B2 The Daily of Geopolitical Europe. News. Files. Reflections. Reports

Blog AnalysisPolice Terrorism

Vicky Ford, the Priestess of Semi-Automatic Weapon Freedom

Vicky Ford presents her gun control report in her office (Credit: Vicky Ford/Facebook)
Vicky Ford presents her gun control report in her office (Credit: Vicky Ford/Facebook)

(BRUSSELS2) Her name is Vicky Ford and she is the rapporteur for the report on arms control which the Industry Committee is about to vote on today (this afternoon).

The least to legislate as an ideology

This MP from East England is a die-hard Conservative. She slays the 'Red Tape'. In other words : " the less we legislate, the better "," the more individuals and companies do what they want, the better "... Under these terms, in fact, hides the ideology of laissez-faire and " law of the strongest ". We have seen what such a result produced financially. The MEP intends to reproduce the same pattern on the legislation on weapons. Which is more than dangerous.

An interesting proposal

In November, the European Commission proposed interesting and quite ambitious legislation, with a public utility objective (Read: A stricter framework on the possession of firearms proposed by the Commission). It's rare enough to be stressed. This proposal is probably not perfect. But it starts from a fair enough observation. National laws on the legal possession of weapons are very different from one country to another. At a time when borders are opening up, we must tighten the bolts, put an end to certain abuses, ban assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons, make weapon deactivations more effective in all countries (deactivation weapons in some countries is light), subject collectors to a little control and identify more effectively the weapons in circulation.

The Breivik trigger

The context of terrorism, in which this proposal took place, immediately brought to mind the latest acts committed in Paris. It is true that some of the weapons used in these attacks were acquired on a "legal" or "grey" (semi-legal) market, particularly flourishing in Slovakia and the Czech Republic, and not on the "black" market ( illegal). The motivation for the legislation was more apparent from the various killings committed with weapons legally acquired by “lone wolves”, often young. The typical example which caused a reaction is the attack in Norway committed by Anders Behring Breivik on the Labor Party's youth summer camp, almost 5 years ago, on July 22, 2011. Toll: 77 dead. Breivik used semi-automatic firearms, including a Glock 34 pistol. He had a hunting license and was a member of a shooting club. Something to think about... (read also: Massacres with semi-automatic weapons... To refresh your memory).

A certain consensus in the Member States

The Member States made certain corrections to this directive in June, with a certain consensus. Some countries remain hostile to this legislation: Slovakia and the Czech Republic, in particular, are braking with 4 irons. A more than disturbing position, which challenges. Because the legislation and the application of the rules of arms sales of these two countries are deemed " rather loose to use the words of a security expert consulted by B2.

Seemingly technical arguments that have only one goal

The amendments presented in committee (approximately 1000) are technical in appearance, claiming “common sense”. Don't be fooled! Their objective is to unravel the Commission's proposal as much as possible. For example, we modify the criteria for deactivating weapons, patiently negotiated between the different Member States, so as to make them more lax. The rapporteur also wants to question the fact of having Community legislation for collectors, referring to national legislation. This amounts to annihilating all regulations (1).

MEP under pressure from arms lobbies

Beneath a "common sense" exterior, Vicky Ford in fact gives in to (certain) hunting companies, to (a few) arms carriers and above all to arms dealers across the Channel, who have lobbied enormously and enormous pressure (see also: The gun lobby is stepping up against tougher legislation). Faced with this, the supporters of public order, security and human rights remain rather timid and silent. In any case, they do not have the same striking power (financial and media) as arms dealers. Between a few big bucks and the lives of a few young people, Vicky Ford has chosen...

The United Armed Campaign for the Freedom of Semi-Automatic Weapons
The Firearms United Campaign for Semi-Automatic Weapon Freedom

Should the nice hobby of a few take precedence over public safety

Proponents of guns call it "sport." And some hunting clubs defend this “art”. It can be understood with precision weapons that fire piecemeal. But swinging a semi-automatic weapon at targets... isn't exactly sport. It is a social problem. And it is not forbidden to ban at this time. The petty, particular, deadly pleasure of some must not outweigh the interest of society and public safety. There are many other, more relaxing, and less harmful sports to practice. Some mountain walking, running, sailing, etc.

(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)

(1) In some countries, gun collectors are subject to specific legislation. In others, it is almost free. Everyone can claim to be a collector and, as a result, buy (for collection) weapons.

Massacres with semi-automatic weapons… To refresh your memory

Neutralized weapons used in the Paris attacks

Nicolas Gros Verheyde

Chief editor of the B2 site. Graduated in European law from the University of Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne and listener to the 65th session of the IHEDN (Institut des Hautes Etudes de la Défense Nationale. Journalist since 1989, founded B2 - Bruxelles2 in 2008. EU/NATO correspondent in Brussels for Sud-Ouest (previously West-France and France-Soir).

5 thoughts on “Vicky Ford, the Priestess of Semi-Automatic Weapon Freedom"

  • David von Felten

    In Switzerland, every male citizen receives an assault rifle at the end of his recruit school in order to be able to mobilize very quickly. And have you ever heard of a massacre with automatic weapons in Switzerland? So moderate your remarks a little, the problem is not the weapons but the profile of those who hold them... To resume your article, the number of crimes committed in Great Britain with a firearm has exploded since their quasi prohibition total (the UK has one of the most restrictive gun laws in Europe), so spot the mistake...

  • Hello,

    What a beautiful demagogic article! You almost believe it.

    Alas, the reality is quite different… The international figures prove it without any ambiguity: the toughening of the laws for the legal owners of firearms does nothing to curb crime. It is a fact !

    The weapons used in crimes and misdemeanors are not legally owned in the vast majority of cases.

    Therefore, apart from the voter, this text will not reassure many people and especially not specialists in weapons and crime, but I suppose that is the desired goal.

    However, I give you two points:

    _ It is necessary to standardize the standards of neutralization, with a flat however: the neutralized weapons must remain objects of collection and thus present an aspect as aesthetic as possible.
    It is time to understand that a criminal capable of CORRECTLY repairing a neutralized weapon in the rules of the art, is quite capable of manufacturing it in its entirety, therefore, the massacre of weapons with a view to their neutralization amounts to utter heresy.

    _ The collector's card is a necessity. Even if it should not for all that deprive the others to hold legally and serenely the objects of their sport (yes yes, it is a sport whatever you think about it), it must allow the access to the collectors to the witnesses of the past that are the weapons, with all the rules that their nature imposes.

    No, the regulations on weapons are not going in the right direction… These are smokescreen measures that will in no way affect users who are already dispensing with the established rules: criminals.

    The only effective measures are unfortunately unpopular:

    More checks, at the borders, in the countries, with “at risk” populations that no one wants to name any more under penalty of being accused of racism.
    More severe penalties incurred and applied with firmness. In short, a little courage...

    Since you like to quote the past, I will allow myself to do the same in order to feed your next crusades, because I have no doubt that after reading these links kitchen utensils will become your next pet peeves:

    http://www.metronews.fr/info/info-metronews-meurtre-au-couteau-a-tournus-saone-et-loire-le-beau-fils-de-la-victime-en-garde-a-vue/mpec!dWN6zMQiAgXaI/

    https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/faits-divers-justice/tuee-coups-de-couteau-par-son-voisin-1464012476

    http://www.francetvinfo.fr/faits-divers/terrorisme/policiers-tues-a-magnanville/policiers-tues-a-magnanville-recit-d-un-guet-apens_1499635.html

    http://www.directmatin.fr/france/2016-05-23/coup-de-couteau-dans-le-rer-le-suspect-ecroue-pour-meurtre-730195

    Greetings,

  • I see that you posted the only comment you wanted to respond to, yet my comment was not offensive.
    So I wanted to ask you if you were well aware of acting like an Ex-USSR propaganda journalist who at least had the excuse of being executed if he did not support the party, and what effect this could have. he do to betray his people in the name of your ideology.

    • B2 received many such comments. And I'm answering this one because I won't be answering the others. 1° I am first of all very surprised to see that this article on arms control triggers (like the previous one) comments of rare violence, most generally under the seal of anonymity. I am not the only one to suffer this kind of assault. Anyone who takes a bias a little against the free bearing of arms is immediately exposed to a volley of emails of the same type. This raises questions and can only encourage very strict arms control. Because if the trigger is as free as speech, there is really cause for concern. 2° Arms control is not part of a purely health policy. It is not the tobacco or the knife as often indicated. But a public safety policy. It is the role of the state to control the use of force. The eruption of a madman in a school or in a political rally cannot be treated in the same way as a settling of accounts in a city or a family drama. This is the same principle as for the prevention of an act of terrorism. All bags are searched at the entrance to a store, it is forbidden to take liquid on a plane simply because there is a risk on 1/100.000th (or even less). The public authority refuses to take this risk. And the whole population submits to it in a disciplined way. There is no reason that the carriers of weapons of war or semi-automatic weapons should not submit to a minimum of control more drastic than what was until now. 3° Concerning the comments on this site. They are only published if they provide factual, justified, affirmed and interesting elements for all readers (not only for the sender of the message). This is our editorial charter. And our very choice of opportunity. This corresponds to a practice regularly acquired in the press. There is no right to have your comment published under an article simply because you want to. 4° There is no censorship. B2 is, until further notice, neither an official organ nor the only media on the square. You are free to express yourself elsewhere. Hunters, weapon bearers and sportsmen have numerous forums, forums and websites. It is besides a regular tropism often used by the carriers of weapons, as soon as one says the opposite of what they think is relatively erroneous. You can agree or not. But it is our opinion, sharpened according to various conversations. 5° As for the insult, it is for me largely characterized. Your last post proves it. Know sir that your remark on “the journalist from the former USSR” is doubly insulting to me. On the one hand, it stems from a very serious misunderstanding of history and the profession of journalism. Journalism is not made to flatter one or the other. He is there to establish facts or deliver opinions. You may disagree. But you have no right to treat a journalist like that. It also constitutes an insult to my particular person. Allow me an image: until further notice you are not calling a simple policeman an SS Commander simply because he fined you for illegal parking. It's quite simply what you have just done by calling me an ex-USSR propaganda journalist.

Comments closed.

s2Member®