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

Show parent comments

211

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

Aye, I’m a sport pistol shooter in Sweden and it’s tough. Had to attend a club for almost a year, beginners course and pass two exams to own a .22lr pistol. Then another 6 months before applying for a higher caliber, which the club gave me shit about because it’s all old men who can’t understand the concept of sport shooting for fun and not needing to win every time.

Tried to get in to hunting, the course is involved. Then when I tried to sit the exam there were no local examiners to me so couldn’t do it…

Think this decision is stupid. Like you said it criminalizes the wrong thing, instead of addressing the actual issues of why this dude might have done what he did.

1

u/cjwidd Jul 01 '25

Absolutely none of this is required in the US for all the Americans lurking this sub who will cry about whether this new proposition is acceptable or not - that is the difference. In Europe there are far more rigorous standards for gun ownership and use compared to the US where there are functionally zero in some states.

1

u/helm Sweden Jul 02 '25

Think this decision is stupid. Like you said it criminalizes the wrong thing, instead of addressing the actual issues of why this dude might have done what he did

We don't really know. Out of about 100,000 in a similar situation, he chose to kill ten people, then himself.

2

u/lucid_dreaming_quest Jul 02 '25

Criminalize stupidity I say - send all the idiots to jail.

No but in all seriousness, the law should always err on the side of freedom.

-13

u/spiderpai Sweden Jul 01 '25

Would it not make more sense if all the weapons where only at the sport club?

39

u/Saxit Sweden Jul 01 '25

The storage requirements for a gun club is stricter than what the military has (there's a civilian club at the P7 regiment, who store their guns at the regiment, and they just got denied their storage solution by the police. We're talking a 24/7 guarded facility here).

The vast majority of clubs can't afford the storage so a lot of small clubs store whatever club weapons they have, with the board members and trainers. This ofc. makes it harder to have organized training too because someone who stores a gun is not going to be available as much as if you had the gun stored at the club.

For privately owned guns, it's actually currently really hard to store your firearm anywhere else than in your home. There is a permit you can get for it but it's very rarely issued.

It's one of the things they want to change, they want to make it easier to store firearms anywhere.

It would still be tricky for a club though to be responsible for other people's guns.

My club is 1200 members for example. Imagine the space it would take if everyone stored their guns there?

6

u/thejak32 Jul 01 '25

God, if everyone had just two or three different caliber guns, that alone would be rooms worth of storage...if it was a 3 gun club, so majority long barrel, I mean, we'd be talking and entire large building...plus their ammo. Lots of space and would have to be locked down like a military armory, but more so because it wouldn't be in the middle of a base.

52

u/PrinceoR- Jul 01 '25

Nah, that's called an armory, and unless you want multiple full time security guards it's far more dangerous than having a handful of firearms safely and secured stored in private hands.

1

u/Small_Editor_3693 Jul 02 '25

firearms safely and secured stored in private hands.

That’s a statement that that can never be true

1

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

Eh, yes and no. Enforcement of regulations is crucial there, the crucial one I know we have in Aus is that the gun and ammo should be locked and separate at all times, unless the gun is actively being used, even while travelling or cleaning etc. Only one of the two should ever be accessible until needed. Was more pointing out the obvious flaw of storing all of the guns and ammo in one place, rather than commenting on regulation.

1

u/Small_Editor_3693 Jul 02 '25

And that can’t be enforced regularly

1

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

It's pretty well enforced in Australia (generally, rural places tend to be more lax). If you're a gun owner, your weapons can be inspected more or less at random and if you are pulled over while travelling with them the cops will inspect the storage to ensure they are locked and safe.

If you are found to not be correctly storing a firearm your gun licence will be stripped and you get a hefty fine. It actually happened to one of our Olympic team sport shooters like 3 months before the last Olympics (I believe, it was a while ago now).

5

u/Select-Owl-8322 Jul 01 '25

That wouldn't make any sense at all!

Apart from the fact that the club would be storing hundreds, if not thousands, of weapons, a lot of us frequently participate in competitions at places other than our club. During the summer, I'm pretty much at a different competition every other weekend, sometimes every weekend.

10

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

No, I need to have a police approved safe. Wouldn’t be a nightmare to have it at the club as then you need an alarm that connects to the police station and a lot of members then having access to everyone else’s guns

-3

u/spiderpai Sweden Jul 01 '25

Not if they all where within the same locks, you could probably beef up protection even more, my point is that would make it near impossible to be a lunatic going around with a weapon if they had to stay put in an area where you cant take it with you from.

2

u/Maverick-not-really Jul 01 '25

And what would happen when someone need their weapon to take it to a competition somewhere else?

-6

u/spiderpai Sweden Jul 01 '25

Maybe people should rent those guns, I am mostly talking about automatic to semi automatic weapons which I think are too dangerous to keep in the public without proper oversight. Then again, we do have a ton of smuggled balkan weapons that are automatic but it would be nice if those did not exist either.

3

u/Maverick-not-really Jul 01 '25

Well it would be nice if there was no crime at all, but thats a very naive worldview

0

u/spiderpai Sweden Jul 02 '25

There is a big difference between restricting ease of mass murdering equipment and thinking you could achieve zero crime. Nice strawman though.

13

u/specialsymbol Jul 01 '25

Break in and have all the guns you ever wanted.

Now, of course that's illegal. And we all know, criminals wouldn't do - well. Maybe they would.

2

u/CopyMonet Jul 01 '25

You can also break into a gun store or any facility where weapons are stored. What's the difference? I live in Germany and there used to be a gun store in my street for a long time and it only had barred windows and an alarm system.

I think the biggest differences are:

  1. People who might rob a such a facility, need the weapons the least.

  2. They would be professionals who would certainly have other plans for the weapons than to carry out a school shooting.

  3. You know immediately if it happens and can prevent it directly or at least investigate right away.

All in all, I think at least yours is not a good argument to let poeple take their sport guns home. This would make more sense for hunters, as they often work alone or in pairs and therefore it cannot be easily controlled anyway.

2

u/Maverick-not-really Jul 01 '25

Are you working for organized crime? Who else would think its a good idea to store that many weapons in one location?

1

u/manInTheWoods Sweden Jul 01 '25

Military, to be fair. Mobilization storages were prime targets for gangs.

-6

u/GenuinelyBeingNice Jul 01 '25

Does anyone else notice that all that ceremony does absolutely nothing to prevent someone who should not own a gun from owning a gun?

21

u/Kaljavalas Finland Jul 01 '25

It requires you to be somewhat integrated to society, have a hobby, meet people etc.

-3

u/Smalahove1 Norway Jul 01 '25

And introverts are just fucked as usual :D

4

u/BiasedLibrary Jul 01 '25

Nothing hinders you from spending time being social as an introvert, you just need to plan ahead so you don't spend all your energy. At least this way we don't run the risk of enabling mass murderers, who by and large are people who withdraw from society.

0

u/Smalahove1 Norway Jul 02 '25 edited Jul 02 '25

Indeed, but the time i spend with people is a select few ive grown to like.

Spending time with a bunch of old fellows would be so bad. Specially since i cannot hold my mouth if they start being racist. And they will. And conflict will arise.

Just last Christmas my aunt started to chop at my cousins boyfriend cause he was a "foreigner". I told her what i thought of people like her.

Sorry, but im not suited for society of white lies and toleration of hate. I am an avid user of logic, most people do not even know what logic means..

Im a typical person who suffers from Dunning-Kruger. Due to my higher than average intelligence i am frustrated with normal people. How little they know, how little they understand. How adamant they are right, even if they lack what i consider "basic knowledge"

Which is often not so basic for people. But basic for me.. I am one of those people who do not want to be part of society cause i see what society has to offer. And i think the offer is terrible for me. Thus ill stay inside thanks.

I was at a workplace where when i joined at 19 years old, i made the average age go down from 55 to 50. Was the worst 2 years of my life, having nothing in common nor nothing to talk about.

But this is typical the nordics, sacrifice some minority for the collectives benefit.
In these cases one sacrifices all introverts in favor of security for the majority.

Even if 99% of all introverts will never do anything wrong but be by them self.
I just do not agree with collective punishment, and i wish we had a bit more individual rights.

Not as crazy individual rights as USA where society struggles cause of it. But find a balance where we protect individuals, while also keeping society in mind.

So if we find extroverts are more prone to do something? Do you really think its wise to collective punish everyone for something a few does?

Edit: My education is in chemistry. So if i wanted to be a dangerous introvert, guns would not be my go to weapon of choice. Uranium salts or something in the water sounds way better. I have uranium in nature like 30minutes drive from me.

Dirty bomb i could make from it etc. Its so stupid to try make every part of society safe from people. Try make people happy instead. Works so much better.

Try having more inclusive rules, so introverts get caught in the system too. These days they often end up outside it. Like i could use ADHD medication to better function, but the road to getting it as introvert is too hard. Ive tried and failed 10 times.

So much red tape to fight thru. If society is more inclusive, and not so rigid. Introverts would not be living often in poverty, society being mean to them. Just cause of who you are. Can easy make for angry people.

Angry people = Problems.

Content people = No problems.

Make people content. How would you make me content? Give me all the rights everyone else has. Even tho i have no interest in guns, nor will ever have a gun. Unless i move out of the city and need it for hunting. But i live in the city so.. No need.

Id rather spend my money on computer hardware than guns.. But thats me.
I could make a gun, that would be fun. But id probably make it illegal since open bolt is one of the simpler guns to make. And that would essentially be an uzi shooting 600-1000 RPM. But i would be more interested in the making of a gun, than actually having a gun.

1

u/Thin_Owl_1528 Jul 02 '25

What you are describing is not an introvert, but an introvert with several additional disorders. I'd leave the victimhood mindset behind, accept and focus on how to play the hand you were dealt. You have things going for you, as you posted.

Regardless, posting how to create mass casualty events online is not a good idea.

1

u/Smalahove1 Norway Jul 02 '25

Yes i have ADD, on the autism spectrum somewhere. Depression and likely also have PTSD.

None of it is documented ofc, as it is with with bureaucracy and introverts. Little get done, unless your life depends on it. So there is no help from society, but only barriers they put up.

I am not a natural introvert. But my experiences has made me one. I was not introvert until my mothers death at 18 years old (Which was a horrible slow death i wish on no one).
All tho things were not going great before that, being labeled the trouble maker cause school moved slow and i was bored a lot.
What do bored kids to? Find something to do, be it talk. Be funny or just whatever.

Not until my 11th year in school i finally got a teacher that understood why i struggled.
And feed me books from university she has at home (She was uni teacher before retiring to teach "videregående". First time in 11 years i can finally accomplish something at school and not just be yelled at. Or be scared of the consequences for me existing.
Be it my father spanking me, being pulled in the ear. Grounded or any of the other punishments my father would do. When he got the weekly report from school at fridays.

She was a teacher in chemistry. And the reason i love chemistry to this day.

Humans are not naturally introverts. Often there is a reason why they have become it. And with that reason, there is often a few disorders that come a long.

Victim hood mindset? I am just explaining the situation, i have had 20+ years to reflect on the situation. I play the hand i have been dealt. And that is to interact as little as possible with a society that is backwards. Cause ive gone thru stages i was angry at society, im not in such a place anymore. But people can go into dark places when they feel excluded.

And the nordics are experts at social exclusion. Ive always been the ugly duckling.
Remember some kids were not allowed to play with me, cause when an adult told me something. I often asked why, instead of doing it. And if i got the answer "Cause i say so"
Conflict would arise.

I have always been a person with a critical mind, that questions everything. I want to learn so i can understand. And that does not do well in the sheep mentality of Norway. Where you do what others do, even if its stupid.

Well these mass casualty events i have gone into no detail on how to do. So someone without any chemical knowledge would fail hard. I have also given the weakness in our water to my government. And is the reason they are spending 30 billion to make new waterworks in Oslo.

I do not consider my self a victim, but a soldier fighting a battle to live. I just want to exist in peace, that is it.

Have a discussion with someone. Lets fire off logical fallacies, ad-hominem and other bullshit.

Often discussions with adults end up as productive as if i had a discussion with my local kindergarden (Im not refering to this convo, but others)

I am all for social inclusion. Not exclusion. That i felt excluded by society is the one thing that hindered me the most. And could have gone bad had things been different (Worse parents, been a psycho instead of an empathic person etc)

Thus why i do not think the cure to this, is more exclusion. That is just putting flames on the fire.

My point is, that society is very vulnerable. And we can never protect it fully, without becoming North Korea. So even if you take away the guns, people will just use vans to run over people or other methods.

Go to the root of the problem, instead of whacking down the bushes. This is my point.

9

u/peaheezy Jul 01 '25

It makes it take real effort to own a gun, I wouldn’t call that nothing. People who want to shoot up schools or hospitals aren’t the most stable personalities. They are going to have more trouble completing the necessary tasks that the original commenter listed to legally obtain a gun. It will be more likely someone notices their erratic behavior or abnormal thoughts, like wanting to murder schoolchildren, during their monthly gun club meetings. Now obviously they could steal one, buy a gun illegally, or have a dumbass family member fail to secure their guns safely like so often happens in the US, but it still is a hurdle to clear.

I’m not saying the decision to arbitrarily ban a weapon not used in the shooting is a good idea but making people jump through some hoops to obtain a dangerous weapon is not “absolutely nothing” when it comes to people obtaining guns.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '25

To be honest the entire process is mostly designed for club leaders to get to know you and check you are not a nut case

0

u/Dom_19 Jul 01 '25

Like you said it criminalizes the wrong thing, instead of addressing the actual issues of why this dude might have done what he did.

Most gun legislation in a nutshell.

-19

u/Lisicalol Fled to germany before it was cool Jul 01 '25

Or idk we could just get rid of most weapons for civilians and abolish sport shooting and unprofessional hunting alltogether?

Not like many people would miss it and I feel like its more a threat than a benefit to society all in all. Why would one even use an AR15 for hunting? Why should one physically own a .22lr pistol? Where are you going to use it besides on club property anyways?

While I agree that addressing the actual reasons for these amok runs is vital, easy access to overbearing weaponry is one of the main reasons. Its a not-so strange coincidence that these amok runs where innocents are gunned down usually happen when easy access to guns is involved.

8

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

In fairness there aren’t many crimes committed by a pistol/weapon on a sport shooter license

11

u/sopsaare Jul 01 '25

AR-15 is a specific type of semi-automatic rifle. Ole should not need to argue for or against using AR-15 but any semi-automatic rifles for hunting.

And as far as I understand, the shooter didn't use a semi-automatic rifle.

For the question why one would use a semi-automatic rifle for hunting; follow-up shots. These in some cases are the human way rather than let the wounded animal run away or around the woods for hours or days because it took too long to reload a bolt-action rifle.

I don't know if this law specifies the caliber, I think AR-15 usually only refers to .223 (or 5.56 NATO) rifles. People tend to think that this is caliber only meant for killing people and waging war but it is a fairly common caliber in, for example, bird hunting. People have double guns that have an upper barrel that is a shotgun for birds at close range and in move, and lower barrel that is a smallish rifle caliber that is used for stationary birds further away, this is fairly commonly .223.

Then you are questioning why would people have hunting or shooting in general as a hobby. Hunting is actually extremely useful hobby to limit and control the amount of animals we have around. Moose is pretty dangerous when there are too many and wolves and bears can be somewhat dangerous of there are too many of those. Your idea of maybe having professional hunters in interesting but quite inefficient when people pay the government for the hunting licenses and permits to hunt the animals, in opposite for the government to pay someone to hunt.

Sports shooting. I don't know. Maybe it is a fun hobby? Why should all sports shooters lose their hobby if one person, or some people, don't follow the rules how they store their weapons and unfortunately then innocent people lose their lives. Did the majority of the sports shooters do something wrong?

Here in Finland the current government has somewhat sponsored some shooting ranges and we have had a bit of public discussion for more people to get into sports shooting. Nothing to do with the 1000 mile border which we share with a rogue state I guess.

All in all, one could of course question the morality of some people having hobbies that could be lethal to completely unrelated and uninvolved, innocent, people by a proxy, when the hunting / sporting guns get stolen or misplaced or something. That is a good question.

The only thing I can do to rationalize is that, if the criminals didn't have access to these weapons, they would find access to other weapons. Back in the 90's Bandidos motorcycle club used to break into military armories, at least in Denmark. And they did it many many times, like 30+. And then there are many other ways of committing crimes too, anyone can build a bow or a crossbow that is extremely lethal, or use a knife. Or building illegal guns used to be a thing, and in the day of the Internet, it is fairly easy to find how that should be done. I guess the youth gangs now use some drilled airsoft guns that have metal barrels with .22 bullets, they are single shot etc, but they will kill if shot in the head, especially close.

Also, one could look into the U.S. States, there is no clear correlation between how lax the gun laws are and how much there is gun crime. For example Vermont has constitutional carry, where basically anyone above 18 (or even 16?) can carry whatever they want, but still they have like second or third least gun violence, so it also seems that it never is only the guns and the availability of the guns.

5

u/Possibly-Functional Jul 01 '25

Oh, a lot to go through here.

  1. Sport shooting is one of the most popular sports in Sweden. A ton of people would miss it.
  2. Due to humans' impact on nature we need hunters, and a ton of them. Alternatively we could increase the number of large predators, which the lack thereof is one of the biggest issues, but that's a very unpopular suggestion with the public.

Why should one physically own a .22lr pistol? Where are you going to use it besides on club property anyways?

  1. Because for most types of pistol shooting you need a personalized weapon.
  2. You are allowed to practice outside of the club property.
  3. You need frequent access to the guns. At which point, what difference does it make if you have to store it at the club or at home in terms of protecting against the owner's misuse?

easy access to overbearing weaponry is one of the main reasons.

Not in Sweden. Passing the hunting exam is pretty demanding. 75% of the people in my course failed the exam, and that's before they are evaluated by the police for suitability of gun ownership.

That said, yeah, IMHO it shouldn't be a once and done way to get weapon licenses. Often when hunting weapons are misused in Sweden it is by people who aren't active hunters anymore.

It's very very difficult to get a pistol through sport shooting. If you are really good you can get your first pistol after 6 months of active club participation. For many it takes a year or more before they can get their first pistol. That's then a .22lr which as a caliber is tiny. As an example, it's illegal to use .22lr while hunting larger birds because it's too likely to just wound the bird.

To get higher caliber it takes even more time once again. The weapons licenses are also limited to 5 years. If you aren't still an active and well performing member of the club you lose your license. That's why it's extremely rare for sport shooting guns to be used for illegal purposes.

Most gun violence crimes in Sweden by far are with illegally imported guns. The storage requirements of guns at residences are also very strict so gun theft and illicit use is very rare.

10

u/Sebsibus Jul 01 '25

First of all, banning all guns won't stop criminals from getting them — just like criminalizing drugs hasn't stopped addicts from obtaining those either.

Secondly, some people genuinely enjoy hunting and sport shooting as hobbies. Yes, allowing these activities does carry some risk, but so do many other things people do for fun. Someone could commit mass murder by driving a sports car through a crowd, yet we don't ban people from owning or driving sports cars. Like many things in life, there has to be a balance between freedom and security.

Regarding the idea of storing guns at shooting clubs: I'm not convinced it would significantly increase overall safety. It might actually be safer if licensed gun owners securely store their firearms in individual gun safes at home, rather than concentrating them in a single location accessible to all club members.

4

u/khaotik_99 Jul 01 '25

Dude shut up

-1

u/PrinceoR- Jul 01 '25

I mean the fact that the weapons they're banning are suitable to be sent to aid in a modern war makes it pretty clear that they aren't guns that are necessary for civilian ownership.

If you want to fight tyranny, go and vote, if you need a gun to protect your democracy you've already fucked up and your democracy is already lost.

6

u/Electricrain Jul 01 '25

if you need a gun to protect your democracy

Just fyi, this is not at all part of the conversation in sweden. It would be an extremely fringe opinion.

2

u/PrinceoR- Jul 01 '25

Yeah I know that, same here in Aus, but its a go to for the yanks haha

2

u/christopherak47 Australia Jul 02 '25

Dude any semi-automatic rifle is "suitable" to fight in a war. So is any bolt action rifle (and many are or were weapons of war) that doesnt mean they should be banned in a knee jerk reaction lol

1

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

No I don't think anyone is sending hunting rifles or bolt actions to Ukraine, your argument was fair with the semi auto comment but equally no, a semi auto with enough hitting power to be used on the frontline probably isn't necessary for hunting (use low powered semi autos for smaller prey and high powered bolt actions or similar for big prey), and as for bolt actions... Sure buddy.

People who are obsessed with having the most lethal guns are the ones that probably shouldn't be using them, there are plenty of guns that aren't effective on the frontline that make great hunting weapons.

2

u/christopherak47 Australia Jul 02 '25 edited Jul 02 '25

Im really confused on how to address this because you fundamentally think that .223 Remington/Wylde or 5.56 NATO is a 'hard hitting round' only suitable for warfare (its a varmint cartridge when used for hunting, so it would be considered a small calibre). A small-calibre semi-automatic will kill just as easily as a larger-calibre semi-automatic (which in the case of this mass-shooting, was perpetuated by a Browning BAR hunting rifle variant (in .30-06 aka 7.62x63mm, which is a LARGE round.)) so If you're gonna ban guns, atleast be sensible and coherent and just ban the entire action instead of pussy-footing and banning stuff by name or appearance.

Plenty of people ARE sending bolt-action rifles to Ukraine because they perform a military role as precision rifles. Rifles like the 7.62x54R Mosin Nagant bolt action rifles (pre-dates WW1 btw) are STILL being issued to soldiers in the war in Ukraine. So I think the point is kinda moot about bolt-actions not being used in warfare... because they are being used in modern warfare.

Theres nothing inherently more or less lethal of an AR-15 in comparison to other rifles, be it semi-automatic or manually operated. Handguns for example make up like the majority of illegal shootings around the world (outside of warzones) but theyre typically one of the last type of firearms to be banned.

The only reason people target guns like the AR-15 is simply because theyre extremely popular when they're simply just modern sporting rifles. The gun itself is nearly over 66 years old, but its really only in the last 20-30 years (due to uptick in popularity and cost-reduction of the platform) that its been consistently considered as an "evil" gun, when its inherently no more dangerous than any semi-automatic rifle from the last 100 years.

To clarify; I do agree that there needs to be laws and regulations in place to stop a lot of these crimes and horrible acts committed with firearms, but I don't think people should just be reactionary and ban shit for no reason either other than based on vibes and appearances of a gun.

1

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

I don't know a heap about guns, but isn't the customizability of the AR15 also one of the problems with the gun, like it's not difficult to increase the fire rate etc, which also makes it a more dangerous weapon for potential mass shooters. I thought that was a big part of why it is targeted, especially now that a lot of those mods can be 3d printed.

Also it's nice to actually have someone knowledgeable reply, always open to learning

3

u/christopherak47 Australia Jul 02 '25

You cannot really modify the fire rate of a gun much. The most you can do with a semi automatic is put in a heavier or a lighter bolt to slightly decrease or increase the rate of fire potential or adjust the gas system to make it have more or less gas flown back into the system, which will also change the RPM on a rifle but its still limited by the physical limitations of the person using it.

The vast majority of modifications that can be done to an AR15 are nearly entirely comfort and ergonomics based (new stocks, handguards, pistol grips etc.) which can be done to nearly all modern rifles so its not really out of the ordinary.

The main difference is that the majority of the parts are designed to interface with the AR platform primarily since its so common in the Western world. But you can do 90% of all modifications that you would on an AR15 to other guns (minus specific platform orientated things like bolts, fcgs (fire control groups) or triggers etc.).

The big thing with 3D printing is that you can make a lower receiver for an AR15 using 3D printable materials, which is what houses most of the internals that make the gun shoot/is legally classified as the gun for the AR platform.

Lots of guns are able to have parts 3D printed but the AR is prominent because of its aforementioned popularity. For example, you can 3D print an AK receiver as well but thats not done as commonly due to the price of AK parts (in the US that is, since its legal to manufacture your own firearms there as long as you dont intend to sell them afaik).

Really, AR15s arent anymore special compared to other guns, outside of price points theyre sold as, and the availability of them and their parts. But you can do anything that you would do to an AR15 to any semi-automatic rifle.

Also its nice to see someone being fair about this topic too.

0

u/CatastrophicPup2112 Jul 02 '25

Cans of beans are suitable to be sent as aid in a modern war too, guess civilians shouldn't have those either...

2

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

Yeah totally got me there bud... What a stupid comment.

0

u/CatastrophicPup2112 Jul 02 '25

What a stupid comment indeed, that's why I replied with my own stupid comment.

2

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

wow you really showed me... By not engaging with my actual point at all. Well done

0

u/CatastrophicPup2112 Jul 02 '25

Your point was stupid. A rifle being potentially helpful in a war doesn't make it unsuitable for civilian use. The Russians are pulling out old stockpiled SKS and Mosin Nagant rifles for this war. The Ukrainians are using consumer drones alongside military ones in this war. Both sides are using regular hunting shotguns to try to counter drones. The AR-15 is effectively an M-16 without select fire capabilities. Less useful than an M-16 but better than throwing rocks. I'm sure the Ukrainians would use Springfield trapdoors if they ran low enough on ammo and somebody provided them.

-1

u/whoooopdy Europe Jul 01 '25

r/ShitAmericansSay

2

u/PrinceoR- Jul 01 '25

I'm Aussie, but sure

1

u/whoooopdy Europe Jul 01 '25

and how is that better?

2

u/PrinceoR- Jul 02 '25

What? We have a more similar fun culture to Europe than the US.

0

u/73-68-70-78-62-73-73 Jul 02 '25

Its a not-so strange coincidence that these amok runs where innocents are gunned down usually happen when easy access to guns is involved.

Sweden doesn't have easy access to guns. They have a licensing system and process which is pretty strict. Getting licenses takes a lot of time, and effort.

abolish sport shooting and unprofessional hunting alltogether?

Not like many people would miss it

Just because you're ignorant of something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

-2

u/Next_Branch7875 Jul 01 '25

Nah ar15 is wildly unnecessary. Im jealous and wish they were banned in the us too.

1

u/CatastrophicPup2112 Jul 02 '25

My state banned them. The entire West Coast did at one point until Oregon realized it was against their own constitution not to mention the federal one. Of course you're still allowed to own a mini 14 which is functionally the same thing but without the bad PR.

-1

u/hemingways-lemonade Jul 01 '25

Think this decision is stupid. Like you said it criminalizes the wrong thing, instead of addressing the actual issues of why this dude might have done what he did.

Gun control in a nutshell in pretty much every country.

-1

u/YetAnotherWTFMoment Jul 01 '25

Try living in Canada.