Jump to content

Europa hat ein Problem mit Feuerwaffen


GunBoard.de

Recommended Posts

http://www.firearms-united.com/

From FACE....

Policy-makers and citizens criticize the proposed revision of the European Firearms Directive

The European Commission proposals are considered “rushed” and “unacceptable” according to MEPs who met yesterday to discuss the European Firearms Directive with citizens, hunters and sport shooters.

PRESS RELEASE

Brussels, 2 March 2016 – The Firearms Directive sparked yet another heated discussion yesterday amongst policy-makers and citizens. The proposals, tabled by the European Commission only five days after the tragic terror attacks in Paris last November, have been since targeted from several sides. Harsh criticism is not only coming from stakeholders directly involved in the legal use of firearms, such as hunters and sport shooters, but also from a vast front of Members of the European Parliament, who expressed doubts about the proposals and highlighted areas in serious need of improvement.

Although some points are generally thought to be acceptable, such as the better tracing of firearms and improved transboundary cooperation between police forces, the most recurring and shared critique is the absence of an impact assessment, which makes it impossible to estimate the consequences of the proposed amendments on criminal activities, as well as on the lawful use of firearms.

Representatives from the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of the EU exchanged views during the conference, which was organised with the support of FACE (the European Federation of Associations for Hunting and Conservation). The panel was composed of Mrs. Vicky FORD MEP, Rapporteur for the Firearms Directive, Tomasz HUSAK, Head of Cabinet of Commissioner Bieńkowska (Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs), Torbjörn LARSSON, Vice President, Nordic Hunters’ Alliance, Jürgen KOHLHEIM, European Shooting Confederation, Günther SABLATTNIG, Advisor to the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator, Council of the EU.
MEP Karl-Heinz FLORENZ, President of the Parliamentary Intergroup Biodiversity, Hunting, Countryside, who chaired the conference, commented that “the Commission proposal is rushed and drafted under time pressure. There is no relationship between the legal possession of civilian firearms, such as those used for hunting or target shooting, and the risk of terrorist attacks. I consider it unacceptable to hinder law-abiding citizens with unnecessary or even disproportionate restrictions, which would bring no gain in security in areas that are already subject to sufficient regulations at the national level.” It was clear that the absence of an impact assessment on the proposed measures could have a disproportionate impact on legal users of firearms.

One of the most controversial points is the proposed ban of firearms based on their resemblance to military firearms. While the Commission is not offering any justification for this measure, there is widespread agreement that restricting legal use will have no effect on the black market as legal and illicit markets are not complementary. Concerns were also expressed that common target shooting firearms used for Olympic shooting disciplines and World Championships could be considered as “military firearms”.

On issues concerning minimum age, storage, the time-limited validity of licences and medical tests, MEPs rejected the Commission’s proposal recalling the subsidiarity principle, which enables Member States to adopt legislation tailored to national requirements.

Existing best practices put in place by countries such as Sweden, which guarantee the continuous strict control of authorities over the sale of firearms by means of distance communication, namely the Internet, make a ban unnecessary. MEPs urged the European Commission to avoid discrimination towards specific user groups, such as hunters and sport shooters, by preventing individual owners to sell their firearms on-line, a tool which is otherwise fostered by EU policies.

MEP Vicky FORD, voiced the concerns of many MEPs stating that the Commission did not respond directly to the question asked by her committee. Mrs. FORD stated that the Commission had planned to protect the interests of sport shooters and hunters, but nonetheless the written text was not a reflection of their initial plan.

In his statement, Mr HUSAK, reiterated the intention of the Commission to improve the security of citizens declaring its willingness to constructively cooperate with stakeholders in view of finding common solutions, while denying widespread allegations whereby hunters and sport shooters would be the real target of the restrictions.

“From a hunters’ perspective, it has been a shocking and demeaning experience to be at the center of the discussion surrounding terrorism and illegal trafficking of firearms”, said Torbjörn LARSSON. “Hunters are nature-loving, law-abiding citizens that take great pleasure in the conservation of our natural resources for generations to come. We do not cause trouble. On the contrary, hunters actively invest their time and money in activities that directly benefit society, such as habitat and species management, tracking down game involved in traffic accidents, pest control and mitigating the effects of invasive alien species. Apart from some useful improvements on the traceability of firearms, the Commission’s proposals appear to respond to a non-existing problem.” Mr. LARSSON also explained how banning semi-automatic rifles would negatively impact both disabled and female hunters as well as restrict the hunting and tracking of certain species of large game.

“The European Commission’s proposals are unfortunately a good example of bad law-making” stated MEP Bendt BENDTSEN, Vice-President of the Intergroup Biodiversity, Hunting, Countryside. “This is a case of symbolic politics! The proposed revision is irrelevant for the fight against terrorism, which was presented to be its main objective. Instead, the proposal will affect a lot of hunters and sport shooters who simply exercise their hobby. Hunters and sport shooters are not the ones committing acts of terrorism in Europe, and no legal firearm has been used in the terrorist activities we have seen - only illegal weapons have.” Mr BENDTSEN also stated that it should still be possible for private persons to legally trade firearms between themselves. However, with this proposal, he stated “the Commission is shooting sparrows with cannons.”

END

 

GRUß

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zitat

MEP Vicky FORD, voiced the concerns of many MEPs stating that the Commission did not respond directly to the question asked by her committee. Mrs. FORD stated that the Commission had planned to protect the interests of sport shooters and hunters,

Genau das!

 

Ich frage mich...warum sind da nur Jäger und Vertreter von Jagdverbänden? Wo war ESC? Wo waren die deutschen Verbände? Die ISSF? IPSC? Waren die alle da aber haben es nicht geschafft zitiert zu werden? 

Edited by Zylinderbohrung
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 2 Stunden, Zylinderbohrung sagte:

Genau das!

 

Ich frage mich...warum sind da nur Jäger und Vertreter von Jagdverbänden? Wo war ESC? Wo waren die deutschen Verbände? Die ISSF? IPSC? Waren die alle da aber haben es nicht geschafft zitiert zu werden? 

Weil das eine Veranstaltung von FACE war.

Ich gehe davon aus, daß die Schützen- und Sammlerverbände am 15.03. beim Hearing bei IMCO groß aufsprechen werden.

 

GRUß

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 7 Stunden, Zylinderbohrung sagte:

ne, der war hart am feiern und verkatert, weil man sich immer noch über seinen Mist unterhält und Kompromisse sucht anstatt ihm eine zu watschen und den Quatsch abzulehnen. Der

Man sollte dabei nicht vergessen, dass es vor über 3 Jahren von EU-seite eine sogenannte "Survey" gab, in welcher eine Dame federführend den ganzen Unfug angeleiert hat, obwohl wir als LWB`s(deutschsprachlich) mehrheitlich in der Survey angegeben haben:

Lasst bitte alles so wie es ist und lasst den neuen Mist sein...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 8 Stunden, DirtyHarriett sagte:

Da fehlt was: Bedürfnis Selbstschutz im Gesetz verankert.

"Bedürfnis" - "Selbstschutz"?

Ich hab das zwar auch mal so geschrieben und ist im Prinzip ja richtig, weil wir diesen "Bedürfnisblödsinn" im Gesetz haben, aber.........

..... wer hat denn kein "Bedürfnis", sich selbst zu schützen? Eigentlich ist Selbstschutz eine Selbstverständlichkeit.

Zumindest für die eigenen 4 Wände muß es eine Selbstverständlichkeit werden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Der Berichterstatterin im LIBE-Ausschuss, die linksgrüne Schwedin Bodil Valero (bei der weiß man auf den ersten Blick nicht so recht, ob sie Männlein oder Weiblein ist  :rolleyes:  ) hat ihren ENTWURF einer Ausschussmeinung zum Thema vorgestellt.

Inhalt: wie von einer Linksgrünen erwartet, überwiegend Bullshit!

Sie will jetzt Magazine als wesentliche Waffenteile klassifizieren und Magazine über 10 Schuss in eine neue Kategorie B7a einordnen.

Zudem will sie "technische Kriterien" für ein B7-Verbot von der Kommission erstellen lassen, wie z.B. Mündungsenergie der Geschosse, Kaliber der Munition, Möglichkeit ein high capacity Magazin anzubringen, oder bestimmte Ausstattungsmerkmale (Pistolengriff, Klappschaft, "Kühlvorrichtungen", etc.), also dann doch wieder "Anschein".

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FNONSGML%2BCOMPARL%2BPE-576.870%2B01%2BDOC%2BPDF%2BV0%2F%2FEN

Das ist wohlgemerkt nur ein Entwurf einer Ausschussmeinung und die Ausschussmitglieder müssen erst noch darüber abstimmen.

Trotzdem ist es jetzt ratsam, die deutschen Ausschussmitglieder in LIBE nochmals anzuschreiben und diesen "Entwurf" ordentlich zu zerpflücken.

Haut in die Tasten Leute, es tut Not!!!

 

GRUß

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...was auch noch interessant sein könnte, ist der Passus, dass die Folge-MPUs weniger "streng" gehandhabt werden sollen. Hier wird m.E. die nur nächste Salamischeibe markiert....Das offensichtliche "Abrücken" vom ursprünglichen Text, ausser den Hauptpunkten die Hollowpoint rausgestellt hat, ist ein Farce. Sollte einiges an "Schreibstoff" bieten. 

Gruss, Thommy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Imprint and Terms of Use (in german)