 Another Gun Press Release |
|
oldraven  |
 Posted: 28-Oct-2003, 12:22 PM
|
The Protector of the Unknown
Group: Scotland
Posts: 3,316
Joined: 20-Oct-2003
Zodiac: Hazel
Realm: Guysborough Co., Nova Scotia
|
Another positive story.  Y'all have far too many guns down there. Far too many. They say in Canada there are 10,000,000 homes and 1,000,000 guns. A million's a lot, but when you look at it that way, it really isn't.
I assume you've seen Bowling for Columbine.
--------------------
Caw "I am a Canadian by birth, but I am a Highlander by blood and feel under an obligation to do all I can for the sake of the Highlanders and their literature.... I have never yet spoken a word of English to any of my children. They can speak as much English as they like to others, but when they talk to me they have to talk in Gaelic." -Alexander Maclean Sinclair of Goshen (protector of Gaelic Culture) We need more Stan Rogers. jams |
|
|
| scottish2 |
Posted: 28-Oct-2003, 12:54 PM
|
Celtic Guardian
Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,048
Joined: 26-Sep-2001
Zodiac: Birch
|
Well in my case I would be opposed to gun control. Our Constitutions never been amended so in my view congress can make no law in this regard.
http://www.archives.gov/national_archives_...transcript.html
| QUOTE | Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
|
Gun control laws do infringe on this right. No way around it they do. Now do I own a gun? No! Do I like guns? No! Do I think guns are useful? Depends! Do I think guns cause more trouble then their worth? Yes! But all that said we still have this right and this right is partly left to us in order for us to control our servant government should it decide to become so corrupt that the people have to exercise a stronger means of control. http://www.geocities.com/libertarian4life2...rty.htm#alexham| QUOTE | | "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." -Alexander Hamilton |
| QUOTE | | "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson |
| QUOTE | | "No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -Thomas Jefferson |
| QUOTE | | "This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." -Adolf Hitler, 1935. |
| QUOTE | "Besides, the advantage of being armed forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. The governments of Europe are afraid to trust the people with arms. If they did, the people would certainly shake off the yoke of tyranny, as America did." - James Madison
By the time James Madison uttered these words, Switzerland had already been a free and armed republic for nearly 250 years. The Swiss government insists that every able bodied person between 18 and 45 years of age possess a military style firearm and ammunition. Switzerland is still a free, armed republic today after nearly 460 years, and was the only nation in Europe that Hitler didn't dare invade. The Swiss also have the lowest crime rate of any nation in Europe. Armed crime in Switzerland is so rare they don't even keep statistics on it. (JP)
|
| QUOTE | "To disarm the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave them..."
-George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates 380.
|
| QUOTE | "When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."
-George Washington
|
| QUOTE | "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and the keystone under independence... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurances and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle, and pistol are equally indispensable... The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
-George Washington
|
I think I have proved my case as to what the founding fathers felt and also what everyones favorite person Hitler (Strong Sarcasm) felt on this as well.
|
|
|
| oldraven |
Posted: 28-Oct-2003, 04:18 PM
|
The Protector of the Unknown
Group: Scotland
Posts: 3,316
Joined: 20-Oct-2003
Zodiac: Hazel
Realm: Guysborough Co., Nova Scotia
|
I see your point. But I don't agree. And gun control doesn't mean the people can't bear arms. It just means we should manage the firearms industry better. We have gun control here in Canada, and there are still a lot of people with guns. They're just registered. Which I don't see as infringement.
Another thing that gun control does do for the good of all, is take guns out of the hands of criminals or psychopaths. If you can't be trusted with a gun, you shouldn't have one.
By the way, just because people hate Hitler, and for good reason, it doesn't prove that because he passed gun control legislation that all others who would are like Hitler. That quote wasn't bad.
These little details are nitpicking, in my opinion. People have to start looking at the big picture. If you, the people of the United States, don't get your gun problems under control, innocent people are going to just keep on getting killed. And it's not going to slow down, it'll only get worse. If your sense of freedom can't be ignored for the good of the people, then I think you're pride, in a sense, is killing people. Take one for the team, I say.
Oh yes, just because your historical leaders made a law, it doesn't mean they were right. Just look at your own thread on stupid laws.
(I'm not targeting you, I'm just stating my opinion)
|
|
|
| Richard Bercot |
Posted: 28-Oct-2003, 08:39 PM
|
House of Hardy
Group: Ireland
Posts: 3,342
Joined: 29-Sep-2003
Zodiac: Ash
|
I, personally, am not for Gun Control.
As Scottish2 said previously, it does not stop the criminals from getting guns. If guns are controlled because it may cause the death of another than you might just as well control Knives, Baseball Bats, & ect. It is not the weapon that does the killing, it is the user of such weapons.
What about the English banning all weapons from the Scots in fear of a revolt against them? What is the difference, a weapon is a weapon no matter how it is made or how it works.
In the case of a Tyrant taking over here in the U.S., I for one do not want to have my hands tied and follow this Tyrant helplessly. I am not a goat to be herded.
--------------------
May your days be filled with Merriment and May you walk in Balance with Creator.
"For every day you fish, you live another day"
|
|
|
| Keltic |
Posted: 28-Oct-2003, 11:51 PM
|
Celtic Guardian
Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,019
Joined: 09-May-2003
Zodiac: Willow
Realm: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
|
| QUOTE (oldraven @ Oct 28 2003, 06:18 PM) | | I see your point. But I don't agree. And gun control doesn't mean the people can't bear arms. It just means we should manage the firearms industry better. We have gun control here in Canada, and there are still a lot of people with guns. They're just registered. Which I don't see as infringement. |
All that the Canadian gun control system has done is provide another drain on the taxpayer. What was supposed to cost a under 85 million dollars has topped one billion and is growing. It has also turned the estimated 10% of firearm owners who have not registered, into criminals.
| QUOTE |
Gary Mauser, Professor
Simon Fraser University
Related Publication
Release Date: December 4, 2002
Vancouver, BC - The ballooning $1 billion price tag of the Canadian gun registry was predictable to anyone who has followed this massive boondoggle, says Gary Mauser, author of the study Misfire: Firearm Registration in Canada published last year by The Fraser Institute.
?It was clear to me in 1995 that this thing was a white elephant,? says Mauser, a highly-regarded academic from Simon Fraser University. For the past 15 years, he has conducted research on the politics of gun control, the effectiveness of gun control laws, and the use of firearms in self-defence.
Escalating Costs and Minimal Benefit
The federal government claimed in parliament that it would cost no more than $85 million over 5 years to implement firearm registration. In 1995, Mauser predicted that the final cost for the registry would be between $1 billion and $1.5 billion. In 2002, the full cost of setting up the registration bureaucracy has already reached $1 billion.
?We don?t know how much this fiasco will eventually cost but if it is allowed to continue on the same path, the bill could easily reach $2 billion by 2005,? says Mauser.
The number of employees working on firearm registration grew from under 100 in 1995 to over 1,700 in the year 2000. Given government secrecy around the program, we do not have an accurate idea of how much the current number of employees may have mushroomed.
At the same time, the total number of RCMP officers has declined by over 10 percent since 1975 on a per capita basis. The ratio of police officers to population is at its lowest point since 1972.
?These costs might be worth it if the benefits were substantial enough,? says Mauser. ?But there is no evidence that merely increasing the difficulty of obtaining a firearm through stricter gun laws has any important effect on crime rates.?
Mauser stresses that the firearm registry merely diverts money from programs that might actually be of use to improve public security. ?Why has the government wasted one billion dollars to register guns owned by hunters, when they should have made a more concerted effort to investigate organized crime? The Canadian Coast Guard or Immigration Canada could use a billion dollars to protect Canadians from terrorists. The criminal justice system could use a billion dollars to track down violent offenders or put more law enforcement officers on the streets,? he says.
?I agree with the Auditor General that the most shocking aspect of this debacle is the complete lack of accountability. The government would not tell Parliament the true costs. The government has spent over a billion for a program with no benefit to the general public,? concludes Mauser.
|
According to Statistics Canada, in 2001 only 31% of homicides were committed with a firearm and almost two-thirds of these were with handguns. Although handguns have had to be registered since 1934, only 26% of handguns used in these homicides were actually registered.
| QUOTE | | Another thing that gun control does do for the good of all, is take guns out of the hands of criminals or psychopaths. If you can't be trusted with a gun, you shouldn't have one. |
According to statistics from the Department of Justice, the refusal rate of firearms certificates, before the new gun control legislation, from 1979 to 1999 was 0.76%. Under the new legislation, from 1999 to 2001 the refusal rate is down to 0.27%. First of all, I don't believe that too many criminals are worried about registering their guns and a psychopath will be a psychopath with a gun, a knife, a car or anything that can be used as a weapon.
| QUOTE | These little details are nitpicking, in my opinion. People have to start looking at the big picture. If you, the people of the United States, don't get your gun problems under control, innocent people are going to just keep on getting killed. And it's not going to slow down, it'll only get worse. If your sense of freedom can't be ignored for the good of the people, then I think you're pride, in a sense, is killing people. Take one for the team, I say.
|
It's easy to look at the U.S. and blame all of the killings on the guns themselves but unless you look at the underlying problems of why people are pulling the trigger, you will never fix the problem. Gun control is more about political points and creating a perception of safety.
--------------------
|
|
|
| scottish2 |
Posted: 29-Oct-2003, 06:18 AM
|
Celtic Guardian
Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,048
Joined: 26-Sep-2001
Zodiac: Birch
|
I will start off my stating I am only posting quotes as for the accuracy of the quotes below am unsure as I don't nessicarily know the group or author.
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~jonjayray/...y/blacrime.html
| QUOTE | | Another spurious explanation of the Australian advantage might be that it has stricter gun control laws. This is only very partially true. While handguns are fairly effectively prohibited in Australia, possession of other firearms is only nominally controlled. At any event, the most heavily armed society in the world is Switzerland. Virtually every adult male in Switzerland has a semi-automatic military firearm in his cupboard. Yet Switzerland has one of the world's lowest rates of gun death (Clinard, 1978). Rate of gun ownership alone cannot explain the rate of gun-related crimes. |
http://www.gunowners.org/op0039.htmThis article also raises a question I have always wondered on and that is since when can the government deny you your right if you don't get a government issues permit? Where in the second amendment does it say you have to have a permit to exercise any of your rights? like protesting where does it say you need a permit to exercise your right to gather and protest? this next article is mixed it tells about what Switzerland is considering yet ends with a valid point. I personally feel that the last paragraph has the most valid point in the entire article. http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/summar...,554622,00.html | QUOTE | Switzerland Considers Revising Gun Laws
10/3/2002
The Zug, Switzerland, massacre where a gunman killed 14 people has led the government to reconsider its gun laws, SwissInfo reported Sept. 28.
The government is holding discussions on a number of measures aimed at tightening control over gun sales and ownership. One of the proposals would require gun buyers to apply for a permit.
Other measures under consideration would ban imitation guns and air guns, prohibit the sale of firearms via the Internet or in newspapers, and outlaw the possession of dangerous objects in public places.
Critics of the gun-law revisions say they fall short of addressing the main problem of widespread private ownership of guns. For instance, the law would still allow Swiss men to bring their rifles home after serving in the army and in between periods of active service.
The gunman in the Zug shooting used an army-issue assault rifle.
"What in Zug was really bad was that this man had an assault rifle, and this sort of rifle will be restricted in future," said Social Democrat parliamentarian, Paul Gunter, who supports banning Swiss soldiers from taking their guns home when they leave active service. "But one of the problems which is not solved in the new proposal is that up till now the soldiers of the Swiss army, which is every man, could keep their own gun when they left the army. And those who are coming out now have an assault rifle."
Switzerland's gun lobby contends that reforms to the 1999 gun laws are unnecessary. Ferdinand Hediger, a spokesman for the gun lobby Pro Tell, said, "We have hundreds and thousands of guns around and yet the crime rate is among the lowest in Europe. Whereas in countries like Italy, they have much tighter gun laws and they still have a much higher crime rate. So it cannot be linked together. There are so many factors that lead to increased crime that have nothing to do with the gun law."
|
This next article is quite interesting I read about half of it but being I just got up could not handle reading it all. Will finihs it when I awake LOL but it has a lot of good figures on percentages here and the UK and Switzerland that prove our case even further that guns don't kill people but the people involved kill people and gun control does nothing to help otherwise Switzerland would not be as they are. Also if everyone that wanted one could get a gun this would in fact deter crimes because criminals would think twice before attacking someone that could possibly shoot back at them. I know there was some discussion on this relating to pilots carrying weapons and how one middle eastern airline has done this for years and they never get hijacked. where as airlines without armed pilots get hijacked all the time it seems. http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/wallstreet.html| QUOTE | GUNS, CRIME, AND THE SWISS
Stephen P. Halbrook, Ph.D., J.D.
Shorter versions published in 1999 in the Wall Street Journal on June 3 (European edition) as "Armed to the Teeth, and Free" and on June 10 (American edition) as "Where Kids and Guns Do Mix."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in 1994, when the U.S. Congress was debating whether to ban "assault weapons," a talk show host asked Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, a sponsor of the ban, whether guns cause crime. The host noted that, in Switzerland, all males are issued assault rifles for their militia service and are required to keep them at home, yet little crime exists there. Bradley responded: "My guess is--Swiss are pretty dull--so my guess is that probably didn't happen."
Actually, for those who think that target shooting is more fun than golf, Switzerland is anything but "dull." By car or by train, you see shooting ranges all over the country, but only a few golf courses. If there is a Schuetzenfest in town, you will find rifles slung on hat racks in restaurants, and you will encounter men and women, old and young, walking, biking, and taking the tram with rifles over the shoulder, to and from the range. They stroll right past the police station and no one bats an eye (in the U.S. a SWAT Team might do you in).
Tourists--especially those from Japan, where guns are banned to all but the police--think it's a revolution. But shooting is really just the national sport, although it has the deadly serious function of being the backbone of the national defense.
Although there is more per capita firepower in Switzerland than any place in the world, it is one of the safest places to be. To the delight of Americans who support the right to keep and bear arms, Switzerland is the proof in the pudding of the argument that guns don't cause crime.
According to the UN International Study on Firearm Regulation, in 1994 the homicide rate in England (including Wales) was 1.4 (9% involving firearms), and the robbery rate 116, per 100,000 population. In the United States, the homicide rate was almost 9.0 (70% involving firearms), and the robbery rate 234, per 100,000. England has strict gun control laws, ergo, the argument goes, the homicide rate is far lower than in the United States. However, such comparisons can be dangerous: in 1900, when England had no gun controls, the homicide rate was only 1.0 per 100,000.
Moreover, using data through 1996, the U.S. Department of Justice study Crime and Justice concluded that in England the robbery rate was 1.4 times higher, the assault rate was 2.3 higher, and the burglary rate was 1.7 times higher than in the United States. Only the murder and rape rates in the United States were higher than in England.
The UN Study omits Switzerland from its comparative analysis. The Swiss example contradicts the Study's hypothesis that a high incidence of firearm ownership correlates with high violent crime.
The Swiss Federal Police Office reports that, in 1997, there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country. Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms (the statistics do not distinguish firearm use in consummated murders from attempts). With its population of seven million (which includes 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. There were 2,498 robberies (and attempted robberies), of which 546 involved firearms, giving a robbery rate of 36 per 100,000. Almost half of these criminal acts were committed by non-resident foreigners, which is why one hears reference in casual talk to "criminal tourists."
Sometimes, the data sounds too good to be true. In 1993, not a single armed robbery was reported in Geneva.
In a word, Switzerland, which is awash in guns, has substantially lower murder and robbery rates than England, where most guns are banned.
The world was horrified on April 20 when two students used guns and bombs to murder a dozen classmates and a teacher in Littleton, Colorado. The Congress is now stampeding to pass additional restrictions on the acquisition of firearms.. Yet in 1996, a pederast who legally owned guns under England's strict regulations went on a rampage in which he murdered 16 children and a teacher in Dunblane, Scotland. The Parliament responded with an outright ban on all handguns and most rifles.
There have been no school shootings in Switzerland, but guns and kids sure do mix there. At all major shooting matches, bicycles aplenty are parked outside. Inside the firing shelter the competitors pay 12-year olds tips to keep score. The 16-year-olds shoot rifles along with men and women of all ages.
What, asks the tourist brochure Zürich News, are the annual events that one must see in Switzerland's largest city? Under "Festivals and local customs" is the entry: "Knabenschiessen (boy's shooting contest), the oldest Zürich tradition, takes place on the second weekend in September. It consists of a shooting contest at the Albisgüetli [range] for 12 to 16 year-old boys/girls and a colorful three-day fun-fair." After that, the next big event is St. Nicholas Day in December.
The Neue Zürcher Zeitung devoted an entire page to the 1996 Knabenschiessen, noting that 3,667 teens had participated and announcing the shooting "king" and "queen." Large pictures of girls and boys with assault rifles and driving bumper cars (not at the same time!) laced the page. The event has been held since 1657.
I once attended a shooting match near Lucerne where the prizes--from rifles and silver cups to computers and bicycles--were on display at the local elementary school. You could see the children's art show while you were there.
Prof. Marshall Clinard writes in Cities With Little Crime: "Even in the largest Swiss cities crime is not a major problem. The incidence of criminal homicide and robbery is low, despite the fact that firearms are readily available in most households." The low crime rate is even more remarkable in that the criminal justice system is relatively lenient.
Besides the militia system requiring automatic rifles and/or semiautomatic pistols to be kept in the homes of all males aged 20 to 42, firearms are readily available for purchase in gun shops. Yet firearms are rarely used in violent crime. Notes Clinard, "These facts contrast strikingly with the belief that a low criminal homicide rate is due to strict firearms regulations." Homicide is tied to a willingness to resort to violence, not the mere presence of firearms. The prevalence of firearms in the home and the participation of youth in shooting matches bind youth to adults and precludes the creation of a generation gap.
Criminal homicide rates are highest in the less developed countries. These same countries often ban private possession of firearms. In some of them, such as Uganda, private murder does not compare to the genocidal murder committed by governments against their unarmed subjects.
In American society, firearms take on a sinister reputation from the nightly news and excessively-violent movies. In Switzerland, firearms symbolize a wholesome, community activity. The typical weekend shooting festival brings out the entire family. By the range will be a huge tent where scores or even hundreds of people are eating, drinking, and socializing. With colorful banners of the Cantons and of the rifle clubs fluttering in the wind, the melody of rifle fire blends with Alpine music and cow bells. Event sponsors may include banks, supermarkets, watch makers, and Die Post--the telephone and postal system.
Some 72,000 competitors participated in the Federal Schuetzenfest in Thun in 1995, making it the largest rifle shooting match in the world. (The American National Matches that year attracted only 4,000 shooters out of 260 million citizens.) The President of Switzerland and other dignitaries gave speeches. There was no "Secret Service" to protect them, and none was needed, although thousands of guns cluttered the assembly.
Since the founding of the Swiss Confederation in 1291, Switzerland has depended on an armed populace for its defense. William Tell used a crossbow, the armor-piercing ammo of the age, not only to shoot the apple from his son's head, but also to kill the tyrant Gessler. For centuries, the cantonal republic defeated the powerful armies of the European monarchs and kept its independence. Machiavelli wrote in 1532: "The Swiss are well armed and enjoy great freedom."
Monarchist philosopher Jean Bodin, writing in 1606, denounced free speech and arms possession by commoners. Averring that "the most usual way to prevent sedition, is to take away the subjects arms," Bodin denounced the wearing of arms, "which by our laws, as also by the manners and customs of the Germans and Englishmen is not only lawful; but by the laws and decrees of the Swiss even necessarily commanded: the cause of an infinite number of murders, he which weareth a sword, a dagger, or a pistol." That argument remains a staple of Sarah Brady and Handgun Control, Inc. today.
American interest in the Swiss did not begin with John McPhree's prize-winning essay La Place de la Concorde Suisse. In 1768, as conflict with the Crown worsened, the colonists called for the strengthening of the militia, so that "this country will have a better security against the calamities of war than any other in the world, Switzerland alone excepted." By the time the new Constitution was being debated in 1787, John Adams wrote a treatise which praised the democratic Swiss Cantons, where every man was entitled to vote on matters of state and to bear arms. The famous orator Patrick Henry praised the Swiss for maintaining their neutrality and independence from the great monarchies, all without "a mighty and splendid President" or a standing army: "Let us follow their example, and be equally happy."
The Swiss influence was partly responsible for the adoption of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This has become the orphan of the Bill of Rights which some love to hate.
When the first U.S. Congress met and turned to defense measures in 1791, Representative Jackson argued: "The inhabitants of Switzerland emancipated themselves by the establishment of a militia, which finally delivered them from the tyranny of their lords." A law was passed requiring every able-bodied citizen to provide himself with a firearm and enroll in the militia, and it stayed on the books for over a century.
President Teddy Roosevelt's strictures about training youngsters to shoot in order to promote the national defense were quoted in Why School Boys Should be Taught to Shoot by General George Wingate. Wingate, a founder of the National Rifle Association (NRA), pointed to the Swiss model as the ideal. American military observers were repeatedly sent to Switzerland, and recommended that the U.S. adopt the Swiss system.
In a 1905 report, U.S. Army Captain T.B. Mott lauded the universal participation of the Swiss population in shooting matches, his only reservation being "the evil attendant upon all such assemblages of the people, drinking and carousing and the spending of money during sometimes a whole week." Actually, the party atmosphere probably ensured the survival of the Swiss militia. Perhaps the suppression of the "drinking and carousing" which characterized the early American militia musters was the reason for the eventual demise of the American militia system.
After the Great War, the Congress, after hearing laudations about Swiss shooting skills, enacted the Civilian Marksmanship Program, which continues to this day to sell surplus military rifles to civilians, much to the sargrin of Senator Ted Kennedy. Indeed, Switzerland has been debated in Congress whenever firearms prohibitions have been an issue. In testimony against a 1935 handgun-registration bill, Col. Calvin Goddard noted that crime was every bit as low in Switzerland as in England, adding: "Any Swiss citizen may carry a pistol, his pockets may bulge with pistols, without a permit, but if he kills somebody he is out of luck."
In a 1994 gun debate, Senator Larry Craig, who is an NRA board member, argued that in Switzerland "there are as many guns as there are people," yet the crime rate is low. "But there is also a fundamentally different social attitude in that country." Now that's an understatement. The Swiss may complain about their occasional "criminal tourists," but there are too many American criminal subcultures with that "different social attitude" which results in a disgraceful rate of violent crime.
While the United States is victimized by embarrassing episodes of criminal degradation, the twentieth-century European experience suggests that tyrannical governments kill far more than private criminals. In 1933, the Nazis seized power via massive search-and-seizure operations for firearms against "Communists," i.e., all political opponents. In 1938, in preparation for and during the Night of the Broken Glass, they disarmed the Jews. And when the Nazis occupied Europe in 1939-41, they proclaimed the death penalty for any person who failed to surrender all firearms within 24 hours.
There may be various reasons why the Nazis did not invade Switzerland, but one of those reasons is that every Swiss man had a rifle at home. The Nazi invasion plans themselves state that, because of the Swiss gun ownership and shooting skills, that country would be difficult to conquer and occupy. The European countries occupied by the Nazis usually had strict gun controls before the war, and their registration lists facilitated confiscation of firearms and, in many cases, execution of their owners.
By being able to keep out of both world wars in part through the dissuasive factor of an armed populace, Switzerland demonstrates that possession of firearms by civilians may help prevent large numbers of deaths and even genocide. The Holocaust never came to Switzerland, the Jewish population of which was armed just like their fellow citizens. In the rest of Europe, what if there had been not just one, but two, three, many Warsaw Ghetto Uprisings?
Traditionally, the Swiss Cantons had few firearm regulations. The first federal gun control law ever to be enacted became valid in 1999. Carrying of machineguns, but not possession thereof, is prohibited. Semiauto conversions of military machineguns may be bought with a permit, except that the retiring soldier needs no permit. Purchase of some types of firearms from a commercial dealer requires a permit, but private sales do not. Repeating rifles, both military and hunting, are exempt. Carrying a loaded weapon requires a permit. Surplus assault rifles may be purchased by any Swiss citizen from the Military Department, which has 200,000 for sale.
The bottom line is one of attitude. Populations with training in civic virtue, though armed, generally do not experience sensational massacres or high crime rates. Switzerland fits this mold. But the United States does not. As H. Rap Brown declared in the 1960s, "Violence is as American as apple pie." |
|
|
|
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
 Pages: (6) [1] 2 3 ... Last »
Track this topic
Receive email notification when a reply has been made to this topic and you are not active on the board.
Subscribe to this forum
Receive email notification when a new topic is posted in this forum and you are not active on the board.
Download / Print this Topic
Download this topic in different formats or view a printer friendly version.
|
