Talk:Gun control in Germany

Germany Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"Non è difficile avere un'arma da fuoco in Repubblica Ceca" (in Italian). Il Post. 22 December 2023. Archived from the original on 23 December 2023. Retrieved 24 December 2023.

Germany

I have added some content to the Germany section. I hope my English is good enough - if you feel it is not, please improve it. Hundehalter (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the Germany section there are some obvious mistakes: - Firearms Licences (Waffenbesitzkarten) which allow you to possess a firearms but not to carry it, are generally valid until revoked or until you sell all your firearms and return your licence. - the situation is different for licences that allow you to carry a firearm (Waffenschein). I know that these are valid for a limited time, but not for how long. Overall the german law on firearms is pretty complicated with loads of exceptions and special cases. I'll edit the article once I have more time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.23.181 (talk) 13:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I don't understand this merge tag, both articles have comleptly the same content. Please install a redirect. Sebastian scha. (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done myself Sebastian scha. (talk) 19:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Airsoft (confused)

Hello, I've noticed that airsoft was under the 'April,2008 amendment'. Is airsoft legal in Germany? (86.169.213.127 (talk) 23:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)).[reply]

Hitler's comments

The content added here (and which I restructured here) concerns me as not being overly relevant to the gun laws themselves. It is very hard to figure out the relevant because I don't have access to the text - a quick review of the text/material would be beneficial. I am hesitant to remove the content purely for being hate speech and by Hitler because it does appear to rationalise the gun laws that were brought in (which would make it relevant) --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 10:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kristallnacht OR?

I've added the OR tag to this bit "It would be difficult not to associate this ban on Jewish ownership of weapons with Kristallnacht," I'm sure this may well be right, but we don't usually do this by making our own associations or commenting on the difficulty of doing so - surely we need a proper reference, so that it is not original research? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firearms without a license

Added a "blackpowder section". ReinickendorferFuchs (talk) 07:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what happened to this article?

it's virtual gibberish, was it always like this?Historian932 (talk) 03:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know, it's a mess. The lead doesn't even refer to the title. And the title is poor - "gun politics" is not the same as "firearms laws", which this article is sort of about. Huw Powell (talk) 01:50, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the lead refers to the title, after I moved the article. Why this was called "politics" is a puzzle to me--such an article shouldn't even deal with laws. Anyway, I took inspiration from the lead of the German article to make this, basically, an article on the current legislation with a lengthy introduction to it, and have tried to tweak the lead accordingly. Your expansion and tweaks are appreciated. Drmies (talk) 03:50, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The new title is better, thanks. I tweaked the lead a bit more.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you. I've also tweaked some of the redirects. We also have Gun politics in Switzerland, from the dab page Waffengesetz, and that lead (though the article not so much) actually points at politics. Drmies (talk) 04:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other "gun politics" article titles are listed here.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of a discussion on the Gun politics in the U.S. talk page

There is a Split proposal discussion on the Gun politics in the U.S. talk page that may be of interest to editors of this page. Lightbreather (talk) 05:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of RfC and request for participation

There is an RfC on the Gun control talk page which may be of interest to editors of this page:

RfC: Remove Nazi gun control argument?

Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 16:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jews and the 1938 German Weapons Act

Our article states that under this act "Jews were prohibited from possessing any dangerous weapons, including firearms. They were also forbidden from the manufacturing or dealing of firearms and ammunition", citing Harcourt. [1] I think this is in error - Harcourt states that "the 1938 law banned Jewish persons from the manufacture business" - he doesn't seem to say anywhere that the 1938 law banned possession by Jews. As I understand it, the later confiscation of weapons from Jews was 'legitimised' by the fact that the Nazis had made them non-citizens, and thus ineligible to possess weapons, rather than through the law directly banning Jews from possessing them - though a later regulation made this explicit. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi gun control theory link

I modified the "See also" link to include the brief annotation[2] "A counterfactual history theory," per WP:SEEALSO. Capitalismojo has reverted that twice now[3][4] as "opinion."

Wasn't this settled two weeks ago at this RfC? (See the closing comment[5] by JzG.) @AndyTheGrump, Anythingyouwant, Godsy, and Happysquirrel: Thoughts? Lightbreather (talk) 21:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I left before the RfC got anywhere, so I don't know what happened after. When I left, there was still a raging argument about wording, but things seem to have cooled down since. Sorry :( Happy Squirrel(Please let me know how to improve!) 22:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC discussion established what the hat note should say, not that it was counterfactual history. That aside, the theory is described that way within the first sentence of the Nazi gun control theory article. A rough consensus of sorts that it is counterfactual history, seems to have been established by looking at all the conversations. As Anythingyouwant has pointed out, "A counterfactual history theory" isn't the proper way to state it. Counterfactual history is a type of history, so simply describing it as "counterfactual history" would be better. That is if it needs to be stated beside it, of which I don't have an opinion (or a verse from the guidelines concerning it) at this time. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 05:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the world v in Europe

The lead said that German gun law is considered among the strictest "in the world." This had two, conflicting source citations. (The other one, from the U.S. Library of Congress, says "in Europe.") I am preserving the "world" source here for discussion.

Breitenbach, Dagmar (July 21, 2010). "German group denounces weapons law as unconstitutional". Deutsche Welle.

The source for the "in the world" statement within the article is a weapons expert. Lightbreather (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily see these sources as conflicting. One says Europe, the other expands it to the world. Europe is within the world, the one source just expands the scope. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 05:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Godsy, do you consider the two sources, the Library of Congress and "weapons expert Holger Soschinka" to be equally qualified? How does saying "the world" over "Europe" improve the article? Lightbreather (talk) 15:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightbreather: The law library of congress source actually says "Germany has one of the most stringent gun control laws in the world." under the blue subsection "Current Gun-Control Law", with the black heading "Overview". So the sources actually agree on the world statement. I should have examined the sources more closely earlier, and the content of my first post here would have been unnecessary. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 15:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added "at=Current Gun-Control Law" to the source citation. Lightbreather (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to doubt the LoC, but its actually very strict about gun use (for private self defence), ownership is rather widespread. I did some adaptation in the lede for that. Polentarion Talk 18:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperinflation

"In 1928, after a near decade of hyperinflation destroyed the structural fabric of the society..." Huh? Inflation ended in Nov. 1923 with the introduction of the Rentenmark. By 1927 the economy had overheated!RogerLustig (talk) 03:27, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gun legislation in Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100727171741/http://www.fvlw.de:80/2010/07/presseerklarung-der-fvlw-e-v-zur-verfassungsbeschwerde/ to http://www.fvlw.de/2010/07/presseerklarung-der-fvlw-e-v-zur-verfassungsbeschwerde/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gun control template

Per this discussion on the template talk page, I am removing the Gun politics by country template from this article, and this article from the template, because the article is not about politics. Scolaire (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]