• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Czech minister wants to guarantee the right to keep and bear arms

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
It's nice to see that the EU Parliament is at least trying to apply common sense to the issue by rejecting "resemblance" banning and examining the nature of the firearm itself, what it is, how it operates in its current configuration. On that point alone, they're far smarter than California's legislators.

Specifically:

Category A
The Commission’s original proposal added:
Category A6 “Automatic firearms which have been converted into semi-automatic firearms“ and Category A7 “Semi-automatic firearms for civilian use which resemble weapons with automatic mechanisms.”

These were both rejected by Parliament´s negotiators, as “there is experience that categorising items based on the subjectivity of resemblance creates legal uncertainty”, said Vicky Ford (ECR, UK).
They're also demonstrating at least rudimentary intelligence:

“The mere possibility of fitting a loading device with the capacity over 10 rounds for long firearms and 20 rounds for short firearms does not determine the categorization of the firearm.”
“Therefore a semi-automatic firearm remains Category B unless the high capacity magazine is fitted”, explained Ms Ford.
On the other hand, the actions they're taking still resemble a monkey dribbling a basketball. For example, they're trying to nitpick various firearms categories based on magazine size, whether the ammunition is center-fired or rim-fired, etc.

Not bright, and in at least one such attempt at categorization, a ban on "high capacity magazines," it "was rejected by Parliament as impractical to enforce." No kidding. Even so, in practical terms, it simply does not matter. The measure would have had absolutely zero effect on whether or not a bad guy went off the deep end.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Your "Swiss example" is pretty non-specific.

Law Library of Congress Summary. Switzerland has a comprehensive gun-control regime that is governed by federal law and implemented by the cantons. This regime may be somewhat less restrictive than that of other European countries, yet since 2008 it has complied with European Union requirements. The Swiss Weapons Act requires an acquisition license for handguns and a carrying license for the carrying of any permitted firearm for defensive purposes. Exceptions exist for hunters. Automatic weapons are banned.

Swiss militiamen may keep their issued personal weapon in their home. A popular referendum to prohibit this practice was rejected in February 2011.

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/switzerland.php

The article is fairly long, and includes "Until recently, Switzerland had a reputation for combining high levels of gun ownership with a low incidence of mass shootings. This reputation, however, has been marred by the recent shooting rampage in Dainnon."
Don't you mean, "Daillon?" Good article, by the way, on why mass shootings won't change Swiss gun culture.
 
Top