Well eating like that is typically Swiss, it's funny they do most other things with such finesse,but mealtime etiquette is not one of them. I'm glad they don't shoot like they eat! I just found an old picture of my grandfather in the Swiss army with his gun, some kind of captain I think. The locals look dirt poor-like Russian peasants out of a Tolstoy play.

I've talked to a few (Swiss) people around about the issue recently - and those who shoot (target) regularly quietly admitted that most of the ammo is kept away from home, they all 'discreetly' keep some back (just in case).

Up in Muotathal, quite a few of the locals are Russian peasants, or at least their descendants...

The "source provided" is the official statistics which does INCLUDE the military guns. That facts are not relevant for statistics is correct, as statistics are dry theoretical figures. But in real practical life, what I wrote is most relevant indeed. At the other hand, Switzerland also in case of a YES to the initiative still will be fairly up in regard to arms at home due to the many shooting clubs in this country.

Possibly, not even the statistics will change in case of a YES. Why ? Very simple, because the soldiers legally will remain to be the holders of the guns, as the guns will be registered to each soldiers, and a shooting accounting will be done as before.

We would have to fly there to be of worry.

I can rectify that situation in about one month.
Of course, she who must be obeyed won't let me own a firearm.

"Miss Swiss" is wrong. He could start to become a HUNTER by working through the program as outlined HERE
http://www.aln.zh.ch/internet/baudir...ordnungen.html

Or he could join the Schützengesellschaft der Stadt Zürich, following the details under THIS link :
http://www.sgz.ch/htdocs/index.php?m...erregistration

Either way is restricted for people from countries in a civil war or ruled by a bloodthirsty dictator. As neither is the case about the U.K., there would be no real problem

Swiss army-uniforms are not designs of haute-couture producers We in the times of the old "work uniforms" had the famous citation out of the Bible about military service Sie hüllten sich in Lumpen und irrten ziellos umher = They wrapped themselves into rags and wandered aimlessly around . When the old uniforms got replaced by "fatigues" it was seen by most as a good thing.

The method is neither new nor complicated. You when going for the "Obligatorische" buy some more "trial-ammunition" than you really need. The shooting clubs love to sell ammunition, and do not care whether you really use it, as selling ammunition is business for them

Seems the biggest problem with this initiative is where will it end....

Like with the smoking law, it started small and innocent and now is snowballing like unbelievable??? and I am not a smoker but disagree with what is happening now, almost like affirmative action....

Stop this nonsence now and vote NO.

Keep this nonsence going, and vote yes..

Not that it is not being done, but I'm pretty sure that people shooting the Obligatorische are subject to the "ammunition order" (Munitionsbefehl) and are not allowed to take home ammunition. It is allowed at private events though.

Of course in Suisse Romande, and particularly in Geneva, many remember our 'Tiananmen square' (sp?) or Bloody Sunday:

La fusillade du 9 novembre 1932 est un évènement tragique qui se déroule à Genève dans la soirée du 9 novembre 1932. Sous le commandement du major Perret, de jeunes recrues de l'armée suisse font face à une manifestation ouvrière contre le fascisme à Plainpalais et tirent sur la foule, tuant 13 personnes et en blessant 65[1],[2].

when young soldiers shot 13, and injured 65 - during a anti-fascist demonstration in 1932.

Who will benefit from this initial change in the law?

Will woman feel safer in their own houses?
Will crims be happier that the weapons are out of the houses?

Like the smoking ban's where will it stop?

This is stage two!

If you get caught, which means that it is obvious that it was done on intent, and is more than about 2 pieces, you might land up in military court, as it is clearly against the "Munitionsbefehl", no doubt

A) Who will benefit from a yes ? All the soldiers who are no longer forced to have the gun at home.
B) you speak about changes to the smoking law. But the first additional public vote was in Solothurn where the smokers lobby tried to topple the Cantonal Smoking Law and reduce that Canton to the more lenient Federal Minimum. The SO-electorate rejected that idea. There is a rather radical vote in the pipeline which would make the smoking ban far more radical. It will meet a definite NO in the Senate and most likely a NO in the public vote.
C) No, the criminal will not be happier, as the military guns never were a problem for them. And the weapons of members of Hunting Clubs and Shooting Clubs will still be around
D) Where will it stop ? If a YES results, it will not automatically result in an even stiffer idea later on as such a move would be rejected by the electorate in any public vote

And by the SAS, too.

I dunno, Blair was pretty bloodthirtsy and did what he wanted for ten years. And he didn;t get voted out, either; left to take a higher paid job, the dirty weasel

Personally I don't believe in the death sentence, but if it is to be used then should only be carried out for the crime of murder, and then by the law. Not by vigililantes, and not for burgalry. Owning a gun to deter criminals just ups the ante, and starts an arms race; criminals carry guns far more and will be far more willing to use them. Net result: more deaths, everyone loses. In my opinion, if guns are really necessary, they should remain in the hands of professionals. Even they shoot innocent people; look at the Brazlian on the tube in London.

... and the women will feel safer in their homes with a yes vote. All Swiss men have guns; that doesn't mean they are all "responsible" gunowners.

And .... we'll also all be safer .. not just feel safer, we will be safer.

Remember the ski champion shot by her husband who was so responsible he was an officer in the military? Army issue gun and ammo. I wonder how many times he threatened to do it before he did it? Doesnt matter, he did it; he actually did it. Took her brother out too while he was at it... too easy.

Remember the 15 year old girl waiting for a bus in Hoengg (Zurich) who was killed by an army issue semi automatic assault rifle and army issue ammo - sorry, guns don't kill, people do - she was killed by a Swiss guy taking pot shots at a random girl at a bus stop. He had a criminal record, and still gets army issue weapon to take home and play with. Everyone does.

Just because the army - and for those who are several thousand miles away, we're speaking about a reserve army here, not paid soldiers, an army of bankers and mechanics and farmers and unemployed people and students and artists and even teachers, a reserve army comprising all Swiss men - just because tje army requires you to keep your gun at home does not mean you are a "responsible" gun owner, and just because it's illegal to take the extra ammo home does not mean it isn't happening. It most certainly is (see above examples and ask any Swiss man).

A yes vote is needed, to prevent unnecessary loss of lives, here in Switzerland.

Lisa

Right on

Maybe its a good idea for you to go to a save place several thousend miles back to Austrelia just saying

You have cited two cases of murder, where the weapon used was issued by the army. How many cases like these occur a year; how many have occurred over the last 10, 20 or 30 years? I know that the Swiss authorities are renowned for burying bad news, no pun intended but I sincerely doubt it is the epidemic proportions that you suggest. I suspect that one has a greater chance of meeting one`s demise by being killed in a plane crash, a car crash, drowning, an escaped lion etc etc.

As I have suggested, more resources should be employed in evaluating the reasons as to why people do these things, so that a plan can be created to prevent other murders like these occuring again. But no matter how well people are screened, somebody will always slip through the net. Just as driving laws have been strengthened, you will alwys get some inconsiderate driver who will disregard the speed limit, or drive whilst intoxicated and take a life. This is murder in my mind...................

You need to get a sense of proportion and stop looking to ban something that you dont understand............

Lisa, you silly little woman, you. Kitchen, bed and don't look in the back of the wardrobe.