Gun rights in Europe post Charlie Hebdo

I can't respond to any of the rebuttals because that would turn this thread into a drag-out, knock-down argument.

I only wanted to say that there is no counter point, or other point of view considered, to the Russia-related narrative that is present. Can I simply point that out without saying anything else?

Since its been such a fantastic and informational thread, it would be a shame to see it locked.

Keep up the great discussion, gentlemen.

I do say that our bureaucracy went easier, getting the permits, registering etc. I have heard that the new additions and changes will be done to the firearm laws, but some say that these would be the sign of what is said here "if god gives the job, it also gives the intelligence for that". Same thing translated - having no knowledge whatsoever about a thing does not exclude working on it. So who knows what will be in it. But for me it does seem to be a little easier, fees and taxes are smaller.

About the Russia-related narrative. The voluntary military force, Defense League, is gaining a lot of new recruits/volunteers, since the fracas in Ukraine and the saber-rattling in our direction (and KGB forces kidnapping one of our intelligence workers inside our borders right after the Obama's visit and strong speech). One of the biggest reasons lately for buying a gun into the civilian registry is defense of both self and homeland. And I mean sidearms, bolt-actions, semi-auto versions of military rifles (some sort of AK, last year couple of hundred VZ.58s, or an AR one sort or another). AND the police say that during the last few years most of the rifles, registered for self-defense, have been in he hands of russian-speaking citizens. In non-PC version, most of them are in the hands of the 5th echelon. So, when a grey scenario runs out, there will be plenty of sniper rifles and assault rifles out there (I use the term by intended usage), in experienced hands; and that knowledge runs behind everything I do, firearm-related. During the last year, also in other minds, from what I hear, the ad's I see - "WTB a gun for self defense, must work and be reliable", the discussions I hear. If anything happens, there will be urban warfare going around and no shortage in tangos.

As a European I won't forget Victoria Nuland's €uck the EU comment after they spent 5bn installing a neo nazi puppet regime in Kiev which then started killing it's own civilians for deciding they won't accept a coup installed government but decided to assert their own right to self governance.

If the Chinese spent 5 bn installing a puppet regime they hand picked to govern in Canada that was anti-US by nature you think the US would sit idle? If they then started shelling your relatives over the border you would not assist? Or decide to burn them alive like the Odessa massacre?

Where there is war there are weapons, we have hosted two world wars here so we have our fair share of weapons.

I only wanted to say that there is no counter point, or other point of view considered, to the Russia-related narrative that is present. Can I simply point that out without saying anything else?

Click to expand...

What POV do you think should be considered here? I'd really like to know. No one is going to jump you for making a point. Taking a drive by pot shot (which you did) is a lot more likely to get things stirred up than making a reasoned argument. I'm always willing to listen. I may not agree with everything I read but when someone takes the time to make a valid argument I try to at least consider the merit of what they're saying. But saying, "you're all being mean but I won't say how so just stop what you're doing" (which is how your comment came off) is the way threads get closed. We have all tried to educate each other here. If you have another POV I'd really like to hear it. But I do have to say I don't like someone throwing out a general slam then running without even actually describing what it is that person might think we're doing wrong. Hiding behind "I can't respond..." is just hiding IMO. I'm not afraid of a different POV. Your assumptions about how we might react are certainly invective in nature. How do you know what we're going to say? This "I can't say what I think because you're too mean" argument is pretty weak friend.

If the Chinese spent 5 bn installing a puppet regime they hand picked to govern in Canada that was anti-US by nature you think the US would sit idle?

Click to expand...

That sure sounds a lot like what happened in Cuba only with Mother Russia being the puppet master. We certainly didn't stand idly by for that at least not at first. It wasn't until we realized that they couldn't hurt us without having nukes there that we started ignoring them. And wow did we ever confront them over that missile deal. I remember wondering what the heck they had us all sitting on the school bus waiting for that day. It was supposedly a new "drill" where we got to practice going home from school early. Yeah right. Everyone knew why we were on that bus including the youngest students there. I was one of them so I can attest to that. After sitting there an hour or so with the motor running we were finally allowed to go back to school. BTW this may be part of why I might use invective in describing the Soviets.

So in answer to your question, no I don't think the US would sit idle in your scenario. I think we have a track record that proves that. We also have the Monroe Doctrine for those who remember something of US history.

Thermactor said:

I can't respond to any of the rebuttals because that would turn this thread into a drag-out, knock-down argument.

Click to expand...

What leads you to believe it would? I mean, if there are valid arguments to counter whatever might have given you an impression of prevalent phobia in this conversation, there shouldn't be a reason why they shouldn't be voiced. I like good conversations. I truly do, even when they sometimes get heated in a civilized and constructive manner. I'd like to believe that Russia, as it stands now, has no intentions to make a shift from verbal politics to outright aggression, but unfortunately we're not far from a point where it historically has been a very real possibility.

I understand russian interests in Crimea very well. Presence in Black Sea area is vital for Russia that aspires to be a superpower once again. I also understand the calculations what kind of operations and where would serve russian interests the best.

That's why a good part of finnish gun ownership is concentrated in making "foreign" occupation (if we need to wonder what that might be, any history book might give a clue) not worth its while. The likelihood of Sweden, Norway or Estonia initiating hostile actions against what's now known as Finland has been quite slim during last half a millennium or so. That's why there are number of sayings in finnish language that essentially mean "Molon Labe", derived from the most ridiculous claims of soviet radio and frontline loudspeaker propaganda of 1939-1944. Those claims were so outrageous and far-fetched that they're laughing stock these days, but strangely enough, they're eerily similar to the statements we hear Sergei Lavrov, the russian minister of foreign affairs, make about the situation in Ukraine on the news every day.

And that's scary.

Cee Zee said:

What POV do you think should be considered here? I'd really like to know. No one is going to jump you for making a point. Taking a drive by pot shot (which you did) is a lot more likely to get things stirred up than making a reasoned argument. I'm always willing to listen. I may not agree with everything I read but when someone takes the time to make a valid argument I try to at least consider the merit of what they're saying. But saying, "you're all being mean but I won't say how so just stop what you're doing" (which is how your comment came off) is the way threads get closed. We have all tried to educate each other here. If you have another POV I'd really like to hear it. But I do have to say I don't like someone throwing out a general slam then running without even actually describing what it is that person might think we're doing wrong. Hiding behind "I can't respond..." is just hiding IMO. I'm not afraid of a different POV. Your assumptions about how we might react are certainly invective in nature. How do you know what we're going to say? This "I can't say what I think because you're too mean" argument is pretty weak friend.

Click to expand...

Please carry on the discussion as intended and imagine I wasn't here.

It's been said, elsewhere in this thread, that Britain is the exception to this rule, having both highly restrictive gun laws and a highly compliant (generally anti-gun) population.

Click to expand...

That view is more prevalent in the urban areas as opposed to the country-side

Please carry on the discussion as intended and imagine I wasn't here.

Click to expand...

That's fine by me but since you saw fit to criticize our discussion I will only point out that your drive by comment did nothing to further the discussion and most likely pushed it much closer to being closed. I don't see how you think that's constructive. You take a pot shot then won't even back it up with an example much less a counter argument. That's the type of thing that gets discussions off track and closed quickly. I hope that doesn't happen in this thread because I've learned a lot here. For my part I will certainly ignore you at your request.

lykoris said:

If the Chinese spent 5 bn installing a puppet regime they hand picked to govern in Canada that was anti-US by nature you think the US would sit idle? If they then started shelling your relatives over the border you would not assist? Or decide to burn them alive like the Odessa massacre?

Click to expand...

Excellent points!
Well-said, and it still vastly understates the level of treachery committed recently. That's why there are those who are fighting for freedom in Novorossiya with the very weapons that people would bury in their yards.

Well-said, and it still vastly understates the level of treachery committed recently. That's why there are those who are fighting for freedom in Novorossiya with the very weapons that people would bury in their yards.

Click to expand...

Where to start. How about the Orange Revolution? The world knows Putin for the thug that he is. Getting caught rigging elections in the now independent state of Ukraine wasn't exactly a great way to shore up relations between the pro-Russian groups there and the groups that were never part of Imperial Russia and very much resented the impositions of the Soviets for such a long time. If the pro-Russian groups felt abused and neglected just imagine how the pro-western forces of the Ukraine felt all that time as a Soviet satellite? I would never condone abuses of any kind but I think you present a one sided view of the events in Novorossiya. It's funny how things really got hot and heavy in the region when Ukraine tried to join NATO.

Let's not forget how many of Putin's detractors ended up poisoned in various places around the world. I do know how the mob mentality rules among the Russian people. But don't forget that I have friends living in that part of the world. Friends who were pro-western Christians who moved to St. Petersburg as missionaries and dealt with the mobsters and gangs until Putin took control. It did not make things better but the Russian people swallow the party line like it was Ambrosia or maybe even manna itself. They don't have a voice that counters the official voice and they have never had one with the exception of the Marxist and Leninist forces that overthrew the Czar,

I'm not there to know the complete story but I do know that payback is a bleep. Maybe karma has caught up to the Russians in eastern Europe. You may be right about abuses against the pro-Russian groups. I just have a hard time taking the official Russian line as gospel knowing what I do about their history and their character.

Neo-nazi regime in Kiev, Novorussia freedom? For god's sake. You have no idea what is actually going on there? But this is OT already.

RIP the Cyborgs

Neo-nazi regime in Kiev, Novorussia freedom? For god's sake. You have no idea what is actually going on there? But this is OT already.

Click to expand...

Could you be more specific on who you are saying has no idea what's going on there? I think I said I didn't know the whole story (my last post I said, "I'm not there to know the complete story..."). But everyone probably knows the basics about extremism on both sides. The reports of supposedly US backed neo-Nazis isn't a secret. I just don't know whether to believe it or not and as I said I'm not real anxious to give the Russians the benefit of the doubt given what I do know about the situation. The left is all too often anxious to label anything remotely what we Americans would call conservative as "neo-Nazi" but I don't accept the connection at all. Nazis were "socialists" wanting a government agent sitting on the board of every corporation controlling the direction they go. That's certainly not what a capitalist would want. Our Dear Leader is far more in tune with those methods than our conservatives are. He's the one that put a government watchdog on the board of GM and other industries. GE and Jeffrey Immelt and his position in the Obama administration is a lot more like the Nazi model than anything I've ever seen from a laissez faire capitalist.

Again the news reports coming out of that region are pretty sketchy for the most part. I'll reserve judgement on who did what until I know more. But in the meantime I won't be jumping on the pro-Russian side because I read it on a web forum. Some actual proof would be better than a "you don't know what you're talking about" comment. Without a correction of what was said a comment like that is pretty useless. And again I've seen the Russians in action for many years. I learned not to trust their portrayal of the facts a long time ago. Want to talk about Chernobyl?

Cee Zee, that comment was on those two expressions, found on Lykoris and Thermactor posts. This thing there has nothing to do with any local freedom fighters for a long time, these are only a cover for regular RF troops, things are pretty heated lately, the number of "200" is quite stably over a 100 per day, and by the US ambassador in UN council, the army of the so-called separatists is larger than of a lot of European countries. Link to this thread - the possibilities of events of that kind happening around here is lately driving the people's understanding and expectations on both the legislation and self-defense issues. Again, this is not paranoia or a fear, but just the wish to be prepared better, just in case.

But covering the Ukr-RF war would be all another topic.

there is a civil war going on in the Ukraine and it is a legitimate use of firearms, half a country´s people rises up against an autocratic regime that initially banned the Russian language despite half the country speaking Russian.

Neo-nazi regime in Kiev.

Plenty of evidence of Svoboda and their extreme far right ideology just google "Svoboda+Nazi". Head of Kiev's security service is from the Svoboda party.

In December the regime set up a "Ministry of Information" to regulate media....yeah, sounds a lot like Orwell's Ministry of Truth.

And now they try to conscript 60 year old men once General Winter passes to fight for Poroshenko, a billionaire president who clearly has the people's best interests at heart.

I respect the right of eastern Ukraine to rise up and fight against a regime that considers them "second class" citizens at best.

As final note, the EU will gradually remove guns rights across member states given enough time. We will never have anything remotely comparable to what those in the US enjoy.

After what has happened in France...the latest I have heard from over the border is increased surveillance of the population and powers of the police to wiretap phones.......yeah, same old playbook.

Cee Zee, that comment was on those two expressions, found on Lykoris and Thermactor posts. This thing there has nothing to do with any local freedom fighters for a long time,

Click to expand...

OK sorry for the misinterpretation. I get a little foggy in the head sometimes I guess. After a thread goes on a while I tend to forget who said what which I shouldn't do but those are the breaks when your noodle starts to get a little soggy.

I say I don't know what's going on there but I sure have my suspicions and they go back to that morning in the early 60's when I found myself sitting a school bus practicing a "drill" where all the kids got sent home early as fast as possible. Yeah right. We sat and talked about where we were going to hide when the missiles came. Pretty heavy stuff for a 6 year old kid. It's never left me I guess.

But again I don't like to jump to conclusions no matter how obvious they might seem.

Plenty of evidence of Svoboda and their extreme far right ideology just google "Svoboda+Nazi".

Click to expand...

I don't have to. I know what the media says about things or at least what certain media says about it. I still don't make the connection between "nazi" anything and "right" anything. National "Socialism" is a left wing way of thinking. It takes rights away from individuals and gives them to the state. That's not what people on the right do. That's what people on the left do. Besides all that I have very little faith in what gets reported by most media. I tend to wait until I can talk to individuals with first hand knowledge of events rather than looking through the media prism at things. It takes longer to get a solid view but there's no reason for me to rush. I wouldn't be surprised to see excesses on both sides in the Ukraine. But again I have to look back on a lifetime of memories of what the Russians have done and the things they have said. I have very little reason to believe much of anything they say. I know how the man in the street gets certain ideas in their head in Russia and it becomes a mob mentality thing. I've seen my friends get caught up in the hysteria when I knew from other sources they were wrong. That had to do with the whole Chechen War situation and the allegations concerning the apartment bombings. We heard lots of reports of how that was Muslim extremists but what I've learned is that most likely it was the Russians themselves that did the bombings hoping to gain sympathy from their own people and from the west. There were what I would call terrorist attacks later like the capture of that theater in Russia. The Russian special forces sure made a mess of that and of course they tried to blame the incident on Islamic terrorism. But of course they are mostly Sunni Islam there which is much less likely to be the source of terrorism. And the subsequent Beslan school hostage crisis was blamed on the Chechen forces and even Putin had to retract that statement eventually. There has been plenty of wrong to go around but as usual it is the Russians who seem to have the most blood on their hands. That is almost a universal truth from what I've seen.

I'm not likely to accept the reports of the media until the dust has had more time to settle when it comes to the events in the Ukraine. But I was a betting man I would take the Russians and give good odds if I was picking who was responsible for the problems.

Cee Zee said:

I still don't make the connection between "nazi" anything and "right" anything.

Click to expand...

There isn't any, either. Since early 20th century, whenever two totalitarian socialist regimes clash, the one that loses is often labeled as "right wing" or "far right", most likely to avoid having to admit that socialism by its very nature is highly oppressive and resorts to violence against anyone who dares to question the absolute power of government. Be that an individual citizen, a group or the government of a neighboring country.

"Far right" or "extreme right" was coined by german militant communist Rotfront-movement, to ridicule a competing socialist party, NSDAP ie. the nazis. Benito Mussolini was a well-known hardcore marxist who founded Fasci-party (which gave its name to fascism) on marxist doctrines, only replacing nationalization of means of production by the use labor unions as a non-parliamentary, government-controlled force for threatening and controlling businesses.

All this has absolutely nothing to do with laissez faire or any other hallmarks of right-wing politics. On contrary, they are the very principles used and advocated by modern day european social Democrat parties. Until mid 40's european social democratic parties also had an extremely strong racial agenda, modeled after NSDAP many of them rubbed shoulders with. If there's a modern day nazi party, all facts and similarities point directly to european social Democrats, which are firmly on the left side of the political field. Just like NSDAP.

Now that we've been fairly massively off-topic for a while, it might be refreshing to get back on the subject. Unless we want to discuss how NSDAP abused the firearm legislation instated by the Weimar Republic, changed some parts of it to suit their agenda and frowned upon private ownership of firearms - just like their modern day socialist comrades do in a number of european countries these days.

There isn't any, either. Since early 20th century, whenever two totalitarian socialist regimes clash, the one that loses is often labeled as "right wing" or "far right", most likely to avoid having to admit that socialism by its very nature is highly oppressive and resorts to violence against anyone who dares to question the absolute power of government. Be that an individual citizen, a group or the government of a neighboring country.

Click to expand...

It sure is refreshing to just hear someone say this besides me. I've been saying it for years but it mostly falls on tin ears. I'm glad that somewhere in the world people do get it. Maybe it's my Scandinavian genetics showing through. But being an American I can claim shared DNA with half the world it seems. My sister recently had her DNA tested and it came back 20% Scandinavian so... Just don't expect me to be eating any lutefisk. I don't think I got that gene. And yes I know it's mostly Norwegian but Finns do take part.

Snejdarek said:

English has a nice saying. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. You are you being fooled by the Kremlin narrative second time.

Click to expand...

"I know this saying. It was invented in Russia."

(Sorry...I couldn't resist!)

Seriously, though...human history if chock full of people, especially those in power, working to fool others. And interestingly, as observed by Mark Twain, people seem to be quite prone to being fooled:

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

Cee Zee said:

It sure is refreshing to just hear someone say this besides me. I've been saying it for years but it mostly falls on tin ears. I'm glad that somewhere in the world people do get it. Maybe it's my Scandinavian genetics showing through. But being an American I can claim shared DNA with half the world it seems. My sister recently had her DNA tested and it came back 20% Scandinavian so... Just don't expect me to be eating any lutefisk. I don't think I got that gene. And yes I know it's mostly Norwegian but Finns do take part.

Click to expand...

In Scandiavia it isn't very common to face the facts either. Many people actually take pride in having a bona fide welfare state (as long as they reckon other people can be forced to pay for it) and don't realize that especially Finland is trapped in a vicious circle of having the goverment "solve" problems that are caused by its own actions. Instead of leaving well enough alone, legislators have a tendency to find a problem that doesn't exist and increase government-mandated bureaucracy until one does.

Firearm legislation is a prime example of this. Everything worked great until 1998. A first time permit applicant had to provide two written statements signed by existing permit holders that in their opinion he can be considered a suitable person to own a firearm. No red tape, no dependency on government and the police official in charge of firearm permits got clear statements from trustworthy individuals that the applicant most likely won't cause any problems.

The social Democrat controlled ministry of interior got involved. They abolished the practise and replaced it with a genuinely idiotic array of directives about which kind of gun is "suitable" to which purposes and, generally speaking, forgot about WHO can have a permit in the first place.

Even worse, by 2007 all these directives had resulted in ex-cons and even clinically diagnosed sociopaths being eligible for firearm permits. The first mass murder (aka. school shooting, what a misnomer) took place in November 2007. The perpetrator was an 18 year old mental patient, hardcore environmental communist, to whom the social Democrat bureaucrats literally handed a purchase permit for a .22 pistol. When former law was in effect, it would've been extremely unlikely if not impossible. Another one happened less than 10 months later. Yet another mental patient. Left-wing politicians, especially social Democrats, were thrilled, started dancing on the graves of the(ir) victims and milked every last bit of publicity out of these events, to forward their already failed agenda.

The right thing to do would've been to reinstate former law and practise, but - obviously - that didn't happen. The new one, written and lobbied by social Democrats, is much, much worse than anything that we'd had earlier. Despite being highly bureaucratic and costly to anyone willing to purchase a handgun, it's full of loopholes. It even violates the UN Charter as far as property right is concerned, because everyone failing to provide proof that they've been using their target pistol on a regular basis on a supervised shooting range, will have their permit revoked.

First "new" permits will be 5 years old next year, expiring and due for renewal. It'll be interesting to see how many guns get tragically "lost" at that point, how the lefties explain it and what kind of collective measures they want to be taken to "solve" the problem they've caused themselves...

Instead of leaving well enough alone, legislators have a tendency to find a problem that doesn't exist and increase government-mandated bureaucracy until one does.

Click to expand...

The "no good, do gooder" phenomenon rears it's ugly head everywhere I guess. Some people can't be happy unless they are "fixing" something even if they were the ones that created the problem in the first place. There are so many examples I wouldn't know where to start.

European Governments can not wait to introduce a more restictive gun control because they know that armed citizens are free citizens.

this is going to be a rather long post:

Part one: on LEO and their duty side-arms: It has been a tradition in Belgium for LEO to take their duty gun home after their shift finished.
Several years ago there was a real boom in family drama's and suicides in wich LEO or their family members were killed with these duty guns, so the government issued an order that duty gun should remain at the police station, except for some officers who are suposedly on an 24h availability scheme.

Last thursday 2 alledged muslim terrorist, both believed to have returned from Sirya - IS) were killed in Verviers by special police forces and in their home evidence was found (hearsay) that they were targeting policeforces and planning an attack on the Molenbeek police headquarters, wich they knew fairly well because they were hosted there on several occasions during their adolescence. They were just trying to get back at the cops.

Police forces now feel they are targets, so every patrol now has Uzi or MP5 smg at arms lenght.

A lot of our police officers also feel they could be targets when they are of duty, so they asked permission to keep their weapons available off duty.

I'm not realy sure but police sidearms are not governed by law or at least there is no mentioning of them in the law that applies to me, but by police regulations, even in of duty situations. It is a sign of a real evolved democracy to make laws for everyone but themselves, remember Orwell: all animals are equal, but some are more equal then others.

Part two: LEO and active membership odf shooting clubs: a lot of them do, certainly the smarther ones, because in general a LEO in Belgium gets 4 4 hour training sessions and 120 to 180 rounds of 9 mm per year for training purposes, so any additional training is welcome, even at own expense

Part three: politics after paris and verviers:

yesterday at the club, some members pointed out to me that a local politian urged our province governor (who is responsible for allocation gun permits) not to issue anymore permits for semi auto 'heavy rifles'.
So I phoned said politician this morning and he said to me that he was working on something like this for some time because he believed semi auto rifles are to easy to convert to full auto and he believed they shouldn't be in the hands of the public. He also said he was aware that the real problem was illegal full autos inported from the east, but hey, in the fuss of the moment it should be easier to get his motion passed and it was certainly going to give him more attention from the press
Now he is a member of our liberal democratic party (and remember liberal in europe = libertarian in US) and I (a liberal/libertarian myself) pointed out to him that a true libertarian believes in free choice with responsibility to go, so anyone should have the freedom to chose his own hobby and to buy stuff as long as he doesn't hurt anybody else, and he agried (what else could he do)
Long story cut short: the governor didn't follow the proposal yesterday, and will stay with federal law, said politician will not introduce a new proposal and added me to has list of people to consult whenever he had questions about gun-issues and he accepted my invitatian for an introduction day at our shooting club. Does that make me an activist now?

Part four (of toppic, yet on topic as well) : introducing new people to the shooting sport

Is I said, yesterday I was at the range to introduce the husband of a member of the EU parliament to the shooting sport.

This is how i go about:
first a safetybriefing about the four rules,

Then there is a half hour session with air rifle and air pistol (match grade Anschutz rifle and Steyr pistol) at 10 metres in which I introduce stance, breathing and trigger technique and aiming technique.

Next we go to the 50 m range for some rifle shooting using an Anschutz single shot then a Browning T-bolt .22 lr rifle and if they are confident enough I let them have a taste of my Unique Alpine TPG 1 in 6.5x55SE

Last we go to the 10/25 m range, were we start of with a browning buckmark at 10m in a single handed stance, then USP 9 mm at 10 m, two handed.
If the new shooter has enough confidence, we shoot my USP 45 match (some real guys immediately recognize it as lara croft's gun) at 10 two handed and ultimately, after I show them and if they insist, they may shoot the 45 single handed at 25 m.
If you want to see a realy big grin, you should come along.

Sorry for the long poste, but don't say I didn't warn U