Proposed EU gun legislation

[gbal]

Montey,in politics much effective work goes on before legislation is voted on-in the drafting stges,and so on,as you know.

If the UK vote(s) have not been effective,that is probably democracy-it's entirely possibe that sometimes the others are proposing something for the geneal good.UK does quite well overall.We contribute because we do well. Its GNP based,and we sell a lot to EU(1/2 our exports) on advantageous terms-as a member,of course.

 

But it has changed. Cameron has negotiated a fundamental change-now a 55% vote can veto proposed legislation, not just delay it a bit while it's tweaked.That really matters,and is long overdue.

BUt there isn't anything that different compared to UK-plenty moan about partypolitics here, about half the time legislation is passed by the Government,which may not have even a 55% mandate-and not for every bit of legislation.

People understandably want to be goverened by those with whome they agree-broadly perhaps,at least more than the alternatives. That just does not happen-governments swing 'left' or 'right'-roughly half the time any voter is subjected to legislation he/she won't agree with.

If one is ,say centre right politically,then the centrerights in the EU will generally be agreeable,justa as centre rights in uK would be (and ditto for all 'party' orientations) A centre right voter would prefer centre right legislation from the EU to radically different legislation from a left UK government.

 

Maybe that gets closer than 'nationality'- and the 55% rule makes it very much more likely to happen-of course 55% is needed,just as a majority is needed in our one effective legislature (Commons).

Not sure the systems are much different-in essence,small majority overall 'wins'.

I don't see any evidence of a 'ganging up on UK' where the UK has a case better than the rest of EU (that will be better than 45% from now on).

Have all the others been out of step,and agreeing,in the past? That has to be 'agreeing more han UK politicians all together,note-not a common (s) scenario!

 

Seems unlikely,but the 55% changes all that,anyhow- we should be used to that kind of democracy here,and we should be used to that kind of democracy here."We"no longer need 100% agreement.

 

Note too,this 55% rule change is important,as it shows what can be done within the EU-with effective negotiation,given a basically decent case-and other members agreed.(perhaps proportional representation helps-big countries get more MEPs-and we may tend to have more ccommonality politically with them....).

 

Sometimes the best team wins; that will increase with the 55% rule. Out and we are not in the big league on equal terms. Norway pays a lot,has all the red tape,and free movement etc- ie no sovereignty on those-none of the membership advantages, and 'no vote' at all on anything.

 

GB

[maximus otter]

As an aside, can a mod please change the thread title from:

 

"Proposed EU gun legalisation"

 

... to "Proposed EU gun legislation", which is what it should say. (People: Learn how to spell and do not rely on autocorrect!)

 

If the EU were going to propose laws legalising guns, even I might be less inclined to vote "Out".

 

maximus otter

[ds1]

Title done.

 

Petition here:

 

https://www.change.org/p/council-of-the-european-union-eu-you-cannot-stop-terrorism-by-restricting-legal-gun-ownership

[gbal]

David,thanks for the 'bump' for the FACE report-Vickey Ford chairperson of the EU Directive Amendments committee will appreciate every signature,on what most shooters should be able to broadly agree.

 

There are important issues about EU membership,but this beaurocracy about terrorism /semi autos cannot be relevant to that decision.We have endured such a ban in the UK for many years with no prospect at all of any change in UK law. The EU may impose this restriction on the EU,but that is no change for the UK. If the EU can be persuaded not to impose the semi auto ban,that will not of itself restore semi autos to he UK,but it clearly helps shooters in the UK more than an EU ban. Does it not follow that we are better served on firearms issues by retaining our negotiating position,along with the considerable European support from,importantly MEPs,and Vicky Ford,and BAsc's lobbying?

 

Whatever the very real issues about in/out are,please consider whether on the 'shooting' one,we gain anything at all by "out" -ie a retreat into our UK much restricted legislation,with no hope of any reprieve,from UK imposed legislation that is already more restrictive than EU. I haven't met any UK shooter who likes the UK legislation-so why make it easier for the EU to impose it on Europe-and that would strengthen the UK restrictions-which is what 'out' does. Support shooting-sign the petition,eg-decide on the EU on some more relevant criteria,where a difference may exist.

 

GB

[maximus otter]

Whatever the very real issues about in/out are,please consider whether on the 'shooting' one,we gain anything at all by "out" -ie a retreat into our UK much restricted legislation,with no hope of any reprieve...

 

We've been a member of the EU for years. Why haven't we felt the benefit of other EU countries' less strict firearms laws yet? I'd love the Czech Republic's policies on handgun ownership for self-defence. Hell, I'd even like to own semi-auto centrefire rifles as they do in France.

 

Accept the fact that all EU laws will be "harmonised" - their word - in years to come, and that that will involve all the worst and most restrictive sections of the various countries' laws being stitched together into the universal "EU Gun Law". At that point, you can kiss field sports goodbye.

 

maximus otter