[Vox.com] Twenty years ago, I headed to Sweden for a sabbatical year to study the country’s attitudes toward hunting. As a responsible hunter, I brought my own guns — an old 12-gauge shotgun and a Remington .30-06 — because I didn’t want to miss a shot or wound an animal using unfamiliar, borrowed firearms.
As a sociologist I thought that bringing my own firearms would give me some firsthand experience with European gun laws. That happened sooner than I expected.
My employer, the Swedish Hunters Association, had filled out all the paperwork (including paying the tax), so there was no problem getting my guns into the country. But I couldn’t take them to my apartment, as I would have in the United States.
Instead, like all guns in Sweden, they had to be stored in a locked safe, so colleagues took them directly to the wildlife research lab that has a walk-in vault to store firearms. For ease of access of governmental goonz
I began to think more about the responsibilities of gun owners rather than gun owners' rights. This guy's an idiot if he owns two long guns and has never thought about his own obligations.
Before I could hunt, there was the trip to the rifle range where my shooting scores were registered. While this is not required by law, I was told that landowners would not let me hunt moose, nor would a hunting team accept me, unless I showed I could hit a target — not just a paper target but a full-size plywood moose at 100 yards, standing and moving.
Much of what happened when I went hunting in Sweden was strange to me — hunting birds in the mountains with unloaded shotguns for example, stopping the moose hunt after a couple of hours to sit around a campfire roasting hot dogs, and then butchering a trophy moose without taking even one picture. (Here's my report on the differences in Swedish and American hunting.) Unloaded guns are not much good to anyone if you're hunting.
Being in this new setting that was much like and yet so different from Wisconsin got me thinking about hunting in new ways. I began to think more about the responsibilities of gun owners rather than gun owners' rights. I also learned that it was possible to maintain a lively hunting culture along with mandatory gun registration and required safe storage. Sure, it is possible to be a happy serf, and that is what government counts on.
As we face a firearm crisis in America today, it’s time for hunters to stop hiding behind the Second Amendment and claim the moral high ground as our nation’s responsible gun owners. The only crisis we have in America is statists trying to strip Americans of the Gawd given right to keep and bear arms. The moral high ground is to keep your weapons functioning and loaded at all times with as much ammunition as you can buy. That is responsible gun ownership.
The nation demands some action, and we, more than 13 million gun owners who hunt, are in a unique position to lead the way. Firearm registration as part of our normal licensing process could both strengthen our hunting tradition and at the same time help break the national logjam of inaction. Hunters are traditionally the weakest of gun owners, with the weakest understand of their rights under the US Constitution, so statists appeal to them first. That is why I think much of this garbage is aimed at them.
In Sweden, only responsible people can have guns.
Except for those who own guns illegally, of course. It's exactly the same in America, which is why the idea of jihadis with arsenals of illegally acquired guns and bombs has everyone on edge.
Here’s how the Swedish system works: Only responsible people are trusted with firearms. Sweden licenses guns in much the same way we license cars and drivers. You can have up to six guns but can get more with special permission. Very nice. Hat in hand, "Please sir, can I have more?" That's a serf, not a free man. Maybe that works well in Sweden, but it is an abomination in a free society.
To apply for a firearm permit you must first take a year-long hunter training program and pass a written and shooting test. You can also apply for a gun permit if you’ve been a member of an established shooting club for six months. What do you expect to learn in a hunting class for a solid year? This inquiring mind wants to know.
In addition to undergoing training, Sweden’s gun owners must store their firearms safely. Guns must be locked away in a vault, not stored beneath your car seat or in the nightstand where your kids can find them. Or where you can find them should Akmed decide he wants the missus or your children for himself.
Responsibility in Sweden goes further yet: Convicted of a felony? No guns for you. Beat your wife? No guns. Under a restraining order? No guns. Drive drunk? No guns. Yes, many of those classes find a way to break the law and obtain some sort of protection. They find a way because gun laws are unjust, and felon or not, they will find a way to protect themselves. I got twenny bucks that says an awful lot of Swedes own guns the government says they can't have.
(The gun law does not spell out specific actions that cause a citizen to be "unfit" to have a gun permit. It does say that the police must have a "reasonable cause" to suspend a permit, and these kinds of things might signal that a gun owner is "unfit.")
Even so, being responsible is not such a tough job. Sweden denies permits to only about 1,000 people a year (out of 600,000 permit holders), and they can appeal their rejection to the courts. Black robed mandarins whose sole job is to protect the provenance of their paychecks, and for Swedish serfs to abide by unjust laws. A responsible gun owner would know it's time to give up guns. The state is not the sole arbiter of that.
I learned that it was possible to maintain a lively hunting culture along with mandatory gun registration and required safe storage.
And despite these restrictions, Sweden has a strong hunting culture. The heavily forested country is about the size of California but with one-fourth the people. Its moose population per acre is the world’s largest, and moose hunting is front-page news. The king himself hunts moose, and small towns shut down for the season opener much like Wisconsin towns do for the state's deer season. Betcha the king has no problem getting his hands on an AR.
Sweden has nearly 300,000 hunters, which means it has a readily armed population should it need defense. And make no mistake: Guns are part of Sweden’s culture, history, and national defense — even though it has enjoyed more than 200 years of peace. Once the Mooslim Brotherhood finds out where all the guns are kept, your defense plans will be flushed down the toilet along with ethnic Swedish blood. But I bet the king will have his firearms close at hand, won't he?
Many of my Swedish colleagues served in the military and are proficient with firearms. They can practice at shooting ranges all over Stockholm. When hiking in a city park, it’s common to hear the measured shots of target practice nearby. Bully for Swedish vets, who should be ashamed they have no changed the oppression that restricts access to firearms.
And yet gun violence is low in Sweden. The country ranks 10th out of 178 countries in the world for per capita gun ownership but in 2014 had only 21 homicides by firearms. In contrast, the US is first in per capita ownership and had more than 8,000 gun homicides in 2014. Controlling for population, US firearms homicides are 700 percent higher than Sweden’s. Cue the harmonica music as this statist talks about the old times back in Wisconsin:
My favorite place in the world is an old cabin in Wisconsin’s Northwoods, where Heberlein relatives and friends have gathered every year for the past seven decades to hunt ruffed grouse and white-tailed deer. My fondest, proudest, and happiest memories of friendship, accomplishment, and even despair have occurred in the presence of firearms in that camp.
America's gun problem, explained
But in my hunting camp, gun rights don’t exist — just gun responsibilities. Wally and Norman know that. Wally was walking down the nearby White City logging road with Dick at his side when his .30-30 lever-action rifle fired unexpectedly. If Dick had been walking ahead of him, Dick would have been the one who didn’t show up at camp that next year instead of Wally, whose carelessness cost him his camp privileges.
Norman, meanwhile, is one of the world’s nicest guys, but he doesn’t hunt with us anymore either. Twice his gun went off accidentally.
I doubt most Americans understand how its hunters focus on gun responsibilities. Novice hunters are taught how to handle guns: Assume every gun is always loaded — even if you’re sure it’s not. Never point a gun at anything you would not shoot. The ground and sky are the exceptions, but not a house, a barn, or the neighbor’s cat. If you find yourself looking into someone’s gun muzzle, you’re always right to call out the hazardous infraction.
In our public rhetoric we may talk about the right to bear arms, but in our hunting life we focus on our safe gun-handling responsibilities to our fellow hunters. We don’t tolerate irresponsible hunters in the field, so why support the alleged rights of gun owners who make mass murders too common in America? Quite a leap to blame gun owners who do not toe your line that ordinary gun owners are responsible for shootings they do not commit.
How American hunters can claim the moral high ground for gun owners
It’s time to show the world that we hunters are the responsible gun owners in America. We can’t wait for Congress to pass new gun control legislation — it seems bound by money and lobbyists to never act. We hunters should use our own institutions, which we fund with license fees, to maintain safe and responsible gun ownership.
We don’t have to wait for the nation to act. We can work state by state to incorporate hunting firearm registration as part of our normal licensing process. Today when you buy a hunting license, you must meet a number of requirements like being a state resident, being a certain age, and in most states providing evidence of hunter safety training.
For each animal, the type of weapon that is legal is already specified in the rules. It would be a simple step in the licensing process to require hunters to specify the serial number of all firearms they are using for hunting. Registering the weapon would make it legal for hunting. Gun registration. This guy wants hunters to be the first in line to get their guns taken away from them when the time comes.
This registration won’t make hunting any safer — hunting will be just as safe whether the gun is registered or not. But it will signal to the vast majority of Americans who support responsible gun ownership that we hunters are willing to make a visible step as responsible gun owners. * Golf clap *
Wildlife commissions set hunting rules in most states, so it’s in their authority to require that any firearms used for hunting in that state be registered with the agency. It’s as simple as listing the make, model, and serial number of the firearms you will use for hunting when you buy your license. It is actually not in their authority to do that, and every "responsible" member of every Wildlife department will shudder at the lawsuits coming their way should such a rule even be proposed. An act in presumption of others' rights is an act that has no force of law. You can't write new rules and you can get legislatures to pass it.
Hunters don’t need expensive, time-consuming background checks — we are already trained. This proposal would apply only to firearms used for hunting. You wouldn’t need to register the AK, AR, handgun, or MSR (modern sporting rifle) you keep in the closet for home defense; our wildlife agencies makes rules only for guns used in the hunt, not all guns. Non-hunting firearms should also be under control, but let’s start first by registering the millions of firearms used for hunting. F*cking crazy
We hunters have our own police — conservation wardens — who number 5,000 strong nationally. We even pay their wages through our hunting fees to make sure we obey the rules. When wardens check a hunter in the field, they determine if the firearm is the right caliber as determined by the hunting regulations. For waterfowl, the magazine is checked to make sure it can only shoot three shells rather than the five for which it was designed. The shells the hunters are carrying are checked to make sure they are nontoxic. More rules and more regulations for hunters. Who is not down for that?
It would be a simple matter for the warden to check the serial number on the gun and compare those printed out on the back of the hunter’s license or to query an electronic data base. If you’re caught hunting with an unregistered gun, then you’re hunting illegally and are subject to fines and lost hunting privileges. It is as simple as that.
Of course this idea faces obstacles, including the biggest one of all: hunters’ unwillingness to change. Anything. We love hunting so much that its traditions and practices create strong emotional ties that we defend instinctively and passionately. If you doubt it, just ask any wildlife manager how stubbornly hunters resist even minor changes to rules and quotas.
Many will say self-registration won’t save lives. They’re right ... and wrong. Hunter involvement in mass shootings is so unusual that no one is keeping the statistics. Hunters very rarely inflict such evil on innocent lives.
But that’s not the point. Self-registration of our hunting weapons would distinguish us from other gun owners, not in words but in deeds. We would be taking the first step toward universal gun registration by registering our hunting firearms. Non-hunting gun owners who want to prove that they are responsible might want to join the hunting registration system. By distinguishing hunters from other gun owners, I think he means ridiculing hunters from other gun owners as placid, craven serfs.
Registration could lead gradually to requiring safe storage by locking all hunting guns in gun vaults. That would prevent tragedies in our own homes, which does mean saving lives. Ask the hunter who has lost a child to an accident or horseplay with an unsecured rifle or handgun. That is on the gun owner for failing to teach responsible gun handling. That is not on everyone else. As a gun owner I am only responsible for what I do, not for that others do. But in the statists' minds, like fascists, everyone can be punished for the acts of a few.
Of course, we can expect to hear this mantra: "If they know who owns guns, they can come and take them away." But "they" already know. Computerized lists of licensed hunters are in government offices in all 50 states, and many of those lists are public information. One must assume they figured out that licensed hunters have guns. As the FBI has said in sworn Congressional testimony, Form 4473s (the document putative gun owners fill out for gun purchases) are not definitive indicators of gun ownership. What make this individual think that hunting license holders are an even better indicator?
Won’t self-registration of guns reduce hunter numbers? I’ve spent much of my career studying hunter population dynamics, and I’m concerned about declines in hunting. But I don’t think the dropout group will be large. This is part of what statists do to grind down individual rights slowly and by degree. "Not a big dropout." I bet its a big one if you are forced to drop out.
Many hunters claim they’ll quit hunting when license fees go up, and, yes, license numbers often dip the first year, but most return the next. Hunting matters that much to us. And, yes, some might keep their hunting firearms secret and give up hunting instead. Personally, I’m willing to see them go. I want to hunt with men and women who responsibly register their hunting firearms. And with those gun registration lists, how long do you think it will be before groups of individuals who have been denied firearms will find you and deal with you?
Why do this? The answer is obvious, isn’t it? How many more mass shootings must we watch with helpless impotence while asking, "What I can do?" To protect what we love — our hunting life — we must differentiate ourselves from other gun owners. That'll do it, for sure.
By choosing to register our guns with our wildlife agencies, we would follow a long history of putting restrictions on ourselves for the greater good: bag limits, season lengths, blaze orange clothing, and so on. We will be recognized as the responsible registered gun owners. And unwittingly the author has noted something which is missing when the rest of us are being lectured about firearms. Consent of the Governed. How many gun laws have been passed in presumption of individual rights, that have been passed without even the slightest consideration for the notion of Consent of the Governed? That those most affected by those laws should have an irreversible veto on those laws? How many times have gun laws been passed which have been passed to attack, under the color of law and authority, the political enemies of statists? How can those laws be enforced if they were passed in the first place without Consent of the Governed? How can the law be considered to be equitable, fair and just for all if they were passed to strip one class of individual from their Gawd given rights?
Sweden shows it’s possible to have a serious hunting culture with firearms restrictions. With rights comes responsibility. Let’s show the way. Who will be the courageous, visionary sportsmen and women who establish the first hunter registration system in Vermont, or New York, or in my home state of Wisconsin, and take a step forward to sensible gun use in America? Not me. Bye, Felicia. Thomas Heberlein is professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin Madison and was a guest professor in the Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. He divides his time between Sweden and Wisconsin. He is working on a book called Falling in Love With Sweden: One Mistake at a Time.
#7
One more time - while I fully understand where you're coming from, I don't think you need to jump down a mod's throat because he didn't spell God in the precise manner you prefer. I'd rather save my energy for things I find more useful, like abusing Amnesty International pollsters in Copley Square and discarding my cigarette butts (still lit, natch) in their backpacks (which was done to two different pollsters on the same encounter - quite a feat if I do say so myself).
Posted by: Bov Flimbers ||
08/17/2016 1:51 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Hey Green commenter, it's a God given right. You are more ignorant than the author of this pathetic article.
Your mods have deleted me before...
Some religions choose not to spell out the word Gawd because they believe to do so is a show of disrespect to Gawd. That is why I spell out Gawd in that manner, the same way yet another ignorant writer, Rudyard Kipling, did it.
#10
Twenty years ago, I headed to Sweden for a sabbatical year to study the country’s attitudes toward hunting.
Its not and never has been about hunting. It's about protection against a tyrannical government. They just had thrown out a King and his 'regulars'. They were once Englishmen themselves and remember the warning of Cromwell, let alone their readings of the classics of Roman history.
I hunt and target shoot. I would defend myself with a gun should the need arise.
But the primary reason for citizens to own guns is to take out uppity public sector types when they become dangerous to private citizens, should no other peaceful means of doing so exist.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
08/17/2016 7:36 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Thanks P2k. That is and always has been the main point.
#13
We don't have a gun problem, we have a crime problem, a left-wing gun-grabber problem, and a problem with left-wingers not wanting to uphold the Constitution.
#15
Some religions choose not to spell out the word Gawd because they believe to do so is a show of disrespect to Gawd. That is why I spell out Gawd in that manner, the same way yet another ignorant writer, Rudyard Kipling, did it.
Sincerely, the Green Commenter
Ahh yes, Kipling. Many would call him an atheist. Explains everything.
This is not a Christian website, jvalentour. We have no test of faith. Some of us are various flavours of Christian, some are Jewish, Buddhist, agnostic, atheist, even Muslim, just as some of us have melanin levels considerably higher than "white". Get over it or take yourself elsewhere.
#16
Tell this officious pansy that hunting hasn't a god damn thing to do with our second amendment rights. "Arms" is a very different concept from "Guns".
[PoliticalIslam] Islam is based on Koran and Sunna. Since the Sunna is found in the Sira and the Hadith, this means that three books contain all the doctrine of Islam--the Trilogy. If it is in the Trilogy (Koran, Sira, Hadith), then it is Islam. If something is not in the Trilogy, then it is not Islam. All of the Islamic doctrine is found in the Trilogy. Now, we have the complete information with no missing pieces.
We have established our first criteria of knowledge. All authoritative statements about Islam must include a reference to the Trilogy to be authenticated. It does not matter what a scholar, imam, media guru, or anyone else says, if what they say cannot be supported by the doctrine in the Trilogy, then it is not Islam. If it is supported by the Trilogy, then it is Islam.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
