Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Is the Swiss approach to guns better? Watch

  • View Poll Results: The best gun control system?
    UK
    45
    71.43%
    US
    5
    7.94%
    Switzerland
    7
    11.11%
    Other(please state)
    3
    4.76%
    Canada
    3
    4.76%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    In Switzerland instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives.

    Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as front-line troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home!

    Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles. Women do not have to own firearms, but are encouraged to.

    Despite the high rate of gun ownership compared to the UK gun crime is much lower!

    Would the Swiss approach work in the UK?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Look at this story- had this woman not had a gun only God knows what would have happened to her!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    Look at this story- had this woman not had a gun only God knows what would have happened to her!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg
    For each piece of anecdotal evidence such as this there is equally anecdotal evidence that without easy access to a firearm several of the high profile shootings in the UK and US would not have happened.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm pretty happy with the state of guns in this country, and I'm pretty happy with us having a professional army.

    The fact that most of the gun debates in this country are started in the wake of someone going on a killing spree in the US tells me I don't want to be any closer to their system. The fact Switzerland has significantly more gun related deaths than our country, for me means I prefer our system.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    For each piece of anecdotal evidence such as this there is equally anecdotal evidence that without easy access to a firearm several of the high profile shootings in the UK and US would not have happened.
    The UK has some of the strictest gun control laws around the world! But it has a higher gun crime than Switzerland -you can't deny the statistics!

    But that example shows that law-abiding citizens with guns can save lives!

    Plus most gun crime is committed by criminals with illegal guns (especially in UK)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    The UK has some of the strictest gun control laws around the world! But it has a higher gun crime than Switzerland -you can't deny the statistics!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

    From here it suggest that is untrue. Where are your stats from?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    I'm pretty happy with the state of guns in this country, and I'm pretty happy with us having a professional army.

    The fact that most of the gun debates in this country are started in the wake of someone going on a killing spree in the US tells me I don't want to be any closer to their system. The fact Switzerland has significantly more gun related deaths than our country, for me means I prefer our system.
    Our system isn't that good !


    In Britain, such people have been so successful that legal gun ownership has been reduced almost to the vanishing point, while even most convicted felons in Britain are not put behind bars. The crime rate, including the rate of crimes committed with guns, is far higher in Britain now than it was back in the days when there were few restrictions on Britons buying firearms. In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s – after decades of ever tightening gun ownership restrictions – there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-thomas-sowell
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    For each piece of anecdotal evidence such as this there is equally anecdotal evidence that without easy access to a firearm several of the high profile shootings in the UK and US would not have happened.
    Would not have happened with firearms. They might still have carried out their attacks using other means. Arson, explosives, mass poisoning. Who knows, evil and deranged people are usually quite adept at finding creative ways to kill large numbers of people. A guy in China a few years back went on a rampage and killed 18 people, using a tractor.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

    From here it suggest that is untrue. Where are your stats from?
    The UK figures aren't that accurate (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...l-figures.html)

    I quoted from a BBC article

    Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1566715.stm
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greenlaner)
    Would not have happened with firearms. They might still have carried out their attacks using other means. Arson, explosives, mass poisoning. Who knows, evil and deranged people are usually quite adept at finding creative ways to kill large numbers of people. A guy in China a few years back went on a rampage and killed 18 people, using a tractor.
    A tractor??


    I bet there were some people who wanted laws restricting the availability of them lol!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    In Britain, such people have been so successful that legal gun ownership has been reduced almost to the vanishing point, while even most convicted felons in Britain are not put behind bars. The crime rate, including the rate of crimes committed with guns, is far higher in Britain now than it was back in the days when there were few restrictions on Britons buying firearms. In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s – after decades of ever tightening gun ownership restrictions – there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-thomas-sowell
    First of all armed robbery is not going to be reduced by introducing guns, its just going to make it mandatory. I don't see the relevance to the average person. Also his source doesn't work, so I can't see where his figures are from. Armed doesn't mean a gun.


    (Original post by a729)
    The UK figures aren't that accurate (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...l-figures.html)

    I quoted from a BBC article

    Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1566715.stm
    60% still means a significantly lower rate.

    The BBC is clearly wrong because there are plenty of figures for a nation that doesn't keep any. It may just means they don't collect official government figures.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greenlaner)
    Would not have happened with firearms. They might still have carried out their attacks using other means. Arson, explosives, mass poisoning. Who knows, evil and deranged people are usually quite adept at finding creative ways to kill large numbers of people. A guy in China a few years back went on a rampage and killed 18 people, using a tractor.
    It could be argued that the killers in this case were opportunistic; they had easy access to a firearm but not to explosives etc. I'm not willing to defend this position as I don't know enough about individual cases, however I would presume that access to firearms facilitated the murder in some of these cases, which would not have happened if the weapons were unavailable.

    (Original post by a729)
    The UK has some of the strictest gun control laws around the world! But it has a higher gun crime than Switzerland -you can't deny the statistics!

    But that example shows that law-abiding citizens with guns can save lives!

    Plus most gun crime is committed by criminals with illegal guns (especially in UK)
    I'm not denying that. Equally I'm not saying that system would work here.

    Most gun crime may be committed with illegal weapons, however that does not mean that if weapons were available, more gun crimes would not take place. To extrapolate from the current situation, more guns leads to more gun crime, would you argue against this point?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    It could be argued that the killers in this case were opportunistic; they had easy access to a firearm but not to explosives etc. I'm not willing to defend this position as I don't know enough about individual cases, however I would presume that access to firearms facilitated the murder in some of these cases, which would not have happened if the weapons were unavailable.



    I'm not denying that. Equally I'm not saying that system would work here.

    Most gun crime may be committed with illegal weapons, however that does not mean that if weapons were available, more gun crimes would not take place. To extrapolate from the current situation, more guns leads to more gun crime, would you argue against this point?
    it depends- more guns could mean more attempted crime-especially burglary been stopped by law abiding citizens with guns!

    i.e http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    it depends- more guns could mean more attempted crime-especially burglary been stopped by law abiding citizens with guns!

    i.e http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg
    This is similar to your initial argument, I'll rebut in the same fashion. Whenever a criminal is killed in self-defense it is big news, however gun related murders are commonplace.

    In addition to this, take for example the mall shooting in america recently. Even highly trained soldiers do not hit their target, do you expect average Joe will be able to? How much collateral damage is acceptable?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    First of all armed robbery is not going to be reduced by introducing guns, its just going to make it mandatory. I don't see the relevance to the average person. Also his source doesn't work, so I can't see where his figures are from. Armed doesn't mean a gun.


    60% still means a significantly lower rate.

    The BBC is clearly wrong because there are plenty of figures for a nation that doesn't keep any. It may just means they don't collect official government figures.
    But guns can save life's, i.e this woman's:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg

    Well in some inner cities - criminals clearly having a monopoly on guns has rendered many urban areas no-go areas to the law-abiding!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    it depends- more guns could mean more attempted crime-especially burglary been stopped by law abiding citizens with guns!

    i.e http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg
    Or it could mean burglars going into homes with the knowledge people are armed. Instantly taking on a much more aggressive stance resulting in people getting shot in their homes.

    The simple fact is, with a US pro gun system, you are more likely to get shot. You cannot get away from that fact. Feeling safer, being able to defend yourself against someone, is just emotional circumstantial rubbish. For every time someone achieves that, other people end up with their and their families brains all over their living room wall.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    This is similar to your initial argument, I'll rebut in the same fashion. Whenever a criminal is killed in self-defense it is big news, however gun related murders are commonplace.

    In addition to this, take for example the mall shooting in america recently. Even highly trained soldiers do not hit their target, do you expect average Joe will be able to? How much collateral damage is acceptable?
    The Swiss are trained so they know how to take out a criminal!

    Also a citizen-trained- with a gun could have taken out the shooter within seconds and saved lives
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think we should be advanced enough in modern society to handle guns without the "oh evil dirty weapons of doom!" hysteria that's all too common.

    An armed society is a polite society. People talk about feeling safe in the UK - But those same people instantly think that an abandoned backpack in a train station is a terrorist bomb, they think that a hooded person has a knife and wants their wallet, they think that every verbal argument will turn into a physical one. Is that really the attitude of a society that feels safe, or one that feels scared?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    Well in some inner cities - criminals clearly having a monopoly on guns has rendered many urban areas no-go areas to the law-abiding!
    Absolute rubbish. Gun crime in cities has been falling, and with populations in the millions deaths in the tens nationwide makes the idea they are no-go because of gun crime idiotic. In London their has been a phenomena of gun-hire, where people are borrowing them to commit crimes, gives you and idea of how many are in circulation.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    The Swiss are trained so they know how to take out a criminal!

    Also a citizen-trained- with a gun could have taken out the shooter within seconds and saved lives
    Trained to what standard? I remain unconvinced that a couple of days a year of training would be sufficient to be proficient with a firearm to, in a high stress environment, hit a criminal among civilians.

    Are you advocating firearm carrying in public places or just the home?
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.