Swiss Firearms Vote Feb 13, 2011 - Page 18

glennsche · #**341** 19.01.2011, 11:41

	Quote:	OSueco
	and for you gun lovers...are army rifles allowed to be stored at home in UK and in US?

i cant speak for the Uk, i'll let a brit do that.

as for "army rifles", that too is a very unclear definition. Army rifles from what era? Current, contemporary select fire ones like what is carried by NATO soldiers in Afghanistan?

in the US, as far as i understand, firearm with a receiver date prior i think to 1890 is considered an antique and doesnt even legally qualify as a gun. So a musket or some first generation bolt action rifles (think zulu wars or franco prussian war era) can be bought like you were buying any household item. Finding ammunition for it though would probably be quite hard and youd probably have to make it yourself.

A firearm which is not select fire/fully automatic/belt fed and is older than 50 years may (or may not, depending on certain features) qualify as a "Curious and Relic" firearm (think ww1 or ww2 to early 50s). The laws very state to state, especially with the particulars to handguns (since the blue urban states have more restrictions on their sale), but basically you can buy these with a valid ID. Some states you take home same day, others you have to wait a while.

In California, for example, a "C&R" rifle can be bought from a private citizen and taken home same day. From a dealer you have to wait 10days or have additional special permissions, which arent ahrd to get but are another legal hoop to go through. Indeed, you get the C&R license and get these types guns delivered to your home in the mail.

More modern assaulty type guns are legal in the US as long as they are "sporterized", which as far as i can tell means they dont go fully automatic. Im not sure if select fire rifles are legal anywhere in the US. I know theyre not in California, where i am from. I confess i dont know much about these types of guns tho since they are uninteresting to me and i dont want to own one.

Indeed the rifles the swiss keep at home would be illegal to have in California and in some other states because of specific features they possess (select fire, easy release magazine greater than 10rd capacity).

just fyi.

MathNut · #**342** 19.01.2011, 12:19

	Quote:	glennsche
	More modern assaulty type guns are legal in the US as long as they are "sporterized", which as far as i can tell means they dont go fully automatic. Im not sure if select fire rifles are legal anywhere in the US. I know theyre not in California, where i am from. I confess i dont know much about these types of guns tho since they are uninteresting to me and i dont want to own one.

They are but you need to jump through some extra hoops (incl. getting local law enforcement AND the feds to sign off on it - I've been told the whole process takes 2-3 months) pay some extra taxes, and even then nobody else is allowed to handle or transport the gun without its owner present. Any further transfer has to be re-registered, re-approved, re-taxed... even transport by the owner across state lines requires written permission in advance from the federal authorities. As you can imagine this considerably decreases the appeal to any Rambo types.

Of course you do get the sort of folks who've shot one, once, at a range, and then spend the next 20 years talking about it like it was last weekend.

But the people I know who actually own full-auto firearms in the US are without exception serious collectors.

Just FYI.

On the subject of "army rifles" - most US states have special exemptions for active-duty military. e.g. even if Gun X is illegal in California, a non-CA resident posted there for military service can bring his privately owned Gun X along with him, no problem.

Mapache · #**343** 19.01.2011, 13:06

I'm not sure how this ties into the debate here, which I view more as an issue of personal sovereignty and responsibility and of the state's respect for its citizens, but I can offer some more details on the US gun laws mentioned here:

	Quote:	glennsche
	i cant speak for the Uk, i'll let a brit do that. as for "army rifles", that too is a very unclear definition. Army rifles from what era? Current, contemporary select fire ones like what is carried by NATO soldiers in Afghanistan? in the US, as far as i understand, firearm with a receiver date prior i think to 1890 is considered an antique and doesnt even legally qualify as a gun. So a musket or some first generation bolt action rifles (think zulu wars or franco prussian war era) can be bought like you were buying any household item. Finding ammunition for it though would probably be quite hard and youd probably have to make it yourself. A firearm which is not select fire/fully automatic/belt fed and is older than 50 years may (or may not, depending on certain features) qualify as a "Curious and Relic" firearm (think ww1 or ww2 to early 50s). The laws very state to state, especially with the particulars to handguns (since the blue urban states have more restrictions on their sale), but basically you can buy these with a valid ID. Some states you take home same day, others you have to wait a while. In California, for example, a "C&R" rifle can be bought from a private citizen and taken home same day. From a dealer you have to wait 10days or have additional special permissions, which arent ahrd to get but are another legal hoop to go through. Indeed, you get the C&R license and get these types guns delivered to your home in the mail. More modern assaulty type guns are legal in the US as long as they are "sporterized", which as far as i can tell means they dont go fully automatic. Im not sure if select fire rifles are legal anywhere in the US. I know theyre not in California, where i am from. I confess i dont know much about these types of guns tho since they are uninteresting to me and i dont want to own one. Indeed the rifles the swiss keep at home would be illegal to have in California and in some other states because of specific features they possess (select fire, easy release magazine greater than 10rd capacity). just fyi.

Some of those pre-1890 weapons are quite formidable and use ammution that is still widely available today. For example, many "cowboy-style" lever-action rifles and revolvers use .44 caliber shells, albeit in lower power than the magnums of the 20th century.

As for WW1 and WW2 military rifles, these include the M1 Garand, a very powerful semi-auto that uses modern .30-06 ammo -- in some ways a superior battle weapon to the M16 despite its old-timey wood stock.

And yes, fully-automatic weapons manufactured before the 1980s are legal in many states, though they are strictly regulated. I never bothered to learn the specifics of how to acquire one since I lived in states where they are illegal and only I wanted shotguns for trapshooting, but it can be done.

bazza · #**344** 19.01.2011, 13:07

I notice in the voting notes I just received through the post that NO E-VOTING IS POSSIBLE for this vote on the 13th of February. That's for the Kanton of Zurich. Is it so for the rest of Switzerland?

#**345** 19.01.2011, 14:17

	Quote:	OSueco
	god you people have watched too many movies..."protect your loves ones..."...please...can you tell me one case here in Switzerland where somebody used their army rifle for self defense at home... and for you gun lovers...are army rifles allowed to be stored at home in UK and in US?

Give the guy a break- he's just come back from the Wild West! Yee haa rawhide...

MusicChick · #**346** 19.01.2011, 16:38

	Quote:	Mud
	Yet you still* won't listen to the Beatles!*

Beatles shmeatles..

I am just into a different kind of sap.

Mud · #**347** 19.01.2011, 17:28

Some interesting reading from this Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy paper (46 pages but worth the read).

On the "wild west/Clint Eastwood" shoot 'em up perspective:

	Quote:
	More than 100 million handguns are owned in the United States84 primarily for self‐defense,85 and 3.5 million people have permits to carry concealed handguns for protection.86 Recent analysis reveals “a great deal of self‐defensive use of firearms” in the United States, “in fact, more defensive gun uses [by victims] than crimes committed with firearms.”87 It is little wonder that the National Institute of Justice surveys among prison inmates find that large percentages report that their fear that a victim might be armed deterred them from confrontation crimes. “[T]he felons most frightened ‘about confronting an armed victim’ were those from states with the greatest relative number of privately owned firearms.” Conversely, robbery is highest in states that most restrict gun ownership.88

On domestic gun violence:

	Quote:
	Nevertheless, critics of gun ownership often argue that a “gun in the closet to protect against burglars will most likely be used to shoot a spouse in a moment of rage . . . .These comments appear to rest on no evidence and actually contradict facts that have so uniformly been established by homicide studies dating back to the 1890s that they have become “criminological axioms.”59 Insofar as studies focus on perpetrators, they show that neither a majority, nor many, nor virtually any murderers are ordinary “law‐abiding citizens.”60 Rather, almost all murderers are extremely aberrant individuals with life histories of violence, psychopathology, substance abuse, and other dangerous behaviors. “The vast majority of persons involved in lifethreatening violence have a long criminal record with many prior contacts with the justice system.”61

On suicide:

	Quote:
	The mantra more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death is also used to argue that “limiting access to firearms could prevent many suicides.”141 Once again, this assertion is directly contradicted by the studies of 36 and 21 nations (respectively) which find no statistical relationship. Overall suicide rates were no worse in nations with many firearms than in those where firearms were far less widespread.142

OSueco · #**348** 19.01.2011, 18:34

According to:
http://www.waffeninitiative-nein.ch

will the safety in Switzerland be weakened...can somebody explain how?
How will the safety be weakened when a army rifle is stored somewhere instead at home when men/women do not have any access to the ammo...

Do Swiss have some sort of martial art where they use their weapon to fight with without ammo?

Gruss

Mark75 · #**349** 19.01.2011, 18:56

	Quote:	OSueco
	How will the safety be weakened when a army rifle is stored somewhere instead at home when men/women do not have any access to the ammo...

Well, as you certainly know, the initiative is not only about the army rifle but also about private gun ownership in general.

Empirical evidence from a number of countries strongly suggests that tougher gun laws actually reduce a population's safety.

If you think about it for a moment it makes perfect sense. Just imagine you were a criminal specializing in robberies. In which of the following two countries would you rather "work"?

Country A with a strict gun law, where only the police is legally allowed to own guns

or

Country B where every citizen has the right to own firearms

Note: in country B, it doesn't matter if the citizens actually do own guns or if they're able and willing to use them against an armed robber. What's important is the worst case scenario the robber has to expect.

OSueco · #**350** 19.01.2011, 19:28

	Quote:	Mark75
	Well, as you certainly know, the initiative is not only about the army rifle but also about private gun ownership in general. Empirical evidence from a number of countries strongly suggests that tougher gun laws actually reduce a population's safety. If you think about it for a moment it makes perfect sense. Just imagine you were a criminal specializing in robberies. In which of the following two countries would you rather "work"? Country A with a strict gun law, where only the police is legally allowed to own guns or Country B where every citizen has the right to own firearms Note: in country B, it doesn't matter if the citizens actually do own guns or if they're able and willing to use them against an armed robber. What's important is the worst case scenario the robber has to expect.

I'm from Sweden which has one of the toughest gun laws in the world, "only" hunters have rifles, and still it is one of the safest countries in the world...I guess it's similar in Finland, Norway and Denmark...

"Nobody" in Sweden would feel safer because they had a weapon at home...it's actually the other way around...

Since Sweden and Switzerland is very similar in terms of population (and immigration)...I tend to compare...

Also in Sweden you are not entitled to use more force against somebody then what is necessary...e.g. if somebody steals your car you are not entitled to shoot him...

#**351** 19.01.2011, 19:30

	Quote:	OSueco
	"only" hunters have rifles

... and criminals: do they have guns, too?

Mark75 · #**352** 19.01.2011, 19:35

	Quote:	OSueco
	"Nobody" in Sweden would feel safer because they had a weapon at home...it's actually the other way around...

I think you're missing the point here... actually you're missing it twice.

a) In the end it doesn't matter if people feel safer. What matters is if they are safer.
b) It doesn't matter if people actually have a gun (I don't BTW). What matters is that criminals must consider the possibility that they have one.

BTW: At least in Finland they have rather liberal gun laws and plenty of guns too.

OSueco · #**353** 19.01.2011, 19:54

	Quote:	Mark75
	I think you're missing the point here... actually you're missing it twice. a) In the end it doesn't matter if people feel safer. What matters is if they *are* safer. b) It doesn't matter if people actually have a gun (I don't BTW). What matters is that criminals must consider the possibility that they have one. BTW: At least in Finland they have rather liberal gun laws and plenty of guns too.

Finland, yes the school massacre...forgot about that...

Yes people in Sweden are safer due to strict gun laws...because we know that is difficult to get your hands on a weapon...

also, people would not be so stupid to get into a shooting with a heavily armed criminal, especially not at home where my wife and children is...if somebody robbed me,...I would let him, armed or not...

SamWeiseVielleicht · #**354** 19.01.2011, 21:27

	Quote:	OSueco
	According to: http://www.waffeninitiative-nein.ch will the safety in Switzerland be weakened...can somebody explain how? How will the safety be weakened when a army rifle is stored somewhere instead at home when men/women do not have any access to the ammo... Do Swiss have some sort of martial art where they use their weapon to fight with without ammo? Gruss

Big packages...

http://www.derbund.ch/kultur/diverse...story/10837419

The last sentence is hilarious...

cannut · #**355** 19.01.2011, 21:37

	Quote:	OSueco
	I'm from Sweden which has one of the toughest gun laws in the world, "only" hunters have rifles, and still it is one of the safest countries in the world...I guess it's similar in Finland, Norway and Denmark... "Nobody" in Sweden would feel safer because they had a weapon at home...it's actually the other way around... Since Sweden and Switzerland is very similar in terms of population (and immigration)...I tend to compare... Also in Sweden you are not entitled to use more force against somebody then what is necessary...e.g. if somebody steals your car you are not entitled to shoot him...

Solution: If you feel safer in Sweden then move to Sweden ,feel saver in Switzerland move to Switzerland simple

Same applies to booze and Taxes

And before I would go to Sweden i would go to Afghanistan

I am surprised that in Sweden the government does not kleen your butt

OSueco · #**356** 19.01.2011, 21:46

	Quote:	cannut
	Solution: If you feel safer in Sweden then move to Sweden ,feel saver in Switzerland move to Switzerland simpleSame applies to booze and Taxes And before I would go to Sweden i would go to Afghanistan

your sense for logical reasoning is mind-boggling! so simple, but yet so brilliant!

I feel absolutely safe here, more as in Sweden, and not because there are more liberal gun laws here but Switzerland is really a safe country, i.e. no need for liberal gun laws...and NO it is no safer DUE to liberal gun laws...that is totally absurd...

Aussie Lisa · #**357** 19.01.2011, 21:50

quote "
The main "problem" with the initiative is that the shooting clubs fear that they will no longer be heavily subsidized by the government, through:

Giving the rifles away almost for free.
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Spending 18 millions per year on the "Obligatorisches" a sum that goes directly into the pockets of the shooting clubs" END Quote
--------------

Aha! It's about money! All about money, why didn't anyone say so instead of complaining about a referendum brought by the people to the people and calling it "government intervention".

Yes = the guns belonging to the reserve army stay at the army

No = the gun clubs no longer subsidized by taxpayers

Yes = licensing before buying, and no licenses will be granted in future for pump action

No = current law prevails, for most weapons no license required. No license. Except pump action. If you have a "waffenschein" you can use it to buy pump action guns as well.

st2lemans · #**358** 19.01.2011, 21:50

	Quote:	OSueco
	I feel absolutely safe here, more as in Sweden, and not because there are more liberal gun laws here but Switzerland is really a safe country, i.e. no need for liberal gun laws...

It is safer BECAUSE of the more liberal gun laws, NOT in spite of them!

Tom

#**359** 19.01.2011, 21:57

	Quote:	st2lemans
	It is safer BECAUSE of the more liberal gun laws, NOT in spite of them! Tom

Places where I've felt safe:

Switzerland: lots of guns in the possession of law-abiding citizens
Rural Mid West of United States: lots of guns in the possession of law-abiding citizens
Greece: lots of guns in the possession of, er, citizens.

Places where I've felt unsafe:

Manchester: few guns in the possession of law-abiding citizens; lots of guns in the possession of criminals.
London: few guns in the possession of law-abiding citizens; lots of guns in the possession of criminals.
Nottingham: few guns in the possession of law-abiding citizens; lots of guns in the possession of criminals.

Is it just me, or is there a pattern there?

Aussie Lisa · #**360** 19.01.2011, 21:57

	Quote:	Mark75
	You're right. You only need a permit for some types of guns, while others (mostly hunting rifles) don't require a permit, but you're required to set up a contract in writing and send a copy of the signed contract to the canton. But even requiring such a permit for all types of guns would still be a far cry from what the initiative wants.

Apology accepted.

And requiring such a permit is exactly what the initiative wants ..