LGC 1.4 - Amendment to the FF Act - Vetoed - Override Failed

[Sestak]

we're doing this again?

[S019]

we're doing this again?

Unfortunately, in the last Council, there was a majority brainwashed by NRA talking points. This bill will simply undo the absurd rollbacks ignorantly and absurdly pushed by people who I will note have yet to present any arguments in favor of their position.

For instance, Australia's worst shooting since 1996 killed four people, while this is ofc an unfortunate tragedy and our sympathies go out to the families of the victims, a shooting of such scale would barely be noted in this country, where we regularly have shootings of 20-30 people

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/05/australia/australia-darwin-gun-attack-intl/index.html

"On the long, bloody list of US gun violence, it would barely be a blip"

Additionally, the United Kingdom has not had a school shooting since 1996: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-1996-dunblane-massacre-pushed-uk-enact-stricter-gun-laws-180977221/

"Since the 1996 Dunblane massacre, they pointed out, “[t]here have been no more school shootings” in the United Kingdom."

Stricter gun control laws work, the people who oppose this have not provided one iota of evidence supporting their position, so naturally there's going to debate over it

[AGA]

we're doing this again?

Unfortunately, in the last Council, there was a majority brainwashed by NRA talking points. This bill will simply undo the absurd rollbacks ignorantly and absurdly pushed by people who I will note have yet to present any arguments in favor of their position.

For instance, Australia's worst shooting since 1996 killed four people, while this is ofc an unfortunate tragedy and our sympathies go out to the families of the victims, a shooting of such scale would barely be noted in this country, where we regularly have shootings of 20-30 people

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/05/australia/australia-darwin-gun-attack-intl/index.html

"On the long, bloody list of US gun violence, it would barely be a blip"

Additionally, the United Kingdom has not had a school shooting since 1996: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-1996-dunblane-massacre-pushed-uk-enact-stricter-gun-laws-180977221/

"Since the 1996 Dunblane massacre, they pointed out, “[t]here have been no more school shootings” in the United Kingdom."

Stricter gun control laws work, the people who oppose this have not provided one iota of evidence supporting their position, so naturally there's going to debate over it

Your argument is extremely shallow and does not support any of these specific measures. Your argument amounts to: countries with stricter gun control have less gun violence; therefore, every gun control measure is effective. Where is the evidence that banning silencers specifically would reduce gun violence? It seems that you place the burden of the proof on the side opposing a ban rather than the side supporting it, which is an awfully authoritarian mindset. If you had gone through each measure of this bill and convincingly argued for it, maybe then your condescending attitude would have been appropriate.

At the end of day, there are still around 400 million guns in Atlasia, leaps and bounds above any other country. That number won't drop dramatically without the confiscation of tens of millions of guns, which would have disastrous consequences that should not be entertained. Banning a gun does not guarantee that someone will not be able to obtain illegally since there are so many of them around. Worst case scenario, it creates a black market, undermines our strong system of background checks, and could make it easier for a criminal to obtain a gun. This has to be considering before banning everything willy-nilly.

I would be interested in gun control measures that have actually been shown to save lives. How about putting some safe storage regulations in here instead?

[S019]

we're doing this again?

Unfortunately, in the last Council, there was a majority brainwashed by NRA talking points. This bill will simply undo the absurd rollbacks ignorantly and absurdly pushed by people who I will note have yet to present any arguments in favor of their position.

For instance, Australia's worst shooting since 1996 killed four people, while this is ofc an unfortunate tragedy and our sympathies go out to the families of the victims, a shooting of such scale would barely be noted in this country, where we regularly have shootings of 20-30 people

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/05/australia/australia-darwin-gun-attack-intl/index.html

"On the long, bloody list of US gun violence, it would barely be a blip"

Additionally, the United Kingdom has not had a school shooting since 1996: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-1996-dunblane-massacre-pushed-uk-enact-stricter-gun-laws-180977221/

"Since the 1996 Dunblane massacre, they pointed out, “[t]here have been no more school shootings” in the United Kingdom."

Stricter gun control laws work, the people who oppose this have not provided one iota of evidence supporting their position, so naturally there's going to debate over it

Your argument is extremely shallow and does not support any of these specific measures. Your argument amounts to: countries with stricter gun control have less gun violence; therefore, every gun control measure is effective. Where is the evidence that banning silencers specifically would reduce gun violence? It seems that you place the burden of the proof on the side opposing a ban rather than the side supporting it, which is an awfully authoritarian mindset. If you had gone through each measure of this bill and convincingly argued for it, maybe then your condescending attitude would have been appropriate.

Yes I agree that these measures are too incremental. Also silencer bans help police find shooters, it doesn't reduce gun violence, what it does do though is reduce the duration of mass shootings, and allow people to flee from danger.

Sources: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nra-wants-to-suppress-one-of-guns-most-important-safety-features/2017/01/22/5a7140fc-dcd7-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.9cc55138e058.

There's a counter to the argument that they hurt your ears too: "The simple and obvious expedients of wearing earplugs or ear covers are alternately dubbed inadequate to protect hearing and a drag on the social experience of shooting."

Nothing sums up my whole argument really, more than this: "But one might attribute silencers’ rare use in modern crime (the Violence Policy Center notes modern silencer use in a handful of serious crimes since 2011) to the success of the strict federal registration requirements governing them — a gun law that has worked, in other words."

Turns out things are used less in crime, when they're regulated, who would've known?

One last thing to end on: "Absent some kind of cataclysmic hearing-loss crisis by America’s tens of millions of gun owners, this political push should be recognized for what it is: an effort to provide an extremely small benefit to gun owners that willfully ignores what can happen to others once a bullet leaves a gun barrel. The lifesaving safety benefits of gun noise should weigh far more in the silencer debate. Just ask anyone caught in the vicinity of a shooting."

At the end of day, there are still around 400 million guns in Atlasia, leaps and bounds above any other country. That number won't drop dramatically without the confiscation of tens of millions of guns, which would have disastrous consequences that should not be entertained. Banning a gun does not guarantee that someone will not be able to obtain illegally since there are so many of them around. Worst case scenario, it creates a black market, undermines our strong system of background checks, and could make it easier for a criminal to obtain a gun. This has to be considering before banning everything willy-nilly.

Yes it may create a black market, but said black market will go away. Great Britain did have a gun black market from 1997 to 2005, but they cracked down on it, and eventually it went away too. Also what disastrous consequences are you referring to, your arguments seem deliberately vague.

I would be interested in gun control measures that have actually been shown to save lives. How about putting some safe storage regulations in here instead?

Yet again, extremely strict gun control does save lives, it's so annoying to have this debate when the other side is literally bought and paid for by the gun lobby. Also if you want measures that do save lives, I'm fully on board with a total handgun ban and requiring actual reasons for gun ownership, not just "I want one."

[KaiserDave]

Waste of text to argue with S019, I am not signing this in any case.

[S019]

Waste of text to argue with S019, I am not signing this in any case.

The arguments presented are very compelling, frankly I don't understand why the model that has worked in Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada can't be copied, strict gun control saves lives and reduces gun violence.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Waste of text to argue with S019, I am not signing this in any case.

You'll probably be overridden.

[KaiserDave]

Waste of text to argue with S019, I am not signing this in any case.

You'll probably be overridden.

I know this to be wrong.

[Former President tack50]

Don't let S019's radical anti-gun positions fool you. No one is proposing to "seize all the guns" or other such nonsense (which would be blatantly unconstitutional)
´
This seems to me like a broadly acceptable gun control bill; at least as originally written by Wulfric. Other than a handgun ban (which is probably excessive); everything else is more than reasonable.

I would like to ask the Governor what is so objectionable about the bill. (especially since I do not share Wulfric's optimism; overriding a veto is very unlikely to happen)

[S019]

Don't let S019's radical anti-gun positions fool you. No one is proposing to "seize all the guns" or other such nonsense (which would be blatantly unconstitutional)
´
This seems to me like a broadly acceptable gun control bill; at least as originally written by Wulfric (Lincoln's council seems to have a passion for making fairly good bill into massive trainwrecks via amendmens).

Other than a handgun ban (which is probably excessive); everything else is more than reasonable.

Yeah this is literally the original gun control bill written by Jimmy

[KaiserDave]

Don't let S019's radical anti-gun positions fool you. No one is proposing to "seize all the guns" or other such nonsense (which would be blatantly unconstitutional)
´
This seems to me like a broadly acceptable gun control bill; at least as originally written by Wulfric. Other than a handgun ban (which is probably excessive); everything else is more than reasonable.

I would like to ask the Governor what is so objectionable about the bill. (especially since I do not share Wulfric's optimism; overriding a veto is very unlikely to happen)

The handgun bill is absolutely objectionable

[Former President tack50]

Don't let S019's radical anti-gun positions fool you. No one is proposing to "seize all the guns" or other such nonsense (which would be blatantly unconstitutional)
´
This seems to me like a broadly acceptable gun control bill; at least as originally written by Wulfric. Other than a handgun ban (which is probably excessive); everything else is more than reasonable.

I would like to ask the Governor what is so objectionable about the bill. (especially since I do not share Wulfric's optimism; overriding a veto is very unlikely to happen)

The handgun bill is absolutely objectionable

Yeah I agree on that. Anything else? Because if not there is an easy compromise here

[KaiserDave]

Don't let S019's radical anti-gun positions fool you. No one is proposing to "seize all the guns" or other such nonsense (which would be blatantly unconstitutional)
´
This seems to me like a broadly acceptable gun control bill; at least as originally written by Wulfric. Other than a handgun ban (which is probably excessive); everything else is more than reasonable.

I would like to ask the Governor what is so objectionable about the bill. (especially since I do not share Wulfric's optimism; overriding a veto is very unlikely to happen)

The handgun bill is absolutely objectionable

Yeah I agree on that. Anything else? Because if not there is an easy compromise here

Not a big fan of the shotgun ban and changing the mental health clause

[Leinad]

idk which is worse, "the cops can where bulletproof vests" to hand-wave away the prospect of civilian shootouts, or the botched (and clearly inebriated!) ur mum joke said by another region's governor. (I do like how this can happen in Atlasia ftr--RL politics would be better if governor's could come in and roast someone after a indulging in a little too much bourbon.)

Anyway, I am not really a fan of this bill. If I was to vote for a version of it, it would need to have some kinda police demilitarization as well--otherwise bills like this just widen the power gap between the state and the working class.

[S019]

idk which is worse, "the cops can where bulletproof vests" to hand-wave away the prospect of civilian shootouts, or the botched (and clearly inebriated!) ur mum joke said by another region's governor. (I do like how this can happen in Atlasia ftr--RL politics would be better if governor's could come in and roast someone after a indulging in a little too much bourbon.)

Anyway, I am not really a fan of this bill. If I was to vote for a version of it, it would need to have some kinda police demilitarization as well--otherwise bills like this just widen the power gap between the state and the working class.

Police demilitarization has been done federally, but I'm fine with banning traffic police for instance from having handguns or shotguns if it makes people happy, given they aren't the units who respond to instances where people are usually armed (which would be special units).

[KaiserDave]

I am not signing a handgun ban under any circumstances

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

No point in having a vote that will be insufficient to override a veto.

I didn't want to have to do this, but whatever....this eliminates the handgun ban and imposes the bans of (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(8) on the Police.

Amendment:

Title 9, Section 6 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

(a) In general. —

No individual shall purchase, sell, or possess
(1) bump stocks;
(2) suppressors;
(3) magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and
(4) assault weapons, defined as semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic handguns, and semi-automatic shotguns.
(5) folding or collapsible stocks
(6) bayonet lugs
(7) threaded barrels
(8) grenade launchers
(9) barrel shrouds

(b) Penalties. —

An individual that purchases or sells, or possesses one or more of the devices in Subsection (a) may face the following penalties at the discretion of the court —
(1) a fine not exceeding $100,000; or
(2) a term of imprisonment of no more than 10 consecutive years.

(c) The Police, except special forces operations, shall also be subject to these restrictions, with the exception of (a)(1),(a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(9)

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Amendment adopted.

Anything further to say here?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Motion for a final vote

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Motion for a final vote

withdrawing

[S019]

I'm going to build on this, I think this is a fair compromise, it pushes for demilitarization of the police and also introduces regulations more consistent with models of gun control that have worked elsewhere in the world. I think this should address the issue of "the state having too much power."

Amendment to the FF Act (L.C. 10.14)

Title 9, Section 4 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

(a) In general. —

A “Gun License” shall be required to purchase, sell, or possess a gun in Lincoln.

(b) License types. —

There shall be the following categories of gun licenses —
(1) Class A, for rifles and shotguns; and
(2) Class B, for Class A weapons and handguns.

(c) Renewal. —

An individual shall be required to renew their Gun License every 3 years.

(d) Suspension. —

An individual's Gun License may be temporarily or permanently suspended by the court as a result of a criminal conviction relating to the violation of this Act, a violation of another gun law, the use of a gun in a crime, a crime involving bodily harm, or domestic violence.

(e) Requirements. —

An individual shall apply at a at a drivers license facility to get or renew a Gun License, where they shall —
(1) undergo a universal comprehensive background check;
(2) not have been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution by a court pass a mental health test issued by a psychologist, if they have a history of mental health issues.
(3) show proof of passing a gun training and safety course at a drivers license facility or on a drivers license facility website; and
(4) pass a gun safety exam at such drivers license facility.
(5) provide an adequate reason for submitting their license application

(f) Driver's licenses facility. —

The Bureau of Firearm Safety and Licensing shall provide to drivers license facilities the necessary courses for gun training and safety, accessible both —
(1) at the drivers license facility; and
(2) online.

(g) Waiting period. —

An individual shall not receive a gun license for the first time no sooner than one week (168 hours) after applying for one.

(h) Failure to comply. —

An individual that shall violate Subsection (a) may face the following penalties at the discretion of the court —
(1) a fine not exceeding $100,000; or
(2) a term of imprisonment of no more than 10 consecutive years.

(i) Buybacks. -

(1) The government of Lincoln shall operate a voluntary buyback program where it will buyback prohibited firearms at a price no less than double the market value.
(2) Any citizen who participates in the buyback program shall be eligible for a 2% tax credit on their regional taxes for the next two fiscal years.


[/b]

Title 9, Section 6 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

(a) In general. —

No individual shall purchase, sell, or possess
(1) bump stocks;
(2) suppressors;
(3) magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and
(4) assault weapons, defined as semi-automatic rifles semi-automatic handguns and semi-automatic shotguns.
(5) folding or collapsible stocks
(6) bayonet lugs
(7) threaded barrels
( grenade launchers
(9) barrel shrouds

(c) The Police, except special forces operations, shall also be subject to these restrictions, with the exception of (a)(1),(a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(9). Police conducting traffic stops shall no longer be permitted to carry any firearm. Special forces operations, including SWAT teams and counterterrorism units shall also be subject to these restrictions with the exception of semi-automatic handguns, which they may carry.



(b) Penalties. —

An individual that purchases or sells, or possesses one or more of the devices in Subsection (a) may face the following penalties at the discretion of the court —
(1) a fine not exceeding $100,000; or
(2) a term of imprisonment of no more than 10 consecutive years.

Title 9, Section 8 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

Any individual who is convicted of a crime involving the use of a gun any gun related offense, including any gun related crimes or possession of an illegal firearm may have any guns or gun accessories in the individual’s possession permanently confiscated by Lincoln at the discretion of the court.

 

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I shall the sponsor the amendment, modified as reflected below as the governor will not sign a handgun ban.

Amendment to the FF Act (L.C. 10.14)

Title 9, Section 4 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

(a) In general. —

A “Gun License” shall be required to purchase, sell, or possess a gun in Lincoln.

(b) License types. —

There shall be the following categories of gun licenses —
(1) Class A, for rifles and shotguns; and
(2) Class B, for Class A weapons and handguns.

(c) Renewal. —

An individual shall be required to renew their Gun License every 3 years.

(d) Suspension. —

An individual's Gun License may be temporarily or permanently suspended by the court as a result of a criminal conviction relating to the violation of this Act, a violation of another gun law, the use of a gun in a crime, a crime involving bodily harm, or domestic violence.

(e) Requirements. —

An individual shall apply at a at a drivers license facility to get or renew a Gun License, where they shall —
(1) undergo a universal comprehensive background check;
(2) not have been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution by a court pass a mental health test issued by a psychologist, if they have a history of mental health issues.
(3) show proof of passing a gun training and safety course at a drivers license facility or on a drivers license facility website; and
(4) pass a gun safety exam at such drivers license facility.
(5) provide an adequate reason for submitting their license application

(f) Driver's licenses facility. —

The Bureau of Firearm Safety and Licensing shall provide to drivers license facilities the necessary courses for gun training and safety, accessible both —
(1) at the drivers license facility; and
(2) online.

(g) Waiting period. —

An individual shall not receive a gun license for the first time no sooner than one week (168 hours) after applying for one.

(h) Failure to comply. —

An individual that shall violate Subsection (a) may face the following penalties at the discretion of the court —
(1) a fine not exceeding $100,000; or
(2) a term of imprisonment of no more than 10 consecutive years.

(i) Buybacks. -

(1) The government of Lincoln shall operate a voluntary buyback program where it will buyback prohibited firearms at a price no less than double the market value.
(2) Any citizen who participates in the buyback program shall be eligible for a 2% tax credit on their regional taxes for the next two fiscal years.


[/b]

Title 9, Section 6 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

(a) In general. —

No individual shall purchase, sell, or possess
(1) bump stocks;
(2) suppressors;
(3) magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and
(4) assault weapons, defined as semi-automatic rifles and semi-automatic shotguns.
(5) folding or collapsible stocks
(6) bayonet lugs
(7) threaded barrels
( grenade launchers
(9) barrel shrouds

(c) The Police, except special forces operations, shall also be subject to these restrictions, with the exception of (a)(1),(a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(9). Police conducting traffic stops shall no longer be permitted to carry any firearm. Special forces operations, including SWAT teams and counterterrorism units shall also be subject to these restrictions with the exception of (a)(4).


(b) Penalties. —

An individual that purchases or sells, or possesses one or more of the devices in Subsection (a) may face the following penalties at the discretion of the court —
(1) a fine not exceeding $100,000; or
(2) a term of imprisonment of no more than 10 consecutive years.

Title 9, Section 8 of the Consolidate Laws of Lincoln Omnibus Act is amended as follows:

Any individual who is convicted of a crime involving the use of a gun any gun related offense, including any gun related crimes or possession of an illegal firearm may have any guns or gun accessories in the individual’s possession permanently confiscated by Lincoln at the discretion of the court.

Is there objection to this amendment?

[AGA]

Nowhere in the Atlasian constitution is the right to bear arms restricted only to those who have an "adequate reason," so I am objecting.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Question is on the amendment.

Aye

Deputies are advised that the amendment vote will close at the beginning of the final business period (noon Wednesday)

[AGA]

Nay