If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Switzerland no longer a safe gun-toting mecca   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 114
    More: Scary, Swiss Police, RTS, Daillon  
•       •       •

14892 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jan 2013 at 12:59 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



114 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-03 06:42:55 AM

drjekel_mrhyde: There is hell of alot of guns in most countries in Africa, but no one brings that up


Not surprising. What goes on in those places doesn't exactly support the "An armed society is a polite society" narrative.
 
2013-01-03 07:10:20 AM

Deep Contact: They said he was mental.


Time to ban brains.

[checks fark politics tab]

Mission Accomplished.
 
2013-01-03 07:25:44 AM

jso2897: drjekel_mrhyde: There is hell of alot of guns in most countries in Africa, but no one brings that up

Not surprising. What goes on in those places doesn't exactly support the "An armed society is a polite society" narrative.


Of course, in "those places" the guns have a surprising tendency to be in the hands of a select subset of the population and consistently pointed at the rest of it. As opposed, say, to places in which the oppressed people have access to weapons. Odd, the groups of people who were clamoring for the United States and Europe to airlift small arms to the Syrian rebels.
 
2013-01-03 07:27:05 AM

Ilmarinen: Mock26: So why would you want to punish 100 million people because every year a handful of legal gun owners commit a crime with their guns?

Have you considered that it might not be about punishing? That it might not be about you?


That's obvious. It's all about you.
 
2013-01-03 07:40:33 AM

HeWhoHasNoName: fusillade762: Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias

That article is, at best, a gross misrepresentation of Swiss gun laws, practices, and ownership culture.

Here is an overview from an actual Swiss citizen and shooter who knows the actual laws:

Some Notes on the Swiss Firearms Experience (and Some 5.56 NATO Ammo for Sane Gun Policy Advocates)


Whoever that guy is, he's seriously cherry picking information to support his pro-gun stance! I lived in Switzerland for 25 years back in the day when you were still required to keep your army assault rifle at home, something that is no longer the case now. So I had one of them too. But even then when most people had their army guns at home, gun laws (from which that army rifle was exempt) in Switzerland were very, very strict. That is still the case now. If you want a gun you need to have a very good reason and there are stringent background checks.

As for the army gun, you may have had the gun at home, but that doesn't mean you get to use it whenever you want. You were given a sealed tin of 20 bullets. If you rock up to your annual reserve training with that tin opened you'll wander straight to jail, even if all the bullets are still inside. You can't buy bullets without a weapons licence either, which practically no one in the country has.

In reality that meant almost every home had a gun, but you weren't able to do anything with it. There were however still quite a few suicides via those army guns. If you're going to kill yourself you don't exactly worry about what will happen if you open your sealed tin of bullets. This was ultimately the reason why the gun is no longer kept at home. So these days it's almost unheard of having a gun at home.
 
2013-01-03 07:41:18 AM

The Lone Gunman: Well, in Switzerland everybody has a gun. So the NRA should do everything they can to make sure everybody has TWO guns.

And, just like in the US, the NRA has some recommended outlets where you can buy more guns,

GUNS!

(Yes, I know that Switzerland doesn't have an NRA)


Yes they do. It's called "ProTell".
 
2013-01-03 07:42:59 AM
Humans kill humans, ban all humans.
 
2013-01-03 07:58:28 AM

The Lone Gunman: Well, in Switzerland everybody has a gun. So the NRA should do everything they can to make sure everybody has TWO guns.

And, just like in the US, the NRA has some recommended outlets where you can buy more guns,

GUNS!

(Yes, I know that Switzerland doesn't have an NRA)


They don't need one, they don't have a Brady Bunch and allied mass media trying to disarm the peasants and ensure only the politicians and criminals have guns. (I know, I'm repeating myself.)
 
2013-01-03 07:58:45 AM

Ilmarinen: Mock26: So why would you want to punish 100 million people because every year a handful of legal gun owners commit a crime with their guns?

Have you considered that it might not be about punishing? That it might not be about you?


Maybe it isn't, but it has that effect, so to his and my viewpoints, the end result is exactly the same whether that is the intent or not.
 
2013-01-03 08:01:09 AM

ex-nuke: The Lone Gunman: Well, in Switzerland everybody has a gun. So the NRA should do everything they can to make sure everybody has TWO guns.

And, just like in the US, the NRA has some recommended outlets where you can buy more guns,

GUNS!

(Yes, I know that Switzerland doesn't have an NRA)

They don't need one, they don't have a Brady Bunch and allied mass media trying to disarm the peasants and ensure only the politicians and criminals have guns. (I know, I'm repeating myself.)


They have their own version of the NRA anyway: http://www/protell.ch
 
2013-01-03 08:07:34 AM

saugoof: Whoever that guy is, he's seriously cherry picking information to support his pro-gun stance! I lived in Switzerland for 25 years back in the day when you were still required to keep your army assault rifle at home, something that is no longer the case now.


False:

Swiss overwhelmingly reject plan to tighten gun control in referendum
AP - Swiss voters came out strongly in favor of their right to bear arms Sunday, with a clear majority rejecting a plan by churches and women's groups to tighten the Alpine nation's liberal gun laws.

Official results showed more than half of Switzerland's 26 cantons (states) voted against the proposal to ban army rifles from homes and impose new requirements for buying other guns.
 
2013-01-03 08:15:41 AM

capt.hollister: Switzerland is, in fact, a very heavily armed country. Every male citizen is a soldier for most of his life (age 18 to 52, IIRC) and must be able to mobilize at a moment's notice. To this end, they all have their uniform and army rifles at home with exactly 3 bullets which they must be able to produce at all times.

My buddy in Geneva is part of an anti-tank unit, so in addition to his rifle and 3 bullets, he also has a bazooka and related ordinance at home.

/Switzerland, home of heavily-armed neutrality


This is a lie. No one has ammo for their guns, unless they're at a shooting range or if they're in quick response groups, of which there are very few. Most Swiss give their guns back to the government after their service is up, anyway.
 
2013-01-03 08:16:22 AM

Seth'n'Spectrum: Meh, the primary problem in the U.S. is that gun ownership is treated as a right


Well, because it IS a right.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed..

The 2nd amendment never gave us the right to own firearms, it recognized that we ALREADY had the right, and the government was not to take that right away.
 
2013-01-03 08:18:36 AM

saugoof: HeWhoHasNoName: fusillade762: Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias

That article is, at best, a gross misrepresentation of Swiss gun laws, practices, and ownership culture.

Here is an overview from an actual Swiss citizen and shooter who knows the actual laws:

Some Notes on the Swiss Firearms Experience (and Some 5.56 NATO Ammo for Sane Gun Policy Advocates)

Whoever that guy is, he's seriously cherry picking information to support his pro-gun stance! I lived in Switzerland for 25 years back in the day when you were still required to keep your army assault rifle at home, something that is no longer the case now. So I had one of them too. But even then when most people had their army guns at home, gun laws (from which that army rifle was exempt) in Switzerland were very, very strict. That is still the case now. If you want a gun you need to have a very good reason and there are stringent background checks.

As for the army gun, you may have had the gun at home, but that doesn't mean you get to use it whenever you want. You were given a sealed tin of 20 bullets. If you rock up to your annual reserve training with that tin opened you'll wander straight to jail, even if all the bullets are still inside. You can't buy bullets without a weapons licence either, which practically no one in the country has.

In reality that meant almost every home had a gun, but you weren't able to do anything with it. There were however still quite a few suicides via those army guns. If you're going to kill yourself you don't exactly worry about what will happen if you open your sealed tin of bullets. This was ultimately the reason why the gun is no longer kept at home. So these days it's almost unheard of having a gun at home.


They're not even allowed the sealed tins, any more. Switzerland has really hardcore gun control laws.
 
2013-01-03 08:18:45 AM

dudemanbro: So let's limit everyone's freedom and leave all decisions up to a few heavily armed people. That will fix everything.


It depends on what you mean by fixed. A few heavily armed people mig t mean jobs for everyone.

www.nazigassings.com

Some people preferred to be cared for than being free because being free comes with burdens like self responsibility and self reliance. The more those burdens are diminished the more individual freedom is diminished
 
2013-01-03 08:28:51 AM

Pete_T_Mann: Gyrfalcon: Guess what? Where there are guns, there are people getting shot with guns. There are no places where people have no guns and yet nobody dies. There are places where nobody has guns but guess what? In those places, people get stabbed or beaten to death. It's almost as though guns were merely tools people use to enable themselves to kill more effectively.

No, no, no. Its the weapons. Look at England, they banned guns and they are a utopia. Oh, crap, they're not. But they've banned knives, and soon, they will ban trees. Because trees have big heavy limbs that you can use to hit people and therefore promote violence. After that, though, everyone will be safe there, forever.

And this really is a shocking story and would make me rethink any plan to go the Switzerland. 5 people shot. 5 people could never get injured by the same person in a country that has no guns....Switzerland has really turned into an unsafe hellhole because of the guns there...


Britain banned some semi-auto and high calibre guns after a guy bought himself an arsenal and wiped out a bunch of his neighbours. Then they banned handguns after some other guy shot up a classroom of kids. They've had one mass shooting since where a guy used a plain old shotgun to kill 12 people, but they haven't banned shotguns because as far as they're concerned all reasonable precautions have been taken. Now they're focusing on making it easier for doctors to flag if a patient is suicidal or a potential risk to others, but when I last checked nothing had been signed into law as there are a boatload of very tricky privacy issues to consider.

It's illegal to carry some types of blades in public. As it is pretty much anywhere.

Britain may not be a Utopia, but they've consistently had a murder rate five times lower than yours, even before they started getting stricter on gun control. The only reason they banned the guns they did was because a) their antiquated laws weren't made to cover the type of weapons available in modern times and b) the guns in question really weren't useful for anything other than killing lots of people, unlike the shotgun the last shooter had which is used all the time, especially in the farming industry.
 
2013-01-03 08:33:04 AM

saugoof: HeWhoHasNoName: fusillade762: Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias

That article is, at best, a gross misrepresentation of Swiss gun laws, practices, and ownership culture.

Here is an overview from an actual Swiss citizen and shooter who knows the actual laws:

Some Notes on the Swiss Firearms Experience (and Some 5.56 NATO Ammo for Sane Gun Policy Advocates)

Whoever that guy is, he's seriously cherry picking information to support his pro-gun stance! I lived in Switzerland for 25 years back in the day when you were still required to keep your army assault rifle at home, something that is no longer the case now. So I had one of them too. But even then when most people had their army guns at home, gun laws (from which that army rifle was exempt) in Switzerland were very, very strict. That is still the case now. If you want a gun you need to have a very good reason and there are stringent background checks.

As for the army gun, you may have had the gun at home, but that doesn't mean you get to use it whenever you want. You were given a sealed tin of 20 bullets. If you rock up to your annual reserve training with that tin opened you'll wander straight to jail, even if all the bullets are still inside. You can't buy bullets without a weapons licence either, which practically no one in the country has.

In reality that meant almost every home had a gun, but you weren't able to do anything with it. There were however still quite a few suicides via those army guns. If you're going to kill yourself you don't exactly worry about what will happen if you open your sealed tin of bullets. This was ultimately the reason why the gun is no longer kept at home. So these days it's almost unheard of having a gun at home.


The underlying issue is that pro-ban folks say the existence of a gun will cause a crime. If people are not using a readily available gun and ammunition to commit crimes, the example falls apart.
It's people who commit crimes, and the rate has got a lot more to do with Swiss culture and its other government policies.

At best, gun control changes how a crime might be committed. People like me care less about the how and are more interested in deterring criminals to begin with.
If you had the same "assault rifle in every home" policy in Mexico, you'd see them involved in more shootings.

...but that brings us back to the point. You can't fix Mexico, or break Switzerland, solely by tampering with the gun policy.
 
2013-01-03 08:39:01 AM

jso2897: drjekel_mrhyde: There is hell of alot of guns in most countries in Africa, but no one brings that up

Not surprising. What goes on in those places doesn't exactly support the "An armed society is a polite society" narrative.


These people hack each other up with machetes when they are good and ready. I'm not sure what a western politico can be expected to make of that.
"Yay, gun control does/doesn't matter because there's too many violent farkwads and no statistics."?
It comes back to the culture, and African culture is a wrecking yard of corruption and bad foreign influence.

/The question is, if you lived there, would you still want a gun? Would you want your friends to have guns?
/If yes then gun control doesn't exactly work for you...
 
2013-01-03 08:42:32 AM

Shakin_Haitian: capt.hollister: Switzerland is, in fact, a very heavily armed country. Every male citizen is a soldier for most of his life (age 18 to 52, IIRC) and must be able to mobilize at a moment's notice. To this end, they all have their uniform and army rifles at home with exactly 3 bullets which they must be able to produce at all times.

My buddy in Geneva is part of an anti-tank unit, so in addition to his rifle and 3 bullets, he also has a bazooka and related ordinance at home.

/Switzerland, home of heavily-armed neutrality

This is a lie. No one has ammo for their guns, unless they're at a shooting range or if they're in quick response groups, of which there are very few. Most Swiss give their guns back to the government after their service is up, anyway.


Wrong, wrong, and absolutely false. Swiss citizens absolutely can and do have ammo for guns at their house.

There are over a million privately owned, government-given machineguns in the country.
 
2013-01-03 08:45:27 AM
With rights come responsibilities. I never hear the firearm fetishist faction speak of responsibility.
 
2013-01-03 08:47:54 AM

saugoof: HeWhoHasNoName: fusillade762: Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias

That article is, at best, a gross misrepresentation of Swiss gun laws, practices, and ownership culture.

Here is an overview from an actual Swiss citizen and shooter who knows the actual laws:

Some Notes on the Swiss Firearms Experience (and Some 5.56 NATO Ammo for Sane Gun Policy Advocates)

Whoever that guy is, he's seriously cherry picking information to support his pro-gun stance! I lived in Switzerland for 25 years back in the day when you were still required to keep your army assault rifle at home, something that is no longer the case now. So I had one of them too. But even then when most people had their army guns at home, gun laws (from which that army rifle was exempt) in Switzerland were very, very strict. That is still the case now. If you want a gun you need to have a very good reason and there are stringent background checks.

As for the army gun, you may have had the gun at home, but that doesn't mean you get to use it whenever you want. You were given a sealed tin of 20 bullets. If you rock up to your annual reserve training with that tin opened you'll wander straight to jail, even if all the bullets are still inside. You can't buy bullets without a weapons licence either, which practically no one in the country has.

In reality that meant almost every home had a gun, but you weren't able to do anything with it. There were however still quite a few suicides via those army guns. If you're going to kill yourself you don't exactly worry about what will happen if you open your sealed tin of bullets. This was ultimately the reason why the gun is no longer kept at home. So these days it's almost unheard of having a gun at home.


Laughably incorrect. You most certainly can buy ammo. Guns are still (abundantly, at that) kept at home. The fact you're saying it's almost unheard of to have guns at home is hilariously false.
 
2013-01-03 08:51:18 AM

Shakin_Haitian: capt.hollister: Switzerland is, in fact, a very heavily armed country. Every male citizen is a soldier for most of his life (age 18 to 52, IIRC) and must be able to mobilize at a moment's notice. To this end, they all have their uniform and army rifles at home with exactly 3 bullets which they must be able to produce at all times.

My buddy in Geneva is part of an anti-tank unit, so in addition to his rifle and 3 bullets, he also has a bazooka and related ordinance at home.

/Switzerland, home of heavily-armed neutrality

This is a lie. No one has ammo for their guns, unless they're at a shooting range or if they're in quick response groups, of which there are very few. Most Swiss give their guns back to the government after their service is up, anyway.


Bullshiat. You can buy all the ammo you want in Switzerland for your military issue gun, and they are used in civilian shooting competitions all the time. In fact, shooting in Switzerland is like baseball in the US: It's the national sport. Some 200,000 people compete in the annual "Feldschiessen" competition in Switzerland. With a population of just 8 million, that's fully 2.5% of the population for a single event. To put that in perspective, in the US that would mean nearly 8 million people attending a similar event. In the US, the national shooting competition is at Camp Perry, there are just a bit over 6,000 competitors (high water mark was in the early 1960's with over 7,000 competitors).

As for the ammo, Switzerland no longer issues ammo to most militia members. That is no bar for them to privately buy as much ammo as they want for their military guns, though: 5.56x45mm military ammo is commonly available and the only "registration" is that sales of ammo (including military calibers) is recorded in a "bound book" in the store where it is purchased. If the ammo is purchased at the range, it is supposed to be fired there, but apparently that rule is widely ignored.
 
2013-01-03 08:53:17 AM
Since God was removed from villages this was inevitable.
 
2013-01-03 09:07:57 AM

DesktopHippie: Britain may not be a Utopia, but they've consistently had a murder rate five times lower than yours, even before they started getting stricter on gun control. The only reason they banned the guns they did was because a) their antiquated laws weren't made to cover the type of weapons available in modern times and b) the guns in question really weren't useful for anything other than killing lots of people, unlike the shotgun the last shooter had which is used all the time, especially in the farming industry.


OK, so the question is:

If they've consistently had a murder rate five times lower than ours, even before they started getting stricter gun control, and they have maintained that, what was the point of the additional gun control? Because apparently the "type of weapons available in modern times" and 'guns useful for killing lots of people' weren't a problem *BEFORE* the bans.

Also, I'd take exception to your characterizations: The 1996-1997 handgun bans banned *ALL* modern handguns, including specialized target pistols. The UK government had to enact a special exception to their complete ban to allow the Olympic pistol competitions to happen last year.

That ban is so complete that it includes single shot cartridge pistols, the first of which appeared in the 1840s. Hell, cartridge revolvers were invented in 1855, and semi-automatic pistols are well over 100 years old now. Hardly the idea of a "modern" gun, when you ban guns that have been around for nearly 160 years.

I'd also like to point out that the UK averaged about one mass shooting per decade before the two bans, and they are still roughly on track with a single mass shooting that happened 14 years after Dunblane (there can be a wide variation in the actual time between shootings: Random events tend to cluster naturally).

So if the laws didn't reduce homicides or suicides, and they didn't reduce mass shooting events, what good are they? They don't do what their proponents claim they would do. So why not err on the side of more freedom instead of less? Why not overturn the ban on handguns? It's been what, 16 years now? If the law was going to have some effect, it would have happened by now (especially since all legally registered guns were turned in). Why not allow their ownership again? Certainly it would do no harm, as people who decide to go on rampages simply substitute weapons that they can acquire, and at handgun-type engagement ranges, there is nothing more deadly than a shotgun.
 
2013-01-03 09:10:01 AM

BillyRayBob: fusillade

Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias

From the link: "Switzerland has also been moving away from having widespread guns"

So NOW they have a mass shooting....

Kinda makes the NRA's point, doesn't it?


Switzerland already had mass shootings. Just one example from a decade ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Leibacher
 
2013-01-03 09:10:28 AM
Uh, "drug addict" and "mental health patient" aren't lingo used to describe responsible gun owners...
 
2013-01-03 09:11:12 AM

2wolves: With rights come responsibilities. I never hear the firearm fetishist faction speak of responsibility.


Then you haven't spoken to many gun owners. The gun culture in the United States - note I said gun culture, not criminal culture - is primarily concerned with gun safety and responsibility. Yes, really. It's kind of a big deal. And the big evil NRA is in fact a major player in promoting safety, responsibility, and training.
 
2013-01-03 09:19:52 AM

2wolves: With rights come responsibilities. I never hear the firearm fetishist faction speak of responsibility.


Would you apply the same logic to Freedom of Speech, or Freedom of Religion, or Freedom of Assembly?

Also, it's those who fear weapons themselves, as if they had some sort of totemistic power all their own independent of human action who are the true firearms fetishists:

fetish (plural fetishes)
Something which is believed to possess, contain, or cause spiritual or magical powers; an amulet or a talisman. [from the early 17th c.]
Something sexual or nonsexual, such as an object or a part of the body which arouses sexual desire or is necessary for one to reach full sexual satisfaction. [from the early 19th c.]
(US) An irrational, or abnormal fixation or preoccupation. [from the 19th c.]


At least two of those definitions describe hoplophobes better than hoplophiles, and given the abnormal obsession with penis size that firearms opponents seem to have, so much so that Markley's Law is the gun version of Godwin's Law, one could argue that all three apply.
 
2013-01-03 09:50:02 AM
I think an important part of this article is being overlooked. Quote from a witness, "At first I didn't realise what was going on. I thought children were shooting at cats..." Apparently this would not be considered anything unusual in Switzerland?
 
2013-01-03 09:52:15 AM

dittybopper: DesktopHippie: Britain may not be a Utopia, but they've consistently had a murder rate five times lower than yours, even before they started getting stricter on gun control. The only reason they banned the guns they did was because a) their antiquated laws weren't made to cover the type of weapons available in modern times and b) the guns in question really weren't useful for anything other than killing lots of people, unlike the shotgun the last shooter had which is used all the time, especially in the farming industry.

OK, so the question is:

If they've consistently had a murder rate five times lower than ours, even before they started getting stricter gun control, and they have maintained that, what was the point of the additional gun control? Because apparently the "type of weapons available in modern times" and 'guns useful for killing lots of people' weren't a problem *BEFORE* the bans.

Also, I'd take exception to your characterizations: The 1996-1997 handgun bans banned *ALL* modern handguns, including specialized target pistols. The UK government had to enact a special exception to their complete ban to allow the Olympic pistol competitions to happen last year.

That ban is so complete that it includes single shot cartridge pistols, the first of which appeared in the 1840s. Hell, cartridge revolvers were invented in 1855, and semi-automatic pistols are well over 100 years old now. Hardly the idea of a "modern" gun, when you ban guns that have been around for nearly 160 years.

I'd also like to point out that the UK averaged about one mass shooting per decade before the two bans, and they are still roughly on track with a single mass shooting that happened 14 years after Dunblane (there can be a wide variation in the actual time between shootings: Random events tend to cluster naturally).

So if the laws didn't reduce homicides or suicides, and they didn't reduce mass shooting events, what good are they? They don't do what their proponents claim the ...


Well, they had an inquiry after Hungerford and decided that the weapons had been a huge factor in how many people the shooter had been able to kill and weren't really useful for anything else, so they banned them. They had another inquiry after Dunblane and came to more or less the same conclusion about handguns. The guy walked into a sports hall and shot every adult and every kid in the room bar one, and killed about half of them. He'd actually planned on opening up on the kids during their school assembly, but when he asked a random kid what time their assembly was the kid mistakenly said it was 9:30am, not 9am.

In Cumbria, on the other hand, the guy shot his victims in different locations and then moved on. He travelled about 15 miles to kill 12 people, giving the police time to figure out what was happening and warn people to stay in off the streets. It was bad, but if the guy had been armed the way the previous shooters had been the death toll is likely to have been far higher. So as far as the UK is concerned, they've done what they can on the weapons side to prevent mass slaughters like this. It's not as if anyone in the UK seems to miss the guns types that have been banned anyway.
 
2013-01-03 09:56:54 AM
reposted from an earlier thread...

I come from a country with next to no civilian access to firearms. Gun licenses are issued by the police department at the sole discretion of the police commissioner's office. They even regulate the ammunition. There's no such thing as a gun store here.

Only 3% of the population has a gun license here and a minimum of 1/3rd of those are held by present and retired police officers as well as competition shooters. We have almost no gun hunting and you can't even legally use a gun in self defense (though the one case we have on record was ultimately dismissed since it was a retired cop who did the shooting in his own home). You can't carry them in public, concealed or otherwise. And like Britain, only a small percentage of our police force is armed.

Now we have had a spike in gun crime in the last several years, but that's been restricted to drug dealers killing eachother (american and latin american gangs are trying to turn our island into a transshipment point) and a number of bank / convenience store robberies. No domestic gun crime and even the criminals have extremely limited access to firearms to the point that the cops say, of the shootings we did have, most of them were done by the same one or two guns.

Now, my country has no historical or cultural love for guns and it's a very, very small country on top of that so I won't pretend our situation is the same as the United States (or in this case, Switzerland). But I'd just like to point out that the vast majority of the world is like my little country, with very limited access to guns, and coincidentally manages to have very little gun crime. It's hard to argue there's not something to that.
 
2013-01-03 10:03:31 AM

Shakin_Haitian: They're not even allowed the sealed tins, any more. Switzerland has really hardcore gun control laws.


Did you even READ the link by the guy that lives there now and not 'back in the day'?

They aren't issued ammo now, but they can readily buy 5.56.
 
2013-01-03 10:05:19 AM
Huh? You mean thar's bad guys in other countries too?
Who would have guessed. i thought they were only in Merixa.

Now please return to your regularly scheduled funny retarded redneck voice idiocy whilst perched atop your little ivory thrones.
 
2013-01-03 10:11:03 AM

Graveworks: I think an important part of this article is being overlooked. Quote from a witness, "At first I didn't realise what was going on. I thought children were shooting at cats..." Apparently this would not be considered anything unusual in Switzerland?


It might be unusual but more likely in their minds than an adult shooting a bunch of people. During the Hungerford massacre several of the shooter's neighbours thought he was messing about and marched out of their houses to yell at him for making too much noise. It didn't even occur to them that he was shooting people until they were hit.
 
2013-01-03 10:13:25 AM

computerguyUT: Huh? You mean thar's bad guys in other countries too?
Who would have guessed. i thought they were only in Merixa.

Now please return to your regularly scheduled funny retarded redneck voice idiocy whilst perched atop your little ivory thrones.


Dude WTF ivory has been banned for years. I don't need a throne made from farking elephant tusks. Geez!
 
2013-01-03 10:37:54 AM

capt.hollister: Switzerland is, in fact, a very heavily armed country. Every male citizen is a soldier for most of his life (age 18 to 52, IIRC) and must be able to mobilize at a moment's notice. To this end, they all have their uniform and army rifles at home with exactly 3 bullets which they must be able to produce at all times.

My buddy in Geneva is part of an anti-tank unit, so in addition to his rifle and 3 bullets, he also has a bazooka and related ordinance at home.

/Switzerland, home of heavily-armed neutrality


Since 2007, militia members haven't been allowed to keep any ammunition at home unless they are part of a unit that protects airports or similar sensitive installations.
 
2013-01-03 10:43:11 AM

Mock26: There are 45.7 civilian owned guns per 100 people in Switzerland.


That .7 gun must jam a lot...
 
2013-01-03 11:07:40 AM
A lot of people seem to think that buying and being able to use ammunition at shooting ranges only is the same as having ammo at home. In Switzerland, you can't have ammo at home. Even the military can't have ammo unless they're part of fast responders, which very few of them are.

Switzerland has strict gun control and sucky blogposts aren't going to change that.
 
2013-01-03 11:23:51 AM

Shakin_Haitian: A lot of people seem to think that buying and being able to use ammunition at shooting ranges only is the same as having ammo at home. In Switzerland, you can't have ammo at home. Even the military can't have ammo unless they're part of fast responders, which very few of them are.

Switzerland has strict gun control and sucky blogposts aren't going to change that.


Please provide some kind of link to show that people cannot have ammunition at home. Yes the Military stopped providing take home ammo.

Even the wiki page says that most types of ammunition is available for commercial sale.
 
2013-01-03 11:25:27 AM
Really? Why is there always a knee-jerk reaction to re-examine our liberties every time a crazy goes all cray-cray?
 
2013-01-03 11:31:00 AM

Benjamin Orr: Shakin_Haitian: A lot of people seem to think that buying and being able to use ammunition at shooting ranges only is the same as having ammo at home. In Switzerland, you can't have ammo at home. Even the military can't have ammo unless they're part of fast responders, which very few of them are.

Switzerland has strict gun control and sucky blogposts aren't going to change that.

Please provide some kind of link to show that people cannot have ammunition at home. Yes the Military stopped providing take home ammo.

Even the wiki page says that most types of ammunition is available for commercial sale.


For use at ranges only. You have to read the whole wiki.
 
2013-01-03 11:32:02 AM
If I was a Swiss Everyman, I'd want to play this kind of thing up, to scare away the billionaire oligarchs who'd otherwise price the locals out of their own country.

/"Make Dubai your Galt's Gulch".
 
2013-01-03 11:35:34 AM
Seth'n'Spectrum Meh, the primary problem in the U.S. is that gun ownership is treated as a right. This is a problem because people don't measure the constitution up to any standard except for itself. "It's a good right because it's in the constitution" is simply not an argument, yet it's promoted as such by both the left and the right in this country.


The American constitution is secular scripture. It's treated like that because it's the only thing keeping the country on a steady course. If it wasn't for this reverence, then fly-by-night demogogues would be able to change the established order to follow whims and fashion. Gun ownership is a right, but it's not a gift of the constitution. The constitution merely enumerates a right that's so important, it rates enumeration.

It works each way for right and left. Guns are here to stay. Got it in Sacred Writing. Heard anything about the flag burner amendment lately? Me neither.
 
2013-01-03 11:36:16 AM

Shakin_Haitian: Benjamin Orr: Shakin_Haitian: A lot of people seem to think that buying and being able to use ammunition at shooting ranges only is the same as having ammo at home. In Switzerland, you can't have ammo at home. Even the military can't have ammo unless they're part of fast responders, which very few of them are.

Switzerland has strict gun control and sucky blogposts aren't going to change that.

Please provide some kind of link to show that people cannot have ammunition at home. Yes the Military stopped providing take home ammo.

Even the wiki page says that most types of ammunition is available for commercial sale.

For use at ranges only. You have to read the whole wiki.


I did... maybe you should read it again and point out what you think tells you this. I saw the section that ammo sold at ranges is supposed to be used there.

Strange that they have laws covering hunting, firearm carry permits and the transport of firearms (including keeping the ammo separate) when nobody can have ammo at home,
 
2013-01-03 11:39:26 AM
Also strange that this guy managed to shoot people with ammo that he can't have. Or they other guy in the article who fired into the ceiling at a restaurant.
 
2013-01-03 11:40:43 AM

give me doughnuts: capt.hollister: Switzerland is, in fact, a very heavily armed country. Every male citizen is a soldier for most of his life (age 18 to 52, IIRC) and must be able to mobilize at a moment's notice. To this end, they all have their uniform and army rifles at home with exactly 3 bullets which they must be able to produce at all times.

My buddy in Geneva is part of an anti-tank unit, so in addition to his rifle and 3 bullets, he also has a bazooka and related ordinance at home.

/Switzerland, home of heavily-armed neutrality

Since 2007, militia members haven't been allowed to keep any ammunition at home unless they are part of a unit that protects airports or similar sensitive installations.


Misleading. They can still buy ammo themselves.
 
2013-01-03 11:41:53 AM

Maul555: Why is there always a knee-jerk reaction to re-examine our liberties every time a crazy goes all cray-cray?


It's not a cause, it's an opportunity, Maul.

You never let a serious crisis go to waste.
- Rahm Emanuel
 
2013-01-03 11:42:37 AM

Shakin_Haitian: A lot of people seem to think that buying and being able to use ammunition at shooting ranges only is the same as having ammo at home. In Switzerland, you can't have ammo at home. Even the military can't have ammo unless they're part of fast responders, which very few of them are.

Switzerland has strict gun control and sucky blogposts aren't going to change that.


Yeah. You can.

Why do you people keep repeating this? You're reading what Wiki says and confusing it. They can't keep government issued ammo at home. They can, however, purchase and own 5.56 ammo themselves, any any other caliber.
 
2013-01-03 11:45:25 AM

fusillade762: Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias


==========

Beat me to it. Those guns belong to trained militia.
 
2013-01-03 11:46:50 AM

Fissile: fusillade762: Mythbusting: Israel and Switzerland are not gun-toting utopias

==========

Beat me to it. Those guns belong to trained militia.


Guess what's monumentally bigger than the other:

The number of Army-issued guns

The number of privately owned guns
 
Displayed 50 of 114 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report