SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Swiss voters on Sunday approved a measure to tighten the Alpine nation's gun laws, bringing the country in line with many of its European partners despite the objections of local gun owners, Swiss media reported, citing official results.
Switzerland's public broadcaster said more than 63% of voters nationwide agreed to align with European Union firearms rules adopted two years ago after deadly attacks in France, Belgium, Germany and Britain.
The vote Sunday was part of Switzerland's regular referendums that give citizens a direct say in policymaking. It had stoked passions in a country with long, proud traditions of gun ownership and sport and target shooting. Switzerland, unlike many other European nations, allows veterans of its obligatory military service for men to take home their service weapons after tours of duty.
The Swiss proposal, among other things, requires regular training on the use of firearms, special waivers to own some semi-automatic weapons and serial number tracking system for key parts of some guns. Gun owners would have to register any weapons not already registered within three years, and keep a registry of their gun collections.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday May 24 2019, @01:26AM (5 children)
Whataboutism and quibbling to bury the point at its finest.
You know damn well what GP AC, in his/her ignorance, was talking about. I grew up around guns. I've shot a lot of them myself. My dad was a proud member of the NRA for several decades before it was taken over by loonies, and he taught me from when I was a young child.
Stop pretending to reply and actually address a post for once. Stop arguing by sidestepping the real issues. You know damn well that so many weapons easily purchased in the U.S. are not necessary for everyday self-defense.
Be honest about the motivations behind the gun lobby -- they like big guns and they like to shoot them. For many gun owners, it's just that. They love the feel of going to a shooting range and rapid-firing a bunch of rounds into a target.
On the other hand, many of them suffer from delusional paranoia about the government. (Note that there are very good reasons to be paranoid about the government -- I'm talking about people who think they need an arsenal of guns because the feds are going to break down their door... which they might now, because they're mentally ill enough to suffer delusions and stockpile giant amounts of weapons... thus becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.) Many of them suffer from delusional paranoia about race wars, immigrants, etc. They "work [themselves] up over a nothingness - a demon conjured by some propagandist, out of [their] own ignorance."
What you say is beside the point. Be honest about the reasons behind U.S. gun policy. It's not about personal protection alone. It's about other stuff, too, which is why U.S. gun policy is so extreme compared to other places.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday May 24 2019, @01:52AM (3 children)
Nope. Quite the opposite, from where I sit.
"You know damn well what GP AC, in his/her ignorance, was talking about."
Well, I think I do at least, I obviously think I understood it well enough to correct it.
I believe he was worried because he thought all these AR-15 tacticool modular builds are actual assault rifles.
In that case he should rest easy, they simply aren't.
It's absolute foolishness to get worked up because you think someone's rifle just *looks* too evil. And that's what this boils down to, but it's whipped up by a dishonest media among a largely ignorant populace.
What next, will you come for my guitar, because it too *looks really evil?*
"I grew up around guns. I've shot a lot of them myself. My dad was a proud member of the NRA for several decades before it was taken over by loonies, and he taught me from when I was a young child."
I'm going to take that profession with a dose of salt for now, I have seen little if anything to make it seem credible.
"Stop pretending to reply and actually address a post for once."
And just what would I have to do in order for you to admit that I've addressed the post?
"You know damn well that so many weapons easily purchased in the U.S. are not necessary for everyday self-defense."
I should certainly hope not!
And nowhere did I say or imply that. What on earth are you on about?
Boy that would really be a sad commentary, if most purchases were because someone expected to have to defend themselves!
No, I'm sure most purchases are for plinking, or varmint culling, or hunting, or something like that. As it should be.
But the reason that we *as a people* chose to enshrine this as one of our very highest values, chose to encourage universal or near-universal ownership of weapons, THAT has a lot to do with self defense. Even more to do with militia, of course.
I think it's appropriate when we exercise our liberty in regards to plinking or hunting or what have you, that we recall that the REASON we have such unparalleled freedom to arm as we like is because we live in a free country, one which does not depend on a standing army of slaves or mercenaries for its ultimate security, but on the people as a whole.
"Be honest about the motivations behind the gun lobby -- they like big guns and they like to shoot them. For many gun owners, it's just that. They love the feel of going to a shooting range and rapid-firing a bunch of rounds into a target."
Hmmm. Not sure about your first sentence, more dishonest framing I think. But the rest of it? Even if so, so what? Nothing wrong with that. FFS, you sound really repressed, like you need a therapist, or a prostitute. Or maybe a couple hours at the range with a .50 BMG would set you straight?
There's nothing at all wrong with liking to shoot, or to drive fast cars, or fly planes. It's a natural human desire. Of course there's a need for care, be safe, but you seem to be implying it's some sort of moral failing.
It's ok to be human.
Your penultimate paragraph is really only objectionable in context, so I won't address it specifically.
"What you say is beside the point. Be honest about the reasons behind U.S. gun policy. It's not about personal protection alone. It's about other stuff, too, which is why U.S. gun policy is so extreme compared to other places."
Oh yeah, see my prior reply.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @02:44AM (2 children)
So, this is mostly about having a fun hobby? Then why in the very next sentence do you say:
So, which is it? Is this about having a fun hobby? Or is it about protection? And exactly what armed militia do you think would be appropriate for Adam Lanza, Stephen Paddock, Devin Patrick Kelley, or Nikolas Cruz? Remember, if you are aiming for "near-universal ownership of weapons", then those guys are inevitably going to be armed too.
Your notions of protecting the homeland with a citizen militia are arguably a bit dated. And, if security of the home front is your true objective then you can always serve in the military. You know? That armed group which is populated by the citizens of these United States of America? That military? Why can't you protect and serve in the military?
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday May 24 2019, @03:14AM (1 child)
"So, which is it?"
I thought I had made it rather clear, but I shall endeavor to make it crystal.
It's both, of course. You're talking about two different things.
The reason that we hold this as cultural and legal value? Or the reason we buy a weapon?
Two very different things. We hold it as a collective value based on the history already mentioned, and we tend to buy them as individuals for the other reasons, also already mentioned.
"And, if security of the home front is your true objective then you can always serve in the military."
Now there's a sentence the founders would have certainly found offensive.
How many levels of nonsense are there?
The assumption that a standing military is a better foundation for national security than an armed citizenry is diametrically opposed to the values of liberal democracy on which this country was founded. And it makes absolutely no sense.
Plus, you're assuming that I'm of age to for that employment, and not currently employed there, why?
Why do you keep trying to make everything into a personal jab of some kind? Why can't you just discuss the ideas without all this rhetoric?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @04:16AM
The founders are no longer with us to offer their opinion on that.
We are no longer in the 18th century, dude! The plain fact is that we now have a standing military made up (mostly) of US citizens. Do you not trust your fellow citizens in protection of he homeland? Why is that?
Look, when you put your ideas out there on full display don't be too surprised if the rest of us do a complete vivsection on them. Or should we just accept your pearls of wisdom without cross examination?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @02:22AM
Ever single thing you must do to shoot accurately especially at distance, is exactly like meditation. Control your breathing, your heartrate (seriously, the pulse of blood from a heartbeat will affect your aim), and focus your mind down to a singlular focus free from the clutter of random thoughts. Precision target shooting is one of the most calming activities one can do. Bubba don't know it, but he's a Buddha on the range.