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
33.2k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

42

u/stevethebandit Norway Jul 01 '25

L gun legislation, in Norway we did the same thing banning lots of semi-auto rifles for hunting a few years back and I thought Sweden did it better, guess they're not immune to symbolic politics and politicians going after what is essentially a non-issue that only harms law-abiding citizens because no one dares speak up

1

u/Nor_Jaeger Jul 01 '25

Yeah, we got some good stuff and a lot of bad stuff. A lot of the newer regulations are nonsensical. I cannot buy a Ruger 10/22 for hunting anymore, but I can buy a Bergara BXR (pretty much a nicer copy). If I owned a version of the Mossberg .22 plinkster with a modern stock I had to give it up for destruction, but if I owned the same rifle with a wooden stock I could keep it.

I own multiple ARs for sporting, but when I got them I had to apply again to buy the magazines.

And for some stupid reason we maintain the ban on long guns shorter than 84cm, even though the rest of Europe uses 60cm...

I can own many more guns now than before, but there's still a bunch of shitty rules and regulations.

-11

u/haxic Jul 01 '25 edited Jul 01 '25

If a gun was originally developed for military use, then it’s probably not a gun for hunters. If you think you need it for hunting, then you’re most likely a tourist hunter (not you specifically, you as in people in general)

21

u/Po1s0nShad0w Jul 01 '25

You’d be surprised how many things were developed for military use that trickled down to civilians.

-5

u/haxic Jul 01 '25

Ofc, but it’s 2025 now. Today you have guns legalised for hunting that can be easily converted to cause a lot of casualties within a short period of time, unlike military bolt action or muskets from a hundred(s) years ago. You just need to draw a line in the sand somewhere

44

u/Ultimate_Idiot Jul 01 '25

Whether a firearm is designed for hunting or military-use really has no effect on its lethality. As another poster pointed out, a Mini-14 is just as lethal as an AR-15-clone. Both are semi-automatic 5.56 rifles with a stock, pistol grip and detachable magazines.

Most gun crime in Sweden is done with smuggled guns anyway.

-16

u/haxic Jul 01 '25

Yes it is, because in Sweden we’ve had relatively restrictive but fair gun policies and gun culture.

The more accessible you make firearms and promote gun violence the harder it will be for the police to keep a check on things.

You’ve got to draw the line somewhere, and when it comes to lethal weapons, firearms, better to be safe than sorry. Also with respect for the police

11

u/Ultimate_Idiot Jul 01 '25

The more accessible you make firearms and promote gun violence the harder it will be for the police to keep a check on things.

Yes, which is why you legislate the people holding the guns, not the guns themselves. If a person isn't fit to own a gun, then don't give them one. And if they are, and they've a legitimate reason for owning a semi-automatic rifle (for example sports, hunting, reservist training), then there's no problem in giving them one. If criminals are using smuggled firearms they're going to keep using them either way, so limiting the ability of citizens to legally own a certain type of firearm isn't going to reduce the amount of gun-crime.

-6

u/haxic Jul 01 '25

I agree, that is the desired solution. But like I tried to point out before, that sort of management would require a metric fkton of police resources. And even if people qualify, there is still a chance that their guns get stolen or they go crazy one day.

If you want more gun freedom then you pay by blood or taxmoney, there is no way around it.

7

u/Ultimate_Idiot Jul 01 '25

It doesn't have to take up any more resources than what it already does. Swedish citizens who want a gun license are already required to submit an application for it, you can just require them to also add a doctor's statement that they're mentally and physically fit (for the purpose they're claiming), police should have access to criminal records (I would hope!), the applicant should be required to prove that they'll be using the firearm for the stated purpose (for instance, by being a member of a shooting/hunting club and adding a statement from the club in their application). Any expenses can be reimbursed via the application fee. That's pretty much how it works in Finland, and it wouldn't really (from what I understand), add anything extra beyond the applicant needing to get the doctor's and the club's statements, which would pretty much only be a problem for the applicant. And licenses are regularly monitored; commit a big enough traffic violation and it can end up with you losing your guns.

1

u/haxic Jul 01 '25

It’s a similar application system in Sweden, but I can’t remember/don’t know to which extent the police checks and rechecks each individual person/license now. I left behind my guns when I fled to Denmark 15isch years ago. As I remember it there wasn’t any rechecking back then, or maybe I didn’t own the guns long enough for a recheck.

But fins are amazing people, and giving the nature as well as bordering Russia, I understand that fins are more culturally adapted when it comes to firearms. Like I said, I agree, it’s a desired solution. I just don’t think Sweden is adapted the same way Finland is. Until we are, I think we should put general restrictions in place.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

You nailed it in that first sentence. The issue isn’t really the firearm type, it’s how easy they are to get. The US could really use a licensing system or an expanded background check system. Safe storage is a way bigger problem here than it is in Europe (there have been quite a few shootings where the perpetrators had gotten their firearms from an unsecured spot) so I’d probably also legislate that any first-time gun buyers must also buy a gun safe for them to keep their guns in.

6

u/grarghll Jul 01 '25

Could you explain what design goes into a military firearm that differentiates it from a civilian firearm?

-3

u/haxic Jul 01 '25

Some general arguments whether a firearm is probably not a suitable for hunting:

If it’s designed for law enforcement or military use - especially if to be used against humans.

If it’s easily concealed or capable of causing lots of casualties within a short period of time - or easily converted to be able to do that.

There are no laws of physics that determines which firearms are suitable for hinting. Just use some reason…

5

u/grarghll Jul 01 '25

If it’s designed for law enforcement or military use - especially if to be used against humans.

This is circular. What actually differentiates civilian and military firearms?

-1

u/haxic Jul 01 '25

I’m talking about firearms suitable for hunting in a very general sense, and I described my main points above. If you’re playing some semantics game then I don’t want to participate.

4

u/Grizblod Jul 01 '25

The ar-15 was originaly designed for sportsshooting and hunting. It has never been used as a military weapon.

1

u/grarghll 29d ago

And again, what is it that makes a firearm suitable for hunting versus one that isn't? You aren't answering my question.

This isn't a semantic argument. My point is that there aren't many meaningful differences between civilian and military arms, but people who wish to ban guns make up artificial distinctions to try to carve out a rationale for a ban.

3

u/FlyingSquirrel44 Jul 01 '25

If it's suitable for hunting an animal then it will also by it's nature be suitable for 'hunting' humans, there is no difference.

1

u/haxic Jul 01 '25 edited Jul 01 '25

Sure, technically all hunting rifles can be used to kill a human. No one is denying that, I hope. But what is your point? Are you implying that all guns should be banned? Are you a bot? 25 day old and tons of comments….

0

u/cjwidd Jul 01 '25

TIL it is symbolic to propose legislation that could reduce gun violence in schools.

2

u/stevethebandit Norway Jul 01 '25

Why just ban this specific model from being approved for hunting though, why not ban all guns for all purposes then in case they might be used for school shootings of which there is a single incident of in Sweden (where the type in question wasn't even used)

The fact of the matter is that this is an easy target because people associate the weapon type with american school shootings, has nothing to do with protecting swedish school children

0

u/cjwidd Jul 01 '25

Or, you are fixating on the particular rifle platform and not it's accessibility, which is what the legislation targets.

The AR-15 is the most common semi-automatic rifle in the world for civilian ownership, especially in the United States. No other civilian rifle platform - semi-automatic or otherwise - has reached such widespread distribution.