other gun-friendly countries?

[Sam1911]

Current Costa Rican gun laws leave a lot to be desired, and more restrictive legislation is likely to pass in the near future. Firearm ownership isn’t a constitutionally protected right, but a privilege granted by the government; and as such can be outlawed at any moment.

Thanks for the in-depth explanation of C.R.'s gun laws. You actually reinforce my point pretty firmly when I said, even countries that are considered "more gun-friendly" are not really anything like what 99% of us here on THR would consider even moderately reasonable, compared to the freedoms we are used to.

When we discuss countries outside the USA, "gun-friendly" takes a meaning closer to simply that there is some possible way for a citizen of that country to legally own a gun of some sort. A limited priviledge that is extended by the government, at the whim of that government.

 

[jason41987]

what i would consider to be gun friendly is allowing semi automatics, and allowing them to be kept in the home.. none of this "you can have them, but they must stay at a gun club" crap because thats not really you owning the gun, more like leasing one... and most countries allow bolt actions for the use of hunting

gun unfriendly would be places with compelete bans on guns, gun tolerant would be places that allow bolt actions for hunting, or guns at a range only, gun friendly would allow someone to keep guns at home, and/or own semi automatics and/or handguns... that would be my definition

 

[Sam1911]

what i would consider to be gun friendly is allowing semi automatics, and allowing them to be kept in the home..

Ok. However, if that were the limit of gun rights in a state here in the US, we would all decry that as an extremely gun-hostile state. (Even NJ, CA, HI, IL, etc. are quite liberal with their gun laws compared to that.) Hence, my point.

 

[X-Rap]

Sounds like most of these "gun friendly" countries lean strongly toward socialism and some are dictatorships, none allow guns as a right and using one in defense will probably put you in a much worse place than you could dream of in the US.
I wish this American collective of gun owners would finally assert ourselves here before its to late.

 

[Serenity]

Alaska

 

[Sam Cade]

does switzerland allow concealed carry at all? anyone know?

It is allowed, but only in extraordinary circumstances or as a necessity of employment.

 

[Ranger30-06]

In Switzerland, ccw isn't outlined because all of the "military" men are allowed to keep their guns on them they want to, which many do. I guess you could call it age restricted ccw...

 

[larryh1108]

Well, that would then include a good portion of the US, wouldn't it? IL, NY, NJ, CT, MA, DC, RI, HI, CA - that's over half this country's population

CT?
What am I missing?
Is there something I'm not aware of?

 

[Wanderling]

Sounds like most of these "gun friendly" countries lean strongly toward socialism and some are dictatorships, none allow guns as a right and using one in defense will probably put you in a much worse place than you could dream of in the US.
I wish this American collective of gun owners would finally assert ourselves here before its to late.

If you look at the countries with little or no gun control, actually many are dictatorships. E.g most people don't realize that under Saddam, an average Iraqi could openly buy a fully automatic AK-47. Much good it did them when they tried to revolt in '91.

The truth is, the belief that a few millions gun-wielding Joes could take down a government protected by well trained, well lead, and loyal army is outright silly and not supported by any historical precedent in the last 50 years. This was somewhat true back in the 1700s when the army and the militia had the same exact equipment and the only difference was in training. This is much more true now with all the latest military technology. In every successful revolution since WW2 either the army changed sides, by actively supporting the "people" or by staying out of the conflict altogether, or there was a foreign invasion supporting the insurgents, like in Libya.

To protect the democracy and freedom, 1A and the free election process are way more important than 2A. I fully support 2A but I am much less worried that I need to fill out a form to buy a gun, than that I don't have to show my ID when voting, or that we have the best government money can buy.

 

[Water-Man]

Wanderling,

You don't have enough confidence in what a few million gun wielding Joes can accomplish.

W-M

 

[TurtlePhish]

CT?
What am I missing?
Is there something I'm not aware of?

We have our own little slice of AWB '94 here.

 

[TGT]

Here's a question to the die-hards that would not consider moving to a country that will not allow concealed carry;

If you moved to a country like Switzerland that has a very homogeneous demographic, a higher standard of living then us, and practically no crime, do you think you could settle for only being able to own a fully automatic military rifle?

I'm as CHL holder who could probably get used to living somewhere like that where I can target shoot and hunt with long arms but don't feel the urgent need to carry a pistol for survival because I'm no longer living amongst baboons.

 

[Wanderling]

Wanderling,

You don't have enough confidence in what a few million gun wielding Joes can accomplish.

W-M

The best they can do is win the military to their side.

During WW2 Nazis had no real problems controlling vast territories with tens of millions of people, despite the fact that there was widespread resistance with no real shortage of arms. It got pretty ugly for them every now and then, but they generally held the upper hand.

I don't mean to sound disrespectful to "Joe" - I am merely stating the fact that a 400,000 strong modern army with well train, well equipped, and loyal professional troops will win a war against a 4,000,000 strong army of poorly trained, poorly armed, and poorly led conscripts. Anytime. Except when half of these professionals join the other side - which has happened many times in the history or armed revolts. I can't think of any successful revolution where the army stayed loyal and didn't win. (American Revolution was a colonial war, the Brits weren't fighting on home soil, and more over they were fighting a huge war in Europe that took up most of their resources).

ADDED: The last phrase wasn't exactly correct... they fought all over the globe, and were trying to maintain the balance between defending British colonies, taking more of the Canada from the French, and not leaving the Britain itself wide open. At any rate, the British army was streched to it's limits in the aftermath of the Seven Years War, and they couldn't commit a large number of troops and resources to put down the revolution in the American colonies (and they almost won, nevertheless). And that's when both sides used the same equipment and the only difference was in training - no jets, no drones, no MLRS, no attack helicopters, etc. etc.

 

[Wanderling]

To add... just recently, Obama and the "mainstream" republicans together confirmed the provision of Patriot Act taking away habeas corpus. Any American can be arrested on mere suspicion of terrorism (without any proof) and kept in prison indefinitely without trial. Which is about as un-Constitutional as it gets, but who cares, right ? We still can buy (some) guns, and hey, these mainstream Republicans at least support that ! So they are pro-freedom, right ? Who cares about habeas corpus, most people don't know what it is anyway... 2A is important in its own right, but often used as a lure - hey, we support 2A, vote for us while we destroy your other basic rights without which the democratic free society can't exist. I don't like Ron Paul but he seems to be the only honest politician left in this country.

 

[X-Rap]

By assert I thought I clearly meant joining together at the voting booth and working to create a gun nirvana but since you went to the armed insurrection I will point out how we and many of the free countrys of the world have spent the last dozen or so years trying to root out a few thousand Islamic Radicals that certainly aren't the best trained force in the world.
Either way I will take my chances in America and hope to leave it a better place than I found it.

 

[mr.trooper]

This was somewhat true back in the 1700s when the army and the militia had the same exact equipment and the only difference was in training.

Not the only difference in the least - there were serious logistical and supply chain differences involved with fighting a war on your own soil, Vs. trying to supply an army isolated across an ocean via the technology of the day.


More on topic: Italy doesn't appear to be too bad on Firearms owners - rather similar to living in California, which is still lenient by global standards:
* No limits on the number of long arms
* Semi-auto long arms permitted
* 10 round magazine limit.
* Handguns can be purchased after obtaining a permit
* limit on number of handguns, but its pretty high - something like 15 handguns allowed.

 

[Sam Cade]

In Switzerland, ccw isn't outlined because all of the "military" men are allowed to keep their guns on them they want to, which many do.

That isn't even close to being correct. A swiss citizen can not, repeat, CAN NOT leave their house with a loaded firearm.

The times that possession of an unloaded firearm is legal are very narrowly defined.

Guns may be transported in public as long as an appropriate justification is present. This means to transport a gun in public, the following requirements apply:

The ammunition must be separated from the gun, no ammunition in a magazine.
The transport has to be direct, i.e.:
For courses or exercises hosted by marksmanship, hunting or military organizations,
To an army warehouse and back,
To and from a holder of a valid arms trade permit,
To and from a specific event, i.e. gun shows.

 

[skt239]

Some countries have very strict gun laws but people are armed regardless. As a child I visited Jordan which has strict gun control and in the cities no one had them. While we were there we went into the out skirts which are inhabited by the bedouins (my father was buying my mother jewelry) and everyone there was heavily armed. It was the same in the Egyptian Sinai.

 

[Wanderling]

By assert I thought I clearly meant joining together at the voting booth and working to create a gun nirvana but since you went to the armed insurrection I will point out how we and many of the free countrys of the world have spent the last dozen or so years trying to root out a few thousand Islamic Radicals that certainly aren't the best trained force in the world.

Name one country where the Islamic insurrection prevailed in the face of determined government supported by loyal troops. Undoubtedly, Iraq under Saddam was virtually Islamist-free. May not be in 10-20 years, though.

There's a world of difference between a few radicals in deep hiding, striking here and there, and full blown revolution overthrowing the government.

Either way I will take my chances in America and hope to leave it a better place than I found it.

I'm with you here. All I was trying to say is, 1A and free / untinkered with election process are more important in making it a better place than 2A.

 

[Ranger30-06]

That isn't even close to being correct. A swiss citizen can not, repeat, CAN NOT leave their house with a loaded firearm.

The times that possession of an unloaded firearm is legal are very narrowly defined.

Well take a look around and you see quite a few photos of Swiss military age men walking around with guns on their backs...

 

[M2]

Israel.

 

[jason41987]

im probably going to finish off my second degree somewhere in europe.. i was thinking czech republic but ill have to do more research on the country itself... other places ive thought of studying were switzerland, russia, sweden, or italy... and i was curious about gun laws of different european countries, but ultimately its not a make or break topic and wont have much bearing on my decision as im more interested in the overall experience of spending a few years in one of these places

 

[SimplyChad]

Wanderling
Member



Join Date: November 21, 2011
Posts: 239 Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Rap
By assert I thought I clearly meant joining together at the voting booth and working to create a gun nirvana but since you went to the armed insurrection I will point out how we and many of the free countrys of the world have spent the last dozen or so years trying to root out a few thousand Islamic Radicals that certainly aren't the best trained force in the world.

Name one country where the Islamic insurrection prevailed in the face of determined government supported by loyal troops. Undoubtedly, Iraq under Saddam was virtually Islamist-free. May not be in 10-20 years, though.

There's a world of difference between a few radicals in deep hiding, striking here and there, and full blown revolution overthrowing the government.


Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Rap
Either way I will take my chances in America and hope to leave it a better place than I found it.

I'm with you here. All I was trying to say is, 1A and free / untinkered with election process are more important in making it a better place than 2A.

Does Libya count? I know we evened the odd by taking the heavy guns and airforce from the game but still

 

[Wanderling]

Does Libya count? I know we evened the odd by taking the heavy guns and airforce from the game but still

Actually, Libya, if anything, proves my point. Khaddafi was winning at first, using the airforce, then NATO imposed a no-fly zone. Rebels started gaining, then slowed down, then government troops were on the offensive and it looked like the crazy dude was winning again. So NATO started heavy bombing campaign - heavy enough that in a few weeks they actually almost ran out of ammunition and had to turn to Obama for help (and if he had any guts, he should've told them to remember all the help they gave us in Iraq, and send a few old planes and a hospital ship). So first NATO destroyed Khaddaffi's air force, then they destroyed his heavy artillery and tanks and whatever troops they could, basically reducing his army to the level of a typical rebel force, all the while providing the insurgents with material help, intelligence, money (taken from Khaddafi's frozen accounts). Finally his army generals got the message and started deserting. It was not a successful revolution, it was a large scale foreign invasion using rebels as foot troops but with NATO providing all the technological power of a modern army and lots of other assistance.

 

[Sam Cade]

Well take a look around and you see quite a few photos of Swiss military age men walking around with guns on their backs...

Unloaded rifles being transported. Anything else is illegal.