Originally
posted by
sinistril:
Are grenades banned in Sweden?
Just seems strange to me that someone from a place with hundreds of grenade attacks a year despite it's small population thinks gun control in a country across an ocean is a problem he should worry about.
Hundreds of grenade attacks? Well dozens last year. Last year there were many, this year not so much. So big fail there.
This has been a manageable problem for decades and there was a great increase in grenade attacks just a few years ago and it seems it is on the decline again, if you like to extrapolate. We are talking about half a dozen attacks this year so far and upwards around 3 dozen last year.
Either way the grenade attacks and a lot of other crap that has happened in Sweden the last 2-3 years correlate very badly with any changes gun laws and is much more a result the 165k refugees (most not from Syria) that came in 2015. Since I like to extrapolate it is to compare with 5 million refugees coming to the US in a year, mostly in October to December, 100% of whom are unable to speak your language and none of who knows your laws or customs. The swedish police force was naturally not able to handle all that and those grenade attacks were mostly diversions for the police as criminals realized they could make the police stop interfeering with their 'work'. That has nothing to do with our gun laws. We had the same gun laws pretty much for decades and afaik 0 grenade attacks up until 2008. In general gun violence in Sweden exists and is a problem but not nearly as much as in the United States. Further I have guns, my father has guns and my grandfather has guns, it has never been difficult to aquire one legaly and I have never needed one of them to defend myself.
------
Also you have to do more to warrant the "counter-tyranny arguement". The burden of proof is on you when you state that assault rifles are neccesary and a sure counter to dictatorship/tyranny or whatever. Show me where and when it happened. Which country has been prevented from becoming a tyranny by a well armed populace? You got a very weird attempt at suggesting a causal relationship from a bunch of historical regimes who control the guns of their people. How will you take out the tanks? You need to buy at least something like an old S-300 system for every backyard to stop that AC-130 from shooting a puncture on your kids tricycle at night. Should you be able to buy it when you are on the no-fly-list and/or the terror watch list? I suppose so, else a tyrannical regime will just use those lists to stop their enemies from aquireing potent freedom-blasters.
There are so many functioning democratic states around the world that offer their people equal (or more) freedoms and privileges as most of the people of the US is offered while still enforcing gun laws that are far more stringent than yours. Which will fail? Which are closer to become tyrannies? The ones with the most stringent gun control?
Personally if I lived in the US I would just use those freedoms and buy whatever I feel like buying and shoot at the range, I would probably enjoy myself, it doesn't really bother me either way. But I would never have the stomach to suggest my HOBBY is in any way responsible for maintaining a well functioning democracy. You are not gonna get away with such grand statements when they are made in such perfunctory manner. Explain your hypothesis in a way that can withstand critizism or have it rejected.