Ruger Forum banner

41 - 60 of 68 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
The Right of Self Defense and the RKBA that make it possible must become one of those "Human Rights" that some people are always quacking about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
The bill will allow all licenced Czech gun owners to openly carry weapons which they would be free to use to defend themselves and their countrymen in the event of a terrorist attack.

A pistol or a rifle, in the hands of citizens is just the ticket, to end a terrorist attack.
Look at Israel as the best example.
No open carry allowed so far, not in the draft either. Maybe it will be in one of the other laws that are on the way.

Moreover, the defense against terrorist attacks is covered by our criminal law - necessary defense. That says: "Deed, otherwise a crime, by which anyone deflects direct threat of an attack or continuing attack on an asset protected by criminal law, is not a crime. It is not necessary defense when the defense is absolutely obviously disproportionate to the means of the attack."
I will show the meaning on few examples, some exaggerated:
Case A)
You are strolling through a park and see group of gypsies carrying firearms and threatening your life by pointing the guns at you and shouting "your money or your life!" Suddenly, you see a loaded MG42(or any firearm that can be unregistered, illegal, not owned by you). You can jump behind that MG42 and gun them down.

(this happened) Case B)
Taxi driver had a customer, who threatened his life with a knife and even cut his throat. The taxi driver took his illegally possessed gun and shot the attacker once, got a malfunction, managed to clear the malfunction and then killed the assailant while bleeding from his neck. Then he found a help in nearby village. Driver wasn't charged with murder, it was necessary defense, but he was charged with illegal firearm ownership, because he was stupid and told LEOs that he was having that for self defense.

(this also happened) Case C)
A man walked into a gun shop(Dave's guns in Prague) and wanted to see knifes. The clerk showed them. The assailant took the knife and stabbed the clerk few times. Owner of the shop saw that and drew her revolver, then when the assailant turned towards her and moved towards her she shot him. He didn't survive. She wasn't even charged.

(this also happened) Case D)
A man in a tram in Ostrava attacked another man by hitting him in the head with glass bottle, shattering it. He wanted to continue the attack, but a woman drew her pistol and stopped his attack. He stopped, survived, got off on the next stop and cops caught him. The woman got a medal.

(this also happened) Case E)
This happened in gypsy ghetto, shortly after truck attacks in western Europe. A man in Chomutov was woken up by a noise outside and his mother told him, that a man is driving over people and crashing into cars. The man dressed up, got his pistol, went down and unloaded ~13 rounds into the driver who was moving away from him, hitting 8. Driver was dead on spot. The man got ~7 years(i am not sure, but he went to jail). The problem here was that the attack was no longer happening, nor directly threatening. And driver was gypsy shot by white(lot of positive discrimination here), so the witnesses were biased.

The problem with our system are not the laws, but the judges, who judge your reaction, which had to be done in 3 seconds, over the period of 3 years while sitting in comfy chair under no stress at all. Thankfully it is turning to the better now.

Back to the reply. You can gun down any terrorist even right now.

Juraj-

Thanks. That was very interesting!
No problem mate, you are welcome. I will try to keep you updated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,368 Posts
Juraj 1
Thanks for sharing so much info and I stand with you and your country men for the basic right to defend and protect. I only wish our so called socialists actually understood what it really means as they don’t have a clue how horrible it is in practice and why you will fight to the death to defend against it. It’s sad but our colleges and universities are treasonous in much of their teachings as well as the “fake” media spreading propaganda to our youth and public at large.

I own two very fine weapons made in your country and will be buying more ,hope they keep up the excellent craftsmanship and innovation in gun manufacturing.
Please continue to keep us posted.
Mike
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,950 Posts
Wonder if any of these stories will make the news?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
@Lc45: Thank you for your support.

Wonder if any of these stories will make the news?
Yes, those stories(except A, that is fiction just to show how it works) made it into news. The thing is, that when the court frees the defender, media dont inform about it that much, unlike when he gets jailtime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Update:
Swiss had a referendum and accepted implementation of the disarming directive.
Czech Republic has become the last bastion of resistance against the disarmament of EU's citizens.

Right now we are trying to secure our rights in the constitution, however it will be incredibly hard since our senate is full of former communists and socialists. Castle doctrine is being worked on as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
869 Posts
Update:
Swiss had a referendum and accepted implementation of the disarming directive.
Czech Republic has become the last bastion of resistance against the disarmament of EU's citizens.

Right now we are trying to secure our rights in the constitution, however it will be incredibly hard since our senate is full of former communists and socialists. Castle doctrine is being worked on as well.
Best of luck for you law-abiding Czech gun owners. :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Holy Crap! Common sense coming out of a government!
When EU commissar came to Prague for the meeting with our representatives, mere official from ministry of interior told him, that if they pass the disarming directive, 90% of the legally owned firearms would get "lost". Our representatives just nodded as they couldn't deny the truth. He couldn't believe his eyes and ears. Then somebody explained that we "lost" our firearms during Nazi occupation and later during Commies rule and it is considered "national sport" over here. It would be interesting if they told him that one of our other national sports is defenestration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,392 Posts
... It would be interesting if they told him that one of our other national sports is defenestration.
Does that score more points for vertical drop or impact distance? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
I am Swedish.
In Scandinavia and Finland, we have a similar system to Czech Republic in obtaining a gun permit.
Concealed carry permit is extremely unusual though.

I live since years on Grand Cayman, British Overseas Territory, and the system here is almost identical to the Swedish one.
Britain would like to ban all handgun ownership here. Thankfully, we have a sensible Government.
EU can say what they want, but it is the country/government in each country that decides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Today LIGA LIBE handed over petition with over 100 000 signatures for incorporating owning and carrying firearms into our constitution. Direct link to the article is here: https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/domaci/kubera-podporuje-petici-ktera-zada-zakotveni-prava-na-drzeni/r~97254a8e8d0111e9b2a00cc47ab5f122/
It was posted on anti-gun pro EU page, however it was rather balanced and straight to the point. Some senators are for this change, some old commies and new commies in the senate are against this. Translation into English is below, please forgive my me for my level of English, as some terms might be not as accurate as I'd want to. I will put some explanations in the brackets.

Right to own firearms should be in the constitution, asks the petition. It was signed even by Kubera(Juraj1: Kubera is one of our right wing senators)

The senate petition comittee will deal with the petition against the disarmament,
which criticizes EU directive restraining the firearm ownership and requests anchoring the right to own and bear firearms into the constitution. During the handover of more than 100 000 signatures, the chairman of the senate Jaroslav Kubera and the senator Martin Cervicek(both ODS(Juraj1: ODS can be translated to Citizen's Democratic Party))


"Freedom has greater value than deeds that happen occasionally," explained Kubera, why he refuses argumentation pointing on the terrorist attacks. Those, according to him, are not committed with legally owned firearms.

The European Parliament passed the directive during the spring two years ago. It's goal is to prevent terrorists from arming themselves. According the critic it mainly limits the owners of the legally owned firearms, market with legally owned firearms and interferes with the inner security of the state. Novelization induced displeasure in the Czech Republic.

The changes would affect almost all of approximately 300 000 owners of firearm licenses(Juraj1: for explanation of our current legislative, please refer to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Czech_Republic) and owners of the decommissioned(Juraj1: rendered unoperational) and magazines, which do not fall under registration yet. Former government of the Bohuslav Sobotka(CSSD (Juraj1: Czech Social Democratic Party)) filed a lawsuit against the directive in the court of the EU.

The Attorney General of the Court of the EU recommended rejecting the lawsuit. Her opinion is not binding for the final decision of the court, however the court follows the recommendations of it's Attorneys General most of the time.

Petition of the LIGA LIBE association, which fights against disarmament, was supported even by the president Milos Zeman and the prime minister Andrej Babis(ANO(Juraj1: Sorry, no translation here)).

The signers of the petition ask the Parliament, the government and the president to "again discuss, and support the novelization of the constitutional bill of Security of the Czech Republic, anchoring the right to legally own firearms for defense and both external and internal security of our state into our constitutional law." They hope, that such change would be constitutional warranty of preserving current law system. At the same time, the petition asks the representatives of the Czech Rep to reject the directive.
End of the article.

The fight is still going on and we are not stopping. However, our constitution is not made as well as the constitution of the USA, since every statement in our constitution has short sentence after it, which states, in general: "Details are established in the law" That basically means: Yeah, you have free speech, but we will limit it as the currently elected government wants, why? Because we can.

Anyway by tying our firearm ownership with the inner security of the state(which it is) is a basically a middle finger towards the EU who, by the Lisboa treaty, cannot interfere with inner security of the state, and many other things.

Thanks for reading, I hope it was easy to understand and I hope it provided a picture of some of the events that are happening in the middle of the new socialist "paradise" called the EU.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
968 Posts
@Petrol and Powder: Some carry FMJs(I do not know why...), some carry Black Mambas, and some carry Soft Points. I personally have for my EDC G17 a Sellier & Bellot 124grs 9mm Luger when I am in the city. I have bought a Ruger GP 161 in .357 magnum to carry in the woods. I still have to test the ammo for it, but I think I will go with Fiocchi 125grs Soft Points.
Sellier & Bellot......What a surprise! :D

Thanks for all the info.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Hello, it's time for update. During my inactivity on this forum, quite a lot happened in the Czech Rep.

First of all. Not only the European Commission is trying to ban firearms, it is trying to completely ban lead in ammunition. We are currently trying to take measures against it, because it would completely destroy any sport shooting in the EU. Frankly, I would like tombac coated wolfram bullets for self defense, just in case you need to kill that 8th person in a row, but the price and the properties of such metal are not useful for training, mostly for it's cost.

Secondly, the petition to amend our Bill of basic human rights has been successful. 102 000 thousand people signed the petition for the sentence: „Právo bránit život svůj či život jiného člověka i se zbraní je zaručeno za podmínek, které stanoví zákon,“ translated to english: "Right to defend own life or another person's life, even with gun, is guaranteed under conditions stated by the law." Senate committee for security approved such thing and it should have been discussed today, but due to the yesterday's events, which will be addressed later in this post, the discussion was postponed till early January. Even though I dislike the way it is written, mainly because of the "under conditions stated by the law" part, which makes our bill of rights only a toilet paper to wipe our bottoms with. It allows such things as: "Well, you have freedom of speech, but the law does not guarantee that you will not have freedom after speech." With censorship spreading under the mask of fight against the "hate speech", it can backfire rather quickly. Those things are already infiltrating in our law system, as it is being pushed by left wing non-profit organisations. However this amendment of our Bill of basic human rights can have significant meaning, as it put's our "necessary defense" principle and right to defend on constitutional level, because right for self defense is slowly diminishing in our western neighbours' countries.
As this is happening, our representatives with LEX, LIGA LIBE and other organisations are trying to implement new legislation that is in agreement with EU's anti-gun directive, HOWEVER, due to the fact it implements many shall-issue exceptions, it should be even more permissive than our current legislation. But what happens during the agreement process in the parliament is completely different thing.

Next is our lawsuit against the EU in the case of invalidity of 2017 anti-gun directive. If anyone is interested in Czech source, here's the link for rather nice analysis, which I will try to sum up in this paragraph, link: https://zbrojnice.com/2019/12/06/rozsudek-evropskeho-soudniho-dvora-evropska-unie-ma-pravomoc-zakazat-civilni-drzeni-jakekoliv-kategorie-zbrani/.

All right, so what was going on. The information about the directive should be mentioned earlier in this topic, so I will not repeat myself. Czech Republic filed a lawsuit against EU's directive, because of these 4 points:
  • The lack of authority to issue such directive due to the fact that EU cannot accept harmonisation measures(read stripping sovereignty from the state and delegating it onto EU) regarding security and cannot interfere with state's activities regarding inner security.
  • Violation of the rule of proportionality, because not a single one of the newly banned firearms was used in any EU terrorist attacks. And not even single intentional crime in the Czech Republic.
  • Violation of the principle of legal certainity, due to the fact that definitions of banned firearms are not unambiguous and because the state should confiscate firearms legally acquired after 13.6.2017(13th June 2017, EU format FTW :D, just pulling your leg).
  • Violation of principle against discrimination due to the fact, that the directive contains an exception that only the Switzerland can use.
Nobody can be surprised that the EU court dismissed our lawsuit. But everybody was waiting for it's official statement, and boy, they uncovered themselves, like really. Ok lets do this.

The first thing is that it was pushed as a directive synchronising European market, however, it was said to be, and it is written in the very directive, that it is a security response to the terrorist attacks in France in 2015! Not only it was not discussed on the EU parliament grounds, it was discussed behind closed doors in so called trialog, and after that commission prohibited remarks to this legislation and just passed it. Czech, Hungarian, Luxembourg and as far as I know even Polish were against it. No chance resisting though.

The first reasoning of the court is(I will only paraphrase as it is long as hell): "rapprochement of member states' legislation is the creation of functional common market is necessary". That means that EU can make it as tight as it wants.

Second reasoning will be at the end, now to the third point: Directive commands the states to confiscate banned firearms that were purchased after 13.6.2017. EU thinks that where the law is ambiguous, the state will follow the most strict way of implementing. We already had that during Nazi and Communist occupation, after UK and France sold us in 1938 to Hitler, not again, thanks! The statement of the court is(again paraphrase): "In this case it is necessary to say that the purpose of this paragraph is to forbid new permits for such firearms and that they will be confiscated when the states implement this law." This basically says: The citizen should've known that his firearms will be taken away from him.

Fourth reasoning about discrimination is straight hilarious.
"The condition regarding military system based on militias, which consists of at least 50 years of transferring military firearms into civilian sector, takes in consideration the culture and the tradition of Swiss confederation and the fact that due to these traditions the state has the necessary experience and proved capability to search and monitor said weapons and persons, which is the basis for assumption, that public safety levels will be reached even with this exception. Due to the fact, that it cannot be assumed that the states which do not have such tradition of firearm transfers into civilian sector, nor experience, nor proven capability to search for and monitor said firearms and persons, it is necessary to consider that only Swiss are capable of such things, because this exists there for along time." This is just hilarious, Czech Republic exists since 1993 and it has better system than the Swiss, which have incredibly high volume of unregistered firearms. Czechs have to register everything(see legislation post which I posted earlier).

For the future development of the situation is necessary 2nd reasoning. First part is that the EU didn't publish an impact study. The court said that the Commission doesn't have to do so, because the rules from 2016 are applicable backward to 2015 legislative and even to formally nonexistent process of trialog, through which is passed the most "urgent" legislative. Second argumentation is that everything can be banned or regulated for the good of public safety and the European Court even openly lies that only legal firearms were used during the terrorist attack. That basically says that EU can legally ban every single firearm in the EU.

This was like a blessing, because this has proven that the EU doesn't respect even it's own laws and is giant hypocrite. And is turning into next USSR. This opened more eyes and pushed the public's mood even more into the anti-EU spectrum. As an agnostic/atheist I must say: Thank god or whatever is there, if it's there, for tyranny from 1938 to 1989. It made many people allergic to such bull****.

Now to the events of 10.12.2019(10th December 2019). In the city of Ostrava, some mad man went into faculty hospital with his illegally owned firearm(CZ75B) and shot dead 6 patients waiting for the medical examination. After this deed, he ran and shot himself in the head, when the police tracked him down in 3 hours(which is rather good time in my opinion, the first SWAT-equivalent units were at the site 5 minutes after the report, which is still respectable time). Why am I mentioning this, Czech national TV(CT) started it's anti-gun agenda and tried to push for another restrictions of legal owners. However they failed tremendously, as they were streaming live from the site, they interviewed many officials from security forces and those said: That more restriction of legal owners are directly contra productive and that if there was a patient with concealed carry permit, he could've prevented this. The funny thing is that reporters and moderators were visibly nervous that the people who knew the situation spoke against their political agenda. In the evening, there were only people who spoke for the restriction of legal ownership. Now the interesting thing comes in, and that is the fact that the shooting happened one day before discussion about amending our Bill of basic human right. Something smells fishy 'round here.

That's all for now. Sorry for any typos. I hope it was legible and understandable. Thanks for your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,007 Posts
Juraj1 Thanks for the update and information. I find it very interesting. My Czech ancestors were starting to see the writing on the wall and "bugged" out of there in the late 1800s-early 1900s. I've often wondered what life would have been like if they'd have stayed or if our blood line would have even survived. I do (barely) remember my Great Great Grandfather talking about "the old country" with my Great Grandfather and how much things were (although not great but), still much better here. The area they settled in here has a very large Czech Heritage that has prospered nicely.
 
41 - 60 of 68 Posts
Top