Wave of illegal weapons hits Sweden

[Weltschmerz]

Wave of illegal weapons hits Sweden
Published: 9 Feb 08 09:37 CET
Online: The Local - Wave of illegal weapons hits Sweden

Weapons crimes have increased by 20 percent in Sweden since 2000. There are an increasing number of weapons in circulation in Sweden and smuggling continues apace.

* Man shot dead in Malmö (2 Feb 08)
* Four indicted after major weapons seizure (22 Jan 08)
* 'The most dangerous place in Sweden' (25 Sep 07)

A case involving four men accused of smuggling 40 pistols in their car over the Öresund bridge in October 2007 reached its conclusion in Malmö this week. The verdict is expected to be delivered during next week.

Rolf Bårdskär at the customs and excise criminal investigation unit (Tullkriminalen) in Malmö described the case as "exceptional."

"During the 2000s we have witnessed an increasing trend regarding seizures. Smuggling is primarily conducted by gangs that in my experience are well established within the EU. I am totally convinced that that there are more illegal weapons in Sweden today than a few years ago," Bårdskär said to Svenska Dagbladet.

Many of the weapons come into Sweden from the former Yugoslavia as there are still a large number of weapons in circulation there since the war.

The Swedish National Police (Rikskriminalpolisen) have noted that criminals are keener to arm themselves when committing offences such as bank robberies, and when in conflict with other gangs. This development is behind the increase in reports of gun crime and possession of illegal weapons, Police believe.

21 attempts to smuggle firearms over the Öresund bridge were discovered in 2007 alone. Customs and excise made double the number of seizures in 2007 as in 2004. A new law, passed in 2006 has given border police the right to search suspicious vehicles.

"This has made it easier to seize weapons," according to Fredrik Bornesand, head of the Nova-group within Stockholm police, talking to Svenska Dagbladet.

TT/Peter Vinthagen Simpson (news@thelocal.se)

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Are there severe restrictions to owning weapons in Sweden?

[Weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by Marulus

Are there severe restrictions to owning weapons in Sweden?

Yes. You must have a license for them. In addition, the market is highly restricted.

[Menydh]

There are always alternatives. E.g. crossbows are (at least here) available at hunting and sports shops without a licence.



And in case that they ever decided to make them unavailable without a licence, you can always build your own.

[Kernunnos]

Originally Posted by Gnist

Yes. You must have a license for them. In addition, the market is highly restricted.

It is the typical social-democratic dictatorship: weapons should not be so crimes could not be committed.

Actually criminals are criminals because of their willingness to break the law, so they will also break it to procure themselves illegal wepons, while honest will be disarmed.

Actually, if honest were armed there would be far less crimes, since there eaction of honest citizens would constitute a good antibody to criminal behavior: also, criminals willing to commit a crime nonetehless would be often more prudent, they would aslo surrender more easily.

The possibility of a violent reation to an armed crime would result in change of modus operand of most professional crimianals who would more happily resort to non violent tactics, such as frauds, than to armed robberies.

Forbidding weapons in the religious hope of forbidding crimes is actually a primitive taboo, that is suited to candid souls and has only a justification: to keep anything under soft government control, mantaining citizens in a state of permanent infancy.

[Carnyx]

I agree with Breha, I think freemen should have a right to wear a weapon as it used to be once.

Originally Posted by Mynydd

There are always alternatives. E.g. crossbows are (at least here) available at hunting and sports shops without a licence.

And in case that they ever decided to make them unavailable without a licence, you can always build your own.

Another alternative is not abide by the law and acquire weapons illegally, as criminals all do. Licences are just ridiculous. They are a problem to average citizens only. It's a form of control for the mighty state.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Another alternative is not abide by the law and acquire weapons illegally, as criminals all do.

Good luck with it. Something tells me that in France it is not going to be different than here, where the black market for fire arms is in the hands of immigrant gangs.

[Weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Good luck with it. Something tells me that in France it is not going to be different than here, where the black market for fire arms is in the hands of immigrant gangs.

And even if you defend your very home against criminals, the first thing our police will ask is if you have a license.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Gnist

And even if you defend your very home against criminals, the first thing our police will ask is if you have a license.

It is not unusual to hear people here who have been [allegedly] told by police officers, that if they ever catch a criminal at home and have a weapon (legal or not) and use it, it is best to go all the way on your own and not having to face a court even for self-defence in your home.

[Carnyx]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Good luck with it. Something tells me that in France it is not going to be different than here, where the black market for fire arms is in the hands of immigrant gangs.

My remark wasn't meant for my little I. I'm not interested in getting fire weapons anyway.

However, if anyone is, I believe it mustn't be extremly difficult (since criminals do it). There's always a way to get one. Not all immigrants are part of a gang, but all immigrants know some remote members of it, and weapons can move from hand to hand.

[Weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

It is not unusual to hear people here who have been [allegedly] told by police officers, that if they ever catch a criminal at home and have a weapon (legal or not) and use it, it is best to go all the way on your own and not having to face a court even for self-defence in your home.

These are very good examples of exactly how dreadful modern day rule-oriented society can be. There's no sense of justice and no principle of justice at the base of the law. It is at best plain arbitrary.

[Kernunnos]

Originally Posted by Gnist

And even if you defend your very home against criminals, the first thing our police will ask is if you have a license.

Once a policeman told me confidentially: remember, it is better a bad trial than a beautiful funeral.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Gnist

These are very good examples of exactly how dreadful modern day rule-oriented society can be. There's no sense of justice and no principle of justice at the base of the law. It is at best plain arbitrary.

The rationale given is that even if the weapon is legal and you've shot dead the criminal in your home with your wife and children slept, so that it is in self-defense beyond any reasonable doubt, you are not going to escape the nightmare of going through a court for a "murder" (even if in self-defense).

Worse, your name is going to be public through the court records and nothing assures you that the family or colleagues of the criminal are going to agree that you killed him to defend your family and your person, and they might want "revenge". Or, if you leave him wounded, he will be put in the street soon and might want a "revenge".

What does logics tell you then? Clearly that if you shoot a criminal in your home to protect your family, and if your don't kill him and get rid of the corpse yourself without telling anyone, you have done only half way to protect your family or, worse, you have even put your family in a danger.

Twisted, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Breha

Once a policeman told me confidentially: remember, it is better a bad trial than a beautiful funeral.

Yes. But it is still better long hours digging a deep hole (or other methods that I won't mention for how macabre they sound), than any bad (or good) trial. When there is blood involved, there is no such thing as a "good" trial.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Breha

Actually criminals are criminals because of their willingness to break the law, so they will also break it to procure themselves illegal wepons, while honest will be disarmed.

Sure, this is kinda the point, since illegal weapons can't be traced back to you if used. You have to be a complete moron to do something criminal with a licenced gun.

Anyway, as for owning weapons, I agree that there must be restrictions, at least in this age. The way things are now, you never know when someone will go on rampage and start shooting people. Like those shootings at schools. Even if someone would attack your family, most of people would be to afraid to use it and even if they would, as Mynydd wrote, you have to get trough those nightmares and revenges. Also, don't forget that it's hard to get over when you kill someone, even if in self-defense, for most people.