EU agrees new gun rules after militant attacks


**EU agrees new gun rules after militant attacks

The European Union agreed stricter gun rules on Tuesday but balked at a proposal for a complete ban on the most lethal semi-automatic weapons such as the Kalashnikov.

The measure is part of an overall tightening of EU rules that govern the purchase and sale of such weapons since two Islamist gunmen shot dead 12 people in the offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in January 2015. Militants killed 130 people in attacks in Paris in November last year.

Proposed in 2015 but disputed by the bloc’s 28 nations, the rules restrict access to some high-caliber weapons and make it easier to track guns to avoid them being sold on the black market.

But amid opposition from Europe’s gun lobby, the European Commission’s plan to prohibit private citizens from owning weapons like the Russian-made AK-47 failed to obtain enough support from member states.

“We have fought hard for an ambitious deal that reduces the risk of shootings in schools, summer camps or terrorist attacks with legally held firearms,” European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said in statement.

“Of course we would have liked to go further.”

Gun-control legislation differs widely across the EU. Some countries sought exemptions on buying and selling semi-automatic firearms for groups ranging from shooting clubs to collectors.

Finland, which shares an 833 mile (1,340 km) border with Russia and runs a mandatory military service for all men, had opposed the Commission’s initial proposal, saying it would have harmed the training of its voluntary reservist clubs.

But the Nordic country welcomed Tuesday’s political agreement: “I am very pleased with the outcome,” Interior Minister Paula Risikko said.**


So… its going to be harder for law-abiding citizens to get guns and the article stated the EU (unsurprisingly) cannot fully control the black market.


**EU reaches deal on contested gun laws

EU states backed a bitterly contested EU gun bill on Tuesday (20 December) as part of larger efforts to restrict the circulation of assault rifles.

The bill, which still needs to be formally adopted by ministers and MEPs, imposes new curbs on acquisition and oversight and makes it more difficult to obtained reactivated weapons.

Slovakia’s interior minister Robert Kalinak, speaking on behalf of the EU presidency, said in a statement that the agreement will “provide tighter controls” to prevent terrorists and criminals from obtaining the firearms.

The commission had wanted an outright ban on semi-automatic rifles, such as AK47s, and those that resembled their military grade counterparts, and had hoped to limit magazine size to 10 bullets.

The European Parliament and most EU states objected. Instead, only some semi-automatic guns will be banned depending on their length. Others that can shoot up to 20 bullets will also be allowed…

Intense lobbying

Much of the debate has been overshadowerd by intense lobbying from pro-gun groups. They argue that current rules are good enough and that the problem is that some EU states are not applying them.

Firearms United, a confederation of gun owners throughout Europe, collected over 337,000 signatures against the commission proposal.

The lobbyists also found allies within the EU parliament. One lobbyist claimed the parliament copy-pasted his position on people who collect guns.

British conservative Vicky Ford, who steered the bill through the assembly, told gun groups in November that she had wanted to “reject the entire thing [the commission bill]” but was met with resistance from too many MEPs…



Utterly pointless and laughable as usual. Nobody is committing terrorist attacks because it isn’t illegal enough.


In other news, the European Union agreed to disarm so militants can cause more harm. No wonder why there was a brexit controversy.


IIRC, the guns used in the Hebdo attacks ( and the attacks on the French train) were the fully automatic AK’s built from smuggled in parts.

So, how exactly, would this legislation prevent that from happening again?


Outside of Islamic terrorists and the Middle Eastern immigrants firing off pistols in Downtown Berlin last New Year’s Eve, who in Europe has firearms ?


Britain couldn’t have done away with their stockpiles from WW2?


Gun ownership isn’t really a thing in Europe anyway, only farmers regularly tend to have them AFAIK. It’s not like it’ll make a blind bit of difference to the average Joe Soap :shrug:


It doesn’t. It’s just an excuse for something they wanted to do anyway. Like the Iraq War, for instance. It’s the way that (flawed, controlling, human) governments work.


Let’s see, the last few terrorist massacres were done by using large vehicles. Yep, that’s what Europe needs, more gun control laws. The fact is, in Europe there are so many hoops for a good citizen who wants to by a gun already, it is virtually impossible for them to do so. Plus the fact that in every instance of firearms being used in terrorist attacks, the firearms were gotten through illegal means. More gun control laws are nothing but a useless action, a statement by the authorities that will have no effect on any future terrorist attacks.


True, very few people own guns in Europe.

I wasn’t even aware of this bill until it was passed yesterday.


Will they outlaw trucks next, perhaps?


Trucks have far more societal utility than guns in private hands.

But ownership and licensing to drive them can be restricted further, and possibly will be.



If someone is trying to break into your house, you would dispute that. And if you live in some rural areas, you would consider both very necessary.

Besides, I was being ironic.

It seems madness to me to see some Islamic terrorist run people down with a truck, then decide that restriction of guns for peaceful people is somehow the answer to it, and particularly when terrorists seem to have no trouble getting guns that are already illegal.


“But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow. … For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.”- Jeff Snyder

closed #17

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit