Czech Parliament Approves Citizens’ Right to Bear Arms
183 replies, posted
Lol its that 'guns don't kill people, people kill people argument again'
Doesn't stop the fact that guns makes it a hell lot easier to kill someone
Please do show me your research evidence
Depending upon how the Czechs implement their gun laws in the future it may just be easier to regulate than the US, dare I say it might be a better "experiment" of right to bear arms than the US.
Here in the US we have a wide swathe of both population and political districts, each with different nuanced changes of gun ownership from state to state. (Try bringing your AR-15 that you bought and registered in Texas to California, that shit wouldn't fly). But the Czech Republic is a more homogenous population and obviously smaller than the US w/o any sub states thus a one-size-fits-all gun law would go over better.
That said, they should definitely learn a thing or two from the problems we've had here in the states, background checks ought to be heavily enforced, even in private purchases (at the minimum register your firearm's serial # to the authorities), a tighter regulation or out right block to own a firearm if one has a history of mental illness and a mandatory course to learn how to properly own a firearm.
Hell mental healthcare in the EU in general is lightyears ahead of the US so that aspect is not as much of a worry.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52414067]Ill give you the benefit of the doubt here and see if you'll actually read and understand my post before you start berrating me again;
The issue with murder rates in the US isnt because of firearms. Owning a gun doesn't give you a powertrip or make you blood thirsty. The amount of guns in the US have only ever increased and despite that, the homicide rate and rate of violence with them has been steadily dropping. The issue very clearly doesnt start with guns.
Its a people problem. Guns are just the tools those people use. If they didn't have guns, theyd manufacture them. If they couldn't make them, theyd use knives, if they couldn't use knives theyd use flathead screwdrivers.
The problem isn't guns dood, its very clearly not. Any amount of research would tell you this but youre stuck in your prejudices and absolutely refuse to move from them.
Saying that all guns are designed to kill isn't just blatantly wrong, its dumb.[/QUOTE]
Of course guns aren't the only method of killing people but you can't say that killing a group of people with a knife or a screwdriver would be as easy as with a firearm.
[QUOTE=Prism;52413516]It actually makes me concerned that people have a mindset. That old saying "And eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" still holds true, I think.
Also, my reaction to this new gun law is basically 'Okay... but for why?" and I'm sure other Europeans feel the same.[/QUOTE]
"Hey this dude broke in to my home and as such is a threat to me and my family, I have the right to protect myself from this threat" =/= "an eye for an eye"
The only reason I don't support more stringent gun control legislation in the US is because it's a lost cause. The gun culture in the US causes obvious problems, but as theres hardly an effective solution, I see pushing for it as a losing battle that only hurts unrelated political endeavors from the left. If I could cleanse the slate of the hundreds of millions of guns in the US and, more difficultly, cleanse the culture that we have towards them here, I would.
The amount of Americans here who want guns to be freely available in Europe as if it were a basic human right is deeply disturbing.
Sorry, but widespread firearm distribution comes with its host of problems, and there's basically no reason to implement it in Europe since we manage ourselves very well without it.
It would be an irreversible move since once a country is saturated with weapons, any attempt at restricting access would impact legal owners more than illegal ones, and criminals will be way more extensively armed at that point than if guns laws remained strict since the beginning. Despite what some people in this thread seem to believe, not every two-bit delinquant carries heat in Europe currently.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52413915]for the whole world, the gun is a mundane and functional item much like a toilet or shovel is
for some americans it's the strange basis of an entire culture[/QUOTE]
name an object that [I]isn't[/I] a part of some subculture and maybe you might have a point, because right now you don't.
[QUOTE=bdd458;52414244]"Hey this dude broke in to my home and as such is a threat to me and my family, I have the right to protect myself from this threat" =/= "an eye for an eye"[/QUOTE]
Yes, but when both the homeowner and the burglar own a weapon, or potentially do, the situation suddenly becomes way more lethal for both because it's a prisoner's dilemma where death is a possible and probable outcome.
[QUOTE=bdd458;52414244]"Hey this dude broke in to my home and as such is a threat to me and my family, I have the right to protect myself from this threat" =/= "an eye for an eye"[/QUOTE]
Guns wouldn't be a solution over here. Self-defense laws are fucking moronic and (IF you can't escape and call the police hoping they magically arrive before he runs away) allow you to only use the same kind of force threatened with (fist -> use fist, knife -> use knife, etc), so either you shoot them and 'win' (getting jailed since self-defense won't apply) or lose (if the robber also has a weapon and gets to shoot you).
Dunno how the rest of EU goes at it (hopefully better), but at least if they break in and use violence ([URL="http://www.lne.es/cuencas/2017/05/04/detienen-cuatro-personas-robo-violencia/2099036.html"]as many have done previously[/URL]) you won't have to expect a BANG to the head.
If self-defense is a right guaranteed by the UN, couldn't it be argued that citizens at least being able to [I]access[/I] guns is be a right? It's always felt that way to me, anyway, but I've always been slightly more on the "gun" side of the fence than the "anti-gun". I don't see it as such a bad thing if people want to access the same weaponry that's being used by the majority of the world.
[QUOTE=Mechanical43;52413295]americans in this threads are just too funny[/QUOTE]
When other Canadians act holier than thou towards Americans it makes me ashamed of my country.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52414067]Ill give you the benefit of the doubt here and see if you'll actually read and understand my post before you start berrating me again;
The issue with murder rates in the US isnt because of firearms. Owning a gun doesn't give you a powertrip or make you blood thirsty. The amount of guns in the US have only ever increased and despite that, the homicide rate and rate of violence with them has been steadily dropping. The issue very clearly doesnt start with guns.
Its a people problem. Guns are just the tools those people use. If they didn't have guns, theyd manufacture them. If they couldn't make them, theyd use knives, if they couldn't use knives theyd use flathead screwdrivers.
The problem isn't guns dood, its very clearly not. Any amount of research would tell you this but youre stuck in your prejudices and absolutely refuse to move from them.
Saying that all guns are designed to kill isn't just blatantly wrong, its dumb.[/QUOTE]
If you reduce the accessibility and distribution of those tools, it would already benefit a lot of people. Sure, in some extreme cases people will adopt other ways like a knife or strangling for instance. But shooting a gun towards a person creates a distance, pulling it a trigger is far easier and attractive for a person than killing someone with a blunt weapon. This is a fact, giving people access to guns is alright but in general it will just cause more incidents.
I am not against weapons in any way, it's a great hobby if you like it and there is lots to like about it but it's undeniable that giving people potential tools to kill somebody will inevitably cause problems. There are loads of responsible gun owners but there are also a lot of people who are not.
[QUOTE=David29;52413429]That's never struck me as a sensible argument. This isn't a binary issue of either having access to weapons or not having access to weapons - it's about how easy they are to obtain. I'm sure that with enough time, money, and effort I could get my hands on weapons-grade plutonium if I really wanted to.[/QUOTE]
I never said I wanted guns to be easy to obtain, I just said I supported gun ownership.
[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;52414460]If self-defense is a right guaranteed by the UN, couldn't it be argued that citizens at least being able to [I]access[/I] guns is be a right? It's always felt that way to me, anyway, but I've always been slightly more on the "gun" side of the fence than the "anti-gun". I don't see it as such a bad thing if people want to access the same weaponry that's being used by the majority of the world.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure where people get this UN personal self-defense right from, the only thing I can find that's similar is Article 51 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which states:
[QUOTE=UN Charter]Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.[/QUOTE]
Which seems to be about individual or collective [I]UN Members[/I] and their right to self defense against an attack directed at the Member itself. It doesn't seem to me like it has anything to do with [I]personal[/I] rights.
This is a pointless argument as Americans view guns as a right and to most people outside the US guns are a tool to kill with.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52414971]This is a pointless argument as Americans view guns as a right and to most people outside the US guns are a tool to kill with.[/QUOTE]
wait, you're telling me we can live without trying to impose our way of life upon others?
unacceptable!
[QUOTE=Araknid;52414236]Of course guns aren't the only method of killing people but you can't say that killing a group of people with a knife or a screwdriver would be as easy as with a firearm.[/QUOTE]
Sure, which is why some Europeans have recently realized that all you need to do is smash a car into a crowd of people.
It's almost as if the desire to inflict death upon a large amount of people is far more dangerous than the individual tools with which they may do it.
[QUOTE=geel9;52415048]Sure, which is why some Europeans have recently realized that all you need to do is smash a car into a crowd of people.
It's almost as if the desire to inflict death upon a large amount of people is far more dangerous than the individual tools with which they may do it.[/QUOTE]
Like with most things that aren't one-dimensional, it's a combination of the two.
The deadlier the tools, the more dangerous an unstable person is. The more unstable a person is, the more dangerous they will be when given a weapon.
I don't see how going "it's the people that's the problem" dismisses any of the concerns linked to firearm availability. Yes, mental health it's a factor. It's not the only one.
We can deal with our problems without arming the populace thank you, the best way to react to terrorism is to show solidarity and support one another while trying to stop more attacks.
Arming the population is not a solution and will only create more problems.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52415093]
Arming the population is not a solution and will only create more problems.[/QUOTE]
Except there is actually no evidence to suggest that this is true. There's no evidence to suggest that disarming a populace in the first place helps at all either.
If that statement were true, you'd expect America to have historical highs for all forms of crime, murder especially. But that's not the case. Despite the fact that there are now 1.12 guns for every person in America (yes, America has more guns than people now) they are at 50-year lows for homicide. If it was simply the access of the populace to firearms that caused crime, America would be as bad as some Europeans seem to ignorantly believe it is from watching news that characterizes it as some massive wild-west shootout. "Arming" the American populace has not caused more problems than America already had in the past, if anything America is safer now than it was before, but there's no guarantee that that was because of the guns. It just means that the guns certainly haven't made anything worse.
Man, any of the times ive been around guns ive been slightly uncomfortable and all but shit dude some of you guys are practically using this to go full on "fuck America(ns)".
Its a little weird.
[QUOTE=geel9;52415048]Sure, which is why some Europeans have recently realized that all you need to do is smash a car into a crowd of people.
It's almost as if the desire to inflict death upon a large amount of people is far more dangerous than the individual tools with which they may do it.[/QUOTE]
I do not see how this changes the stance on weapons. If weapons were more readily available, they would just unload some machine gun fire on a crowd. Sure, you can use any kind of item or vehicle to inflict harm on somebody or a group, nevertheless having cars crash into people is a better option than having guns that kill people more easily and can be concealed.
Also I think these terrorist attacks are kind of an extreme example, these fanatics will use anything and are entirely brainwashed. They are dedicated killers and will use anything.
I don't think that this would be a valid point during a discussion about making weapons more accessible.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;52415170]Except there is actually no evidence to suggest that this is true. There's no evidence to suggest that disarming a populace in the first place helps at all either.
If that statement were true, you'd expect America to have historical highs for all forms of crime, murder especially. But that's not the case. Despite the fact that there are now 1.12 guns for every person in America (yes, America has more guns than people now) they are at 50-year lows for homicide. If it was simply the access of the populace to firearms that caused crime, America would be as bad as some Europeans seem to ignorantly believe it is from watching news that characterizes it as some massive wild-west shootout. "Arming" the American populace has not caused more problems than America already had in the past, if anything America is safer now than it was before, but there's no guarantee that that was because of the guns. It just means that the guns certainly haven't made anything worse.[/QUOTE]
I'd like to see your source on that as according to the NVSS (National Vital Statistics System) Homicide is at a almost double rate in the US vs other western countries: (Per 100,000)
[quote]Country: | Intentional Homicide:| Rape:| Robbery: | AA:
Austria | 0.42 | 9 | 61 | 47
UK, England/Wales | 2.6 | 18 | 157 | -
USA | 4.5 | 26.8 | 133 | 241 [/quote]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vital_Statistics_System[/url]
[QUOTE=Redcoat893;52415239]I'd like to see your source on that as according to the NVCS (National Vital Crime Statistics) Homicide is at a almost double rate in the US vs other western countries: (Per 100,000)
Country: Intentional Homicide: Rape: Robbery: AA:
Austria 0.42 | 9 | 61 | 47
UK, England/Wales 2.6 | 18 | 157 | -
USA 4.5 | 26.8 | 133 | 241
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vital_Statistics_System[/url][/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.infoplease.com/us/crime/homicide-rate-1950-2014[/url]
US Homicide rate has always been higher than other countries, even when all countries had similar gun control policies, due to the fact that crime is caused mostly by a large number of societal factors, not availability to guns. Note also how I only compared America to America. Because America has always had a higher homicide rate, comparing America to other countries in relation to the effectiveness of gun control in those countries is disingenuous. I said that America is safer now than America has been for 50 years, not that America has less homicide than X European country, because comparing America to America is a fair comparison to make.
And to clarify, when I said "You'd expect America to have historical highs" I should have said "be experiencing historical highs," as I was attempting to compare modern American data to historical American data, not to compare America to other countries.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;52415253][url]https://www.infoplease.com/us/crime/homicide-rate-1950-2014[/url]
US Homicide rate has always been higher than other countries, even when all countries had similar gun control policies, due to the fact that crime is caused mostly by a large number of societal factors, not availability to guns. Note also how I only compared America to America. Because America has always had a higher homicide rate, comparing America to other countries in relation to the effectiveness of gun control in those countries is disingenuous. I said that America is safer now than America has been for 50 years, not that America has less homicide than X European country, because comparing America to America is a fair comparison to make.
And to clarify, when I said "You'd expect America to have historical highs" I should have said "be experiencing historical highs," as I was attempting to compare modern American data to historical American data, not to compare America to other countries.[/QUOTE]
The US populance has been armed since it's inception, this has caused some of the problems it deals with in regards to gun control today, the fact that it (and several other countries with laxer gun controls) has higher rates of crime than those without is one of the reasons many Europeans feel that there is no reason to own a gun, amongst that is the fact that many European countries do not need guns for the same reasons America does, most do not have the same wildlife concerns, you might forget the reasons that the right to bear arms was drafted in the first place:
[url]http://www.csub.edu/~jreyna/MAPS/US%20TO%201776-1853.jpg[/url]
You have British Canada to the North, a fragile peace, France to the South, a Alliance of Convineince, Unknown Territory to the West, and you have a majority of Farmsteads, who needed guns to protect themselves from Wildlife and Reivers, we did not have that problem in the UK, and therefore have not developed the same "need" for firearms the USA has, the fact that the US is safer now does not mean that it is made better or safer by your gun laws, the evidence points to the opposite.
[QUOTE=Redcoat893;52415285]The US populance has been armed since it's inception, this has caused some of the problems it deals with in regards to gun control today, the fact that it (and several other countries with laxer gun controls) has higher rates of crime than those without is one of the reasons many Europeans feel that there is no reason to own a gun, amongst that is the fact that many European countries do not need guns for the same reasons America does, most do not have the same wildlife concerns, you might forget the reasons that the right to bear arms was drafted in the first place:
[url]http://www.csub.edu/~jreyna/MAPS/US%20TO%201776-1853.jpg[/url]
You have British Canada to the North, a fragile peace, France to the South, a Alliance of Convineince, Unknown Territory to the West, and you have a majority of Farmsteads, who needed guns to protect themselves from Wildlife and Reivers, we did not have that problem in the UK, and therefore have not developed the same "need" for firearms the USA has, the fact that the US is safer now does not mean that it is made better or safer by your gun laws, the evidence points to the opposite.[/QUOTE]
The United Kingdom, until only a few decades ago, had a thriving gun culture and many respected gun makers and gunsmiths. Bisley had annual competitions among gun manufacturers and sport shooters that were, at one point in history, the competitions to be at. In the early 20th century, it was considered "gentlemanly" to be armed in Britain. One key failing of British gun culture, in my opinion, is the elitism it experienced. While it was thriving, it only really thrived for those who could afford a high cost of entry. This led to it being seen as an "upper-class" thing, and disconnected from the populace, which meant it was very easy to turn popular opinion against gun ownership following the Hungerford Massacre in 1987.
In America, gun culture has painted guns out to be something for everyone, not just for the upper-class, which has led to much more widespread support for guns and a much greater pushback, especially in recent years, against more gun control. However, it seems rather divided along political lines, rather than class lines, with Democrats opposing gun rights, claiming that American gun culture is "toxic" or "redneck," whereas Republicans are more likely to view it as "patriotic" and characterize gun control advocates as "traitors."
One thing you may not know, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 guarantees Protestants in particular the right to bear arms in England for their own defence. This right, however, is listed as being subject to law, which does effectively make it a right only in symbolism rather than in practice, as it can essentially be ignored.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689[/url]
[quote]Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;[/quote]
The idea that guns aren't a European thing is completely false. Guns were invented there, some of the finest gun makers in the world are still there, and there are historical gun cultures in nearly every European country. If you look at data for the number of guns per capita by country, 5 of the top 10 are European nations, 3 of them Scandinavian.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country[/url]
And as I said, evidence does not point to the idea that America would be safer with more gun control, nor does evidence point to gun control having made most countries in which it's been enacted any safer. In America, CDC research showed that many proposed gun control initiatives, such as the Assault Weapons Ban, were ineffective, and a report from 2013 found that most gun control initiatives were expected to be ineffective [url]https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1#ix[/url]
I never said America was safer because it had more guns, I actually said that there was possibly no relation. I said more guns has not had the effect of making America more dangerous, and it hasn't.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;52415170]Except there is actually no evidence to suggest that this is true.[/QUOTE]oh yeah? how about the outrageously infamous trigger-happiness of US cops? why do you think that is?
it's because everyone and their damn dog could have a firearm - you stop a guy for speeding, he happens to have some dirt on him, he gets scared and pulls a gun from the glove compartment (or elsewhere nearby) and shoots the lawman dead. saw a dashcam video of one such case, and it certainly wasn't a unique event.
OR perhaps it's just another regular dude who's unarmed, but the cop takes no chances and acts like he has a pistol close by anyway, the exchange gets tense for unrelated reasons, cop gets nervous, and one wrong TWITCH from the driver results in a dead innocent civilian.
OR maybe we're dealing with a rotten cop who just looks for an excuse, so he shoots first and then explains "but he could've had a gun!". has happened.
for shit's sake from what i've read and heard you can't even put your hand in place X during a routine traffic stop without carefully asking first because the officer could think you're reaching for a pistol and react in the appropriate way. that is NOT liberty, that is not security, that is fear and paranoia, like the Cold War balance of terror.
and then you have people who simply can't handle a deadly device in a non-idiotic way, and then you have the alcoholics and other substance abusers. how do you think it would end if Finland had gun ownership laws similar to American ones? we're a depressed, alcoholic bunch of sad losers, and too many husbands already kill their entire families and themselves every year. "but they're going to kill gun or not" oh you shut up right there, adding a firearm to that equation only serves to increase the bodycount. in addition to shooting his wife and kids he might go shoot his neighbours too - he has a gun in his hand, and that makes things a lot easier than, say, a knife would.
an armed populace is [U]not[/U] a secure populace - an armed populace is a [I]paranoid[/I] populace, and comes with an equally balls-to-the-wall paranoid law enforcement.
if most people have a gun, they're also going to act like [I]everyone[/I] has a gun, because a gun is a literal matter of life and death, and after the above examples i'm not sure if i have to explain why this could actually be terrible thing.
like yeah sure i'm fine with people owning a few shooty things for going to the range or hunting, but you should have [I]extensive[/I] paperwork - make it a real monolithic bureaucratic mess, preferably - to prove that you are, indeed, a responsible gun owner and not some halfwit who puts whatever in the documents and then keeps a loaded revolver on a shelf where a child can reach it with predictable results.
[QUOTE=geel9;52415048]Sure, which is why some Europeans have recently realized that all you need to do is smash a car into a crowd of people.
It's almost as if the desire to inflict death upon a large amount of people is far more dangerous than the individual tools with which they may do it.[/QUOTE]
And then they got out of the van and started stabbing people. Imagine if they all had guns.
[QUOTE=Joazzz;52415329]oh yeah? how about the outrageously infamous trigger-happiness of US cops? why do you think that is?
it's because everyone and their damn dog could have a firearm - you stop a guy for speeding, he happens to have some dirt on him, he gets scared and pulls a gun from the glove compartment (or elsewhere nearby) and shoots the lawman dead. saw a dashcam video of one such case, and it certainly wasn't a unique event.
OR perhaps it's just another regular dude who's unarmed, but the cop takes no chances and acts like he has a pistol close by anyway, the exchange gets tense for unrelated reasons, cop gets nervous, and one wrong TWITCH from the driver results in a dead innocent civilian.
OR maybe we're dealing with a rotten cop who just looks for an excuse, so he shoots first and then explains "but he could've had a gun!". has happened.
for shit's sake from what i've read and heard you can't even put your hand in place X during a routine traffic stop without carefully asking first because the officer could think you're reaching for a pistol and react in the appropriate way. that is NOT liberty, that is not security, that is fear and paranoia, like the Cold War balance of terror.
and then you have people who simply can't handle a deadly device in a non-idiotic way, and then you have the alcoholics and other substance abusers. how do you think it would end if Finland had gun ownership laws similar to American ones? we're a depressed, alcoholic bunch of sad losers, and too many husbands already kill their entire families and themselves every year. "but they're going to kill gun or not" oh you shut up right there, adding a firearm to that equation only serves to increase the bodycount. in addition to shooting his wife and kids he might go shoot his neighbours too - he has a gun in his hand, and that makes things a lot easier than, say, a knife would.
an armed populace is [U]not[/U] a secure populace - an armed populace is a [I]paranoid[/I] populace, and comes with an equally balls-to-the-wall paranoid law enforcement.
if most people have a gun, they're also going to act like [I]everyone[/I] has a gun, because a gun is a literal matter of life and death, and after the above examples i'm not sure if i have to explain why this could actually be terrible thing.
like yeah sure i'm fine with people owning a few shooty things for going to the range or hunting, but you should have [I]extensive[/I] paperwork - make it a real monolithic bureaucratic mess, preferably - to prove that you are, indeed, a responsible gun owner and not some halfwit who puts whatever in the documents and then keeps a loaded revolver on a shelf where a child can reach it with predictable results.[/QUOTE]
A few incidents that make the news of American cops shooting people does not mean that guns have caused America to become a less safe place As evidenced by statistics that I have already linked earlier, America is experiencing lows in homicide rate it hasn't since the 1960s. If simply the presence of more guns in a society made it less safe, then America would be experiencing historical highs in homicide rates, since it has a historically high number of guns, but it's not.
As for domestic homicide, no, really a gun doesn't make it any more likely for a person to kill their spouse and I'm not going to "shut up right there" because the assertion you make is completely false. A spousal abuse situation happens in a contained environment, gun or not the spouse is going to die. How many knives are there in a house's kitchen? The presence of a gun doesn't make someone more or less likely to kill their spouse, if someone is going to kill their spouse, there are plenty of other weapons they can and will use to do it.
Also look at what I just posted about per-capita gun ownership rates, Finland is #6 in the world, and Finland is also one of the only other countries than the Czech Republic pushing back against proposed EU gun control. [url]http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-eu-security-finland-idUKKBN0TZ1L820151216[/url]
As far as I know this is only a law which allows to use guns in case of any terror "incidents", which means people who had acquired gun may use them in such situations and their situation is clear now. So they shouldn't feel scared of using guns.
But still this is not a liberation of gun laws, which I find sad, since in modern days Europe, where Police, just like in England, is disarmed and state can't properly defend it's own people, people should be able to take care of themselves.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.