Gun rights in Europe post Charlie Hebdo

[kwguy]

There's no way they'll get more gun freedom.

Pretty much this. If they don't already have the privilege in place, then I don't see it getting any better.

In the U.S., the ability to exercise our 2A right has generally gotten better, but not because of mass shootings, it was because of other reasons. And I'm not aware of any federal legislation actually being repealed, simply that the exercise of our existing rights are being exercised by more people. On the state level, it's gotten better for some, and worse for others, of course.

I simply don't see European gun laws in general getting any better because of this. At the most, I see the police being armed more often in places where they are not right now.

 

[leadcounsel]

The natural knee-jerk response for GOVERNMENTS that want to tighten control is to increase gun control.

Following the 1990s Dunblane school shooting in Scotland, the UK experienced significant gun control measures. The people largely went along with it much to their regret now.

Governments won't learn the lesson and lessen gun control. They simply won't.

Gun control is totally illogical and counter - it cannot honestly and reasonably be about guns. It's about control.

 

[Cee Zee]

I think you would be surprised that there *are* places there where private firearms ownership is absolutely enshrined in law.

Do you know which European countries have that? I looked through all the EU countries and then some but didn't find any countries that allowed gun ownership unless you could prove that you have a valid reason to own a gun. The list I went through wasn't complete but it covered most of western Europe. I checked this web page and couldn't find anything except countries that said you needed a valid reason to own a gun or countries that did not guarantee people the right to own firearms. Maybe I didn't check all the Euro countries but I checked most of them.

 

[hq]

Europeans don't have a 2nd Amendment to fall back on. Their rights to own firearms are not guaranteed by the law.
There's no way they'll get more gun freedom.

Like with most freedoms, it's not about getting it or having it awarded to you by an entity like the government. It's about taking it. So far so good; in Finland we still have more registered, privately owned machine guns (cannons, rocket launchers, tanks and I've even seen a fully functional, licensed anti aircraft missile system with my own eyes) per capita than the US - which, of course, has more to do with FOPA of 1986 in contrast to licensed finnish collectors being able to literally hoard pretty much whatever they like even today.

In any case, in several european countries large numbers of firearms have "disappeared" when laws have been changed and registrations implemented. People are suspicious of governments' motives for a good reason, even though the subject isn't talked about in public and it's somewhat of a taboo. When the soviet-led eastern block fell, military arsenals were looted fairly thoroughly and massive amounts of AK:s, LMG:s and handguns flooded european (black) market. I remember visiting Estonia in the 90's. AK:s were sold under the counter everywhere for equivalent of less than $100, Tokarev and Makarov pistols could be had for next to nothing and many were bought as illicit souvenirs. Nowadays many of these countries are a part of EU and both legal and illegal gun trade is flourishing. I got a pair of MG42:s (yes, I'm a collector) from a western european dealer a few years ago and, unsurprisingly, they had Warzaw pact arsenal stampings on their stocks and receivers. I bet the government who originally owned them never sold them to anyone.

Make no mistake about it. At least some parts of Europe are armed to the teeth and the main difference to the US is that governments have little or no idea about the big picture, possibly because unlicensed guns aren't shot and few people talk about them at all. Neither do I, but after over five years as the vice president of NRA Finland and meeting countless of people who have intimate knowledge of the general, actual gun ownership of their respective countries, I'm truly astounded by how culturally common it is to own unregistered guns and keep quiet about it.

 

[Onmilo]

Anybody notice that our President did NOT attend the Paris Solidarity Rally on Sunday and instead elected to send Eric Holder (!?)
Holder also did NOT attend the actual rally.
One can only wonder and speculate what the real intentions of that move were all about,,,,

 

[Red Wind]

Anybody notice that our President did NOT attend the Paris Solidarity Rally on Sunday and instead elected to send Eric Holder (!?)
Holder also did NOT attend the actual rally.
One can only wonder and speculate what the real intentions of that move were all about,,,,

Yes. My wife (who is Spanish) and I both noticed. Holder and Obama are both Socialists, both hoplopobes and both cowards, who run away from the action and not towards it, unlike the Israeli Prime Minister and Egypt's new brave President.

As long as they are setting the table, our chances for real action against Islamic and other terror groups whether in Europe, Africa ,Asia are wherever are dismal.

2016 cannot come soon enough. No matter who the new anointed one will be, it will be an improvement. Bank that.

 

[Willie Sutton]

"but after over five years as the vice president of NRA Finland and meeting countless of people who have intimate knowledge of the general, actual gun ownership of their respective countries, I'm truly astounded by how culturally common it is to own unregistered guns and keep quiet about it."


Having relatives in France, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Germany, it's common knowlage that very many gardens have a buried box where greased and wrapped "things" were planted in 1945, the wherebouts of which are still known by the family. Much of Europe is only a shovel away from being able to resist...next time.



Willie

.

 

[Snejdarek]

Do you know which European countries have that? I looked through all the EU countries and then some but didn't find any countries that allowed gun ownership unless you could prove that you have a valid reason to own a gun. The list I went through wasn't complete but it covered most of western Europe. I checked this web page and couldn't find anything except countries that said you needed a valid reason to own a gun or countries that did not guarantee people the right to own firearms. Maybe I didn't check all the Euro countries but I checked most of them.

Gunpolicy.org is a farce run by Australian antis sitting at the University of Sydney. I have been compiling information for the this table and I must say that most of information at gunpolicy.org is either outdated or incorrect.

Czech Republic and Estonia are the two countries with best gun laws (and their best interpretation). Neither have the right enshrined in the constitution, but both have it in a pretty solid law that is now (in case of the Czech Republic) 20 years old with basically no movement in society asking for it to get stricter. Constitution would be better since it would take 2/3 of parliament to change unlike simple majority in case of law, but considering that 20% of Czech parliamentarians are gun license holders and some carry within parliament, I am not worried in immediate future. Having genuine reason in my country means ticking "self-defense" on the license request, no questions asked. 30 days shall issue, includes CC.

I would point out to Italy as bad example - they have the right in constitution and yet in reality access to firearms (especially for self-defense) is much more restricted then in the Czech Republic or Estonia.

Then there are Austria and Slovakia with relatively permissive may issue CC license. Then it gets worse, but if we don't look at CC, there is a bunch of countries like Slovenia (Belgium, Finland?) that have relatively easy access to guns for sports and hunting. So out of 27 EU countries, there are 2 with very good laws and 2 with relatively good ones. Which basically shows that your original post was more or less right, even though based on the probably wrong information of Australian antis.

 

[Snejdarek]

Here the third Parisian gentleman gets thoroughly terminated by the police.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siL3tNt9WzE

 

[Snejdarek]

sentences are extremely lenient

Would you also hand 21 years imprisonment sentence for murder of 77 people in Finland?

 

[Bobson]

I voted don't know, don't care; but the truth is, it's much closer to don't know, and can't do anything about it anyway, so whatever.

The pessimist/realist in me thinks tighter control will be pushed on the people, or at least that efforts will be made by Europe's legislators - same as it is here every time something like this happens.

The rational person in me thinks, how dumb does a person really have to be to miss the fact that this was at least potentially preventable, if only gun control hadn't been an issue?

 

[sequins]

Now I for one do hope that the controls are relaxed as armed citizens simply existing deters threats.

However, in the case of the shooting at Charlie Hebdo, what sort of realistic CCW is going to make a difference? The police officer with a handgun wasn't very effective.

Two attackers with automatic weapons, body armor (Maybe just a molle vest, but I think it was a plate carrier as well), and what looked like 6 or so magazines each. I mean, I carry a full sized handgun and that's hard for most to conceal effectively and it would be a suicide mission to engage a fire select AK47 with a handgun. I'd probably still try if I was pinned inside a building, but if I had a chance to run on the street I'd probably try to run rather than throw my life away.

Should likely targets keep an armory nearby? I mean short of their own rifles and/or 12g shotguns under their desks there was nothing anyone in Charlie Hebdo could have done whether they all had handguns or not. Maybe they could have engaged the attackers long enough for police to arrive but there certainly would still have been lives lost. However if I worked in a building that had been firebombed and there was a standing death threat I might very well keep a rifle handy, so I guess maybe that is reasonable.

Don't get me wrong because I totally support expanded gun ownership and think that the deterrent effect of an armed populace is real but in this specific case would it have really mattered? This was a pretty hardcore assault... I'm not sure the level of armament necessary to fight such determined attackers is feasible to keep on hand.

 

[Snejdarek]

but in this specific case would it have really mattered?

Just my opinion, but lets say that between the 20 people inside there would be 6 pistols, had the French laws allowed it. The attackers had AKs and vests, but it was close quarters in the building. Yes, there would be no good outcome, but I think that the attackers would not walk out on their own. I also believe that if the people inside carried, they would think about their safety more and wouldn't just dismiss the gunfire they heard from lobby as a "weird sounds" and guys in balaclavas with AKs as "weird joke" (despite getting daily death threats and being firebombed in 2011).

Our cops are trained to engage armed attacker immediately and if they are out-gunned, just pin him down and keep him busy until the cavalry arrives. You don't need uniform to do that, and if you don't have any way out, I guess that is just what you do.

Even in the worst case scenario, with 6 armed people inside, I very much doubt that both attackers would be able to leave on their own and kill people on the street and elsewhere in the country.

 

[sequins]

The man in the deli who only died because he tried to pick up the jammed AK and was subsequently shot is a perfect example of how at such close quarters any weapon would have been all that was necessary, so maybe you're right and I'm not giving handguns enough credit.

Perhaps you are right and a numerical advantage might well have overcome the attackers armament, which while substantial isn't six (or given number) different targets.

 

[Bobson]

In the U.S., the ability to exercise our 2A right has generally gotten better...

I see this reasonably often, but never with any sort of quantification.

Better compared to when? Sure, many Americans have better opportunities to obtain a license to carry than they had ten or twenty years ago. But is that an example of things getting better? On the contrary, I see it as an example of things getting worse. The difference is, I'm comparing things today to when Americans truly had the right to bear arms - without any type of special permission needing to be granted by our government.

Overall, the rights granted to Americans by their Constitution have been eroded, not strengthened or maintained.

At any rate, to expect things to go from freedom to better is to fail to understand or learn from history. A country's decline begins moments after it's conception, just as a man's death begins moments after his birth.

 

[Cee Zee]

Gunpolicy.org is a farce run by Australian antis sitting at the University of Sydney.

That's why I included the source of the "information" I found. You can't trust what you find on a lot of web sites.

 

[hq]

Would you also hand 21 years imprisonment sentence for murder of 77 people in Finland?

Most likely even less. The average "life sentence" is approximately 14 years before a full pardon and there aren't enough mass murderers to gather a meaningful statistic. Some have been paroled or pardoned after less than 21 years. Additionally, life sentences can't be stacked consecutively so no matter how horrific the crime and how many homicides are committed, it's treated in legal terms the same as a single murder. There are multiple examples of ex-convicts who have been paroled after a life sentence and committed another murder shortly after being released. The system doesn't work at all. Personally I think that all incarceration services for violent crimes should be subcontracted to the lowest bidder in Siberia.

 

[vaupet]

When people talk about 77 murders and 21 years in finland, I suppose they are talking about the Anders Breivik murders in NORWAY.

First, the sentence is 21 years and then re-evaluation, because he is deamed insane, not responsible for his actions.

It is a fact in my opinion, that anders Breivik would have killed no more then just a few people on this island if Norwegians would have CC'd.
Among his victims was even a policeman who was unarmed, as is the rule in Norway, as is in the UK. IIRC

The rest of the policeforce remained on the mainland, awaiting the arrival of heavily armed officers while he had a free hunt.

For my american friends who talk about Europe in a general way: Europe is much more diverse then the US of A.
To my European friends who are well informed by our excellent press and who thus think that everyone in every place in the US of A can buy as many fully automatic machineguns of the shelf at any grocerie shop to go on the streets and shoot at whatever the think would be nice to shoot, I often have to explain that there is no such thing as an American gun law, because it is different from state to state, with some places (Cali, NY, Sikago) being much more restrictive then many European countries.
I do have to point out that crimerates and gun related incidents or often higher in the more restrictive areas, and that most mass killings appear to happen in gun free zones (schools), in my opinion because in this places perps know nobody can shoot back at them

On european legislation: every countres has his own, then comes europe and no single government wants european law to be more leniant, so european laws often end up being a combination of the harshest rules

 

[kwguy]

Better compared to when? Sure, many Americans have better opportunities to obtain a license to carry than they had ten or twenty years ago. But is that an example of things getting better? On the contrary, I see it as an example of things getting worse. The difference is, I'm comparing things today to when Americans truly had the right to bear arms - without any type of special permission needing to be granted by our government.

That's pretty much what I meant by 'better' (in terms of CCW). You're right though, on the whole, our rights have been eroded over the last couple of centuries, no doubt about that. And I don't see any federal legislation getting repealed. It seems that all we can do now is hope people become more and more aware of their 2A right, and guard that right jealously, so no more legislation (federal) passes that erodes our rights even further.

As far as the state level is concerned, I feel the same way, but it seems too late for some states...

 

[Thermactor]

I'm truly astounded by how culturally common it is to own unregistered guns and keep quiet about it.

Thanks for your post, it's great to get your perspective.

Having relatives in France, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Germany, it's common knowlage that very many gardens have a buried box where greased and wrapped "things" were planted in 1945, the wherebouts of which are still known by the family. Much of Europe is only a shovel away from being able to resist...next time.

Willie

Interesting. Reminds me of the German guy who got caught (how?) with dozens of guns that he had buried under concrete because he feared a Russian invasion.

 

[vaupet]

Until last year, we had a list in belgium wich comprised so called historic weapons, wich everybody could own (without ammo) without registration or permit.

Most of these were truly historic but the list also comprised the 1895 nagant revolver, the Carl Gustav m96 swedish mauser, the K31 Schmidt Rubin and the Ljungman AG 42b semi-auto battle rifle.
So I owned 1 k31 on a permit, wich allowed me to legally posses the ammo and 3 other k31, nobody knew about and I stayed completely within the boundaries of the law.

Especially the Nagant became popular in certain parts of the population, with ammo pouring in from former eastern block countries and nagant stil in paper, in wooden 40pc boxes, from old russian army stocks.

About the hiding of non registered weapons: in Belgium we historically had entire populations coming for a visit uninvited tru history, from Cesar, via Napoleon and Kaiser Wilhelm to Hitler, so who's to blame.
After all we hosted Waterloo, Ypres and the battle of the Bulge.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Most likely even less. The average "life sentence" is approximately 14 years before a full pardon and there aren't enough mass murderers to gather a meaningful statistic. Some have been paroled or pardoned after less than 21 years. Additionally, life sentences can't be stacked consecutively so no matter how horrific the crime and how many homicides are committed, it's treated in legal terms the same as a single murder. There are multiple examples of ex-convicts who have been paroled after a life sentence and committed another murder shortly after being released. The system doesn't work at all. Personally I think that all incarceration services for violent crimes should be subcontracted to the lowest bidder in Siberia.

I hope you will pardon my curiosity but I have absolutely no knowledge of Finnish law or corrections. The article stated that after the 14 years the sentence could be lengthened by another 5 if he was still a "threat to society." How is that threat or lack of threat determined? Is it within the realm of possibility this could be a "life sentence" with a parole hearing every 5 years after the initial 14?

 

[hq]

How is that threat or lack of threat determined?

That was about Anders Breivik in Norway. In Finland "life sentence" is set, but after 12 years convicts are automatically scheduled for reconsideration by parole board and many/most of them released after serving 12-16 years. There are very few cases of convicted murderers dying of old age in prison. Which, IMO, is just plain wrong.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

Interestingly enough about 70% of Czechs that landed on Ellis Island declared freethinkers/agnostic as their religion, which corresponds to the nowadays 80-85% of atheists in the Czech Republic, but somehow from what I read it seems that today's Czech communities in the US are quite Christian. FYI, until 2010 we had slightly more CC licenses per capita then Texas

Sounds a little Bohemian to me

I'm an American Bohunk myself. Since so many were Catholics coming from Orthodox-dominated countries I wonder if they were not being completely honest about being agnostic.

Mike

 

[Sol]

If I had to guess, those pesky European politicos would rather stifle free speech than expand gun ownership.