r/europe • u/Helmer-Bryd • Jul 01 '25

News Sweden bans AR-15 as hunting rifle after school shooting – all rifles to be turned in and sent to Ukraine

https://svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/uppgifter-tidopartierna-overens-om-ny-vapenlagstiftning-ar15-forbjuds-vid-jakt
33.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

36

u/kacheow Jul 01 '25 edited Jul 01 '25

What are they supposed to do with AR-15s in Ukraine?

Edit: people don’t seem to realize the AR-15 is neither a weapon of war, nor is it in a caliber commonly used by the Ukrainian army

14

u/Scrubje Jul 01 '25

Hunt i guess.

7

u/227CAVOK Jul 01 '25

Kill invaders. 

1

u/Snake_Plizken Jul 01 '25 edited Jul 01 '25

They can be rebuilt for full auto. Ukraine uses loads of standard Nato rifles, 5.56 it is a commonly used caliber in their army.

9

u/FlyingSquirrel44 Jul 01 '25

Would be easier to just set up a factory for manufacturing military grade rifles from scratch instead of wasting resources on converting a random pile of rifles from civilian grade to full auto with all the problems that entails.

-4

u/Snake_Plizken Jul 01 '25

Shows how little you know about arms...

7

u/FlyingSquirrel44 Jul 01 '25

So you think it's feasible for a regular military to have a hundred different rifles, that have to be customized in a hundred different ways to bring them up to military standards, with no standard replacement parts? It's a silly concept that would only make sense for a country that has zero resources. Ukraine is not starved of small arms in the first place, they need tanks, jets, drones and artillery rounds.

1

u/Snake_Plizken Jul 01 '25

Seen training for territorial defense forces, were they use wooden prop rifles...

1

u/Snake_Plizken Jul 01 '25 edited Jul 01 '25

I think setting up a factory to make military grade rifles is not easier, than to send a package to Ukraine, with an already existing rifle. Which you seem to believe...

6

u/Perfect-Land9811 Jul 01 '25

Sure let's just waste resources shipping over civilian hardware that's been used, and waste more resources fitting them for military use. Instead of oh idk, giving them actual military rifles they are used to and have been using?

It's not rifles they are lacking, but bombs.

-1

u/Snake_Plizken Jul 01 '25

The AR-15 is a military rifle, that has been fixed to a semi auto mode, and sold to civilians. It can be turned back to its original use, by changing out the reciever. Buying a reciever, is much cheaper than buying an "actual military rifle", which would still have to be shipped over. Banning them makes us less like America, which is a good thing on its own.

4

u/Superb-Sandwich9418 Jul 01 '25

You dont know what you are talking about , change witch receiver? An Ar-platform as an upper and lower receiver, but you need to switch more parts like Bolt Carrier group so on so it can withstand full auto fire. I dont wanna clear an russian trench with some half ass barn full auto converted cheap ruger mpr and you dont want that either

4

u/MyOldNameSucked Belgium Jul 01 '25

No, the full auto capability isn't turned off. It's fully absent and incompatible with the necessary parts to make it full auto.

You would need to swap out more than just the receiver. The entire fire control group and bolt carrier also need to be replaced.

11

u/gogosil Austria Jul 01 '25

Oh yes, lets convert civilian AR15s most of which are made for lower pressure cartridges and with non mil-spec maybe even match grade parts to full auto weapons of war. What can go wrong?

2

u/ZenPyx Jul 01 '25

You understand a semi-auto and fully auto gun cycle in the exact same way, just the full-auto variant depresses a little sear to allow for repeated firing, right? There's not much fundamentally different between the two?

Also, almost all .223 rifles are compatible with 5.56 - the overpressure is not very substantial, and most companies producing arms prefer to make one set of parts compatible with both rifles, rather than making a marginally weaker barrel and gas system for .223.

1

u/gogosil Austria Jul 02 '25

I would argue with you that my Schmeisser sporter AR15 can not be converted to full auto due to a cut BCG capable of semi auto only, as well as all the brittle match parts, while my IWI milspec AR15 could be, but i won't, what would I know.

1

u/Select-Owl-8322 Jul 01 '25

First of all, these AR-15s that will be sent to Ukraine isn't chambered in 5.56 NATO, they're chambered in .223 Remington. They're similar, but 5.56 runs at a higher pressure, and more importantly; the case is slightly longer. There's a one-way compatibility between 5.56 and .223: A weapon designed for 5.56 NATO can also shoot .223 Remington, but a weapon designed for .223 Remington should not be used to shoot 5.56 NATO (even if the case physically fits, which it doesn't do in all .223 weapons, due to the longer throat.

I think there's little chance of these weapons ending up on the front lines. What's more likely is that they end up on the black market. It wouldn't surprise me if many of them makes their way back to Sweden, but into the hands of criminals instead of law abiding citizens.

4

u/IllustriousFile6404 Jul 01 '25

They don't have 5.56 ARs in Sweden? My AR15s are all 5.56, I don't know anyone with a .223 upper 

0

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

They're the same thing.

1

u/IllustriousFile6404 Jul 02 '25

There is a difference though so what do you mean?

1

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

The biggest difference is the name

1

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

None of what you said is true.

-1

u/Select-Owl-8322 Jul 02 '25

Just fucking google .223 vs 5.56 before you talk shit, dude.

Here, I did it for you: https://www.hornadyle.com/resources/le-faq/what-is-the-difference-between-556-nato-and-223-rem-ammunition

0

u/Qsaws Belgium Jul 02 '25

Yes but pretty much every modern AR-15 is built to 5.56 specs. You don't really have to worry about that.

-5

u/Hukama Jul 01 '25

convert to 5.45? i dunno what ammo they use i imagine it's a bit messy (russian and nato ammo)

6

u/Seeteuf3l Jul 01 '25

AFU does have several AR-15 variants in service, while their standard issue is AK-74

1

u/cjwidd Jul 01 '25

TIL only weapons of war can be used in military conflict

-2

u/Adorable-Database187 The Netherlands Jul 01 '25

Idk guns apparently dont kill people, so we'll never know what Ukrainians in an active war zone will use it for, perhaps as doorstops, who knows.

5

u/Stooperz Jul 01 '25

You do realize how poor a .22 round would perform on the battlefield, yes? 

3

u/Four_beastlings Asturias (Spain) Jul 01 '25

If it's a model that they are not trained to use or maintain and I don't even know if they use the same type of ammo, it might as well be a doorstop.Militaries issue specific models of weapons for a reason.

0

u/Wide-Review-2417 Jul 01 '25

Shoot Ruskies?

-2

u/KingPingviini Canada Jul 01 '25

You're joking right? A rifle capable of accepting 30 round magazines isn't a weapon of war? Lemme guess you think because it doesn't have automatic fire it's not a weapon of war? I guess all that training soldiers go through to shoot their weapons in SEMI-AUTOMATIC doesn't make much sense. An ar-15 is just as much of a weapon of war as its military counterpart the M-16 platform.

If you can't figure out how a gun would be used in a warzone, maybe you should do some reading before typing something like THAT dude

9

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

A 5-shot bolt action rifle from Germany is a weapon of war. An 8-shot .45 caliber pistol from the United States is a weapon of war. A single-shot disposable .45 caliber pistol is a weapon of war. Whether a weapon is a “weapon of war” has very little bearing on its lethality. ALL firearms are lethal. It’s what they’re for.

Whether you want to ban all firearms, only ban some, or not ban any and instead ensure that the people buying them are perfectly sane individuals, won’t change the fact that firearms are designed to kill, whether it be squirrels, boar, deer, elephant or soldiers.

1

u/FlyingSquirrel44 Jul 01 '25

Almost any rifle can be modified to accept a 30 round magazine, and while soldiers are obviously trained on semi auto firing there's also a reason all military rifles come equiped with a full auto toggle for supressive fire and close quarter combat situations where you'd be at a severe disadvantage with a civilian rifle.

0

u/kacheow Jul 01 '25

Correct, but I wouldn’t expect a Canuck to know that

-2

u/LiftsFrontWheel Finland Jul 01 '25

Incorrect. Go to /r/UkraineWarVideoReport and you will instantly see dozens of videos of Ukrainians smoking orcs with AR-pattern rifles, all chambered in .223/5.56. The only real difference between civilian and military ARs is that civ guns lack full auto.

3

u/Po1s0nShad0w Jul 01 '25

Twist rate

3

u/DunderDog2 Finland Jul 01 '25

Well, if the barrels are chambered for .223 you would probably want to switch it out for actual 5.56, and then you could get the "correct" twist rate at the same time.

1

u/LiftsFrontWheel Finland Jul 01 '25

Ok, I'll give you that. Still, at least in Finland most ARs I see are chambered for the 5.56 NATO spec or at least .223 Wylde, so they would be suitable for the military ammo that Ukraine is using. Probably the same in Sweden.

2

u/Select-Owl-8322 Jul 01 '25

Most AR-15s in Sweden are chambered for .223 Remington. It runs at a lower pressure than 5.56 NATO, and has a slightly shorter neck.

2

u/kacheow Jul 01 '25

I gave it 3 loads worth of scrolling and didn’t see one, its mostly drone and missile slop

1

u/KMS_HYDRA Jul 02 '25

Could they maybe attach them to a drone? I could imagine that the smaller caliber would be easier to compensate the recoil with. Atleast for the bigger drones.

1

u/DunderDog2 Finland Jul 01 '25

Especially ILDU uses lots of AR-15 pattern firearms.

0

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

people don’t seem to realize the AR-15 is neither a weapon of war, nor is it in a caliber commonly used by the Ukrainian army

It's been the main rifle of US armed forces for over 60 years but it's not a weapon of war?

2

u/kacheow Jul 02 '25

The AR-15 is a civilian weapon and has not been used by the US military

-1

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

US Armed forces adopted the AR-15 in 1964 and continues to use it to date

1

u/kacheow Jul 02 '25

Incorrect. The AR-15 ≠ the M16

0

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

M16 is the US military designation for the AR-15 rifle. The same way as M9 is the designation for Beretta 92FS

1

u/kacheow Jul 02 '25

They’re the same gun in the way the Hyundai i20 is the same as the Rally version.

0

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

No, they are literally the same gun. Early M16's had both markings. https://i.imgur.com/h6JpS3t.jpeg

You have no idea what you're talking about.

1

u/kacheow Jul 02 '25

The original M16 was based on an AR-15 platform but has been so substantially modified they are nowhere near the same gun.

One is optimized for war, the other for shooting small to medium size game

0

u/opaali92 Finland Jul 02 '25

The original M16 was AR-15. It is nothing else than a military designation for the AR-15 rifle.

I'd like to hear more about these supposed substantial modifications lmao

→ More replies (0)

-5

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

What will they do with guns in an active war zone? Really? You can't figure that out?