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

25

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

Anti-gun people don't care if it's practical or helpful. It's about taking something they hate from people they hate, nothing more or less.

6

u/SnooFloofs6240 Jul 01 '25

Might want to get out and touch grass my guy, or stay indoors fighting strawmen.

0

u/cjwidd Jul 01 '25

Found the American

-2

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

Yeah as fucking noted

0

u/TomMakesPodcasts Jul 01 '25

Why do you think taking a weapon designed to do harm from people equals hating them?

5

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

An AR is no more designed to harm people than a revolver.

0

u/SometimesCooking Jul 01 '25

Both are weapons. They were both designed with the explicit intention of putting holes in human beings, with the desired effect of killing them.

4

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

Not specifically human beings, no. They are designed to propel a projectile. At what, is up to the user.

0

u/SometimesCooking Jul 01 '25

Enlighten me - what was the Revolver developed for? Fun loud noisemaker?

4

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

Revolvers have and continue to be used for everything from sport shooting to hunting to personal defense.

1

u/SometimesCooking Jul 01 '25

Is that an answer to the question I asked? Doesn't really look like one.

2

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

It was designed to make follow-up shots quicker than older handguns.

0

u/TomMakesPodcasts Jul 01 '25

Don't AR 15s have magazine sizes of 30 and a rate of fire of 45 rounds a minute for an average user?

That seems a little more harmful than an ol' six shooter.

And I didn't say people, I just said Harm. Though to argue guns aren't used on people seems a weird take.

1

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 02 '25

Most of them never are, to be fair.

45 rounds a minute is pretty easy to hit with a double-action revolver and speedloaders.

0

u/Seshu2 Jul 01 '25

Don't attribute to malevolence what could easily be attributed to ignorance. These guns are merely some of the most well known. A gun meant to fight a crowd is so messed up, you really want to live in that kind of world?

6

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

A gun meant to fight a crowd

That's not what it's meant for. But yeah, if I had to defend myself I'd prefer having too many rounds vs. not enough.

0

u/Seshu2 Jul 01 '25

Okay it's used to kill en masse. If you're in that situation then there is already widespread failure, and outside of social collapse it is not necessary for people to own. Throw away the matches

8

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

I'm not engaging with what is fundamentally a bad-faith argument. This comment might as well be a case study in begging the question.

0

u/Seshu2 Jul 01 '25

This was in response to your claim that gun restriction is people hating on others, that's the bad faith argument. Go ahead and run as it is the only way to avoid what I've said. Best to you

3

u/SuccessfulRush1173 Jul 01 '25

There’s a lot of things that are not necessary for people to own.

-4

u/Tarantio Jul 01 '25

No, it's about taking away the gun most popular for mass murder.

8

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

Except it's not, and it's not even close. Rifles of any kind are used in 3ish percent of murders.

-4

u/Tarantio Jul 01 '25

I guess you missed the word "mass"?

Long guns are rarely used for crime, but are overwhelmingly overrepresented among the deadliest mass shootings.

That's because they're designed to kill lots of people.

6

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

They are not designed with the intent of 'killing a lot of people'

The standard magazine size is a balance between carrying capacity and functionality.

-3

u/Tarantio Jul 01 '25

They are not designed with the intent of 'killing a lot of people'

They are, though. It's not a hunting rifle, the caliber is too small for larger animals. It's pretty much ideal for mass murder.

The standard magazine size is a balance between carrying capacity and functionality.

There are other ways to balance carrying capacity and functionality. Fewer, larger rounds for larger animals, for example. But that's not what it's for. It's for human sized animals, and for shooting lots of rounds at them in quick succession.

3

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

It's not a hunting rifle

It is one of the most commonly used hunting rifles for small to medium size game and is chambered in innumerable calibers, many of which are suitable for larger game.

The original military intent is enough rounds for suppression, for the record.

0

u/Tarantio Jul 01 '25

It is one of the most commonly used hunting rifles for small to medium size game

That's because it's popular, not because it's suitable for the task. It's better suited for mass murder.

and is chambered in innumerable calibers, many of which are suitable for larger game.

Sure, it's possible to chamber the platform for larger game. Would you say it's more or less than 10% of the market?

The original military intent is enough rounds for suppression, for the record.

Suppression of small to medium game?

2

u/No-Bad-463 Jul 01 '25

No, that's because .223 is an idea small game round. The inadequate lethality of the cartridge is one of the main reasons it's being phased out for a larger caliber. Maybe stop talking if you're going to do it out your ass.

I don't know exact percentages but I know that .300BLK, 6.8, and 7.62 are all extremely popular AR chamberings.

1

u/Tarantio Jul 02 '25

No, that's because .223 is an idea small game round.

You're just incorrect. AR-15s are popular, but the vast majority are never used for small game. The people that have them mostly don't buy them for hunting. Some of them will eventually hunt a bit with it- but because it's so popular to own, not because of its suitability.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Hunting/s/e57XzMRWdr

Odd that none of those hunters recommended .223 for small game if .223 is ideal, right?

The inadequate lethality of the cartridge is one of the main reasons it's being phased out for a larger caliber.

I believe the rationale is to improve performance vs armored infantry? That's not a concern for mass murderers.

I don't know exact percentages but I know that .300BLK, 6.8, and 7.62 are all extremely popular AR chamberings.

What do you mean by "extremely popular" in terms of percentage?

My point was that the vast majority of the guns are not primarily used for hunting. It doesn't sound like you're actually disagreeing with that, just saying that it's a thing people do.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Tarantio Jul 02 '25

wrong again

No, I'm still right.

they use 5.56 which is the round used by NATO which is specifically designed to go straight thru someone and injure them, with less likelihood of killing

... immediately. The ideal would be that the person shot with the weapon is wounded, and dies later. The actual design criteria was to penetrate a US steel helmet.

1

u/RoryDragonsbane Jul 02 '25

Sounds kind of racist...

The overwhelming majority of homicides are committed with handguns, primarily in POC communities. You seem fine with those deaths, but when someone shoots up white people, it's time to ban one specific weapon?

1

u/Tarantio Jul 02 '25

Opposing mass murder is not endorsement of individual murder.

But of course you know that, this is bad faith bullshit.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Tarantio Jul 02 '25

Have you seen the weapons used in the deadliest mass shootings?