Zaostritev EU zakonodaje o orožju

[romunov]

Hehe, ne morm verjet, da ljudje celo berejo tole sranje od nova24teve.

Finski predstavnik je poslal tolele. Če komu angleščina ne gre, zna translate.google.com dobro prevesti.

Thank you for your message. Here are a couple of thoughts regarding the Firearms Directive, to which the European Commission proposed a revision on 18 November 2015. You can find the proposal here: http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/13965
 
The Parliament, the Commission and the Council started their trilogue meetings in September, and this autumn has been full of intense debates. Precise plans and impact assessments were supposed to be conducted during 2016, but since there are many views on the matter, it is hardly possible that the trilogues end up in a satisfactory outcome during Slovakia’s presidency of the Council.
 
For Finland, the Commission’s proposal had two questionable sections. Firstly, the total ban of automatic firearms would have a negative impact on a great amount of firearm collectors. We need to take into account that firearms which are legally in somebody's possession have not actually been used to commit crimes in Europe.
 
Secondly, the hardest part is the Commission's proposal to ban all semi-automatic rifles that resemble automatic military weapons. These are used widely in Europe in precision shooting and in hunting. In Finland, the over 90 000 members of reserve organisations practice with exactly these kinds of weapons. For Finnish national defence this would be fatal. Finnish defence is based on a reserve army but the defence force does not have the resources to continuously train it. The field qualifications and marksmanship of the reserves is dependent on voluntary practice.
 
Finland has made its stand very clear to the Commission, the Council and the Parliament: We won't accept those amendments which have a negative impact to the voluntary national defence and to the education of reserves. In addition, together with like-minded EU member states, we have highlighted the negative effects of the Commission's proposal considering firearm hobby, collecting firearms and hunting.
 
Fortunately, it would seem that the concerns have been heard and considered. It has been admitted that the Commission's proposal was poorly drafted, and many of the most restrictive parts have been deleted. The original bans no longer threaten manufacturing firearms or employment. The views of the Parliament and the Council are compatible, and they match Finland’s liberal objectives. There will be wide exemptions to the Directive, particularly in Article 6, which includes freedom for national defence systems to operate as before.
 
Registration and tracking of firearms will improve through new data filing, but arms permit systems will be working rationally. Hobbyists can continue sporting, hunting and collecting activities, even though new procedures might unfortunately increase administrative burden. What comes to national autonomy, the exemptions give enough room for states to control national regulations and practices. This directive is a complex issue, but when criticizing it, we should remember its aim to ensure and increase safety in Europe.
 
To conclude, the direction of the Directive seems better than expected. There are possible changes and turns ahead, since the debate is still fierce. We must continue to monitor the process and make sure that our demands are properly met.
 
Best regards,
 
Hannu Takkula