Friday, September 5, 2008

Dawson College School Shooter Coroners report released

The school shooting that took place a while ago, at Dawson College, has been in the news lately.

The coroner has said, ban guns, and that will solve the problem. Sound familiar?

Ok , specifically the coroner said, ban the type of guns the shooter Kimveer Gill used in the crime. Coroner says gun used by Dawson College killer should be banned

"Canada should seriously consider a ban on semi-automatic assault rifles like the one used to kill a teenage student and wound 16 other people at Dawson College two years ago, a coroner said Thursday"


Here are some other headlines from all round the world.
Canada: Call for Ban on Some Rifles
New York Times, United States - 10 hours ago
By IAN AUSTEN A coroner recommended in a report released Thursday that sales of semiautomatic, short-barreled rifles be banned in Canada. ...

Report: Canada should ban semi-automatic rifle
International Herald Tribune, France - 21 hours ago
AP MONTREAL: A Canadian coroner says in a new report that the government should ban the type of semiautomatic rifle used by a gunman who killed a student ...


So Canada should ban the semi-automatic rifle?

I disagree.

A problem with Kimveer Gill and one that was not addressed or even mentioned, and should be looked into was the medication Kimveer Gill was taking.
They talk about the fact he had a few drinks prior to the shooting, but was not intoxicated, or so they say, but who knows?
But the coroner makes no mention of the psychiatric drugs Kimveer Gill was on, or had recently stopped taking.
Why?
Don't want to bite the hands of big pharma?

But, it is true, Kimveer Gill was prescribed anti-depressants. What kind? Who knows?

This is his mom speaking

"Why didn't anyone notify us that he was feeling badly?" she asked, after a Quebec coroner told her that Kimveer Gill had seen a doctor, was prescribed antidepressants, but then stopped taking them."

"He told me he'd seen a doctor who gave him medication for anxiety, so I didn't know he was depressed."

Why is this never spoken of ? These prescription drugs. Are they really safe? Or are they contributing to this cycle of violence? This seems to be a recurrent theme in these shootings going all the way back to Columbine, that the shooters are on or recently have been on these types of meds. Yet everytime, the solution laid out for the populace is gun control, but if that is not really the problem what difference is it going to make?

Maggie, from Maggies Musings had left a link here regarding the numbers of shootings, including school shootings, connected to the use of prescription psychiatric drugs That list was a shocker. As maggie said "Just take a look at this database."

Wether guns, knives, sticks, stones or baseball bats are used as weapons, if the common factor is the prescription drugs then that is where the real problem lies.

Well take a look at the database, it's not possible that it is all coincidence.

17 comments:

  1. The truth about these school shootings is that there are always more involved. That proves that these things are really gub'mint-run covert ops.


    "Another witness told CBC News she was smoking outside the college when she saw a tall, white man wearing a long black trench coat walk down the street with a large gun. He was with a number of other people, said the woman.... The man was about 19 years old with body piercings and wore clothing with studs, she said."
    [Comment: the lone gunman was 25 and of south asian extraction. In his photos posted online, it does not appear he had any piercings]]


    www.abovetopsecret.com/fo...638/schoolhardson family murders.
    [poster on ATS, and eyewitness]
    A girl giving an interview said that she was standing outside the entrance to the school smoking when she noticed 3 guys in trenchcoats walking towards them and one pulled out an automatic of some kind and started shooting at the entrance of the school...


    CanWest News Service
    Frightened students giving wildly varying accounts of what was happening inside. There were several reports saying there was one gunman, while others said there were as many as four.


    www.neogaf.com/forum/show...084&page=2
    poster 'mattx5'
    I was with the media all day (I co-run the Dawson college newspaper) and the police are definitely supressing some information.
    The info of 1 gunman doesn't match up with people's descriptions of gunfire taking place over 30-45 minutes, considering the 1 gunman was taken out just 3 minutes after he initially opened fire.
    This is so horrible, the info has been changing all day, first 4 dead, than none, than 1, now 2? I'm losing track, ah jesus.
    I was in the basement gymnasium when this happened and only found out at 1:30 (shooting happend at 12:41). The radio was on and cut to a breaking news report saying the school had been evacuated, that 4 gunmen were in the school.


    cnn.com at 5pm, 9-13-06
    A SWAT team was in the college because "we believe there might be other suspects inside," a police spokesman said.
    --A recorded message at the college administration office said two gunmen were killed...


    MSNBC News Services
    Updated: 2:59 p.m. ET Sept. 13, 2006
    Student Devansh Smri Vastava said he saw a man in military fatigues storm the schools cafeteria..... Other witnesses said the man wore a black trench coat.


    Andie Bennett, CHUM Radio's Team 990
    She says students have described at least one suspect as a white male with a beard..... One witness recounts tales of seeing an armed Goth-garbed male with long black hair in the building


    940 MontrealAM radio talk show
    one witness said the shooter had long stringy hair, another saw 'spiky' hair sticking out from under a mask.
    Caller identifiied herself as Danielle, a student: shooter had blond hair, "faux hawk," not a mohawk; had a mask around the face....
    --"a lot of students have seen many, many ...like a lot of shooters..."
    --"a lot of what students were hearing on the news is not right"
    --"anybody you ask at Dawson....there's no way it was only one shooter"


    www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/09/13/shots-dawson.html
    Public transit officials temporarily closed the subway system's green line, which serves Dawson College, in order to allow a SWAT team to sweep the underground stations.


    AndyM3 at CRTF
    I seen it on MSN and I'm reading about it online right now. They are reporting 2-4 gunmen, one shot by police, one committed suicide, and possibly a third or fourth on the run 'still'.


    www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/09/13/shots-dawson.html
    Earlier reports had said as many as three shooters walked into Dawson College. At one point, police had told local media outlets that two gunmen were dead and a third was still at large.


    TorontoStar 9-13-06
    Seventeen-year-old Elizabeth Gagnon: She spent the next two hours in that class withother frightened students, listening to the gunfire outside. It would stop for a minute, and then start again. Gagnon estimated that she heard at least 30 gunshots. It was continuous. There had to be more than one shooter, she said.


    CanWest News Service
    It is believed two of the dead were gunmen. One report quoted police saying two gunman were dead one had been shot and one had taken his own life.
    [Comment: Police at first said the shooter had shot himself, then insisted that they had killed the gunman. ]


    www.canada.com/montrealgazette
    "The police came out with the guy in handcuffs and there was a long trail of blood behind him," said Sonny Chiasson, an Alexis Nihon(adjacent shopping center) maintenance employee. "He was bleeding heavily from his upper chest. (Then he) fell to the ground and the police kept trying to talk to him."
    Many minutes went by. "But eventually they just put a towel over his face because he was dead."
    [Comment: these wounds don't sound like they were self inflicted]


    940 MontrealAM radio talk show
    --A caller called Adam said his sister saw a trenchcoater with buldging coat walking down a street near the school; this was after a description of the gunman had already been broadcast. Police scene converging on that area.
    --Caller identified himself as James Santos, student held at gunpoint by gunman(on the second floor)..... Gunman told him to get up and stand between himself and police. Gunman told him and another student to drag a "heavy, heavy" bag a few feet, gunman then collapsed to floor from shot to the knee(blood started pouring out), he then pulled handgun from his trenchcoat and put it under his chin and shot himself.
    [Comment: Medical Examiner now says shooter shot himself in the mouth and had another gunshot would to his arm.]

    ReplyDelete
  2. woweee, wow, wow, thanks starviego, there is so much here to read, it is going to take me sometime.
    and I am going to pop in at your place, to check that out also

    http://signofthetimes.yuku.com/

    I have heard previously there was more to the school shootings then meets they eye, so thanks,thanks thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Always trust the government and the health care professionals.

    Two years ago, Texas’ Comptroller General, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, said the state’s child welfare system was broken, citing numerous unexplained deaths, examples of abuse, both physical and sexual, and more importantly, Governor Rick Perry’s attempts to stonewall her investigation of the irreparable broken system. Strayhorn opened her statement by first stating that Governor Perry’s attempts to derail her investigation were “unconscionable,” and why she had finally come forward:

    "I am here today to release disturbing information found during my investigation about the deaths, poisonings, rapes and pregnancies of children in our state’s foster care system."

    Strayhorn then proceeded on to reveal something you’ll never hear about on the television news, especially as it relates to the state of Texas’ recent and unconstitutional kidnapping of the FLDS’ children:

    "If you compare the number of deaths of children in our state’s population to the number of deaths in our state’s foster care system, a child is four times more likely to die in our state’s foster care system."
    http://www.window.state.tx.us/news/60623statement.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. In regards to banning guns or certain weapons in Canada is bullshit. Allowing physicians to have a list of people with firearms. Absolutely, bizarre! You can see what is happening here. It is only the start.

    This Coroner doesn't know his ass from his elbow. I know of
    coroners (in the last 20 years) that botched up autopsies just to protect their own ass, and a lot of other asses, because they were scared of the consequences, and also to prevent them from being in harms way. I will say no more.

    And this makes me very angry. Is this the start of a police state? Make people defenseless. It is only a matter of time before all citizens will be micro-chipped.

    In British Columbia, all personal medical information pertaining to healthcare is being archived in the U. S., because of course it is cheaper. Pretty scarey, I would say. The citizens allow this!

    There are some people that have firearms for hunting purposes only, farmers that have to have rifles to protect their cattle or livestock. I will also include the gun enthusiast that enjoys competitive shooting, skeet, or trap shooting at their local gun club or rife association.

    These individuals do not go around shooting people or robbing banks. I do feel that every person should have the right to protect themselves, their families & property against any one person, or persons, I am one of a very few that bothered to register my firearms in Canada, with the Firearms Scam that cost the tax payers millions or more and was a complete flop.

    If the Feds decided to ban certain weapons, do you think for one moment that crime will decrease. I hardly think so.

    I have spent a lot of time in the southern states of the U. S. and a vast majority of people carry rifles or guns right in their trucks or vehicles.

    In the state of Florida, anyone and their Mother can obtain a license to carry a handgun for their own protection, which would be a restricted weapon here in Canada, unless you have a carriers permit after taking a lot of gun courses, also being screened for criminal records etc., which is good. Again, in Florida all a person has to do is go in and pass a quick 4 hour course, whether you can speak English or not, pass the majority of questions, (like yes or no) and walk out with a license to purchase and carry a handgun.

    After passing the course, which most everyone does, (they make it that easy) these people are told that if you happen to be in a place (like a restaurant) where someone is committing a violent act with a weapon, just pull your gun out of your purse or pocket, and shoot them. How is that for law and order.

    In LA, if you get stopped by the police, you better put your hands up on the steering wheel, and don't move them even to get your license out. Hands on deck or else they shoot you. No questions asked. It's like, pass the potatoes please.

    If a person wants to buy a gun nowadays, they can buy one off the streets for $50.00 anywhere.

    I have the right as a citizen of Canada for many generations, to have in my possession a firearm, as long as I am of sane mind, no criminal record, and not on drugs, legal or illegal. If they are going to take away our rights, then eventually people will put the law into their own hands, and it will be a vigilanty country. People will have to protect themselves in some way or another.

    I happen to know that the sales in bear and pepper spray have almost doubled since this horrible killing of Tim McLean. If only someone had pepper or bear spray on them when Li was attacking Tim, he might be alive today.

    I have been carrying pepper spray for years. So, does that make me a criminal? Carrying a weapon? lol

    I had one cop tell me one time, that it was illegal to carry pepper
    or bear spray. I reminded him that it was not illegal to carry it, but apparently it was illegal to use it. He, then asked me if I would ever use it, & I told him if the circumstances warranted it, I would not hesitate for a second. No doubt, this cop was a little wet behind the ears and a bookman, not weathered yet. A good cop would have said to be prepared to use it, if you were ever in trouble. Police have to have a guideline for people to follow, and the majority of good cops would tell you to do whatever you have to in order to protect yourself.

    The old Girl Guide, and Boy Scouts motto, "Be prepared!

    I have taught my kids the same.

    Effie.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://tinyurl.com/6ja5nv
    Doctors lying about guns.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Crazy eh Pen?

    Pardon my absence - you know what I've been doing - and still doing - ack...

    Great post! I too think that there is far more here than meets the eye. Our media totally ignores the issue of prescription meds leading to deranged behaviour in otherwise 'normal' folks. You are right - they don't want to piss off big pharma and lose all those advertising dollars!! Especially since dead tree media is on its way out!!

    Prohibition never works - whether with alcohol, drugs, prostitution or guns. Plain and simple.

    And anyone who thinks that it is the job of the police to protect you is deluding themselves. It's not their job - they clean up after the fact. That's about it. I remember a few years ago reading a study about response times to 911 calls. Apparantly, if there was violence being reported some of the response times were actually slower than pre-911 introduction. IOW the cops just waited until the violence was over with and then showed up to 'question' who ever was left...

    So, yeah - Canada a police state? Sure are on our way! It's too bad we don't have a 2nd Amendment here - the right to bear arms.

    Hey, just a thought - didn't Herr Hitler conficate all arms from the public????? That should tell us volumes.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hitler did not confiscate private gun. The privately held firearms were confiscated by the "liberators".

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hiya teacher.paris,

    Do you have a cite for that? From my understanding, Hitler did confiscate firearms, using in part the registration data.

    While I am not entirely sure whether or not the Nazis themselves were the authors of the gun laws in Germany at that time, they certainly did use what was alreadly perhaps existing to its fullest extent.

    Surely, they did confiscate firearms from local populations which they occupied:

    Der größte Unsinn, den man in den besetzen Ostgebieten machen könnte, sei der, den unterworfenen Völkern Waffen zu geben. Die Geschicte lehre, daß alle Herrenvölker untergegangen seien, nachdem sie den von ihnen unterworfenen Volkern Waffen bewilligt hatten.

    [The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.]

    --- Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitlers Tischegesprache Im Fuhrerhauptquartier 1941-1942.
    [Hitler's Table-Talk at the Fuhrer's Headquarters 1941-1942], Dr. Henry Picker, ed. (Athenaum-Verlag, Bonn, 1951)



    As far as private guns conficated by the liberators - I have no doubt, but I'm pretty sure that the Nazis made very good use of anti-gun laws as well.

    If one thinks about it, any leadership which rules through fear and manipulation would itself fear an armed and critically thinking populace.

    Another thought: If 'martial' law were ever enacted here, would our constabularies and military not use the registry to assess, and perhaps confiscate said registered weapons? I think that they just might.

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnazimyth.html

    and

    http://www.louisbeam.com/heinz2.htm

    Shortly thereafter, in 1929, we moved to Berlin. In Germany, under the Weimar Republic, one had to register each gun with the police. There were no restrictions on the possession except if you wanted to carry them. In this case you had to have a hunting license which required a lengthy course in gun handling, marksmanship, game laws and handling of bagged game. The police had absolutely no say or power to refuse you the ownership of your guns when you came to register. It was a purely bureaucratic measure which enabled the police to trace a gun involved in a criminal action.

    My guns were registered in the name of my (Jewish) mother, who had contributed the money for their original purchase, because I was only fifteen years old and could not own firearms until I reached maturity (21 yrs). After Hitler came to power, nothing was changed in the existing gun regulations; nobody had to turn in the registered guns--period. My mother still had them on the day of her immigration to the US (May 1941) and gave them to a friend of mine because importation of firearms was prohibited under US law.

    ReplyDelete
  10. You are quite correct,as an occupying power,Germany did disarm the occupied.
    The articles I have seen that claim that German Jews, per se, rather than Jews who were Communists, were disarmed rely upon dubious sources and ignore the time frame.
    It is clear that the disarmament of Jews per se was not a part of the 1938 law.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Switzerland's Gun Laws, a good act to follow. Here is part of a very interesting article.

    All Swiss boys and girls must put their time into military training, and most households have weapons for defence. In some cases it is mandatory.

    This is the article:

    The Swiss & G U N S
    ~A Success Story~
    "A no-compromise Gun Lobby for the Nation!


    PLEASE POST THE ARTICLE BELOW FAR AND WIDE! THIS IS THE SOLUTION
    TO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, AND ACTS OF TERRORISM. EDUCATE THE MASSES!

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By David B. Kopel and Stephen D'Andrilli
    (American Rifleman February 1990)

    "What America can learn from Switzerland is that the best way to reduce gun misuse is to promote responsible gun ownership."
    In the right to bear arms debate, pro-gun Americans point to Switzerland, where almost every adult male is legally required to possess a gun. One of the few nations with a higher per capita rate of gun ownership than the United States, Switzerland has virtually no gun crime. Therefore, argue the pro-gunners, America doesn't need gun control. Yet Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI), in its brochure "Handgun Facts," points to Switzerland as one of the advanced nations with strict handgun laws." The brochure states that all guns are registered, and handgun purchases require a background check and a permit. Gun crime in Switzerland is virtually non-existent. Therefore, concludes Handgun Control, America needs strict gun control. Who's right? As usual, Handgun Control is wrong, but that doesn't necessarily make the pro-gun side right. Gun ownership in Switzerland defies the simple categories of the American gun debate. Most Swiss still live in traditional patriarchal families. In fact, Switzerland has the lowest percentage of working mothers of any European country. While America was debating the Equal Rights Amendment, Switzerland was wondering whether women should be allowed to vote. (The long delay in female suffrage may have something to do with the equation of civil rights and militia service.) Schools are strict, and teenagers have less freedom than in most of the rest of Europe. Studies shows that Swiss teenagers, unlike teenagers in other countries, feel closer to their parents than to their fellow teenagers. Communications between the generations are open. Among the factors contributing to the inter-generational harmony is military service, which provides an opportunity for all groups of males to interact. Adults and youth share many sports, such as skiing and swimming.

    -------------
    Effie

    ReplyDelete
  12. So do the school shootings present the justification for gun control,(for one thing) it would seem so given the most recent coroners report in Canada, and many of the other ones I looked through today.

    Then there is other legislation that can crop up, to restrict ability to own firearms. Psychiatric testing, background checks these kind of things all sound good, but are they really?

    In the interview with Jim marrs oddly enough, he was speaking of his own recent attempt to purchase a gun, no criminal record, tax paying, law abiding citizen, and guess what he was declined.

    Now with Jim , I would say there was politics involved in that, and that is what is always boils down to political motivations.

    The largest benefactor of the moves to restrict gun ownership is the government, and the burgeoning police state. Frightful!

    ReplyDelete
  13. effie: what an interesting article!

    as I was getting through that I wondered, is the difference between the swiss and the americans a difference in societal values and bingo, there it is, more cohesion in society,

    "Communications between the generations are open."
    "Adults and children share common activities"

    In other words, they have a greater sense of community, of belonging, of being loved and secure, of being cared for.

    These types of securites , these emotional bonds are lacking sorely in the US and Canada.

    I enjoyed that one, in fact, all wonderful responses.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Just to add a little humour to our day!

    This article was found under "The Canadian Liberal Gun Farse"

    Man registered soldering gun as firearm
    OAK LAKE, Man. (CP) -- The Manitoba man who successfully registered his soldering gun as a firearm to protest new federal gun laws says he is not concerned he could go to jail. "I don't think they would be foolish enough to want this thing to drag out for a year or two, because it could if they charged me," Brian Buckley said from his auto body shop in Oak Lake, 250 kilometres west of Winnipeg. "I won't plead guilty."Under the Criminal Code it is illegal for anyone to provide false information to register a firearm. Officials have said Buckley violated the Criminal Code because the information he supplied does not relate to a firearm. (YaHoo.. What Coup... I'm sure all the information on the 'gun' was true information, and there are a hell of a lot of people at the C.F.C. that are unclear as to what actually constitutes a 'firearm' anyway!!. That's why the law REQUIRES Firearms to be verified. The government has decided to ignore this portion of their own laws! If charges are to be laid against Mr Buckley, because the government thinks this is obviously false information, then charges should ALSO be laid against the registrar at the C.F.C. who actually entered, what the government deems to be blatantly false information, into the database. Had they just pulled the form from the queue before the information was entered, charges might have been laid. But, the Government participated by actually 'MANUALLY' ENTERING the information into the database, and unbelievably issuing a registration certificate for a soldering 'gun'. I can practically hear the employees snickering at the C.F.C. as they pushed this through.. To see the actual registration click here(pdf file).

    effie

    ReplyDelete
  15. Interesting article found under "SWISS GUNS" on Swiss gun control- 1939 just before Hitler launched WW2
    It reads as follows:
    ---------------------
    So let's take a step back, and look at Switzerland's unique gun laws and culture.

    "While traveling around Switzerland on Sundays, everywhere one hears gunfire, but a peaceful gunfire: this is the Swiss practicing their favorite sport, their national sport. They are doing their obligatory shooting, or practicing for the regional, Cantonal or federal shooting festivals, as their ancestors did it with the musket, the arquebus or the crossbow. Everywhere, one meets urbanites and country people, rifle to the shoulder, causing foreigners to exclaim: 'You are having a revolution!'" These words were written by General Henri Guisan, commander in chief of the Swiss Militia Army, the year before World War II began.

    Having participated in Swiss shooting matches for over a decade, Stephen Halbrook can attest to the continuing validity of this statement. Throughout the country, people are free to come and go for shooting competitions, and competitors are commonly seen with firearms on trains, buses, bicycles, and on foot.

    In 1939, just before Hitler launched World War II, Switzerland hosted the International Shooting Championships. Swiss president Philipp Etter told the audience, which included representatives from Nazi Germany:

    There is probably no other country which, like Switzerland, gives the soldier his weapon to keep in the home.... With this rifle, he is able every hour, if the country calls, to defend his hearth, his home, his family, his birthplace.... The Swiss does not part with his rifle.

    Switzerland won the service-rifle team championship. The lesson was not lost on the Nazi observers.

    Halbrook details in Target Switzerland: Swiss Armed Neutrality in World War II, the Swiss militia policy of a rifle in every home deterred a Nazi invasion. A Nazi attack would have cost far more in Wehrmacht blood than did the easy conquests of the other European countries, whose governments had restricted firearm ownership before the war. Many hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of Swiss — and refugees who found sanctuary there — were saved because every Swiss had a rifle, and was prepared to resist.

    To this day, every male, when he turns 20, is issued a full automatic military rifle and required to keep it at home. Universal service in the Militia Army is required. When a Swiss is no longer required to serve, he may keep his rifle (converted from automatic to semi-automatic) or his pistol (if he served as an officer).

    American Founding Fathers such as John Adams and Patrick Henry greatly admired the Swiss militia, which helped inspire the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution — the preference for a "well regulated militia" as "necessary for the security of a free state," and the guarantee of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." Late in the 19th century, the American military sent observers to Switzerland in hopes of emulating the Swiss shooting culture.

    The American Founders also admired Switzerland's decentralized system of government. Switzerland is a confederation in which the federal government has strictly defined and limited powers, and the cantons, even more so than American states, have the main powers to legislate. The citizens often exercise direct democracy, in the form of the initiative and the referendum. The late political scientist Gianfranco Miglio said the Swiss enjoyed the "last, real federalism in the world," as opposed to the "false and/or deteriorated" federalism of Germany or America.

    For centuries, the Swiss cantons had no restrictions on keeping and bearing arms, though every male was required to provide himself with arms for militia service. By the latter part of the 20th century, some cantons required licenses to carry pistols, imposed fees for the acquisition of certain firearms (which could be evaded by buying them in other cantons), and imposed other restrictions — albeit never interfering with the ever-present shooting matches.

    In other cantons — usually those with the lowest crime rates — one did not need a police permit for carrying a pistol or for buying a semiautomatic, lookalike Kalashnikov rifle. A permit was necessary only for a non-militia machine gun. Silencers or noise suppressors were unrestricted. Indeed, the Swiss federal government sold to civilian collectors all manner of military surplus, including antiaircraft guns, cannon, and machine guns.

    In 1996, the Swiss people voted to allow the federal government to legislate concerning firearms, and to prohibit the cantons from regulating firearms. Some who favored more restrictions (as in other European countries) saw this as a way to pass gun-control laws at the federal level; those who objected to restrictions in some cantons saw it as a way to preempt cantonal regulation, such as the former requirement in Geneva of a permit for an air gun.

    The result is a federal firearms law that imposes certain restrictions, but leaves virtually untouched the ability of citizens to possess Swiss military firearms, and to participate in competitions all over the country.

    The Federal Weapons Law of 1998 regulates import, export, manufacture, trade, and certain types of possession of firearms. The right of buying, possessing, and carrying arms is guaranteed with certain restrictions. It does not apply to the police or to the Militia Army — of which most adult males are members.

    The law forbids fully automatic arms and certain semiautomatics "derived" therefrom; but Swiss military assault rifles are excluded from this prohibition. (The exclusion makes the prohibition nearly meaningless.) Further, collectors may obtain special permits for the "banned" arms, such as submachine guns and machine guns.

    In purchasing a firearm from a licensed dealer, a permit is required for handguns and some long guns, but not for single-shot rifles, multi-barrel rifles, Swiss bolt-action military rifles, target rifles, or hunting rifles. Permits must be granted provided the applicant is at least 18 years old and has no disqualifying criminal record. Authorities may not keep any registry of firearms owners. Private persons may freely buy and sell firearms without restriction, provided that they retain a written agreement, and that the seller believes the purchaser is not criminally disqualified.

    A permit was already required for manufacturing and dealing in firearms, but now there are more regulations still. Storage regulations exist for both shops and individuals. During the Cold War, the government required every house to include a bomb shelter, which today often provide safe storage for large collections of firearms (and double as wine cellars).

    Criminal penalties depend on intent. Willfully committing an offense may be punishable by incarceration for up to five years, but failure to comply through neglect, or without intent, may result in a fine or no punishment at all.

    Before 1998, about half the cantons (like 33 American states) allowed all law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for protection in public; in some cases, an easily obtainable permit was needed. The new federal law makes permits necessary everywhere, and, so far, permits have been issued restrictively. (Still, one can freely carry a handgun or rifle to a shooting range, and there is one in every village, nook, and cranny.)

    Zug, site of the September murders, had always been a difficult place to obtain a handgun carry permit (Waffentragschein). Even if permits had been issued readily, it might not have made a difference on September 27, since, as one of our Swiss friends put it: "the mental climate of Zug was entirely peaceful. While I would — before the outrage — not at all have been surprised to learn that in the Uri or Ticino or the Grisons assembly there were members carrying arms, in Zug I would have been surprised indeed. This is exactly what the mad felon exploited, a state of mind. There are more parallels between the hideous September crimes than first meet the eyes!"

    Any proposed new restrictions on peaceable firearm possession and use will be opposed by the Militia Army; by shooting organizations, such as the Swiss Shooting Federation; and by the gun-rights group ProTell, named after William Tell, who shot an apple off his son's head. Their allies are the political parties that support free trade, federalism, limited government, non-interventionism, and remaining independent from international organizations such as the European Union or United Nations.

    Supporters of firearm restrictions tend to be socialists and Leftists — including those who wish to abolish the Militia Army, to strengthen the central government to be more like Germany, and to join the European Union. Ironically, the Swiss Socialist Party went through a similar period at the beginning of Hitler's rise. But the Swiss socialists soon recognized the danger, and in 1942 — when Switzerland was completely surrounded by Axis dictatorships — the Socialist Party resolved that "the Swiss should never disarm, even in peacetime."

    Since September 27, the European media have been complaining about this "armed country" where every citizen is a "potential sniper." But the fact is, Switzerland is just as safe as countries where firearms are far more restricted. In 1994, the homicide rate in Switzerland was 1.32 per 100,000 in the population. Of those, 0.58 (44 percent) involved firearms. Compare this to Italy 2.25 (1.66 firearms), France 1.12 (0.44), and Germany 1.17 (0.22).

    The Swiss household gun-ownership rate is 27 percent excluding militia weapons. Contrast this with the household gun-ownership rates (at least for households willing to divulge gun ownership to a government-affiliated telephone pollster) of 16 percent for Italians, 23 percent for French, and 9 percent for Germans.

    The far left has been demanding massive new gun control, and prohibition on keeping militia rifles in the home. The Defence Minister has ruled out such changes, however. The Justice Department will push for an amendment to the
    federal gun law which would abolish private firearms transfers; all private transfers would require police approval.

    While most of Switzerland's less-armed neighbors are as peaceful as Switzerland, danger emanates from the Balkans — the former Yugoslavia and Albania — not to mention from the chaos that's followed the breakup of the Soviet Union. Political terrorists and organized criminals are swamping Europe. Indeed, the same terrorist organizations that murdered Americans on September 11 operate in all European countries, including Switzerland. The new Swiss federal-weapons law is in part a reaction to this turmoil. But given that terrorists may buy black market AK-47s from the former Red Army in all European countries, the Swiss federal law impinges more on law-abiding Swiss than it does on foreign miscreants.

    One wonders whether more gun laws will do as much good for Switzerland as would imprisoning people who threaten bus drivers with a gun, or improving supervision of released felony sexual predators against children.
    ----------------------------------------------
    Effie

    ReplyDelete
  16. thanks effie: great article btw, it is an excellent model for society as a whole and for an invader to think twice, about what will greet them once they decide to make such a crazy move.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sorry I didn't read everything everything as closely as I ought. I'll do that later at home.

    Just quickly (before my battery runs out), my thoughts on Swiss guns are that I suspect Switzerland has a far narrower spread between rich and poor. I'm just guessing, but I'd be surprised if they had more than one percent living below the poverty line. Frankly I'd say that his has a far greater impact of how much crime takes place than how many guns there are. I suspect that the majority of pro-gun people wouldn't care for this argument.

    ReplyDelete

TROLLS &SPAM WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT HESITATION
KEEP IT RELEVANT. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS