Anti gun consequences of Paris attack

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Paris attacks shouldn't affect gun control either way. Restrictive laws wouldn't have kept the guns out of the terrorist hands, and less restrictive laws would have led to more gunfire from the crowd.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting it would be a BAD thing for the victims to defend themselves?
 
Not at all, but there is a big difference between taking out someone who is breaking down your front door, accosting you with a knife at a gas station, or a teacher defending a single classroom full of kids against an active shooter; and the delusion that a couple of people whipping out their compact handguns in a panicked mob against terrorists with AK-47s without adding to the carnage.
 
shafter said:
131+ would be worse.
Click to expand...
You mean that interrupting ongoing 25 minutes long rampage of a bunch of psychopatic muslims by firing back at them would make things worse, huh?

Not to mention that in most active shooter cases, the situation of general chaos and shooting spree exists only for an initial minute or two, and is followed by a long time in which searching for more victims with targeted killings comes. And goes on, and on, and on... until the first "other" gun arrives on scene, notwithstanding if with a shield or without.

Using your logic, cops should never intervene, as they are twice as likely to miss their target compared to an armed civilian.
 
Originally posted by Snejdarek:

You mean that interrupting ongoing 25 minutes long rampage of a bunch of psychopatic muslims by firing back at them would make things worse, huh?
Click to expand...

Give it up -- we're dealing with a guy who is convinced his imagination is superior to anyone else's actual experience.
 
On June 9th and 10th there will be a decisive meeting of the Council of EU in which the Council will vote on the proposed EU Gun Ban.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/jha/2016/06/9-10/

The decision will be taken on Ministerial level, which means that it may be taken by majority vote, unlike decisions taken on Prime Ministerial level, which would have to be unanimous.

Call to all EU citizens that are on THR: please do write and call to your Ministers of Interior!
 
This has been the single most reported news over the whole past week in the country.

What coverage did it get in your countries @wyk , @RoscoeBryant , @vaupet ?
 
Shafter, two Texas cops 'whipping out pistols' same as your or mine ended a terrorist attack around a year or so ago, by guys with rifles almost immediately. It's absolutely plausible, even likely, that especially two defenders could make a mess of the assault(ers)

Remember the Kenyan mall; these attacks last until armed resistance is met, and don't go much further.

TCB
 
no media coverage at all about the counsil.
The draft for gun control is not favorable. It contains a lot of new gun control measures.
Not sure about the final decision, is it parliament or counsil.

Parlement has a "final draft" wich will be discussed 14 of june and voted 14 of juli.

Meanwhile their is a EU funded study, costing almost 600000 € wich wil be denied because the outcome is not what they expected, so it can't be used to install more gun control.

http://www.coventry.ac.uk/research/...sics-in-europe-and-across-territories-effect/


Very interesting chapter 3.5.3:
Firearms legislation can’t impact gun crime Participants from three countries (NL. BE, UK) suggested that the current firearms legislation was missing its target due to the focus on legal ownership and acquisition, whereas gun crimes are illegal by definition and therefore not addressed directly by firearms legislation:​
Firearms controls push people to illegal weapons Participants from four countries (PT, FD, BE, UK) also cautioned that a potentially unwanted side-effect of increasing controls on the legal acquisition and ownership of firearms is that potentially legitimate owners will seek illegal weapons: “​
Criminals will always find a way A perception expressed by participants in two countries (BE, UK) was that regardless of how good legislation is, and the changes that might be made, criminal individuals and groups are always one step ahead and will always find a way to circumvent legislation:
​


Still working on it
 
Last edited:
Snejdarek said:
This has been the single most reported news over the whole past week in the country.

What coverage did it get in your countries @wyk , @RoscoeBryant , @vaupet ?
Click to expand...
There has not been much coverage on this issue over here in the US. I get most of my updates on the EU Directive via all4shooters.com. Very disappointed to learn that countries such as Finland, Germany, Hungary, Austria, Slovenia and Sweden who initially opposed the directive abandoned gun owners at a crucial moment.

Just wondering how things will progress from here on. Would the Council adopt the Durch position? Will opposition by gun owners in countries such as Sweden and Finland be effective in blocking the Dutch proposals? Does it mean that the fight is almost lost?

I am keeping my fingers crossed that a miracle could happen and this directive does not pass
 
Today in Parliament: Czech Minister of Interior on the left.
13339691_1260761440602149_241463202439713706_n.jpg
 
For those of us unfamiliar with extra-national unelected governing bodies*...what happens if Czechs say "nuts" to the new rules? Seems silly you would be brutally sanctioned over something so trivial during this trepidatious time for EU unity.

TCB
*God, reading that I just realized it's like "meet the new boss same as the old boss" on some level for a lot of you guys --my condolences
 
Sadly, the "media coverage" in Austria was about half a paragraph in an article about terrorism in an online newspaper.
Our politicians who initially mostly opposed the directive ("we have good gun control laws in Austria, there is no need for changing in them") seem to either have shifted to a "compromise standpoint" or completely abandoned the topic. Even the far right party, who usually claims to fight against "EU-tyranny" and wants to curry favor with gun owners got very silent about the issue...
 
also on non-gun issues:

the problem as I see it today, with non-political governing bodies is as followes:

first there are local ellections.
The chosen one's have messures that are popular and they will impose them on a local level and benefit from them.(they will of course try to pass the bill, popular messures mostly cost money, to Europe )

Then there are the unpopular mesures: local ministers (our version of secretary of state) come together in the counsil of europe, they deside on the mather and let the commision execute the unpopular mesure.

At home they say: hey we don't have a choise, it's europe .

And then they wonder why people allianate from Europe.

The only sollution IMHO is more Europe, as in United states of Europe, with a direct election of the governing bodies and president, because apart we are nothing, together we are the number one economical power in the world.

But that is not going to happen anytime soon, because of all our local smurfs.

This is what is happening right now on the gun front:
- Anti-gun, socialist Commision, influenced by the unpolitical, non elected Swedisch chief of police and others

- Anti gun Dutch president of the counsil, supported mainly by the (coincendentally socialist) governments of France and the mediteranean countries (Italy,..)and of course the UK, which we will be happy to return to the US of A if you want them (and pierce morgan with it)

- Democraticaly elected European parliament, that strongly opposes the new rules. The members of the parliament, of course, do have to face the voter in 3 years

Former Eastern Europe countries and most Scandinavian countries opposing the new rules, the Germans will probably propose some kind of compromise, to go were the money is.
Belgium will probably follow the Germans
 
fresh from the EU counsil, and it is not good.
In this proposition, all semi-auto's with a removable magazine will be banned,

They made exceptions, to persuade hunters and some countries, but we all know how that will work out, they'll be next: divide and conquer

http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9841-2016-INIT/en/pdf

This proposition has to pass the parliament, so there is still hope.

Time to arm our pens again
 

Attachments

  • ST_9841_2016_INIT_EN.pdf
    369.9 KB · Views: 1
Proposition adopted this afternoon in Luxemburg, only the cjech minister opposed.
Now the parliament has to do its job and negotiate a compromise. Luckily, the negotiations will no longer be led by the Dutch but by the Slovacs, Sney, I sincerely hope you are right about them.
I now understand why the adjective Dutch in the english language most always refers to something bad.

If this thing goes on, it will be the largest disarmement of law abiding citizens since the little Austrian with the small mustache and the largest supply of heavy artillery into the illegal circuit.


Well all be much safer!!

Go figure
 
Originally posted by barnbwt:
For those of us unfamiliar with extra-national unelected governing bodies*...what happens if Czechs say "nuts" to the new rules? Seems silly you would be brutally sanctioned over something so trivial during this trepidatious time for EU unity.
Click to expand...
It's starting to happen here, too -- we are starting to see where one state, being less anal retentive, either doesn't pass a certain law another state wants, or prohibits something another state likes, and the more anal retentive states impose sanctions -- like forbidding state (or sometimes city) employees traveling there.
*God, reading that I just realized it's like "meet the new boss same as the old boss" on some level for a lot of you guys --my condolences
 
Proposition adopted this afternoon in Luxemburg, only the cjech minister opposed.
Click to expand...

Czech Republic and Poland opposed. + Luxembourg, but they opposed on the grounds it should be more restrictive, so I guess that should not count.

what happens if Czechs say "nuts" to the new rules? Seems silly you would be brutally sanctioned over something so trivial during this trepidatious time for EU unity.
Click to expand...
We won't say no. We will find a way to say "but of course" and do otherwise. We were occupied by Austria for 300 years and they went all genocidal on us, and yet here we are. We were occupied by Germans and they went all genocidal on our national elites, and yet here we are. We had Soviet-sponsored communist puppet dictatorship for 40 years... you know where I am going to with this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Soldier_Švejk

We have shall issue semi-auto purchase under current EU rules which say that you need "a good reason" to buy a semi-auto. Here "I want it for self-defense" is good enough.

We have shall issue concealed carry.

The chief of parliamentary committee suggested (he just went short of saying out loud) that we expect there to be a carve-out for military reservists, and thus in the eyes of Czech law god-damn-everyone will be considered a reservist.

Luckily, the negotiations will no longer be led by the Dutch but by the Slovacs, Sney, I sincerely hope you are right about them.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that Slovak minister of interior APOLOGIZED for positive vote, saying that they did it due to their incoming presidency and need to look constructive. They see it as something that will need to be changed dramatically in order to support in the end.

Now the parliament has to do its job and negotiate a compromise.
Click to expand...
It should be noted that this was "general approach" vote in the council. I.e. it was "allow it further or return it to commission". As far as I understand council will still have to vote on the final version.

Czech government is bound by Czech parliament resolution to do whatever it takes to prevent the EU Gun Ban from being passed. That might mean taking the final vote from Ministerial to Prime Ministerial level - while Ministerial is qualified majority vote, Prime Ministerial must be unanimous.

So there is still some hope, especially if the final Council vote is just before Czech autumn election. Not doing all possible will mean losing several % of votes in Czech elections - and that is after all everything Czech politicians care about.

Czech Minister of Interior's first public response to the mass shooting in Uherský Brod was that there are too many guns in Czech population. He quickly caught the wind that even in immediate aftermath of mass shooting gun control won't get him any favors, but to the contrary, and he has been pro-gun ever since.
 
Last edited:
vaupet said:
fresh from the EU counsil, and it is not good.
In this proposition, all semi-auto's with a removable magazine will be banned,

They made exceptions, to persuade hunters and some countries, but we all know how that will work out, they'll be next: divide and conquer

http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9841-2016-INIT/en/pdf

This proposition has to pass the parliament, so there is still hope.

Time to arm our pens again
Click to expand...


In regards to 'hunters'.


That was a big reason for the passing of the 'assault weapons ban' (AWB) in 1994 here in the US.

The Govt's tactic was to try to ban as much as they could.

When a the hunters spoke out against it, mostly in rural states, the Govt divided and conquered.


The hunters sold-out everyone else.


They really didn't have a need for those so called 'assault rifles' so they were happy to support the AWB as long as it didn't affect them.


I don't know if that info can be helpful to you.

Good luck.


Oh... Snej

Could there ever be a 'CzeXit' over this?

(CzeXit = similar to Brexit)
 
Could there ever be a 'CzeXit' over this?
Click to expand...

I'll take the liberty and go into more explaining when it comes to this question.

Czechs have been the most Eurosceptic nation during the "good times", i.e. before the Euroe crisis. We fared relatively well during the crisis so while the mood here hasn't changed it did change drastically in other countries so while couple of years ago the Czech Euroscepticism would be considered extreme, by today's standard in countries like UK, Greece or Hungary, it is pretty mild.

The guns themselves won't be a deal breaker leading to Czechixt simply because they don't affect enough people. It affects about 3% of population directly and about 10% if we extend individual licenses to family circle. On the other hand, these are all folk who take the issue personally and who are deciding actively as regards their political choices (we don't have any vocal antis in the country, so there are no votes to win by being anti-gun rights, only votes to lose). The whole EU gun ban has brought the community together though. I personally used to be pretty pro-EU before this, and now I think you can guess what my attitude is. This is the same for basically everyone of this 10% of electorate.

In normal circumstances, EU gun ban would be an issue only for the 10%. Czech Republic is extremely safe country by Western European standards, and probably unimaginably safe by US standards. So most of population don't care about guns, and they don't really realize they do have A RIGHT to carry a firearm (subject to getting a license first) until they find themselves in situation when they do need to enjoy that right (which is unlikely to happen).

The migration crisis has been completely absent in the Czech Republic thanks to our combination of restrictive immigration laws (you don't get asylum here, only "international protection", i.e. you either earn your citizenship, or get sent back once your home country is safe - immediately and forcibly) and low welfare (you won't go hungry, but that's about it). Yet as absent as it may have been in the streets, it has been all over the news and just behind the border in Austria and Germany. It is 3 hours ride with train to Vienna or Munich from Prague, and there is no border check in between. This has made many people start thinking what would they do should Cologne come here. And that's when they realized they have the RIGHT. Even if they didn't go and run to get a license (many did, more didn't).

And now EU wants to take this RIGHT they even didn't enjoy yet away from them. So there is unknown % of people who take this seriously over the 10% we already know take it as deal breaker of Czech EU membership.

Then there are those for whom EU gun ban is not an issue but who are still unbelievably angry about the immigration mess, and especially about the forced quotas - Czech Republic voted against redistribution of migrants, and the majority voting was actually the first time a decision was taken against a country's will in the EU Council. We are especially sensible to that since the Munich Agreement. So this adds unknown % over the 10% and X%.

So far, the forced distribution affects only 160.000 migrants, of which only 4.000 should come our way. However, there is "permanent quota redistribution" on the table. If that was passed against our will (and there is no way in hell any Czech government would accept it), then I would say yes, next election would be clearly won by any party offering Czexit.

Meanwhile you need to keep in mind that Czech Republic has the lowest unemployment in the EU, low crime, good healthcare, nice standard of living, no migrants to stirr things up so far - so in general things are going well and people don't tend to like huge changes like leaving EU when things are working out for them.

Interestingly enough, Slovakia is actually the only country that took EU to the EU court over the 160K redistribution (and that is EXTREMELY hostile act in EU politics which happens about once in a decade, and never by a small players like Slovakia). Which means that it is extremely unlikely that the permanent quota will be put to vote now that Slovakia will take EU presidency in Q2 2016.

Czexit may be a possibility in a couple of years, but not because of the guns only. Meanwhile our government will be finding ways to flex whatever EU gun legislation is coming our way if not for any other reason than because they don't want hundreds of thousands of legal guns entering the black market.

They actually made the point out loud that while today terrorists use beaten up unreliable guns that lied in post-soviet/yugoslav stock for decades before being smuggled to the EU, if the gun ban is passed then the black market will be full of currently legal tricked-out vz.58s and brand new AR-15s. Simply because there is no chance in hell owners will just give them up.
 
Last edited:
danez71 said:
In regards to 'hunters'.


That was a big reason for the passing of the 'assault weapons ban' (AWB) in 1994 here in the US.

The Govt's tactic was to try to ban as much as they could.

When a the hunters spoke out against it, mostly in rural states, the Govt divided and conquered.


The hunters sold-out everyone else.


They really didn't have a need for those so called 'assault rifles' so they were happy to support the AWB as long as it didn't affect them.


I don't know if that info can be helpful to you.

Good luck.


Oh... Snej

Could there ever be a 'CzeXit' over this?

(CzeXit = similar to Brexit)
Click to expand...
That is exactly what has happened in Austria, not only with "assault weapons" but also with rimfire guns.
The Austrian Weapons Act states, that "War Rifles" in general are forbidden, which affects all AR, AK, AUG, SIG550 etc. types of weapons. In the 90s, some companies in Germany and Switzerland took up the process, of modifying their rifles for the Austrian Market (some technical alterations to the bolt, the action etc.) and got permission to sell them, because now they no longer were considered "War Rifles". So now, we have AR-15, Steyr AUG and SIG550 legally available.

Since about 2 years, there is a mayor push by left parties for outlawing these 3 types again because "nobody needs them for hunting", "do you want to make war against deer?", "these guns are constructed for killing" etc., and some officials from the hunting association supported these ridiculous statements (and the hunting associations are very influencial in the political process).

It hasn't come that far with "assault weapons", but they got their way with rimfire guns. Semi Auto rimfires in all forms were legal to buy without a permit, but politicians wanted to put them on the list of types requiring a permit. So they simply convinced the hunting associations and the general public, that these are "poachers guns" and got their way. Now, rimfires need a permit and take down guns are outlawed in general. It is sad, but many hunters have sold us out in the past, and I fear many of them will again, as long as they are not affected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

angrybird
  • Locked
[Petition] EU : You cannot stop terrorism by restricting legal gun ownership.
Replies
0
Views
1K
angrybird
angrybird
2
  • Locked
Europe's gun culture rivals US
Replies
17
Views
692
0007
0
O
  • Locked
Europe hurries to tighten gun laws
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
mrtom762
M
Snejdarek
  • Locked
Police in EU confiscates firearms decomissioned in Slovakia
Replies
10
Views
1K
Snejdarek
Snejdarek
W
  • Locked
New Euro gun laws with plenty of US bashing...
2 3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
6K
Sgt.Dusk
S
Back
Top