tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post4669326933446370823..comments2024-03-28T02:32:17.979-07:00Comments on EU Law Analysis: Friendly Fire in the European Union? AG Sharpston’s opinion on the validity of the revised firearms DirectiveSteve Peershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05869161329197244113noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-37309012997741959432022-11-22T22:02:27.079-08:002022-11-22T22:02:27.079-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Montor Aimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15079857165697789056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-71382185709256654582019-05-09T11:17:49.872-07:002019-05-09T11:17:49.872-07:00Legally what matters is the aim and content of the...Legally what matters is the aim and content of the Directive, not what someone said in a public debate. Referring to Nazis and Stalin is textbook Godwin's Law. The UK restricted gun ownership without gulags or genocide. Steve Peershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05869161329197244113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-89434862209970574232019-05-09T08:59:36.327-07:002019-05-09T08:59:36.327-07:00> The AG opinion does not say that safety is ir...> The AG opinion does not say that safety is irrelevant<br /><br />You misread me. I did not claim that. I said that Commission spent two years drumming up safety, not mentioning internal market. But now suddenly AG is saying that safety was not primary concern as regards the directive to prove that stripping Czech Republic of the veto power was OK.<br /><br />> Godwin's Law route<br /><br />I am not going down the Godwin Route, I am pointing out something that is very much present in the Czech national debate about the EU Gun Ban and which may not be obvious to someone from outside of the Czech Republic.<br /><br />> nothing good came of the mass killings<br /><br />As regards the cases you mentioned: We do have effective system of gun laws which strike right balance between citizens' liberty, keeping legal firearms out of hands of clearly dangerous people and not feeding the black market. We don't need to have that balance upset by nonsensical EU Directive.<br /><br />Last but not least the perpetrator chooses the victim, the time, the place, the method as well as the tool to commit the act. Most plan the act up to two years in advance. As evidenced by the never ending series of terrorist acts in the EU committed with cars, bombs, knives and illegal firearms.Tomáš Gawron, advokáthttp://gawron.cznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-401424467887458222019-05-09T07:43:04.717-07:002019-05-09T07:43:04.717-07:00Whether the internal market powers were 'abuse...Whether the internal market powers were 'abused' is the legal issue here. It also determines whether a veto in fact existed. The AG opinion does not say that safety is irrelevant - rather that it is a factor having considered the criteria for use of the internal market powers. If you're going down the Godwin's Law route, I would note that nothing good came of the mass killings in Dunblane, Sandy Hook, Christchurch, Montreal etc etc etc etc etc etc Steve Peershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05869161329197244113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-29989188740538279502019-05-09T07:19:06.376-07:002019-05-09T07:19:06.376-07:002/2
4) EU Commission was tasked in 2008 to enact ...2/2<br /><br />4) EU Commission was tasked in 2008 to enact rules on deactivation of firearms - which stand completely outside of the area of legal live firing firearms. Then ONE such firearm was used during attack at Hypercacher (which was sold to the terrorist by a police informant in an operation aimed at following the black market).<br /><br />We saw no mea culpa from Commission for failing to enact the rules on deactivation for 7 years (which they did in the end through Regulation No. (EU) 2015/2403 - i.e. outside of the EU Gun Ban directive). We saw no mea culpa from French authorities for providing a terrorist with a gun in failed operation. No, we saw attack on rights of law abiding citizens as a result.<br /><br />Last, let me get back to the beginning, why it is an issue in countries like the Czech Republic (the case at hand) or Switzerland where they will have a referendum on implementation on May 19.<br /><br />In core EU countries, firearms are reduced to being dangerous sport or hobby tools. Like golf clubs, just more dangerous.<br /><br />But then you have countries like the Czech Republic, Switzerland or Finland, where civilian firearms possession is inherent part of providing security on either national or individual level.<br /><br />Saying that "[g]uns are one of the predominant tools for committing criminal acts" is not only contrary to our statistical and personal experience, but it is outright insulting to all legal gun owners. <br /><br />And in my opinion, it is insulting also to all the victims who were shot by illegal fireams without legal chance of defending self and then bled out waiting for autorities to respond. Waiting needlessly and bleeding for 2 hours 40 minutes in Bataclan, 40 minutes on a street in the middle of Strasbourg, and so on and on and on...Tomáš Gawron, advokáthttp://gawron.cznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-6413420029645608142019-05-09T07:18:33.611-07:002019-05-09T07:18:33.611-07:001/2
Although right to the point of the AG's o...1/2<br /><br />Although right to the point of the AG's opinion, there is a key information missing in this article. Let's take a step back to the basics - issue of legitimacy.<br /><br />1) The pretext for the EU Gun Ban were terror attacks. None of which was committed with a legal firearm, apart from Hypercacher (insufficiently deactivated firearm) and Copenhagen (stolen military firearm) all were committed with firearms illegally smuggled from Balcans. All of them were committed on civilians in countries where governments prevent people from having chance of defending self (legally carrying firearms for self defence). Prevent even those who really want to - primary example being chief editor of Charlie Hebdo, who was denied a license to be able to carry a firearm for self defense.<br /><br />Imagine being a Czech who has the right to carry firearm for personal protection (80% of licensed Czech gun owners have concealed carry license). And an EU politician tells you you would be safer if you are disarmed. That doesn't sound right, does it?<br /><br />2) From fall 2015 all the way to final vote in Parliament and Council the argument was safety and terrorism. Yet the Czech Republic was stripped of its veto right. Now the AG is claiming safety is just a side-issue, it is all about internal market. So was the Commission lying for two years or is the AG lying now?<br /><br />BTW do you remember that the Czech Republic was the last country to sign Lisbon Treaty? The story was "there will never be a majority vote in Council on an issue that is considered of vast importance to any country." Not only was that breached, but EU went a step further by abusing internal market procedure for a legislation on safety where there is no majority voting.<br /><br />3) We Czechs have historical experience than only Nazis and Communists were banning civilian firearms possession. Nothing good followed in either case. Now the idea comes from a guy who is unveiling statues to Marx (and believe me, that is not taken as a joke in countries where thousands were murdered by communists). <br /><br />We can see that the ban on possession and carrying of firearms for self defense in countries struck by terror attacks does not seem to work particularly well.<br /><br />Not only that but the size of the black market in countries like France or Belgium is quite frankly frightening to us. We have historical experience that people did not surrender firearms even when they faced summary execution during the German occupation. Why should they act differently now? Why should we expect different outcome as regards size of black market than in France or Belgium?Tomáš Gawron, advokáthttp://gawron.cznoreply@blogger.com