The Swiss Army is based on a militia. The national principle – it is strongly resented by the Left – is universal service. After basic training, the citizen is obligated to serve yearly for about two weeks to update his skills. He is also to maintain his marksmanship in his village’s gun club.
The positive law is a superior form of logic, and the best way to deny the positive law is denying its intrinsic logic, as it is done here. By means of logical fallacies, you can transform an illegitimate law into a legal one.
In this post, the scribe
- makes a comparison between the USA law of firearms and the Swiss army system;
- tries to ideologically identify the legal ability to bear assault rifles and war weapons in general, on one hand, with the legal ability to carry a firearm, on the other hand. This means that, for the scribe, to deny a citizen the ability to legally carry an assault rifle is the same as denying a citizen the ability to legally carry a Colt 38, or a 6 mm bullet pistol.
1/ The Swiss army system may be compared to the US National Guard — it is a form of militia. Question: is a US National Guard member allowed to carry his assault rifle home? Answer: yes!
But the US National Guard status is not the same as private gun ownership status! — unless the US government makes mandatory that everybody in the country to join the National Guard (as it happens in Switzerland!), and therefore everybody would be allowed to carry their assault rifles home.
2/ Referring to point 2, please try to shoot a dummy with an assault rifle at 55 yards of distance; and afterward try the same shot with a 6 mm bullet pistol. And check the difference.
I am right-winger myself, but try not to be stupid.