The rule of law does not grant anyone basic approval for the use of firearms, use must always be justified.
VAENEC
In times of increasing insecurity, despite declining crimes, there is a growing public desire to own a firearm and to be able to defend it at all times. It is greatly underestimated what responsibility comes with owning a firearm and what can be done with this deadly instrument. In addition, there is also the question of who is actually willing to end another life in extreme cases if he has to defend his own or maybe not milder means are equally effective to protect life and limb. Does it really have to be the strongest of all variants with which a citizen has to defend himself?
Fact
The first question is who actually has the right to own a firearm, let alone be allowed to carry it with them. The right of possession belongs in the private sphere to people like hunters or sport shooters who have the reason for the practice of hunting or competitive shooting. However, owning a weapon alone is not an authorization to carry it with you in public, ready to fire. This right is normally only granted to state security officials such as police officers, who may also carry firearms in public in order to practice their profession. This right to carry is only granted to private individuals in exceptional cases of a particular risk situation.
Guidance
In the case of self-defense, it is humanly understandable to have the strongest means of defense with you. There are three questions to be asked. Is it really realistic and necessary to have a firearm ready to fire to ensure the defense of physical integrity and one’s own life? If the firearm is available as a means of defense, am I ready to use it against another person? And am I also aware of the following consequences when using it?
If all questions are assessed positively, there are very different ways in Europe of being allowed to use a firearm. The easiest way to do this is in the Czech Republic, which has by far the most liberal arms law in the European Union. In the follow-up, however, the country with what is probably the most stringent weapons law should serve as an example, the Federal Republic of Germany. According to German law, the possession of a firearm is reserved for authorized persons and the mere possession does not entitle to carry it with the public. Firearms are firearms that use hot gases to propel a projectile through a barrel. With what appearances weapons such as airsoft pistols or firearms act like firearms, but they do not exert the effect that is externally assigned to them when the trigger is actuated.
Anyone who not only wants to own a firearm in Germany but also wants to carry it ready to fire needs a so-called gun license. This can be requested from the respective local regulatory authorities. The prerequisites for receipt are, among many other points, a flawless reputation and training on the weapon. The majority is relatively easy to achieve with monetary expenditure, time to invest and motivation to learn. The most important reason, however, is proof of need. So answering the questions why the applicant not only has a firearm, but also wants to have it readily available in public? Reasons can be a particular risk to the applicant. This applies, among other things, if a person publicly represents legally compliant opinions that may or may already have made them the target of attacks. During the politically active time of Ronald Schill, former Hamburg senator, he was said to have a gun license because he wanted to move without personal protection.
The chosen practical example should clarify how strong a need must be to receive a firearm in Germany. In addition, it must be verified again every three years in order to extend the weapon license. However, the pure politician or celebrity status is far from entitling you to obtain a gun license.
If the firearm license is available and a firearm may be carried in public ready to fire, then the use of this weapon in a defense situation is possible but legally extremely questionable. In the event of a deployment, the holder of the firearm license must always demonstrate that he / she weighed in proportion to the use of the firearm. Thus, after firearm use, it is normally checked legally whether this was actually the mildest means in the situation to ward off an attack. It is usually extremely difficult to present this reversal load. In addition, a risk to uninvolved people can never be completely ruled out, which negatively affects the use in retrospect.
Therefore, each individual’s need for protection must be examined separately and the milder options available must be determined before taking the extremely critical way of owning and using a firearm.