[MP-Ryan]

Croatia

*snip*

Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx

Aside from the incorrect citation, that sounds like a NOT ALLOWED to me. An unloaded firearm is as an effective self defence as my hardened mobile telephone.

To be fair the terms buttstroke and pistol whip don't exist because firearms are as ineffective as a cellphone in melee.  I know I wouldn't want my skull clocked with a 1911. 

Maybe some of you are too young to remember brick phones, but I certainly wouldn't want to be clocked with a couple kinds of cellphone, either

[StarSlayer]

Croatia

*snip*

Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx

Aside from the incorrect citation, that sounds like a NOT ALLOWED to me. An unloaded firearm is as an effective self defence as my hardened mobile telephone.

To be fair the terms buttstroke and pistol whip don't exist because firearms are as ineffective as a cellphone in melee.  I know I wouldn't want my skull clocked with a 1911. 

Maybe some of you are too young to remember brick phones, but I certainly wouldn't want to be clocked with a couple kinds of cellphone, either

Cellphone? Gimme a rotary and I could stove in a knight's helm.  Its got the added bonus of making a pleasant sonorous ring on contact.

[Grizzly]

Croatia

*snip*

Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx

Aside from the incorrect citation, that sounds like a NOT ALLOWED to me. An unloaded firearm is as an effective self defence as my hardened mobile telephone.

To be fair the terms buttstroke and pistol whip don't exist because firearms are as ineffective as a cellphone in melee.  I know I wouldn't want my skull clocked with a 1911. 

My cellphone is pretty damn hard, shock resistent, and water proof. You can use it to beat someones skull to bloody bits and then call the police to pick him up afterwards .

It is not allowed to use the weapon in public places, or in places where the safety of the greater public can be put at risk.

Does that mean that the man who shot that other dude wasn't allowed to use the gun in such circumstance? The street sounds like a public place to me.

[Nakura]

Austria
Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx

Aside from you not directly linking to Austria itself (COME ON DUDE, it's like you are intentionally making this inconvenient to make it harder for me to reply here it is) this entire page is NOT about individual firearm ownership, it's about firearms trade on a nation wide scale (Like on how Qadaffi got himself a bunch of M113s type of scale). It contains NO information at all on individual carry laws.

Belgium
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

See above - also, this data is a survey neatly placed into a 1997 ms Acces database file, which I do not have the skills to open or use - You have got to do better then that.



Bulgaria

*snip*

Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx

Incorrect citation at best. See Austria.
Croatia

*snip*

Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx

Aside from the incorrect citation, that sounds like a NOT ALLOWED to me. An unloaded firearm is as an effective self defence as my hardened mobile telephone.

Cyprus
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Incorrect citation.


Czech Republic

*snip*

In the Czech Republic, private possession of handguns (pistols and revolvers) is permitted only with special authorisation (source). It is debetable wether or not this would have been obtained in this case.

Estonia

*snip*

Source: http://www.legaltext.ee/en/andmebaas/ava.asp?m=022

Ooh. So you need a permit, and you can only carry the weapon without ammunition, which must be concealed in such a way that they can not be stolen? In this case, the victim could have run away before the perpetrator even had drawn his gun.

According to my source, The perpetrator would need to have been trained in the use of the gun, and has to go trough many many background checks, including criminal, medical, mental, and military. He also needs a good reason, and since Estonia has an adequate police force, his reason for "protecting the neighborhood" would most likely not apply.

France

*snip*

Source: http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005618597&dateTexte=vig#

The law which you quoted says "PROHIBITED" unless special requirements are met. I assume you are familiar with the phrase prohibited?

According to my source, handgun ownership in france is prohibited with only narrow exemptions (such as being a target shooter or a security guard).

Germany
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Greece
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Hungary
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Incorrect citations, see Austria.

Ireland (Republic of)*snip*

Source: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1925/en/act/pub/0017/index.html[/quote]

The law itself says that it is not allowed to carry firearms except with a permit. [http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/ireland]according to my source[/url]:

(2) The conditions subject to which a firearm certificate may be granted are that, in the opinion of the issuing person, the applicant --
(a) has a good reason for requiring the firearm in respect of which the certificate is applied for,
(b) can be permitted to possess, use and carry the firearm and ammunition without danger to the public safety or security or the peace,
(c) is not a person declared by this Act to be disentitled to hold a firearm certificate,
(d) has provided secure accommodation for the firearm and ammunition at the place where it is to be kept,
(e) where the firearm is a rifle or pistol to be used for target shooting, is a member of an authorised rifle or pistol club,
(f) has complied with subsection (3),
(g) complies with such other conditions (if any) specified in the firearm certificate, including any such conditions to be complied with before a specified date as the issuing person considers necessary in the interests of public safety or security, and
(h) in case the application is for a restricted firearm certificate --
(i) has a good and sufficient reason for requiring such a firearm, and
(ii) has demonstrated that the firearm is the only type of weapon that is appropriate for the purpose for which it is required

The last bit is crucial. Ireland has a very capable police force, which themselves do not always carry firearms. If the police can do without them, so can a neighbourhood watch.


Latvia

*snip*

Source: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/latvia
[/quote]

Same source also explains how hard it is to get a licence - see ireland.

Liechtenstein
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Incorrect citation

Lithuania

*snip*

Source: http://www3.lrs.lt/pls/inter3/dokpaieska.showdoc_e?p_id=365738&p_query=&p_tr2=

From the same source, article 1 to 5 which you FAILED TO QUOTE tell a tale:

1. Police institutions shall issue permits to acquire weapons classified in Categories A, B and C to natural persons, legal persons registered in the Republic of Lithuania (except entities having a special status, state institutions of criminal expert examination).

2. Permits to acquire weapons classified in Categories A, B and C shall be issued to:

1) natural persons who have the right to acquire weapons of such categories;

2) legal persons, registered in the Republic of Lithuania, who have obtained the licenses specified in subparagraphs 1, 5 and 6 of paragraph 1 of Article 19 of this Law, and who have the right to acquire weapons classified in such Categories;

3) legal persons, registered in the Republic of Lithuania, who carry out professional activities and have the right to acquire weapons classified in such categories;

3. Upon the receipt of applications for the acquisition of weapons, police institutions shall carry out checks with the view of establishing whether the persons who apply for permits to acquire weapons are not subject to the restrictions established by this Law. Checks shall be carried out and decisions concerning the issuance of a permit made not later than within 45 days of the submitting of the application.

4. Persons who have valid permits to carry weapons or permits to hold weapons shall be issued permits for new weapons by police institutions not later than within 5 days of the submitting of the application. Repeated checks indicated in paragraph 3 of this Article shall not be carried out.

5. Refusal to issue a permit must be grounded. An applicant or a person authorised by him shall be entitled to appeal against the refusal to issue a permit to the Commissar General of the Police who must, not later than within 30 days, make a decision concerning the issuance of a permit to acquire a weapon. An applicant who has not received a satisfying reply or who has not received any reply, may appeal to the court against the refusal to issue a permit to acquire a weapon.

As in, only under special circumstances, which would not have been applied in the perpetrators case.

Moldova

*SNIP*

Source: http://www.seesac.org/uploads/armslaws/moldova.pdf
that quote of yours only states what one can do WITH a license, not how one OBTAINS the licence.
However, that licence may be granted for reasons of self defence, so there you go. In this one (1) case, it is likely that the accusant is allowed to have a weapon on him.

Monaco
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm


Montenegro

Physical person may carry weapons on the ground of weapon permit and possess it on the basis of permit to carry it.

Source: http://www.poa-iss.org/CountryProfiles/CountryProfiles.aspx


Poland
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Incorrect citations

Romania

*snip*

Again, license and permit required.

Serbia

*snip*

Serbia is not part of the European Union.

Slovakia
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm
Slovenia
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm
Spain
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm
Sweden
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Incorrect citations

Switzerland

Carrying of arms

1 Any person who carries an arm in a place accessible to the general public or who transports an arm must hold a licence to carry arms. The holder of this licence must keep it on him and present it upon request to the police or customs authorities. Art. 28, para. 1 is reserved.

2 A licence to carry arms is issued to any person who fulfills the following conditions:
a. no objection can be raised against the person for any of the reasons as referred to in art. 8, para. 2;
b. the person plausibly establishes that he needs an arm to protect himself or third parties or objects against a tangible danger;
c. the person has passed an examination attesting to the fact that he is capable of handling an arm and knows the legal provisions regarding the use of arms; the Federal Police and Justice Department lays down examination regulations.

3 The licence to carry arms is issued by the competent authority of the Canton of ordinary residence for a given type of arm for a maximum period of five years. It is valid throughout Switzerland and fees may be payable. The persons ordinarily resident abroad must obtain it from the competent authority of the Canton by which they intend entering Switzerland.

Source: http://www.un-casa.org/CASACountryProfile/NationalLegislation/[email protected]
[/quote]

See bolded part. Debatable whether or not the accusant would have been able to explain that there was an adequate danger (indeed, this whole upheaval is that the victim did NOT posses any kind of danger, and it is unlikely that a licence based on such grounds would be granted, seeing as Switzerland has a very capable police force

Turkey
Source: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/
Ukraine
Source: http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/firearms/index.htm

Incorrect citations.

Though as previously mentioned, I could not find information for a number of European states, such as Andorra, Denmark and Italy.

Gunpolicy.org has all of them. Not that it would help you, given your complete inaduquacy to actually read the sources you quoted.
[/quote]

Gunpolicy.org is one of the main sources I used, and it corroborates everything I said. Go ahead and check for yourself: http://www.gunpolicy.org/

And gunpolicy.org doesn't have information for a number of countries, such as the ones I mentioned (Andorra, Denmark, Italy, etc.). Check for yourself, there is no data available on those nations laws. You can't just ignore inconvenient facts by saying "incorrect citation," when the nations laws themselves, the United Nations and GunPolicy.org all show that the right to carry is legal.

You keep saying "a permit is required to carry in this country," as if that means anything. A permit is required to carry a handgun in Florida as well, a permit that George Zimmerman obtained legally. If Zimmerman had a carry permit in say, Sweden, or any other country and that list, then he could legally carry his firearm.

[Ghostavo]

Is Portugal not part of the EU now?

[The E]

Are you even reading what other people are writing.

Carry permits are incredibly rare in Europe, and a lot of countries restrict them to people who have a really really good reason to have them. You've also ****ed up the quote chain, making distinguishing what you are saying almost impossible to make out.

[Lorric]

Tip: Bottom three paragraphs are from Nakura.

[The E]

Tip: Bottom three paragraphs are from Nakura.

Oh, I know that. But I only found that out after scrutinizing the massive post he quoted. That's bad. That he didn't even make a point is even worse.

[Lorric]

Tip: Bottom three paragraphs are from Nakura.

Oh, I know that. But I only found that out after scrutinizing the massive post he quoted. That's bad. That he didn't even make a point is even worse.

The post wasn't directed at you personally btw, but for anyone who scrolls down the latest posts, so they'll see that first and save themselves some time.

Newb mistake with the quote system I expect. I did that too early on.

[X3N0-Life-Form]

*snip*

It's also usually a good idea to cut out some part of a quote chain once they start getting big. It gets a bit hard to read after a while. Especially if your answer is not much more than a couple of small paragraphs.

[pecenipicek]

It is not allowed to use the weapon in public places, or in places where the safety of the greater public can be put at risk.

Does that mean that the man who shot that other dude wasn't allowed to use the gun in such circumstance? The street sounds like a public place to me.

From what i remember of previous cases of that stuff happening over here, in general using a firearm in self-defence against someone who is not threatening you with a firearm construes as "over-use of force".

Why? Becuase its almost the same deal as if you are a professional martial artist. If they dont back down after the third verbal warning, they are fair game.

(in short, if threatened, yes, you are effectively permitted to brandish the weapon in an effort to intimidate right back and are sort-of required to warn. not 100% sure on that one. it is still however considered extremely bad form to shoot the offender if he was not brandishing a gun of his own)


also, yes, i am very, very aware of the holes that puts in the law and what "word of mouth" entails in cases like that.


in short, comparing it to the american case: "gross overuse of force" or "vigilantism"

(which for the record is very very very illegal here. citizens arrest exists, but is very rarely used because of the caveats involved)

[Grizzly]

Gunpolicy.org is one of the main sources I used, and it corroborates everything I said. Go ahead and check for yourself: http://www.gunpolicy.org/

And gunpolicy.org doesn't have information for a number of countries, such as the ones I mentioned (Andorra, Denmark, Italy, etc.). Check for yourself, there is no data available on those nations laws. You can't just ignore inconvenient facts by saying "incorrect citation," when the nations laws themselves, the United Nations and GunPolicy.org all show that the right to carry is legal.

You keep saying "a permit is required to carry in this country," as if that means anything. A permit is required to carry a handgun in Florida as well, a permit that George Zimmerman obtained legally. If Zimmerman had a carry permit in say, Sweden, or any other country and that list, then he could legally carry his firearm.

Gunpolicy.org is nto the main source you used in that post, and it does not correborate everything you said. In fact, it correberates what I said. I even quoted and everything - You need to start reading my posts.

Incorrect citation means quite simply that you did not cite properly - If you only link to a general site which may or may not contain any information then you are doing it wrong. You are making the statements, so you will have to put some work into making those statements veriable. I don't have to do that for you (link DIRECTLY to the source. Like I did). And with some of those "Citations" you didn't actually cite anything.

If you had taken the time to fully read my post, you would also have noticed that I quoted the requirements for the permit - which, across european countries, are extremely harsh. All the countres that require a permit to obtain a handgun also require a person to have a good reason to own one, which is in almost every case you to be a professional hunter/target shooter/security gaurd. "Protecting the neighborhood" is not a valid reason, and even if it was, you would not need a gun to do so (Governments make damn sure that they have the "Monopoly on violence")

[Grizzly]

Never explain to malice what can be described to incompetence...

And gunpolicy.org doesn't have information for a number of countries, such as the ones I mentioned (Andorra, Denmark, Italy, etc.)

This is the link to Italy: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/italy
This is the link to denmark: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/denmark
This is the link to andorra: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/andorra

Notice a pattern? Also notice how those countries are in the drop down box by "Find gun policy facts"?
I am sorry, but if you are not able to find that even though you've used gun policy a lot like you claim, then it is a suprise you were able to find this forum in the first place. Therefore, I ascribe this to malice and say that you are an open lair. That is not going to improve your points in my eyes.

But anyway, now that we are busy

Italy only allows handguns via special authorisation

Portugal only allows handguns via special authorisation

Denmark only allows handguns via special authorisation

Andorra is not part of the European Union. Indeed, the gunpolicy.org link has suprisingly few information on firearm regulation in this. Since Andorra is a very small country, it is safe to assume it has no laws on this. However, andorra is a VERY small country (60,000 inhabitants) and therefore does not have it's own law enforcement - it's being regulated by France and Spain. Considering France's and Spain's stance on firearms, it's safe to asume that Martin would not be allowed to carry a firearm.

And do you really think that you know the laws of a country better then people who actually live there, and better then the actual laws themselves say? That is what you are claiming, and honestly, I don't think it's going to make you any friends around here.