Politics Gun laws and news around the world

ban semi auto include pistol or shotguns?
As far as I can tell, all semi-auto arms equipped with a "large capacity magazine" will be banned, subject to exemptions. Large capacity means more than 20 rounds for pistols and more than 10 rounds for rifles/shotguns. Capacity aside, the ban will also include folding buttstock arms if folding reduces the overall length to less than 60 cm. Military-issued ordinance rifles that got converted to semi-auto are exempt from the ban. High-capacity mags will only be permitted on request for members in a shooter's association or gun club, or non-members who regularily use their guns for "sportive" shooting.

Law text in German:
 
What bunch of Bo*****S. The Swiss didn't capitulate to the EU. The majority of its people simply understood what their relaxed gun laws ment for the rest of Europe. ...

That's right, why all the previous armed terrorist attackers got their firearms from Switzerland didn't they? What, they didn't? They got them from the Balkans??!?! Gosh surely that can't be right. Next up I'm sure the EU will insist that the Balkan nations disarm their criminals. That sounds like a recipie for great success (if you're a moron that is).
 
I think somebody in here is just pissed that the laws in his country got changed. Funnily enough it wasn't because of some dope smoking tree huggers or a beardy but because a right-winger ran amok. :cool:
 
I think somebody in here is gloating that a right-winger ran amok which resulted in a member here losing their rights.

Knock it off.
 
Actually we're pissy because it was a foreigner who was given a license by the Police, even though he didn't qualify for one.

The answer from politicians was then (as always) to punish the law abiding, not the criminals and certainly not the Police who F***ed up so badly.

They're not even subtle about it, stating that they won't pay up any money for illegal firearms that are turned in - they're only after law abiding firearms owners. Which is why they've had so little compliance with their pathetic little scheme - fewer than 3000 owners have contacted them out of a FA community of 240,000.
 
Meanwhile our dribbly idiot of a Prime Minister goes "duhhh, I don't understand American gun laws", something she has in common with so much else in life. What she means is that she doesn't understand the idea of a constitution or human rights that can't be overruled with a flick of her pen.
 
right wing = ruby ridge case,branch davidians case, Timothy James Mcveigh case
Violence never ends.
 
@HisRoyalHighness: What do you know about the gun market in the Swiss? The problem with Swiss guns isn't only related to full-auto ones but also includes pistols and others.
Okay, how many firearms from Switzerland are smuggled through the EU and used in crimes vs how many firearms from the Balkans/Eastern Europe are used in crimes?

For Europe’s criminals and terrorists, buying a gun is getting easier
While illicit handguns cost between $2,300 and $3,000 in Denmark, Croatian dealers are offering similar products for 1/20th of the price. But purchasing an illicit firearm in Croatia would still be nearly impossible for a Danish criminal with no local connections. “Having the right criminal connections and reputation are crucial factors,” the group of researchers writes.
Legal firearms sales are much more tightly regulated in Europe than in the United States, so weapons are often smuggled from the western Balkans into the borderless Schengen area that includes countries such as France, Germany and Italy. Europe’s borderless area that ranges from countries such as Slovenia in the east to Portugal in the far west of the continent may be an advantage for travelers and traders, but its expansion has also eased the work of smugglers who can now access most of the continent without having to fear border checks. The conversion of blank-firing guns and reactivation of discarded weapons is also a source of illegal firearms.

Hand Grenades and Gang Violence Rattle Sweden’s Middle Class
Much of the problem is the supply of surplus weapons. The Dayton peace agreement, which ended the Bosnian war, required paramilitaries to disarm and decommission their arsenals. Sellers in Bosnia and Serbia have networks in Sweden’s diaspora and are so eager to unload excess grenades, often rusted from decades in storage, that they throw them in free with the purchase of AK-47s, Mr. Appelgren said. In Sweden the street price of a hand grenade is 100 kroner, or $12.50.
“It’s odd,” said Manne Gerell, a lecturer in criminology at Malmo University. “I don’t know of any Western country with a similar use of hand grenades. Our hypothesis is that they are used to send a message. Not so much as a weapon, as a tool for intimidation. You don’t need perfect aim. You are not trying to kill a particular person.”
Seems like there is an issue of BORDER CONTROLS that need to be taken care of and not go after law abiding gun owners. Maybe set up s giant wall and have X-ray scans of all vehicles? Nope, too hard got to go after the law abiding.



@Devil Child: Do you even know what the Schengen Agreement is and what it includes?

@muck: My guess would be that it's because it sets a precedent for mob rule and people giving up their rights to own guns through force and he's afraid this someday may happen where he lives.
Fixed to reflect reality. It’s not just the evil AR-15s, it’s your hunting rifle that is now considered a sniper rifle, it’s your shotgun that is now considered to be a gun from the Wild West, it’s your musket now considered to be black powder bomb, It’s even your crossbow/compound bow which will be called a silent killer. All ranged weapons are in the crosshairs.
 
...Fixed to reflect reality. It’s not just the evil AR-15s, it’s your hunting rifle that is now considered a sniper rifle, ...

Indeed. The rumour here is that next on the "vorbotten" list will be rifles in calibres like .338 Lapua and .50BMG and .300WM which are "far too big to be hunting rounds", because the F***-wits truly think that.
 
Again; the people of Switzerland have voted on a bill and adopted it. And yes, they did have a free choice. Whenever the Swiss have rejected a proposal the EU approached them with, a settlement was reached. A solid majority made that unnecessary today, suggesting the bill would've been passed anyway.

It's over the top to go on heated rants against the EU now. I don't seem to remember any forum member protesting when Uncle Sam forced Switzerland to renounce their constitutional right to financial confidentiality back in the day. Mind you, unlike the EU today the US actually threatened to detain Swiss nationals and kill Switzerland's economy through global sanctions.

Sure, today is a bad day for Swiss gun owners. But I have a hard time calling it a bad day for freedom, considering the bone of contention is a people's vote – and a landfall vote at that.
 
Generally speaking, the "tyranny of the majority" is a bad thing for a society, regardless of which way it goes.

That's how you get urban dwellers who think "farmers shouldn't kill animals, they can get meat from the supermarket" voting on how farmers should farm.
 
Bern had cautioned that a "No" vote would lead to Switzerland's exclusion from the visa-free Schengen travel region and also the Dublin accords regulating Europe's asylum-seeking process.
This would have far-reaching consequences for security, asylum and even tourism, and would cost the country "several billion Swiss francs each year," it said.

This is an ultimatum from Brussels, do as we say or we cut you off. This is why I deeply dislike the EU.
 
I think somebody in here is gloating that a right-winger ran amok which resulted in a member here losing their rights.

Knock it off.

I see you're a mod now. Who ever came up with that brilliant idea is obviously not aware of your posting history over at themess. :cool:

Indeed. The rumour here is that next on the "vorbotten" list will be rifles in calibres like .338 Lapua and .50BMG and .300WM which are "far too big to be hunting rounds", because the F***-wits truly think that.

It's "verboten" just as a sidenote.

Generally speaking, the "tyranny of the majority" is a bad thing for a society, regardless of which way it goes.

That's how you get urban dwellers who think "farmers shouldn't kill animals, they can get meat from the supermarket" voting on how farmers should farm.

If you really think that you should maybe move to a remote island somewhere far away from...oh wait. :cool:
 
...
If you really think that you should maybe move to a remote island somewhere far away from...oh wait. :cool:

I look forward to you whining yet again next time something happens that is passed by 50.0000005% of the population that you disagree with.

And a reminder: I've lived all over the world, you seem to have been scared to leave Germany.
 
Nobody should get offended, the majority voted for it and it is what democracy is all about. For the rest of us who have no say on our gun laws, then it is up to us to resist. My country lived through gun confiscation under martial law, though we allow the government to restrain some of our gun rights, most just ignore it.

It is up to the people to accept it or not.

FYI, most westerners get this wrong but it's not gun confiscation then tyranny, it is always tyranny first then gun confiscation.
 
Nobody should get offended, the majority voted for it and it is what democracy is all about. For the rest of us who have no say on our gun laws, then it is up to us to resist. My country lived through gun confiscation under martial law, though we allow the government to restrain some of our gun rights, most just ignore it.

It is up to the people to accept it or not.

FYI, most westerners get this wrong but it's not gun confiscation then tyranny, it is always tyranny first then gun confiscation.
What’s ironic is you are pretty correct.

Even the Chinese Communists can’t eradicate gun ownership no matter how hard they try:

Until 1981, hunting rifles in China were not required to be registered! In 1981, registration of hunting rifles was required, but most people in China, over the age of 18, were allowed to own two hunting rifles! In 1996, the law was changed to make it very difficult for almost anyone to legally own a gun. Common air rifles, which had not been considered guns, were defined as guns by a change in the law.
This does much to explain the large numbers of illegal guns the Small Arms Survey estimated to exist in China. China has the third largest number of privately held firearms in the world, at nearly 50 million! Only 1.4 percent of those are registered. Apparently, most of the guns owned before 1981, were not registered, and most were not turned in in 1996. The Tiananmen Square protests and massacre occurred in 1989.
Education and industrialization in China have been increasing. The Small Arms Survey reports that craftsmen in the Songtao Miao Autonomous County in Guizhou province make black market semi-automatic pistols for about $45 each. In the coastal cities, they sell for about $1500. There is a thriving black market in guns in China. From jamestown.org:

China’s expanding underground gun trade is the byproduct of the state’s struggle with market forces. The state fears an armed populace, but a strict ban on gun ownership has only created a black market where the wealthy and well-connected can still buy guns with ease. With the growth of the Chinese economy, the gun trade will continue to expand in response to rising demand from a population with money to spend and an appreciation for weapons stemming from its culture and history. Currently, the gun ban is unlikely to be lifted, yet it is necessary for the Chinese state to recognize the unintended consequences of the ban, and how it allocates guns disproportionately into the hands of black society syndicates that constitute a threat to the livelihood of law abiding citizens, a phenomenon that will have long-lasting negative consequences for social stability.

Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/ch...nership-of-guns-and-ammunition/#ixzz5oQfZw057
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
 
I had to correct it because for most specially the Americans, they think that taking your guns away is a sure sign of authoritarianism and teh truth is when they start taking your guns away, then it's already too late and the authoritarian government is already well entrenched. Even if say its in the guise of a female prime minister wearing a hijab to be at one with the victims...

yeah we are looking at you NZ.
 
Department Of Justice Urges SCOTUS To Strike Down NYC Gun Rule
New York City’s bizarre gun rule that prohibits gun owners from transporting their guns outside of the city is facing the ax via the Supreme Court. It’ll probably be struck down. The law makes no sense from a constitutional standpoint.

Then again, it makes no sense by any other criteria one can think of.

Now, the Department of Justice is joining in the chorus asking for the Court to overturn the law.
Trump Administration and Pro-Gun Heavyweights Support NYSRPA v City of New York
As NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox reported in March, the U.S. Supreme Court has taken up a challenge by an NRA state affiliate to a New York City gun control scheme that effectively prohibits lawfully licensed handgun owners from leaving the city with their own firearms. The plaintiffs in the case have raised a number of objections to the regime, the foremost of which is that it violates the Second Amendment. The case is New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. New York City.
The City itself, in fact, recently made a desperate attempt to avoid a ruling on its laws by claiming to the court that it was in the process of revising the regulations to address the issues raised in the case. The court rejected that gambit, and proceedings in the case have continued, with a number of stakeholders filing friend of the court (amicus curiae) briefs this week to help inform the justices’ deliberations.

Chief among them was none other than the Trump administration, with the Department of Justice (DOJ) filing a brief in support of the plaintiffs. The DOJ offered two possible bases for finding New York City’s regulations unconstitutional, including that the “transport ban infringes the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.”

This is big and has so much support from many heavyweights. I'm closely watching.
 

Similar threads

T
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top