Sem jim (Lowri Evans) odgovoril (pa vsem slovenskim MEP v CC) in jih povprasal
- v koliko drzavah clanicah je "significant number of crimes" storjen z legalnim orozjem (ker se na to zgovarjajo)
- koliko primerov kriminala v EU je storjenega z legalnim orozjem kat. B7
- koliko B7 je bilo ukradenega legalnim lastnikom EU
- koliko B7 je bilo predanega ali prodanega s strani EU lastnikov kriminalcem ali teroristom
- koliko teroristicnih dejanj je bilo storjenih z legalnim B7 orozjem
- koliko zgoraj omenjenih zlocinov je bilo storjenih z "PAP orozjem ki spominja na avtomatsko orozje" oz. kot ga oni arbitrarno imenujejo "najnevarnejse orozje"
- kaksna avtoriteta, kaksno ekspertno mnjenje oz. na podlagi katerega numericnega kriterija je bilo B7 (in podobno) oznaceno za "najnevarnejse orozje"
- na kaksni podlagi so sestavili direktivo, ki specificno deluje proti kategoriji B7
- koliko kriminala in terorizma je bilo v EU storjenega z legalnim orozjem kategorij B1 in C1
- koliko kriminala in terorizma je bilo v EU storjenega z ilegalnim orozjem (katere koli kategorije)
- se enkrat, glede na stevilke kriminala z ilegalnim vs. legalnim orozjem kategorij B1, B7 in C1, zakaj so se odlocili sestaviti direktivo proti B7
- v luci dogajanja v Parizu, zakaj niso izvajali direktive 2008/51/EC4
original tekst _____________________________________________
TO: GROW-I4@ec.europa.eu
Respected Ms. Lowri EVANS,
Respected members of European Parliament,
Respected others,
In Your response to my letter, You are addressing an issue, I quote:
"This report indicated that there are indeed specific loopholes in the Firearms legislation which have allowed for firearms to be used in criminal activities. As an example, the report highlights that in certain Member States, a significant number of crimes are actually committed with legal firearms."
"the European Commission proposed // a revision of the Firearms Directive // to reinforce its security aspects in order to tackle these challenges."
"These measures are based on the conclusions of a study"
You are quoting a study [1] which is inaccessible on given internet address.
If You are basing Your proposal on a specific study, please answer me these questions:
#1 - IN HOW MANY MEMBER STATES a significant number of crimes are committed with legal firearms
#2 - HOW MANY CRIMES ARE COMMITTED IN EU BY LEGAL FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7 (per year or in last 10 years)
#3 - HOW MANY FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7 HAVE BEEN STOLEN FROM LEGAL OWNERS IN EU IN RECENT YEARS
#4 - HOW MANY FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7 HAVE BEEN SOLD OR GIVEN AWAY TO CRIMINALS OR TERRORISTS FROM LEGAL OWNERS in EU
#5 - HOW MANY TERRORIST ATTACKS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED IN EU BY LEGAL FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7
#6 - HOW MANY OF THE ABOVE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED WITH (as You say) "semi-automatic firearms for civilian use which resemble weapons with automatic mechanisms" (or as you arbitrarily name them "most dangerous firearms")
#7 - ON WHAT AUTHORITY, ON WHAT EXPERT OPINION, ON WHICH NUMERIC CRITERIA DID YOU CATEGORIZE THE AFOREMENTIONED FIREARMS (B7 and similar) as "MOST DANGEROUS FIREARMS"
Let me remind You, that You have put together a proposal of directive, that is specifically targeting legally-owned firearms of category B7 and other legally-owned long firearms that (by your words) are "most dangerous firearms".
#8 - What backing do You have in regards to THIS PARTICULAR KIND OF FIREARMS (category B7 and selfloading long firearms that look dangerous to You) that You composed a directive specifically targeting these (and only these) firearms?
Please answer me also:
#9 - How many crimes or terrorist attacks have been committed in EU (per year or in last 10 years) using legally owned categories of firearms B1 and C1?
#10 - How many crimes or terrorist attacks have been committed in EU (per year or in last 10 years) using ILLEGAL firearms (of any category)?
#11 - Considering the numbers of crimes committed with illegal firearms, and those committed with legal firearms of categories B1, B7 and C1 (separately), why are You targeting only category B7?
For the end I would also like to remind You, that EC adopted a directive 2008/51/EC4, which under point 13,b,i says
"point (a) shall be replaced by the following"
where the following text says:
"(a) have been rendered permanently unfit for use by deactivation, ensuring that all essential parts of the firearm have been rendered permanently inoperable and incapable of removal, replacement or a modification that would permit the firearm to be reactivated in any way’;"
"(ii) the following paragraph shall be inserted after the first paragraph:
‘Member States shall make arrangements for the deactivation measures referred to in point (a) to be verified by a competent authority in order to ensure that the modifications made to a firearm render it irreversibly inoperable. Member States shall, in the context of this verification, provide for the issuance of a certificate or record attesting to the deactivation of the firearm or the apposition of a clearly visible mark to that effect on the firearm. The Commission shall, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13a(2) of the Directive, issue common guidelines on deactivation standards and techniques to ensure that deactivated firearms are rendered irreversibly inoperable.’."
Furthermore, article 2 states:
"Member States shall, by 28 July 2010, bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive."
Question:
#12 - In light of recent Paris terrorist attacks committed with reactivated firearms, why did not EC act in previous years against MS that did not comply with the above directive adopted on 21st of May 2008?
My conclusion is, that EC is the prime entity responsible that Paris attacks occured with reactivated firearms as EC did not act against MS to enforce the adopted legislation in all member states.
My conclusion is, that EC is the prime entity responsible that Paris attacks occured with illegal firearms, as EC did nothing to crack down on the illegal firearms market.
My conclusion is, that EC is now acting hastily with unreasonable proposal, trying to punish the only partner that it can, and that is legal owners of long self-loading firearms that seem dangerous to an untrained eye, who are not responsible or guilty for any crimes or violations stated under reasons for these proposed measures.
I expect from You written answers on ALL questions numbered #1 to #12, with all numeric data that you based Your amendment proposal on.
I expect that Your numbers have weight needed to back up such a drastic reduction of liberties and punishment for the law-abiding citizens of EU.
best regards
- v koliko drzavah clanicah je "significant number of crimes" storjen z legalnim orozjem (ker se na to zgovarjajo)
- koliko primerov kriminala v EU je storjenega z legalnim orozjem kat. B7
- koliko B7 je bilo ukradenega legalnim lastnikom EU
- koliko B7 je bilo predanega ali prodanega s strani EU lastnikov kriminalcem ali teroristom
- koliko teroristicnih dejanj je bilo storjenih z legalnim B7 orozjem
- koliko zgoraj omenjenih zlocinov je bilo storjenih z "PAP orozjem ki spominja na avtomatsko orozje" oz. kot ga oni arbitrarno imenujejo "najnevarnejse orozje"
- kaksna avtoriteta, kaksno ekspertno mnjenje oz. na podlagi katerega numericnega kriterija je bilo B7 (in podobno) oznaceno za "najnevarnejse orozje"
- na kaksni podlagi so sestavili direktivo, ki specificno deluje proti kategoriji B7
- koliko kriminala in terorizma je bilo v EU storjenega z legalnim orozjem kategorij B1 in C1
- koliko kriminala in terorizma je bilo v EU storjenega z ilegalnim orozjem (katere koli kategorije)
- se enkrat, glede na stevilke kriminala z ilegalnim vs. legalnim orozjem kategorij B1, B7 in C1, zakaj so se odlocili sestaviti direktivo proti B7
- v luci dogajanja v Parizu, zakaj niso izvajali direktive 2008/51/EC4
original tekst _____________________________________________
TO: GROW-I4@ec.europa.eu
Respected Ms. Lowri EVANS,
Respected members of European Parliament,
Respected others,
In Your response to my letter, You are addressing an issue, I quote:
"This report indicated that there are indeed specific loopholes in the Firearms legislation which have allowed for firearms to be used in criminal activities. As an example, the report highlights that in certain Member States, a significant number of crimes are actually committed with legal firearms."
"the European Commission proposed // a revision of the Firearms Directive // to reinforce its security aspects in order to tackle these challenges."
"These measures are based on the conclusions of a study"
You are quoting a study [1] which is inaccessible on given internet address.
If You are basing Your proposal on a specific study, please answer me these questions:
#1 - IN HOW MANY MEMBER STATES a significant number of crimes are committed with legal firearms
#2 - HOW MANY CRIMES ARE COMMITTED IN EU BY LEGAL FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7 (per year or in last 10 years)
#3 - HOW MANY FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7 HAVE BEEN STOLEN FROM LEGAL OWNERS IN EU IN RECENT YEARS
#4 - HOW MANY FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7 HAVE BEEN SOLD OR GIVEN AWAY TO CRIMINALS OR TERRORISTS FROM LEGAL OWNERS in EU
#5 - HOW MANY TERRORIST ATTACKS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED IN EU BY LEGAL FIREARMS OF CATEGORY B7
#6 - HOW MANY OF THE ABOVE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN COMMITTED WITH (as You say) "semi-automatic firearms for civilian use which resemble weapons with automatic mechanisms" (or as you arbitrarily name them "most dangerous firearms")
#7 - ON WHAT AUTHORITY, ON WHAT EXPERT OPINION, ON WHICH NUMERIC CRITERIA DID YOU CATEGORIZE THE AFOREMENTIONED FIREARMS (B7 and similar) as "MOST DANGEROUS FIREARMS"
Let me remind You, that You have put together a proposal of directive, that is specifically targeting legally-owned firearms of category B7 and other legally-owned long firearms that (by your words) are "most dangerous firearms".
#8 - What backing do You have in regards to THIS PARTICULAR KIND OF FIREARMS (category B7 and selfloading long firearms that look dangerous to You) that You composed a directive specifically targeting these (and only these) firearms?
Please answer me also:
#9 - How many crimes or terrorist attacks have been committed in EU (per year or in last 10 years) using legally owned categories of firearms B1 and C1?
#10 - How many crimes or terrorist attacks have been committed in EU (per year or in last 10 years) using ILLEGAL firearms (of any category)?
#11 - Considering the numbers of crimes committed with illegal firearms, and those committed with legal firearms of categories B1, B7 and C1 (separately), why are You targeting only category B7?
For the end I would also like to remind You, that EC adopted a directive 2008/51/EC4, which under point 13,b,i says
"point (a) shall be replaced by the following"
where the following text says:
"(a) have been rendered permanently unfit for use by deactivation, ensuring that all essential parts of the firearm have been rendered permanently inoperable and incapable of removal, replacement or a modification that would permit the firearm to be reactivated in any way’;"
"(ii) the following paragraph shall be inserted after the first paragraph:
‘Member States shall make arrangements for the deactivation measures referred to in point (a) to be verified by a competent authority in order to ensure that the modifications made to a firearm render it irreversibly inoperable. Member States shall, in the context of this verification, provide for the issuance of a certificate or record attesting to the deactivation of the firearm or the apposition of a clearly visible mark to that effect on the firearm. The Commission shall, acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13a(2) of the Directive, issue common guidelines on deactivation standards and techniques to ensure that deactivated firearms are rendered irreversibly inoperable.’."
Furthermore, article 2 states:
"Member States shall, by 28 July 2010, bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive."
Question:
#12 - In light of recent Paris terrorist attacks committed with reactivated firearms, why did not EC act in previous years against MS that did not comply with the above directive adopted on 21st of May 2008?
My conclusion is, that EC is the prime entity responsible that Paris attacks occured with reactivated firearms as EC did not act against MS to enforce the adopted legislation in all member states.
My conclusion is, that EC is the prime entity responsible that Paris attacks occured with illegal firearms, as EC did nothing to crack down on the illegal firearms market.
My conclusion is, that EC is now acting hastily with unreasonable proposal, trying to punish the only partner that it can, and that is legal owners of long self-loading firearms that seem dangerous to an untrained eye, who are not responsible or guilty for any crimes or violations stated under reasons for these proposed measures.
I expect from You written answers on ALL questions numbered #1 to #12, with all numeric data that you based Your amendment proposal on.
I expect that Your numbers have weight needed to back up such a drastic reduction of liberties and punishment for the law-abiding citizens of EU.
best regards