Weapons banned in the UK!

[LoneTiger108]

A QUOTE FROM THE SUN NEWSPAPER, 11/12/2207

All Samurai Swords are set to be outlawed tomorrow in a crackdown on lethal weapons

BAN THE BLADE

SAMURAI swords were designed for one purpose — to kill with shocking efficiency.

In the wrong hands, they are as dangerous as any gun.

There is no place for such fearsome blades on our streets.

Yet they are now the weapon of choice for gangsters and psychopaths.

Ministers are right to ban the sale of all imitation weapons.

Legitimate collectors can keep historic originals by licensed Japanese swordsmiths — under lock and key.

But we must stop more innocent victims being hacked to death by drug-crazed or demented thugs with such weapons.

Email your views to g.pascoewatson@the-sun.co.uk

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

Proof that the UK Martial Arts community, especially the weaponry enthusiast, is going to be hard-hit AGAIN by the introduction of new laws banning the possession of any bladed weapon or replica-type blade.

A Police source said (to The Sun) "The Government is going to act firmly and decisively. Samurai swords are increasingly being used on the streets as some sort of macho weapon. It is right hey are taken out of circulation once and for all."

Any breach of the law will lead to a min 6 month jail term and a 5 thousand pounds fine.

I know of no weaponry or Martial Art specialist that has been consulted during this process. No middle ground. No monitoring system in place. Just an outright ban.

If this attitude spreads in the UK I can't see a good future for the Martial Arts Import businesses here, and being an enthusiast myself I'm disgusted in my government again for reacting in a similar way to the eighties 'nunchaku ban' in Bruce Lee's movies. Soon, legislation like this may even spread to training weapons, wushu swords and who knows what else??!!

Does anyone out there have an opinion on this madness??

[LoneTiger108]

I felt that I had to share this info within the Kung Fu Forum! Click the internal link to see what all the fuss is about:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49333

[LoneTiger108]

I've just found this info on the Home Office website, which is worth a read although all consultation for this subject actually ended in May:

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-ban-offensive-weapons-0307

[David Jamieson]

samurai swords are of little concern to kungfu men. :p

sorry to hear that the uk is becoming even more of a nanny welfare state than it already is.

[LoneTiger108]

samurai swords are of little concern to kungfu men. :p.

David,

Maybe when you read the actual term to be used you may have a rethink! It's stated in the HO document that this addition to the Offensive Weapons Order 1988 is to be

"a curved, single edged sword (sometimes known as a 'samurai sword')"

17 other weapons appear on this order including 'Push Daggers & Butterfly Knives'.

Still not concerned?

[ngokfei]

A bann is harsh but a requirement to obtain a permit is more feasible.

Just like it was in Hong Kong, I remember reading that the sifu of the Taiji mantis school had to have a permit for each of his Kung Fu weapons, Can't remember exactly but think he did not have an actual chain whip because they would not give him a permit for such a weapon.

I wouldn't mind this being implemented here in the states for all weapons. would definetly cut down on the wrong kinds of people getting a hold of them.

[David Jamieson]

my lack of concern is because it is in britain. I'm in Canada and it doesn't effect me whatsoever. so...write your mp?

[sanjuro_ronin]

We assume butcher knives are next ?

[Black Jack II]

Just another one of the U.K's many, many steps to make its people back into serfs.

One of the biggest anti-self defense countries in the free world.

[BruceSteveRoy]

you would think they would allow liscenses to be issued to MA instructors/ school owners and that while a student is training on that schools premises would be using the instructors liscense. of course that would put the burden on the school/instructor to store all of the weapons but its better than nothing. of course that sucks for ppl that want to train in parks and out of schools. my suggestion is become a staff enthusiast while they are still legal.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I wouldn't mind this being implemented here in the states for all weapons. would definetly cut down on the wrong kinds of people getting a hold of them.

Reply]
Are you on CRACK? The Wrong people will get them no matter what....LAWS do not apply to them. They are free to acquire any weapon they wish, and implement it in any manor that suites thier fancy. Why? Agian, becasue they are not bound by the laws!! Everytime I see a coment like that I just smack myself in the head at the sheer stupidity of the person who made the comment....how dense can you be to not see what is crystal clear to everyone else? You are the type that would get an arm hacked off by someone with bread knife, and instead of realising that you could not defend yourself because it was illegal for you to carry a weapon, you will call for the banning of bread knives so MORE law abiding citizens can be disarmed even more, making your situation even more common.

The only thing a new law will do is prevent the Law ABIDING citizen to arm themselves for self defense. All they do is disarm the good people. The criminals just start laughing at you because they can now do whatever they want and you can't stop them. It becomes a joke to them, a game. Do you really want to feed thier power trips, and bring them laughter and enjoyment at the ease of thier ablities to inflict harm on you?. Criminals WANT weapons to be illegal because it gives them more controll and power....why would you want to do that? Do you really want it to become EASIER for them to commit crimes against you? Do you really want it to be easier for them to rob and kill you?

What about your daughter? Do you feel safer knwoing she can sleep with a Dagger under her pillow? or would you rather she has no recourse to fight back and must succumb to being gang raped by criminals who enjoy having all the weapons in the world?

I don't know about you, but I feel a hell of a lot better that she has the tools to protect herself. What kind of Pure ******* do you have to be to want to take that away from her???

[Ben Gash]

Hardly. This is another example of the government creating pointless new laws to appear "tough on crime" . It's already illegal to carry a long blade outside without good reason (going to dismember your rivals not being one ;) ), so what exactly is this law going to change? Most blade related crimes occur with a kitchen knife anyway :rolleyes:
We'll see what happens tomorrow (the Sun is hardly the most reliable source).

[sanjuro_ronin]

The biggest issue with banning anything is that it keeps it from the hands of law abiding people, criminals and people with criminal intent will still get to them.

Certainly, in an ideal world, there would be no firearms, no bladed weapons, no impact weapons and nothing that could be used as a weapon, but since that world has NEVER EXISTED, something else needs to be done.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I am not sure what happened to this thread, but I posted a long response to ngokfei's comment and it dissapeared. I feel it needs to be said and luckly I was able to find it all cached in my browser with my Back button.

Here is what he said.


ngokfei ngokfei

Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Covington, Georgia
Posts: 858
A bann is harsh but a requirement to obtain a permit is more feasible.

Just like it was in Hong Kong, I remember reading that the sifu of the Taiji mantis school had to have a permit for each of his Kung Fu weapons, Can't remember exactly but think he did not have an actual chain whip because they would not give him a permit for such a weapon.

I wouldn't mind this being implemented here in the states for all weapons. would definetly cut down on the wrong kinds of people getting a hold of them.

Here is my response:

RD'S Alias - 1A RD'S Alias - 1A is online now
The Emperor!!

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,927
I wouldn't mind this being implemented here in the states for all weapons. would definetly cut down on the wrong kinds of people getting a hold of them.

Reply]
Are you on CRACK? The Wrong people will get them no matter what....LAWS do not apply to them. They are free to acquire any weapon they wish, and implement it in any manor that suites thier fancy. Why? Agian, becasue they are not bound by the laws!! Everytime I see a coment like that I just smack myself in the head at the sheer stupidity of the person who made the comment....how dense can you be to not see what is crystal clear to everyone else? You are the type that would get an arm hacked off by someone with bread knife, and instead of realising that you could not defend yourself because it was illegal for you to carry a weapon, you will call for the banning of bread knives so MORE law abiding citizens can be disarmed even more, making your situation even more common.

The only thing a new law will do is prevent the Law ABIDING citizen to arm themselves for self defense. All they do is disarm the good people. The criminals just start laughing at you because they can now do whatever they want and you can't stop them. It becomes a joke to them, a game. Do you really want to feed thier power trips, and bring them laughter and enjoyment at the ease of thier ablities to inflict harm on you?. Criminals WANT weapons to be illegal because it gives them more controll and power....why would you want to do that? Do you really want it to become EASIER for them to commit crimes against you? Do you really want it to be easier for them to rob and kill you?

What about your daughter? Do you feel safer knwoing she can sleep with a Dagger under her pillow? or would you rather she has no recourse to fight back and must succumb to being gang raped by criminals who enjoy having all the weapons in the world?

I don't know about you, but I feel a hell of a lot better that she has the tools to protect herself. What kind of Pure ******* do you have to be to want to take that away from her???
__________________
Royal Dragon's secret Alias profile for trolling.

[sanjuro_ronin]

My post was loss too....next time I will use my chi !
:D

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I figured out what happened, I replied to the thread on the link...it's on the Martial Media and Popular Culture board. My post is still there.

This is a topic that belongs on this forum though.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Certainly, in an ideal world, there would be no firearms, no bladed weapons, no impact weapons and nothing that could be used as a weapon, but since that world has NEVER EXISTED, something else needs to be done.

Reply]
Well said. That world will never exist either. Does anyone actually think the Mexicans that have invaded and occupied the Southwester US care about our laws? No, they don't...which is why there is such a growing state of anarchy down there. If you are not armed, you will be at thier mercy.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Certainly, in an ideal world, there would be no firearms, no bladed weapons, no impact weapons and nothing that could be used as a weapon, but since that world has NEVER EXISTED, something else needs to be done.

Reply]
Well said. That world will never exist either. Does anyone actually think the Mexicans that have invaded and occupied the Southwester US care about our laws? No, they don't...which is why there is such a growing state of anarchy down there. If you are not armed, you will be at thier mercy.

Off your meds today?

[D-FENS]

There is no place for such fearsome blades on our streets.

Yet they are now the weapon of choice for gangsters and psychopaths.

Ministers are right to ban the sale of all imitation weapons.

Legitimate collectors can keep historic originals by licensed Japanese swordsmiths — under lock and key.

But we must stop more innocent victims being hacked to death by drug-crazed or demented thugs with such weapons.



Hey, I've got an idea.... why not ban drug-crazed and demented thugs instead? Doesn't that make more sense? It would definitely cut out the middleman (pun intended)

The UK has just given up its last ray of hope against being assimilated into the Ummah.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Hey, I've got an idea.... why not ban drug-crazed and demented thugs instead? Doesn't that make more sense? It would definitely cut out the middleman (pun intended)

Reply]
They are already banned..doesn't seem to be doing much good.....

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Off your meds today?

Reply]
No, What do you ask?

[ngokfei]

RDs

Actually you are probably one of those I would label as "wrong people".

Just reading you lengthy ranting posts makes me wonder about you.

That's good, smack your self, real stable personality.

Speaking of being gang raped, does it still hurt? I hear the 1st time is the worse but then gets easier..:p

Funny how you mention law abiding. Watching/reading the news or taking alook at the Polices Log I don't read about many incidences where self defense took place. Mall shooting, oh and what about that guy in Texas? who shot 2 burglars who were not even robbing his house. They are going to like him on the inside:D

A$$holio or should I say (Raw D:ck's 1 A$$)

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49329


People defend themselves and others ALL the time smart asss.....

Look at how many lives were saved becasue this woman had a gun and was armed. If she had not, all those innocent people would have been killed becasue the BAD GUYS will be armed no matter WHAT the law says....Moron!


People like you just want to take our ability to defend ourselfs away so the criminals can freely prey on us without resistance.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Here, read these at the bottom of this page

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14817480/detail.html

* December 10, 2007: Police: Same Gunman Attacked Both Churches
* December 10, 2007: Gunman Opens Fire At Missionary Center; 2 Killed, 2 Hurt
* December 10, 2007: 6 Shot At New Life Church; Gunman, 2 Churchgoers Dead
* December 10, 2007: Report: No General Alert Sent After Arvada Shootings


If more people had been armed, then these criminals would not have killed so many innocent people.

Taking weapons away form good people so they cannot defend themselves makes you a worthless ***** in my book. You need to be faced with the very situation you are trying to created and see how well you do against armed criminals....I bet you'd be praying for a weapon and a shot to protect your life.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Actually you are probably one of those I would label as "wrong people".

Reply]
Why? Because I am willing to step up and defend people and I speak up when asshols like you want to take peoples right to self defense away?

I got news for you, you may classify me anyway you want, but when the girl in the next building got attacked by the 6'3 monster with the stick ready to rain down on her becasue he didn't like her Dogs, I was there to defend her...you would be making sure she wasn't allowed defense or protection, and had to succumb to his beating. :mad:

[Jingwu Man]

Hopefully things don't go that far here. It's already tough to get chain whips, nunchaku, and 3 section staffs. My club has to sneak anything like that through the border with "understanding" friends. The reason those are illegal is that they are concealable. I don't see a sword as being concealable though.

[ngokfei]

Be part of the solution and not part of the probem.

That was a great thing you did.:)

Why not take it to the next level and become a Police Officer. Then you can do what you love.

and if you read my original post I said

"A bann is harsh but a requirement to obtain a permit is more feasible."

"I wouldn't mind this being implemented here in the states for all weapons. would definetly cut down on the wrong kinds of people getting a hold of them."

There are many weapons one can carry that is legal. And for weapons that are not then a Permit to Carry is a good idea.

hand held gardening tools are very appealing:D

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Permit to Carry is a good idea.

Reply]
No, it's not, It is too cumbersome a process, and is much harder than just putting your knife on your belt in the morning. Just to get an FOID card you have to fiol out forms, get your picture taken, it's a big ordeal when compared to just putting yur knife on your belt in the morning....so people will have to put it off for other priorities...then when the time comes and they need it it's too late.

better to leave it unregulated so good people have no hindrances in self protection...the criminals are unhindered and allways will be no matter what laws are put in place....heck, it's ALREADY illegal to be a criminal. That has yet to stop any of them ever.

[ngokfei]

I guess you have something to hide? or just parranoid..

A simple solution and you find a problem with it. Guess you can't take time off from work to be safe...

I neve thought I'd be quoting this:

"Freedom isn't Free".

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I shouldn't have to take time off of work to be safe...the criminals don't take time off of work when they attack...why should I?

[xcakid]

Permit to Carry is a good idea.

Reply]
No, it's not, It is too cumbersome a process, and is much harder than just putting your knife on your belt in the morning. Just to get an FOID card you have to fiol out forms, get your picture taken, it's a big ordeal when compared to just putting yur knife on your belt in the morning....so people will have to put it off for other priorities...then when the time comes and they need it it's too late.

better to leave it unregulated so good people have no hindrances in self protection...the criminals are unhindered and allways will be no matter what laws are put in place....heck, it's ALREADY illegal to be a criminal. That has yet to stop any of them ever.

RD, I am with you regards to being armed and all that. I have been a 2nd Ammendment proponent all my life. As well as my entire family.

However, here is where I sit on the fence. I have met some serious wacko's in my life. I really would not like for these people to have firearms let alone a fork. With that said, what Ngok Fei said does make sense. Have a permit to carry. A process like we have here in TX and other state that allow CCW. If you do, do not restrict what I can carry. If I want to carry a Mac10, why the hell not.

As far as cumbersome process. Guess one does not value their life enough if they think protecting it is cumbersome. I have a concealed carry permit. Took 10hr class. Handgun proficiency exam(that was another hr). Fingerprinted. FBI background check. Credit check. Then paid $60 and waiting 3mos.

There should be a national CCW process. Firearms should not be classified by their type, semi auto, auto(assualt weapon) etc. They all go bang. They all can be used for good or bad. They are just tools.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

"Freedom isn't Free".

Reply]
That has nothing to do with this.

What if I am attacked while on my way to fill out my forms? Do I tell the criminal to wait while I get my picture taken, and fill out forms to be mailed in?

Sorry, that is bull****. All good people should have UNRESTRICTED freedom to carry weapons. The bad guys have unrestricted freedom, we need to at least be able to compete on the same level.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

As far as cumbersome process. Guess one does not value their life enough if they think protecting it is cumbersome. I have a concealed carry permit. Took 10hr class. Handgun proficiency exam(that was another hr). Fingerprinted. FBI background check. Credit check. Then paid $60 and waiting 3mos.

Reply]
The bad guy stuffed a gun in his pants and off he went....took me longer to wright this than it took him to arm for the day's kill.

Who the hell has TIME to go take a 10 hr class, pay $60,00 and wait 3 months? How stupid do you have to be to see the ludicras idiocy of that?

[xcakid]

As far as cumbersome process. Guess one does not value their life enough if they think protecting it is cumbersome. I have a concealed carry permit. Took 10hr class. Handgun proficiency exam(that was another hr). Fingerprinted. FBI background check. Credit check. Then paid $60 and waiting 3mos.

Reply]
The bad guy stuffed a gun in his pants and off he went....took me longer to wright this than it took him to arm for the day's kill.

Who the hell has TIME to go take a 10 hr class, pay $60,00 and wait 3 months? How stupid do you have to be to see the ludicras idiocy of that?

Yes its pretty idiotic. Specially when there is a 2nd Ammendment written in our constitution. However, I am a law abiding citizen and will continue to do so and still protect myself. :D


RDs

Funny how you mention law abiding. Watching/reading the news or taking alook at the Polices Log I don't read about many incidences where self defense took place. Mall shooting, oh and what about that guy in Texas? who shot 2 burglars who were not even robbing his house. They are going to like him on the inside:D




Actually here in TX there is a law saying you can use deadly force to protect your person, another person, your property or the property of others. It was written back in cattle rustling days but never taken of the books.



Here it is: Penal Code Sec 9.43
http://www.texaspolicecentral.com/2007_-_2008_Penal_Code.pdf
There is a little itty bitty catch. The neighbor does have to say he asked to have his property looked after. If I was the neighbor that would've been a no brainer. "I asked his to watch my property your honor" Cased closed, you are free to go. Stand by for civil suit though.

[ngokfei]

xcakid.

Well if that was on the books then I don't see any legal objection to what this guy did.

Yeah that Civil Suit is going to take away all his stuff:D

I guess classifying the types of guns helps if Law Enforcement has to knock at their door, Single Shot or get the f... down:eek:

[Mr Punch]

However, here is where I sit on the fence. I have met some serious wacko's in my life. I really would not like for these people to have firearms let alone a fork. With that said, what Ngok Fei said does make sense. Have a permit to carry. A process like we have here in TX and other state that allow CCW. If you do, do not restrict what I can carry. If I want to carry a Mac10, why the hell not. Interesting you chose a Mac10 as your example... isn't that the one they call 'Spray-and-pray' because it's so renowned for being inaccurate? Which is a good reason to ban that particular gun, no?

Point is, all of these things have been tested. Someone somewhere in a firearms training programme or in law enforcement has tested the Mac10 and found it a bloody liability. Guns should be rated on their accuracy.

What is a Mac10 designed for? It's not a target shooter. It's not for personal protection unless you're getting chased by zombies/you're in Precinct 13. It's a criminals' gun, isn't it?


As far as cumbersome process. Guess one does not value their life enough if they think protecting it is cumbersome. I have a concealed carry permit. Took 10hr class. Handgun proficiency exam(that was another hr). Fingerprinted. FBI background check. Credit check. Then paid $60 and waiting 3mos. Precisely. Crazy neo-KKK b@stards screaming about Mexicans invading and disregarding all your laws as they come to rape your house and burgle your daughter can scream all they want about wanting a gun, but basically, it's not that much of a hassle to go through the checks. $60 seems a bit steep; 3 months does too, but if that's the cost to the taxpayers to do the checks properly, I think that's reasonable.


There should be a national CCW process. Firearms should not be classified by their type, semi auto, auto(assualt weapon) etc. They all go bang. They all can be used for good or bad. They are just tools.That's where we disagree. As I said, a Mac10 is a crims' weapon, full stop. A handgun class is a great idea, and do you think that that would then make people proficient in assault rifles too? How about sniper rifles? Automatic shotguns? There should be courses, and tests and checks (and yes, stated reasons for wanting to own some of these weapons, even if that reason is just 'gun collector' or 'gun enthusiast' in which case you should be the member of a club: the NRA would do!) for each class of weapon.

And as an Englishman intent on entering politics, that's what I intend to push for in the UK too. Although, in the UK there should be no carry permission, since the gun crime problem is nowhere near as bad as the US. Banning people from owning firearms/swords in their homes is wrong though. I quite like the Swiss militia system, where everybody has to have a weapon in working order with a registered number of bullets and attend shooting courses several times every year... but in the UK that wouldn't work, because we're a helluva a lot more ghetto than Switzerland!

[Mr Punch]

Yes its pretty idiotic. Specially when there is a 2nd Ammendment written in our constitution. However, I am a law abiding citizen and will continue to do so and still protect myself. :DYour point on the Constitution: it's a two-hundred year-old document with many of the articles having a direct precedent in the British Bill of Rights and the Magna Carta. It's old school! While I'm for a constitution in many ways, it shouldn't be the Gospel: the law should be the checks and balances on it and federal gun laws are a good example of people having some say in how the articles of the Constitution are interpreted.

Well, to be precise, the Constitution and the Law should be mutually supportive and restrictive, and gun laws are a good example of Constitution and Law working properly together IMO.


Actually here in TX there is a law saying you can use deadly force to protect your person, another person, your property or the property of others. It was written back in cattle rustling days but never taken of the books. Excellent law!


...There is a little itty bitty catch. The neighbor does have to say he asked to have his property looked after. If I was the neighbor that would've been a no brainer. "I asked his to watch my property your honor" Cased closed, you are free to go. Stand by for civil suit though.That's where neighbourhood watch schemes could come in useful. Sign up for the Watch and have that clause written in: you are asking your neighbours to wacth your property! ;)

[xcakid]

Interesting you chose a Mac10 as your example... isn't that the one they call 'Spray-and-pray' because it's so renowned for being inaccurate? Which is a good reason to ban that particular gun, no?

Point is, all of these things have been tested. Someone somewhere in a firearms training programme or in law enforcement has tested the Mac10 and found it a bloody liability. Guns should be rated on their accuracy.

What is a Mac10 designed for? It's not a target shooter. It's not for personal protection unless you're getting chased by zombies/you're in Precinct 13. It's a criminals' gun, isn't it?

Tell that to the Israeli commando who used the Mac10 in conjuntion with the Uzi. They are used for single shots not spray and pray. And yes I have used a Mac10 civilian version so it was semi. It is rated as a pistol and as such should not be used over 25yrs. In that ranged its accuracy is not bad at all.

Many private security and the US secret service used them. Up till the H&K MP5K and the mini Uzi came to popularity and similar compactness to make it feasible to conceal effectively.

The problem with Mac10's in accuracy is not the gun itself. It is with the various modification to accomodate many different calibers. With its short barrel and twist rate it is best suited in a .45ACP. However other variants like the 9MM, require a fast twist rate made it inaccurate. The sight also contributes to its inaccuracy. Putting a halo site or red dot site would greatly increase it.




That's where we disagree. As I said, a Mac10 is a crims' weapon, full stop. A handgun class is a great idea, and do you think that that would then make people proficient in assault rifles too? How about sniper rifles? Automatic shotguns? There should be courses, and tests and checks (and yes, stated reasons for wanting to own some of these weapons, even if that reason is just 'gun collector' or 'gun enthusiast' in which case you should be the member of a club: the NRA would do!) for each class of weapon.



First I believe you buy into the medias description of assualt weapon in which they include semi auto rifles. Assualt weapon by military definition should be fully automatic weapon.

Second yes. Gun ownership come with responsibility. You have it, learn to use it. Myself and people I know(friends) that are firearms enthusiast, all take classes. I have taken various tactical handgun and rifle courses. I use to compete in practical and tactical shooting matches quite a bit. My recently unemployment has hampered that lately. Sniper, well not really my bag. I am more of a defensive and tactical shooter. So those are the training I take. My late brother however was a hunter, so he did take long range shooting classes. Concealment classes, etc.

I believe most responsible gun owners here in the US do belong to the NRA. I am a life member so is my entire family with the exception of my mom. I am also a member of GOA (Gun Owners of America). Like I said, I believe gun ownership is a responsibility. It is those that are not educated with firearms that tend to do more harm to others and themselves. Due to the fact that they see it as a thing of destruction ONLY.


I quite like the Swiss militia system, where everybody has to have a weapon in working order with a registered number of bullets and attend shooting courses several times every year... but in the UK that wouldn't work, because we're a helluva a lot more ghetto than Switzerland!

Well see that is the whole purpose of the US 2nd Ammendment. A civilian militia to support and protect their own property. Thomas Jefferson even went as far as saying that it is to protect the civilians from its own government. However, I believe he was referring the British rule.

It has been argued in our supreme court that since we have a National Guard, the 2nd ammedment was set up for that purpose. Given that our National Guard is able to deploy overseas that is highly unlikely.

[Black Jack II]

The Second Amendment is such a fundamental right for the American individual that it is sacred to what our country is and who we are as a people. I am a member of the NRA and GOA, being more a fan of the GOA as they really seem to understand that statement to its real core value.

People possess extactly as much freedom as they can take or defend and the U.S. Constitution should be taken as a form of gospel in a certain respect if not in that full respect.

That is why I really like Huckabee right now, he is where the second should stand, a solid position of non-retreat, and holding it's spirit to its core.

Ron Paul is excellent as well for the second, but right now, Huckabee is taking first place for me in this regard.

[David Jamieson]

Everyone on the planet should be trained in the use of all the latest weaponry technologies for all modalities. From boxing and wrestling to small arms and different vehicle and ordinance delivery systems with eventual understanding of global thermonuclear warfare.

That way there would be global deterrence and arguments would be very short.

[Mr Punch]

The problem with Mac10's in accuracy is not the gun itself. It is with the various modification to accomodate many different calibers. With its short barrel and twist rate it is best suited in a .45ACP. However other variants like the 9MM, require a fast twist rate made it inaccurate. The sight also contributes to its inaccuracy. Putting a halo site or red dot site would greatly increase it. Thanks! Interesting stuff.


First I believe you buy into the medias description of assualt weapon in which they include semi auto rifles. Assualt weapon by military definition should be fully automatic weapon. I was thinking of the military def.

But specifics notwithstanding I was just saying that there IS a good reason for classes of weapons: of course those classifications should be accurate.


Second yes. Gun ownership come with responsibility. You have it, learn to use it. Myself and people I know(friends) that are firearms enthusiast, all take classes. I have taken various tactical handgun and rifle courses. I use to compete in practical and tactical shooting matches quite a bit. My recently unemployment has hampered that lately. Sniper, well not really my bag. I am more of a defensive and tactical shooter. So those are the training I take. My late brother however was a hunter, so he did take long range shooting classes. Concealment classes, etc. Good, I was agreeing with you, so I'm glad you agree with me agreeing with you! :D


I believe most responsible gun owners here in the US do belong to the NRA.My point wasn't actually that everyone should be a member of the NRA - just that ownership of some classes of weapons should come with a reason IMO, for clearance of your application, and that 'gun enthusiast' is a good enough reason to make the law not too restrictive, but would need validation by proof of membership to some legitimate gun organisation. Whether it is the NRA or not to me is irrelevant, though I'm sure they're a good organisation for some people.


Well see that is the whole purpose of the US 2nd Ammendment. A civilian militia to support and protect their own property. Thomas Jefferson even went as far as saying that it is to protect the civilians from its own government. However, I believe he was referring the British rule. There's a difference already which causes problems if you are saying the US is the same as Switzerland. The Swiss militia is everybody and for protecting the country from invasion/foreign aggression. The US 2nd Amendment isn't. I'm not syaing the 2nd is wrong in any way, but the purposes are not the same and nor is their execution.


It has been argued in our supreme court that since we have a National Guard, the 2nd ammedment was set up for that purpose. Given that our National Guard is able to deploy overseas that is highly unlikely.Agreed. They are separate concepts.

[Drake]

I was taught in both high school and college that the 2nd Amendment was a sort of defense against tyranny. For instance, if the President decided to overthrow our current form of government, he would be unable to enforce it due to the fact that the armed populace would prevent it.

However, like said before, this is a very old document, so it may require a reexamining.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Americans and their guns.

[Drake]

Americans and their guns.

If it weren't for our guns, we'd still be sipping tea and paying taxes without representation. :)

And if we didn't keep our guns, you all would be having bratwurst and sauerkraut for dinner every night.

And speaking of current events... have you all seen Al Qaeda's 100-year plan for the world? Scary stuff.

[sanjuro_ronin]

If it weren't for our guns, we'd still be sipping tea and paying taxes without representation. :)

And if we didn't keep our guns, you all would be having bratwurst and sauerkraut for dinner every night.

And speaking of current events... have you all seen Al Qaeda's 100-year plan for the world? Scary stuff.

Dude, you guys love your guns, period, don't make excuses, just admit that you are a gun culture, nothing wrong with that.
Cowboys and all that ;)

Oh and by the way,
And if we didn't keep our guns, you all would be having bratwurst and sauerkraut for dinner every night., you need to check your history a tad, the Canadians were fighting the German long before you guys were.
in BOTH wars.

[Drake]

Dude, you guys love your guns, period, don't make excuses, just admit that you are a gun culture, nothing wrong with that.
Cowboys and all that ;)

Oh and by the way, , you need to check your history a tad, the Canadians were fighting the German long before you guys were.
in BOTH wars.

Yes, but what did the Canadians accomplish? They were certainly a help, though.

I like guns. They do their job, and they do it well. I just hate how Hollywood gives the impression that it's easy. It's ridiculously easy to miss.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Yes, but what did the Canadians accomplish? They were certainly a help, though.

I like guns. They do their job, and they do it well. I just hate how Hollywood gives the impression that it's easy. It's ridiculously easy to miss.

Lets not make this about WW1 or WW2, that is another thread.

Hollywood makes everything look easy.

Problem with the US and guns is that you guys can't seem to find a "happy medium", a way to keep guns in the hands of those that are law abiding and responsible and out of the hands of the criminals.
That is the issue, maybe you should look into how the Swiss do it...

[Drake]

Lets not make this about WW1 or WW2, that is another thread.

Hollywood makes everything look easy.

Problem with the US and guns is that you guys can't seem to find a "happy medium", a way to keep guns in the hands of those that are law abiding and responsible and out of the hands of the criminals.
That is the issue, maybe you should look into how the Swiss do it...

Problem is that any measures will generally be ignored by the criminals anyway. Hence them being called criminals.

I don't understand why they'd ban all curved blades in the UK, considering te impact it would have on their martial arts communities.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The UK likes to ban stuff, makes them feel powerful and in control, that's all.

"look at us, we have so little violence that are police officers don't need to carry guns".

Of course, unless you are a brasilian electrician that will be shot dead by the police for no reason whatsoever other than you are the "wrong colour".

Ah, gotta loves those Brits :D

[Drake]

The UK likes to ban stuff, makes them feel powerful and in control, that's all.

"look at us, we have so little violence that are police officers don't need to carry guns".

Of course, unless you are a brasilian electrician that will be shot dead by the police for no reason whatsoever other than you are the "wrong colour".

Ah, gotta loves those Brits :D

Being unfamilar with UK lawmaking, is there any way to appeal this sort of thing?

[LoneTiger108]

Can't understand why, but hey! I've been reading through all the posts and have been shocked to see it turn into a macho-man competition about guns, how slack us Brits are in our 'Nanny State' and even what a terrorists' 10 year plan is!!

If anyone actually read the documents from the Home Office, which I did link to, you would have seen that it's not just the 'Samurai' or 'curved blade' weapon on the list. This is just the latest addition to be debated.

There are 17 others, which I will list here later when I'm home and have the document handy, if anyone is interested?

As an example 'Butterfly Knives' are listed. What do you think of that?

[xcakid]

There's a difference already which causes problems if you are saying the US is the same as Switzerland. The Swiss militia is everybody and for protecting the country from invasion/foreign aggression. The US 2nd Amendment isn't. I'm not syaing the 2nd is wrong in any way, but the purposes are not the same and nor is their execution.

.

They are the same in concept. When the 2nd Ammendment was drafted it was meant so that the people can be armed and defend the country if needed. This was as a result of colonial militia help George Washingtons army to defeat the British. It was then decided that the people should at least be armed for this purpose.

Now there have been opposition regarding this. But if you look back to the history of the US and the Ammendments to the constitution, granted the body of the Constitution is patterned after the Magna Carta, but the ammendments are what make our constitution unique. The make up of our government being a democratic republic also solidifies that the ammendments made are for the people.

ETA: The ammendments are there so that the government cannot just pick and choose what rights its people should have. Kinda like what they are doing now.

[Drake]

FYI... it was Jonathan Locke who was the influence of our current government.

[golden arhat]

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49329


People defend themselves and others ALL the time smart asss.....

Look at how many lives were saved becasue this woman had a gun and was armed. If she had not, all those innocent people would have been killed becasue the BAD GUYS will be armed no matter WHAT the law says....Moron!


.

why is your crime rate higher than ours then ? (on average)


btw i kind of agree with u RD just wondering

i'm buying loads of swords soon just in case they get banned


lol

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

why is your crime rate higher than ours then ? (on average)

Reply]
Not enough people carry guns.

[golden arhat]

why is your crime rate higher than ours then ? (on average)

Reply]
Not enough people carry guns.

but here less people carry guns and the rate is lower

the logic is sound

bad guy carries gun ...bad guy aims gun...bystander shoots bad guy before bad guy fires

seems like there are enough guns about in ur country

whats with all the criminals and why are they not all dead thanx to bystanders shooting them ?

[Ben Gash]

I should like to point out that the headline in today's Sun was "Rose West's Guinea Pig Murdered!" :rolleyes:

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

whats with all the criminals and why are they not all dead thanx to bystanders shooting them

Reply]
In most places in the US, we are allowed to own guns, however there are strict laws forbidding us to carry them, or store them in a way that they are easily accessible in a self defence situation. The criminals are not bound by those laws, so carrying a concealed .45 or a 9 that is fully loaded with the safety off is perfectly ok for them.

For us, if that criminal enters our home we must first tell him to wait a minute while we unlock our gun cabinet and retrieve our gun...then we have to tell him to hang on just a bit longer because we have to fumble with the keys or lock combination. Once that is done we must tell him he should go in the kitchen and get himself a beer while he waits for us to get the Ammo, which is locked up in a separate area.

While he is waiting, & relaxing on our couch watching TV, we are loading our gun and getting ready to defend ourselves....most criminals get fed up waiting for all this to happen (They are an impatient lot), and just shoot us so they can go about thier business of robbing our homes and raping our daughters.

Now, if we were allowed to have unrestricted freedoms with our weapons like the Criminals, none of this would be happening. Infact in states where Concealed carry is permitted, you find the lowest crime rates in the nation....because we can shoot back just as fast as they can.

[Mas Judt]

Wasn't the UK where they banned defending yourself in your own home - so home invasions skyrocketed?

The Brits are truly lost and confused.

But don't worry, we are doing a good job of being just as screwy over here 'across the pond.'

[bakxierboxer]

Wasn't the UK where they banned defending yourself in your own home - so home invasions skyrocketed?

It's also easy to "understand" why the "crime rate is lower" once they've made it illegal to defend yourself in your own home.... obviously home invasion is no longer a crime over there. It's the criminals' god/gummint-given right to plunder Brits in their own homes. It seems as though self-defense is no longer legal over there under any circumstances.... PFFFT! add on another large contributor to their "lower crime rate" when assault/rape/whatever becomes "legal".

[Ben Gash]

It is not, and has never been illegal to defend yourself in your own home :rolleyes:

[bakxierboxer]

It is not, and has never been illegal to defend yourself in your own home :rolleyes:

So why do we keep seeing those (Brit) news articles about Brits being arrested for doing so?
Do they somehow have to "prove" that they were "within their rights"?
Or is that "just" your very own version of "journalistic license"?

[Ben Gash]

You are entitled to use reasonable force to prevent the comission of a crime, exactly the same as in the US. If the force you use is deemed to be excessive, you'll be prosecuted, as you would in the US. If you gun down an unarmed 16 year old without warning, you've got problems. If you struggle and the guy goes out a window, you're going to have to answer some questions.
Where do you "keep seeing" these stories? I can only think of a handful of examples, and only one prosecution, in the past decade.

[bakxierboxer]

You are entitled to use reasonable force to prevent the comission of a crime, exactly the same as in the US. If the force you use is deemed to be excessive, you'll be prosecuted, as you would in the US. If you gun down an unarmed 16 year old without warning, you've got problems. If you struggle and the guy goes out a window, you're going to have to answer some questions.
Where do you "keep seeing" these stories? I can only think of a handful of examples, and only one prosecution, in the past decade.

Usually with an attribution to The Sun, a "tabloid" with all that implies.
There are actually some areas in the US that (at least in theory) espouse "a duty to retreat" even within one's own home.
I didn't find it far-fetched to think that Britain would have similar laws.

[xcakid]

Usually with an attribution to The Sun, a "tabloid" with all that implies.
There are actually some areas in the US that (at least in theory) espouse "a duty to retreat" even within one's own home.
I didn't find it far-fetched to think that Britain would have similar laws.


Duty to retreat is typically found in the liberal states like CA, NJ, NJ, MA, DC, MD, HI. That's where they think bad guys are just misunderstood people that are in desperate need of a hug.

Here in the southern states, we have the castle doctorine, where if you mean us harm we will harm you back. The cops and the courts send us a thank you card for saving the tax payers money in trials and housing these duma$$e$

[Mano Mano]

I should like to point out that the headline in today's Sun was "Rose West's Guinea Pig Murdered!" :rolleyes:
Have they looked under the pattio?

[Ben Gash]

I think it was in the drain actually ;)

[Ben Gash]

An explanation for our American friends
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_West

[fopah]

Ask any non-Nazi German who survived WWII... when the government takes the citizens right/ability to defend themselves (in their case their guns), it's not only criminals you have to look out for it's the government itself. Hitler was all for gun control.

[AdrianUK]

Do you think you should have compulsory training to own a firearm ?

I mean how comfortable are you with the idea someone with no training could pull a gun and started shooting at a criminal not directly threatning them when it could be the first time they have ever fired the **** thing ? On the home defense front what level of threat before you shoot them ? Unarmed ? knife ? If the lights are off how would you know ? If the criminal suspects you have a gun would he shoot you first , just to make sure ?

Personally I don't go to bed at night worrying that because I don't have a gun I might get gang raped, I feel sorry for you if thats keeping you up at night !

[sanjuro_ronin]

I remember when I was taking my civilian firearms course, I had to even though I had been in the military, they mentioned that more people get killed by accidents with firearms than by crimes commited with firearms.

Firearms training should be mandatory, period.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

they mentioned that more people get killed by accidents with firearms than by crimes commited with firearms.

Reply]
they are neglecting to mention all the times crimes are thwarted by a gun that is not even fired....which is a lot of them.

[sanjuro_ronin]

they mentioned that more people get killed by accidents with firearms than by crimes commited with firearms.

Reply]
they are neglecting to mention all the times crimes are thwarted by a gun that is not even fired....which is a lot of them.

What the heck does that have to do with what I posted?
:confused:

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Because what you posted makes it look like guns are more detrimental than anything because they cause more accidents...when in truth they prevent more crimes than anything, but it's not logged as such because the gun was not fired.

If you take guns form the good guys who are stopping crimes by just brandishing the weapon, but not having to fire it, then the bad guys committing crimes would go un checked and then be more numerous than the accidents.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Because what you posted makes it look like guns are more detrimental than anything because they cause more accidents...when in truth they prevent more crimes than anything, but it's not logged as such because the gun was not fired.

If you take guns form the good guys who are stopping crimes by just brandishing the weapon, but not having to fire it, then the bad guys committing crimes would go un checked and then be more numerous than the accidents.

Guns don't cause accidents or deaths, people do, re-read the post, it was about gun owners being educated on how to use them and care for them.

[Black Jack II]

In some areas it is required to undertake some basic firearm instruction but I don't believe it should be required on a personal level.

Ryan

[Black Jack II]

It should be a very important facet of any good gun owner though, but not through any one specific channel, or government mandated.