You know how gun rights people bring up Switzerland a lot?

[MRT144]

Leave the cats alone. Shoot the damn kids, but use a knife on the morons that let their unneutered cats out to wander around.

Yup.

[Sava]

Felch wins the thread with post 7 Hitler reference. I'd give it to Slowwypoo, but he didn't say the magic word(s)... hitler, nazis... and of course... OBAMA

[kentonio]

You think the Swiss Army wasn't a factor in their decision? I don't think anybody pretends it was the only factor, but the technical challenge of invading a heavily armed mountainous country can't be ignored.

I think a country that was capable to invading the Soviet Union was not actually terrified by the idea of attacking Switzerland, no.

[Lonestar]

I don't bring up Switzerland. Finland is a better comparison from a gun-culture standpoint. More privately owned firearms per capita than any other country other than Iraq and the US.

[kentonio]

I don't bring up Switzerland. Finland is a better comparison from a gun-culture standpoint. More privately owned firearms per capita than any other country other than Iraq and the US.

Ah so you favour tight regulation?

Guns and other weapons are tightly regulated. One must separately apply for a gun license, which cannot be issued for "self defense reasons". Even other weapons, such as pepper sprays, are regulated. Carrying weapons, including guns and knives, in public is not allowed.

[Dauphin]

You think the Swiss Army wasn't a factor in their decision? I don't think anybody pretends it was the only factor, but the technical challenge of invading a heavily armed mountainous country can't be ignored.

Conceding your previous fair comment:

Hitler wasn't exactly known for his rationality.

[Lonestar]

Ah so you favour tight regulation?

I favor reasonable regulation.

Most of what I know about Finnish gun laws comes from some Finns on another(Mostly military and ex-military) Messageboard I frequent. They all think "ban the things" is ****ing stupid too, and the Finns have much easier access to some firearms items then we do in the States, such as suppressors.


EDIT: I'd be okay with a gun license at a national level that also doubles as a carry permit. When you purchase a new firearm. instead of filling out the 4473 everytime you buy a gun from a FFL, there would be a toll-free number you could call where you just plug your license # in, automated voice message says whether or not it's valid, and they hand you the gun. That would be the Due Diligence.

[kentonio]

That's it? Put in a number to an automated line and voila you've got a gun?

[Lonestar]

That's it? Put in a number to an automated line and voila you've got a gun?

After the license has been issued, yes. The license would consist of a background check using NICS and the 4473 form as the framework, and if you want the carry portion of the license you have to go to a carry class. License would be at a national level, so California or NY wouldn't be able to say "No! You can't have guns or carry here!".

I'd tweak existing rules so that States are required to share everything on the 4473 form with NICS, so we don't have someone like the VA Tech shooter getting ahold of firearms when he legally shouldn't be able to. If something happens after the initial issue of the license that changes the answer to one of those questions on the 4473 form ("Are you a stalker y/n") you have to turn in the license in a timely manner, or appeal the decision(again, in a timely manner).

[Imran Siddiqui]

After the license has been issued, yes. The license would consist of a background check using NICS and the 4473 form as the framework, and if you want the carry portion of the license you have to go to a carry class. License would be at a national level, so California or NY wouldn't be able to say "No! You can't have guns or carry here!".

I'd tweak existing rules so that States are required to share everything on the 4473 form with NICS, so we don't have someone like the VA Tech shooter getting ahold of firearms when he legally shouldn't be able to. If something happens after the initial issue of the license that changes the answer to one of those questions on the 4473 form ("Are you a stalker y/n") you have to turn in the license in a timely manner, or appeal the decision(again, in a timely manner).

[Sava]

They all think "ban the things" is ****ing stupid too

This thing reminds me of the fight against cigarettes so much. There isn't a safe cigarette.

And arguing with people who are inherently hostile, cranky and opposed to any restriction on their addiction or hobby seems pointless.

Normally, I'm against the government banning something... like tobacco, weed or anything else that is easily derived from a plant. But, for the most part, guns require complicated and expensive manufacturing processes. I don't doubt that human ingenuity will allow a few underground weapons factories to exist. But these industrious individuals cannot possibly produce an enormous volume of weapons without large factories.

Whack a mole is a lot easier when you open up the machine and turn off as many of those little bastards as possible.

Just be honest. You don't like the idea of restricting guns because it's your hobby.

I feel for you man. Any time someone complains about porn and video games, I get all defensive and angry.

Even Scalia (in reference to the Heller case) has said that banning "large weapons" is acceptable.

The fact that we can interpret what constitutes protected "arms" is nearly universally accepted across the political spectrum... in the minds of the people that make such decisions.

Everything else is just about dealing with angry people who like to shoot things.

[DaShi]

After the license has been issued, yes. The license would consist of a background check using NICS and the 4473 form as the framework, and if you want the carry portion of the license you have to go to a carry class. License would be at a national level, so California or NY wouldn't be able to say "No! You can't have guns or carry here!".

I'd tweak existing rules so that States are required to share everything on the 4473 form with NICS, so we don't have someone like the VA Tech shooter getting ahold of firearms when he legally shouldn't be able to. If something happens after the initial issue of the license that changes the answer to one of those questions on the 4473 form ("Are you a stalker y/n") you have to turn in the license in a timely manner, or appeal the decision(again, in a timely manner).

Quite reasonable.

[Lonestar]

Quite reasonable.

The reason why people don't do FFLs for private sales is because, frankly, it's a huge pain in the ass. Just being able to call a number and get a green/red response on the license # would dramatically improve things. No one likes finding some guy and paying him 20/30/40 then waiting while the background check happens.

[regexcellent]

Well, not only is it a pain in the ass, but even if you did implement that it wouldn't stop straw purchases.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I think a country that was capable to invading the Soviet Union was not actually terrified by the idea of attacking Switzerland, no.

This is a really absured comparison. First you have all the racial views of slavs as inferior, then the Germans knew leadership state of the post-purge Soviet army, then the decrepit equipment (T26, T28, T35 and pre-Barbarossa air force), plus the strategic benefits - lebensraum, oil in Caucasus, etc., all factoring into the decision to invade. Then you had the elements of unrealistic planning and unjustified optimism -the delay in launching Barbarossa due to the Balkans campaign, the failure to account for the T34 and KV tanks, the underestimation of Soviet partisans and supply line security.

On the Swiss side, you got no resources, no room for population, no disadvantage to not invading (not like the Swiss were going over to the allies or usable by the allies as an invasion route), the extremely limited usability of air forces and armor, and the shortage of trained mountain troops.

Terrified of invading Switzerland? No, definitely not. Discouraged and deterred by multiple factors that didn't apply to the Soviet Union? Yes. Does that factor include the "armed" Swiss citenry? In part - the Germans had no delusions about Swiss resistance, or their limited number of properly trained troops. Was it the NRA wet dream example of an armed citizenry being a primary deterrent? Not at all. A lot of factors led to the decision not to invade or threaten invasion.