Don’t know about every male but most that are serving in the army have one. We used to have one in our cellar, along with all the other crap that goes with it. Now it’s been given up (and all given back) we have a wine shelf and room for the suitcases instead. Winner.
1 Like
They give them the option these days of storing the weapon for them so they don’t have to keep them at home anymore.
We still have to store all the other crap though until they’re officially done with their service.
1 Like
Ooh, it’s changed then from my husband’s days. The rifle lived in the damn hallway for months at a time because “I need to clean it before putting it away” apparently. I once threatened to clean it myself by putting it in the dishwasher. That shifted it pretty quickly… 
3 Likes
It was said during the press conference that this particular killer got his license 20 years ago. Since then the conditions for the license changed several times (they became stricter).
In a liberal (the meaning free, not progressive) high trust society, the state doesn’t infringe on the personal freedom of people more than necessary - owning guns is not something inherently evil. You can buy a STGW 90 and anyone can just turn it to full auto if they wanted to - yet we don’t have meaningfully more shootings than countries with much stricter gun laws…
There is a lot of more dangerous stuff allowed than owning guns, do you want to infringe on this too?
I completely disagree here - armed neutrality is a key pillar of our society and an armed populous is a very good way to keep the politicians in check too.
That’s the biggest load of tosh I’ve read this week.
Gun people in the US always use the overthrow-a-government which has stepped out of line argument.
I don’t see a call to arms in the US now? Why ever not?
How about: People can own guns and use them at the range -but the gun stays at the range, or armoury when it is not being used?
Owning a caravan or yacht is not inherently evil either but most people are not allowed to keep one parked outside their properties and I don’t hear these people bitching about high-trust societies.
3 Likes
That is why an armed populous scares the shit out of me. The statistics are quite clear. If there is a gun at home, you and your family are much more at risk than if there is not. John Wayne and the wild west belong in the movies.
Seriously, Switzerland has a lot of important decisions to make on how and where to spend its defence budget. How to organise its cooperation with NATO etc etc
1 Like
Yes - large, unnecessary SUV ownership and stricter penalties for mobile phone use at the wheel.
In a high-trust society, I trust people to obey the law and not use their mobile phone whilst driving but it’s clear that the people cannot be trusted to do that.
1 Like
It’s always nice to see foreigners trying to tell the locals how to run the country. After the way they run it made it attractive enough to migrate here, that is.
It’s a packet deal: accept it or leave. Seriously.
4 Likes
The Swiss Army does not use AK-74s. The shooter gave the service rifle back to the army 10+ years ago.
Recruited and trained as a troop cook, he left the army at the end of his mandatory service in 2013, surrendering his service weapon.
More gun controls, maybe. But, it should not be about selling, but the follow up along a lifetime. How’s the person doing 20 years later, just like this case. This is already done with driving licenses, they can be withdrawn if the person has mental health issues, addiction, etc. Maybe…the health system could rise a red flag to the police, check the cantonal gun registry.
The investigation continues, but it starts to look like the Germanwings pilot. The health system said “unfit”, but this info never arrived to the people that mattered. There is a history of why data privacy laws exist, they’re not wrong, but they may need some fine tuning.
Don’t you mean “libertarian” rather than “liberal” in that case?
Have you heard of the phrase"Discussion forum?"
Now I know why pubs never caught on here.
1 Like
Lets have a discussion about this, because If you pay taxes, like any local resident, I believe you should have some say in how you are governed and the rules that affect your life.
In the 20 years I have lived here, I’ve heard countless variations of “just be grateful to live here” or “if you dont like it, leave’!!” (predominatly from po-faced expats). However I don’t think my contributions to Switzerland, financially or professionally, have been that insignificant. And given that my education was funded by British taxpayers, the Swiss economy has benefited from the skills and experience I brought with me.
So in that context, having and expressing a view on life in this country is the very least I should be entitled to. It doesn’t mean I am ungrateful or unhappy to be here, just that I think certain things could be better.
8 Likes
Even undesirable places have immigrants and tourists, so desirability is irrelevant. What matters is sovereignty. From this perspective, foreigners don’t vote about the rules here, which is absolutely fine.
But, one thing is no voting rights, and another thing freedom of speech. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t see hate, discrimination, defamation, slander or insults on what KiwiSteve wrote.
Of course, there are laws and social conventions. Telling the locals how to run the country is a social faux pas. So, how to deal with a faux pas?
The curious thing is that the overall attitude of “take it or leave it” contributes to the marginalization of guys like the shooter. People think they’re giving the proper treatment to insolent foreigners. In reality, many locals ends up being marginalized and circling down the drain.
2 Likes
Immigrants in Switzerland, particularly those self-proclaimed “expats”, are quite often toxic cancer to other immigrants. Locals I’ve found to be overwhelmingly fine.
Other than my ragebait, I agree with you.
1 Like
It depends where the term is used. In the US liberal is vastly to different to what is liberal in Switzerland, for example.
Here it’s the classical understanding of it (centre right), i.e. lean government, low taxes, free market, the social safety net put to the bare survival minimum etc. Switzerland was built by liberals like that.
1 Like
Lets have a discussion about this, because If you pay taxes, like any local resident, I believe you should have some say in how you are governed and the rules that affect your life.
In the sense of free speech yes, no matter what you do.
Formally, no, it’s not a part of your social contract - if you want to formalize your relation to the state then naturalize.
But, if you want to partially participate without naturalizing, then you could join a local party branch, for example. Some parties accept foreigners, allow them to vote internally on whether to support a certain idea etc. So indirectly you’d be influencing it.
Sure, which is why I asked. The gun-totin’ stuff about modifying your weapon to fully automatic, as well as the “armed populous keepin’ them politicians in check” sort of made me wonder, is this Switzerland or a gatherin’ in da hood…
The earliest you could typically be naturalised is around 12 years after arriving. Thats a long time to be expected to bite your tongue simply to satisfy social niceties. I have no issue being polite and tactful, but that doesn’t mean accepting that I should remain silent about my experience of the country in which I live, work, pay taxes and contribute.
2 Likes
Article 16 of the Swiss constitution says you don’t have to:
“Freedom of opinion and information” and states, in essence:
- Everyone has the right to form, express and disseminate their opinions freely.
- Everyone has the right to receive information freely, to obtain it from generally accessible sources, and to disseminate it.
Doesn’t say anything about “Except YOU, Johnny Foreigner!”
1 Like