Lost a knife to day

Hi Maximus!
thanks for the kind words! Actualy I'm police officer in France but have a danish wife so...
Great exemple you sended! A shame more people of the Danish government don't share this point of vew...But ok...there is some good electors like Porcupine who are reasonable enough to maintain a great balance in this country ;) Hva Bo?
An exemple...In north of France a police officer was shot last week with a AK47...I doubt this gun was very legal...France is very liberal speaking about guns laws, for exemple everybody over 18 years old can buy a 12 gauge or a 22 caliber, if you're member of a shooting club after 6 months you can buy whatever you want, no restrictions about calibers and size...And you know what? In 11 years in the force I've seen people using LEGALS GUNS to a criminal activity 2 times...(and I mean in Paris where I'm cop I meet quiet a lot situations...).
OVERGAAR any comments??? :yawn:
 
Away for one day - and behold what I created :D

I really feel sorry for Carl who lost a nice nife. But since we are off topic anyway, I’ll just continue down that road.

You have been so busy that I cannot possibly answer all of you individually. I'll try so sum it up though. Please try to understand though, that I am not trying to make you all change your mind, I do not mind you having a different opinion.

I think that I agree with you all in the following: Any dedicated criminal will be able to obtain and use any gun the he desires. No matter what the laws are. That has been proven over and over in history. And of course dedicated criminals use stolen or illegal guns: These are more difficult to track and therefore will make it less easy to get caught.

Where I beg to differ is in my view on whether “my right to self-defence” automatically should extend into “my right to carry a gun”. IMHO, more public guns will create more shootings, and more killings. And I believe that’s bad. Imagine a situation where any UK or Italian citizen were allowed to carry a handgun in public. How many shooting would happen when the hooligans and tifosi were fighting over a soccer-match? Not that I care much for their lives anyway, but thay could kill innocent bystanders.

The “cost” of having many guns in public should be weighted agains the “cost” of innocent people not being able to shoot back if they are assaulted in public or in their own home. I weigh these costs differently than you. I believe that any gunfight is a loose-loose situation. If you want to win, the best thing is not to get into that situation.

And even if you advocate that self-defence guns should be allowed, I can hardly see how any guns but handguns could be regarded as self-defence in a non-military environment. A rifle cannot be used for defence (unless perhaps you have a very big property and alarms to alert you when trespassers are getting nearer). Rifles are offensive in nature (still assuming a civil environment). The name of the M16 and M4 is “Assault Rifle”. I cannot see any reason what so ever to allow that kind of weapon outside the military.

Maximus: Would allowing guns get the number of guns down? Or do you feel safe when you carry you own gun – despite the number of guns around you? – Anyway, you are very welcome to come cycling in Denmark (i.e. when your shoulder is fixed).

Enough about guns.

The right to defend you self: I of course agree that it is ridiculuos – no it is unjust, unfair and plain wrong, - when you are charged with violence when you kick the butt of an intruder. Luckily that is not always the case. To years ago, my father had been harassed (not violently) during a long period by his neighbour’s 19 your old son. My father then complained to the police, and they warned the punk. One day my father was parking his car in the driveway, when the punk approached him in a theathing manner, saying he would beat my father up because he went to the police. When he came into the driveway and got within arms length, my father (who was 60 at that time) hit the punk once very hard. The punk went down, my father escaped to the house and called the police. The punk was arrested, an no charges were brought against my father. Unfortunately the punk were released later because of lack of evidence (i.e. who started) but he never bothered my father again. My father ad a sore arm for one week.

About knifes: I don’t think our opinions differ that much.

And please: Your mileage may vary.
 
Originally posted by Overgaar
I cannot see any reason what so ever to allow that kind of weapon outside the military.
Click to expand...


There are a lot of people who wouldn’t see any reason for Carl to have a pocket knife with thumb studs.


What I can’t understand is why you would gratefully “allow” some politician or bureaucrat to dictate what kinds of knives or guns you or your fellow citizens can or cannot own for lawful purposes.


Overgaar, do you really think that you are safer because responsible law abiding people are forbidden to own military style rifles for collecting or target shooting?


How about someone like Carl? Do you feel safer because he had his Sebenza confiscated?


Do you think your misguided sense of security is more important than someone else’s freedom?








- Frank
 
Frank,

What I can’t understand is why you would gratefully “allow” some politician or bureaucrat to tell you what kinds of knives or guns you or your fellow citizens can own for lawful purposes.
Click to expand...
I "allow" the "politicians" to tell me a lot of other even more important stuff, e.g. how much I should pay in taxes, how fast I can drive on the freeway, whether we should go to war, whether I can have child pornography material, etc. So why not waepons? The idea of the representative democracy is that we elect people who then make the rules. If you don't like the rules - elect some other people. Take a look at the Swiss system - they have public referendums on almost everything.

Overgaar, do you really think that you are safer because responsible law abiding people are forbidden to own military style rifles for collecting or target shooting?
Click to expand...
Yes, I do believe that. However - my main point is not to discuss what happens at controlled shooting clubs. But what's allowed to carry in public.

Do you think your misguided sense of security is more important than someone else’s freedom?
Click to expand...
I want freedom to be secure. Whether my sense is misguided is hardly up to you to judge. But of course - at least one of us is wrong here. We could of discuss homicide rates per inhabitants for a lot of different contries. And try to correlate that with the local weapons law.

How about someone like Carl? Do you feel safer because he had his Sebenza confiscated?
Click to expand...
No I don't. I already stated that several times. However, if it had been a desert eagle that somehone had had confiscated then my answer would have been "Yes, I do feel more secure"

I understand that you disagree. But what part of my reasoning don't you understand?

(Moderators: If this thread is getting too much OT, please move it to some other forum.)
 
Uhhhhh... Maybe it's the part where you so easily state that the government should have complete control over you... Sounds kinda like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia...:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: As for the Swiss, they also keep full-auto assault weapons at home, yet have the lowest crime rates in Europe... Hmmmmmm... I wonder why...:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

-Mark
 
OVERGAAR...I've never read so much crap in a thread...Rifles can not be defensive weapons? So YOU overgaar with your I imagine GREAT combat experience know better than mostly experts around the world?
Have Mr OVERGAAR forget than in Denmark there is something called "National guard"? This national guard represent 10% of the danish population and most of them have a G3 assault rifle at home!!! Funny enough since over 50 years the Danish national guard exist and have been delivered ASSAULT RIFLES at home there have been only 5 cases of criminality where people of the national guard was involved... Beside, the most popular form for shooting in Denmark is Rifle target shooting where 2 calibers are allowed...308W and 6.5¤55 wich are both military caliber.People shoot it from Mauser type rifles wich have been used as ASSAULT Rifles long before you was born so PLEASE OVERGAAR don't come with your crap about what people need to own or shoot because of your safety.Denmark is still a safe country where a knife agression on the street still make the first side of all the news papers (wich is good) but it's not due to the guns restrictions!
Tell me your opinion: Is it OK to prohibit 45 caliber and 44 mag because it's too overkill but at the same time everybody can become a member of the danish national guard without ANY form for psychologic control and get an assault rifle! Is it ok that this same person can shoot this assault rifle for fun on sunday with other members of the national guard, but it's not OK to shoot precision shooting sports disciplines with the same kind of rifles?
Come on!:barf:
The big problem in denmark is that it's TABOO too say I like guns...When you say in Denmark I enjoy shooting, people look at you as a psycho...But it's ok to HIDE his interest behind a sport and say "I practice shooting discipline"...
:barf: :barf: :barf:
And you still didn't answered... About restriction, Is a psycho less dangerous with one gun than with 5 guns? I don't think so...
About your notice on English people and Italian people I consider it very very low...specialy when statistics show than Denmark have the european record of youngs alcoholics... But hey! I'm sure you feel very safe a saturday night on the street with all this over drunk youngs...this is OK to allow them to drink so much but for god sake prohibit guns! THIS is the Danish cancer...
 
And please OVERGAAR don't speak about government contoling about child porno because Denmark is STILL the ONLY country in the world where PEDOPHIL ASSOCIATIONS are autorised by the government...
 
Oh darn.....Xellos and Olivier said what I wanted to say!:D

Oh well...since I am posting anyway; I would never trust the politicians, the government and/or the police to know what's the best for the people!
Actually, I don't trust them at all!
 
Originally posted by Overgaar
I "allow" the "politicians" to tell me a lot of other even more important stuff, e.g. how much I should pay in taxes, how fast I can drive on the freeway, whether we should go to war, whether I can have child pornography material, etc. So why not waepons? The idea of the representative democracy is that we elect people who then make the rules. If you don't like the rules - elect some other people. Take a look at the Swiss system - they have public referendums on almost everything.
Click to expand...


Yes, politician can make many decisions that effect our lives, but I don’t need them telling me I can’t have a rifle that looks like a military rifle or a one hand opening pocket knife just because some hysterical ninny would feel safer. These laws have proven to have little if any effect on criminals and only restrict people who obey the laws already. I for one am never grateful when honest people are restricted by big brother/nanny state laws, even when they don’t affect me. I believe that a just government should be a public servant not a dictator.

Besides, I wouldn’t want to rely on the hysterical ninnies and politicians to protect me. ;)

And guns are in no way comparable to child pornography. :barf:



Yes, I do believe that. However - my main point is not to discuss what happens at controlled shooting clubs. But what's allowed to carry in public.
Click to expand...


I want freedom to be secure. Whether my sense is misguided is hardly up to you to judge. But of course - at least one of us is wrong here. We could of discuss homicide rates per inhabitants for a lot of different contries. And try to correlate that with the local weapons law.
Click to expand...



It is not my judgment, just a fact. In the USA there are 36 states with right to carry laws. The effects of these laws have been studied very carefully, and in no instance have these laws caused an increase in crime – in fact they have been proven to have reduced violent crime.

In Europe, Switzerland has about the lowest violent crime rates and the highest gun ownership per capita.

I’m not saying that the number of guns per capita will determine the crime rate – actually it is one of many factors. What I am saying is that restrictive gun control laws don’t work and that right to carry laws have proven to reduce violent crime.




No I don't. I already stated that several times. However, if it had been a desert eagle that somehone had had confiscated then my answer would have been "Yes, I do feel more secure"
Click to expand...

But what part of my reasoning don't you understand?
Click to expand...



Overgaar, what I don’t understand is why you do not see that forbidding others from owning a firearm, not because they are a criminal or irresponsible, but simply because you don’t want them to have what you consider to be a “weapon” or don’t think that a firearm is something ordinary people should be allowed to have, is the same misguided mentality that allows someone to dictate to you what kind of pocket knife you can own on the same basis.






- Frank
 
Sorry guys, I am on the brink of giving up this conversation.

You do not agree with me. Fine. You are putting words in my mouth, you don't read what I write (or perhaps I am just not able to express my self in writing). That's still acceptable. But when you are getting personal, calling me names, using 4-letter words, or identifying my views with the views of totalitarian regimes, I get offended. And my reaction to that will be to withdraw from this discussion. So here is my very last attempt to explain my beliefs.

About assault rifles and the national guard: Of course the national guard ("Hjemmeværnet" in Denmark) are having rifles. They are part of the military system. But no one in their right mind can claim that rifles are defensive in a civilian (read: Non-military ) urban or suburban setting. I have nothing against hunting, I have nothing against carrying guns (handguns or rifles) in the wilderness where dangerous animals rule. But you will not find those settings in Denmark (Yeah - I know: Polar bears in Greenland ;) ). And I have nothing against shooting clubs.

About freedom: Living in any society sometimes means that we have to give up on our own needs for better of the society. You do that as well. You have speeding laws, building safety regulations, the Americans have the FDA and FAA and ... you name it. Government controlled bodies that regulate our behavior. I like personal freedom as well. But as well as I don’t think people should be allowed to drive e.g. 180 km/s through the down town city, I don’t think people should be allowed to carry guns there too.

About the great conspiracy theory (“The Government is evil”, "the politicians are evil", or more moderate: “Perhaps they are not evil, but then they are selfish and stupid”): People get the politicians they deserve. I you do not believe in the society, if you do not believe in democracy, then I cannot argue against that. You do not believe in dictatorships either, I presume. There is a name for a society where all people can do what they want regardless. It’s called anarchy. Why don’t you find another country to live in?

Regarding the Swiss: They are having right-to-carry. Exactly. And they are having a very low crime rate. Exactly. But they are not (or rather, only to a small degree) having a representative democracy. They have direct democracy. They vote on almost anything. If you were proposing that your country and my country should change our constitutions to adopt the same system, I would regard that as a serious, honest point of view. I might agree or disagree, but I would respect your point of view. But, as long as you live in a representative democracy, you have to abide by the rules set by the people you elect.

To sum it all up: I do not believe that peoples right to freedom should automatically grant the people the right to carry guns in public.
 
Overgaar,
it seem that you still don't understand the point of this conversation, nobody said we HAVE to carry guns, and nobody said the Danish government is foolish by prohibiting to carry gun.
What we mean is that this government is foolish to restrict the number of owned guns and their caliber. THIS IS NOT A SOLUTION.
We're not speaking about leting people to get armed for defensive purposes, we 're talking about letting people shoot whatever they want to shoot in the rules of some shooting organisations.We don't even have this rights in Denmark and whatever you mean about democraty, you should know that the politicians in place in the danish government didn't keep the promises they made when elected.
Anyway we're not here to speak about politic,but about rights and freedom. I can deal with rules made by a government as long as they protect people like not to drive 180 downtown or stuff like that, but in this situation the restrictions about guns laws are prooved to have ZERO impact on criminality.The only impact this rules have is to cut some people from their right to practice a legal shooting activity.
Regulations are called regulation when they're in the interest of people, but I call it privation when they don't have sens.
To conclude it, I just ordered a Vietnam Hawk and got it because it's not prohibited in denmark (yet...), and if you have a weapon permit you can even buy a Trailmaster legaly.But not a little one hand opening knife...Wich is more dangerous?
So a guy as Carl buying a Sebenza is getting troubles because they consider his knife as a dangerous weapon, but the same Carl can buy a Trailmaster legaly without troubles.Where is the logic?
There is none, as there is none logic in prohibit people to buy a 45 but let them buy a 357 mag legaly...
 
Oliver,


Now I understand what you are trying to say. I was talking about right to carry - you were talking about the right to own and use in a controlled environment. I think we actually agree. :D

I do not care what caliber weapons people are shooting in regulated shooting organisations. For my sake you could have an Abrams tank shooting club, as long as you paid the ammo your self, and you were not distubring the neighbours.

In my initial post in this thread I said that I approved of the Danish gun laws. I still do. At least regarding the right to carry. I can see you point in critisizing in the missing right to own.

You say:
it seem that you still don't understand the point of this conversation,
Click to expand...
I think it is you who did not understand the point of the discussion. After all, I started it :cool:
 
Frank, you don't even have to leave our shores to make a point regarding gun ownership and gun violence. Yes, Switzerland has armed citizens, and the crime rate is low. But just look at the gold ol' USA, where the highest crime rates (and gun crime rates) are in the areas of our counrty that have the most stringent gun control. And the areas that have the most lax gun control laws have the lowest crime rates and gun crime rates. Imagine that! It's not the guns, it's the people! Where you find more criminals, you find more crime. And criminals do not observe gun laws.

As Benjamin Franklin said (I believe it was him) He who would give up freedom for security deserves neither.
 
Hello all, I just finished to read this
thread (what a debate!), and as Olivier
and I share the same citizenship, I'd
like him to explain how would be considered a small sebenza by a french
cop if found on someone carrying it
downtown? If I remember well the law,
the sebie would have had the same end,
no :confused: ?
To clarify a bit, in France, a lockable
blade knife is part of a weapons' category
where the application of the law is relying mostly on the interpretation of
the police officer officing, though any
scenario could occure, but what would be
the most possible one(s)?
 
I'd like to add a note on the situation in
switzerland: yes, you can find automatic/
assault rifles in many houses BUT, this is
because of the lack of a true army. To
defend the country the government relies
on milicias made of people having other
professionnal activities most of the time,
and those people can be drilled anytime,
and to get a quick reactive "army" they
MUST have their weapons and combat
equipment at the ready. DON'T TAKE THINGS
OUT OF CONTEXT to justify your "truths".

Knowing a bit of the mentality among
swiss people, I'd say that the low rate
of crime should rather be attributed to
the fairly good economic situation of
the country and a kind of paranoid attitude that push everyone to look at
what your neighbors are doing and call the police if it's illegal beyond tolerance ... :barf: and tolerance can
be somewhat tight.
 
Dear French Kiss...
since I'm and French and Capitaine in the French Police, I think I know the law enough to explain it...
In France, it is LEGAL to buy any type of knives, even automatics...
Every knives with a system that lock the blade in open position are classified as weapons of category 6, as are most fixed blades,sword daggers batons, etc...
Everybody over 18 years old can buy it and own it.
So if Carl lived in France he would have received his knife with the post.
Beside,in france, the license delivered by an athletic federation (shooting, ball-trap, combat sports) allow you to carry a weapon of category 6.(article 35 look at articles 20 and 36 of decree law 18/04/1939).
Any questions?
I've been cop in now 11 years and I know few cops who would arest a normal person going at work with a Spyderco in his pocket...personnaly I never did it!
:rolleyes:
 
Oliver,

Interesting career you've had. To quote from your profile:
I'm a French guy living in Denmark,military have been all my life,I'm VET from Ethiopia,Somalia,Rwanda,Congo and Bosnia.
Click to expand...
and from your previous post:
I'm and French and Capitaine in the French Police.
I've been cop in now 11 years
Click to expand...
You were born in 1973. Having been a cop for 11 years, means that you became a cop only 19 years old. Is that possible in France? In Denmark you have to be 21, I believe. And how have you had time to go to war in all those exotic countries while you were a cop? Are you still a (French) cop, now that you live in Denmark? :confused:
 
Thanks for your answer my dear Olivier!

hope to read you in the future, you sound
like a sensed person... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top