Norway tragedy: politics proposing further gun control laws

[vaupet]

After the Norway tragedy, our foreign minister, mr Steven Vanacker was very quick in proposing Europe enforced very strict gun control laws.

I don't believe this could be a solution, on the contrary, I suppose that if 10% of the people on the island would have been CCW, there would have been considerably less casualties.

Questions:
1: are there examples of the public preventing or adressing shootings in the US
2: is their a pan-european equivalent to the NRA?

thanks

Peter

 

[razorback2003]

I assumed that Norway has pretty strict gun control laws, such as licensing of owners and registration. That is much stricter than anywhere in the USA. From what I have read, people must have a reason to own any sort of firearm in Norway. That is pretty strict by American standards. It doesn't appear people there can walk into their friendly gun store when they want and buy a handgun and walk out the door after filling out simple paperwork and a background check. It also doesn't appear people in Norway can just buy guns legally from friends or relatives like Americans do. Again, that is strict to Americans.

 

[ArmedOkie]

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheArmedCitizen

 

[ArmedOkie]

i can't find mention of a european gun rights group, but i did find this, which happened in 2007, kinda disturbing

http://concealed.wordpress.com/2007/10/27/switzerland-strips-all-citizens-of-gun-rights/


i've always worried thats the way we'll lose OUR rights.

 

[Owen Sparks]

The murdered used a bomb and a machine gun both are illegal for common citizens in Norway. He dressed in a police uniform to aid him in shooting up the kids camp. That was also illegal. Laws did not stop this guy.

 

[ArmedOkie]

your right owen,

it appears we are wrong here! for some reason, when people are intent on breaking the law, they don't adhere to the laws! who'da thunkit... we'll have to rethink this gun control thing... oh wait no we won't, we'll just make MORE gun control laws.

 

[NMBrian]

Too bad Murder isnt illegal in Norway....this whole thing could have been prevented.



oh wait.

 

[jcwit]

If a guy who is not a farmer can slip thru the net buying 6 tons of fertilizer, any thing can slip thru.

More gun laws won't help.

 

[hq]

The murdered used a bomb and a machine gun both are illegal for common citizens in Norway. He dressed in a police uniform to aid him in shooting up the kids camp. That was also illegal. Laws did not stop this guy.

Actually the long gun he used was a regular Mini 14, a reasonably common small game rifle in Scandinavia as well. Some highly biased british reporters have called it "automatic", which is the source of widespread misinformation. I'm not quite sure about the full auto legislation in Norway, but in Finland full auto guns are fairly common among registered collectors. However, there hasn't been a single incident in the country, ever, where a legally owned full auto firearm has used in a crime.

In a number of european countries there has been a rising environmental-leftist movement that aims to ban all private ownership of firearms. They're well funded, systematical and persistent - it took less than 24 hours to have the first finnish (he's a known stalinist) politician to step up and demand stricter gun laws in Finland so incidents like this can be prevented.

Many european countries don't have any kind of gun rights organization, except for publicly funded and toothless sport shooting organizations. Notable exceptions are Switzerland (Pro Tell), Germany (Waffenrecht) and Finland (NRA).

 

[gym]

Once again we see that anyone can committ an act such as this. It's impossible to stop and even more rediculous to try and legislate to attempt to safegaurd against. It's impossible to know what is going on in every persons head.
Having a more liberal carry policy will help in some of these cases, "other than Bombs", I don't know how this one ended but usually the attacker kills themselves or is eventually killed by police. More people need to realize that citizens who are armed are a deterent to at least this spray type of murder.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Laws don't prevent crimes. Laws make activities into crimes, which can then be legally punished.

Norway and all other civilized nations already has laws against murder. Once a criminal decides to break one law, it doesn't matter whether he breaks one or a thousand laws: he's nothing more nor nothing less than a law-breaker.

The task is to discover how to identify crazy people, not write more laws that will be broken by crazy people.

 

[Owen Sparks]

The problen with laws against things (like guns) is that they presuppose guilt based on potential for future criminal action.

Murder is the crime.

Having a tool that MIGHT be misused in a crime is not the same thing as actually using that tool for evil purposes.

 

[hq]

More people need to realize that citizens who are armed are a deterent to at least this spray type of murder.

I already asked this from a number of frontline politicians on saturday. Response can't really described in words, "hysterical" is an understatement. I'd bet quite a few of the victims prayed for a gun in the end. I most certainly would have, but then again, I carry so I don't have to put all my faith in a prayer and one hour response time of the police.

One armed citizen could've made a huge difference, but that's something left-wing politicians will never admit. There even was an unarmed cop among the victims.

 

[george29]

IBTL. From the things I read Norway is not anti gun nor are they pro. I believe they rightfully see guns as tools for sports and hunting and not for SD. The Norwegian newspaper article I read (Google News) basically said that new laws would not be enacted just because of this incident and that freedoms would not be diminished. If that is true, then we here (USA) have much to learn from Norway that is not acting in a Knee-Jerk fashion. (I could be wrong, it was after all a newspaper).

Let's hope the Stalanist's in Norway lose the use of their tongues. Thanks hq!

 

[Justin]

I have little knowledge on Norway's laws, but my general impression is that their laws are quite strict by US standards, but somewhat liberal by European ones.

That said, it appears that the killer bought his firearms by going through the legal channels to do so. Presumably, US anti-gun activists would like similar laws enacted here (mandatory training, can only have a handgun if you are a participant in a sanctioned shooting sport, etc.) and this incident only serves to demonstrate that such laws can and will be circumvented by those with evil intentions.

 

[El Mariachi]

Any sightings yet of Mrs. Brady leaving her favorite travel agency?.....

 

[MachIVshooter]

1: are there examples of the public preventing or adressing shootings in the US

Tons. But using us as an example probably won't get you what you want. The U.S. is a huge country with more than 60 times the population of Norway, and an incredibly diverse one at that. Because of that diversity, and the greater disparity between top and bottom economically speaking, we have always had a higher crime rate and probably always will. Would more or less guns change that? No one can say for sure, but the prevailing wisdom from people who should actually be taken seriously is that no, it has no real impact.

When Britain virtually banned guns, their gun crime dropped, but the overall violent crime did not. It actually increased, though it is purely speculative to say that the ban was causal.

Criminals will be criminals, and they will use whatever tools they can find to do their bidding. In the US, firearms are more available, and thus more commonly used. In the UK, firearms are far less prevalent, and so thugs use knives, clubs, fists and other improvised weapons. Statistically speaking, you are less likely to be murdered but more likely to be a victim of violent crime in the UK. This has not changed much since the days when Britain didn't have such strict controls; Like Norway, the UK has always had a lower homicide rate than the US.

The Homicide rate in the US waxes and wanes a bit, but it seems to do so completely independent of gun laws and ownership/CCW at that time. The economy seems to be a much more important factor

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that both sides are wrong. More guns does not equal more crime, nor does it equal less.

However, restricting ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens means denying them the ability to defend themselves using one of the most effective tools we have. I'd much rather live here in the US and face a higher risk of being murdered yet have the ability to defend myself than live in the UK or elsewhere where I'm more likely to survive an assault, but also more likely to be assaulted and have no means other than my own physical strength by which to avoid it.

 

[pbearperry]

Police Officer uniforms and summer camps should be done away with.

 

[ArmedOkie]

rofl

 

[HorseSoldier]

I have little knowledge on Norway's laws, but my general impression is that their laws are quite strict by US standards, but somewhat liberal by European ones.

+1. Scandinavia in general is more gun friendly than continental western Europe (+/- Switzerland) but things are pretty tight all the same. Still, they have better gun laws in Norway than California . . .

 

[TexasBill]

In Norway, ownership of rifles, shotguns and handguns is allowed, but there is a fair amount of red tape - a hunting license requires a 30-hour, 9-session course with a written exam, a sport shooting license requires a shorter course, but the applicant must prove they intend to engage in sport shooting by active participation in a gun club for six months, using the club's guns in competition, before they can get permission to buy their own firearm (a hunter can apply for permission to purchase a firearm immediately).

Permits are also granted for those employed as security or bodyguards but almost never purely for self-defense (almost no European government recognizes self-defense as a legitimate need to own a firearm).

Individuals with hunting licenses can own up to four handguns, but only one in any particular caliber. Sport shooters can have two in a caliber, as one is considered a spare.

The poor response time of the police was caused by the fact it took nearly an hour before the Beredskapstroppen, their version of a SWAT team, was called out. It took them 20 minutes to reach Utoya and another 20 to reach Anders Breivik.

Something the needs to be understood is that, although Norwegian police officers are issued HK P30 pistols, they don't always carry them. Most of the time, they are locked in the patrol cars. Trond Berntsen, the off-duty officer killed in Utoya, was unarmed when he tried to challenge Breivik after Berntsen had gotten his 10-year-old son to safety. Berntsen was working as a security guard at the camp.

So, IF the Norwegian police were like American police and carried their weapons 24/7/365, and IF Berntsen could have gotten the drop on Breivik, the outcome might have been different.

The same is true of the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords. Joe Zamudio, who was armed and in the area, responded, but by the time he arrived, unarmed civilians had already gotten Loughner pinned to the ground. IF Zamudio had been in the crowd and IF he could have deployed his weapon and drop Loughner, perhaps Loughner would not have been able to shoot and kill as many as he did.

The truth is that the odds of this type of criminal being stopped by an armed civilian are slim and we should be grateful when such situations occur. There just aren't enough people who will get the permit and carry the weapon to make a better outcome more likely.

BTW: In response to an earlier comment: Gun crime in Great Britain is up, though it's not anything like the armed crime rate in the U.S. The gangs that are causing so many problems have easy access to guns. This is why armed British police are patrolling certain parts of London and one of the reasons there is discussion of arming all British police.

 

[vaupet]

Texas Bill is right, just of the news, I heard that one of the ongoing discussions in Norway is wether police should be armed at all times.

Incidentally, the LEO killed is the stepbrother to the Norwegian crownprincess.

on the other hand, I don't know about Norway buth in Belgium, most LEO are poorly trained. They have a budget allowing something like 100 rounds of ammo for training, usually shot in 4 sessions per YEAR. The local police make use of our clubs range and their targets look like you would expect from someone only shooting 100 rounds/year of 9 mm out of a 50 year old BHP.

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

I'd like to applaud the King of Norway who instead of blaming the gun, or proposing new laws said:

“I remain convinced that the belief in freedom is stronger than fear. I remain convinced in the belief of an open Norwegian democracy and society. I remain convinced in the belief in our ability to live freely and safely in our own country.’’ Cite here

What a pity that this Monarch knows more about democracy and freedom than Nancy Pelosi

 

[RedAlert]

You can regulate guns and other items used as dangerous weapons all you want. At some level, a person bent on doing harm to another will find a tool that will do the job. Eventually you come down to bare hands. Folks have been strangled for centuries.

So it comes to the mind. Until such time as civilized nations band together to understand and treat the diseased mind, develop better screening, etc. we will continue to have disturbed individuals doing insane things by killing scores of people. No law, no matter how restrictive will stop these events until we care for the diseased mind.

My heart goes out to the devastated friends and families of those slain in Norway.

 

[KJS]

Reading what wikipedia has to say about gun laws in Norway they appear quite permissive by typical global standards (though restrictive by American standards, American standards that I deem far too restrictive).

Not even close to the draconian restrictions that the UK or Austrailia have which effectively amount to gun bans.

Of course, both the Brits & Aussies ended up where there are after both having a knee-jerk reaction to a spree shooting. One can reasonably speculate that Norway might well go down the same path of banning substantially all firearms as they did.

This makes the Dunblane Masacre look small by comparison. Doesn't this Norway incident now hold the world record for most killed in a spree shooting ever? Bigger masacre would make me expect even bigger reaction from gun grabbers that are always standing at the ready to pounce upon tragedy to further their political agenda.

We've told every gun used by Mexican drug cartels was handed to them by you crazy NRA members. Wonder how they're going to link this Norweigan nut's gun to the US? Did he watch a US action film that showed gun fire, pushing him over the edge?