What is Digg?359 Comments
- Lax32, on 10/12/2007, -39/+201Its 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. - Frequency, on 10/12/2007, -39/+153@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. - 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?
- painted82, on 10/12/2007, -82/+164No *****. Who's going to commit a crime when the chances are the the others have guns also?
- swooshonln, on 10/12/2007, -68/+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? - dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -3/+79jrghoull:
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. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -66/+139This is how I think we should solve America's problem with guns.
- vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -62/+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. - 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. - 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. - Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -91/+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! - d00ley, on 10/19/2007, -0/+43Actually 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.
- 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. - Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -11/+48 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. - AntBing, on 10/12/2007, -4/+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, -8/+44A significant majority of gun violence in the U.S. can be attributed to gangs. That's what's different.
- 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.. - 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. - 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... - 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 - 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. - ghettron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30I 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. - trevorsnyder, on 10/12/2007, -4/+30It's the culture stupid.
No, not you with the gun. I like you. Please don't shoot me sir. - 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. - 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. - 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. - 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. - wreckingcru, on 10/12/2007, -9/+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. - 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.
- 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.
- hagbard72, on 10/12/2007, -5/+24Works there because the Swiss aren't crazy *****.
- 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. - 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!?" - Ibanezfoo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21People 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 *****.
- 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. - MusicalGenius, on 10/12/2007, -12/+26A 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. - 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. - YixilTesiphon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Along 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.
- 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. - 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. - 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.
- phmfthacim, on 10/12/2007, -13/+24"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. - Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -10/+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. - 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. - 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? - Oracle95, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12The 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? - 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.
- gappodi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Guns don't kill people. People (crazy) kill people.
The swiss are not crazy. - inactive, 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.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 359 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is