Tag Archives: rejecting proposal

Firearms United is going to Supreme Court – In Sweden!

The Swedish authorities have been very active when it comes to making life hard for citizens practising IPSC-shooting or other dynamic shooting disciplines that require semiautomatic modern sporting rifles. [1][2]

Several Swedish authorities have been running a campaign for quite some time to ban and restrict the ownership of semiautomatic firearms and for example the previous EU Gunban of 2013 [3] was orchestrated and driven by Swedish Commisioner Cecilia Malmström, supported by shady authorities making up the rules and ”facts” on the fly. Firerams United was originally founded to counter this outrageous and unjustified attack on civil liberties.

We have also heard that Swedish authorities have already denied at least three permits for sport shooters on grounds of the EU Firearms directive – which had not been even finished at the time, let alone in effect.

One common practice is also the misuse of tax payers funds by taking things to court – most of the time the sport shooters win the case and get their permits, and case is conveniently forgotten, but when authorities win a case, it comes a precedent which is used by the authorities to deny permits in the future. [1]

When the latest round of firearms directive was discussed, Sweden sent their best experts in banning firearms to offer their ideologically coloured expertise and push for a stricter firearms directive. In other words, their agenda is now pushed over the Swedish borders and we have had enough of this now.

Firearms United is supporting financially the Swedish shooters to take things to supreme court and put an end to this nonsense.

There is a case currently ongoing, which is widely known among the shooters in Sweden. A sport shooter has applied permit for modern semiautomatic sporting rifle for a sport called ”free rifle” which was denied by the authorities because the sport is practiced on club level and does not have authorized international organization behind it. The defendant has won in court already once, and now the case is going to the supreme court.

The stakes are high:
If authorities win, they can dictate which firearms are ok to use and which are not. It is probably end of the IPSC in Sweden as we know it. Actually, if authorities win, they would have a capability to dictate which forms of sport would approved in Sweden, and which are not.

To put it simply, we do not want the future of for example IPSC in Sweden be in the hands of an person who has stated about IPSC “If they want to play war they can take up paintball” and who has stated in court that scopes of high magnification, weapon lights and picatinny rails should be only allowed for police and military use.

If the free citizens win, they will have a powerful precedent on their side.

As usual, the authorities (mis)using tax payer funds so there is no end to their war chest. Swedish shooters have been running a campaign to fund the fight which might cost as much as 20 000 €, and have collected 90% of the sum. Firearms United will provide the missing 2000 € to fill the war chest and support taking the fight back to the authorities.

Why?

a) As a principle, this case is of utmost importance for the future of civilian firearms ownership in Sweden, as the police authority may severely limit it, should they win the case.

b) Swedish sport shooters have been very active in Firearms United.

c) Authorities can not make rules up as they go.

d) Payback. Opportunity for payback for everything since the Firearms Directive update in 2013.

Time to fight back!

United we stand, divided we fall.

* Clarification: Firearms United is not involved in the case in any other way than that we are following the process and that we decided to donate to the cause. To donate is open to anyone that want to support the cause. Why we decided to donate stands clear in the text above, principally this is a very important case. The text above is to be seen as an explanation and justification to our followers and donors as to why we decided to donate. And to why this case is so important that we decided to support an individual case. Which we normally don’t do.

The donation comes from Firearms United Fighting Fund which was funded by firearms enthusiasts during our common fight against EU directive.

 

[1] https://firearms-united.com/something-rotten-kingdom-sweden-spreading-part-1/

[2] https://firearms-united.com/something-rotten-kingdom-sweden-part-2/

[3] http://www.dw.com/en/eus-malmstroem-pushes-for-tougher-unified-european-gun-laws/a-17170795

WRITE TO OR CALL YOUR MEPs NOW!

PLEASE SHARE AND ACT: EU COMMISSION WILL ENABLE ORIGINAL EUGUNBAN PROPOSAL

Perhaps it is due to our facts which we presented last Wednesday in Brussels and which were not spread by media at all – even when we made a paid press release. It seems no journalist or online magazin forwarded this information, even when it got 1 million views.

We came to know that Commission and the Ministries of the Interior of FR, DE and IT are pressuring Parliament to accept their ban proposal by the end of this year.

They want to ban magazines and semi-automatic rifles: Read more

Please support your MEPs that they do not give in to this pressure.

INFOMATERIAL & ADDRESSES:

Zip-file in English: Link or arguments only

Zip-file in German: Link oder nur die Argumente

XLS with emails: Link

Under the links above, we have prepared for you a help for arguments, a list of emails of the MEPs and a draft for serial emails in word.

Continue reading

Finnish Organizations Issue a joint statement about firearms directive

Finnish organizations have together issued a joint statement to Vicky Ford, the shadow rapporteurs and to the trilogue-participating members of the Commission about the firearms directive proposal:

Dear Ms. Ford and the rapporteurs for the firearms directive:

First of all, we would like to sincerely thank you for the great work you have done so far to improve the technically misguided directive-draft 91/477/EEC Control of the acquisition and possession of weapons presented by the commission. The hard work you have done has not gone unnoticed among the hunters, sport shooters, firearms collectors, reservists and recreational shooters.

We, the undersigned organizations in Finland represent over 600 000 law-abiding firearms owners that have been following the process closely. Even though the current draft is better than the original, it still leaves some room for improvement. We have observed that the process and the proposal of the commission has already shifted the opinions of firearms owners towards euroscepticism and we wish that we would work together to prevent this from becoming a major trend among the citizens.

Currently the following parts of the proposal are generally viewed as unfounded:

  • Magazine restrictions have been tried before, but they have not had any impact on security merely harassment of law-abiding shooters.
  • Firearms categorization by non-technical criteria makes unambiguous interpretation of law impossible.
  • Length restrictions

The criteria above do not make firearm any more or less dangerous, and based on material we have seen so far, the proposal is not supported by facts or statistics, but instead driven by ideological reasons – which should not be the case in legislation.

We are also concerned about the mandatory maximum duration of firearms permit. Finland is a small country and the resources of our authorities are already stretched quite thin to maintain public security. Periodic renewal process would force government to allocate more resources into maintaining the permits which means diverting the resources and budget away from real problem, preventing the movement of the illegal firearms. A major problem these days is the lack of resources of the law enforcement for solving real crimes.

We wish you all the best of luck for the ongoing trilogues and sincerely hope that you can address the points listed above. We are also willing to support you in this process with free technical consultation. Please advise us how we can best be of assistance. Our liaisons in this matter are …

The statement above was signed pretty much by all significant associations, including hunters, firearms dealers, sport shooters, reserve organizations, firearms collectors and even air gunners, as well as FIREARMS UNITED.

finnish-against-eugunban

Open Letter to MEP Marlene Mizzi: We ask for trust and respect

Dear Mrs. Mizzi,

I read your circular email which repeatedly asks presents a question: What you need it for? My name is David Karasek, a spokesman of Czech firearms rights association, and I am answering your question from an Eastern Europe perspective.

To be honest, your reply angered me at first, but then I thought about it more deeply and I saw that it needs more detailed explanation.

Continue reading

Protest 2.0

The IMCO Rapporteur and MEPs tabled 847 amendments. The Compromise Amendments have been drawn up and the committee will vote on the final list on 14th July.

The prospects of a favorable vote that rejects most of the Commission proposals are good. The statements by MEPs during the debate on the amendments indicate majority support for our arguments.

This has been achieved through careful discourse with the MEPsand we shall continue along that path. We draw your attention that no matter how upset you may be with the EU you must always retain a polite and civil attitude in your contacts with MEPs. Focus on the S&D members as the more we win over the greater our chances of success.

When you read our article about the debate, you will see that:

  • EPP, ECR, ALDE clearly support a totally watered down version of the Commission proposal
  • S&D and the Greens are for more stringent measures.
  • EFDD and ENF support an outright rejection of the proposal.

What can YOU do?

Continue reading

Commissioner’s Scandalous Speech led to Rejection by MEPs

Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska ( European Commission ) claimed 100.000 deaths in ten years by legally-held firearms and said law abiding citizens should not own semi-automatic firearms at all.

Snippets of Commissioner’s speech:

  • I think that first we have to limit the access to automatic and semi-automatic firearms.
  • Such assault weapons are not necessary for sport shooting.
  • Hunters in some member states are not concerned at all by our proposal.
  • We have evidence from the last year that during the last decade 100.000 people in Europe were killed by such weapons. Homicide … they were… murdered by using weapons which were at home.
  • Our proposal does not endager sport shooters, really not.
  • Kalashnikovs are military arms. Even when they are semi-automatic or non-automatic at all I am convinced such firearms should not be authorized for sports.
  • To many people were killed, so be more open-minded on this topic.

Continue reading

FIREARMS UNITED’s Reasons for Rejecting Proposal

FIREARMS UNITED is against the whole “Proposal of the European Parliament and Council amending Council Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons (Firearms Directive)”

The reasons:

  • no impact assessment;
  • not in accordance with REFIT;
  • useless rules that do not solve any problem;
  • useless rules which only affect legal gunowners while doing nothing about illegal guns;
  • useless rules which hurt museums and collectors who never were part of the problem;
  • all loopholes (marking, deactivated firearms, alarm weapons) could be handled in guidelines.

Continue reading