand how many modern weapons are semiautomatic?

How is this a "weapon of war"?


Do the sponsor and supporters of this not know that fully automatic weapons are
1. Already heavily regulated
2. Not common
3. Not used in mass shootings
Why ban something that isn't harming anyone?

Why should a manufacturer be held responsible for someone misusing their product? Is it acceptable to sue Ford if a drunk person drove an F150 and caused an accident?

What do you suppose people will do with their already owned and legally purchased property? The government can't just make people give them up, and Lincoln clearly doesn't have the money to offer adequate compensation for people turning them in.

Who is enforcing said laws? The police? Remember, Lincoln contains cities that don't have the best reputation with the police and their citizens. You know what's likely to happen? Minorities will be the ones targeted for owning a harmless semiautomatic pistol.

You know who else gets hurt by these proposals? Women. There's been a huge rise in women purchasing a firearm, especially pistols, for the purpose of protecting themselves. Many women feel safer because of this, especially if they purchased one following violent acts being done against them, or if they live alone.

What is the penalty for breaking these laws?

It seems S019 this didn't actually bother doing any research, and it seems those who have already come out in support need to do their research as well.
Logged
VPeanut
Peanut
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,711
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2019, 09:02:31 pm »

Does anyone in favor of this actually understand how semiautomatic firearms work? Does anyone understand how many modern weapons are semiautomatic?

How is this a "weapon of war"?


Do the sponsor and supporters of this not know that fully automatic weapons are
1. Already heavily regulated
2. Not common
3. Not used in mass shootings
Why ban something that isn't harming anyone?

Why should a manufacturer be held responsible for someone misusing their product? Is it acceptable to sue Ford if a drunk person drove an F150 and caused an accident?

What do you suppose people will do with their already owned and legally purchased property? The government can't just make people give them up, and Lincoln clearly doesn't have the money to offer adequate compensation for people turning them in.

Who is enforcing said laws? The police? Remember, Lincoln contains cities that don't have the best reputation with the police and their citizens. You know what's likely to happen? Minorities will be the ones targeted for owning a harmless semiautomatic pistol.

You know who else gets hurt by these proposals? Women. There's been a huge rise in women purchasing a firearm, especially pistols, for the purpose of protecting themselves. Many women feel safer because of this, especially if they purchased one following violent acts being done against them, or if they live alone.

What is the penalty for breaking these laws?

It seems S019 this didn't actually bother doing any research, and it seems those who have already come out in support need to do their research as well.

That's why I'm asking us to work on clarifying content in the bill, Fhtagn. As much as I appreciate your input, rest assured I know how to keep my legislature working and under the Constitution, and that we know our citizens.
Logged
DKrol
dkrolga
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,733


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2019, 09:16:12 pm »

This bill does not take away people's existing firearms. Nowhere does it say that and nowhere has a supporter of the bill, to my knowledge, said that.

This bill is designed to curb the sale of these especially dangerous weapons that no private citizen has a need to own. One does not need to own a AK-47 in order to feel safe. Personally, I do not believe anyone needs to own any firearm to feel safe, but I recognize that I would not win the argument.

Simply having these kinds of guns around makes our region more dangerous. The theory of a good guy with a gun is a myth. Having more guns around means there are more opportunities for them to misfire in the grocery store, or for someone to get a case of road rage and open fire on the highway, or for a disgruntled teenager to lose their fight with mental illness at open fire in a classroom. I don't want to see these horrors happen any longer.

Lincoln must take action, and we must take it now.
Logged
Representative fhtagn
fhtagn
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,902
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2019, 10:58:14 pm »
« Edited: September 17, 2019, 11:08:57 pm by The C Word »

This bill does not take away people's existing firearms. Nowhere does it say that and nowhere has a supporter of the bill, to my knowledge, said that.

This bill is designed to curb the sale of these especially dangerous weapons that no private citizen has a need to own. One does not need to own a AK-47 in order to feel safe. Personally, I do not believe anyone needs to own any firearm to feel safe, but I recognize that I would not win the argument.

Simply having these kinds of guns around makes our region more dangerous. The theory of a good guy with a gun is a myth. Having more guns around means there are more opportunities for them to misfire in the grocery store, or for someone to get a case of road rage and open fire on the highway, or for a disgruntled teenager to lose their fight with mental illness at open fire in a classroom. I don't want to see these horrors happen any longer.

Lincoln must take action, and we must take it now.

It literally says in the bill that possession is banned.

The only way that can reasonably be enforced, is by taking away people's guns.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

Did you even read the bill?
Logged
Feel The Bern
Lakigigar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,924
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -2.96

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2019, 05:26:28 am »
« Edited: September 18, 2019, 05:30:20 am by Councilman Laki »

I oppose this bill because I disagree SOME semi-automatic rifles and pistols are assault weapons. I disagree that gun manufacturers should be sued. I propose this amendment.

Quote
Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act

SECTION I: NAME

1. This bill may be cited as the Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act.
2. This bill may, in short, be cited as the Lincoln Assault Automatic Weapon Ban Act.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

2. Any weapon that is purchased, sold, or possessed may not have a folding or collapsible stock, a bayonet lug, a threaded barrel, a grenade launcher, or a barrel shroud.


SECTION III: AUTOMATIC WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of fully automatic weapons, also known as Title II weapons under the National Firearms Act.

SECTION IV: LEGAL LIABILITIES FOR GUN MANUFACTURERS

1. Gun manufacturers may be sued if their weapons are used in violent crimes, by family members, close friends, and/or legal counsel of family members or close friends of gun violence victims.

2. Manufacturers may be sued for up to $15 million.

3. These cases will be be submitted to, heard, and ruled on by Lincoln's regional Justice.


SECTION V: GUN TAX

1. There shall be a 15% additional tax imposed on all shotguns.

2. There shall be a 30% additional tax imposed on all handguns and pistols

3. There shall be a 50% additional tax imposed on all other firearms, that are legal to purchase, under this bill.


SECTION VI: TIMING

1. This bill shall take effect, one week after being signed by the Governor.
Logged
Pragmatist_TNAG
Full Member
***
Posts: 151


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2019, 06:17:13 am »

I agree with and support the proposed amendment made by the honorable Lakigigar
Logged
DKrol
dkrolga
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,733


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2019, 06:23:36 am »

This bill does not take away people's existing firearms. Nowhere does it say that and nowhere has a supporter of the bill, to my knowledge, said that.

This bill is designed to curb the sale of these especially dangerous weapons that no private citizen has a need to own. One does not need to own a AK-47 in order to feel safe. Personally, I do not believe anyone needs to own any firearm to feel safe, but I recognize that I would not win the argument.

Simply having these kinds of guns around makes our region more dangerous. The theory of a good guy with a gun is a myth. Having more guns around means there are more opportunities for them to misfire in the grocery store, or for someone to get a case of road rage and open fire on the highway, or for a disgruntled teenager to lose their fight with mental illness at open fire in a classroom. I don't want to see these horrors happen any longer.

Lincoln must take action, and we must take it now.

It literally says in the bill that possession is banned.

The only way that can reasonably be enforced, is by taking away people's guns.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

Did you even read the bill?

I did. But banning possession and taking guns away are, in my mind, different things.
Logged
Feel The Bern
Lakigigar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,924
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -2.96

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 18, 2019, 08:41:17 am »

This bill does not take away people's existing firearms. Nowhere does it say that and nowhere has a supporter of the bill, to my knowledge, said that.

This bill is designed to curb the sale of these especially dangerous weapons that no private citizen has a need to own. One does not need to own a AK-47 in order to feel safe. Personally, I do not believe anyone needs to own any firearm to feel safe, but I recognize that I would not win the argument.

Simply having these kinds of guns around makes our region more dangerous. The theory of a good guy with a gun is a myth. Having more guns around means there are more opportunities for them to misfire in the grocery store, or for someone to get a case of road rage and open fire on the highway, or for a disgruntled teenager to lose their fight with mental illness at open fire in a classroom. I don't want to see these horrors happen any longer.

Lincoln must take action, and we must take it now.

It literally says in the bill that possession is banned.

The only way that can reasonably be enforced, is by taking away people's guns.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

Did you even read the bill?

I did. But banning possession and taking guns away are, in my mind, different things.
That's not true. That means that everyone who owns a gun is punishable by the law.
Logged
VPeanut
Peanut
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,711
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 18, 2019, 10:44:52 am »

Friendly reminder nobody has taken up sponsorship of the original bill.
Logged
OneJ
OneJ_
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,351
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -2.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 18, 2019, 11:10:56 am »

Iíll take sponsorship and Councilman Lakigigarís amendment is friendly by me.
Logged
OneJ
OneJ_
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,351
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -2.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 18, 2019, 11:59:41 am »
« Edited: September 21, 2019, 09:09:43 am by Speaker OneJ »

I oppose this bill because I disagree SOME semi-automatic rifles and pistols are assault weapons. I disagree that gun manufacturers should be sued. I propose this amendment.

Quote
Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act

SECTION I: NAME

1. This bill may be cited as the Lincoln Assault Weapon and Automatic Weapon Ban Act.
2. This bill may, in short, be cited as the Lincoln Assault Automatic Weapon Ban Act.

SECTION II: ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a regiowide ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of assualt weapons, these weapons include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, which can accept detachable magazines, as well as revolving cylindrical shotguns.

2. Any weapon that is purchased, sold, or possessed may not have a folding or collapsible stock, a bayonet lug, a threaded barrel, a grenade launcher, or a barrel shroud.


SECTION III: AUTOMATIC WEAPON BAN

1. There shall be a ban on the purchasing, sale, or possession of fully automatic weapons, also known as Title II weapons under the National Firearms Act.

SECTION IV: LEGAL LIABILITIES FOR GUN MANUFACTURERS

1. Gun manufacturers may be sued if their weapons are used in violent crimes, by family members, close friends, and/or legal counsel of family members or close friends of gun violence victims.

2. Manufacturers may be sued for up to $15 million.

3. These cases will be be submitted to, heard, and ruled on by Lincoln's regional Justice.


SECTION V: GUN TAX

1. There shall be a 15% additional tax imposed on all shotguns.

2. There shall be a 30% additional tax imposed on all handguns and pistols

3. There shall be a 50% additional tax imposed on all other firearms, that are legal to purchase, under this bill.


SECTION VI: TIMING

1. This bill shall take effect, one week after being signed by the Governor.


Sponsor Feedback: Friendly

24 hours to object.
Logged
VPeanut
Peanut
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,711
Costa Rica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: September 21, 2019, 09:00:10 am »

Anything further, Councillors?
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,016
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 21, 2019, 05:04:25 pm »

R.I.P. film industry in Lincoln.
Logged
Representative fhtagn
fhtagn
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,902
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2019, 10:49:32 pm »

I'd like to see someone address what is wrong with current regulations on fully automatic weapons?

Whether or not someone "needs" one is irrelevant. What good reason is there for a ban when they currently aren't harming anyone?
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,016
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: September 24, 2019, 06:13:31 am »

I'd like to see someone address what is wrong with current regulations on fully automatic weapons?

Whether or not someone "needs" one is irrelevant. What good reason is there for a ban when they currently aren't harming anyone?

No one has been killed with a legally owned machine gun in Atlasia since 1988. There have been a whopping 2 murders with such weapons since 1934.
Logged
OneJ
OneJ_
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,351
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -2.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: September 25, 2019, 01:36:35 pm »

If no other councilor has anything to add, I'll motion for a final vote. The period to object shall last for 24 hours.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547
United States



WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: September 25, 2019, 02:29:24 pm »

I'm concerned regarding the vague ban on possession of Title II weapons and how the regional government plans to institute such a ban. Most of these types of weapons are already heavily regulated and are not readily available for gun owners. Will museums be prohibited from displaying historical weaponry matching Title II descriptions?

If the purpose of this part of the bill is to address public safety, I would argue that the Firearms Safety Act did that perfectly fine without instituting a ban.

Also, why are shotguns specifically targeted in Sec 5? Why tax such a specific firearm?
Logged
PSOL
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: September 28, 2019, 09:48:00 pm »

I echo the sentiments of Pyro, weíve already passed comprehensive gun reform, and such changes are very similar or go into further depth than this one. This bill isnít needed.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,016
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2019, 01:31:37 pm »

I'm concerned regarding the vague ban on possession of Title II weapons and how the regional government plans to institute such a ban. Most of these types of weapons are already heavily regulated and are not readily available for gun owners. Will museums be prohibited from displaying historical weaponry matching Title II descriptions?

If the purpose of this part of the bill is to address public safety, I would argue that the Firearms Safety Act did that perfectly fine without instituting a ban.

Also, why are shotguns specifically targeted in Sec 5? Why tax such a specific firearm?

There are no exceptions for museums or artists. TV and movies often feature legally owned machine guns. No studio would be able to film anything involving such weapons in Lincoln. Talk about cutting off your own nose to spite ... who are yall even trying to spite with this?
Logged
PSOL
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2019, 03:19:59 pm »


Quote
Insane Tax removal Amendment

SECTION V: GUN TAX

1. There shall be a 15% additional tax imposed on all shotguns

2. There shall be a 30% additional tax imposed on all handguns and pistols

3. There shall be a 50% additional tax imposed on all other firearms, that are legal to purchase, under this bill

Logged
OneJ
OneJ_
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,351
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -2.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2019, 08:38:44 pm »

Quote
Insane Tax removal Amendment

SECTION V: GUN TAX

1. There shall be a 15% additional tax imposed on all shotguns

2. There shall be a 30% additional tax imposed on all handguns and pistols

3. There shall be a 50% additional tax imposed on all other firearms, that are legal to purchase, under this bill


This amendment is friendly by me. However, I have been thinking that I should probably table this bill given that Lincoln already has, what I think, are effective enough laws regarding guns as said by a few already.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC