When governments fail in their basic duties

mauser-soldier1

He’s got a Mauser – his fellow citizens are going modern

Like protecting the lives and property of law abiding citizens, the people will take matters into their own hands.

Gun sales soar in Sweden, home to the refugee.

Known as a bastion of liberalism and tolerance in a pre-manufactured multicultural society, Sweden is seeing the first signs of a culture breaking down.

Official law enforcement statistics show a significant surge in violence in Sweden even before the massive influx of 190,000 refugees in 2015. Sweden has been importing Muslim immigrants into its major cities for decades, and parts of Stockholm, Trelleborg and Malmo have taken on a new, distinctively Middle Eastern look and feel. Sexual assaults, killings and gang activity are all on the rise.

But the flood of new refugees from Syria, Afghanistan and North Africa in 2015 has been a wake-up call for many Swedes, who are now getting armed, reports Ingrid Carlqvist for Gatestone Institute.

Carlqvist says Sweden has become, not a police state, but a “nightwatchman state – every man is on his own.”

“And the Swedes are preparing: demand for firearms licenses is increasing; more and more Swedes are joining shooting clubs and starting vigilante groups. … According to police statistics, there are 1,901,325 licensed guns, owned by 567,733 people, in Sweden.”

Add to this an unknown number of illegal weapons. To get a gun permit in Sweden, you need to be at least 18 years old, law-abiding, well-behaved, and have a hunting license or be a member of an approved shooting club. In 2014, 11,000 people got hunting licenses: 10 percent more than the year before. One out of five was a woman.

It is illegal for a civilian in Sweden to carry a firearm, unless for a specific, legal purpose, such as hunting or attending shooting ranges, according to the website Sweden.org.

Guns must by law be stored in an approved safe. And to transport firearms, there are also rules. “The general regulations are that the gun must be unloaded, hidden and transported in a safe and secure way under supervision,” the website says.

But even with these restrictions, increasing numbers of people are willing to go through the red tape necessary to get a gun.

If, as gun control advocates admit, their ultimate goal is the confiscation of all guns and the disarming of the citizenry, they’re in for a bloody battle. And not just from the NRA “kooks” they so deride. Confiscate 350 million guns from 330 million people? I think not.

 

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “When governments fail in their basic duties

  1. Anonymous

    One day inner city voters will wake up and realize that the Democrats they vote in are not doing them any favors.
    Rahm Emanuel rejects calls for resignation
    http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/rahm-emanuel-laquan-mcdonald-resignation/index.html

  2. It’s funny,the same liberals who insist that they can confiscate all firearms in the USA insist that we can’t possibly deport 10-15 million illegal aliens .

  3. Mark B.

    I’m thinking the only thing that would start a full blown revolution over gun confiscation would be sudden (and I mean blitzkrieg sudden) door-to-door confiscation on a VERY broad scale.
    But how would they do it?
    Send the armed forces to our door? Our sons and daughters? Good luck with that.
    The BATF has already proven they’re willingness to treat us like criminals, but there are less than 5k total BATF employees and not all of them are jackboots.
    Send in the police? Again, good luck with that.
    NY has already proven you can’t just legislate us into registering (surrendering), so what’s left?
    I don’t see it happening.
    But in a way that’s just as scary; they’re not going to do it in a way that would trigger an uprising, but incrementally, slow and steady.

  4. Miles Long

    Implementing a full scale confiscation in any state would trigger the doomsday scenario on the part of organized and motivated gun owners. Doomsday scenario being a defacto civil war fought by citizens against the US Government. This is a right most would be willing to die for. No different than if the US Government said you could no longer practice the religion of your choice or read certain books. Any infringement or attempt to compromise the US Constitution should and will be met with violence.