Norway's Police Only Fired Two Bullets Last Year

'The Independent' (UK): Norway's police only fired two bullets last year... and no one was killed -- "In the US, where officers are armed at all times, 547 people have been killed by police during the first six months of 2015 alone, 503 of them by gunshot... In the first 24 days of 2015, US police shot and killed 59 people, which is more than police in England and Wales did in the last 24 years (55)."



For sure there will be someone who will be quick to point out the mass shooting at a youth camp in Norway on Friday, July 22, 2011. There were 77 killed and another 242 were wounded by a single nut with guns. Some may argue because Norwegian police weren't equipped properly it hampered their efforts to respond quickly.

However strong counter arguments can be made.
The 77 killed and 242 wounded represented only a fraction of the number police here in the United States shot and killed (503) in just the first six months of this year (2015).

Furthering the argument, as of this writing there have been 279 mass shooting deaths by bad actors here in the U.S. so far this year Hundreds more were injured in them. The FBI crime statistics indicate there were between 8,583-10,129 gun murders each year ranging from 2007-2011.

Therefore one mass killing in Norway does not an argument make.


Norway's Gun Laws
HERE they are in a nutshell"The Firearms Act stipulates that anyone intending to buy or otherwise acquire a firearm or firearm parts must have permission from the police commissioner of the place of residence... Those who intend to buy or otherwise acquire ammunition must also have a police permit. The permit will only cover a certain quantity of ammunition and may not be made valid for a period longer than three months."

According to Wikipedia-- "Gun ownership is restricted in Norway, unless one has officially documented a use for the gun. By far the most common grounds for civilian ownership are hunting and sports shooting, in that order. Other needs can include special guard duties or self-defense, but the first is rare unless the person shows identification confirming that he or she is a trained guard or member of a law-enforcement agency.

Storage: For shotguns and rifles, the requirement given in the weapons act is to have the firearm, or a vital part of it, securely locked away... Police are allowed to make a home inspection of the safe... Ammunition is generally only sold to persons with valid weapon license.

Transportation: The owner must always have a good reason to bring the weapon to a public place. Such reasons include transportation to a range or hunting area, transportation for repairs, or for maintenance and hobby activities. During transportation, the weapon must be empty and concealed, but not worn on the body, and under the constant supervision of the owner. This applies equally to replicas, air guns and decommissioned firearms."

COMMENTARY503 police shootings are entirely too many. Surely it must be a result of feeling threatened (not in all cases) by a bunch of nuts running around with guns killing nearly 9,000 of their fellow citizens every year. More guns aren't making anyone safer. Not for the police nor you and I.

The answer is quite clear. All one has to do is look at the gun laws in Norway by example and apply those that conform to our second amendment here in the United States. Anything that contributes to less guns getting in the wrong hands will go a long way. Take for example...



CLICK ON PIC: Smart Gun Could Save Lives

"Smart Gun" Technology
One way of doing this is to require the already readily available technology in all future productions for so-called 'smart guns'. Many smart phones require the user's fingerprint to unlock it. If we do this for cell phones I should think a gun should be of a much higher priority. That way if a weapon is ever lost, stolen or a kid got ahold of it the gun would be rendered useless to anyone other then it's registered owner. This conforms completely to those who argue for their constitutional right to own one.





Video Courtesy: UPROXX

You'd think after someone spent hundreds of dollars and legitimately registered a weapon they'd be all for it. In this manner it would not only protect their investment but protect the gun owner from being accused of firing it at someone in the commission of a crime.

There are solutions if we really wanted to solve needless slaughtering. The problem is Americans would rather cling to their guns then support common sense solutions. How many more have to die before something changes? Ten, twenty a hundred thousand?

Perhaps never at the rate we're going!