Don't mess with the Swiss...

I know I wouldn't break into a house when I knew EVERY one had a gun in it and someone that knew how to use it.
 
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]In 1911 Kaiser Wilhelm was visiting Switzerland. He was talking to a Swiss general.
Kaiser Wilhelm said "If things start to heat up we may have to invade your country, I'm afraid. You wouldn't stand a chance, we would send 12 divisions, and we would outnumber you two to one!"

The Swiss general replied, "Then each of my men would have to shoot twice."[/FONT]
 
Puts the right to bear arms to shame doesn't it?

There was a PBS travel show on tv at one point about a decade ago. (Steve something travels in EU?) The guy was going through Switzerland and was talking to one of the locals. He was visiting a normal citizen and got to see the arsenal in the closet. They went out to a generic run of the mill barn and opened the door. Behind that door was a locked steel door. Behind that door was a huge 5" cannon aimed at the country border down the valley and a respectable amount of shells stacked along the wall. They don't even have to leave home to defend their country. Open the barn doors and boom, bad guys dead all over the place. I wonder how far an enemy jet would get before AA fire from Uncle Louie's milk cow farm took it out.

I could just see that kind of setup here and the uproar it would cause.
 
Good video. I just watched the film series Why We Fight, which Frank Capra made during WW II, and it was striking to see the map showing almost all of Europe, with Switzwerland being a little patch of unconquered territory in the middle.

Besides the arming of the citizenry, I saw a documentary that showed the very extensive system of tunnel defenses that the Swiss had installed in the mountains. If the Nazis had invaded, they would have paid a high price!
 
fgcason said:
Puts the right to bear arms to shame doesn't it?

There was a PBS travel show on tv at one point about a decade ago. (Steve something travels in EU?) The guy was going through Switzerland and was talking to one of the locals. He was visiting a normal citizen and got to see the arsenal in the closet. They went out to a generic run of the mill barn and opened the door. Behind that door was a locked steel door. Behind that door was a huge 5" cannon aimed at the country border down the valley and a respectable amount of shells stacked along the wall. They don't even have to leave home to defend their country. Open the barn doors and boom, bad guys dead all over the place. I wonder how far an enemy jet would get before AA fire from Uncle Louie's milk cow farm took it out.

I could just see that kind of setup here and the uproar it would cause.
Click to expand...

That's Rick Steves. We've been using his books for European travel for years. Good stuff.
 
RogerT said:
What a concept ... allowing citizens the right to defend
themselves.
Click to expand...

Well...what are they allowed to do with the weapons? Are they required to have the weapons and be competent in their use in the event of a national emergency, or are they allowed to open up on people breaking into their houses?

Also, I saw a post implying that the decision not invade Switzerland during WWII could be, at least in part, attributed to what was seen in the video. I hate to burst anyones' bubble, but possession of small arms wasn't really a concern.

Next, to the extent that this thread is about crime rates, there's a lot more to that issue than guns in houses. Demographics would be a good factor to consider.

Finally, and I got a kick out of this, I noticed that the stickers in the guy's gun cabinet looked to be American - they were written in English, at least.... I found that interesting.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Well...what are they allowed to do with the weapons? Are they required to have the weapons and be competent in their use in the event of a national emergency, or are they allowed to open up on people breaking into their houses?
Click to expand...

Do you think an intruder would be confident they wouldn't open up on him simply because they weren't allowed to?
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Well...what are they allowed to do with the weapons? Are they required to have the weapons and be competent in their use in the event of a national emergency, or are they allowed to open up on people breaking into their houses?

Also, I saw a post implying that the decision not invade Switzerland during WWII could be, at least in part, attributed to what was seen in the video. I hate to burst anyones' bubble, but possession of small arms wasn't really a concern.

Next, to the extent that this thread is about crime rates, there's a lot more to that issue than guns in houses. Demographics would be a good factor to consider.

Finally, and I got a kick out of this, I noticed that the stickers in the guy's gun cabinet looked to be American - they were written in English, at least.... I found that interesting.
Click to expand...
One of the wealthiest countries in the world, with an average annual income of $80,000 a year, 3% unemployment, and a very highly educated population,,,,,,, no it is the guns. It's the guns, everyone knows that if you have guns in your house there isn't crime. Guns stop crime. How can you argue that? If everyone had a gun in their pocket, there wouldn't be any crime. I know, because I have guns.
 
Even though the States doesn't require mandatory services, I'd say more people hunt than not (I could be wrong), and know enough about firearms.
 
Geico266 said:
Manditory service for all young Swiss men. Now there is change I can believe in!
Click to expand...

And if that were the case here and it involved regular firearms training like it seems the Swiss have, I'd stand behind it in a heartbeat. Note that they get a firearm and a couple of magazines of ammunition. Not the gun nut stockpiling you see in the US where you need 14 rifles and 30000 rounds in your bunker for the 'revolution'. And oh my god, they keep their firearms in a gun cabinet, heaven forbid you tell a gun owner in the US to keep their firearms locked up.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
Also, I saw a post implying that the decision not invade Switzerland during WWII could be, at least in part, attributed to what was seen in the video. I hate to burst anyones' bubble, but possession of small arms wasn't really a concern.
Click to expand...

As the author of that post, I'd like to clarify that I don't think the possession of small arms alone would have done the trick. My guess is that the extensive system of tunnel defenses I referred to were a bigger factor.
 
This should be in the SZ. Too many ignorant opinions will no doubt emerge and it's already turning into a political topic.

Btw., if guns are responsible for the low crime rates (Hint: they aren't), then why do other European countries where owning a gun isn't generally allowed have much lower crime rates than the U.S., where that right is in the Constitution? Can you imagine that other factors could be at work here?
 
The model only works in a well educated society. Can you imagine this in some parts of our inner cities?
 
Erik1010 said:
Even though the States doesn't require mandatory services, I'd say more people hunt than not (I could be wrong), and know enough about firearms.
Click to expand...
Given the population of urban areas, and my observation that the majority in urban areas don't hunt (having conducted a thoroughly scientific poll of two people), I suspect that you may be overestimating the number of educated gun aficionados.

I too, could be wrong, however. But this isn't the SZ, so we can make all sorts of unverified claims! :)
 
The number of hunters is slowly declining, but the number of "educated gun aficionados" is on the rise.
 
gprellwitz said:
Given the population of urban areas, and my observation that the majority in urban areas don't hunt (having conducted a thoroughly scientific poll of two people), I suspect that you may be overestimating the number of educated gun aficionados.

I too, could be wrong, however. But this isn't the SZ, so we can make all sorts of unverified claims! :)
Click to expand...
You know it is my favorite time of the year, deer hunting season. This is when the news from our neighbors to the north gets quite comical. I think it hilarious that the amount of 'educated gun afficiando hunters' that shoot themselves and/or their buddies, shoot the wrong animals (cows), or just plain injure themselves each year due to their lack of gun knowledge or massive consumption of alcohol is quite telling about the so called weapons training and maturity of the average hunter.

The only thing that tickles me more are when the snowmobilers start falling through the half frozen lakes.
 
dmccormack said:
Why should I keep my firearms "locked up?"
Click to expand...

No comment on whether you "should" or "shouldn't," but the time is coming (if it's not here already) when you stand a chance of being sued for not locking your guns up if they're stolen and a stolen gun is later used in a murder or some other kind of crime.

Putting my "reasonable [normal/average] American citizen" hat on - that is, I'm your average juror right now - I can't say I'd be surprised if your average person thought that if you didn't have your guns locked up and one were stolen and later used to kill, say, a police officer during the commission of another felony, you were negligent.

Do I agree with that? It doesn't matter whether I do or don't - it ain't my (or yours, or anyone other single individual's) opinion that matters. The only opinions that matter are 4/6 people on a civil jury.

So, that's something to keep in mind.

As always, consider the demographics where you live. Boston ain't Pittsburg ain't Baltimore ain't Denver.
 
Last I heard, theft was a crime in itself. Breaking into a locked gun case or breaking into a locked house...I don't see a difference. The only time my loaded guns are locked up are when my grandsons are visiting. Otherwise they're at my fingertips, which makes their theft from either the case or the house a d... sight less likely. The laser works REALLY well in the dark.
 
RickH said:
Last I heard, theft was a crime in itself. Breaking into a locked gun case or breaking into a locked house...I don't see a difference. ....
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, but what I'm saying is that it's not a particularly far stretch (if it's a stretch at all) for a jury to decide that, without regard to the intervening crimes of B&E and theft (two distinct occurrences), it is negligence for someone to leave their guns unlocked.

I think I said it before, but it depends very much on the people who'd be on your jury.

Also, this subject has been discussed in the past, with someone (I think it might have been Dan) saying that these types of lawsuits have already been filed.

I'm not saying that I agree with those types of suits, but what I think doesn't matter. It only matters what a majority of a civil jury thinks - and unless there's a law saying that it's not negligence to have unlocked guns, a jury is free to find that it is negligent not to lock them up.

So, all I'm saying is that it's a possibility.

The next step down the line would be homeowners insurance companies requiring that guns be locked up. And, if you don't, there's the potential for your coverage evaporating in case of an event. As in aviation, insurance can drive actual practice (you willing to take the chance of not being covered in case of a fire/hurricane/tornado/swarm-of-manatees by having your guns unlocked?).
 
Last edited:
RickH said:
Last I heard, theft was a crime in itself. Breaking into a locked gun case or breaking into a locked house...I don't see a difference. The only time my loaded guns are locked up are when my grandsons are visiting. Otherwise they're at my fingertips, which makes their theft from either the case or the house a d... sight less likely. The laser works REALLY well in the dark.
Click to expand...
It doesn't take a lot of skill to bust out a window. Hopefully, it takes more skill to crack a locked gun cabinet. Having them loaded at all times is fine if you're there at all times. How about when you're at church? Are they all at your fingertips then, or are some back at the house, unguarded, relying on a piece of glass in the window and the honesty of your fellow man to keep them secure?

An honest question, because I don't know. In the armed forces in barracks, do the soldiers keep their loaded weapons at hand, or are they in locked cabinets? Do police officers at home leave the guns locked up if they don't have them with them, or lying in a nightstand? Is there generally departmental policy on this, or is it up to the individual officer?
 
They're at my fingertips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top