The European Commission DG Home wants to propose a semiautomatic ban for EU individuals, which look similar to military ones. This EC also wants stricter rules for arms control.
Proposals for a new law or amendment to the Directive on firearms will be presented on Wednesday – the author learned from Union source PAP.
Initially the amendment was planned for next year, but the European Commission DG Home analyzing over the weekend the possible reactions to the Paris bombings recognized the need to accelerate the project. So Polish Commissioner Elizabeth Bieńkowska in which portfolio is the common market, has been informed about the work in progress:
Individuals should no longer own a semiautomatical Kalashnikov
Illegally acquired firearms are increasingly being used by terrorists. During Friday’s attacks in the capital of France a vast majority of the victims have been killed by bullets.
In January bombers who attacked in January editors of Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish shop in Paris used similiar weapons. Without intervention by passengers the assasin in August would have produced a tragedy with his gun in a fast moving train from Brussels to Paris.
According to PAP, if the Member States agree to the proposal of the European Commission, individuals will not be able to buy certain types of Kalashnikov – even when the law only allows the civilian semiautomatical version, which is used for the purpose of sport and needs a permit.
The end of the arms trade through the Internet?
The Commission also proposes a ban for buying weapons and ammunition through the internet. It also wants across the EU the same rules for marking weapons so that EC could effectively « follow » these guns, even if they change the owner.
The Commission wants all national registers of weapons combined in a huge pan-European database.
EU countries should also inform about all refusals to grant a permit for a weapon. (This regards export permits to third countries – outside of the EU).
The framework of the Directive would also regulated access to weapons parts. The EC believes that with these parts a licit rifle can be easily converted into a deadly weapon and serve the attacks. The new rules would also introduce restrictions for collectors of weapons, in order to reduce the risk of sales of weapons held by them to terrorists.
There may be restrictions on the sale of deactivated weapons
The EC also wants further to restrict the ownership of deactivated weapons which could easily be coverted to reactivated weapons.
In Poland (and other Member States) there are shops that offer such a weapon (including a semi-automatic) without permission over the internet. Theoretically people are able to reactivate such a gun by reaming the chamber or by welding the barrel.
This kind of gun has been used by the assassin who might have carried out in August his massacre on the train from Brussels to Paris, had his gun not jammed. The jamming allowed the terrorist incapacitation.
The answer of Firearms United founder Andrzej Turczyn, president of Polish ROMB:
Restricting access to weapons is an immoral crusade against law-abiding citizens
Which of the EU countries issued a permit for the islamic gun terrorists from Paris?
- Islamist have not bought their guns in a store on the base of the EC guidelines
- They achieved their weapons on illegal ways.
- They did not have an administrative permission.
None of the terrorist had been able to possess a weapon with a permit. But these laws did not stop the Islamists to commit in Paris a hideous crime.
For what reason – therefore – proposes the European Commission now – after the assassination in Paris – limited access to firerarms for law-abiding Europeans?
I emphasize: law-abiding Europeans! Others – like criminals or terrorists – do not pay attention to the law at all!
Was EC inspired by those who in the future want to be absolutely sure that their own sovereign – or in other words: vulnerable victims- will never threat the EC itself? Or may those people do not distinguish between illegally-held weapons and the ones based on weapons permits?
One way or the other : this application leads to one conviction:
- it opposes to freedom
- it opposes to rational reasoning and
- it declares the proposing EC as enemy to of each of us
We can only hope that there are are other ECs which have their priorities on freedom, on rational reasoning and which support their sovereigns – us people – instead of their elites.