The conflict of Arms

Polish MEPs 2050 prepared an unconstitutional task introducing periodic investigation and should be knocked out by the PSL.

The past of this dispute dates back to 2018, when, under the influence of the anti-lager communities, the president of PiS, Jarosław Kaczyński, introduced this provision into the law. Fortunately, it was then possible to negociate a five-year transitional period. Finally, just before the end of the second term, Minister Edward Siarka persuaded the Minister of Agriculture and Home Affairs, pointing out the danger to the safety of the state that mass taking of weapons carries.

Inefficient system

The existing provisions of the Arms and Ammunition Act are ruthless. The survey is only valid for 3 months. This means that it would should be done almost simultaneously for everyone. Those who neglect to execute it will gotta surrender the weapon and the full procedure for obtaining the weapon licence to begin again.

This will lead to a large disaster. On a national scale, we have only a fewer 100 doctors qualified to do specified research, so only a fewer will be able to pass the study. The police do not have adequate officers to initiate and conduct more than 200,000 administrative proceedings to remove the weapon permit. Even if he can carry them out, he does not have warehouses capable of carrying respective 100 1000 weapons that would gotta deposit hunters and shooters to the sport!

Advertising

Disarming legal weapon holders in specified a chaotic way would have painful economical consequences: the fall of weapon ranges, arms and ammunition companies, and, above all, the deficiency of the anticipation of guarding fields against harm and execution of wildlife wellness shots.

Breaking the Constitution

The work of periodic investigation only for selected groups of arms holders is simply a violation of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Article 32 guarantees that all citizens are equal before the law and that no 1 can be discriminated against. The erstwhile amendment (limited to hunters) was undoubtedly unconstitutional. Members of Poland 2050, adding to the latest plan of sports shooters, tried to solve this problem, but forgot about collectors. Their task continues to discriminate and in effect remains unconstitutional!

Advertising

Currently, the work of periodic investigating applies only to arms holders for individual protection. Soldiers, police officers, Border Guards or State Protection Service do NOT undergo periodic intellectual examinations. They shall do so in case of reasonable grounds. That's precisely what the police have the right to order a survey of hunters and sports shooters at any time erstwhile they have reason to.

Weakening of defence potential

Since there is simply a war going on behind our east border, the demolition of 230 1000 trained Poles (thinking and sports shooters) is an apparent action to the detriment of the country. It's hunters who have applicable shooting skills to shoot down drones. Taking distant our weapons clearance means losing our defence possible at a critical moment.

The public consultation introduced by the Marshal of Holovnia to the parliamentary projects was to be an chance for the hunting community to show unity. Unfortunately, it came out very poorly. The anti-fishing environments have shown greater commitment.

The biggest surprise is the deficiency of participation in the survey of many leaders of our union and well-known influencers, who publically called for the vote among others president NRŁ Marcin Możdjonek. This showed the weakness of the Polish Hunting Union, which is water on the mill for our opponents.

For over 20 years, vegan warriors have been implementing a plan to ban hunting. The introduction of investigation obligations is simply a key component of this strategy, due to the fact that they know very well that the introduction of costly investigation would weaken our community, and this is the overarching nonsubjective of opponents of hunting.

If the PSL again opposes proceeding on the amendment of the Act on Arms and Ammunition, the 2050 task will divide the destiny of the first. It remains to be hoped that pragmatism and concern for the constitutionality of the law and the safety of the state will prevail on the stigmatisation of our environment.