Firearms/self Defense Discussion

[Jun]

Jun-san,

 

Explain please if you would, "Why licensing firearms and/or owners is a positive thing"?

 

kFL

 

As gramps said -

One good thing. If the gun is stolen (as happens... most gun crime in the US involves a gun stolen from a house holder) the Licensee has to report the gun missing as soon as possible, else, if it is used in the commission of a crime, the owner is held accountable (fined IIRC). A gun robbery gets WELL investigated, rather than a normal one, which gets treated as an insurance claim and the police hardly even finger print the SOC.

 

Further addendum: It ensures that legal holder also is trained in use, maintenance and storage of most weapons... I even think there's a review every few years.

 

Keeping track of persons who have particular weapons at their disposal is a good thing, no? Making it harder for people to get hold of weapons - through licensing requirements, waiting periods, a national database,....is not a step in the right direction?

 

I know that when the police in Oz are called out to a domestic dispute, the first thing they check is the firearms database to see if there are firearms in the house. (granted, it doesn't mean there aren't, but it's a heads-up). That must be a good thing, no?

 

I don't own a gun - and never will. But I own quite a few Japanese swords. The Japanese government has a law to restrict their purchase to only those who are in genuine need of having them. It restricts their use to only those who are deemed responsible enough and trained in their use and maintenance. It regulates their sale and ownership to ensure public safety. The same is true of guns. Is it not positive to restrict the sale and ownership of dangerous weapons to those deemed responsible and legitimate owners?

 

As you are a gun owner (a legitimate and responsible one I would hope) aren't you glad that your government sees you as such and that you have the law on your side? Help me to understand why it would be negative. Please, in your own words, not another off-site link. I'm trying to understand your stance.

 

Respectfully.

 

That report would seem to be correct Jun. However matters would be very different if the shop owner had shot the hostage taker.

Casey

 

The shop owner would then probably have been charged with manslaughter.

 

There's a thing in British Law called 'reasonable force'. If it came to trial, and for the sake of argument, in self defence, I had incapacitated someone with a ball point pen, or even my thumb, then I'd cop for reasonable force. That's assuming the the Crown Prosecution Service had decided that I had used unreasonable force for self defence, accepted the charge brought against me, with a view to having a cat in Hell's chance of getting a conviction. There are numerous factors involved, but mostly, the law works out pretty well. Someone is coming for you with bit of four by two with a nail in it and you break their knee, remove an eye or similar, you'll normally get no problem. They do frown on killing but it's down to the Crown to establish that one was 'not reasonably in fear for one's life' Having said that the law can be an ass. They will nail you for shooting someone, even if they're armed.

 

That's Ozzy law to a T. Exactly the same.

[Casey]

Having said that the law can be an ass. They will nail you for shooting someone, even if they're armed.

 

In that respect, Tony Martin's must surely be a case in point, eh?

 

The Tony Martin case, a cause celebre in Britain, may not be as clear-cut as some claim, but it's still pretty outrageous. The eccentric Martin lived in a dilapidated Norfolk farmhouse with only three rottweilers for company. One night in 1999 the place was broken into by Brendan Fearon, 29, and Fred Barras, 16, both of whom had long criminal records. Martin claims he heard a noise, grabbed a shotgun, headed downstairs, had a flashlight shone in his face, and began shooting. The following afternoon Barras was found dead in the garden; the wounded Fearon was arrested nearby. Martin was convicted of murder and given a mandatory life sentence, but an appeals court reduced the charge to manslaughter on grounds of mental illness. Martin was denied parole, in part because probation officers feared he would shoot additional burglars; he's out now. Fearon, who did time for burglary, was granted legal-aid funding to sue Martin, although the suit failed. OK, the burglars weren't armed, Martin had previously expressed a hatred of Gypsies (Barras was one), and Barras was shot in the back, but many Americans would say: Come on--it was dark and they were in the guy's house.

(Martin had, it would seem, been burgled six times previously.)

 

Ah yes, burglars are entitled to safe working conditions, good honest criminals that they are.

 

Contrast that with a tale that is told of the notorious New York lawyer Abe Hummel in the early 20th or late 19th Century (I forget which). Having discovered two burglars in his house, Hummel opened fire and wounded one. The other escaped. In response to a newspaper reporter, Hummel said that he "Owned several revolvers and considered himself a good shot". (This was evidently before the Sullivan Act). Hummel added, "I have no objection to burglars per se, most of 'em that I know are good payers and provide me with steady employment ... but I damn well do object to their plying their avocation in my house!" Hummel wasn't charged with anything. How times have changed, and not for the better, I'd say.

Casey

[Grandpa Harley]

Having said that the law can be an ass. They will nail you for shooting someone, even if they're armed.

 

In that respect, Tony Martin's must surely be a case in point, eh?

 

The Tony Martin case, a cause celebre in Britain, may not be as clear-cut as some claim, but it's still pretty outrageous. The eccentric Martin lived in a dilapidated Norfolk farmhouse with only three rottweilers for company. One night in 1999 the place was broken into by Brendan Fearon, 29, and Fred Barras, 16, both of whom had long criminal records. Martin claims he heard a noise, grabbed a shotgun, headed downstairs, had a flashlight shone in his face, and began shooting. The following afternoon Barras was found dead in the garden; the wounded Fearon was arrested nearby. Martin was convicted of murder and given a mandatory life sentence, but an appeals court reduced the charge to manslaughter on grounds of mental illness. Martin was denied parole, in part because probation officers feared he would shoot additional burglars; he's out now. Fearon, who did time for burglary, was granted legal-aid funding to sue Martin, although the suit failed. OK, the burglars weren't armed, Martin had previously expressed a hatred of Gypsies (Barras was one), and Barras was shot in the back, but many Americans would say: Come on--it was dark and they were in the guy's house.

(Martin had, it would seem, been burgled six times previously.)

 

Ah yes, burglars are entitled to safe working conditions, good honest criminals that they are.

 

Contrast that with a tale that is told of the notorious New York lawyer Abe Hummel in the early 20th or late 19th Century (I forget which). Having discovered two burglars in his house, Hummel opened fire and wounded one. The other escaped. In response to a newspaper reporter, Hummel said that he "Owned several revolvers and considered himself a good shot". (This was evidently before the Sullivan Act). Hummel added, "I have no objection to burglars per se, most of 'em that I know are good payers and provide me with steady employment ... but I damn well do object to their plying their avocation in my house!" Hummel wasn't charged with anything. How times have changed, and not for the better, I'd say.

Casey

THe BBC is a little more of an objective piece of reporting (I think the facts speak for themselves, rather than hyperbole.)

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/3101669.stm (I've posted the last story more or less, since the earlier ones link off it)

 

Here's a piece about recreational shooting in the UK

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5209632.stm

 

(BBC News Search on Tony Martin, Nofolk)

[♦ nivek ♦]

As gramps said -

 

One good thing. If the gun is stolen (as happens... most gun crime in the US involves a gun stolen from a house holder) the Licensee has to report the gun missing as soon as possible, else, if it is used in the commission of a crime, the owner is held accountable (fined IIRC). A gun robbery gets WELL investigated, rather than a normal one, which gets treated as an insurance claim and the police hardly even finger print the SOC.

 

Further addendum: It ensures that legal holder also is trained in use, maintenance and storage of most weapons... I even think there's a review every few years.

 

Have little problem reporting missing/stolen arms. DO have a problems with a "WELL" investigation, better than something more mundane, as the Po-Po ought not have any reason to judge the value of a crime against person property simply on the content of the missing items. Stolen arm is indeed an important thing, however it ought not be 'mo' important than anything else the taxpayer has had unlawfully removed from his/her domicile.

 

Keeping track of persons who have particular weapons at their disposal is a good thing, no? Making it harder for people to get hold of weapons - through licensing requirements, waiting periods, a national database,....is not a step in the right direction?

 

Wow Jun-san, why don't you espouse wearing of yellow stars to help Police know who is 'dangerous'? You scare the fuck out of me espousing that a centralized government be given MORE ability to track the personal habits of folks living there.

YOU have no access to this database unless you are a cop, or some 'official'.

All this information grows as its collected, and you, the collectee have no recourse or ability to know, or challenge whats contained in this.

Again, in my post to Ramen, in this Country, the uS, licencing, waiting, databases, all based in racist control laws, made to ensure the uppity minorities are kept well track of.

 

Step in right direction? For whom? The People? Bigger Government? Jun, the culture here is one of decentralization and more inclined to personal Freedom than it is to obediance to laws and Rules pushed out from a "Black Box Government".

 

I know that when the police in Oz are called out to a domestic dispute, the first thing they check is the firearms database to see if there are firearms in the house. (granted, it doesn't mean there aren't, but it's a heads-up). That must be a good thing, no?

 

Umm.. My answer is gonna appear to be callous. "No". Not a "good thing". If the Police aren't adaptable and well trained enough to handle the problems they face on calls and on the streets, find another fucking job, one more safe and sedate.

 

Oregon has a defacto registration with new guns bought since '91, all purchaces are on a database held by the State Police. Despite being told and directed by the State Legislature to discontinue this unlawful keeping of records (to be destroyed after 2 years), the Po-Po have fought in courts to prevent it.

What good does it do? No one at OSP will give a public rational for being lawbreaker themselves...

 

I don't own a gun - and never will. But I own quite a few Japanese swords. The Japanese government has a law to restrict their purchase to only those who are in genuine need of having them.

 

You require, neeeeeeeeeeeeed, realllllllllllly neeeeeeeeeed a fine edged weapon for what reason again?

The reports of the necessity of a resident in Japan for such an offensive arm is severly under reported in our Press.

 

Seriously Jun-san, why does a man require a sword in a post-McAurthur Japan where democracy replaced the insane-ness of the milliltaristic 30's and 40's?

 

It restricts their use to only those who are deemed responsible enough and trained in their use and maintenance.

 

Every kid in the uS used to carry a good quality folding pocketknife and was expected to use it responsibily, keep it clean and sharp.

Sadly in this sissiness-era, knifes and sharps, the love of a good clean slick sharp blade is long being tuned out of children, for 'SAFETY' of course.

 

Kids grow to adults ignorant of the proper use of edged things..

 

It regulates their sale and ownership to ensure public safety. The same is true of guns. Is it not positive to restrict the sale and ownership of dangerous weapons to those deemed responsible and legitimate owners?

 

Of course. As long as you pass the datbase checks (again which you cannot change or complain against) and are approved a 'good citizen', and the Goobers allow you your toys...

 

Wait... In uS, WE the People are the Power... Something turned turtle when we have to go to a centralized system and beg permission for something.

Legitimate owners? As in the man who own the gun, or one given permission by the Goobers?

 

I have no truck with those who would have me beg to excercise my Rights via asking for permissions. Thats the difference between someone from my side of pond and damn near everywhere else, that pesky Bill of Rights.

 

As you are a gun owner (a legitimate and responsible one I would hope) aren't you glad that your government sees you as such and that you have the law on your side?

 

Yes on first, fuck no on the second. I could care less what my government thinks of me. Until the paper starts flying and/or the handcuffs are applied, the State is the Evil Empire requiring constant watching and reminding of its legitimate place.

 

 

Help me to understand why it would be negative. Please, in your own words, not another off-site link. I'm trying to understand your stance.

 

I've typed a lot this thread, and others already, but simply as an American denizen (not a citizen) I have inalienable Rights that I choose to use to empower my life, my family, my community. The Laws, those cornerstones of American-ness provide a Freedom from interference that makes room for a wide variety of opinion, clash and difference. They allow many cultures, colors and creeds the ability to live and adjust to each other.

 

We do not have the sterotypical Japaneese disdane for the foriegners, as we are a Nation of mutts and leftovers.

 

With that in mind the *typical American* simply does not like to be told what to do by 'authority'. We'll do anything we can for the most part to be good honest productive folks, but when things become abusive or foolish by those we've elected to represent (not lord over, not rule us, not be the bosses) us, we reserve the rights to replace them.

 

Firearms are part of a culture of individual warriorism that goes back to the roots of this Nation, I realize 400-odd years isn't shit compared to the thousands of years of civilization that other parts of world have had, however the Americas and its people have had Freedom unlike any other.

 

I willingly do not conceed anything to a centralized government. Knowledge of what is in the privcy of my "castle" (doctrine in Commn Law since the 800's in Occidental accounting of time) is nobodies business but my own. My nose does not belong in your home, your gear, your life and business. Until I am invited into your space and holdings, what you do is not my business.

 

What more right does the State, employees of the People, have in your life and property? Jun-san, here in the uS the State, the workers in government are paid for by the taxpayers, and in turn we taxpayers do hold these persons accountable somewhat for their actions.

From what I understand in other placves I have been too, the State is fairly much the arbiter of everything, being the assigner of numbers, enumerator of everything, grantor of permissions.

 

Here in the uS, we still hang onto a vestige of self determination and choice. Indeed things are slipping towards a less Free and more controlled State, there are those of we who are using the soap and ballot boxes to try and stop this tide towards State-run Corporatism. If that doesn't work, and its a choice of a Corporate run country or the bullet box, I've made my choices.

 

Americans are generally individualists who will refuse to surrender their self determination.

 

I'll never progress up the ranks in karate past where I am at. You know the mind needed to study and practice past ni-dan, I do not have it, nor am I willing to surrender enough to find it.

 

In return, with deep respect

 

kL

[Jun]

YOU have no access to this database unless you are a cop, or some 'official'.

All this information grows as its collected, and you, the collectee have no recourse or ability to know, or challenge whats contained in this.

 

Under the Freedom of information act, Ozzies do have access to any and all personal information collected and held by Government. Ozzies do have control over and are able to vote on what info is collected and for what purposes. I'm sorry the U.S. can't.

 

...the culture here is one of decentralization and more inclined to personal Freedom than it is to obediance to laws and Rules pushed out from a "Black Box Government".

 

Clearly the U.S. is a different animal.

 

Umm.. My answer is gonna appear to be callous. "No". Not a "good thing". If the Police aren't adaptable and well trained enough to handle the problems they face on calls and on the streets, find another fucking job, one more safe and sedate.

 

Having trained members of the Federal Police department in Oz, and with the Tokyo Central Police Unit and Rapid Response Unit; I can truthfully say that Ozzy police are probably the worst trained police in the world - any help is a lot of help for them! You have a good point.

 

You require, neeeeeeeeeeeeed, realllllllllllly neeeeeeeeeed a fine edged weapon for what reason again?

The reports of the necessity of a resident in Japan for such an offensive arm is severly under reported in our Press.

 

I'm married into a traditional Samurai family - with over nine hundred years of history. I am the oldest male, and have inherited the family heirlooms - that includes the family swords and armour. I am also a teacher in the family martial tradition and a member of the Japanese Sword Museum. Sorry, you probably don't understand Japanese history or tradition - so it would probably be hard for you to understand this.

 

Sadly in this sissiness-era, knifes and sharps, the love of a good clean slick sharp blade is long being tuned out of children, for 'SAFETY' of course.

 

I really don't know what to say.

 

Clearly from the rest of your post, Americans hate their government.

 

I'll never progress up the ranks in karate past where I am at. You know the mind needed to study and practice past ni-dan, I do not have it, nor am I willing to surrender enough to find it.

 

No. I don't. Have never practiced or studied sports at all.

 

Thanks for your response.

[Casey]

I don't think Americans hate their Government so much as they have a healthy distrust of it. I myself wouldn't implicitly trust my own Government. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said, "Let us hear no more of confidence in man; rather let him be bound from mischief by the chains of the Constitution". Meaning both that limited Government was the ideal to be sought after and meaning something much deeper as well, that those who are governed should keep a sharp eye out lest their Government escape its chains.

Casey

[Jun]

I don't think Americans hate their Government so much as they have a healthy distrust of it.

 

Well, judging from Nivek's tone, that's pretty agressive distrust - together with Burnedout - it appears rather agressive and hate laden.

 

It sounds from the posts here by Amanda, Nivek, and Burnedout that they are implying the American government is bordering on becoming a dictatorship.

 

I will admit that I can't see why Americans love their boom-sticks so much or why they would want them to be available to eveyone without regulation or licensing. I'll admit that I also can't understand their stance on "use of force" and need for "power."

 

I can't offer anything further to this thread - except my lack of understanding - based on the fact that I'm not an American I suppose.

 

Casey, I also don't trust the Ozzy government, implicitly, but I'm not about to go out and break the laws to push that point, or to claim that I would.

 

I will humbly bow out of what I can't understand.

 

It has been enlightening.

[Grandpa Harley]

I think I'll join Jun-San and leave the bespittled nonsense to become a wank fest of who has the biggest 'rod'...

 

It's been fun stirring the pot.

[NotBlinded]

Have little problem reporting missing/stolen arms. DO have a problems with a "WELL" investigation, better than something more mundane, as the Po-Po ought not have any reason to judge the value of a crime against person property simply on the content of the missing items. Stolen arm is indeed an important thing, however it ought not be 'mo' important than anything else the taxpayer has had unlawfully removed from his/her domicile.

It is funny isn't it? My house was burglarized twice and my car broken into once. My gun was the only thing stolen from my car, but my house was emptied of all electronics and one of my dogs was limping (she was probably kicked).

 

Can you guess what the only thing I received back from any of those crimes was? Yep...my gun.

 

And, the second time that I called the police because the front door was open, I told them there was a gun in the house. It's amazing how fast they show up when you say that!

[NotBlinded]

It sounds from the posts here by Amanda, Nivek, and Burnedout that they are implying the American government is bordering on becoming a dictatorship.

Nahhh, that won't happen...we have guns!

 

 

 

 

I had to say it!

[NotBlinded]

Casey, I also don't trust the Ozzy government, implicitly, but I'm not about to go out and break the laws to push that point, or to claim that I would.

Jun,

 

I don't think it is so much about breaking the law as it is in trying to perserve the ones we have without restrictions being added to them. I mean, there comes a time when the law changes so much that the original law becomes obsolete. At what point do we resist the not-so-obvious removing of rights?

[NotBlinded]

I think I'll join Jun-San and leave the bespittled nonsense to become a wank fest of who has the biggest 'rod'...

 

It's been fun stirring the pot.

Weenie...

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Amanda]

There you go again, name calling....my my how adult........

 

You guys remind me of how it was raising my two sons. I'm beginning to be inclined to think that much of the root of world problems is due to testosterone problems... in ALL nationalities.

 

 

Defenseless? Defenseless against whom? You sound as if you are living in a war-zone. Clearly you have a differing idea about your government, referring to "balances of power" and their "leader." It sounds like you are referring to some distant time with an empire ruled over by a ruthless king who wishes to dominate all! "Power of force," "firearm power." Are you in a dictatorship? Are you at civil war?

Jun, no, we are not in a war zone, nor dictatorship, nor civil war. IMO, it is about preventitive measures of it occurring. We have a saying here that an ounce of prenvention is worth more than a pound of cure.

Americans appear to talk a lot about war and fighting and guns and power. Why is that? Please help me to understand.

Guns and their power do exist. How can we unring the bell?

 

Also, we have such a tremendous amount of illegal immigration into this country, and IMO this adds to the problem. Our leaders are trying to address this now. Again, how can we unring the bell?

Australians are "defenceless" in the sense that guns/weapons are strictly controlled. Japanese are even more so. I don't see either government ruling over them with an iron fist. In Japan, even the police must turn in their weapons at the end of a shift. Security officers are not permitted to carry firearms. And the country is clearly better off for it. I don't see anyone jumping up and down and demanding that the government allow everyone to carry guns.

I already conceded to this, the current statistics shows it is working. I also said that I'm interested to see the longer term effects. It is a relatively new stance in those countries.

 

You are happy with someone claiming to want to purchase unlicensed (illegal) guns then? You are happy with his statement that he will fight the government, break the law?

I appologize. I didn't catch that he was going to have illegal guns, unless they make it illegal to have one perhaps. I thought we all agreed on more strict licensing and training. I was under the impression that BO was saying that if the government ever went too far, he'd fight back. I think there is a point government can go too far, however, we are far more complacent than you seem to think when it comes to armed force. We do try to enlighten people at voting, and our government officials do live under a microscope. IMO, we just like 'balance' of all appropriate groups involved in this country. We're actually a very compassionate group too, privately donating to foreign causes more than I think most countries do... if not more than all countries.

It is clear that Americans can't live without their boom-sticks. I'll probably never understand the American wish to do harm to others. I offer no malice or disrespect to any one here - please help us to understand.

Like I said... how do we unring the bell? They're here... and how can we ever go back? The enormosly vast majority here want peace and avoid violence, yet there seems to be desperate groups who resort to desperate means... and no one wants to be vulnerable to one of them. It's about protection, protection, protection. Having them means we won't need them. We have a saying here, if we outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them.

I'm not sure that you're even reading the same thread as Jun and I... it's almost like it's a different language...

 

It appears that way.

I appologize if I missed something he said. It just seems to me he is very opinionated. Americans have no problem with opinions. If he has any ideas he'd like to assert, if a lot of people see merit in them, then... let's vote on them. The majority either goes for it, or we don't. We seem to like a balance of power to everyone... including BO.

[♦ nivek ♦]

YOU have no access to this database unless you are a cop, or some 'official'.

All this information grows as its collected, and you, the collectee have no recourse or ability to know, or challenge whats contained in this.

 

Under the Freedom of information act, Ozzies do have access to any and all personal information collected and held by Government. Ozzies do have control over and are able to vote on what info is collected and for what purposes. I'm sorry the U.S. can't.

 

>Jun, we too can go to the State Courts and attempt to sue the State and make them open records up. We too have a form of FOIA, however having to "fight City Hall" to have them released is painfully expensive and often non-productive timewise.

The State has all the time, and all the records. You have little money to spend on the project, and the information may not be released in full, or worse, at all.

 

...the culture here is one of decentralization and more inclined to personal Freedom than it is to obediance to laws and Rules pushed out from a "Black Box Government".

 

Clearly the U.S. is a different animal.

 

>Indeed, Freedom does that to a People. Not long ago foks were self-directed and polite to each other for most part. Still are in 90+% of places you might visit. The however and "what_the_fuck!!!" are those raised with no supervision, lackof parenting, or raised with some form of entitlement. Seems rich and poor in my Country suffer from "gimmie-itus", the disease in which folks feel they are entitled to something they did not earn.

If this spreads, it'll be the cancer that destroys the heart of America. Happy to say, the kids who are upcoming seem to be gaining more knowledge of wha is right in thoughts, deeds and actions.

 

Umm.. My answer is gonna appear to be callous. "No". Not a "good thing". If the Police aren't adaptable and well trained enough to handle the problems they face on calls and on the streets, find another fucking job, one more safe and sedate.

 

Having trained members of the Federal Police department in Oz, and with the Tokyo Central Police Unit and Rapid Response Unit; I can truthfully say that Ozzy police are probably the worst trained police in the world - any help is a lot of help for them! You have a good point.

 

>Hate to say it, but here in America "cops" have gone from "Peace Officers" taking care of the peace to "Law Enforcement Officers", taking care of every little niggling thing politicians and judges can find for them to do. Most of our Police Agencies are good folks. Again, the however is that these agencies are arming up heavily, getting to an "Us vs. Them", and the 'Us" covering its ass even when found to be wrong..

 

You require, neeeeeeeeeeeeed, realllllllllllly neeeeeeeeeed a fine edged weapon for what reason again?

The reports of the necessity of a resident in Japan for such an offensive arm is severly under reported in our Press.

 

I'm married into a traditional Samurai family - with over nine hundred years of history. I am the oldest male, and have inherited the family heirlooms - that includes the family swords and armour. I am also a teacher in the family martial tradition and a member of the Japanese Sword Museum. Sorry, you probably don't understand Japanese history or tradition - so it would probably be hard for you to understand this.

 

>You are one of the priviledged class of persons due to birth or family connections who *can* own these fine edged tools?

Your tradition, work and family help ensure that you are able to own these?

 

If you were not Samurai, a 'commoner', what chance would you have under these permitting and licencing laws to own these beautiful worked of fighting art?

 

Happy you teach and carry on a tradition. More happy you have privelidges that commoners will never be able to obtain or earn.

Again, it seems to me the "haves" are more than ready to lay restrictions down on the "have nots".

 

You are right Jun-san, my limits to understanding your culture are as small as a speck on a grain of rice. My ignorance is willing to be fixed with education and training. the big however is simply this, "In the uS a Man does not have to bow his neck to his Master's sword, as the Master may fear the bullet in his."

 

We've got class issues indeed Jun, but firearms ensure we'll not be made peasants for the pure pleasure of the Masters.

 

With a rifle in hand, a peasant can take his Master down. I understand a lot about why the ruling classes want things and persons to be registered, enumerated, accounted for and safely stored away from the commoners.

 

Little I think I know of Japanese history, the introduction of the rifle and the rise of the commoner conscript soldier was the beginning of the end of Samurai as professional warriors. Seems a bullet had no sense of honor as it ripped through the defences of a man with a sword from distances that were safe for the commoner with a gun.

 

 

Sadly in this sissiness-era, knifes and sharps, the love of a good clean slick sharp blade is long being tuned out of children, for 'SAFETY' of course.

 

I really don't know what to say.

 

>It is a gold plated bitch to see my country and its kids sissified by the professional political nannies.. You might cry to see what would happen to your child in these current public schools if Jun II was caught with your penknife he had left in his pants pockets after you loaned it to him..

The bullshit I've had to live with when my son did same was to the tune of five thousands in uSD to remove this spot from his school records.

 

Clearly from the rest of your post, Americans hate their government.

 

>As Casey has said. I simply have learned not to trust it. When a politician says "A", I know he'll do "F" and "N", but never what he promised.. Current crop of folks we've elected have so little connection to their electorate that they simply don't care..

Working on doing what might be done, but am reminded that Jefferson said that "..a little revolution every 20 years or so is a good thing.."

We the People need to make the changes, or find ourselves in a bloody Balkanization of the continent.

 

I'll never progress up the ranks in karate past where I am at. You know the mind needed to study and practice past ni-dan, I do not have it, nor am I willing to surrender enough to find it.

 

No. I don't. Have never practiced or studied sports at all.

 

>I don't do sports either, and you'll never find me playing UFC or whatever popular televised beat_the_pulp_out_of_eachother "sport" is.

My purpose is to stay healty as possible, flexible as I still can, and study the Way best I can understand.

You might be suprised that Warriors practice with firearms as seriously as your study of the blade mastery. I'll never be an accomplished master of anything edged, not inclined.. However the bullet and its projector I am doing quite well with.

 

That may be an Occidental thing, but I don't apologize for loving arms and implements for self defence.

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Always a pleasure to find someone conversant in english who cares to share knowledge of other cultures.

 

kL

[♦ nivek ♦]

Just for Ramen.. Attorney General of US wants "right" to seize guns.

 

Feel free to do your homework Ramen.. The Goobers want the ability to contra-Constitutionally "take" (study 'taking' in legal terms, not fun for those being taken from) firearms from people.

 

Google is your friend when you need backup sources to net stories..

 

kFL

[Ramen666]

Nivek,

 

This may be a stupid question, and probably has been answered. I just need to clarify. Your stance is no regulation on guns at all. No license the whole thing, basically you can get guns just like buying towels? Am I correct? I am no way being saractic but it sounds like what it is to me and I am just clarifying.....

 

PS

 

Doing my homework on the whole gun control thing. I still think story A, the Chicago thing is bull shit I have only found one other link about it but the same story.

[♦ nivek ♦]

Nivek,

 

This may be a stupid question, and probably has been answered. I just need to clarify. Your stance is no regulation on guns at all. No license the whole thing, basically you can get guns just like buying towels? Am I correct? I am no way being saractic but it sounds like what it is to me and I am just clarifying.....

 

What about the Second Amendment is fuzzy to you? What licence do you propose? Who maintains this, what mandate will provide for this particular set of contra-Constitutional ideas? Look at the Canadian Gun Laws link I left for Amanda a bit up list for the stellar sucess that the Canadians have had compelling their subjects to register their arms..

 

PS

 

Doing my homework on the whole gun control thing. I still think story A, the Chicago thing is bull shit I have only found one other link about it but the same story.

 

It is a freshly breaking story. Continue to watch it devolop. You might not see anything about this issue in the government approved news stations over the air/in print.

 

kL

[♦ nivek ♦]

Trio of Op-Eds worth following the links of...

 

 

The forty something generation

The Libertarian Enterprise

by L.Neil Smith

 

"Most of my best friends and associates (with notable exceptions) are about my age, or ten years older, or ten years younger. I refer to that twenty-year bracket as the 'Forty-Something Generation.' That's because we're of an age to have grown up alongside the Colt Government Model 1911A1 .45 caliber automatic pistol, designed by Saint John Moses Browning. Most of us have used it much, become very familiar with it, and even regard it with a sort of reverence." (04/28/07)

 

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2007/tle415-20070429-10.html

 

-----

 

Should students, faculty carry weapons on campus?

Charlotte Observer

by Bradford Wiles

 

"I cannot help but think that things could have been different at Virginia Tech. As a Tech student and a Concealed Handgun Permit holder, I have requested that the university allow me, and those who wish to be responsible for their own safety, the ability to carry a legally licensed firearm as a means of self-defense without fear of expulsion or termination from employment. The associate vice president for university relations, Larry Hincker, responded to my plea, writing that 'guns don't belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same.'" (04/30/07)

 

http://www.charlotte.com/409/story/104288.html

 

-----

 

Fear

The Libertarian Enterprise

by Ron Beatty

 

"In all the news I've seen since the incident at Virginia Tech, the one thing I've noticed above all, from almost every source, is the sheer amount of fear in the news. Now, to a certain degree, this is somewhat understandable. However when it becomes an all-consuming, pervasive shroud hanging over our society, this is totally unacceptable. Just look at what has happened over the last week or so: one student arrested, his life and plans ruined for being explicit in a creative writing class; a college campus thrown into turmoil over a box of condoms; and the craven shrieks of the cowards screaming for more gun control. What's even worse is the cold-blooded manipulation of this incident by certain feckless cowards and power-mad would-be dictators, eager to use any possible excuse to garner more power, more control, more influence over the lives of all of us." (04/28/07)

 

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2007/tle415-20070429-07.html

[♦ nivek ♦]

Add a litle dhimmitude to the mix of "Why I need A Gun, or Ten":

 

 

Top Hamas official: Kill all Americans

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Etgar Lefkovits, THE JERUSALEM POST May. 1, 2007

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Sheik Ahmad Bahr, acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, declared during a Friday sermon at a Sudan mosque that America and Israel will be annihilated and called upon Allah to kill Jews and Americans "to the very Last One." Following are excerpts from the sermon that took place last month, courtesy of MEMRI.

 

Ahmad Bahr began: "'You will be victorious' on the face of this planet. You are the masters of the world on the face of this planet. Yes, [the Koran says that] 'you will be victorious,' but only 'if you are believers.' Allah willing, 'you will be victorious,' while America and Israel will be annihilated. I guarantee you that the power of belief and faith is greater than the power of America and Israel. They are cowards who are eager for life, while we are eager for death for the sake of Allah. That is why America's nose was rubbed in the mud in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Somalia, and everywhere."

 

Bahr continued and said that America will be annihilated, while Islam will remain. The Muslims "'will be victorious, if you are believers.' Oh Muslims, I guarantee you that the power of Allah is greater than America, by whom many are blinded today. Some people are blinded by the power of America. We say to them that with the might of Allah, with the might of His Messenger, and with the power of Allah, we are stronger than America and Israel."

 

The Hamas spokesperson concluded with a prayer, saying: "Oh Allah, vanquish the Jews and their supporters. Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them all, down to the very last one. Oh Allah, show them a day of darkness. Oh Allah, who sent down His Book, the mover of the clouds, who defeated the enemies of the Prophet, defeat the Jews and the Americans, and bring us victory over them."

[Ramen666]

You gave me a Hamas story...

 

I have to say that is not the best example. Your other ones where good examples but those Hamas people just have big mouths.

[Amanda]

Nivek,

 

This may be a stupid question, and probably has been answered. I just need to clarify. Your stance is no regulation on guns at all. No license the whole thing, basically you can get guns just like buying towels? Am I correct? I am no way being saractic but it sounds like what it is to me and I am just clarifying.....

 

What about the Second Amendment is fuzzy to you? What licence do you propose? Who maintains this, what mandate will provide for this particular set of contra-Constitutional ideas? Look at the Canadian Gun Laws link I left for Amanda a bit up list for the stellar sucess that the Canadians have had compelling their subjects to register their arms..

 

Nivek, I do agree with the right of the general population having access to a gun... however, I thought that your position of those who have been institutionalized for psychiatric issues should not be allowed to have one, unless released by a psychiatrist, right?

 

I saw your site that gave what is considered legal, and I guess I've been confusing registered with licensed. Registration holds people accountable and responsible for their actions with that gun. Good idea, no? Maybe others have misconstrued these aspects too. It is a bit difficult to grasp all the info you offer, and remember... the rest of us, I assume, are not as well versed in these issues as you. So, what about people that have been arrested for felonies? Currently it is illegal for them to own guns. Are you agreeing with that? Some convictions cause people to lose some of their rights. ie.: a convicted pedophile has to live so far away from a school, etc.

 

I definitely side with the right to own a gun, even if I'm not too crazy about using one myself. (I am more motivated to take lessons now.) Further, I think most here agree with the right to bear arms. What is more difficult to define is where exactly do we draw the line? Do we let psychiatric patients have one? How about felons? BTW, I think many people that have criminal records are treated unjustly after they have already served their time, yet I'm not sure how we should address those issues.

[Amanda]

You gave me a Hamas story...

 

I have to say that is not the best example. Your other ones where good examples but those Hamas people just have big mouths.

Yeah right. Do you think what fueled 9/11 was from a big mouth?

[Ramen666]

No the thing is Hamas has been threatning us for years and has yet to do anything. They are bluffing right now that is all this. Look how many news stories happend within the last year same threats.

 

What fueled 9/11 was from religous nutjobs I admit that but isn't this a different group that seems to be threatning us ALL the time. I may be wrong but feel free to correct me if I am but this is a different group.

[Amanda]

No the thing is Hamas has been threatning us for years and has yet to do anything. They are bluffing right now that is all this. Look how many news stories happend within the last year same threats.

 

What fueled 9/11 was from religous nutjobs I admit that but isn't this a different group that seems to be threatning us ALL the time. I may be wrong but feel free to correct me if I am but this is a different group.

 

Here it says:

 

Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by Canada,[8][9] the European Union,[10] Israel,[11] Japan,[12] and the United States,[13] and is banned in Jordan.[14] Australia[15] and the United Kingdom[16] both list the militant wing of Hamas, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, as a terrorist organization. According to the US State Department, the group is funded by Iran, Palestinian expatriates, and private benefactors in Saudi Arabia and other Arab states.[13] In a 2002 report, Human Rights Watch stated that Hamas' leaders "should be held accountable for the war crimes and crimes against humanity" that have been committed by its members.[17]

 

On November 8, 2006 the military wing of Hamas called on Muslims around the world to attack American targets. "America is offering political, financial and logistic cover for the Zionist occupation crimes, and it is responsible for the Beit Hanoun massacre. Therefore, the people and the nation all over the globe are required to teach the American enemy tough lessons," Hamas said in a statement sent to The Associated Press. Ghazi Hamad, spokesman for the Hamas-led Palestinian government said, however, that the group had no intention of attacking American targets.[61]

 

It has been argued that Hamas threatens the United States due to the number of alleged Hamas covert cells the FBI and United States Department of Justice are aware of on U.S. soil.[62][63] Hamas has, however, repeatedly stated that it is only interested in operations against the Israeli occupation and not one single terrorist attack outside Israel/Gaza/West Bank has ever been attributed to Hamas.

 

IMO, threats and propaganda against a country should definitely be recognized. Why wait for a direct domestic incident to be alarmed?

[Ramen666]

I honestly do not want to argue about Hamas, Al Quaida, Iraq, and threats because this is for another thread another time. I am agreeing with you but I don't want this to go off the subject because this is suppose to be about guns for protection.

 

I just hear the threats all the time and count them as a grain of salt.