Digg

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Switzerland and the gun

news.bbc.co.uk — The gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept. The country has a population of six million, but there are estimated to be at least two million publicly-owned firearms, including about 600,000 automatic rifles and 500,000 pistols. This is in a very large part due to Switzerland's unique system of national defence.

Bury

stalepie 1 year 130 days ago, made popular 1 year 129 days ago

2085 diggs
digg it

362 Comments
Who Dugg It?
Blog It
Email It

stalepie, on 10/12/2007, -66/+137This is how I think we should solve America's problem with guns.
- painted82, on 10/12/2007, -82/+164No *****. Who's going to commit a crime when the chances are the the others have guns also?
- maglob, on 10/12/2007, -50/+20It's very hard to change a current system, you cant just say, lets change and then its done. So hard to go back. Personally i dont agree that everyone should have guns, but America has gone too far to retract to that now, at least not for a long long long time.
- Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -90/+137That worked like a blaze in the Wild West, now did it?
  
  But let's take it to a higher level and give all countries nuclear weapons. What country would attack a country that has nuclear weapons, right? Damn you Ronald Reagan, why did you stop the race for an all-peace world? And Mr. Bush, what is it about Iran and North Korea? More weapons make for a safer world, so stop bugging them!
- swooshonln, on 10/12/2007, -67/+145Your wrong.
  
  We have too many immature criminals growing up in America to provide them with weapons. Think about how many poor urban neighborhoods there are, and you want to tell me that we should give them guns? Your kidding right?
- GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -35/+26Pro gun or anti gun, this has been an odd two weeks...I've seen three different shootings. The Virginia Tech, the NASA, the Missouri Shopping Center. What's going on over there?
- MrStabby, on 10/12/2007, -38/+32Putting all violent crimes aside...
  
  In a socialist society such as Switzerland, the crime rate is going to be low anyway. I think the fact that the public is legally armed is merely a bit of extra insurance.
- TheGilmanator, on 10/12/2007, -41/+15@swooshonln
  
  You're grammar sucks.
- Lax32, on 10/12/2007, -39/+200Its the entire reason Germany never invaded Switzerland in WWII. He got intelligence that every village had a gun range and realized that it would not only be hard but it would take forever and a day to take over because they would have to fight pretty much Switzerlands entire population.
  
  You know, the second amendmant does exist as a matter of national security, I think people forget that sometimes.
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -61/+117@"No *****. Who's going to commit a crime when the chances are the the others have guns also?"
  
  I've heard this really works well in Somalia.
- Frequency, on 10/12/2007, -39/+152@swoosh
  
  You don't GIVE people guns just for the hell of it, these people that are issued firearms by the Swiss government are all members of the military. It would be ridiculous and useless to give people guns without giving them training to go with it.
  
  Seriously, the only reason VT and Columbine were such bloodbaths is because everyone was unarmed. If teachers and adults were allowed to responsibly protect themselves then we wouldn't even see such things happen.
  
  @vertinox: Somalia is basically under anarchy. That kind of firearm use happens because there are no repercussions.
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -31/+80@"Its the entire reason Germany never invaded Switzerland in WWII."
  
  No. Because they were on good terms with the Swiss bankers. Where did you think all that Nazi loot went after the war? Same goes for Sweeden.
- JrGhoull, on 10/12/2007, -53/+19i had a funny discussion with a neighbor about gun policy recently...he felt it was his legal right to buy 15 guns (be them semi automatics) within a month....i can see all of 1 reason for that (killspree). the pro gun people argue about how its their constitutional right to own guns and blah blah blah (those laws were written literally hundreds of years ago when most people at least at one point or another hunted their own food) which is horrible because its saying that a few words justify the largest number of innocent killings in the entire western world. if u want to hunt or like old guns or want a gun for protection, i'm cool with that, but being able to buy guns as easily as we can in the usa....its just wrong, and the numbers prove it.
- quomen, on 10/12/2007, -24/+77You can't compare a country like Switzerland to a country like the USA.
  Do you really believe that a cookie cutter method to gun control will solve everyone's problems? Like another poster said, look at Somalia, look at the war torn African nations. There are many more variables to look at before judging whether or not free distribution of guns is the thing we should do. Frankly, I feel very safe right now and i'd feel a LOT more scared if everyone around me had a gun that was at their disposal whenever they want.
- jbarnes1234, on 10/12/2007, -8/+28The number of guns don't paint a complete picture of the weapons policy in switzerland, which proves to be far more regulated then anything in the US. If you're in the militia, you're required to have an assault rifle...but then it's also illegal to carry ammunition in public....so it's not a simple equation of more guns=safety. As suggested above, more guns=less invasions.
- nossenigma, on 10/12/2007, -17/+16@painted82
  
  Answer: Criminals.
- misteral, on 10/12/2007, -27/+14@Lax32: You know, the second amendmant does exist as a matter of national security, I think people forget that sometimes.
  
  Sometimes I think people forget what sort of guns they had back then. You know, the type that took 20 minutes to reload and had a fraction of the bang of even the wimpiest gun on the street today
- NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -30/+38PurplePig has the right of it.
  
  This nation (i.e. The US) is so concerned about foisting responsibilities on others that they forget what responsibility is in the first place. Can a nation of people with no concept of responsibility be trusted to bear arms?
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -3/+78jrghoull:
  
  The gun rights were not written so people could hunt their own food. Our founding fathers came from a time of political turmoil, where their need for freedoms necessitated their withdrawal from an overbearing government. They wanted to make sure they weren't hypocritical, and gave the rights to bear arms to all Americans for several reasons well beyond hunting food, namely so people could create their own private militias in case the american government got out of hand, or in case of invasion by another country, at which time the American people could act independently as a military. Don't be so short-sighted. They sure as hell weren't.
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -11/+47 by swooshonln 1 hour ago
  
  "Your wrong." (it is you're)
  
  "We have too many immature criminals growing up in America to provide them with weapons. Think about how many poor urban neighborhoods there are, and you want to tell me that we should give them guns? Your kidding right?"
  ---------------------------------------------
  
  They already have guns.
- iceperson, on 10/12/2007, -15/+49"That worked like a blaze in the Wild West, now did it?"
  
  How about citing some statistics showing that gun crimes were higher in the "wild wild west"? Oh wait, you can't because it wasn't. Stop watching old movies and read a book sometime...
- hipnerd, on 10/12/2007, -16/+45The people that bring this stuff up never want to enact _all_ of Switzerland's gun laws, I notice.
  
  You need a permit to buy a gun in Switzerland. The sale of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons is forbidden (as is the sale of certain disabled automatic firearms which have been identified as easily restored to fully automatic capability), unless the buyer has a special collector's license.
  
  There are three conditions that must be met in order to get a carry permit:
  
  * fulfilling the conditions for a buying permit
  * stating plausibly the need to carry firearms to protect oneself, other people, or real property from a specified danger
  * passing an examination proving both weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon
  
  The NRA would crap it's pants rather than allowing any of these regulations, but they want to point at the high gun ownership rates and claim that is the reason for low crime.
  
  Maybe the reason is that they ban automatics or test for competency before getting a carry permit. It's our gun culture that hurts us, not our guns per se. Our belief that we can solve problems via guns hurts us as a society.
- ostracize, on 10/12/2007, -6/+31@lax32
  If Hitler saw any value in Switzerland, he would have invaded anyway under the false assumption his troops could obliterate any enemy he faced. The fact that the citizens may or may not have had guns would have less bearing on an invasion than the fact that Switzerland is an economically useless area to him, the mountains would be a pain to get his tanks through, and that Switzerland posed no threat to his ambitions.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24@swooshonln
  
  it's funny, your comment basically amounted to "yea right, you wouldn't want to give the poor racially oppressed minorities guns, would you!?"
- keyrat, on 10/12/2007, -13/+36The major difference is that the Swiss don't want to carry firearms around. There's no cowboy mentality, nor is there a mentality that you need a gun to protect yourself. There's also not a concealed weapons permit. You only have a gun for it to stay at your house in the unlikely chance that the country is invaded.
  
  Here everyone thinks they need a gun because they're going to get mugged, or they just like the empowering feeling of having a gun (Cowboy mentality). That leads to shooting deaths. In Switzerland, they don't have that mentality, they just have rifles at their houses in a closet.
- scythefwd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26@misteral
  
  Actually, a fast person was capable of getting off 2 rounds a minute on a caps lock
  (about 30 second reload speed). Secondly, the earliest revolver is dated back to about 1680. Before our revolution. The admendment was intended so that the civilian populace was capable of getting arms equivelent of the army so that they can both defend the country... or protect themselves against martial law.
  
  Personally, I think firearms are way to easy to obtain in the US. I am all for needing a license to purchase ammo and firearms. I am against banning firearms at all. Granted, there isn't many valid reasons for owning a 800 round per minute 5.56mm machine gun but they are a blast on the range. All the gun control in the world , including banning firearms, will not work in the US because there are way to many firearms that are unaccounted for. Unfettered access to firearms will not work because our society is not mature enough to handle the responsibilty. What we need is a middle ground. What we need is to make it harder, within reason (no felonies, mental evals, no restraining orders, no history of violent crimes, required training, etc...) to obtain firearms legally. Yes, someone can crack and go kill everyone around him with the firearm that he bought 10 years ago... but how big of a chance is that statistically? Make the license all you need to buy a firearm and ammo. That would make it harder because even though crimes are committed with illegal arms.. I'd wager most of the time the ammo was bought legally. Make the license a federal license. Don't register the arms a person buys.. just register that he has a license to own them.
- veersite, on 10/12/2007, -9/+13@ GawtMilk,
  
  What's up with all the shootings? Well, MSNBC and NBC posted much of the lunatic killer's deranged rantings online which made him appear much cooler and interesting than he was in real life. Misfits and retards the world over scratched their heads collectively and went, "hmmm... _I_ could do that" and be "cool" too.
  
  That's just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth.
- orientis, on 10/12/2007, -32/+32PurplePig and nsmike are absolutely correct. America has the collective maturity of a twelve-year-old. Your popular culture glorifies stupidity and violence. Your civil legal system's sole purpose seems to be to pass the blame on to somebody else.
  
  You yanks just aren't as smart or wise as the Swiss. Deal with it and grow the ***** up.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -13/+23"Your civil legal system's sole purpose seems to be to pass the blame on to somebody else."
  
  We typically pass it on to poor minorities.
  
  And whoever dugg me down up there needs to grow the ***** up, cause what I said about swooshonln was true.
- Ibanezfoo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20People who bring up the "wild west" are ignorant of history. Do you morons get your history from old western movies or what? Hell, you would be arrested if you wore your pistols in town! There were no duels at high noon or any of that other *****.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -12/+8"No *****. Who's going to commit a crime when the chances are the the others have guns also?"
  Who's going to commit a crime when the chances are the others have two hands that can form fists also?
- s1ade, on 10/12/2007, -15/+18More retarded American logic: The Swiss have guns and gun crime is low, so it must be good to give everyone guns.
- SillyRabbits, on 10/12/2007, -3/+38@Gawtmilk
  /quote
  "Pro gun or anti gun, this has been an odd two weeks...I've seen three different shootings. The Virginia Tech, the NASA, the Missouri Shopping Center. What's going on over there? "
  
  In those same two weeks over 1500 people have died in US auto accidents. It's just a matter of where people are focusing their attention.
- alpinweiss88, on 10/12/2007, -19/+18@frequency
  "Seriously, the only reason VT and Columbine were such bloodbaths is because everyone was unarmed. If teachers and adults were allowed to responsibly protect themselves then we wouldn't even see such things happen."
  
  First off, F you and everyone like you, who is using a tragedy like this to push your personal agenda (pro-gun, anti-gun, etc)
  
  The mentality of pro-gun people amaze me. They think that might-makes-right, which is disturbing from a human perspective. It is too bad that we have yet to evolve past that. Everyone likes to point to other countries and say "SEE! they have guns and don't go around killing each other, why can't WE all carry guns?" Maybe because as a country, we are chest-puffing teenagers who aren't responsible enough. I am most certainly not anti-gun, I grew up with them. I am for their responsible use, and our country has clearly proven that we aren't a responsible society.
  
  And to address your point that the VT or any other tragedy wouldn't have been as bad if everyone was armed:
  Guns don't protect people, people protect people.
- Ozymandias42, on 10/12/2007, -16/+15@frequency, in reply to "Seriously, the only reason VT and Columbine were such bloodbaths is because everyone was unarmed.":
  
  No, the only reason VT and Columbine were such bloodbaths was because one person was armed.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7how many of you stupid ass elitist libertarians would also advocate any of the other socialist qualities of swiss life as a way to get rid of crime?
  
  read this ***** quote from about.ch:
  "Private schools usually are expensive and people tend to think that students of private schools probably didn't make it at the public school."
- JohnP, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15One thing that really pisses me off with this "open the gun laws!" argument is that it is based on the assumption that the US population is full of paranoid ultra protective people, who want a 9mm in their pocket, just in case.
  
  Now, i know there is a large gun culture in the US, but i also know that there is a massive portion of society that would rather not have a gun anywhere near them. Then there is another massive portion who only want guns in the hands of responsible people. They certainly dont want to carry guns themselves, so what would change by opening the laws?
  
  The answer is: The people who previously couldnt get a gun will get one. Now tell me, what type of people do you think they are?
  
  The people who didnt have guns before didnt have them because their lives have no place for a gun. They are too busy living to think about buying a gun. They are not going to rush out a buy one just because they can.
  
  I see no problem with someone responsible having a gun for a hobby, or having a gun put away for serious situations. But they must be intelligent responsible citizens who know how to lock their guns and ammo up, and know when to use them.
- qmeister, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5@phmfthacim
  
  Where the hell did race come into his comment. Stop looking for racism where it isn't.
- MissingObject, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5The Swiss population is much more advanced in terms of civility. Too many Americans are stuck in a violent tribal mentality.
  
  Common American Mentality: If someone isn't making you happy, you should probably shoot them.
- ubuwalker31, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13@GawtMilk:
  It was the week of Hitler's Birthday. Seriously, I don't understand why our police aren't on high alert this entire month. It is the beginning of spring, and all of the unhinged nutjobs and unruly teenagers come out of the woodwork.
  @The Rest of you diggers:
  The problem with 'gun violence' in the US isn't a problem with guns. It is a problem with violence, in general. It is also societal problem. Ask an average white guy who he is defending himself against when he buys a shotgun, and he will describe a " dark skinned 'nappy haired' gangsta wearing bling carrying a 9mm" instead of his next door trailer trash neighbor. Ask this same guy what he would tell his son if he gets beaten up at school, and he'll say "make sure to fight back" instead of "block the punch, punch back, and then run and tell the principle". The problem is a lack of responsibility and a lack of training. It is also a result of a "lone wolf"/"gun slinger" mentality which has developed because there is a complete failure of the part of the government and the people to instill civic pride and responsibility in the populace at large. (Michael Moore hit the nail on the head when he noted that people in Detroit lock their doors, but across the water in Canada, no one does. Go figure.)
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8@qmeister,
  You are wrong as hell. Race is not just skin color, it's also socioeconomic class. What's more, segregation occurs in the US by race and socioeconomic class.
  
  Statistically, "poor innercity people" means "minorities." You're a colorblind ***** for denying this, because this means that you are also denying the existence of oppression.
- MusicalGenius, on 10/12/2007, -12/+25A bunch of MORONS!!! - Take it from someone who has not only been to Switzerland but my heritage is from there. I love Switzerland and my heart will always be there while I live here(U.S) I study the culture and government of the beautiful country because I enjoy it and someday I wish to live there. I would sell everything I have to live there. I tell you now that it is nothing related to everyone has a gun so no one dares shoot. In America if everyone had a gun and one person misfired it would be chaos. There would be someone who wouldn't care if everyone pulled out a gun because he has nothing to live for and would pull it out to cause mayhem. He shoots and everyone shoots him. More bullets on a subway at the same time mean more probability of an innocent person also getting hit. An experienced gunman would hit him. Someone who can't aim as well would shoot and barely miss him. Now you have a bullet which could hit a lot of other people who are innocent. In America, this would happen.
  
  The people of Switzerland generally desire more for this world than Americans do. There are amazing Americans and there are horrible people in Switzerland. There is good and evil everywhere. I don't deny this, but I know that Switzerland is capable of going where the world should be already. Switzerland is just more capable and responsible when it comes to owning a weapon.
  
  I love America for it's beauty and good people, but the majority are lazy. Americans could fix their own economy if they all just started voting and doing it wisely. Most of America hates the war, but they are too lazy to protest it to the extent it needs. Most Americans hate the way their workplaces control their lives, but won't vote for a better candidate and won't call their senator etc.
  
  Americans don't care enough to be better, that is why it is different from Switzerland. America is the stupid beast that never thinks.
- gappodi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Guns don't kill people. People (crazy) kill people.
  The swiss are not crazy.
- nadadingsda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+37The article is not very accurate, here are some corrections:
  
  - The rifle is not a M-57 but a SG 550 (but not the sniper version from CS ;)
  - We get 50 rounds of ammunition, not 24
  
  I think the reason why there is relatively little crime connected with the rifles we get from the military is that most people don't like their rifles. Of course, shooting can be "fun" (I don't mean shooting people here, of course) but after you have been to the military and carried this stupid rifle around for weeks and cleaned it every day, you just start to hate it. So when you come home from the military is take your rifle and put it somewhere in the basement so you don't have to look at it for another year..
- roodammy44, on 10/12/2007, -10/+11Wow, America's pretty violent already, could you imagine how much worse it'd be if noone had guns in america?
  The murder rate would go through the roof!
  
  /sarcasm
- qmeister, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4@phmfthacim - Hey num-nutz, ever been to rural america? Where there are poor people that aren't "minorities." I never said there isn't oppression...there definitely is and it's tragic. The state of affairs after Katrina is a prime example of what happens to people who have less. I GET IT.
  
  What I was pointing out was the previous commenter's message said nothing about race. The last thing I am is a colorblind *****. You don't know anything about me.
  
  Repeat after me *****. "Everyone is not a racist....Everyone is not a racist"
- Jolls, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2http://digg.com/podcasts/Radio_Free_Liberty/384999
  I just heard this podcast about the Switzerland gun/defense/democracy model. Good podcast. and yes, this is *shameless* promoting for one of my favorite podcasts.
- Comatose51, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I'm an advocate of the 2nd Amendment but the Switzerland comparison is such BS. First, the vast majority of those guns are service rifles not handguns. Second, the soldiers are issued a box of bullets that are sealed and can only be open upon mobilization. Third, Hitler didn't invande Switzerland for two reasons:
  
  1. It is mountainous.
  2. Same reason he didn't invade Sweden: it didn't add much to his strategic value. If the German army can roll through most of Europe, a bunch of people with guns aren't going to stop them since they do have tanks and airplanes and this was before the invention of effective anti tank weapons.
  
  Japan has a low crime rate and they ban guns. So if lots of guns and no guns both can have low crime rate, then I say guns have little to do with crime rate. I don't believe guns make people evil but I don't think giving out guns to every household is the solution to our problems either.
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Honestly, you can argue the whole "lots of guns" or "no guns" argument until you're blue in the face. Switzerland has a high gun-ownership ratio, yet a very low gun-related crime rate. Civilian ownership of handguns is generally illegal in Canada, and gun-related crime is also very low in Canada.
  
  The difference is HOW you get the guns and how gun ownership is handled. In Canada, all firearms need to be registered, even hunting rifles. You CAN legally get a handgun in Canada, but it'll require a *****-ton of paperwork, interviews to judge mental stability and need, and it generally takes about 3 years for the process to complete. In Switzerland, sure, you can get a handgun, but you've also been trained and disciplined by the military, as well as given a controlled amount of ammunition. Switzerland also has a history of peace, much longer than most (having been neutral throughout both world wars).
  Meanwhile, in the US, you can obtain a handgun at a Wal*Mart after an over-night background check (and sometimes even easier), without any training requirement or assessment into need.
  
  It's likely that gun laws will ever change much in the US - it's pretty much too late. Guns and embedded deep into US history and culture and people *already* have the guns. I also don't believe Switzerland's approach, while a good one, would work in the US. While it might benefit the population in the long-run, in light of the last few years I certainly wouldn't want the US military to have mandatory service.
- CedEx, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0@ sillyrabbits
  
  Sure 1500 died from auto accidents compared to the
- AnubisAscended, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@nogger:
  
  Like how both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. had nukes during the Cold War, but didn't use them out of fear of nuclear war?
- gimpbully, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@frequency
  Stop that crap, the same argument is easily made in the exact opposite. "Columbine would have never happened if those kids couldn't get their hands on guns in the first place". Logically, it's the exact same argument. (Note, I didn't say a damn thing about gun control, just the logic of that specific argument).
- jeriqo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4"by stalepie on 4/29/07
  This is how I think we should solve America's problem with guns."
  
  "by painted82 23 hours ago
  No *****. Who's going to commit a crime when the chances are the the others have guns also?"
  
  I hope you die shot.
- daroots, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I can read in these comment so many noobs that don't know ***** about Switzerland.
  
  1) During WW2 Switzerland were good with both side.
  be aware that the Swiss Alps can hold 6million people ( Swiss population at the time ) inside its bunkers. Also every village had hidden some kind of tanks and artillery or even in some case Air force. Still today , ALL bridge and tunnels of Switzerland are mined.
  
  2) Swiss culture is not related to guns, but to the army , its known to be the oldest army still in action (Swiss guards of Vatican City)
  
  3) You cannot go in a shop and by a gun and start shooting people , permit is needed .
  concerning the reserve army gun, ammunition are checked and changed every year.
  
  4)The army is only used for defensive purposes
  
  5) VT and Columbine stuff DO HAPPEN in Switzerland, but rarely and at smaller scale.
  
  The main difference , if I may, between Swiss and US, apart from their culture,history..., is their ability to have a "good citizenship"
- Gir53457, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@ lens
  
  That essentially what the US is. A Confederation of states in the form of a Republic. Only recently have we began seeing ourselves as a whole. It used to be if you were out of country and people asked you where you are from you'd say what state and not USA.
- diggingaround, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2
  
  The differences between US and Switzerland is like a difference between apples and oranges.
  Therefore you can't solve the crime and violence problem with the same methods.
- irvman21, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"it's funny, your comment basically amounted to "yea right, you wouldn't want to give the poor racially oppressed minorities guns, would you!?"
  
  Like he said, they already have them.
- WileEPeyote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They only have around 6 million people, compared to 301 million people in the United States. They also have a different culture and government. What they do there would likely not work here. We would need to fix several other issues we have before we could do something like that in the US (IMHO).
- cgoff, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@MusicalGenius,
  
  I'll pay for your ticket back to Switzerland. You assume that if everyone had the right to carry America would be an instant wild-west or Mad Max apocalypse. MANY states already allow you to legally carry concealed firearms and guess what, crime rate as DROPPED. I have not read anything in the news about a wild shootout in the streets of some town in KY because someone called somebody a liar at the local watering hole and testosterone took over for common sense. The mere fact that a citizen applies for a CCW shows that he is more knowledgeable and responsible!
  
  To put this in perspective, why didn't Cho (or the Columbine boys) head to their local National Guard Post for a shootout? Maybe the police station? How about the local shooting range? (man, why don't we see people getting killed at those constantly with all those evil weapons!!) Maybe because they were COWARDS. Willing to take it all out on people who couldn't do anything in return.
  
  The idea here is that citizens in this great country have the RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES yet liberals and the sheeple who follow them are scared to death of that. They'd rather the government protect them, well a lot of good that did for VT. If you choose to pass gun control laws you do NOTHING BUT STRIP THE HONEST CITIZEN OF HIS RIGHTS. I don't know how many times I've had to tell people: criminals by definition will not abide by the rules, so there is no point whatsoever in further gun control!
  
  Let's face it: firearms are literally in the blood of the American citizen. We love them! We love to shoot them, clean them, show them, etc. That doesn't mean we like to kill people or are blood thirsty. I don't expect anyone from any other country to understand one of our customs any more than I understand why Muslim terrorists use women and children for bullet shields. But I certainly ask you to respect us for it.
  
  Now where are my blood pressure pills...
- fourteenapart, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1http://protestwarrior.com/nimages/signs/large/pw_sign_47.gif
- KongKNoob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1In Norway we have a similar system to the Swiss, but a few years ago the army had to revoke all weapons due to several killings in witch army guns were used. I'm all for gun control, but as many others have commented, the mind set of inhabitants is a major factor here. Good luck with that, US...
- maisis00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@vertinox: I want to preface this by stating this is only my personal and humble opinion. Somalia's issues are not rooted in the fact that almost every citizen owns a gun (if that is even true, without hard statistics backing up that comment it is merely conjecture). That country's issues more have to do with the fact there is zero economic growth in the region coupled with a total lack of government stability. So the citizens get divided into gangs and/or waring factions that fight to control what little economic scraps are available (i.e. drug trade, foreign aid shipments, limited domestic goods that can be re-sold else where, etc). They are using the rule of the gun because the rule government and economy has failed them. They are simply trying to survive by what ever means they have available to them and at the present time in Somalia survival means being willing to fight for what you have and want.
  
  Most self respecting human beings do not want to be taken care of by receiving endless hand outs, they want to be self sufficient. The world governing bodies such as the UN cannot continue to pass these "so-named" third world nations the table scraps of the world and expect them to merely be content. These people want to be self-sufficient but at present they do not see how and until some one can show them a way out of the darkness they currently live in nothing will ever change for them. It is going to take one of there own to stand up and make things better we cannot make them change. They have to want the change for themselves.
- maisis00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@alpinweiss88
  
  I dugg you up from the negative one because you are right "people protect people" you also need to remember that the human body makes a poor defensive weapon. It is better suited to run defense from an offensive posture such as with a gun hand. Hand-to-gun combat seldom ends well for the hand persuasion.
- StandupShowcase, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0lol thats pretty funny. give everyone guns and there'll be less gun violence. you must be dense, very dense.
  
  the swiss have so many guns because they are all forced to serve in the military.
  
  go back to your gay fan boy paint ball games
- NickDaddyKing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@swooshln (or however you spelled it)
  
  If there are that many immature criminals (as apposed to mature criminals) let nature work its magic with natural selection
- Ultroniar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Every one of the first posters here has missed the main point of the article. The reason for Switzerland having such low gun crime despite such high ownership is the fact that other crimes which lend themselves to gun crime do not exist. eg Gangs, Drugs. It is a different society. This approach would not work in the US, neither the UK or for that matter any other country. Each must have its own approach.
  
  Why Switzerland doesn't have as many occasional crazy shooting sprees is another question, to which neither I nor this article has the answer.
- Mothrog, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"That worked like a blaze in the Wild West, now did it?"
  
  I hate to break it to you, but your idea of the "Wild West" is thanks largely to dime store novels, not reality.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@qmeister,
  Here is a direct quote, and I'm pretty sure that this isn't talking about rural neighborhoods but *maybe* I'm wrong. You tell me:
- tybris, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"Guns don't kill people. People (crazy) kill people."
  
  Guns facilitate murder, that's what they're built for.
- EmileVictor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think people have this wrong... The reason there is such a low firearms death rate is that while there are 2 million guns, there is no ammo around. Only in the event of a national crisis they would distribute ammo.
- BirdCatcher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@nogger
  
  Actually the extreme violence of the wild west has been a fabrication of American culture. In reality the wild west was very mundane and most people who cowboys were African Americans.
- qmeister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@phmfthacim - Were you saying something?
  
  What I am trying to say is don't swirl every story into..."we are oppressed by all the *****, racist, white people." Not all ***** white people are racist and oppressive...a whole damn lot of us are the opposite as a matter of fact. (did anyone catch the hint of humor in that?? C'mon!!)
  
  The fact is this country is pretty screwed up these days....
- Pureeviljester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@phmidiot
  
  that first sentence about private schools isn't racist. I have a private school near where i live that IS expensive and minorities DO attend the school.
  stop being an idiot
- Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The problem with the comparisons above (switzerland vs. somalia, for example) is that the difference isn't just the availability of guns. The availability of guns is not enough to drive down the crime rate. The difference is that the populace also has a sense of responsibility, is well educated, well mannered, employed, and do not live in a lawless society. You know that saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people"? Guns don't deter crime; people deter crime.
  
  In a polite and well mannered society that is also well armed, you will have peace, and a deterrent to crime. In a lawless society where the people are not thoroughly responsible, but are desperate, and divided by hatreds and contentions, you will have civil war.
  
  With that said, if you look at places in the US where the population is under-educated, under-employed, crass, and dominated by thug culture and gangs, where the police are not well respected and do not have effective power because of mistrust or resentment, proliferating small arms among such a population will not make crime go away; it is likely to make violence escalate where and when it breaks out. If you proliferate self defense firearms in areas where the population is responsible, and generally moral, it will be a deterrent to those who would otherwise resort to violence to victimize people for their personal gain.
- MadOgre, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The Wild West comments crack me up.
  If you really study American History during this time, you will find that at no other time was there so much peace and growth in the US. The "Wild" aspect of the West is a gross exaggeration. The shoot outs that happened are all very well documented to the point of mythology.
  And lots of people had guns... most hunting rifles or shotguns of one sort or another.
  Now days, there are Gun Laws, restrictions, and fewer people have guns... and today the US is much Wilder than it ever was back then.
  
  Everyone here enjoys their First Amendment rights. It boggles my mind that people can shun the Second... that which protects the First and the rest of them.
- bobbknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The sad truth of all the discussion regarding firearms is that we as a people do not know our own history.
  Muskets were the assault weapon of the day when our founding fathers wrote the Constitution, and the people at the time defined as, able bodied, free, and able to vote, were the army.
  I fact the Constitution does not allow for a standing army, only a naval and marine corps. The free peoples of the United States were to make up any required army, in time of war.
  I wasn't until about the time of the second world war that the US had a standing army.
  
  The VTech killer was never adjudicated as not mentally fit, and had never been convicted of a crime. He was in compliance with both state and federal law, to the point of his first kill. Vtech last year helped to prevent a law that would have allowed the legal permit holder to carry on campus.
  
  The killers at Columbine had acquired their pistols in an illegal manor, the 21 year old girl friend of one of them bought the pistols and transfered them to a person under the age of 21.
  
  This day and age I am more afraid of the police and what they do with guns, than my next door neighbor and what he may do if he has one.
  
  I for one would love to have a state of the art assault weapon of the age, something that goes Bbbrrrrrrrrriiiiippppp in the night, like a P90 and it's pistol cousin the five seven pistol.
  
  I live close to Canada, and watch the news from there, and since the general gun ban in Canada, gun crimes have gone up.
  Also the gun registration program in Ontario has only helped solve a crime or two, at a high dollar cost, and there is talk of getting rid of the registration law.
  
  I love it when people talk of the old west as some type of wide open kill fest. Sure some drunk stupid cowboy might get pissed off and shoot up a saloon, but it was never like in the movies. Most of the time no one ever got hurt, except for the odd spittoon. Most of the time the town folk would put a stop the crime before the sheriff made it to the scene. But that just don't make for a good movie.
  
  As for suicides, all the places above 20 degrees north latitude have a high rate of it.
- diggimator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Switzerland is one of the world's richest countries, but has remained relatively isolated.
  
  It has none of the social problems associated with gun crime seen in other industrialised countries like drugs or urban deprivation."
  
  Gun ownership is neither the plague or the silver bullet. There are many other factors. (But availability of guns certainly do aide people who want to go on a rampage.)
- WileEPeyote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@All The "Wild West" wasn't "Wild" people
  
  I am not able to find any of the statistics on "crime" in the old west (most places I have looked don't have stats before 1960). I would love to see those. I have done some research (not related to crime statistics) on the western US during the mid to late 1800's and it seemed quite violent (especially if you were not a white male).
jeffiek, on 10/12/2007, -17/+129Maybe the real lesson here is that it isn't the guns, it's the people. What is it about Americans that makes them so violent?
- Wonderkind, on 10/12/2007, -25/+10Just don't blame it on video games or someone will kill you.
- AntBing, on 10/12/2007, -3/+40It's the difference in social status. People will do crazy things for money and/or power. I would argue that the spread between the very poor and very rich in Switzerland is much less than here in the U.S.
- jfreeman, on 10/12/2007, -7/+44A significant majority of gun violence in the U.S. can be attributed to gangs. That's what's different.
- blakestah, on 10/12/2007, -24/+32In Kennesaw Georgia USA, on the outskirts of Atlanta, they instituted a law that
  every household had to have a gun. The crime rate dropped precipitously afterwards,
  and remains among the lowest in the USA. If every household has a gun, there is a lot
  less crime.
  
  http://www.rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm
  
  Given this "real world" experiment, why would anyone deny that placing guns
  in every house would reduce crime?
- wreckingcru, on 10/12/2007, -8/+30I agree with you 100%.
  It works in Switzerland because the people don't want to shoot others because they were bullied or some other flippant reason.
  
  I would take my chance screaming at a bad driver on a Swiss road who most probably has a gun (knowing that he'd never use it), rather than with an American.
  If all of America were armed, the number of 'drive-by's would be insane - and I'd prob be involved in half of them. There are so many times when bad driving irritates me, and I've been known to curse out someone with a look or a gesture, and I don't want to imagine that doing something so trivial could possibly get me shot and/or killed.
  
  My suggestion: treat owning a gun, like owning a car. Its use requires proof of ability of use. You must pass a written test as well as some kind of physical test of your marksmanship. I would also recommend ensuring that the license also requires some proof of mental sanity/stability.
  Now, in the auto sector, has this curbed bad driving or incidents of road rage - probably not much. But I would like to believe, it has in some significant way, curbed the ability of unstable/incompetant drivers to obtains permits to drive. And policing a mandatory license with strict deterrant policy (heavy fines, vehicle impounding) has helped make the system work.
  
  Or we could always do what Chris Rock says: make the bullets cost $5000 each.
- DreKor, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14blake:
  
  This is another one of those, correlation/causality things. The town in question is an upper middle class, primarily white, suburban sub development. There is no cause for violent crime there. All the poverty, drugs, and racial tension was pushed out by mini-mansions and SUVs.
- jadenguy, on 10/12/2007, -19/+13black people.
- Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -9/+20American's are not more violent than other people. The overall violent crime rate in the United States compares favorably with other developed nations.
  
  In many cases EU states have a HIGHER rate of violent crime, just fewer of them are committed with firearms.
  
  I'm not picking on the EU either, it just makes a good comparison.
- klang, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Please note, that guns and ammunition in Switzerland are sold almost without profit. The State controls the sale of both and does not need that specific profit. Furthermore, the first gun that people get, they get for free.
  
  The same system could easily be set up in the States. Direct that 60% of the national budget, that goes to the defence of the country to heighten the standard of living for everybody.. in return, everybody has to defend the country, in the country, against outside agressors.
- Oracle95, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11The news media glorifies and makes the scumbag criminal into a sympathetic figure. Last week so many news stories centered around the Virginia tech shooter and "what horrible things could have happened to drive someone to such a horrible crime?" Then NBC gives the guy a chance for immortality by televising his tape, making him the hero he wanted to be. Now every loser who wants his 10 minutes of fame can get a whole week by making a video tape and killing a bunch of people.
  
  Way to go NBC. Didn't we learn from the video tapes of the Columbine killers that were on the news? Where do you think this little punk got the idea?
- iceperson, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6"It's the difference in social status. People will do crazy things for money and/or power. I would argue that the spread between the very poor and very rich in Switzerland is much less than here in the U.S."
  
  That would be logical if the gun violence in America today was poor on rich instead of poor on poor (black on black.)
- gini1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@Buelldozer
  >In many cases EU states have a HIGHER rate of violent crime, just fewer of them are committed with firearms.
  
  Well a cite would have been nice... That difference can be explained by differences in reporting. Those "crime rates" are actually official reports written by police officers. If police officers in Europe report every street quarrel they disperse without taking anyone in custody and American counterparts file a report only when someone is taken in custody those numbers get skewed pretty quick.
- tennisOK, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9 @Buelldozer 10 minutes ago Block/Report this User
  "American's are not more violent than other people. The overall violent crime rate in the United States compares favorably with other developed nations.
  
  In many cases EU states have a HIGHER rate of violent crime, just fewer of them are committed with firearms."
  
  This is utterly untrue.
  
  http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
  
  The only EU country with a higher rate of violent crime is Poland, which only entered the EU a couple of years ago and has huge economic and social problems. The nearest established EU country is Portugal, which has about half the rate of homocide compared to USA.
- prwlives, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1No, it's the guns.
- Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14@tennisok,
  
  First let me say that the Digg comment system SUCKS!
  
  Second, you're comparing murder ONLY. Go to the site you linked and check things like "assault" where the US & UK numbers are almost identical.
  
  Try burglary where the US ranks below Denmark, the UK, Finland, CANADA, AND ***SWITZERLAND***.
  
  How about "rape"? The US has half the rape statistic that CANADA does, or AUSTRALIA.
  
  The UK also ranks higher than the US in Robbery.
  
  Heck man, go look up "Total Crimes per capita" and compare! The UK has a higher total crime rate than the US does!
  
  This is from your own link!
  
  Do you REALLY believe that "violent crime" only means murder???
  
  It's pretty sad when I use your own "evidence" to beat you down.
- Baconn, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@jeffiek
  
  From the article:
  
  "Switzerland is one of the world's richest countries, but has remained relatively isolated."
  
  It has none of the social problems associated with gun crime seen in other industrialised countries like drugs or urban deprivation."
  
  To put it bluntly: Switzerland has no poor people out killing each other over drugs, and no immigrants fueling high crime rates.
- veersite, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Well, first off, we're not pussies. If a bunch of minorities went on month long nightly riots like what happened in France a while back, around the 4th night or so they would have started to be picked-off by pissed-off folks. They might not have respected the police, but I doubt they would have liked becoming "target practice."
  
  Go solve your own problems, oh lazy Socialist one. You might want to start memorizing the Koran. It's going to be your national religion in about 20 years.
- veersite, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Dude... the drive-by's would eventually drop off. Ever hear of Darwin? This Christian has... and doesn't have a problem with applying it to both biological and social systems.
- teaguehopkins, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@Buelldozer (#6415324)
  Do you have references to back that up?
- blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16"To put it bluntly: Switzerland has no poor people out killing each other over drugs, and no immigrants fueling high crime rates."
  
  Nice try. I live in Lausanne, Switzerland and I am part of the 35%+ percent population of foreigners (mostly explained that you don't get a swiss passport just by being born here).
  
  I only killed 6 people this week, your comment is unfair.
- Gir53457, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Individualism is what make Americans more aggressive. We put ourselves first than focusing on fitting in.
- LGgeek, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3NO it's because EVERYONE is armed, only an idiot is going to try something.
- mb96net, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@blakestah
  That study is BS! First of all they say that the # of crimes is inversely proportionate to # of guns, but they don't compare the number of GUN RELATED crimes. How can a city with 0 guns have a gun related crime? It can't.
  
  People should be able to own rifles. If your country is invaded are you going to defend it with a 9mm? You'd use a rifle (as the military does). If no one could buy a hand gun, gun related crimes would go down. Something like 80% of gun related crimes are committed using hand guns. People don't rob stores with rifles, because you can't conceal them as easily.
  We'd all be better off if no one owned a hand gun. Every application I can think of for a hand guns should have non-lethal replacement...rifles are OK.
- maisis00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ veersite [Well, first off, we're not pussies. If a bunch of minorities went on month long nightly riots]
  
  Dude! You are an idiot! In 1992 (16yrs ago) L.A. saw six straight days of rioting by an enraged group of African-American citizens (a.k.a. minorities) which was sparked by what they felt to be an unjust verdict in the Rodney King trial. Eventually the national guard and later even the United States Marines' 1st Expeditionary Unit were called in to L.A. to quell the rioters. It was crazy and I have to tell you more than a little surreal for boy (me) in a Midwest farm town who was watching it on CNN.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots
  
  By the way the citizens who were considered of the majority population were not up in arms and at their front door to repel the rioters with their magnificent ways with a gun. Most were cowering in fear within their residences hoping that the would not be beaten to death by an angry mob.
- wangl3r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0What about England? They had, I believe, 46 gun-related homicides last year. New York City had 400 something. In England, handguns are banned. What is so hard to understand? Less guns=less shootings.
- strebormj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Maybe the real lesson here is that it isn't the guns, it's the people. What is it about Americans that makes them so violent?"
  
  What is it about some people that make them think that a small percentage of the population is representative of the whole?
subman697, on 10/12/2007, -22/+31This country was built on the gun as conqueror, not protector. America has a long history of using violence for our means. It wasn't called the "Wild West" by accident, for example.
- d00ley, on 10/19/2007, -0/+42Actually the "Wild West" is a myth created by the newspapers. The industrialists in the East were having major trouble losing their laborers who were heading out west to be free. They began funding and buying newspapers and created the concept of the "Wild West", creating the illusion of extreme danger.
- NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4@d00ley -
  
  Regardless of the myth, the history stands. It's not what actually happened that matters, it's what people believe.
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6 by subman697 16 hours ago
  
  "This country was built on the gun as conqueror, not protector. America has a long history of using violence for our means. It wasn't called the "Wild West" by accident, for example."
  ----------------------------------
  Actually many "wild west" towns and cities had very strict gun laws. Outside the cities, where there were no laws, there was very little gun violence other than clashes with indians and other countries.
  
  There is a difference between conquering and crime. Although the conquered might disagree.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Although the conquered might disagree."
  Let American indians murder your family and take your land and see whether or not you think it is a crime.
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1 by Osjpr on 4/30/07
  
  "Let American indians murder your family and take your land and see whether or not you think it is a crime."
  ---------------------------------------------
  Tiresome emotional ploy. A crime has to violate a law to qualify as such. As someone who spend a part of his youth on a reservation, who's father was a member of the tribe, I can say "***** YOU". What happened to the american natives was hideous, but in the context of this discussion it does not have much relevance.
  
  Grow up!
Junkyarddawg, on 10/12/2007, -9/+48I bet the situation in Switzerland is the same as in Sweden, which also has a citizen-militia armed with automatic weapons:
the murder rate is low due for social reasons, and the militia and its automatic weapons actually _raise_ the statistics somewhat, since they're involved in a couple of shootings per year.
That is, the murder rate isn't low because they're armed, it's low despite.
- eddyc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27Agreed, Switzerland is one of the most unique countrys in the world, giving every household a gun in say Ireland for example would probably raise the amount of shootings per year.
  
  Swiss people seem to have a greater sense of social responsibility than citizens of other western countrys, they are the only direct democracy on the planet, and they are very well off, so there is no social inequality to speak of, consequently there is very low crime.
- alpinweiss88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7All you really need to do is look at their foreign policies and how the rest of the world views them. The people who really need to defend themselves (or do pre-emptive strikes) are the countries that have governments that are either a-holes or who are insane.
  
  There are two things about the US:
  1. The VAST majority of our violence and crime is self-imposed. Nobody is invading our shores.
  2. We have a horrible reputation in the rest of the world (kind of a love/hate thing actually) because of how our government behaves.
- lensman00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It seems there are a pair of connected issues (gun rights and USA military hegemony) that would best be dealt with by devolving authority over arming and training citizens to the states. The USA federal monopoly on military force is frightening, both to those outside the country and to many of its own citizens.
  
  With a military run by the states, if states chose to make alliances to defend against and/or avenge military attacks, then fine. If other states wish to opt out, that would also be OK. Certain states (probably those with currently strong defense industries) would specialize in research, development and manufacturing. The federal role would be limited to its constitutional one to "regulate commerce" amongst the states.
  
  Under this system, we probably would have a Switzerland or two. We would probably have a couple of Zimbabwes, a France and a Japan as well. As long as citizens remained free to move among the states, it would probably all hold together.
- MrKite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Personally, I think it's like comparing apples to oranges. You're talking about 6 million people vs 300 million people.
  
  Also, a mass-murderer will find other ways to do it if a gun is no longer a convenience.
Itazura, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22"Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives."

Training, not guns, is what keeps the rate so low.
- clickdown, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I totally agree - it's the fact that everyone has been brought up with guns in their lives as a means of defence. It's not bulletproof (pardon the pun!) but it works pretty for the Swiss. Trying to re-educate an entire nation such as the UK or USA is virtually impossible
- tszarathstra, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Yes, the Swiss have a low crime rate and lots of guns. Then again Japan has a low crime rate and not even the police have guns. I have a feeling it has more to do with culture and wealth than with the guns. After all a large number of Americans own guns, yet houses still get broken into and people still get mugged.
- dfdemar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Didn't the mayor of Nagasaki get murdered by a gunman a week or two ago?
- GnuTzu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Quite true.
  
  And, as I've stated elsewhere, our mainstream media provides almost nothing in the way of a positive examples with regard to the safe and proper handling of weapons.
  
  We need more in the way of healthy mentoring in the safe handling of weapons in our culture (in all socioeconomic classes) to contrast the romanticized violence that permeates main-stream culture.
  
  But, then education is very much the key to solving many of our socioeconomic problems.
- bsdfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1He was killed by the Yakuza, or the Japanese mafia. People in organized crime are pretty much the only ones with guns in Japan.
trevorsnyder, on 10/12/2007, -3/+30It's the culture stupid.

No, not you with the gun. I like you. Please don't shoot me sir.
- nickerj1, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Governments and countries are optimized and perform more efficiently when all members of the entity are alike. It's mainly dependent on race, religion, and money, which indirectly includes morals and other areas.
  
  People preach about how great diversity is over and over again. I look at the current state of things in America and continue my belief that there is way more harmony in a non-diversified society.
  
  Prime example: Switzerland. Though their religion split is interesting.
- tennisOK, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@nickerj1
  
  Your assertion is as racist as it is factually incorrect. Did you know, for example that Switzerland actually has three languages, german, italian and french? That doesn't sound like social hegemony to me.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@tennisOK,
  I think that Europe as a whole has its fairs share of hegemony (look at how many European countries treat Muslim immigrants), but you make a good point.
- jiggawoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ TennisOK
  
  Actually there are 4 official languages of Switzerland.
  Romansch is pretty much a bastardised version of Latin that was left over from times of Roman occupation.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh
  (I hate to use wiki as a source, but it's got a pretty good definition).
mrgreg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11As much as I would LOVE America to be like this, we need to institute some mandatory military service time for individuals to train them properly on firearms, and make them responsible, before this would work.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yea, and give them the good education and other basic benefits that Switzerland gives its citizens also!
  
  Here is a quote from www.about.ch:
  
  "Private schools usually are expensive and people tend to think that students of private schools probably didn't make it at the public school." (http://www.about.ch/education/index.html#CH_Edu_Gymnasium)
- MadOgre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Mandatory service... that has got to be the most stupid thing I've read on Digg today.
  Our volunteer Military is out there to protect our Freedom and yet you want to take that freedom away with this mandatory obligation. Nice. Now shut the fark up.
rmetzger, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2of course you cant rule out stupidity as a cause ...
ucbrave92, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15do your research before you throw out the ignorant "wild west" claim. the REAL west wasn't so wild. at the time it was a new land and people were exploring and traveling. stories would get passes back to the east and of course were highly exaggerated. also the western novels that were written at the time were also highly responsible for this idea of the "wild west". why do you think the shoot out at the OK corral was so famous? because in reality it was unusual for there to be a big gun fight. don't get me wrong there was outlaws and some gun fights, but the idea some think is real is that every day there were standoffs and train robberies and that just isn't even close to reality.
swhite76, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15While I'm sure the US and the Swiss have a lot in common, look at the differences.

How do you compare a country of 6 million with the US? I dare say the US is far more diverse -- racially, ethnically, religiously, etc.

Mere geography shows the two countries are hardly analogous. Switzerland is a landlocked neutral nation. Doesn't; exactly compare, does it?

The linked article is interesting, but can't add much to the ongoing gun discussions in the US.
- ronar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Switzerland is quite a diverse country. There are 4 official languages and foreigners make up over 20% of the population. Perhaps not as diverse as the United States but it is definately one of the most diverse countries in Europe. Being a landlocked country makes it far easier for illegal immagrants to enter, since Switzerland borders 4 countries (excluding Lichtenstein).
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland/People
  
  But I totally agree with you that it doesn't add anything to the gun discussions in the US. The culture is completely different:
  The attitude is more laid back, as for instance the media doesn't fearmonger all the time.
  The gap between the rich and the poor is much smaller than in the US (the country with one of the smallest gaps is Japan, google Gini-index).
  There are no gang related crimes (drug policy is quite relaxed and prostitution is completely legal).
  There are no homeless people (there is an underground group of homeless youngsters in their teens and twens though, but that's by choice; they could get support from the state any time they want, but refuse to)
  And of course the country is much smaller, so it's not easy to hide (from crimes)
  
  There are more differences, but i'm to lazy to continue.
- wreckingcru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thank you for finally stating the biggest flaw in the "Switzerland has, so can we!" argument!
  
  Just because it works in a small, neutral, peaceful nation in ANOTHER CONTINENT, it does not mean it will work in America.
  
  I have a Swiss girlfriend, and family living there as well - and there are definitely lots of immigrants as well as their own (slightly more upscale) version of the "projects". They are also poor and uneducated etc.
  
  This may be a very sweeping generalization - but I firmly believe it boils down to culture and the overall attitude of people. Americans are MORE LIKELY to go on a shooting spree with or without gun control than the Swiss. That's cold, hard history talking. Whether the reason be the desire for fame, the "bully" factor, plain psychopathy or celebrity obsession, Americans are/will always be a lot more trigger happy than the Swiss.
  
  A little analogy for the cultural differences: (I'm originally from India)
  *The "left-turn yield" system on American roads (yield to oncoming traffic when turning left) would NEVER work in India. Because culturally, we just don't care about such "rules". Indians will just take the left turn, like the road was given to them as dowry.
  *Similarly, the "leave-a-penny, take-a-penny" on every convenience store counter - it works so well here - people leave and take pennies as needed. In India, you'd never see anyone leaving pennies, in fact they'd come in the store JUST to take some free penny.
ghettron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28I have recently moved to Zurich, Switzerland and I must say that it is little shocking to walk on to a train and see ten 20-somethings with sub-machine guns going home for the weekend. However, I have never felt safer on the streets anywhere in the world. The swiss idea of 'the bad part of town' is laughable to someone from LA.

I think this really does prove the theory that guns aren't the problem. Its people and society that are the problem. Even though everyone has a gun, the swiss are not in love with guns. In fact quite the contrary. It is a very strange mindset for an american to understand.
- roodammy44, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I went to Norway the other week and their "bad part of town" in Bergen was laughable too.
  In London, the bad parts of town will get you beat up or stabbed just by walking through them.
  I know, because that's exactly what happened to me and my friends.
scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The Swiss railway system is apparently almost sci-fi in its quality.
- RomanH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's not as sci-fi as the Japanese one, but we're working on it. :-)
Vispo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+36This article isn't a justification for owning a weapon.
If you think it is you completely wrong.

This Article has some major flaws.
I was trained on a Sig 550 and continue to own it till I'm not in the reserve anymore.
We never change to a bolt action riffle, this one was taken out of service in 1957 or so...
its not a M57 (sturmgewehr 57?) sorry its a sig 550 its a riffle with 20 rounds NATO ammo.
With it you have 50 round box at home.
we have 6 weeks minimum in weapon, ABC training and tactics.

Main point we have about 18-21 weeks where you are indoctrinated to take responsibility of your gun.
if ANYTHING happens with this gun, its YOUR fault.

But now the major thing, yes we have allot of guns in this country. But talking about how well we do with it, is complete nonsense. In my opinion (this representing the majority after new statistics) we should leave it in a armory and the army should take care of it.
Repeatedly we had family dramas with this weapons, that i think could be avoided.
What was a good point is that we know the responsibility that comes along with this gun.

I saw to whom they gave this weapon and hell some guys shouldn't have any gun at home. For their and our security.

Sorry for my bad English
- GoEKniGhtofNi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8you're right!
  I'm Swiss to and have to agree 100% with what you said! Some peoples should never get a gun. It wouldn't do them any good.
  
  Besides that. Over 60% of the Swiss population would vote against keeping the army weapons at home.
  To get a training how to use your gun and have the responsibility is a good thing, to have a firearm at home next to your jacket and shoes is stupid.
- drdank, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8No apologies necessary as along as you continue to make those delicious chocolates.
- MadOgre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sig 550... great rifle. I'm waiting on my SIG 556 to get in. It will rest in my vault next to the Vector Arms underfolder AK-47 I just picked up.
  
  /Libertarian Gun Owner who hasn't killed anyone today.
YixilTesiphon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Along with the fact that more guns do tend to cause less crime (yes, even in Somalia), there's the fact that it's impossible to remove any product from a society. After all, cocaine is illegal, isn't produced in the United States, and is still widely available. You can shut down every gun factory in the country, order every citizen to turn in their guns, and you won't get rid of the guns.
david927, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I'm also an American living in Zurich, and I get tired of the same story over and over again about Switzerland's love crime rate and high gun ownership. First, the ammo for those guns are in cans, you have to use a can opener to get to them, and opening a can is a big offense. No one is afraid of getting shot by one of these guns because they are NEVER loaded. Second, the crime rate is low because the European crime is low, and because it's a much richer country than most, including America.
- gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3But what about the guns that are sold to individuals? Sure, the ones that the males are forced to keep may have the ammunition in cans, but there are many more guns than that and as this article said, there are few restrictions on buying them. Do people just buy guns they're never going to load?
- dblbender, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0...but you can get the right ammo at any gunshop in Switzerland, it's no problem if you want it. You just can't open that one official can.
DrHelpU, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1you know why coke is so popluar in the developing world?

the same logic: people there think why americans so rich? because they drink coke every day. do we want to be as rich as them?
- Syphax23, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3coke is popular in africa because it's drinkable, and potable water is often unavailable
- qmeister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6no offense to the mentally challenged, but that was about the most retarded statement I've ever read...
hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24Works there because the Swiss aren't crazy *****.
- NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Plus they have those cool army knives.
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2by nsmike 17 minutes ago
  + 1 digg
  Plus they have those cool army knives.
  ----------------------
  
  To cut the cheese with? :P
- CedEx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3To cut cheese with?! No you idiot, to cut their chocolates...
  
  Can't take you out anywhere.... sheesh..
EclipseGSX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4In the U.S., states that have laws allowing citizens to carry guns have lower crime rates. If I were I criminal, I would be much less likely to creep up on someone looking to steal their car or break into their house if I felt like that person might be carrying a weapon. The inverse is true where guns are not allowed -- in that case, only criminals have firearms, and law abiding citizens have no way to protect themselves.
- DesertFlyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Is Arizona the only exception? People carry guns around like packs of gum here and our crime rate is still extremely high.
stustyle, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2"Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives."

No Thanks.
- klang, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"No Thanks"?
  
  Well, then you can't live here .. that's the point. You do not have the choice to say "no thanks" to enjoy the freedom that the system provides without taking part in this... besides; don't you love your country? Don't you want to defend it?
- qmeister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@klang, no, stustyle wants to enjoy the freedom other people pay with their lives for and pay nothing back...that's the problem with the US...people live under an umbrella of freedom, but don't have to do anything for it. I live in the US and served 5+ years in the military...I'm not claiming to have done anything special or saved the world, but I think instituting mandatory 2 year enlistment is a good idea. It will give some of these piss-ants who know nothing about what it takes to keep a country free some knowledge and discipline....and, I have three kids....I think they should do something when they are old enough.
- WebCester, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You can choose to peform civil service instead of serving in the army. Only catch, it's longer than military service, and it's pretty hard to get into. You need to prove that you have major moral qualms about serving in the army.
  
  That's the way I've chosen, precisely *because* I'm a patriot. I'd rather perform a sane and useful service for my country than cost it thousands of francs for no good reason and walk away with military training I'm never going to use.
reticulate, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Yeah, but Swiss culture isn't exactly known for its infatuation with firearms, is it?
jdbeast00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"But this does not explain why Switzerland, so often thought of as a peaceful country, should have so many family killings"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4755143.stm
- hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Okay, maybe they are crazy *****.
- psyjoniz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1damn.. so maybe they are all just boiling inside? if they ever did go to war, oh man.. like that scrawny kid who never hurt nobody but got messed with one day in the schoolyard and did things to his antagonizer that scarred onlookers for life. :|
- HarryGldfarb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ok not entirely related but I witnessed something happen when i was in Switzerland that might suggest it's cultural:
  
  I was outside my hotel in Basel at about 8am when a man and a woman came out on the street a couple doors down. They were yelling at each other until the man punched the woman in the face and knocked her to the ground. I started to go see if she was OK but the dude was big and staring me down. I went inside to tell the receptionist at the hotel to call the cops. She says, "It's ok, they drink and do drugs all night. It happens all the time."
  
  I'm thinking their tolerance for minor crimes (teens were always smoking pot on the riverbed in plain view, and a few looked like they were on heroin) somehow extends to domestic violence. I know the situations in the article were much more extreme but i wanted to share my story.
- WebCester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You're dead wrong. Having high tolerance towards pot smokers and performing a major service to the community by keeping heroin addicts honest and non-violent by *giving* them heroin and methadone has nothing to do with domestic violence. And if you think the Swiss police tolerates minor crimes then you have a skewed view of them. We're practically a police state, but in a good way. No one here fears the police, they are actually your friend and helper and it's very rare that they abuse their authority. Having army weapons at home certainly helps to escalate domestic disputes into domestic violence, and I'm all for putting them in the garrisons where they belong.
  
  Basel is one of the most progressive cities in Switzerland and I'm proud to live here.
  Rant mode off.
- paratroopamac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2mhh... i live in basel too, and even the "ghetto" here (4057 & 4058) is a really nice place where people from all over the town come to shop, party, have a drink or just relax.
  and hell does swiss society have a drug problem (due to the relaxed policies), i mean, i'm a pot smoker too, but compared to any other country i've ever been (amsterdam doesn't count . it's all stoned tourists there) we are a high people, damn we are...
  
  but the reason there are so few killings and violence in switzerland is because the poor and the rich (while not on a same level) play fairly well together. we LIKE each other. really.
  
  i previously lived in some of the richest parts of basel (Gellert / Riehen), and now i live in the Kleinbasel (the "Ghetto"), and even if the first months were strange, i now love it and i would never want to go back, because even in this part of town where there are easily more than 50% foreigners, nobody attacks people for no damn reason.
  and that cultural mix makes everything so vibrant and full of live. if there is a fighting at 3 o clock in the morning, all people open their windows and come out of their houses to see what's happening. because they care.
  
  so put it however you want, but swiss people (even immigrants) try to function together as good as possible, and that's where the strength, wealth and peacefull state of mind comes from. we are one.
- WebCester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nice to see another Basler using digg. So far I've counted at least 3 of us. I currently live in Riehen, but before that I lived in the St. Johann (4056), which is also a bit of a "ghetto" in the understanding of most people. But in the whole time I lived there I was never mugged and I never even thought about the possibility. I've only been mugged once in the whole time I've lived in Basel (almost all my life), and that was in front of the Münster, one of the richest parts of the city, and it was more a beat down than a mugging. Some psycho with a knife threatened my friend and me for no good reason and proceeded to slap us around until my friend reasoned with him in Turkish and he went away. Weirdest ***** I'd ever experienced. He kept saying we Swiss were responsible for 9/11 (WTF?).
  
  Of course we also have our fair share of psychopathic youth "gangs" looking for fights, but I was surprised the first time I met one of those because after their initial provocation they insisted on a fair one on one fight, which my friend won by submission. Then they just walked away. Any other country, I'd be afraid of getting stabbed or even shot. Damn I love it here.
  
  End of off topic rant. Digg me down if you want.
  /should get a blog
evcarforum, on 10/12/2007, -13/+10it helps when you have no "brothas" in your country.
thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4While it's nice to assume a correlation between lower gun crime and higher gun owernship, I don't think you can just make the leap. Personally, I love guns. I competed in marksmanship competetions for literally over a decade. But, I don't think that the issue with guns is how available they are. I think it's how many are in the hands of trained, responsible people.

I really believe that before owning a gun, you MUST complete a gun safety course... not any of the one-day-here-ya-go things... I mean a real course in gun saftey, use, maintenece, and ramifications of use (think of the "blood on the highway movies" from drivers ed).

Background checks are a great idea. But I don't believe in registration... (I know... y'all think I'm contradicting myself on that one.) Also, you should have the "cool-down" waiting period and be able to present your certifcation of the course I mentioned above plus any other licensures required by your state.
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2 by thcobbs 24 minutes ago
  + 1 digg
  
  "I really believe that before owning a gun, you MUST complete a gun safety course... not any of the one-day-here-ya-go things... I mean a real course in gun saftey, use, maintenece, and ramifications of use (think of the "blood on the highway movies" from drivers ed). "
  ------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  This would make sense if most gun deaths were attributable to accidents. The reality is most gun deaths are attributable to gangs. So how would training help?
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@boondogle
  
  Well, first... you're assuming that the guns owned by the gang members were legally purchased.
  
  Secondly, I forgot to include "a basic marksmanship course" in my class definition. While this won't stop gangs from killing people, maybe it will reduce the death of bystandards in a gun battle.
- scythefwd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree 100%. Your ideas almost completely agree with my post earlier. Think of the class completion certificate as your license. No registration of firearms, but you can bet they will keep track of class graduates. So basically its tracking of who can own but not what they own.
  
  Dugg up!.
  
  funny aside : my capta was pebck (think digg is telling me something?)
Subiklim, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Oh gee, that's brilliant. Force citizens to be soldiers.

Why didn't we think of that? Oh wait. We're a free country.
- klang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6.. a free country that uses two thirds of the national budget on defending yourself ..
  
  Switzerland, minding it's own business, making sure that nobody even THINKS about messing with them, thus, enjoying a very high standard of living... I don't see the problem. (and I am not from Switzerland)
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Subiklim
  
  If they don't like it, they are free to move to another country.
- DreKor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Switzerland is a pretty damn free democracy. However, their military is, primarily, a national defense force. They don't usually deploy internationally and they try to stay out of international conflicts. People have less of a problem with joining the military when they think they won't be sent off to war.
- trilks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Force citizens to be soldiers."
  
  You mean like a draft? I seem to recall having one of those in this free country. (this = USA)
- Pseudorious, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You cannot compare the defensive situation of Switzerland to the United States. Hell, you can't compare any aspect of Switzerland with the USA. Switzerland is a tiny country with a tiny, near-homogeneous population (yes, I know about the languages and canton prejudices). Governance is easy, and made easier by the high levels of decentralization. Switzerland makes a statement, no one cares. Bush decides to eat Chinese food, and China thinks it has a green light to invade Taiwan. Switzerland has also kept its peace by making itself invaluable to the most despicable regimes that have ever graced this planet.
  
  However, America has twice decided in ignorance to feign Swiss isolationism last century. World Wars erupted as the result.
- qmeister, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1That you do nothing for? What have you done in your life to help keep the freedom alive here? I imagine nothing, but I bet you have high expectations. Get off your ass and spend a little time in the military...it should absolutely be a requirement in a free country.
- vroom101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And don't even think about harassing/attacking Switzerland from the air either!
  
  PHOTO: Swiss Air Force (Schweizer Luftwaffe, Forces aériennes suisses, Forze Aeree Svizzere) F/A-18C Hornet: http://www.Airliners.net/open.file/0946082/L/
  (via http://www.FreeRepublic.com/focus/f-news/1737296/posts?page=88 [post #88])
analyze, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6The Swiss and U.S. are SUICIDE leaders with GUNS. One country has strict gun control and one doesn't. But why are they equal in killing themselves (per capita)?

"Researchers at Zurich University published a study at the end of August showing that Switzerland and the United States have the highest rates in the world of suicide involving guns. According to the study, published in the American Journal of Public Health, every day one person in Switzerland commits suicide with a firearm, usually a military weapon."

Source: http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/More_die_from_suicide_than_wars_and_murders.html?siteSect=105&sid=7051323&cKey=1157904394000
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Personally, if I was going to committ suicide.... I think I'd rather use a gun. Quick and done.
  
  Just my 2cents
- nwoshill, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@analyze
  
  So guns encourage people to commit suicide?
- klang, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"every day one person in Switzerland commits suicide with a firearm, usually a military weapon."
  
  .. everybody owns a "military weapon", by law, so that's probably why... besides, if you really want to kill yourself in the comforts of your own home, the gun you have there is a natural choice. As Switzerland is full of mountains, jumping off a cliff would probably be the typical choice if guns were restricted more.
- analyze, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Never mind. I misunderstood the article. I thought the Swiss had tight gun control so I came in with a bias. I just shot my own argument (figuratively). Crap!
- DreKor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2thcobbs did a really good job of illustrating why there are so many gun suicides. nothing else is quite as easy or reliable if you want to kill yourself.
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oops
- Pseudorious, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You didn't read the article and instead stood on your own ignorance as your base. At least you corrected yourself. I wish more diggers had that courage.
- dmeyers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Gee, I guess those other countries should get rid of sleeping pills, SSRI's, MAOI's, cars, bathtubs and electricity in the same room, and rope (or anything that can be used in the same manner as a rope).
  
  No, because that makes no ***** sense.
  
  It is incredibly easy to tell that you have never been severely depressed. When you feel ***** enough, you will do anything you can to get the hell out. Banning guns won't make a difference because you can go to the store, buy a box or two of benadryl, and its game over.
MrBison, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Look i live in Switzerland and the reasons Swiss people do not kill each other are simple..

- Free rational thinking.
- Police are not 90% nazis (like USA)
- People dont get put in Jail for minor crimes (no wonder some small time pot dealer is going to have a gun if he has a better chance of shooting his way out of a situation than giving up and facing 10 years in a hole)
- You can live on minimum wage
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3@bison....
  
  I take offense to your police commnet (and the minimum wage). The LARGE majority of police officers I know actually CARE about the "Serve and Protect" that they live their life under. And to call them Nazi's is insulting to them, and the USA.
  
  As to the minimum wage. Anyone in the USA that ACTUALLY make the federal minimum wage is worth even less than that as a worker.
- Anevilweasel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@thcobbs
  
  There are many people working several minimum wage jobs just to get by for their families in this country. I know of a few who work constantly and do great jobs. There is just nothing in this area for high paying jobs. These are college educated people. Just because YOU may be lucky enough to have employment where you get by does not mean others do...or that they aren't good workers.
  
  As to Cops...I'm sorry, my brother is a police officer and I've yet to meet one that isn't a prick from birth.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Minimum wage in the US is used simply to put a cap on illegal immigrants' wages.
psyjoniz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i think it works because the population at large is not diverse. with all due respect (and i certainly mean no negativity), they are Swiss. and for 6 million people to always take the neutral stance tells me that they are way more likely to be less violent in both their own internal dealings and dealings with the rest of the world.

i don't think their solution would be feasible in the United States for many different reasons. we have too many diverse types of people - many of which are dominant and aggressive. but i certainly believe we could take notes. i don't relish the idea of being forced into a couple weeks of boot camp a year but i also think that our entire country would benefit hugely not the least of which is exercise for the typical lazy American XD~
- klang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2don't they have like 3 official languages in Switzerland? .. i.e. it's a collection of 3 different populations..
- ghettron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Switzerland actually has 4 offical languages. German, French, Italian and a little know, rarely spoke language called Rumantsch (spelling may be different).
opinionsstink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6While I do think gun control laws are pointless and counter productive, I think the solution to the problem is far more complicated than simply removing all restrictions on owning a firearm.

Yes Switzerland has low gun crime, but it is not just because they have no gun control laws. The fact that every man in the country between the ages of 21-32 has been through boot camp and served in their civilian army is probably more important that no gun control laws.

What I would like to see. No gun control laws (simply because it violates the 2nd amendment), but also bring back the state militias. Everyone in a state from the ages of 21-? serves in their state's militias. may even reduce crime in general if everyone goes through boot camp.
ceresian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Remember that this wasn't a black person, nor was he poor, so you can't use either scapegoat. The Culture of Evil, not exclusively American culture, created by a lack of respect for life, violent images and extraordinarily irresponsible music, bears much of the blame. This person ( I will not use his name) was a foreign national influenced by a trans-national poison of violence, combined with mental illness. He should never had a gun. Its also time to push this death culture back. Leaders such as Russel Simmons, must push against this evil since it provides an incubator for lunatics to do their possible worst. Self Defense classes, and licensing for guns with mental testing should be instituted.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/04/23/simmons.bad.words.ap/index.html
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think he was just a crazy ***** who should have been in a mental hospital.
DivisibleByZero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Did they ever wonder why the gun crime rate is so low... but the gun "accident" rate is so high?
- BarneyF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@thcobbs
  
  It's totally over the top to say 90% of Americans cops are Nazis but there is no doubt that policing in Europe is vastly better than America, and that the police in America are much too violent.
  
  In fact if Giuliani is right that his reforms caused the fall in crime in NYC, then clearly, bad policing is the cause of the crime in America.
  
  In Germany you sometimes see teenage girls in the most stunning costumes hitchhiking to the disco. That would be madness in America.
  
  I think the problem is that Americans are incapable of considering non-violent solutions to problems. You see it in Iraq, you can read it everywhere in Digg, you hear it in the theories of the NRA, you see it in the crime statistics, and yuo notice it in the behavior of the police.
DeFex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Problem is, the swiss also have an education system.

who cares if it is the leader of suicide with guns. if people want to kill themselves, they will find a way, so whats the big deal if they use a gun, pills or subway train.
MrBison, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Look i live in Switzerland and the reasons Swiss people do not kill each other are simple..

- Free rational thinking...hardly any extremists
- Police are not 90% Nazis (like USA)
- People don't get put in Jail for minor crimes (no wonder some small time pot dealer is going to have a gun if he has a better chance of shooting his way out of a situation than giving up and facing 10 years in a hole)
- You can live on minimum wage
chicoer2001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Having lived in Switzerland, I know it's not the guns it's the people. There arent crimes period. You never hear about carjacking or knifings or anything. Pot is legal to an extent. Prostitution is legal (it's also taxed) It's not about guns it's about crime in general.
MrBison, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Look i live in Switzerland and the reasons Swiss people do not kill each other are simple..

- Free rational thinking...hardly any extremists
- Police are not 90% Nazis (like USA)...its more like (50%)
- People don't get put in Jail for minor crimes (no wonder some small time pot dealer is going to have a gun if he has a better chance of shooting his way out of a situation than giving up and facing 10 years in a hole)
- You can live on minimum wage
- redfan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You're a small, relatively homogeneous, wealthy nation whose government spends intelligently. Beyond that, Swiss people aren't any better than people in any other country, so you should get off that horse.
- OMGWTFROFLMAOx2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Do the Swiss have regularly televised fear mongering news reports crammed down their throats every night at 5, 6 and 7 pm?
Aurra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Well, they may not have guns, but the knives of their army are quite a force to be reckoned with. Especially if you have to open a bottle of wine, or need a toothpick or something.
redfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6We're a country where half the people can't even freaking drive properly. And we're really going to trust our government to teach people how to use guns?

Switzerland, BTW, has a population of about 7.5 million, with the vast majority being white and Christian. They also aren't run by neocons dumb enough to get involved in neverending boondoggles like ours does in places like Vietnam, Central America, and Iraq. Their government prefers to, y'know, spend its money on helping the people. Without the kind of gap between the rich and poor that we have here, and without the racial and social inequality, the need to shoot someone to take their money tends to decrease.

But yeah, other than all of that, giving everyone a gun here would work out perfectly I'm sure.
- bumblefoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1dugg for a valid point and use of the word boondoggle
- paratroopamac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1word up!
mightyzug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2as many have said, it's the culture. it has nothing to do with the # of guns per capita
ARMADILDO, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3http://www.maybelogic.com/gunsanddopeparty/

We advocate

[1] guns for those who want them, no guns
forced on those who don't want them (pacfists, Quakers etc.)
[2] drugs for those who want them,
no drugs forced on those who don't want them (Christian Scientists etc.)
[3] an end to Tsarism and a return to constitutional democracy
[4] equal rights for ostriches.
- Ibanezfoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Fn' ostritches! Always messing it up for everyone else!
EarthAndStars, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I'm all for gun ownership, but to compare American culture to Swiss culture is ridiculous. Their society isn't anything like the US in attitude. People won't cross the street if the sign tells them not to, even if no cars are coming. They have a very conservative business culture, strict immigration programs, and only a few years ago was there any separation of Church and state financially. Kids in Switzerland can walk the streets at night without adults and be safe. It's a cultural difference, not one of just who has guns.
qwertywatcher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Also heroine is made legalized to prevent heroine addicts from commiting acts of violence to get their drugs. instead clinics in switzerland hand our heroine to those who want it. This does in fact keep violent crime low.

oh and for the record the stats are very biased because swiss gun related incidents per capita are higher than most western nations. You only get the stat you want to look favourable on guns when you

Switzerland and the gun