Swiss soldiers face loss of right to store guns at home

Disarm the militia.
Does this ring a bit of deja vu with the rest of y'all?

I think I am gonna move to the states. The only place were people have a right to bear arms that is not Canada. I have nothing against Canada, its just too cold for a south african boy like me.
 
The Swiss, most armed=most free. let's hope the referendum fails.

I hope they stay out of the UN too!

"There's a bad moon on the rise..."

Tom
 
I don't know how much longer those of us under the stars and stripes will get to keep our firearms. I think Obama is already trying to resurrect the "assault weapons" ban, and I think he's made it pretty obvious his agenda is Chicago politics for the whole nation.
Eh... maybe I'm just being cynical. I mean, the government knows better than us what's best right? I mean, with guys like Stalin and Mao maintaining such logic, how we can go wrong? The USSR and China are glistening beacons of freedom...
Oh... whoops.
You know what, titus? Come to the states. We could use another rifle in the revolution.
 
MagenDavid said:
I don't know how much longer those of us under the stars and stripes will get to keep our firearms. I think Obama is already trying to resurrect the "assault weapons" ban, and I think he's made it pretty obvious his agenda is Chicago politics for the whole nation.
Eh... maybe I'm just being cynical. I mean, the government knows better than us what's best right? I mean, with guys like Stalin and Mao maintaining such logic, how we can go wrong? The USSR and China are glistening beacons of freedom...
Oh... whoops.
You know what, titus? Come to the states. We could use another rifle in the revolution.
Click to expand...

My friend, I am seriously considering this.
The uk is a great place to live if you are a complete pussy that thinks he can rely on the state to protect him from violent crime.
I wish Oliver Cromwell had been more successfull
 
To be honest, I don't see the point of people having access to military grade weaponry. guns don't kill people but they sure help. Here, where I live, people are allowed to own shotguns and rifles to hunt, but anything more advanced is illegal. And even this is regulated. This is fine by me; we have very few gun killings. In addition it makes law enforcement a safer occupation, and actually makes it easier to bring down criminals who use weapons.

And besides, if someone breaks into your house at night, cut the power and all you really need is a CAK.
 
Acinonyx said:
To be honest, I don't see the point of people having access to military grade weaponry. guns don't kill people but they sure help. Here, where I live, people are allowed to own shotguns and rifles to hunt, but anything more advanced is illegal. And even this is regulated. This is fine by me; we have very few gun killings. In addition it makes law enforcement a safer occupation, and actually makes it easier to bring down criminals who use weapons.

And besides, if someone breaks into your house at night, cut the power and all you really need is a CAK.
Click to expand...

All I need is a CAK, yes. Or a ball point pen. I'm also 6'2" and 215 lbs on a light day and quite grumpy about having my territory invaded. What about my ex girlfriend, though, who's 5'3" and 110 lbs soaking wet? Unless that first cut (or two if she's lucky) is precise, I'm going to de-limb her barehanded from the adrenaline rush before I die.

What sorts of regulations do you face as far as keeping the shotgun loaded at home?
 
Notice that the Greens are part of the leftist coalition behind this attempt. It's long been the case that the Green movement is less about the enviroment than it is about communist totalitarianism, in theme and in philosophy. "The environment" is simply a convenient lever for pushing this agenda of state control over the individual. Arms must be confiscated, by the Swiss leftists there and by Obama's followers here, if that statist agenda is to progress.

Acinonyx said:
To be honest, I don't see the point of people having access to military grade weaponry. guns don't kill people but they sure help. Here, where I live, people are allowed to own shotguns and rifles to hunt, but anything more advanced is illegal. And even this is regulated. This is fine by me; we have very few gun killings. In addition it makes law enforcement a safer occupation, and actually makes it easier to bring down criminals who use weapons.

And besides, if someone breaks into your house at night, cut the power and all you really need is a CAK.
Click to expand...

This statement is thoroughly ignorant of virtually every single tenet of realistic self-defense that it defies response. In the future, I would urge you not to state opinions about things of which you have no knowledge. It only tends to enflame threads about hot-button issues.
 
Sharp Phil said:
Notice that the Greens are part of the leftist coalition behind this attempt. It's long been the case that the Green movement is less about the enviroment than it is about communist totalitarianism, in theme and in philosophy. "The environment" is simply a convenient lever for pushing this agenda of state control over the individual. Arms must be confiscated, by the Swiss leftists there and by Obama's followers here, if that statist agenda is to progress.



This statement is thoroughly ignorant of virtually every single tenet of realistic self-defense that it defies response. In the future, I would urge you not to state opinions about things of which you have no knowledge. It only tends to enflame threads about hot-button issues.
Click to expand...



Notice how you're the only one talking like this in here? We don't have use for ad homs. It's a friendly back and forth. You'd probably be more comfortable posting somewhere else.
 
MagenDavid said:
Notice how you're the only one talking like this in here? We don't have use for ad homs. It's a friendly back and forth. You'd probably be more comfortable posting somewhere else.
Click to expand...

There is nothing about my statement that constitutes an ad hominem attack.
 
Thanks, MagenDavid, that means a lot! My point is that if gun ownership is just about unregulated, of course you'll get little something for protection. However, so will the guy kicking in your door at 3 am, and his will be bigger. In addition, he'll be terrified of getting shot himself, and pretty likely shot any residents on sight.

Now, if you live somewhere where people don't own guns, then the one entering probably won't own one either, and if he does he'll be confident enough to settle with robbing you. And you can live with that. Literally. And, if he does own a gun, chances are that he'll get charged with that alone before he gets to do anything too serious. (Tenets vs. statistical data, I'll go with statistics any day.)

Sharp Phil is of course entitled to entertain whatever opinions and ideas he wishes, and I can only hope that his fight for individual freedom also includes freedom of speech. Hone your Zen, and allow me my opinion, please.
 
Acinonyx said:
Thanks, MagenDavid, that means a lot! My point is that if gun ownership is just about unregulated, of course you'll get little something for protection. However, so will the guy kicking in your door at 3 am, and his will be bigger. In addition, he'll be terrified of getting shot himself, and pretty likely shot any residents on sight.

Now, if you live somewhere where people don't own guns, then the one entering probably won't own one either, and if he does he'll be confident enough to settle with robbing you. And you can live with that. Literally. And, if he does own a gun, chances are that he'll get charged with that alone before he gets to do anything too serious. (Tenets vs. statistical data, I'll go with statistics any day.)

Sharp Phil is of course entitled to entertain whatever opinions and ideas he wishes, and I can only hope that his fight for individual freedom also includes freedom of speech. Hone your Zen, and allow me my opinion, please.
Click to expand...

These, again, are statements made of complete ignorance. That is not an attack on you; that is merely the declaration that the opinion you are expressing has no relation to the actual, objective facts concerning the topic on which you have chosen to express your opinions. These opinions cannot be reconciled with the crime statistics of either nations with extensive gun ownership OR nations with heavy restrictions on personal firearms.

Nations that strictly control firearms generally had much lower levels of violent crime before they enacted those controls, because this violence is cultural in nature -- that is, not generated by the availability of personal arms. Those same nations, after enacting strict controls of firearms (the UK is a very good example) have seen a marked increase in both violent crime and crimes committed with firearms -- because the enaction of those controls essentially declares a field day on law-abiding citizens, who are now completely disarmed and at the mercy of those who need not follow any laws. Laws restricting firearms encourage the black market trade in and importation of weapons because those weapons become a valuable, desirable commodity that cannot be had through other means.

By contrast, those localities in which citizens may arm themselves experience lower (or flat) levels of violent crime specifically due to the deterrent effect of arms owned by law-abiding citizens. Certain states in the US that recently enacted "shall issue" firearms laws are good examples of this, such as Florida and Texas, where the enaction of such laws, far from creating the "blood in the streets" that firearms prohibitionists predicted, actually decreased levels of violent crime (or produced no effect on it, depending on the statistic examined).

Please, before you advocate laws that have a direct bearing on the very lives of human beings, inform yourself of the facts. Disarming citizens does nothing but endanger their lives.
 
Acinonyx said:
To be honest, I don't see the point of people having access to military grade weaponry.
Click to expand...


The point is actually very simple. "People" ought to have access to military grade weaponry in order to be able to resist the tyrannical misuse of military forces. Otherwise, you are an outright slave to whomever may take over control of the military and use it to reduce you to abject servitude.

As far as criminal misuse of firearms, that is really beside the point. In the United States, our country and freedoms were founded by the civilian ownership and use of military grade arms.

If our freedoms are ever ultimately lost, it will likely be due to a failure of the people insisting that their freedoms be respected, and their failure to have and use military grade arms to enforce their will.

Indeed, as someone mentioned above, any freedom loving person is welcome to come here, and help us maintain the freedoms we have, and regain the ones we have frittered away.

I don't often quote communists, but I will here.

"political power flows through the barrel of a gun."

Therefore, if I am to have any political power my self as a citizen, I must have a gun.

Take care, learn to shoot, shoot well.

Tom
 
I won't fuel this debate further as it seems like a fairly sensitive subject for some of you guys. Nor will I contaminate the harmony of Aunt Yangdu's forum by elaborating on the fundamental flaws and general insufficiency of Sharp Phil's “facts”. I just wouldn't be nice.

I will, however, point out that with more than ten thousand firearm kills per year, you're obviously doing something wrong, and blindly advocating the supremacy of this policy isn't going to do wonders for your credibility. And besides, why stop at assault rifles and machine guns? How's a nuke for deterrent effect?
 
They're facts borne out by public crime statistics. They're not in dispute. Firearms in my nation save more lives than they take by a considerable margin; this, too, is borne out by statistical research, such as the extensive studies conducted by Kleck and Lott.

It's intellectually dishonest to proclaim something false while simultaneously saying you won't substantiate that claim. Engaging in emotional hyperbole on top of that harms your credibility further. You're certainly entitled to your opinions; I just take issue with statements made that directly contradict objective facts. This is a life and death issue, and stating blithely that you wish to disarm law-abiding citizens essentially tells them that you think their lives are worth very little.
 
Crime in England and Wales, both of which have recently imposed severe restrictions on both firearms and knives.
I quote:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/crime-statistics/?view=Standard said:
* the number of recorded crimes fell by 9% between 2006-07 and 2007-08
* violent crime, home burglaries, vandalism and car thefts all fell over the previous year (by 8%, 4%, 13% and 14% respectively)
* the risk of becoming a victim of crime fell from 24% to 22%
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
gravertom said:
The point is actually very simple. "People" ought to have access to military grade weaponry in order to be able to resist the tyrannical misuse of military forces. Otherwise, you are an outright slave to whomever may take over control of the military and use it to reduce you to abject servitude.

As far as criminal misuse of firearms, that is really beside the point. In the United States, our country and freedoms were founded by the civilian ownership and use of military grade arms.

If our freedoms are ever ultimately lost, it will likely be due to a failure of the people insisting that their freedoms be respected, and their failure to have and use military grade arms to enforce their will.

Indeed, as someone mentioned above, any freedom loving person is welcome to come here, and help us maintain the freedoms we have, and regain the ones we have frittered away.

I don't often quote communists, but I will here.

"political power flows through the barrel of a gun."

Therefore, if I am to have any political power my self as a citizen, I must have a gun.

Take care, learn to shoot, shoot well.

Tom
Click to expand...

:thumbup:
You Sir, are a fine gentleman, a good father and I am happy to read your able posts.
Not to mention one heck of a graver:eek::)

:D
Mark
 
Acinonyx said:
Crime in England and Wales, both of which have recently imposed severe restrictions on both firearms and knives.
I quote:
Click to expand...

Yet the UK had much lower levels of violent crime, compared to the United States, before the enaction of its strict firearms control, and it saw an increase in firearms crime and violent crime immediately after enacting those controls.

Gun Crime on the Rise in Manchester

Gun Crime on the Rise as Number of Armed Police Falls

Black Gun Crime on the Rise

The fact is, violent crime and firearms-related crime in the UK has risen, not decreased. Even if it hasn't, however, the point I made previously still stands -- crime is generated culturally, not spawned by the availability of weapons.

I'm sorry, friend, but you're simply, flatly wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top