Right-Wing Gun Lies (Israel/Switzerland)

The right-wing has been spreading a lot of lies to avoid any new gun restrictions at all. I think they know that most Americans want background checks on all guns sales (85% to 90%) and a majority want to see the sale of military-style assault weapons banned (54%), so they have been saying all sorts of things to try and change public opinion.

One of the things they have been doing to try and demonstrate that guns are not the real reason for the many thousands of gun deaths in this country every year, is to use the nations of Israel and Switzerland as examples. They want Americans to believe that large numbers of people in those countries are allowed to have guns, and since they don't have an inordinate amount of gun deaths, then guns can't be the problem in this country. The problem with that argument is that it just is NOT TRUE!

Janet Rosenbaum studied these claims for the National Institute of Health (NIH), and she found two things -- neither country has anywhere near the number of guns possessed by civilians per capita as the United States does, and both countries have much more restrictive laws on gun possession by civilians than the U.S. does.

The United States has an estimated 83 to 97 guns per 100 residents. That is far more than either Switzerland or Israel. Switzerland had about 16 guns per 100 residents in 2002, but they issued long guns to some residents when they reduced the size of their standing army. The ratio now is between 31 and 60 guns per 100 residents (and very few of those are handguns). Israel has far less than that, at only about 7.3 guns per 100 residents. And in Israel, most of those civilian-possessed guns are in the settlements (and are not handguns).

The laws for possession of a handgun by a civilian in both countries in much stricter than in the United States. While a citizen in the U.S. can own an unlimited number of handguns, in Switzerland and Israel a citizen can only own one gun -- and the ownership of that one handgun must be approved by the government (and Israel leads the world in turning down handgun permits by rejecting at least 40% of all applications).

In both countries, a citizen must demonstrate a justifiable need for a handgun before the government will issue a permit (and "home defense" is not considered a justifiable need). After satisfying the government that the need has been met, a Swiss citizen is issued a permit for six months, and then that permit must be renewed every three months. In Israel, a permit is issued for a year and must be renewed annually, or whenever the permit-holder changes residence, job, or national security status (and no one who takes psychotropic drugs or has been arrested for domestic violence, even if not convicted, can get a permit).

The NIH report concludes by saying:

Swiss and Israeli gun ownership is rare, regulated stringently such as by putting the burden of proof on permit applicants to demonstrate a specific need for a gun, and neither country encourages gun ownership.

By using these two countries as examples, the right-wing gun proponents in this country are hurting their own argument for less restrictions on gun ownership. Both countries have far fewer guns possessed by civilians per capita than the U.S. does -- and both countries have far more stringent rules about gun ownership and possession (especially of handguns). Personally, I think their gun laws make a lot more sense than ours do.

Swiss Cancel Bush Appearance

When Bush finished his term as one of the most unpopular presidents of all time, some Republicans said he would be treated more favorably by history. Of course it wasn't historians who said that (they still rate him very low among past presidents), and the two years since his presidency hasn't seemed to blunt his unpopularity.

Take for instance his scheduled appearance in Switzerland to speak before a group called United Israel Appeal. The speech was scheduled for February 12th, but it has now been cancelled. It has been cancelled because substantial demonstrations against his appearance were being scheduled (with everyone encouraged to bring a shoe to throw at him).

Several groups were also planning to try and bring charges against him for approving the use of torture in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it is doubtful that the charges would have been accepted by the Swiss government, even though torture is against international law and the Geneva Conventions (and Bush has admitted ordering the torture of prisoners).

But whether it was the possibility of charges (unlikely) or the large number of planned demonstrators (more likely), it is obvious that there are still a lot of negative feelings toward Bush -- both in the United States and in Europe.

It looks like its going to be a very long time before the Bush legacy can be rehabilitated, if it can be at all. I doubt that anyone alive today will live to see it.

Swiss People Vote For Bigotry

We normally think of Switzerland as a peaceful country -- one that seldom takes sides in other peoples and countries controversies or wars. But it looks like the ugly face of bigotry can live even in a country like Switzerland. The approval of a new referendum there proves this to be a fact.

This Swiss people have approved by a whopping 57% of the vote, a referendum that bans the building of minarets anywhere in the country. The country only has four minarets, even though the second largest religion in the country is Islam. And unless this new law is overturned by the Swiss Supreme Court, as Amnesty International believes it will be, there will never be another one built there.

The Swiss Justice Minister tried to calm the fears of Swiss muslims by saying the vote was "not a rejection of the muslim community, religion or culture." Those are hollow words. The vote was indeed a rejection of all three. In fact, the secretary general of Switzerland's largest political party said, "This was a vote against minarets as symbols of Islamic power."

Do the Swiss people know they have voted in favor of religious bigotry? Of course, they do. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. They weren't voting against an architectural style -- but against a religion. Last week, a Geneva mosque was vandalized for the third time in the weeks leading up to the vote.

I don't know that I can ever again have the same positive feelings about the Swiss that I've had in the past. Bigotry is an ugly and offensive thing wherever it happens.

Hopefully, our Constitution and religious freedom laws would prevent such a law being approved in this country, but I have little doubt that given the opportunity voters in America might well do the same thing.