Message from Deleted User in #FedsShallRiseAgain! #fremont-feds
Yes I believe so not 100% sure
That this house calls on the federal government to institute tighter Gun Control.
Whereas, current levels of gun crime and violence in Atlasia are the highest in the western world.
Whereas, the federal government has done nothing to combat this crisis.
Resolved, that the Commonwealth of Fremont calls on the federal government to institute tighter gun control measures.
Further Resolved, that such measures should include mandatory background checks on buyers of firearms.
Further Resolved, that such measures should include a federal gun registry with complete retroactivity.
Further Resolved, that such measures should include a complete ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of automatic and semi-automatic firearms.
Further Resolved, that such measures should include a complete ban on the carry of firearms for the purpose of self-defence without a permit.
Such a bill would most likley be unconstitutional
@Deleted User I am calling on the federal government to introduce such measures.
They can deal with constitutional issues.
Meanwhile I'm now drafting a bill to repeal our Gun Reform act.
Main aim is a complete ban on Assault Weapons within Fremont.
manufacture, sale and possession
@Deleted User If I want to pass conflicting legislation do I have to first repeal the conflicting legislation?
Namely, a Fremont Assault Weapons ban
Probably best but you can do so in the same bill
@Deleted User What If I only want to strike down parts of the original act.
I don't want to get rid of the bump stock ban.
1. Part XXX of The Gun Reform Act are repealed
XXX is whatever parts of the act you want it to be
I want to strike down 2 through 5 of section 2 of a bill.
Section 2: Regulations
1. The sale and use of bump stocks in Fremont is hereby illegal.
***2. No state is allowed to prohibit the sale and use of assault weapons.***
***3. No state is allowed to have more than a seven day or less than a 72 hour waiting period before acquiring a gun.***
***4. No state is allowed to ban less than 15 rounds of ammunition.***
***5. Gun manufactures should not be held accountable if an individual commits or attempts to commit a crime with a gun, provided the gun was acquired in a legal way.***
@Deleted User How would I word a repeal of only the bolded parts of section 2.
That is, 2., 3., 4. and 5.
1. Section 2.2 -2.5 of the Gun Reform act are hereby repealed
I am proud to be introducing a Fremont Assault Weapons Ban.
To ban Assault Weapons.
Section 1: Title
1. This act may be cities as the Fremont Assault Weapons Ban Act.
Section 2: Repeal
1. Section 2.2 - 2.4 of the Gun Reform Act are hereby repealed, namely-
2. No state is allowed to prohibit the sale and use of assault weapons.
3. No state is allowed to have more than a seven day or less than a 72 hour waiting period before acquiring a gun.
4. No state is allowed to ban less than 15 rounds of ammunition.
Section 3: Assault Weapons Ban
1. The manufacture, sale, possession and use of Assault Weapons within the Commonwealth of Fremont is hereby illegal.
2. The sale and use of silencers or suppressors on guns in Fremont is hereby illegal.
Section 4: Implementation
1. This act shall be implemented immediately.
This bill is unconstitutional
Actually, how is it unconstitutional?
It violates section 7 of the bill of rights (aka the atlasian version of the 2nd amendment)
And the real-life AWB wasn't unconstitutional.
Even if it wasn't passed.
Mr. R would hate this bill
I know he will.
More than anyone in here
However he is always the one who points out how something is unconstitutional.
So after he tells me why it is unconstitutional, I can revise it to so that it passes constitutional muster.