Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Switzerland's gun freedoms compared with the U.S.A. and England
Wall Street Journal Europe | June 4th 1999 | Stephen P.Halbrook

Posted on 10/16/2001 8:23:14 PM PDT by 2nd_Ammendment_Defender

In 1994, when the U.S. Congress debated whether to ban "assault weapons," a talk show host asked then-Senator Bill Bradley (New Jersey), a sponsor of the ban, whether guns cause crime. The host noted that, in Switzerland, all males are issued assault rifles for militia service and keep them at home, yet little crime exists there. Senator Bradley responded that the Swiss "are pretty dull."

For those who think that target shooting is more fun than golf, however, Switzerland is anything but "dull." By car or train, you see shooting ranges everywhere, but few golf courses. If there is a Schuetzenfest (shooting festival) in town, you will find rifles slung on hat racks in restaurants, and you will encounter men and women, old and young, walking, biking and taking the tram with rifles over their shoulders, to and from the range. They stroll right past the police station and no one bats an eye. (Try this in the U.S., and a SWAT Team might do you in.)

Tourists--especially those from Japan, where guns are banned to all but the police--think it's a revolution. But shooting is the national sport, and the backbone of the national defense as well. More per capita firepower exists in Switzerland than in any other place in the world, yet it is one of the safest places to be.

According to the U.N. International Study on Firearm Regulation, England's 1994 homicide rate was 1.4 (9% involving firearms), and the robbery rate 116, per 100,000 population. In the United States, the homicide rate was 9.0 (70% involving firearms), and the robbery rate 234, per 100,000. England has strict gun control laws, ergo, the homicide rate is lower than in the U.S. However, such comparisons can be dangerous: In 1900, when England had no gun controls, the homicide rate was only 1.0 per 100,000.

Moreover, using data through 1996, the U.S. Department of Justice study "Crime and Justice" concluded that in England the robbery rate was 1.4 times higher, the assault rate was 2.3 times higher, and the burglary rate was 1.7 times higher than in the U.S. This suggests that lawfully armed citizens in the U.S. deter such crimes. Only the murder and rape rates in the U.S. were higher than in England. The small number of violent predators who commit most of these crimes in the U.S. have little trouble arming themselves unlawfully.

The U.N. study omits mention of Switzerland, which is awash in guns and has substantially lower murder and robbery rates than England, where most guns are banned.

Here are the figures: The Swiss Federal Police Office reports that in 1997 there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country. Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms. With its population of seven million (including 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. There were 2,498 robberies (and attempted robberies), of which 546 involved firearms, resulting in a robbery rate of 36 per 100,000. Almost half of these crimes were committed by non-resident foreigners, whom locals call "criminal tourists."

Sometimes, the data sound too good to be true. In 1993, not a single armed robbery was reported in Geneva. No one seems to be looking at the Swiss example in the U.S., however.

Congress is stampeding to pass additional firearm restrictions in response to the events of April 20, when two students used guns and bombs to murder a dozen classmates and a teacher in Littleton, Colorado.

Yet in 1996, a man who legally owned guns under England's strict regulations went on a rampage, murdering 16 children and a teacher in Dunblane, Scotland. Parliament then banned all handguns and most rifles.

But there have been no school massacres in Switzerland, where guns and kids mix freely. At shooting matches, bicycles aplenty are parked outside. Inside the firing shelter, the competitors pay 12-year-olds tips to keep score. The 16-year-olds shoot rifles with men and women of all ages. In fact, the tourist brochure, "Zurich News" recommends September's Knabenschiessen (boy's shooting contest) as a must-see: "The oldest Zurich tradition consists of a shooting contest at the Albisguetli (range) for 12 to 16 year-old boys and girls and a colorful three-day fun-fair." The event has been held since 1657, and attracts thousands of teenage participants and spectators.

While many shoot for sport, all males aged 20 to 42 are required by militia system regulation to keep rifles and/or pistols at home. In addition, gun shops abound. Yet firearms are rarely used in crime.

Homicide is tied to a willingness to resort to violence, not the mere presence of guns. The prevalence of firearms in the home and the participation of youth in shooting matches bind youth to adults and discourages a generation gap.

By contrast, homicide rates are highest in the underdeveloped countries, many of which ban private firearm possession. In some, private murder does not compare to the genocidal murder committed by governments against their unarmed subjects.

In America, firearms take on a sinister reputation from the nightly news and violent movies. But in Switzerland, firearms symbolize a wholesome, community activity. The typical weekend shooting festival brings out the entire family. Beside the range is a huge tent where scores or hundreds of people are eating, drinking, and socializing. With cantonal and rifle club banners fluttering in the wind, the melody of rifle fire blends with Alpine music and cow bells.

Since its founding in 1291, Switzerland has depended on an armed populace for its defense. William Tell used a crossbow not only to shoot the apple from his son's head, but also to kill the tyrant Gessler. For centuries, the cantonal republic defeated the powerful armies of the European monarchs. Machiavelli wrote in 1532: "The Swiss are well armed and enjoy great freedom."

This coincidence has not escaped the notice of those who oppose liberty.

Monarchist philosopher Jean Bodin, writing in 1606, denounced free speech and arms possession by commoners. Subjects must be disarmed to prevent democratic sedition, he said. The Swiss proved, Bodin wrongly averred, that arms bearing was "the cause of an infinite number of murders."

The Swiss militia model, however, preserved democracy and held Europe's despots at bay. In fact, it inspired the rebellious American colonists.

John Adams praised the democratic Swiss Cantons, where every man was entitled to vote on laws and to bear arms. Patrick Henry, another American Founding Father, lauded the Swiss for maintaining their independence without "a mighty and splendid President" or a standing army.

The Swiss influence is clear in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Today, it has become fashionable to hate this orphan of the Bill of Rights.

However, a quick glance at history shows that tyrannical governments kill far more than do private criminals. But first, governments must disarm their victims. In 1933, the Nazis seized power via massive search-and-seizure operations for firearms against "Communists," i.e., all political opponents. In 1938, during the Night of the Broken Glass, they disarmed the Jews. When the Nazis occupied Europe in 1939-41, they proclaimed the death penalty for any person who failed to surrender all firearms within 24 hours.

There may be various reasons why the Nazis did not invade Switzerland, but one of those reasons is that every Swiss man had a rifle at home.

For this we have no better record than the Nazi invasion plans, which stated that, because of the Swiss shooting skills, Switzerland would be difficult to conquer and pacify.

European countries occupied by the Nazis had strict gun controls before the war, and the registration lists facilitated confiscation of firearms and the execution of their owners.

By being able to keep out of both world wars in part through the dissuasive factor of an armed populace, Switzerland demonstrates that civilian firearm possession may prevent large numbers of deaths and even genocide. The Holocaust never came to Switzerland, the Jewish population of which was armed just like their fellow citizens. In the rest of Europe, what if there had been not just one, but two, three, or many Warsaw Ghetto Uprisings?

Traditionally, the Swiss Cantons had few firearm regulations. The first federal firearms law was recently enacted. Certain firearm purchases require a permit, and others do not. On retirement, every soldier may keep his rifle or pistol. Surplus assault rifles may be purchased by any Swiss citizen from the Military Department.

The bottom line is one of attitude. Populations with training in civic virtue, though armed, do not experience sensational massacres or high crime rates. Indeed, armed citizens deter crime. Switzerland fits this mold. Similarly, America's lawful "gun culture" is peaceful. Sadly, some of its subcultures are not.

From The Wall Street Journal Europe


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Gun control advocates such as Sarah Brady I'm sure look at Switzerland with disdain and call them a barbaric country. I wonder many times the people who attack our freedoms have ever studied the issue of firearms and the United States Constitution? Perhaps too many of them believe everything the media pushes at them the nightly on the television. Whatever the reason, there are alot of people in the United States attacking our freedom of self preservation in the name of peace when they are actually attacking peace.
1 posted on 10/16/2001 8:23:14 PM PDT by 2nd_Ammendment_Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2nd_Ammendment_Defender
I THINK this MAY have been written before the latest crazy went "postal" in Switzerland and shot several members of the local government with an "assault rifle".

Anyone want to guess what the immediate response was????

Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Bueller?

Bueller?

2 posted on 10/16/2001 8:41:05 PM PDT by China Clipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: China Clipper
Yup - articel published June 4th 1999.

Last I heard the Swiss govt. has started to review their laws concerning guns after that incident. What a shame - one incident and they disregard all the facts. Let's hope they see the light.

3 posted on 10/16/2001 8:46:33 PM PDT by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2nd_Ammendment_Defender
It has been said that Switzerland doesn't HAVE an army, Switzerland IS an army.
4 posted on 10/16/2001 8:51:29 PM PDT by Henry F. Bowman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henry F. Bowman
Must be interesting to live there. Once, when discussing gun control with my liberal mother, she mentioned that one of her colleagues (a public school teacher - 'nuff said) lived there for a year and that no one talked to each other; that it was a very unfriendly place.

I just laughed - if that's the best defense libbies can come up with, let 'em have it. I'll take unfriendliness over getting killed for a pair of sneakers because my omniscient government didn't think I was capable of defending myself any day.

5 posted on 10/16/2001 8:54:26 PM PDT by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: China Clipper
I wonder how hard it would be to learn the Swiss language?

Maybe I belong there, since folks like me (I grew up with guns) seem to be an outmoded anachronism in our PC society.

6 posted on 10/16/2001 8:57:41 PM PDT by Gig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gig
I don't think there's an actual Swiss language. They've got four I believe - French, German, Italian, and one other (Romansch? Something like that)
7 posted on 10/16/2001 8:59:05 PM PDT by Rightwing Canuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2nd_Ammendment_Defender
"There may be various reasons why the Nazis did not invade Switzerland, but one of those reasons is that every Swiss man had a rifle at home."

Early in WW2 a German minister (can't remember which one) went to Switzerland to discuss allowing the German army free access thru Switzerland in order to help the Germans to defend their new Fortress Europe. The Swiss leader refused. The Swiss had enough sense to know that once the Germans arrived, they would not be leaving without a fight.

The German minister suggested that the Swiss had no real choice in the matter, and that it would be in their best interests to comply. He asked what the 250,000 man Swiss militia would do if faced with 500,000 crack German airborne troops.

"We would all shoot twice, then we would go home."

Peace through strength.

8 posted on 10/16/2001 9:45:14 PM PDT by jrewingjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson