|
The new EC gun policy update seems to have faced heavy resistance from, unsurprisingly, countries that are high in in gun ownership, with Finland being somewhat a special case because they rely on their reserve training with their personally owned guns. The directive aims to ban most guns that are semi-automatic or bear resemblance to military rifles, most normal hunting weapons would remain the same as far as I know. Now however, the reasons for this ban seem really absurd, as it is claimed to be aimed to curb terrorist access to weapons, where the recent terrorist attacks on Europe used illegal weapons. Some people say that this will be an issue in Brexit as well, trying to use it as leverage to either go through with the ban or UK leaves. The news only ever mention opposition to the ban but I'd like some goon opinions as well. For me personally I do welcome policies that would secure weapons from terrorists but this is a really rear end backwards way of doing it, where it only punishes the legal gun owners and why would you ban anything based on how it looks anyway? EDIT some news sources http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/05/news/gun-control-europe-new-laws/ http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-6111_en.htm Patrocclesiastes fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Mar 7, 2016 |
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Awesome, news saying that a kalashnikov rifle has been found. This will give the EU gun ban new steam to gently caress over legal hobbyists, even though the terrorists in Europe have had pretty much illegal weapons only.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:......glad you found your source of displeasure from all this. My source of displeasure is that this type of thing happening is even possible in Europe, let alone in the capital of EU. We need to do more back here and abroad that radicalized muslims dont attack people and muslims dont become radicalized. I also dont like that this will be utilized to curb my freedom and restrict my country's ability to conduct self-defense, it must be nice to be rich enough and far away enough from the Russian border to be able to run down your military but Finnish reservists training use mostly self-owned semi-automatic guns and keeping a capable reserve is in the best interest of Finnish defense.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Do you have any reason to believe that would happen or are you just nitpicking a national tragedy to bemoan your gun rights, let alone that you think a small militia with self provided weapons would even cause the Russians to flinch. Following the EU gun ban process, yes, absolutely this will be used, just like the arrests days before we're used. The whole process has been locked due to opposition by countries like Finland and others, and the compromise suggested by the chairman country Netherlands was to ban something, anything, just decide on what to ban, nothing that is based on facts or actual research, just fear and feelings. Besides that, the Finnish constitutional court has already declared earlier when we had our school shootings which led to tightening of gun laws here, that there is no need to tighten them further. And I am just going to laugh at your remark of a small militia, maybe do some research first, or do you consider an army of 230 000 active reservists plus non-active and second tier conscripts to be small? I do not look for a chance to relive Winter War, it is about deterring it, hth.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:230,000 active reservists versus 740k active Russian military and 2 million reservists. You are right, they are not coming, you are almost there understanding my point, why they are not coming, yet you miss, I will give you a hint: it is something to do with the defense forces and their training. But it is alright. And true, in the end bemoaning the gun rights is probably useless, as the ban, even though they will use these attacks, that used illegal guns, as a fuel against legal gun owners, will probably not go through, as it seems most countries are against it and the next EU chair country is also opposing it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:HAHA. Got it. Finland is key to holding back the Ruskies. Thank goodness your gun rights stop the hun. You still dont understand, it is okay, I see it is rather useless to try to explain it to you either. YF-23 posted:And here I thought NRA-style idiots who stand on top of the dead to cry about gun control was a distinctive american phenomenon, and this is not even after a mass shooting. Please take this poo poo to either another place, or another time, not here and now. I am sorry, I thought it was okay when inside the EU parliament the speakers were telling the MEPs that those EVIL KALASHNIKOVS are used right at this moment, but I guess standing on top of the dead is okay if it is for your team 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:29
|
|
'ing over your gun right while other people have lost their lives is petty and disturbing. Give it a couple days before you choose focusing on them finding an AK before you throw your hands in the air and declare all is lost for your precious gun rights.
|
CommieGIR posted:Find another time, jackass. Now is not the time. Absolutely, just hoping the ban advocates do the same in Brussels.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:And they should. But here you are. Just bringing up the tertiary non-issues they are tackling instead of the real problems at hand, what can we do with radicalized muslims and help muslims not become radicalized.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Truga posted:Hey, I know exactly where you're coming from. If a personal freedom you have gets removed due to some lovely terrorist attack and in no way a fault of your own, it's always lovely (that kind of poo poo is what makes terrorists actually win, if you ask me), but holy poo poo is your excuse for wanting to have a gun dumb, and possibly more importantly, can you at least wait until such a proposal even exists in the first place? I don't have much faith in this world but even I think nothing is going to happen to your lovely gun collection. The proposal exists and is actually going through the motions in the parliament, they were discussing it during the arrests in Brussels earlier, and even used those arrests as a context for the ban. CommieGIR posted:Its not the time. Wait until those politicians actually open their mouth. Agreed, I am sorry in the way I brought it up. Freezer posted:Isn't the Finnish containment zone thread pretty much meant for this? Take your awful poo poo there. Not a militia and not just about Finland, as Finland is not the whole EU. YF-23 posted:There were a thousand different ways you could've made your posts, and the one you picked makes it blindingly obvious that you put disgustingly higher priority on gun control than you do on the actual terrorist attacks and the people that died in them. Take that attitude elsewhere or elsewhen. I do place personal freedoms higher than terrorist attacks, but I did bring that out in a bad way, I had posted about the gun ban earlier in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
CrazyLoon posted:I thought all the replies ITT were about the latest attack, and thought: "*sigh* Figures...let's see how the thread handled it..." So the best you can reply to posts about actual EU policymaking is ad hominems?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
The gun directive started out great actually, it was going to bring gun parts, deactived guns and starter guns more inline inside the EU as a whole, only after Paris did they stack on whole bans on semi-automatic guns and going after collectors. The guns used in Paris and most likely what the guys had in Belgium originate from the Balkans and most were purchased from company called Kol Arms in Slovakia, where they deactivated them, but this, unlike deactivations in other countries, only was done so that the barrel was welded shut, the guns can be made working again after changing the barrel. The original directive would have dealt with them. Instead now you have fear based legislation that does nothing but hurt legal owners and in Finland's case the training of reservists. I posted earlier in this thread about what the directive entails with the associated links.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
I dont understand, the directive is already in the EU parliament, I posted about it in the thread before.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Nobody cares about your dumb toys and about your weekend soldiers club. Honestly I am saddened that you dont care about the legislative process in EU.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:Hey, lemme give a Finnish redneck opinion on this: Paranoid fuckheads who go as far as to name themselves "punakone" do not need automatic weapons, and really needing even a semi-auto means you're a lovely hunter who shouldn't be shooting. The new gun ban is poorly worded and should probably be revised to eliminate edge cases, but it's better than nothing. If for nothing else, then for the sake of my barn and animals. I wouldn't trust punakone to reliably identify a cow from a moose. Automatics are not legal anyway, I dont use a semiautomatic to hunt, which have a three bullet magazine limit, if not outright banned for certain game. Semiautomatics in Finland are mostly used in Finland for reservist training, as it is part of building a beliveable defence. You need licenses and prove use for said license. The gun directive had been out before Paris, and it actually was great for intended purpose, only after Paris was semiauto ban slapped on based purely on fear and does nothing to actually address the illegal weapons the terrorists have had, which have been shoddily deactivated guns, which the directive would have taken care of. But keep the ad hominems instead of actually addressing any points.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Rifles are not a credible defence force against cruise missiles and fighter jets, hth. I take it you have taken time to become familiar with the Finnish defence doctrine to make such statements? The keyword is cost. I am sure its nice to be under the US nuclear umbrella but some of us actually have To do some legwork
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
The reason Finland trains most of its men to be in the army and supports active reservists training with their own rifles, which the current iteration if the directive would curb, is to make any military action against us too costly, hth. It must be nice to be rich enough to make flippant statements about other countries safety and I am glad that you guys are not interested in the directive as it means the powers opposing it are more likely to prevail. I suppose you guys oppose any kind of self-defence and believe in the rule of the strong too? I can imagine you would have said roll over to Ukraine as well.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 10:46
|
|
|
https://www.all4shooters.com/en/mobile/Shooting/law/EU-Gun-Ban-French-Ministry-Internal-Affairs-responsibility/ Not surprising but nice hypocricy from the French government.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:I'm probably going to regret this, but are these the changes you're so upset about? The original scope of the directive which I outlined earlier in the thread is perfect. It did everything to curb current illegal firearms. My main disagreement with its current form is the ban of all semi automatics and the way this directive would criminalize collectors, who already have To have a license to be a collector, then have separate licenses to the guns themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Where any of the weapons used in recent terrorist attacks bought legally? If yes, carry on and ban them. Sorry phoneposting so double. They were legally bought shoddily deactivated guns, which were illegally modified to be functioning again. The directive in its original form wouldve already dealt with this by making deactivation requirements the same throughout EU and brought which parts of guns require licenses in line between member states.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:There's no proposal to ban all semi-automatics: Ah, I do believe Finnish translations have misled me, apologies. However, that would apply to most semi automatics still, which, as said before, affects unduly on the Finnish reserve training, sports shooting, among others. It also feels really stupid that you would ban guns based on how they look, instead of actual technical basis. Besides this, this does nothing to actually address the weapons used in the recent attacks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Isn't deactivation supposed to be permanent and irreversible? Was it performed incorrectly? Is the seller legally responsible for what happens with the weapons? It was a Slovakian company called Kol arms that deactivated them. They had only welded the barrels shut to allow the firing of blanks. They can be made functional by changing the barrel. It was made correctly according to Slovakian laws, but for example in Finland they would have been considered functional. Thus I dont know if the company would actually be responsible for what the end user does.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Holy poo poo, what is wrong with Slovakia? I guess there really wasnt a point having stricter laws back when, but it is a problem that directive would solve.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FNONSGML%2BCOMPARL%2BPE-578.822%2B01%2BDOC%2BPDF%2BV0%2F%2FEN This is the newest draft for the new EU Gun directive and its really good, it has fixed pretty much everything that they earlier had wrong, wow. Up next they are going to vote about this, hope it goes through.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
CrazyLoon posted:Not really. OhYeah is posting. Cool casual racism 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Managed to take some time off from bravely facing down the Soviet hordes I see punakone. Oh dear, I am sorry for any traumatic memories that might surface. Its just that kind of language towards eastern europeans sometimes seems to have a really racist under current, but in this case I 100% made a reach.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:Only because the blood on the floor didn't have time to cool before French politicians charged forth to change legalization that was basically finished and everyone was happy about in effort to ban scary looking murder machines that weren't connected to the terrorist attacks in any way. Pretty much, except Netherlands is trying to make a compromise suggestion about this which would make everything banned again, but its not likely to pass
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Its almost as if americans dont care about Roma besides using them to call Europeans racist.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
France and cazaneuve are demanding that the gun directive must be passed before May, they are aware that Slovakia will stall it when it becomes the chaircountry in june. Netherlands are demanding that "something in the context of semi-automatics must be banned" Is this even real life anymore? Its like certain politicians involved in this are absolute regards.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Skinnymansbeerbelly posted:I check the international news religiously, and there is no English-language news source that covers these EU directives, so I find it informative. I will start trying to include sources with these then, most are second hand information from one of the groups lobbying against this so obviously biased. Its just that there seems to be zero english language publishing about this, for or against. The Finnish media as well quieted down about this after running headlines about how the Finnish need for training our reserves was hear in Eu.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
So the EU EFFECT research about firearms and forensics was published, you can read it here: http://www.coventry.ac.uk/Global/08%20New%20Research%20Section/FINAL%20EFFECT%20PROJECT%20REPORT.pdf I dunno how good it is to illustrate trends or try to predict anything if the datarange you use is only one year. And apparently they state that 6700 people die of gunshot wounds each year and 75% are self-inflicted. So the rest 1675 cases are either criminal incidents or accidents, they dont really make it clear. But to get to this number, they have listed 770 cases from Turkey(not EU), 22 from Macedonia(not EU), 13 from Montenegro(not EU) and 75 from Serbia(not EU). So almost half of the cases are not even from EU. What is the purpose of trying to affect EU gun policy with research that includes case that are decidedly not EU?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
Youd think that people would be interested that EU pays for research data that is biased to support policy making whether its gun policy on refugee policy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:05
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Is there some magical difference that makes gun wounds follow different rules of physics and physiology in the EU compared to out of the EU? I'm trying to get why statistics from countries outside the EU are necessarily invalid. I would think crime statistics outside EU are not relevant when making policy inside EU.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:I must have missed that EU regulation that magically turns bullets into singing flowers once they enter into our borders. So you are saying murder rate inside France is somehow related to that inside say Turkey? Could you elaborate the connection here for me?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Related? No. You do comparisons between states using different policies and analyse the similarities and differences according to relevant criteria. Of course, but why then would you lump said control group (outside EU countries) with the group (EU) you are studying and who will be affected by it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
Pesmerga posted:The report focuses not only on the EU but also neighbouring and candidate countries, including for reasons involving cross-border trade in guns. It's explained in the beginning of the report. Indeed, missed that while skimming, sorry. No mentions of cross-border trade though, just intelligence gathering. Would be interesting to see what kind of traffic there is from non-EU countries to EU countries regarding legal vs illegal firearms and what kind of systems are in place for police intelligence gathering regarding investigations with ballistic forensics. And speaking of Turkey, Germany has outlined them as supporting terrorists http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/tuerkei-619.html lol
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Tightening laws regarding deactivated weapons is good imo even through it hosed over lots of people who now face the choice of destroying their already deactivated guns or paying to deactivate them again.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 15:05
|
|