I'm from Switzerland. Pretty much everyone has a gun at home. It works very well for us.
To all NON AMERICANS, would you feel safer if your country allowed its citizens to carry/own guns?, page 4
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 03:16 PM by Swizzy
reply to post by User8911
Poor population? We're not poor at all
!
Yes I know it's hard to use Switzerland as an example as it has a smaller population all around than many large cities. I always look at Switzerland as my little garden of eden in this mad world as things there ( I don't live there anymore) seem to be pretty normal still and I strongly believe that is partly due to the fact that if the politicians ever got a bit too cheeky they'd have to deal with a population thats armed.
The only major evil thing we have in our country I can think of are banks however they seem to treat US rather nicely but I know most of them are wound up in very very immoral business practices. A bit offtopic but there ya go!
Poor population? We're not poor at all
! Yes I know it's hard to use Switzerland as an example as it has a smaller population all around than many large cities. I always look at Switzerland as my little garden of eden in this mad world as things there ( I don't live there anymore) seem to be pretty normal still and I strongly believe that is partly due to the fact that if the politicians ever got a bit too cheeky they'd have to deal with a population thats armed.
The only major evil thing we have in our country I can think of are banks however they seem to treat US rather nicely but I know most of them are wound up in very very immoral business practices. A bit offtopic but there ya go!
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 03:19 PM by Freeborn
reply to post by Swizzy
Yes.
But correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this for slightly different reasons?
Every young male has to undergo military training and remain in the militia until they turn 30.
When going to work etc militia are entitled to carry their officially issued arms but not their private guns.
Security / Police etc can carry arms but private citizens may not.
Every household has to have a gun which must be registered etc.
None of this is to do with a 'God' given Right, or fear of a tyrannical government, protection from criminals or most other reasons given in support of the US Second Amendment but as a defensive military precaution.
Switzerland is situated in the middle of Europe which for centuries was beset by warfare.
Switzerland has long been neutral but they also feel the need to be able to defend themselves in the event of invasion from a foreign military force.
This has been conditioned into the Swiss people over centuries.
Switzerland is quite a unique place and is hardly comparable to anywhere else.
Personally I envy their Direct Democracy form of government.
I'm from Switzerland. Pretty much everyone has a gun at home. It works very well for us.
Yes.
But correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this for slightly different reasons?
Every young male has to undergo military training and remain in the militia until they turn 30.
When going to work etc militia are entitled to carry their officially issued arms but not their private guns.
Security / Police etc can carry arms but private citizens may not.
Every household has to have a gun which must be registered etc.
None of this is to do with a 'God' given Right, or fear of a tyrannical government, protection from criminals or most other reasons given in support of the US Second Amendment but as a defensive military precaution.
Switzerland is situated in the middle of Europe which for centuries was beset by warfare.
Switzerland has long been neutral but they also feel the need to be able to defend themselves in the event of invasion from a foreign military force.
This has been conditioned into the Swiss people over centuries.
Switzerland is quite a unique place and is hardly comparable to anywhere else.
Personally I envy their Direct Democracy form of government.
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 04:14 PM by UnknownEntity4U
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
From USA,Vermont,VT has no gun laws. well cant own full auto but blah single shots better hehehe
stopping people from having guns will not stop people that commit crimes from getting guns. good chance there doing it under the table. i think everyone should have the right to buy and own guns, background checks sure why not. guns don't kill people.... people kill people. you can buy a handgun and lay it in a safe loaded and it will never kill anyone. it usually shows, when more people own guns, crime tends to go down. no robber is going to wanna rob someone if they know there is a 99% chance they have a gun. no robbers are going to try if they know ppl have guns, the more guns ppl had less likely someone is going to do something. if all stores had guns or a watchmen near by with a gun, no one would robber up a store. people now a day don't really wanna die or they would all the time it be on the news. so thinking ooo more guns more gun fights. well i don't think it would work that way for most people again don't really desire to die lol least most people anyhow lol
From USA,Vermont,VT has no gun laws. well cant own full auto but blah single shots better hehehe
stopping people from having guns will not stop people that commit crimes from getting guns. good chance there doing it under the table. i think everyone should have the right to buy and own guns, background checks sure why not. guns don't kill people.... people kill people. you can buy a handgun and lay it in a safe loaded and it will never kill anyone. it usually shows, when more people own guns, crime tends to go down. no robber is going to wanna rob someone if they know there is a 99% chance they have a gun. no robbers are going to try if they know ppl have guns, the more guns ppl had less likely someone is going to do something. if all stores had guns or a watchmen near by with a gun, no one would robber up a store. people now a day don't really wanna die or they would all the time it be on the news. so thinking ooo more guns more gun fights. well i don't think it would work that way for most people again don't really desire to die lol least most people anyhow lol
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 04:36 PM by IkNOwSTuff
Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by Trolloks
If they were legal many more people would have them, and the ammo, and with this, a huge increase in gang violence that result in death, robberies at gun point, shop hold ups, etc etc.
We have lots of firearms here in the United States, and considering your comment, I'd be interested in hearing why the United Kingdom has a higher rate of violent crime than the United States. Hell, it's even worse than South Africa according to this article. If you feel that article isn't accurate, please explain why.
See ya,
Milt
Im curious why if guns are such a great deterrent to violent crime the US still has such a high rate?
You would be one of the most heavily armed civilian populations yet you are all more fearful about crime and home invasions than the rest of the world (civilised Western world)
And as the article you linked stated different things count as crimes in different places, Im guessing if everyone who went to the emergency room in the US as a result of violence was listed in the figures and not just reported crimes it would tell a different story.
Wouldnt a can of mace be just as good as a gun? surely for a gun to be a deterrent the perp would need to know you have it, but then how often would you actually get the chance to pull it out prior to knowing you needed to?
Unless you walk around with it in your hand ready to fire the gun as safety/deterrent argument is BS
Despite all evidence and common sense Americans still delude themselves into thinking guns make them safer.
Just admit you like guns and would want one even if you knew no criminals had them
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 05:20 PM by Freeborn
reply to post by thebabyseagull
Exactly.
As the USA has a population of approximately 5 times that of the UK then if all things were equal one would expect to see round about 215 gun related deaths in the USA - instead it is over 40 times higher.
Hmmm....wonder why?
But as I've said repeatedly, that's their concern and nothing to do with anyone else.
It's just when they start rattling on about how all our wrongs etc in our countries wouldn't be half as bad if we had the Right To Bear Arms.
Shut up!
It's got nothing to do with you what we do here in the UK or anywhere else outside of the USA.
.......43 gun related death's in the u.k last year compared to 8,775 murder's [not counting suicide's or accidental shootings] in the good old U.S of A.it all say's really,
Exactly.
As the USA has a population of approximately 5 times that of the UK then if all things were equal one would expect to see round about 215 gun related deaths in the USA - instead it is over 40 times higher.
Hmmm....wonder why?
But as I've said repeatedly, that's their concern and nothing to do with anyone else.
It's just when they start rattling on about how all our wrongs etc in our countries wouldn't be half as bad if we had the Right To Bear Arms.
Shut up!
It's got nothing to do with you what we do here in the UK or anywhere else outside of the USA.
edit on 9/4/12 by Freeborn because: (no reason
given)
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 05:36 PM by nake13
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
I do currently hold illegal firearms( I am in the UK),however,I find it ridiculous that gun ownership is illegal here.
The legislation designed to outlaw firearms is completely worthless IMO,as the criminal element will always manage to procure guns as needed,responsible gun ownership should be actively encouraged as in the US where regardless of the scare stories involving criminal use of firearms,the vast majority of gun owners in the US do use them responsibly thus giving them the option of defending themselves in a last resort situation.
Illegal or not if I find my family or myself in a life or death situation where a gun could tip the balance I would fire first and worry about the legal "niceties" later.
I do currently hold illegal firearms( I am in the UK),however,I find it ridiculous that gun ownership is illegal here.
The legislation designed to outlaw firearms is completely worthless IMO,as the criminal element will always manage to procure guns as needed,responsible gun ownership should be actively encouraged as in the US where regardless of the scare stories involving criminal use of firearms,the vast majority of gun owners in the US do use them responsibly thus giving them the option of defending themselves in a last resort situation.
Illegal or not if I find my family or myself in a life or death situation where a gun could tip the balance I would fire first and worry about the legal "niceties" later.
reply posted on 9-4-2012 @ 05:44 PM by RyanFromCan
Canadian Here,
I think that gun controls work to a degree, I have little issue with Hand guns being controlled the way they are, and I say that as someone who is taking their "restricted weapons" course. If you have no criminal record and meet the requirement, you CAN own a handgun or other restricted firearm in Canada, though I must admit, there are a few "conditions" I don't exactly agree with, but that is something I can lobby or protest against, because I doubt they make an ultimate difference.
I think long Guns should be less controlled, but I do not agree with unfettered access to them. I was against the gun registry, not because I have any great problem with anyone knowing (within reason) who has them, but because of the abuse of the laws by those who were charged with enforcing them. I have heard too many stories of gun owners having their guns removed after calling the police over a neighbor dispute, because they "might" use them for retribution, only to find out when the time came to get them back that the authorities "accidentally" destroyed them.
What I would like to see is a more reasonable law concerning the use of firearms to protect yourself. My elderly disabled father lives with me, we have lived together ever since the passing of my mother, if someone comes into my home intent on causing me or him harm, there is little to no option to retreat. If that person comes in and threatens or attempts to use deadly force, It would be difficult to use "reasonable force" against them in the form of a firearm, this is evidenced by a case currently going on in Welland, Ontario.
National Post - Man faces jail after protecting home from masked attackers
A short synopsis of the story:
Ian Thompson has been the target of an ongoing "land" dispute, a couple masked men entered his property and lobbed some Molotov cocktails at his home, Ian being a former firearms instructor, had access to firearms, and went to his safe and grabbed a handgun, loaded it, and fired warning shots, not actually aiming for the attackers. The police were called and found him with a loaded restricted firearm, and proceeded to charged him with a few gun storage offenses, pointing a firearm, and careless use of a firearm. The case is currently in front of the courts and the Crown (prosecutors) are demanding jail time. Ian Thompson did not even fire with the intent to kill, only scare off those fire bombing his property (including the dog house, they injured one of his dogs).
I Canada, we supposedly have the right to defend ourselves with reasonable force. In this case, I absolutely agree that the use of a firearm was not excessive, it WAS reasonable force. If the men were only rummaging through his garbage, and he shot them, that would, in my opinion be excessive force, but this case was reasonable force.
Even politicians are calling for a "Castle Doctrine Law" which I think might be a bit excessive, to many horror stories of parents killing their kids when the posed no danger, and were "sneaking in" after curfew. I do think however self defense and firearms laws should be changed to allow for use of firearms to protect your home in cases where deadly force is threatened (with a reasonable fear of it being carried out) or used. On the street, it might be a different story, but your home, the last bastion of comfort and safety, that is a different story.
Lorne Gunter: Why hang Ian Thomson for the ‘crime’ of protecting himself?
Matt Gurney: Ian Thomson case shows how the Crown feels about self-defence
I am not for the unfettered, wholesale possession of firearms, I am not for the unrestricted ability to "open carry", and I am definitely not for the right to "conceal carry" by just anyone, unless there is a demonstrated need for a valid reason, not just because "i have a permit". Most off duty police officers do not even carry here, they only carry while on duty (undercover, plain clothes, and uniform)
That is my two cents worth.
I think that gun controls work to a degree, I have little issue with Hand guns being controlled the way they are, and I say that as someone who is taking their "restricted weapons" course. If you have no criminal record and meet the requirement, you CAN own a handgun or other restricted firearm in Canada, though I must admit, there are a few "conditions" I don't exactly agree with, but that is something I can lobby or protest against, because I doubt they make an ultimate difference.
I think long Guns should be less controlled, but I do not agree with unfettered access to them. I was against the gun registry, not because I have any great problem with anyone knowing (within reason) who has them, but because of the abuse of the laws by those who were charged with enforcing them. I have heard too many stories of gun owners having their guns removed after calling the police over a neighbor dispute, because they "might" use them for retribution, only to find out when the time came to get them back that the authorities "accidentally" destroyed them.
What I would like to see is a more reasonable law concerning the use of firearms to protect yourself. My elderly disabled father lives with me, we have lived together ever since the passing of my mother, if someone comes into my home intent on causing me or him harm, there is little to no option to retreat. If that person comes in and threatens or attempts to use deadly force, It would be difficult to use "reasonable force" against them in the form of a firearm, this is evidenced by a case currently going on in Welland, Ontario.
National Post - Man faces jail after protecting home from masked attackers
A short synopsis of the story:
Ian Thompson has been the target of an ongoing "land" dispute, a couple masked men entered his property and lobbed some Molotov cocktails at his home, Ian being a former firearms instructor, had access to firearms, and went to his safe and grabbed a handgun, loaded it, and fired warning shots, not actually aiming for the attackers. The police were called and found him with a loaded restricted firearm, and proceeded to charged him with a few gun storage offenses, pointing a firearm, and careless use of a firearm. The case is currently in front of the courts and the Crown (prosecutors) are demanding jail time. Ian Thompson did not even fire with the intent to kill, only scare off those fire bombing his property (including the dog house, they injured one of his dogs).
I Canada, we supposedly have the right to defend ourselves with reasonable force. In this case, I absolutely agree that the use of a firearm was not excessive, it WAS reasonable force. If the men were only rummaging through his garbage, and he shot them, that would, in my opinion be excessive force, but this case was reasonable force.
Even politicians are calling for a "Castle Doctrine Law" which I think might be a bit excessive, to many horror stories of parents killing their kids when the posed no danger, and were "sneaking in" after curfew. I do think however self defense and firearms laws should be changed to allow for use of firearms to protect your home in cases where deadly force is threatened (with a reasonable fear of it being carried out) or used. On the street, it might be a different story, but your home, the last bastion of comfort and safety, that is a different story.
Lorne Gunter: Why hang Ian Thomson for the ‘crime’ of protecting himself?
Matt Gurney: Ian Thomson case shows how the Crown feels about self-defence
I am not for the unfettered, wholesale possession of firearms, I am not for the unrestricted ability to "open carry", and I am definitely not for the right to "conceal carry" by just anyone, unless there is a demonstrated need for a valid reason, not just because "i have a permit". Most off duty police officers do not even carry here, they only carry while on duty (undercover, plain clothes, and uniform)
That is my two cents worth.
Man being arrested ,prays to Yahweh , is handcuffed then tazed, and still escapes.
Posted 13 days ago with 34 member flags
Posted 13 days ago with 34 member flags
Extremely rare photographs depicting massively historical moments!
Posted 2 days ago with 28 member flags
Posted 2 days ago with 28 member flags
You won\'t believe it until you see it...This Chimpanzee Can Cook!
Posted 14 days ago with 23 member flags
Posted 14 days ago with 23 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
First recorded case of of H5N1 (Bird Flu) in Seals, and First recorded case of Australian Lysovirus
Diseases and Pandemics: 21 minutes ago
Diseases and Pandemics: 21 minutes ago
Scientific explanations for sleep disorders and sleep disturbances
Health & Wellness: 50 minutes ago
Health & Wellness: 50 minutes ago
Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan Leaking Radioactive Water Into Lake Michigan!
Fragile Earth: 52 minutes ago
Fragile Earth: 52 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Julian Assange reveals government eavesdropping messages that allegedly speculate he's being framed
Breaking Alternative News: 16 hours ago, 23 flags
Breaking Alternative News: 16 hours ago, 23 flags
Republican Texas judge orders lesbian couple to live apart or lose children
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 16 hours ago, 22 flags
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 16 hours ago, 22 flags
Is freedom of speech dead? Activists Rally to Free Adam Kokesh.
Political Issues: 12 hours ago, 18 flags
Political Issues: 12 hours ago, 18 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
Large tornado plowing through Moore OK, southern OKC right now
Fragile Earth: 8 hours ago, 306 replies
Fragile Earth: 8 hours ago, 306 replies
Republican Texas judge orders lesbian couple to live apart or lose children
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 16 hours ago, 91 replies
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 16 hours ago, 91 replies
Here is what I have to say about my experience
Geo-Engineering and Chemtrails: 17 hours ago, 73 replies
Geo-Engineering and Chemtrails: 17 hours ago, 73 replies
1000-year-old coins found in Northern Territory may rewrite Australian history.
Ancient & Lost Civilizations: 11 hours ago, 35 replies
Ancient & Lost Civilizations: 11 hours ago, 35 replies
Where Are We Now? Post Feminism and the Modern World
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 12 hours ago, 34 replies
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 12 hours ago, 34 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.008 seconds
Page processed in: 0.279 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.008 seconds
Page processed in: 0.279 seconds
