Update 10-01-private-possession-of-weapons.md

10-miscellaneous/10-01-private-possession-of-weapons.md

@@ -2,25 +2,30 @@
 
 ## Possession of private weaponry
 
-> [Apologia]: This section needs a re-do very badly. It is not satisfactory at all.
+Implicit in the right to life is the right to defend one's life against initiations of force by other conagents. Therefore `WS` categorically denies to the legislature the power to make any laws which infringe on the residents' **pre-existing** right to keep and bear weapons. In particular:
+- Any weapon which is in use by the police force **must** be freely and **liberally** available for purchase, distribution and use by the residents of a `WS` polity.
+- Any weapon which is in use by the military **must** be freely and **liberally** available for purchase, distribution and use by the residents of a `WS` polity, excepting only those weapons which meet **all** of the following criteria:
+- The weapon is has intercontinental range, or range that extends beyond the borders of the `WS` polity.
+- The weapon, is capable of mass, indiscriminate destruction.
 
-In `WS`, private possession of arms is intended to keep pace with the known and provable (by balance of probability of evidence) defensive or offensive capabilities of politicians.
+Ergo, any weapons which are denied to the police and military by the "Weaponry denied to the police and military" section below, is also denied to the
 
-We can accomplish this by any of the following:
+## Weaponry denied to the police and military:
-1. Allowing politicians freedom to possess (or rent/hire) unlimited weapons and defenses, and then allowing private individuals to sue to establish the minimum level of private weapons capability required to, without failure, subdue a politician.
-2. Restricting politicians to only employ the defenses of the public police force.
-3. Enabling politicians to define a uniform security force funded by govt for their protection (e.g, secret service in the usa), with well known weapons and defense capability and policy, and making the limit on private weapons possession be whatever level of capability is required to subdue that publicly defined security force's capabilities in the pursuit of an outlawed politician.
 
-The 3rd option is eminently superior so that is what we have chosen since it makes it crystal clear what level of private arms possession is needed, and therefore what the legal basis for private arms regulation should be; as well as ensuring that politicians will never become rogue silos of amassed arms. [Define how we should control the soldiers and keep the military subordinate to politics.]
+The government shall never arm the police and/or military with weapons which have the following characteristics:
+- Weapons which harness biological entities/organisms to cause harm to individuals; commonly known as "biological weapons".
+
+The government shall never arm the police (though they may arm the military with such weapons, as the military are to deal with external threats and not internal threats) with weapons which have the following characteristics:
+- Weapons which harness an ability to modify/write to the consciousness (whether the data, goals or algorithms/logic) of a conscious agent.
 
 ## The "recreational nuke" controversy:
 
 > [Apologia]: While the government is operating subject to the principle of being an enforcer of the sovereignty of its residents, it is not a threat for the government to possess weapons of mass destruction while barring such weapons to the residents since political accountability is still functional.
 
-> [Apologia]: However, when a government becomes tyrannical, there is no functional accountability and politicians feel no threat of consequences from the residents, and they do unleash such weapons on the residents (Assad and chemical weapons in Syria, etc). Under such circumstances however, it is not likely that it would be necessary to extend the right to keep and bear weapons of mass destruction such as ICBMs and nuclear missiles to the residents, in order to enable them to bring the government to heel. There is a much more effective measure: we will keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of the private residents, but we will also apply this policy to the government:
+> [Apologia]: However, when a government becomes tyrannical, there is no functional accountability and politicians feel no threat of consequences from the residents, and they do unleash such weapons on the residents (chemical weapons deployed in Syria, etc). Under such circumstances however, it is not likely that it would be necessary to extend the right to keep and bear weapons of mass destruction such as ICBMs and nuclear missiles to the residents, in order to enable them to bring the government to heel. There is a much more effective measure: we will keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of the private residents, but we will also apply this policy to the government:
 
 If at any time, for any reason, weapons of mass destruction are deployed by a `WS` government against the internal residents of a `WS` polity, every single conagent currently holding a political office in the legislative and executive branches shall **immediately** become an outlaw without exception.
 
-For this reason, politicians holding office are recommended to hold impeachment proceedings against any individual holding a political office who is engaged in conspiracy to deploy a weapon of mass destruction against the internal residents of a `WS` polity.
+For this reason, politicians holding office are advised to hold impeachment proceedings against any individual holding a political office who is engaged in conspiracy to deploy a weapon of mass destruction against the internal residents of a `WS` polity.
 
 > [Apologia]: That should be sufficient to ensure that politicians do not deploy weapons of mass destruction against `WS` residents and also ensure that politicians will have sufficient incentive to actively take action to stop other politicians from taking such action. Weapons of mass destruction are meant to be deployed against external enemies and not against internal residents of `WS`.