patrick.net

Switzerland does not "require". Non-military citizens have a rigorous licensing process to obtain a gun. Switzerland has conscription to around age 35, which includes a state issued gun.

Is your cartoon suggesting we need conscription in the U.S.?

Nope, it is pointing out that guns are not the problem.

www.pELwCqz2JfE

indigenous says

Nope, it is pointing out that guns are not the problem.

You only need to look at a state like Vermont which has extremely loose gun laws, yet the 2nd or 3rd least gun crime in the 50 states, to determine that the "gun problem" isn't simply about the inanimate object.

(I own a handgun, and want to buy an AR15, but am by no means a gun nut, but I do realize how the left uses this issue to polarize and pander for votes despite facts)

If you actually knew what the gun regulations and restrictions are for Switzerland you wouldn't hold this up as an example you want to follow. (ammunition restriction, transportation/use while not on duty illegal, and on and on...)

I'm all for gun rights, but this is cherry picking. You could have compared Yemen and Denmark and got a totally different picture.

If you choose to ignore that fact, for whatever reason, watch the video.

In the World the US has by far the highest per capita gun ownership. IIRC around 1 gun per person

Yet is the 111th on the per capita murders rate in the World.

BTW if you want to look at the causes of psycho gun incidents then this has to be on the short list of causes:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/07/gary-g-kohls/brain-altering-psych-drugs-and-the-batmanshooter/

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/05/russia-today/psychiatric-drugs-kill-500000-every-year/

www.gqylvZL845w

indigenous says

of psycho gun incidents

Are you saying the killers were loaded?

junkmail says

Are you saying the killers were loaded?

Yes

*Sigh* It was a joke...
Guns loaded... killers loaded

junkmail says

*Sigh* It was a joke...

Oh in that case, don't quit your day job.

I'm not joking, it is a little known fact. Watch the video it is 2 minutes long.

Relax your grip, kemosabe.
You're not on this planet long enough to make a difference.

junkmail says

Relax your grip, kemosabe.

I am.

junkmail says

You're not on this planet long enough to make a difference.

Then why are we not sitting around the campfire wearing animal skins?

I'd say, posting little videos on a backwater site in the corner of the internet is akin to sitting around a campfire wearing animal skins.

Did you hear that tree fall?

junkmail says

'd say, posting little videos on a backwater site in the corner of the internet is akin to sitting around a campfire wearing animal skins.

You have not heard of Michael Moore?

I'm tired of the gun critics.
Guns are not the threat.
Rocks,sticks.pipes,knives,broken bottles,sharpened spoons
allow crazies to butcher people in massive numbers.
I can't believe Americans allow anyone to own these "arms".
This is where we need control of mass killing weapons.

What about dinner plates used as frisbees to decapitate
many in large crowds,with one throw? When I'm at dinner I keep my firearm in my hand.
One never knows when someone might try to strangle everyone at the table with their napkin.

Hope gun lovers never lose any loved ones from safe firearms. HA!HA!HA!

epitaph says

No, I think all bad arguments should be dismissed.

Did you watch this video?

www.pELwCqz2JfE

Rew says

If you actually knew what the gun regulations and restrictions are for Switzerland you wouldn't hold this up as an example you want to follow. (ammunition restriction, transportation/use while not on duty illegal, and on and on...)

Can't scare Californians with that.

Straw Man says

Can't scare Californians with that.

The funny thing about that video as he goes on to say the cities with the highest murder rate are all democratically controlled. Detroit, New Orleans, Chicago, et.al.

Ironman says

It's amazing what a few facts can do to completely blow up the liberal narrative.

The really amazing part is that they do not see them.

Ironman says

Here's the screen shot of that data from the video.... Funny how it never gets mentioned in the MSM and by Hillary or Obama... I wonder why??

-

Cue standard answer "this is because guns are easy to get elsewhere and we have no real borders between states" in 3, 2, 1....

Gees with all of that government money you would expect that Detroit, New Orleans would be able to do better than that.

Maybe that is not the way it works?

Straw Man says

Can't scare Californians with that.

Switzerland's gun regulations are too extreme for this Democratic Liberal gun owning Californian.

Rew says

Straw Man says

Can't scare Californians with that.

Switzerland's gun regulations are too extreme for this Democratic Liberal gun owning Californian.

They are not much different: slightly more lax in some areas (no stupid distinction between rifles with and without pistol grip, for example), slightly more restrictive in others but are on the same level overall.

Straw Man says

They are not much different: slightly more lax in some areas (no stupid distinction between rifles with and without pistol grip, for example), slightly more restrictive in others but are on the same level overall.

They have far better initial purchasing checks and carry training but they have very restrictive carry and transport laws. They also maintain a list of their registered gun owners, and track them. *GASP*

I take it back, Switzerland would be a great model for the US to follow. They even have the intent of fire arm ownership the constitution does: militia defense.

And while you are at it there should be a training requirement and that everyone have a gun. Not just for hunting but for defense.

Interesting side note is that Hitler wanted to invade Switzerland during WW2 as it was the best way to get goods to and from Italy.
Hitler was advised that if he invaded Switzerland he would not have an army left. IIRC Russia learned something similar.

Any way it would sure help if people did not faint at the sight of a gun.

Better idea, why not pass a law banning killings and terrorism. Why beat around the bush, after all if bans work, than this should work since it goes straight to the point of the matter? Only following liberal logic here.

Clearly we need laws passed to make shooting people illegal!

Rew says

They have far better initial purchasing checks and carry training but they have very restrictive carry and transport laws. They also maintain a list of their registered gun owners, and track them

As I said, I don't see a drastic difference vs Cali situation. Pistols are registered here too, rifles are registered since 2014, transportation rules are practically identical. Carry permit requirements are very similar at a glance.

We can ban weapons. Look how few bales of marijuana, tons of heroin, and hundreds of thousands of 130lb+ people cross our land borders every year.

It should be simple to stop the smuggling of pistols and rifles.

Of course, to help do that, you might need a "Barrier" of some kind. :)

Philistine says

Switzerland does not "require". Non-military citizens have a rigorous licensing process to obtain a gun.

Actually, every male is required to join something like the army reserve. They do some training for about a year, part of which is owning a gun. The gun is theirs to keep, and they do keep them. By picking at semantics, you seem to be trying to mislead people about the truth of the post.

As to conscription, I'll take that over the mandatory draft enlistment any day. Especially when the Swiss rely heavily on armed militia as their standing army is virtually non-existent. Wait, this model sounds awfully familiar, 1776...

indigenous says

And while you are at it there should be a training requirement and that everyone have a gun. Not just for hunting but for defense.

Interesting side note is that Hitler wanted to invade Switzerland during WW2 as it was the best way to get goods to and from Italy.

Hitler was advised that if he invaded Switzerland he would not have an army left. IIRC Russia learned something similar.

Any way it would sure help if people did not faint at the sight of a gun.

Switzerland and losing an army is over exaggerated. Essentially, the terrain makes a large force moving through there fool hardy. You beat Switzerland like you beat some of the Japanese islands in WWII ... move around, and logistically cut off. Yes, the rifles they own are an important deterrent, but its the terrain that really makes this effective. The same could not be said for Poland, or France, which FAR outclassed Switzerland in military might in WWII. Transpose the Swiss force to France/Poland and it isn't like magically because "every man was trained with a rifle" they suddenly turn back Germany or Russia. Quite the opposite. They fall even harder. Again, the point here is the rifle is NOT some magical I-can-now-resist-a-modern-army device. Modern armies are mechanized, have air superiority, and now have intelligence that looks like people are playing video games instead of fighting a war. A group of riflemen is yes, an element of that force, but riflemen alone are just corpses in waiting.

When people pretend they are going to take on an army with a side arm it's pretty juvenile.

I'm for mandatory national service of some sort, of which, something like a national guard service could be envisioned. But I don't think forcing every person toward that type of service, alone, is smart at all. Some people are far more valuable and motivated spending their talents helping the nation in other ways. The US also has no need with the volunteer army it is able to raise, yearly, to mandate that every person need to be trained to defend the nation.

I have yet to witness any American faint at the sight of a fire arm.

NuttBoxer says

Actually, every male is required to join something like the army reserve. They do some training for about a year, part of which is owning a gun. The gun is theirs to keep, and they do keep them. By picking at semantics, you seem to be trying to mislead people about the truth of the post.

They are required to keep the rifle as a military weapon/tool for defense. They are issued enough bullets to fight their way to the nearest post, only. They may only transport that rifle to and from service exercises.

thunderlips11 says

Of course, to help do that, you might need a "Barrier" of some kind. :)

No barrier stops human motivation. Not even the Berlin wall.

I have heard NO single politician in my lifetime call for a ban of weapons or guns outright. Not a single one.