Introduction: Good evening. My name is ZachKearns, and I am going to be running for a seat in the House of Representatives. I am a Middle-Class Citizen and understand how legislation directly affects citizens and other agencies. I am tired of sitting on my ass all day and want to help make Firestone a safer and fairer community. There are 13 spots open, and I plan to take one of them. I will keep Firestone safe, and propose legislation to keep criminals in DOC where they belong. Firestone has just undergone a rather significant change, and I want to make an appearance in Firestone Politics. I’ve watched Law Enforcement, and understand how laws can and do impact their job. I want to make their job easier, and keep citizens safe.
What I can do for the common citizen:
I am your typical average law-abiding citizen. I understand the frustrations of citizens and other departmental agencies, and I want to be on their side. I will be the representative that listens to them and proposes legislation. For example, I would like to see controlling automatic weapons more and making it harder for criminals to be able to use weapons with light consequences. I would also propose a bill to limit and/or control the use of crowbars. I will be on the right side, and make sure to propose fair bills. I will propose legislation that makes sense and keep my supporters happy. I will make people that support me confident in their choices, and give them a voice in the house.
Conclusion:
I would like to thank you for reading this today, and if you are on the fence about voting for me, you should. I will not disappoint and will be proposing bills to congress. Thank you for reading my speech, and if you want a safe fair Firestone, you know who to vote for!
Several questions about this speech. First off, you stated “and propose legislation to keep criminals in DOC where they belong.” what legislation(s) could you purpose? Further, as a Representative you don’t just hold a position to keep criminals in DOC, you’d be making laws, voting on critical laws.
You stated “For example, I would like to see controlling automatic weapons more and making it harder for criminals to be able to use weapons with light consequences.”. You said criminals and use weapons. Criminals are not meant to have weapons, and even if they do, they shouldn’t face light consequences. Atop that, the Government can not really control who gets guns, etc – your response to this?
Take no offense to this; nor take it as slander. This is merely me stating my personal opinion on loop holes within your speech.
Thank you for asking. I was going to propose a bill about keeping people off light poles and having more severe consequences. For example, if you climb on a light pole, and an officer gets hurt or you hurt the officer you could be charged. If I get into the house, I will look into this further. I also would like to have trespassing be a much longer amount of time then just up to 5 minutes.
Secondly, When you said " You stated, “For example, I would like to see controlling automatic weapons more and making it harder for criminals to be able to use weapons with light consequences.”. You said criminals and use weapons. Criminals are not meant to have weapons, and even if they do, they shouldn’t face light consequences." I might not have phrased that correctly. I do not intend for them to have light consequences, I feel that if a criminal has an illegal weapon, they should get an automatic 900 seconds. Criminals already do not have access to weapons legally. If they have a weapon without a CFCT or its an illegal variant, there is NO other definable use except to cause murder or harm to other citizens, as well as taking our citizens’ hostage.
I will be working on a bill that makes it significantly harder to get an automatic weapon legally. I would like to have them banned, but I will talk with the FFC and see if we could settle on a compromise (Perhaps a secondary CFCT class just for automatic weapons?) There is no reason for anyone outside of law enforcement or national guard to have automatic weapons. Automatic weapons only have one use outside of self-defense. Causing mass murder. If you take for example - An AK 47, and you are a criminal with a CFCT, you very easily can go to the car dealership and open fire on people. Having semi-automatic weapons also would help to prevent hitting innocent people in the crossfire, as you have more control over the firearm. With an automatic weapon, you someone you are firing at could move and you may not have the reaction time to stop firing before you hit innocent people. With a semi-automatic, someone will have a much tougher time killing many people, and law enforcement will have a better time taking the suspect down.
I may have misphrased that, again. I would like to see that if a LEO goes up there and gets hurt by falling or other nature, they should be held responsible. Only in an instance where SCFD is NOT online.