EU: Verbot von Halbautomaten - Teil 4

[rhodium]

Ich mutmaße das gibt einen richtigen Aufstand in der Schweiz ...

[Maddin]

Können wir mal eine Liste von Ländern bzw. Regionen erstellen wo der legale Waffenbesitz (inkl. halbautomatischer Langwaffen) denn nach einer entsprechenden Umsetzung der Richtlinie überhaupt noch erlaubt ist?
Manche US Bundesstaaten jetzt mal ausgenommen?
In Kanada z.B. ist der Besitz ja mittlerweile auch stark reglementiert, nur manche bzw. "kastrierte" Halbautomaten und diese nur mit kleinen Magazinen erlaubt

Schweiz, Italien (teilweise, je südlicher desto besser), CZ, Dänemark in der EU.
Arizona, Florida, Alaska, Utah, und noch ein paar die mir nicht einfallen.
Es gibt aber schöne Listen.
Südamerika soll auch net schlecht sein, in Afrika sitzt halbert an der Quelle.
Russland ist so teils teils, war schon mal besser, genauso wie China.
Japan kannst komplett kübeln, da leben wir ja im reinen Luxus!

Bezüglich Demo:
In den USA gibt es regelmäßig Demos pro-Waffen, diese kommen auch gut an, weil die Konservativen solche Aktionen unterstützen.
Natürlich gibt es dann auch die ganz witzigen, die eine "Open Carry" Demo machen.
Open Cary hat was gutes, provozieren solltest aber nicht.

LG

Nur zum Verständnis, inwiefern sind CZ, Dänemark, Italien oder die Schweiz jetzt davon ausgenommen oder wie kann man deine Worte verstehen ? Haben die da bestimmte Waffen die nicht darunter fallen ? Rest der Welt sollte klar sein, die betrifft es eh nicht.

[raptor]

Zum Thema "Jede illegale Waffe war mal legal bla, bla ...": http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/world ... .html?_r=0

[<BigM>]

Ich mutmaße das gibt einen richtigen Aufstand in der Schweiz ...

Nix wirds geben, weder in der Schweiz noch in Österreich oder Deutschland. Jeder Besitzer wird getreu dem Motto "Schafe - eine Reihe zum Schlachthof bitte" seine (betroffenen) Waffen abliefern. Das autochthone Volk wird wie immer sich umdrehen, bücken, Arsch hinhalten und auf die eurokratische Besteigung warten!!!

Klar gibts noch Hoffnung, bis zum Nächsten Vorfall....

[diver99]

Ich mutmaße das gibt einen richtigen Aufstand in der Schweiz ...

Nix wirds geben, weder in der Schweiz noch in Österreich oder Deutschland. Jeder Besitzer wird getreu dem Motto "Schafe - eine Reihe zum Schlachthof bitte" seine (betroffenen) Waffen abliefern. Das autochthone Volk wird wie immer sich umdrehen, bücken, Arsch hinhalten und auf die eurokratische Besteigung warten!!!

Klar gibts noch Hoffnung, bis zum Nächsten Vorfall....

Vergleich die Schweiz nicht mit uns Österreichern. Auch bei uns wird es Widerstand geben. Wenn nicht, sind wir Lulus.

[SwissShot]

Meines Wissens nach eine Kurzwaffe also 20 "runden" wie die korrekten Übersetzungen in Brüssel lauteten

Da bin ich mir eben nicht wirklich sicher, zu hoffen wäre es.

Ich mutmaße das gibt einen richtigen Aufstand in der Schweiz ...

Da irrst Du dich, leider.

Einerseits sind die verschieden Schützen untereinander schon nicht grün.
Zum Beispiel, hat ja unsere Klavierspielerin gesagt "Ihr könnt das Sturmgewehr behalten" (ich vermute mal es sind nur die CH-Sturmgewehre Stgw 57 und Stgw 90 gemeint) und somit haben sich die Sturmgewehrschützen schon wieder unter dem Stein verkrochen.
Und so sieht es bei den verschiedenen Schützen aus, Hauptsache mein Garten bleibt intakt.

Ebenfalls gibt es sehr viele Waffengegner und einem Grossteil des Volkes, ist es schlichtweg egal.

Von daher bin ich eher der Meinung von BigM.

Gruss SwissShot.

[diver99]

Meines Wissens nach eine Kurzwaffe also 20 "runden" wie die korrekten Übersetzungen in Brüssel lauteten

Da bin ich mir eben nicht wirklich sicher, zu hoffen wäre es.

Ich mutmaße das gibt einen richtigen Aufstand in der Schweiz ...

Da irrst Du dich, leider.

Einerseits sind die verschieden Schützen untereinander schon nicht grün.
Zum Beispiel, hat ja unsere Klavierspielerin gesagt "Ihr könnt das Sturmgewehr behalten" (ich vermute mal es sind nur die CH-Sturmgewehre Stgw 57 und Stgw 90 gemeint) und somit haben sich die Sturmgewehrschützen schon wieder unter dem Stein verkrochen.
Und so sieht es bei den verschiedenen Schützen aus, Hauptsache mein Garten bleibt intakt.

Ebenfalls gibt es sehr viele Waffengegner und einem Grossteil des Volkes, ist es schlichtweg egal.

Von daher bin ich eher der Meinung von BigM.

Gruss SwissShot.

Leider ziehen die Waffenbesitzer in Österreich auch nicht alle am selben Strang.

[d-s]

Read at your own risk. I'm not responsible for any heart attacks

From latest version of "Draft Compromises" (compromise between Council and EP):

The acquisition and possession of firearms should only be permitted if, inter alia, there is good cause. Member States should have the option of stipulating that the acquisition and possession of firearms for the purpose, for example, of hunting, target shooting, use by associations which cultivate customs and traditions and by cultural and historical bodies, the conduct of various scientific and technical activities, testing procedures and the re-enactment of historical events, filmmaking or historical study constitutes good cause

No self-defense there...

The maximum limits duration of an authorisation shall not exceed five years, unless Member States have implemented a system of continuous monitoring referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 5(2). The authorisation may be renewed if the conditions on the basis of which it was granted are still fulfilled.

Fine for me in Slovakia where it's cheap, but it can get expensive in Austria,

When stored, firearms and ammunition for them shall not be readily accessible together.

Well, home defense...

The Commission shall every five years submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive, including a fitness check of the provisions, accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals in particular as regards the categories of firearms of Annex I and the issues related to the implementation of the system for the European firearms pass, marking and to new technologies such as impacts of 3D printing. The first report shall be submitted by [two years after the date of entry into force of this Amending Directive].

For those who think that they're safe as their firearms are not banned now...

Annex I - Part II - Category A, point 7
Semi-automatic firearms with centrefire percussion, and loading devices, with one or more of the following characteristics:
(a) long firearms (i.e. firearms that are originally intended to be fired from the shoulder) that can be reduced to a length of less than 60cm without losing functionality by means of a folding or telescoping stock or by a stock that can be removed without using tools;

b) firearms which allow the firing of more than 21 rounds without reloading, if a loading device with a capacity exceeding 20 rounds is part of the firearm or is inserted into it; and

c) loading devices which can hold more than 20 rounds;

or

Annex I - Part II - Category A, point 7
Semi-automatic firearms with centrefire percussion, and loading devices, with one or more of the following characteristics:
(a) long firearms (i.e. firearms that are originally intended to be fired from the shoulder) that can be reduced to a length of less than 60cm without losing functionality by means of a folding or telescoping stock or by a stock that can be removed without using tools;

b) firearms which allow the firing of more than 11 rounds without reloading, if a loading device with a capacity exceeding 10 rounds is part of the firearm or is inserted into it.

c) loading devices for firearms which can hold more than 10 rounds.

Member States may decide to confirm authorisations for firearms classified in category A.6 or A.7 and legally acquired and registered before [date of entry into force of amending Directive], and to renew them for the legal owner at that date, subject to the other conditions of this Directive, and may also allow such firearms to be inherited or acquired by persons authorised under Article 6.

y. Member States may authorise target shooters to acquire and possess semi-automatic firearms classified in categories A.6 or A.7, subject to the following conditions:

a) the target shooter participates in shooting competitions organised by an official shooting sport organisation recognised by a Member State or by an internationally established and officially recognised shooting sport federation; and

b) the target shooter is a member of a recognised shooting club, regularly practises target shooting and has been doing so for at least twelve months.

So as we can see, "compromise" basically equals to what Council wants.

[BigBen]

nothing new here...

[d-s]

Well, one thing is "new", or important.
This is not Council document.
It's EP Compromise document.
That basically means that so far it seems that all our influence which led to reasonable IMCO document will have no or only small effect.

[BigBen]

Ok that is new - where can I find anything official about this?

[hmg382]

@d-s: Leaked? Source?

I can imagine that this BS is taken into account, however, IMCO first has to vote about their own Amendments. Compromise amendments may also be integrated and others may be summarized (as announced ... as far as I can remember).

However, it's not over until it's over. IMCO has to reject this BS and agree their own "senseful" amendments (although the only senseful amendment is #1).

Anyway. Time to write some MEPs ...

[d-s]

The document was not officially published. As of now, I can't post full doc here.

This is the document header if it helps you:

3nd Draft Compromises – blocks of issues
Reflecting the discussion at the 30/6 Shadow meeting
(changes after 30/6 meeting tracked)

It's what IMCO will vote about. It's not final version, it can still change.
E.g. one change requested by France is to limit magazines to 6...

[d-s]

@d-s: Leaked? Source?

I can imagine that this BS is taken into account, however, IMCO first has to vote about their own Amendments. Compromise amendments may also be integrated and others may be summarized (as announced ... as far as I can remember).

However, it's not over until it's over. IMCO has to reject this BS and agree their own "senseful" amendments (although the only senseful amendment is #1).

Anyway. Time to write some MEPs ...

Source: Brussels. The source did not authorize me to reveal it.

Unfortunately the way I understand it is that this is what IMCO will vote about on July 13.
It was prepared by Reporter and it's compromise between original IMCO version and change requests IN IMCO. But as we can see, change requests in IMCO match Council requests.
So there's a good chance IMCO version will be very close to Council one even before compromising between EP and Council starts.

[hmg382]

@d-s: Leaked? Source?

I can imagine that this BS is taken into account, however, IMCO first has to vote about their own Amendments. Compromise amendments may also be integrated and others may be summarized (as announced ... as far as I can remember).

However, it's not over until it's over. IMCO has to reject this BS and agree their own "senseful" amendments (although the only senseful amendment is #1).

Anyway. Time to write some MEPs ...

Source: Brussels. The source did not authorize me to reveal it.

Unfortunately the way I understand it is that this is what IMCO will vote about on July 13.
It was prepared by Reporter and it's compromise between original IMCO version and change requests IN IMCO. But as we can see, change requests in IMCO match Council requests.
So there's a good chance IMCO version will be very close to Council one even before compromising between EP and Council starts.

Thanks. Matches the shitstorm on Vicky's FB page.

And it's not close ... it's literally the same.

(1) good cause ... well there's a "for example" ... so MS can define it as they want ... that doesn't bother me so far

(2) Maximum limits/monitoring -> BS

(3) Storage ... well, I would need the context: The Council says:

Firearms and ammunition should be stored in a secure manner when not immediately
supervised. If stored other than in a safe, firearms and ammunition should be stored
separately from each other. Criteria for (...) storage should be defined by national rules.

If IMCO would even go beyond this then ... -> BS

(4) 5-Year-Reporting -> nothing new (maybe they do so as with deactivation standards prior to Paris attacks )

(5) A.7 -> BS, BS, BS ...