Have any of you seen the EU constitution?

[Treylis]

Huh?

Actually, when I read that it made me think of indoctrination camps, hah.

 

[Rebeldon]

What a bunch of tyrants!!

Gee, isn't it nice and benevolent of the EU to GRANT these rights to its SUBJECTS. They proper way to protect rights is not to GRANT them but to prohibit the government from infringing upon them.

 

[TCD]

for my knowledge, the EU cant really grant anything similar to the 2nd ammendment just because all the nations already have very different gun laws and regulations.

 

[Art Eatman]

Re-reading this thread, one thing comes to mind: This whole concept of "Rights" as granted by some governmental body doesn't seem to jibe with the concept of "Human Rights" as promulgated by the Helsinki Accords.

How can the same people hold these views at the same time?

The underlying rationale of the U.S. BOR is that if you're homo sap and breathing, you have rights, some of which are enumerated therein. In the ECU, your rights are subject to the whim of the state or its political subdivisions--yet this concept is contradicted by the underlying theme of the Helsinki Accords.

At best this seems to be fuzzy-minded. I won't speak to the less positive view...

, Art

 

[Werewolf]

Re-reading this thread, one thing comes to mind: This whole concept of "Rights" as granted by some governmental body doesn't seem to jibe with the concept of "Human Rights" as promulgated by the Helsinki Accords.

For 1900 of the last 2000 years Europeans lived under the thumb of the Roman Empire, feudal warlords, or monarchies. For 1900 of the last 2000 years Europeans were taught from birth that fealty to monarch/warlord was the most important attribute that a man could have - it was a fundamental halmark of his honor. And if they didn't believe it in their hearts they at least lived it. A guaranteed quick walk to the headsman or hangman was to challenge your earthly lord.

European people did what they were allowed to do by their overlord or quite simply they died. (there's some pretty impressive genetic implications in that)

Those European peoples that resisted that lesson eventualy upped and moved. Guess where to...

This whole concept of "Rights" as granted by some governmental body isn't actually that hard to understand if one but looks at the cultural heritage of Europe. Fealty to lord has simply been translated to fealty to the government

 

[LAR-15]

for my knowledge, the EU cant really grant anything similar to the 2nd ammendment just because all the nations already have very different gun laws and regulations.

I believe under the Maastrict Treaty they tried to harmonize EU gun laws.

I think automatic weapons are totally forbidden for civilians in the EU Zone and so is hollowpoint handgun ammo.

So they could harmonize their gun laws and that might help a few countries like England or Ireland.

But that would never happen unless it was to completely ban guns EU wide.

The EU is nothing but a bunch of one world bureaucrats.

 

[LAR-15]

I believe Norway rejected the EU.

Has any other country?

 

[TCD]

I'm fairly certain the Finns can own automatic weapons and they are apart of the EU....


I don't think I recall any firearm type laws from Mastricht, but I could be wrong

 

[trooper]

Maybe I can dig up the respective EU regulations about firearms. I think I remember that firearms are divided into four different categories with fully automatic weapons being in the highest and, for example, single-shot long guns in the lowest category. Handguns fall somewhere inbetween.

Technically it is possible to own guns from all categories but it depends on the legislation of the member states. The EU requires its member states to set up a permit system for the higher categories and a registration system for the lower categories. Everything else is left to the discretion of the states. For example, in Austria home defense is considered a legitimate need for a firearm whereas in Germany it is not.

In Germany you can only own full-auto guns if you are a collector or a recognized expert (who testifies in court, gives technical advice to gov't agencies and businesses etc.) and prove that you need the gun for a work/project that has a real technical, scientific or historic value.

EU legislation says nothing about hollowpoint ammunition, they're perfectly legal in Germany (one of the few good things in the new Firearms Act). I think I remember that explosive and incendiary ammo is outlawed by EU regulation though.


Regards,

Trooper

 

[c_yeager]

Notice how many of thier rights have the qualifier "In accordance with the law" attached to them. What kind of "right" is directly contingent upon legislation? That effectively means that legislation is a HIGHER authority than their constitution. That makes it completely worthless since the ENTIRE point of a constitution is to be an "ultimate" authority or guaranter of INALIENABLE rights. They arent even pretending to provide actual protections to their citizens.

 

[trooper]

What's the difference? YOUR rights as written down in the US constitution are also subject to regulations and legal restrictions (think CCW permit, taxes on full-auto, AWB...).

"In accordance with the law" simply means that the rights mentioned have certain limits (I really don't want to quote the old fire-in-the-theatre-thing now...)


Regards,

Trooper

 

[c_yeager]

The difference is that there is RECOURSE built into the American constitution for laws that violate it. Thats what the supreme court is for. Sure, it doesnt always work. But, the way this thing is written there isnt even the option.

 

[iapetus]

Couple of points:

Someone called that the "EU Constitution".

Thats's not the EU Constitution.

That (The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union) is just part of the Constitution. That is just 12 pages of a 200 page document (!)



You also missed out what is (IMO) the worst part of the "Charter of Fundamental Rights":

THE CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE UNION

PREAMBLE

The peoples of Europe, in creating an ever closer union among them, are resolved to share a peaceful future based on common values.

Conscious of its spiritual and moral heritage, the Union is founded on the indivisible, universal values of human dignity, freedom, equality and solidarity; it is based on the principles of democracy and the rule of law. It places the individual at the heart of its activities, by establishing the citizenship of the Union and by creating an area of freedom, security and justice. The Union contributes to the preservation and to the development of these common values while respecting the diversity of the cultures and traditions of the peoples of Europe as well as the national identities of the Member States and the organisation of their public authorities at national, regional and local levels; it seeks to promote balanced and sustainable development and ensures free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, and the freedom of establishment.

To this end, it is necessary to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights in the light of changes in society, social progress and scientific and technological developments by making those rights more visible in a Charter.

This Charter reaffirms, with due regard for the powers and tasks of the Union and the principle of subsidiarity, the rights as they result, in particular, from the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to the Member States, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Social Charters adopted by the Union
and by the Council of Europe and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights. In this context the Charter will be interpreted by the courts of the Union and the Member States with due regard to the explanations prepared at the instigation of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter.

Enjoyment of these rights entails responsibilities and duties with regard to other persons, to the human community and to future generations.

The Union therefore recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out hereafter.

In other words - these "rights" come from various treaties and conventions, not by virtue of being born human.


*Disclaimer* - that was from the draft treaty, I haven't read the ratified version. But I expect the "Charter of Fundamental Rights" will be unchanged, as it was basically a "cut and paste" of a previously established Charter.

Editied to make easier to read

 

[trooper]

You got a good point there.

I suspect the reason for this is that the member states didn't feel like doing away with their own various "constitutional traditions and international obligations" and creating a new Bill of Rights (which would in some ways most likely be a bit different from some of the national constitutions).

The whole EU is basically a compromise between a whole damn lot of different national, local and individual interests and traditions, and unfortunately the constitution draft reflects that in a very negative way.

There's nothing inherently wrong with including those different points of view in the constitution, but the way it should be done is to find the smallest common denominator and move on from there by creating something new, instead of lumping together everything that someone wants to see in the future constitution and thereby producing a massive giant heap of legalities and politically correct nonsense.


Regards,

Trooper

 

[iapetus]

I've just found the ammendments to the (now ratified) treaty:

http://europa.eu.int/futurum/index_en.htm
(actual document: http://ue.eu.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/misc/81109.pdf)

They have altered Paragraph 5 of the Preamble, but just to tag on "and updated under the responsibility of the Praesidium of the European Convention".

 

[LAR-15]

I'm pretty sure at one point hollowpoint handgun ammo was banned in the EU.

I also read that by joining the EU French shooters had to surrender their automatics.

I guess I was wrong?

Anyway it's good to see the law was changed.

 

[c_yeager]

I also read that by joining the EU French shooters had to surrender their automatics.

They didnt have to. But, they just couldnt resist the temptation to surrender SOMETHING.

Actually i really have no idea.