Found an error?
Report now
If a private military assault rifle has been sitting unused for more than ten years, it should not have to be confiscated for that reason. The National Council does not want to tighten regulations on privately owned weapons. (File photo)
Keystone
Anyone who has kept their former military weapon after completing military service will not be required to surrender it in the future, even if it has been sitting unused in a closet for years. The National Council has rejected a motion by the SP that would have mandated the confiscation of such weapons after ten years of non-use.
If a privatized military weapon has not been used for more than ten years, it should not be subject to mandatory confiscation. According to proponents, such a requirement would have helped prevent homicides. But the National Council said no.
On Tuesday, the National Council rejected a motion from the SP by a vote of 98 to 92, with 4 abstentions. The SP, the Greens, and the GLP voted in favor of the motion. However, “yes” votes also came from the FDP and the Center faction. With this rejection, the motion is off the table.
The motion called for a legal obligation to confiscate military weapons in private households if they had not been used for sport shooting for more than ten years. The motion was submitted by Priska Seiler Graf (SP/ZH).
She justified the motion by citing domestic homicides committed with firearms. A study by the Office for Gender Equality concluded that handguns and former military weapons were frequently used in such crimes.
According to the study, these weapons pose a particular risk when older men kill their partners and then take their own lives. The state remains responsible, even if the privatization of a weapon may have taken place decades ago.
A narrow majority in the Council opposed the measure. “You want to expropriate me and my fellow marksmen,” said Walter Gartmann (SVP/SG). He argued that the move would send the message that while militia soldiers are good enough to risk their lives in the army, they are not good enough to keep their weapons. He noted that weapons can already be confiscated today if they pose a threat.
The Federal Council would have liked to implement the motion. The requested encroachment on private property requires a legal basis, said Justice Minister Beat Jans. He also addressed a compensation scheme. His department intends to implement the requirement in a proportionate manner. Such an assessment would also cover the handling of former military weapons such as carbines.
16.06.2026, 13:06
16.06.2026, 14:10
