Talk:Firearms regulation in Switzerland

message: To anyone who waded through all this stuff some of it very accurate and some extreamly argumentative and technically clueless. An Army's military designations of it's own ammunition may not agree with civilian designations of the same cartridge. i.e. US designation of cartridges for older M-16, M-16A1 rifles was "Cartridge, Ball, 5.56 mm, M-193". Note that there is NO mention of the cartridge length in millimeters. That 5.56 x 45 stuff is for technical comparison and is very nice to have in a list, but doesn't denote actual commonly used designations -- military or civilian in every country. If the Swiss want to round off the designation to 5,6 mm who's to question that? Besides that, it's common in German speaking countries to round off some measurements to one decimal place. They aren't a member of NATO, nor the NATO military standards. It's not changing the actual dimensions of the cartridge, the weapon's chamber or bore.--TGC55 08:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, both parties are correct and incorrect. The 5.6mm and 5.56mm ammunition types both exist. From what I understand, this ammunition was designed specifically for the weapon in service.  It would be incorrect to claim (as the poster above did) to claim this type of ammunition is the exact same as 5.56x45 NATO. However, they are both the exact same thing (well, not exactly). The 5.6mm round in question is interchangeable with 5.56mm ammunition, just as 5.56 ammunition is interchangeable with .223 Remington. They are not identical, but similar enough to be interchangeable. 5.56x45 NATO would be usable in the issue weapon. In Switzerland, the ammunition type used should be designated as 5.6mm as that refers to the ammunition designed in companionship with the rifle. Outside of Switzerland the ammunition type is advertised as 5.56mm because that is the ammunition (5.56x45 NATO) that most people outside of Switzerland will be firing out of it. This is likely why one can find manufacturer information claiming both (or either.) Hope that clears some of the confusion up. Dogabutila (talk) 07:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know the specifics of these two cartridges, which are actually covered in 5.56×45mm NATO, but within the M16/AR-15 .224 caliber bullet class, there are multiple different chamberings that are somewhat interchangeable, but not completely. The MILSTD 5.56 mm cartridge is based on the SAAMI specification .223 Remington. The CIP specs (European) are slightly different as well. There is also a chambering that is designed to safely accomodate both 5.56 and .223 called a .223 Wylde. I believe it does this by having a slightly longer than spec freebore/leade. Caisson 06 (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calibre and Cartridge Designations 

message: The introduction should be re-worked a little bit; it goes too quickly, too deep and too specifically into the subject of military weapons.
It think that the plethora of German words here and there should simply go. German is not the only language of Switzerland, and since I think it impractical to label all terms in German, French, Italian and Romanche, I would suggest simply dropping them, possibly linking from the English wording for terms like Landwehr. Rama 06:43, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Military weapons are the primary weapons that are in the Swiss civilian community. Hunting weapons and other civilian weapons are just not that common.--TGC55 05:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

text: German is the language of the majority of the people in Switzerland. I think that some if not all of the terms have been translated into English with the German language terms left in parenthesis. Romansche is not a required Swiss language as far as I know - German, French and Italian are required languages. --TGC55 05:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language and intro 

message: I have a hard time believing that switzerland is the only country in which it is legal to produce one's own black powder.  First of all, using 'country' in this context is slightly problematic.  'State' would probably be better.  Take Somalia a few years ago: lacking a government, or any apparatus of state, the country of Somalia was a place where it was not illegal to manufacture black powder.  There were no laws.  Perhaps the author meant Switzerland was the the only EU state to allow black powder manufacture?  There should at least be a cite on this.
:Switzerland's not an EU state! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.35.31.33 (talk) 23:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black Powder 

message: Gun "control", so to say, has been a much-discussed topic in Switzerland as of late. This past week the parliament approved of new regulations which "require" that army ammunition be stored at the barracks and not at home -- a major change from past policy. The law itself seems to be rather complex, but this was still treated in the Swiss media as a major alteration of the law.
I wasn't sure if this belonged in this entry or not. Here is a link to news stories in German from Zürich's two main newspapers (Tages Anzeiger and Neue Zürcher Zeitung). [] [] For those who cannot speak German, here is an English article from the NZZ. []
Ami in der Schweiz 17:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army Ammunition Reform 

message: Hello
I was interested to read about this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
It included 'airsoft'as well. Can someone tell me in what way airsoft will be affected?
(86.169.247.19 (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airsoft 

message: This article has a lot of outdated material. 75.236.238.77 (talk) 15:40, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  stale material 

message: Some sort of editing/pre-processing? Might be distracting.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Firing_range_HDR.jpg 88.159.72.240 (talk) 18:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is up with the image? 

message: It is stated in the article twice that according to Kopel that although legally the ammo bought at a range must be used at the range, "the rule is barely known and almost never obeyed." This is a bare assertion made in a magazine article from 1990. If this was and remains true a better citation should be used to provide the details of to what degree the rule on ammunition use at the range is followed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.32.239 (talk) 15:25, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ammo from Range 

message: Should the article maybe have a section for crime rate vs other countries? I've seen it mentioned on the web that "switzerland has the lowest crime rate in the world due to it's unique stance on gun control".
I couldn't get a grip on the truth of that position at all by reading the article. --Meepdeedoo (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime rates vs other countries? 

message: I deleted this picture: 
The article correctly states: "the transport has to be direct". Doing errands while transporting your army rifle is illegal. Therefore the picture shouldn't be used in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjaminKay (talk • contribs) 11:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  wiki picture displaying illegal behavior 

message: The article discusses laws and regulations concerning firearm ownership, trading and use and abuse but doesn't even mention actual politics - does a significant anti-gun lobby even exist? It should be titled Firearm law in Switzerland or something similar but not include the deceptive term "politics". Roger (talk) 08:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: From the article it looks like they are anti-military, not anti-gun as such. They don't seem to explicitly oppose civilian gun ownership, shooting sports, hunting. Either way my point is that the title of this article is incorrect because it does not discuss gun politics as such. Roger (talk) 18:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See Bullet Counter Points: The Truth About Guns in Switzerland. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:23, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What politics? 

message: :Note. This section was moved from the top where it had been incorrectly placed.
The article is liberally sprinkled with German words giving an impression of expertise, but Switzerland has a multitude of languages and Swiss citizens (and recruits) not talking German neither use nor know these words. In addition to being gratuitous and possibly plain wrong, the affectation of using German words in the English-language article is insulting to them.
Given how the intention of the article can't help but being entangled with the debate on US gun control (see the rants below), one thing needs to be stressed further: to the overwhelming majority of army-incorporated Swiss citizens - who aren't volunteers but are drafted - the care of a firearm imposed on them outside the days of service is a nuisance rather that an asset. This of course contrasts with the case of purchased guns and makes the comparison/statistics quite misleading.
178.238.167.236 (talk) 10:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: German WTF, US gun control debate entanglement

message: See: Bearing arms in Switzerland. Quote from that page: 
Strict legislation in Switzerland has made it extremely difficult to obtain a license to bear arms, and the trend is moving towards even stricter laws. For information purposes only, 400 people had a license to bear arms in the canton of Geneva in 1998. Only eight "survivors" still have authorization today. Understandable when you realize how little violent crime there is in Switzerland.
The following source indicates 10.3% of households in Switzerland possessed handguns in 2004 or 2005. Is there more recent info? The quote higher up seems to indicate that handgun ownership may be falling. The percentages in table 18 linked below are by household. 
*Table 18 on page 279 of Criminal Victimisation in International Perspective, by the International Crime Victims Survey. Table 18 heading: "Ownership of firearms and handguns in countries and main cities (percentages). 1989-2005 ICVS and 2005 EU ICS." From the report intro: "A large portion of the latest data in this report comes from the European Survey on Crime and Safety (EU ICS), organised by a consortium lead by Gallup Europe, co-financed by the European Commission’s Directorate General for Research and Technology Development."
*Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993. By Lydia Saad. October 26, 2011. Gallup report. "Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property. This is up from 41% a year ago and is the highest Gallup has recorded since 1993, albeit marginally above the 44% and 45% highs seen during that period."
People also want reliable stats in order to compare household handgun stats by country with homicide rates by country. See chart to the right and List of countries by intentional homicide rate.
In 2011, 72% of the 8,583 homicides committed using firearms in the United States were committed using handguns. Source: Expanded Homicide Data Table 8 - Murder Victims by Weapon, 2007-2011. By the FBI (U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation). --Timeshifter (talk) 08:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Percent of households with handguns 

message: I request this be removed as Switzerland does in fact have a free standing army. They do not rely on a national militia, that is a terrible rumor.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.78.181.159 (talk) 04:10, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Switzerland does not have a standing army" 

message: I'm changing where it says "hunters do not need one [a gun permit] for buying typical hunting rifles" to read "hunters do not need one for buying typical bolt-action hunting rifles". Hunters still need a permit for semi-auto hunting rifles. Freddiefreelance (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conditions under the 1999 Gun Act 

message: So, I found it very odd that someone edited the article to add the 75% gun homicide rate compared to overall homicide rate and decided to check the official website of the Swiss goverment.
I found this:
http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/19/03/02/key/02/10.html
There you can download an excel document where the crime and gun crime from 2009 until 2014 is stated. If you downloaded it and check it out, you will notice that the rates are completely wrong.
The real rates are:
15 gun homicides out of 53 homicides. The 40 figure is including attempted gun homicide. So it's certainly not 75% of all homicides!
Also, why not update the statistic with the rates for 2014 since these are already included? 
The rates for 2014 are as follow:
* 41 homicides
* 7 were committed with guns
All this information is freely available in that link that I provided.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zorthianator (talk • contribs) 06:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The same thing is occurring with other articles on firearms issues. When current data does not mesh with certain arguments being made, the current data is removed in favor of older data! Carwon (talk) 14:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The gun crime rate is false. 

message: In the 'prohibited weapons' section of this entry there is a reference to 'Skidding with armrest'. This is pretty obscure  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.195.230 (talk) 08:02, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Unless explained, this should be removed. Robvanvee 08:18, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the wrong translation of . -- ZH8000 (talk) 09:45, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prohibited weaponry 

message: I think that term is overused in this article, and I am not even sure if the German term "Milliz" could really be translated with the word "militia". In the anglo-saxon sphere, militia likely infers the brave soldiers under George Washington or other political leaders, when soldiers were quickly recruited, some of them with their own arms to serve. But that is not really how the Swiss Army works, they are drafted, and swear a code to the nation, and not to any sub-group. They obey orders from a centralistic type system and the Swiss Army also employs professional instructors. Maybe because (some) Swiss soldiers have their weapons at home, but in essence it's more a people's army (Volksarmee) than a militia. Again, there are no militia units there that would act on their own or something, and private gun ownership does not always overlap with military rank or position. Occasionally, these terms are taken up by political groups, mostly to the right, outside of Switzerland, and it makes it look like the Swiss are armed to be part of some vigilanti force, nothing is further from the truth (Osterluzei (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Militia?

message: My edit was recently reverted, under the belief that I had not read the applicable laws. I had, but I and the reverter took into consideration different areas.
In my edit, I considered 514.54 art. 27 abs. 1, the French version of which reads:
:Toute personne qui porte une arme dans un lieu accessible au public ou qui transporte une arme doit être titulaire d'un permis de port d'armes. Le titulaire de ce permis doit le conserver sur lui et le présenter sur demande aux organes de la police ou des douanes. L'art. 28, al. 1, est réservé.
:Everyone who carries a gun in a public place or who transports a gun must hold a Carry Permit. The holder of this permit must carry it on their person and present it on request to police or customs officials. Art. 28 abs. 1 lists exceptions.
To me, the wording "To carry a loaded firearm in public or outdoors" implies that it is perfectly legal in Switzerland to carry an unloaded gun on your hip wherever you wish, which is not the case according to the above section. There is nothing about the gun being loaded or unloaded, so I sought to correct it. But I grant that such correction does not take into account the law's allowances for regular transport of firearms, which I have incorporated into my newest edit. Pokajanje|Talk 07:06, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you are right: it is misleading to write about "loaded firearm" only. The Transporting guns section already exists. I made a reference to it. -- ZH8000 (talk) 11:55, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carrying firearms in public 

message: Buying guns: According to the article, SR 514.541 art. 12, passed in 2008, amended in 2014, explicitly prohibits the purchase or ownership of weapons to nationals of eight states: Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Algeria and Albania.
I checked the law in German as it stood on 1 July 2016 and there was no mention of any of those countries.   
https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19983208/index.html
514.54 Bundesgesetz über Waffen, Waffenzubehör und Munition (Waffengesetz, WG) vom 20. Juni 1997 (Stand am 1. Juli 2016) Mumbo-jumbophobe (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You must lookup the correct law (WV, not WG). -- ZH8000 (talk) 07:02, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: WV 514.541 Art. 12

message: "Firearms legislation in Switzerland is comparatively liberal, more similar to gun politics in the United States"
Legislation is not politics.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisca123 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That is concerning me also. It seemed to be trying to make a political point on American Gun Control, which would be inappropriate, particularly in the lead paragraph. That's not the topic.GliderMaven (talk) 23:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  First paragraph -  comparing apples and tube socks 

message: The English in parts of this article is something appalling. It has clearly been edited by non native English speaker(s) who clearly do not have the competence to edit the English Wikipedia. I have made a start it improving it (but only a start), but have neither the time nor the familiarity with Switzerland's gun laws to do the job justice. 86.149.136.154 (talk) 12:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article should be in English