Impact Assessment is sent by letter post to all MEPs
Because of the “urgency of the situation”, the commission decided to – against all principles of good administration – to skip an essential part of the process called impact assessment.
It is just what it sounds like – a study on how the proposed directive will impact various stakeholders like hunters, reservists, sport shooters, recreational shooters, firearms collectors to name a few. Despite requests of the MEPs and rapporteurs, commission has failed – to this date – deliver a proper impact assessment to justify the directive proposal.
I think we all know why.
One of the reasons of the conference was to provide a voice to all shooting enthusiasts and an opportunity for each stakeholder group to voice their opinion on the directive. One could characterize it as a live version of the impact assessment.
After the conference, everything was put together by Firearms United team of volunteers and now we have two versions:
King wants an agreement that would restrict the circulation of fully automatic and converted semi-automatic weapons in such a way that safeguards their legitimate use. FIREARMS UNITED agrees with this aim – the safeguard of legitimate use, that is.
King believes that the European Commission, Council and Parliament can come out with effective control measures against criminal misuse of firearms. We don’t think that any possible compromise between their current positions could have any effect on illegally held firearms. It would, instead, have a huge negative impact on legally held firearms, their owners and the civilian firearms industry that supports more than 580,000 jobs in small and medium enterprises.
The next MEP – after Christofer Fjellner (SE) – rejects the proposal: Jussi Halla-aho (FI)
Snippets of his speech:
The large number of ammendments is encouraging as many of them address the most excessive and disproportional details in the proposal. The rapporteur has also generally done a good job.
We should reject not only the proposed and unjustified ban on semi-automatic sporting rifles that are subcategorized A6 and A7, but also the proposed recategorisation of legal firearms as a whole.
This rejection has already been done by LIBE.
We also should reject the nearly total ban of category A firearms which would lead to destruction of valuable historical collections. These weapons are not used in crime and are already strictly controlled.
This ban was also rejected by LIBE.
We should reject mandatory time limits for licenses and medical checks because they only lead to more bureaucrazy and inconveniece without impact on crime.
These were rejected by LIBE.
I support to reject the whole proposal as it violates all principles of good regulation.
The Commission tried to took advantage of the tragic event in Paris last November to push through a largely ideological anti-firearm proposal. This has greatly damaged the image and credibility of the EU.
The attitude of the Commission in the Committee hearings has been incredible.
It is now up to the Parliament to try and undo that damage.