@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

The Iowa example seems weird, but is because CH is in the middle of the EU, not an edge. So it is "objects" being "flown in directly" that are potentially leaving the confines of CH and going into the EU. Hence the bizarre example.

I understood why you used it. It is the same issue marijuana legalization in the US. EU has to police it just like neighboring states of Colorado.

Almost. But add the bit about the airport, that's key. In CO right now, anything that leaves CO had to be made in CO. They can't ship marijuana in or out. (But they can produce it, so that's nearly unlimited.) But in the CH example, stuff flies over the borders and into the middle, then is free to travel around. So the source objects could come from anywhere, not only be created inside CH.

They law may state they cannot ship in or out but there is nothing stopping the people from doing so. By plane or car. No stopping the law breakers. Just like the CH/EU situation.

The only people the EU will be hurting is the law abiding folks. Especially those in the town you mentioned above.

Again, I am not saying CH can not/should not increase their gun laws to match the EU. The CH just shouldn't have a fist in their face to force them to do it to keep an accord going.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

The Iowa example seems weird, but is because CH is in the middle of the EU, not an edge. So it is "objects" being "flown in directly" that are potentially leaving the confines of CH and going into the EU. Hence the bizarre example.

I understood why you used it. It is the same issue marijuana legalization in the US. EU has to police it just like neighboring states of Colorado.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

Basically a bait and switch tactic. Aka - Bullying.

Not really. It's a voluntary association that they are free to leave. Even if what you say is accurate and it was a bait and switch, they are no worse off leaving now than never having joined. So there was no bullying.

If they derive benefits from the agreement, then there is possible economic loss.

But less economic loss than if they were never allowed in in the first place. But this isn't a business thing, this is the free movement of people without needing to go through a checkpoint. It's not like EU membership, it's just a border zone. So the problem is is that CH allowing guns in completely opened the EU borders without the EU having any control. So, in effect, CH was bullying the EU.

So if CH will have less economic loss, did both show an economic loss or was it EU's gain at CH's expense?

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

and, not really related, literally working on booking our hotel in Switzerland right now.

Man, really wish I could join you. One of these days, I need to get there. I hear they have some of the tallest and longest pedestrian bridges in the world. I love heights because they scare the crap of me.

Tunnels, too. Some truly insane ones.

I didn't know that. I'm not really the spelunker but it could be pretty cool.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

Basically a bait and switch tactic. Aka - Bullying.

Not really. It's a voluntary association that they are free to leave. Even if what you say is accurate and it was a bait and switch, they are no worse off leaving now than never having joined. So there was no bullying.

If they derive benefits from the agreement, then there is possible economic loss.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

and, not really related, literally working on booking our hotel in Switzerland right now.

Man, really wish I could join you. One of these days, I need to get there. I hear they have some of the tallest and longest pedestrian bridges in the world. I love heights because they scare the crap of me.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

Plus the Swiss gun control laws don't hurt the EU one bit. It's the EU just being a prick.

They are believed to not just hurt the EU by jeopardizing security, many Swiss believe that they are causing problems in Switzerland.

That is fine. Then the Swiss can adjust their own laws. I'm all on board with that.

That's what they just did. This was totally voluntary from Switzerland. They took an internal vote and got an overwhelming majority at around 2/3rds that desired tighter gun control.

They did this because they had very very limited choice and the EU with their fist in their face.

In the beginning (based on limited reading), basically the EU said, "If you wanna play with us, you have to do A, B and C." Swiss state, "Sweet, I will do that so we a can all play together." Now we are playing for hours and hours and the EU comes back and says, "If you wanna keep playing (with mean grin and shaking fist) you have to now do D, E and F, RIGHT NOW, or GET OUT!"

That is how I see it. Top is all off, Swiss helped the EU more than the other way around.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

Its an all or nothing deal. My way or highway.

That's like calling all laws bullies. It's just the law. And in this case, not a law forced on them, one that they voluntarily joined.

All laws are not bullies but there are some that can be considered as such. What they joined voluntarily many many moons ago is not what they are being give today based on the this new requirement of "our way or the highway." Basically a bait and switch tactic. Aka - Bullying.

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

Plus the Swiss gun control laws don't hurt the EU one bit. It's the EU just being a prick.

They are believed to not just hurt the EU by jeopardizing security, many Swiss believe that they are causing problems in Switzerland.

That is fine. Then the Swiss can adjust their own laws. I'm all on board with that.

@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:

@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

@pmoncho said in Non-IT News Thread:

@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

BBC News - Switzerland gun control: Voters back EU regulations
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48328867

"Switzerland is not an EU member, but risked removal from the open-border Schengen Area if it had voted "no""

Hmmm... Sounds like someone is being bullied.

Not exactly. They have some benefits of EU (open border). But if they want to retain them they have to meet the EU rules. This is pretty straightforward.

See, it's stuff like this that gets called bullying that has made the world nothing but a bully factory.

This is classic bullying 101. Switzerland is not being occasionally "teased" or "made fun of" (that is the crap I hate called bullying) in this situation. Its an all or nothing deal. My way or highway. That is top notch political bullying to me. Plus the Swiss gun control laws don't hurt the EU one bit. It's the EU just being a prick. If it was based on economics, missile defense, or explosives with a wide blast radius, that makes total sense.

Although, as the years go on, Switzerland keeps losing its balls and continues to cave at the EU's whim. Hell, they even voluntarily fixed their Franc to the Euro to help. How did that work out for the Swiss????

Oh well, the Earth will keep turning no matter which way the chips fall.