Ocena teme:
  • 11 Glas(ov) - 4 Povprečje
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Zaostritev EU zakonodaje o orožju
Na to vižo je vsaj eden od slovenskih mojstrov tutifruti organizacije , 'grozil' tistim ki mu niso hoteli več plačevati precej visoke članarine Eek , češ fantje plačajte ali boste ob OL ker bom prijavil na UE da niste več naši.
Odgovori
(15-02-2017, 13:02)Bobo Napisal: Hja to je po moje nekaj kar je ostalo izven v trenutni ureditvi. Certifikat ti ostane in greš lahko "legalno" v trgovino kupit smodnik.

Ne bo držalo!
Zakon o eksplozivih in pirotehničnih izdelkih (ZEPI), prvi odstavek 30.člena: "Fizične osebe, ki imajo na podlagi predpisov, ki urejajo posest orožja, veljavni orožni list, lahko kupujejo in imajo v posesti dele streliva (smodnik, netilke in tulce z netilkami) na podlagi orožnega lista in certifikata o strokovni usposobljenosti za polnjenje streliva za lastne potrebe. "

Po zakonu, z DP ne moreš zakonito kupovati delov streliva za polnjenje za lastne potrebe!
Odgovori
Iurium: problem slovenske zakondaje je najlepše razviden na tej strani:

http://www.tax-fin-lex.si/Supervizor/VeljavniPredpisi

Leta 1991 smo imeli 357 zakonov in 872 predpisov.
Danes pa 834 zakonov in 19.108 podzakonskih predpisov.

Zato je verjetno mission imposible, da bi se uspelo doseči, da bi se novi ZORO napisal "iz nule".
Najbrž bodo šli po liniji najmanjšega odpora, implementirali EU direktivo in šli na dopust.
Odgovori
@JRC
Da postajamo družba hiperregulacije mnogokrat poudarjam tudi sam in to je nedvomno slabost, nikakor pa ne gre enačiti prekomernega obstoja zakonodaje s kakovostjo le te. V tem segmentu se odrežemo še mnogo slabše, kot na področju kvantitete.

Praksa je, da se zakonodaja ob revizijah »nadgrajuje«. Slabost takšnega pristopa se v veliki večini primerov kaže v tem, da se ob vsaki reviziji izgubi nekaj tistega osnovnega koncepta in ciljev, ki ga je ta na začetku nemara imel. Zanemariti ne gre niti drugih dejavnikov, ki imajo vpliv na nastanek končnih zakonodajnih besedil, razprava o tem pa presega okvire tega portala. Rezultat vsega tega je zakonodaja vse prej, kot kakovostna.

Nikakor si ne delam utvar, da bi kdorkoli v zakonodajni, ali izvršilni veji oblasti, ravno odprtih rok sprejel idejo, da se lotimo pisanja nove orožne zakonodaje od začetka, izredno težko pa sprejemam misel, da te pripravljenosti, ali celo interesa, občasno ni zaznati pri zainteresirani javnosti. Morda marsikdo ocenjuje, da je to zgolj izguba časa in energije, taka trditev pa temelji predvsem na pomanjkljivem poznavanju splošnega zakonodajnega in zakonskega področja.

Priprava izhodišč, ne nazadnje pa tudi zakonskih predlogov ima vrsto blagodejnih učinkov, četudi se na koncu te v celoti ne implementirajo v sprejete rešitve. Ena med njimi je, da se mnogo laže ocenjuje primernost in učinkovitost nekaterih predlaganih ukrepov, ne nazadnje tudi njihovo formulacijo. Preprosto pristajanje na vedno nove »nadgradnje« že obstoječih pravnih rešitev, nas tudi teoretično ne more pripeljati drugam, kot v situacijo, kjer smo priče zakonodajnim slabostim, tako na kvantiteti, kot tudi kvalitetni ravni, torej situaciji, ki je bila postavljena v prvotni trditvi.

Kot sem nekajkrat že zapisal, marsikdo je do mojih predlogov zadržan zaradi razlogov nerazumevanja problematike, mnogo manj, zaradi vsebinskih vprašanj. Ravno zaradi tega je ključnega pomena, da se v krovno organizacijo vključi strokovnjake posameznih področij, preostanek pa napore podpre po svojih močeh, seveda v kolikor vsak posameznik sodi, da so v njenem delovanju zajeti njegovi lastni interesi, oziroma vsaj glavnina njih.
Odgovori
Ne vem kaj ti preprečuje, da se ne vključiš v krovno organizacijo. Pač potrkaš na vrata (v prispodobi) in poveš, da bi rad sodeloval pri pripravi nove zakonodaje. Sicer ne poznam šefov SZS, ampak najbrž bi bili veseli kvalitetnih in konstruktivnih predlogov.
Odgovori
Nič, ali skoraj nič.
Kot sem že mnogokrat zapisal, posest/uporaba strelnega orožja je mnogo širši koncept, kot ga pokrivajo zgolj SZS, LZS, ter druge zveze, društva in posamezniki, ki imajo stik s strelnim orožjem. V kolikor bi uspeli preseči parcialne interese in združiti moči pri skutnih ciljih, bi bilo to nedavno korak v pravi smeri, je pa ob upoštevanju dosedanje prakse vprašanje, ali je to mogoče v okviru obstoječih organizacij. Iz tod izhaja moja ideja o ločeni krovni organizaciji, seveda pa dopuščam možnost, da se motim.
Odgovori
Seveda.
In smo spet pri - statut, osebne izkaznice, denarnice... ker obstoječe zveze same ne bodo šle ustanavljati krovne organizacije Whistle

Če tega ne boš storil, potem bo ostalo le pri ideji, če teh ambicij nimaš, pa je IMHO škoda pisati tudi po forumu.

In če se vrnemo še malo nazaj k osnovni temi: EU direktiva.

Tole sem ravnokar zasledil:
https://www.gunsweek.com/en/current/arti...rms-united
Odgovori
Kot je napisal goranzivec zgoraj potrebuješ za nakup in posest delov streliva za polnjenje dve stvari: 1. veljaven orožni list in 2. certifikat o strokovni usposobljenosti za polnjenje za lastne potrebe. V primeru prepisa orožja iz orožnega lista na DP in prenehanja veljavnosti orožnega lista ostane certifikat še vedno veljaven (je le potrdilo o usposobljenosti), ni pa mogoče samo s certifikatom kupovati delov streliva za polnjenje. Trgovec mora ob prodaji preveriti ali ima kupec vse pogoje za nakup, zgolj certifikat ne zadostuje. V kolikor proda dele streliva za polnjenje nekomu, ki nima orožnega lista ima pa certifikat (kar je možno v primeru prenehanja veljavnosti orožnega lista), je enako, kot če bi prodal nekomu, ki ima samo DP ali nekomu, ki sploh nima ničesar - nedovoljena proizvodna in promet orožja in eksploziva.
Odgovori
(15-02-2017, 13:48)goranzivec Napisal:
(15-02-2017, 13:02)Bobo Napisal: Hja to je po moje nekaj kar je ostalo izven v trenutni ureditvi. Certifikat ti ostane in greš lahko "legalno" v trgovino kupit smodnik.

Ne bo držalo!
Zakon o eksplozivih in pirotehničnih izdelkih (ZEPI), prvi odstavek 30.člena: "Fizične osebe, ki imajo na podlagi predpisov, ki urejajo posest orožja, veljavni orožni list, lahko kupujejo in imajo v posesti dele streliva (smodnik, netilke in tulce z netilkami) na podlagi orožnega lista in certifikata o strokovni usposobljenosti za polnjenje streliva za lastne potrebe. "

Po zakonu, z DP ne moreš zakonito kupovati delov streliva za polnjenje za lastne potrebe!

Si opazil mogoče v mojem postu, da je legalno v navednicah???
Odgovori
(15-02-2017, 14:11)JRC Napisal: Iurium: problem slovenske zakondaje je najlepše razviden na tej strani:

http://www.tax-fin-lex.si/Supervizor/VeljavniPredpisi

Leta 1991 smo imeli 357 zakonov in 872 predpisov.
Danes pa 834 zakonov in 19.108 podzakonskih predpisov.

Zato je verjetno mission imposible, da bi se uspelo doseči, da bi se novi ZORO napisal "iz nule".
Najbrž bodo šli po liniji najmanjšega odpora, implementirali EU direktivo in šli na dopust.

Super podatki. To je prava panevropska bolečina in razlog nekonkurenčnosti.  Lepo je napisal B. M. Župančič bolj je družba dezorientirana, korumpirana in nemoralna več ima pravil, predpisov in zakonov, hipernormativizacija je znamenje razkroja. Slovenska bonus posebnost pa je, da smo zaprli toliko fabrk, da morajo ljudje pač pisati, če ni drugega dela.
Odgovori
Tisti, ki ste bili v kontaktih z europoslanci: pisitw jim, da naj prispevajo podpis podpore k amandmajem, ki jih pripravlja Dita Charanzova. Potrebnih je 40 podpisov, da se potem o amandmajih razpravlja in glasuje.
Odgovori
Malo kronološkega pregleda (v ang):
http://www.amacs-malta.org/wp-content/up...b-2017.pdf
Odgovori
Pozdravljeni

Med brskanjem po internetu sem našel seznam evropskih poslancev v mandatu 2014-2019 (imena, e-naslovi in še nekatere druge zadeve) v Excelovem formatu, kar omogoča masovno pošiljanje personaliziranih e-sporočil (t.j. vsak dobi enako sporočilo, vendar s svojim imenom).

Če bo kdorkoli od vas pred marčevskim plenarnim zasedanjem Evropskega parlamenta pisal poslancem glede glasovanja o direktivi, mu bo datoteka v pomoč.


Priponke
.xlsx   MEPs 2014.xlsx (Velikost: 123,47 KB / Prenosi: 59)
Odgovori
V kolikor je kdorkoli menil, da se bomo zaostrovanju nemara izognili.


Priponke
.pdf   2017-01-25-Firearms_directive_EN.pdf (Velikost: 624,41 KB / Prenosi: 172)
Odgovori
kako zdaj ta zadeva poteka mi pošljejo z upravne kam moram odnest rore al se moram jaz poklicat za termin.
Odgovori
Hej, hej...kam se ti mudi  Doh
Ok, ce se zajebavas, ampak nikamor ne bo treba rorov nosit  Hand
Odgovori
(26-02-2017, 17:18)Matjaž_ Napisal: Pozdravljeni

Med brskanjem po internetu sem našel seznam evropskih poslancev v mandatu 2014-2019 (imena, e-naslovi in še nekatere druge zadeve) v Excelovem formatu, kar omogoča masovno pošiljanje personaliziranih e-sporočil (t.j. vsak dobi enako sporočilo, vendar s svojim imenom).

Če bo kdorkoli od vas pred marčevskim plenarnim zasedanjem Evropskega parlamenta pisal poslancem glede glasovanja o direktivi, mu bo datoteka v pomoč.

Ni čist up-to-date, ampak veliko jih pa še dela.

http://www.strelec.si/forum/thread-16150.html
Odgovori
(26-02-2017, 19:12)jagdsport Napisal: kako zdaj ta zadeva poteka mi pošljejo z upravne kam moram odnest rore al se moram jaz poklicat za termin.

Glede na to kaj vse je označeno kot "dogovorjeno/usklajeno" ne boš prav dolgo čakal za termine...
Odgovori
Orožje ni edino, ki ga režejo. Zdaj so lotili še tistih nekaj normalnih jezikov v EU parlamentu...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/...g_share_tw
Odgovori
Na zadnje pisanje poslancem sem zaenkrat dobil en odgovor. Prva razprava v EP naj bi bila 14. marca, vidim pa grožnjo, da bodo v primeru zavrnitve s strani poslancev vse skupaj spet prevzeli "neizvoljeni" in naredili nekaj po svoje.

Vseeno je tale kompromis za moje pojme slab kompromis, saj je spisan tako, da je vse nekje v oblakih in je posledično veliko manevrskega prostora za zaostrovanje in izsiljevanje, zato tudi pismo poslancem. Morda podam ključne točke:
  • Strelci smo še vedno označeni kot potencialni kriminalci, čeprav se tu hudo krši načelo nedolžnosti do dokazane krivde. Absurd je, da moramo mi na podlagi nekih nebuloz bruseljskega CK dokazovati svojo nedolžnost. To za demokratični sistem ni dopustno.
  • Grandfathering je slaba ideja (zakaj, je bilo tudi tu gor že napisano)
  • Uvrstitev katerekoli kategorije športnega orožja v kategorijo A in izjeme za aktivne tekmovalce so nedopustne, saj so diskriminatorne do rekreativcev, ki ne tekmujejo redno (če sploh). Očitno točka, k nastanku katere so najverjetneje pripomogli tisti, ki bi se morali boriti za interese strelcev, ne le za lastne žepe  Doh
    Če dodam: orožje smo kupili ob vednosti države in to je za moje pojme čisto dovolj - nikogar ne briga, kaj s tem orožjem počnemo, dokler ga seveda ne prodamo ali z njim naredimo kakšne traparije.
  • Tudi te nesmiselne uredbe, ki ne rešujejo problemov, temveč kvečjemu ustvarjajo nove, so eden glavnih razlogov za naraščanje nezadovoljstva nad EU.



Citat:"There has been a European law on firearms since the 1990s.  This did require reviewing, especially regarding the provisions for inadequately deactivated firearms. However the changes that were proposed by the European Commission in 2015 were unworkable and would have put disproportional restrictions on legal owners.  There was a vote in the European Parliament Committee to reject the entire proposal but this was not supported by a majority.  Instead the Committee proposed significant amendments in order to protect the interests of citizens.



It is not possible for the European Parliament to make these changes alone as it also needs the approval of the European Council which consists of national governments of the 28 different countries that are members of the EU.  Many of these governments wanted to introduce even more new rules and did not accept the amendments from the Parliament.



Significant Amendments

During the months of scrutiny the Parliament worked with many different groups of legal owners and secured many very significant improvements to the proposal including:



   Removing the restriction on items that "resemble" automatic firearms, as criteria based on cosmetic appearance is legally unworkable;
   Reintroducing provisions to enable reservists, museums and collectors, and film makers to continue ownership with Member State approval and strict safety procedures;
   Enabling re-enactors and holders of deactivated firearms to continue ownership whilst also ensuring that deactivation standards are robust across Europe.  Technical issues with deactivation standards have been re-considered;
   The issue of poorly deactivated "salute and acoustic weapons" which were sold without authorisation, but then reconverted and used in certain recent terror attacks has been addressed;
   Provisions to support younger owners have been retained, as has recognition of the needs of those in remote rural areas;
   Strong  conditions for storage were introduced in line with common practice in many Member States;
   Proposals for a controversial mandatory medical test have been removed, instead each country will need to have in place its own systems for medical assessment;
   New measures for clearer marking and better information sharing between Member States are introduced but with care taken not to put overly burdensome requirements on small dealers.



Nevertheless there are some outstanding questions from owners.



Target and Sports Shooters

The European Parliament negotiators believe that people participating in target and sports shooting should be able to continue to do so, provided that this is accepted in the Member State concerned.  The Commission's original approach would have placed many of the firearms used by target shooters into the Category A which is restricted for civilians.  However after the Parliament amendments each Member State has the power to give Category A authorisations to target shooters, provided the individual is actively practising for or participating in shooting competitions.



The Parliament negotiators worked closely with national and international sports shooting organisations, including IPSC, to ensure that the authorisation covers those entering the sport as well as those already competing. The current freedom of choice of equipment used by competitors in their shooting disciplines can continue and, in order to facilitate continued participation in international competitions, the rules governing the European Firearms Pass will be updated to cover firearms, including Category A firearms, held by such target shooters.



Many firearms commonly used for sports shooting, such as centre-fire semi-automatics, are not themselves affected.



This is one of several areas where the Member States sought the inclusion of more rigid and less workable provisions, but this was rejected by the Parliament team. If target shooters are concerned about how the new proposals will work in practice they should work with the authorities in their own Member States as it will be a national decision whether or not to authorise such activities.



Magazines and loading devices

The European Council and the Commission both wanted to ban all high capacity magazines.  The Parliament negotiating team did not support this.   However the Council refused to accept that there should be no new limitations on magazines and loading devices. Here again the Member States sought more restrictive and less workable provisions which were rejected by the Parliament team. After much negotiation the following was offered:



   Loading devices themselves, including magazines, are not restricted per se.



   Semi-automatic centre fire firearms which allow the firing of more than A certain number of rounds without reloading will now become Category A firearms only if a loading device with a capacity exceeding a set number of rounds is inserted into it or is part of the firearm. For short firearms, the limit is at 20 rounds and for long firearms at 10.  Target shooters, existing holders, collectors, reservists and certain other specialist users will be able to continue holding such firearms and use the higher capacity magazine provided their Member State agrees and issues them the appropriate Category A authorisation.



   People who do not have a Category A authorisation but have a Category B firearm and who are also found in possession of a high capacity magazine will risk having their authorisation to hold firearms removed. There is no restriction in the Directive on re-applying for an authorisation in the future.



   New purchases of high capacity magazines are restricted to those with a Category A authorisation.



Reservists

Under the agreement Member States continue to have the ability to organise and protect their national reserve or public defence forces.  



Member States will be able to give Category A authorisations to individuals for the protection of the security of critical infrastructure, commercial shipping, high-value convoys and sensitive premises, as well as for national defence. Member States may issue or permit the acquisition and possession of firearms for those purposes. This meets the needs of countries like Finland.



Armed forces, the police and certain public authorities are not regulated by the Directive and there is special recognition of the Swiss situation.



Collectors and Museums

The European Commission and the Council insisted that collectors and museums fall within the scope of the Directive under the revision, as in many Member States they are required to follow existing national rules already. Once in force, the Directive will require collectors to follow the same acquisition and possession rules as other firearms holders.



The Parliament negotiating team worked hard to secure a special authorisation for collectors to continue hold Category A firearms. Member States will therefore have the ability to give Category A authorisations in exceptional cases to collectors subject to strict security measures. These authorisations can be given when demonstrating good cause, which can be for historical and research purposes, as is the case for collectors licensed at present.



Firearms of particular historical importance will not be covered by the new marking requirements, nor will marking requirements apply to antiques.



The collection of ammunition is permitted and rules regarding the marking of ammunition have not changed.



Automatic firearms converted into semi-automatic firearms

The Parliament’s initial approach was that automatic firearms which have been converted into semi-automatic firearms should remain in Category B if the conversion was irreversible.  However this was completely rejected by the Council and the Commission.



The Parliament team secured a grandfathering provision that will allow existing owners to continue to own, transfer, inherit or sell these firearms to others who have appropriate authorisation, provided their own Member State agrees.



These types of firearms will also be available to target and sports shooters who receive a Category A authorisations.



Next steps

The provisional deal needs to be voted by the full Parliament in an upcoming plenary session on 14 March and formally approved by the EU Council of Ministers.



There will also be a full debate in the chamber of the Parliament on the morning of 14 March, where MEPs from across Parliament will be able to speak on the matter.   MEPs may table amendments to the negotiated position but if these are passed it does risk destabilising the entire package as the proposal is then returned for a "second reading".  At this stage the Parliament is not so involved in the detailed negotiation and there is a risk that the Council reverts to its much more rigid approach.



In order to protect the rights of legal owners it is important to keep engaging with national governments as soon as possible and especially during the "transposition" process when governments update their own national laws.  Individual Member States have the power and the flexibility to grant their own authorisations and exemptions for the many types of genuine legal owners.  It is important that citizens hold their governments to account, and ensure that those powers are applied to the fullest extent."
Odgovori




Uporabnikov, ki berejo to temo: 2 Gost(ov)