Europe's gun culture rivals US

[2dogs]

http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?aid=11931

Europe's gun culture rivals US


Not such a great difference between the United States and Europe after all (Photo: EUobserver.com)
The UK's Independent picks up on a report that Europe's gun culture is giving the US a serious run for its money.

It quotes figures from the Small Arms Survey which show that Europeans own a total of 67 million registered guns - a number, the survey argues, showing that some nations have developed a gun culture that bears comparison with the United States.

"Contrary to the common assumption that Europeans are virtually unarmed, an estimated 84 million firearms are legally held in the 15 member states of the EU. Of these, 80 per cent - 67 million guns - are in civilian hands", the report states.

The Survey also shows that there are major differences between countries.

Germans are buying almost as many new firearms per capita as Americans.

Finland, with its strong hunting tradition, has the most legally registered guns in the EU at 39 per 100 people, the UK has 10 - one third of the German and French figures - and the Netherlands has two.

Gun laws are tightest in the UK, the Netherlands and Poland.

Aaron Karp, co-author of the report told the Independent: "Citizens of most European countries are more heavily armed than they realise, with an average of 17.4 guns per 100 people in the 15 EU countries alone."

 

[AZRickD]

Hmmm. Note the repetition of the word "registered," as if that is the only way in which guns can be owned.

Even in our local press in Arizona where gun registration is specifically outlawed, talking heads or ignorant reporters will often say, "The gun was legally registered." One paper, the Tucson Citizen made this mistake so often that it got tired of all the e-mail and printed a retraction and said it would no longer be using the phrase.

Sorry to hijack your thread. Pet peeve, don't ya know?

Rick

 

[2dogs]

Sorry to hijack your thread.

No problemo (T2 was on TV last night, Ahnold said that) 'bro.

 

[Mark Tyson]

But what kinds of guns are they allowed? Can they have full capacity magazines, semi-auto rifles, anything like that?

 

[rock jock]

I don't know about the rest of the stuff, but full-capacity mags are OK. There are restrictions on certain calibers of ammo, IIRC.

 

[trooper]

As for Germany...

1.) Full capacity magazines: yes (but with long guns only for target shooting)

2.) semi-auto rifles: only if it doesn't qualify as a military weapon (no flash suppressor, no bayonet lug, no collapsible or folding stock and so on)

3.) No caliber restrictions whatsoever

I'm steadily working towards becoming one of those gun-owning Europeans


Regards,

Trooper

 

[Byron Quick]

Mark Tyson,

Folks in Finland can get things we either can't get or can get only with great expense and jumping through many hoops. I don't think they have concealed carry, though.

 

[trooper]

One has to ask, though, whether a large number of people owning guns actually makes up a gun culture.

While Germany might have nearly as much guns per capita as the US (though I'm not quite sure about the above mentioned figures), we haven't really got anything like a gun culture.

There are long and deeply rooted traditions of hunting and sports shooting in Europe but they never produced a common understanding about the nature of firearms. Over here a gun in the hands of a citizen is regarded as a potential threat to public safety.

Lets face it, despite the numerous attempts to demonize guns there are still a lot of people in the US who recognize gun ownership as a natural right and as a "normal" behaviour. And that's really a big part of what makes up a gun culture.

The fact that the idea of defending oneself with a gun against an unlawful attack is generally frowned upon over here speaks volumes about this issue.

I was arguing with my flatmate (who is a fellow LEO) about gun laws, and I brought up the old argument of the 100-pound woman who has to defend herself against a 200-pound mugger/rapist. He shrugged and suggested that she should rather take a CQB/self-defense course.

And that comes from a guy who is a good shooter, very switched on in terms of officer safety and also (lately) very interested in defense and arrest tactics...


Regards,

Trooper

 

[Jim March]

The term "gun culture" is irrelevent.

The term we must focus on is "SELF DEFENSE CULTURE".

There are people on this board as young as 13 or 14, who are carrying knives as defensive weapons, who have studied the rules both on carry and lawful self defense with lethal force, that are far more involved in the "self defense culture" than any number of shotgunners, hunters and the like.

 

[roscoe]

Most importantly, Europeans have no concept similar to our 2nd amendment. They have no right to resist an oppressive government. They were, after all, just 'subjects' until pretty recently.

 

[trooper]

The term "gun culture" is irrelevent. The term we must focus on is "SELF DEFENSE CULTURE".

I don't quite agree. In fact, part of the problem is that people over here tend to see "guns" and "self-defense" as different things because they associate guns with aggression.

The basic idea of self-defense is just as common in Europe as it is elsewhere. You can find martial arts/CQB schools and clubs in even the smallest towns. But since guns are kind of hard to come by, people don't really integrate them into their concepts of personal defense, and worse, don't really bother to think about them.

Most importantly, Europeans have no concept similar to our 2nd amendment. They have no right to resist an oppressive government. They were, after all, just 'subjects' until pretty recently.

Not entirely true. In the German constitution there is an article that says that "...every German has the right of resistance against a government that tries to remove this constitutional order, if no other means are available."

The founding fathers just didn't bother to think about HOW one should resist an oppressive government.

You are right, though, about the second amendment part. The constitution doesn't specifically guarantee RKBA.

Regards,

Trooper

 

[BenW]

I was arguing with my flatmate (who is a fellow LEO) about gun laws, and I brought up the old argument of the 100-pound woman who has to defend herself against a 200-pound mugger/rapist. He shrugged and suggested that she should rather take a CQB/self-defense course.

That kind of statement never fails to amaze me, especially coming from an LEO. People who think hand to hand defense training is a magical answer to criminal trouble must watch too much TV. I'm a 6'4" 225 pound citizen-minding-my-own-business and I'm just as macho as the next guy. But if I were to run into the 200 pound mugger, why on Earth would I want to make hand to hand combat my first defensive choice and take the chance of (even if I won) walking away with a broken nose, or a broken rib, or a gouged out eye? Having a gun can bring a peaceful end to a problem with no one getting hurt.

 

[Jim March]

Trooper: you still don't get it. In fact, what you just said in response to my post proves that you don't get it: without the ability to defend yourself with DEADLY force when necessary, you don't really have self defense.

The ability to defend includes both tools and laws.

What happens in Germany if you shoot an intruder in your home who is armed with the crowbar he broke through your door with (assuming a situation where the shot can be proven to have happened at 10ft range, and there's no witnesses)? In England, you'd be facing years in jail. I suspect it's the same in Germany.

In most of the US, you'd be OK PLUS you'd have the legal ability to have the gun in your home, loaded, accessible for defensive purposes.

 

[Frohickey]

It quotes figures from the Small Arms Survey which show that Europeans own a total of 67 million registered guns - a number, the survey argues, showing that some nations have developed a gun culture that bears comparison with the United States.

"Contrary to the common assumption that Europeans are virtually unarmed, an estimated 84 million firearms are legally held in the 15 member states of the EU. Of these, 80 per cent - 67 million guns - are in civilian hands", the report states.

How many Europeans are there, compared to how many Americans are there (291 million)?

Last number I have heard is that there are 300 million guns in the hands of civilians in the United States.

Hmm... 300 million civilian guns, vs 17 million European guns not in civilian hands... anyone want to invade Europe? France should be easy.

 

[Croyance]

I would say that the number of guns per capita is irrelavent. The real marker of "gun culture" is the amount of activism for it. Ownership itself can be an indicator of wealth, fiscal priorities, personal responsibility, and difficulty in obtaining (both in commercial supply and legal hassle) guns.
Heck, many Americans look forward to Memorial Day as a day off from work, but many do not know or think of what it means. Does the fact that 291 million Americans look forward to a day off make us a culture that appreciates the sacrifice of others? I think not.
While I may be mistaken, I have observed less attempts (and less fervent attempt) to maintain gun ownership and rights in Europe than I do in America. There is ownership but less idealism. To me this is not a "gun culture".

 

[trooper]

Jim,

I DO agree with you about guns being an integral part of self-defense. Problem is, most people over here don't realize that. To them self-defense is no more than hand-to-hand, blades, sticks, chemical agents and so on.

While they don't get the whole package, I wouldn't say there's no self-defense culture in Europe (well, you might be right though if you're talking about the UK).

Regarding your example: you generally can't shoot someone to protect your property over here. If you argue that he attacked you with the crowbar and you shot him in fear of your life, that would be a different story.

The principle "In dubio pro reo" applies here, too. If the forensics support your statement, you'll probably walk free. It is important, however, that this applies only to shooting someone who attacks you, not someone who simply broke into your house.

Anyway, that gun of yours better be legally owned and registered, otherweise you'd be in trouble.

While the laws regarding self-defense might not be good as in the US, we have the advantage that we won't get sued by the other guy afterwards if the criminal court ruled that the respective act of self-defense was lawful and justified.

Croyance,

I'm sad to say but I have to agree with you about the idealism. There's an organization which represents gun owners and lobbies for our cause. Of all the 10 to 15 millions German gun owners, only 28,000 are members. During the last year, when gun laws were tightened again under the impression of the Erfurt school massacre, only about 1,800 people applied for membership.

A lot of shooters (especially the older ones) didn't even fully realize what was happening. Some argued, "Well, I've already got all the guns I want, they can't take them away from me now, so who cares..." It was a sad sight.

Every American should be glad and thankful about the existence and influence of the NRA, even though some of you might occasionally disagree with their politics.


Regards,

Trooper

 

[agricola]

jim,

What happens in Germany if you shoot an intruder in your home who is armed with the crowbar he broke through your door with (assuming a situation where the shot can be proven to have happened at 10ft range, and there's no witnesses)? In England, you'd be facing years in jail. I suspect it's the same in Germany.

Which is a misstatement. Tony Martin and the chap from Tottenham were found guilty because their version of events was not supported by the available evidence - when trooper mentions:

The principle "In dubio pro reo" applies here, too. If the forensics support your statement, you'll probably walk free. It is important, however, that this applies only to shooting someone who attacks you, not someone who simply broke into your house.

that is an accurate statement of what the state of play in the UK is.

 

[0007]

Yep, ole Tony should have just set there or at least offered to help the guys take his stuff out his door. Your little island is so much safer with Tony in jail and his "poor abused victim" on the outside planning his next job.
OH, that's right , he's sueing claiming he can't persue his old career of housebreaking due to the grevious injury that the evil Tony inflicted on him.

mini-sarcasm off

Good to have you back Ag