First, I want to remind you all about the FIRST proposal in the wake of different terrorist attacks.
The original can be found here.
So the original proposal was justified mostly towards illegal weapons and harmonizing EU member state rules, so that you couldn’t assemble complete, illegal weapons from parts, ordered from different EU countries.
So everyone merrily started to scrutinize the proposal to see whether this would be effective against illegal weapons. Which it was not. It was totally targeted at LEGAL weapons owners. The sports shooters in IPSC disciplines discovered that the proposal would effectively ban most of the IPSC shooting sport.
And now the EU process seem to have one hurdle left, ie. a vote in the EU parliament. And lo and behold, the compromize IS EVEN WORSE than the original proposal in some cases.
And Juncker now actually acknowledges the fact that the target was LEGAL gun owners.
The original can be found here.
And the worst of all, the justification is not only dishonest, but an outright lie.
First and foremost, the number 10.000 homicides. 8.800 of the homicides in this data IS NOT from EU member states. So it is not only dishonest, but an outright lie, considering weapons and their safety risks in the European Union. Also, almost none of the homicides are comitted with the weapons that the EU commission want to restrict.
So this compromise, that will end up with a vote in the EU parliament would effectively make LEGAL gun owners illegal. One example is the fact that if you are a legal gun owner, then you are NOT allowed to own certain magazines, with the penalty of loosing ALL your firearms licenses.
BUT, if you are a criminal without any weapon licenses, you can own as many and as large magazines as you wish. That is OK according to the proposal.
So the EU commission, headed by Mr. Juncker makes a good job to motivate SWEXIT and other EXITS from the EU, by creating legislation that will make no improvements for the security of EU citizens, but just limit the freedom of the law abiding citizens.
So now we will see if the EU parliament is the safeguard that it was supposed to be, ie. protect the rights and freedoms of the EU member states citizens. I fear though that the EU parliament will rubber stamp this and hence show a lack of their moral obligation to make only laws that are necessary for the citizens.
I have seldom felt that the EU is a failed project, but this could be my personal turning point. And I’m surely not alone.
If you want to go technical on some of the debates, this is a good link.