Banning martial arts weapons [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Radhnoti

03-24-2004, 12:42 PM

Just read a commentary that reminded me about this topic:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott27.html

From the article:

First...Victoria has banned laser pointers as well. Sounds like the beginning of a joke, but apparently it's true.
Next..."After July 1, swords will be banned and violators will face penalties that previously have been reserved for laser pointers – six months in jail and a $12,000 fine. ...A licensing process will be set up so that a select few will be granted an exemption and pay a $135 fee, but they will have to lock their weapons in sturdy safes and put in burglar alarms."

Now to the actual problem, I think:

"...for much of the past century Australia had lower crime rates than the US or the UK. Violent crime rates have gone up dramatically in Australia since the 1996 Port Arthur gun control measures. And violent crime rates averaged 20 per cent higher in the six years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did in 1996, 32 per cent higher than the violent crime rates in 1995. The same comparisons for armed robbery rates showed increases of 67 per cent and 74 per cent, respectively; for aggravated assault, 20 per cent and 32 per cent; for rape, 11 per cent and 12 per cent; murder, attempted murder and manslaughter rose by 5 per cent in both cases.

Perhaps six years of crime data is just not enough to evaluate the experience. Yet Australian governments seem to believe that if gun controls don’t work at first, more and stricter regulations (like getting rid of swords) are surely the solution."

One more quote and I'm done.

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
-Ayn Rand

GeneChing

03-24-2004, 01:15 PM

It's always a hassle with illegal weapons. Laws vary, not only from state to state, but also from county to county. That's why we make such a big point of saying "check your local laws" especially with nunchuku. 'Intention' is a big issue. A baseball bat or a broomstick can be considered a weapon if the arresting officer determines intention to cause bodily harm. Of course, a sword is more obvious, since given the nature of the object, you're brandishing it just to be carrying it (can't sweep the flor with a sword really).

A swordmaker friend of mine had sent me a link to this Vitocria article and I was about to post it when the link came up 'not found'. I'm glad Radhnoti found another version.

David Jamieson

03-24-2004, 02:19 PM

Send a letter to Parliment.

Make sure in big bold letters you put:

Assault is a behaviour, Not a device.

get about 300,000 people to do this until they get it.:rolleyes:

pandora's box has been open for many years now, anyone who trys to stop the tide as opposed to take responsibility for the tide is plain old stupid imo. :)

any type pf weapons control is ridiculous. Better to educate people in the responsible use of weapons and to ensure that educational standard is met.

Like a drivers license, you cannot have the weapon until you prove you can use it properly, yes there will be some accidents and yes there will be some willful wrongness done, but hey, that's what being a human is about.

anybody here know what a "meme" is? meditate on it when ya find out. :D

cheers

Judge Pen

03-24-2004, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by GeneChing
It's always a hassle with illegal weapons. Laws vary, not only from state to state, but also from county to county. That's why we make such a big point of saying "check your local laws" especially with nunchuku. 'Intention' is a big issue. A baseball bat or a broomstick can be considered a weapon if the arresting officer determines intention to cause bodily harm. Of course, a sword is more obvious, since given the nature of the object, you're brandishing it just to be carrying it (can't sweep the flor with a sword really).

A swordmaker friend of mine had sent me a link to this Vitocria article and I was about to post it when the link came up 'not found'. I'm glad Radhnoti found another version.

Gene, in Tennessee it's illegal to carry a club or a fixed blade over 4" long with "the intent to go armed." The bat, broomstick or nunchucku would all qualify as illegal if I was carrying it to use as a weapon either offensively or defensively. I suppose a coke bottle would qualify if you had that intent.

joedoe

03-24-2004, 03:31 PM

Victorians are a bunch of whackos anyway, so it is good that they are banning swords :D

Sounds to me like a pretty silly law. What are they going to ban next - kitchen knives?

Toby

03-24-2004, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by Radhnoti
First...Victoria has banned laser pointers as well. Sounds like the beginning of a joke, but apparently it's true.
Good. I ****ing hate laser pointers. Dunno what's happening now in the rest of Oz, but a few years ago they banned laser pointers over (IIRC) 1mW in my area (not Vic). I remember when I was visiting the States once and we went to the movies in Anaheim and some dick shone a laser pointer at the screen through the whole movie. Everyone was shouting out for him to stop it and abusing him, but no-one could work out who it was - packed cinema. It ruined the movie. If I saw someone being a dick with a laser pointer now, I'd chop it in half with my sword. Oh, wait a minute ...

GeneChing

03-25-2004, 01:34 PM

You can have intent with a fork. Think about it. If you were Jackie Chan, you can have intent with a ladder, a bench, a bowl, an antenna, just about anything. Of course, most things have other uses than being a weapon, and that's where these kinds of laws become rather tricky.

To me, what makes it really sad is that even ineffectual weapons like plastic nunchuks (http://store.martialartsmart.net/50-27.html) are rendered illegal in some areas under strict intrepretation of the law. That's just silly. I mean, really, this nunchuk is just a toy. The only way I could harm someone with it is the shove it down their throat... or up their...ok, we're not going there. But where is the cut off? At what point does a wushu sword (http://store.martialartsmart.net/45-66wu26.html) become deadly?

David Jamieson

03-25-2004, 01:38 PM

Mad props to G for making a statement AND doing his marketing responsibilities at the same time!

:D

Toby

03-25-2004, 09:24 PM

Gene, what about BB guns? They're ineffectual weapons. AFAIK, they're now banned (or otherwise severely restricted like firearms are) in Oz. I used to have a really good one, too. People were using them frequently for holdups. E.g. bank tellers couldn't tell if it were a real gun or not so they'd be complying fearing for their life. When the robber was caught, (s)he'd say "But it was only a BB gun." and AFAIK according to the law receive a lesser penalty than if they were carrying a real gun. If they didn't get caught, though, the BB gun would serve the same purpose as a real gun i.e. intimidate the bank/shop employee into handing over money.

SPJ

03-25-2004, 09:27 PM

For people that are not allowed to have practice swords, there are substitutes.

You may use a bamboo stick or even a umbrella to practice for a sword play. For broad sword play, that is tricky. But you just use something heavier then.

When I was young, I had to practice with bamboo sticks or any tree branches with a cloth tied on the end for gripping. I swing away for full hour of fun of practice. Only after several years of practice, did I "deserve" a practice sword with blunt edges. As a matter of fact, my father was afraid that me and my brothers destroy the swords when practicing. We were allowed to use the practice swords only when performing for Lunar Festivals.

All scholars in old China were required to study Wushu and sword play. Even Confusicous has a sword. What a man will be without his sword.

If the constitution said people has the right to bear arm and defend himself. Why ban a practice sword with blunt edges? Maybe "Kill Bill" movie gave me wrong ideas about the sword in general. By the way, the samurai sword is banned for sure.

Toby

03-25-2004, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by SPJ
If the constitution said people has the right to bear arm and defend himself. Why ban a practice sword with blunt edges? Maybe "Kill Bill" movie gave me wrong ideas about the sword in general. By the way, the samurai sword is banned for sure.
Wrong country, SPJ. Constitution you're referring to is U.S. Sword story refers to Australia.

I just read through Radhnoti's lewrockwell link and all I can say is :(.

SPJ

03-25-2004, 11:00 PM

Agreed.

GeneChing

05-07-2010, 09:52 AM

Washington is looking to ban all martial arts weapons at schools and colleges. I wonder if that would cover fencing. Anyone here from WA like to chime in on this one?

New initiatives would privatize liquor sales, outlaw martial arts weapons (http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/spincontrol/2010/may/06/new-initiatives-would-privatize-liquor-sales-outlaw-martial-arts-weapons/)
at 3:12 p.m. on May 6 Comments (2)

OLYMPIA — Another initiative to privatize the state’s liquor business is being proposed. A group calling itself Washington Citizens for Liquor Reform filed a measure to get the state out of the liquor business but to continue to raise money from it through a percentage of the booze sold.

Also looking to give voters a chance to pass a new law is the North American Self-defense Association, which has one proposal to outlaw all martial arts weapons at schools and colleges, and another that would mandate “abduction prevention training” as part of physical education courses at public schools.

Both groups face rather daunting math for getting their proposals on the ballot.

There are less than 60 days left before the July 2 deadline for turning in signatures, and while the state requires about 242,000 valid signatures, most drives shoot for 300,000 to allow for a certain number of invalidated signers.

Even if sponsors can get the language of the initiatives checked and petitions printed by the middle of the month, they’ll have, at best, 45 days for a signature drive.That means they’ll need to collect about 6,700 signatures a day. That’s 277 an hour or 5 a minute.

“It’s a heavy lift,” said Charla Neuman, a spokeswoman for the liquor sales initiative. They’ll have paid signature gatherers because “in that amount of time, there’s no other way to do it.”

One complicating factor on liquor sales is there are two other initiatives aimed at getting the state out of the liquor stor business. The biggest difference, Neuman said, is that this proposal ties the fee for the license to a store’s sales, rather than charging a flat rate for a license. So the more a store sells, the more the state makes.

Jim Curtis of the self-defense association, said they will rely strictly on volunteers for what he concedes is “a big push.” He has contacts with veterans groups, the self-defense and martial arts groups, and hopes to enlist some civic groups. Curtis said he has tried to interest legislators in bills that would do the same thing, but has received “the cold shoulder.”

To see all the initiatives to the people proposed thus for this year, click here to go to the Secretary of State’s website.

SanHeChuan

05-07-2010, 10:51 AM

I'd have no problem with them banning Weapons in dorm rooms, and the like.

I would like to know if there would be some exception for official school groups organized martial arts practice.

But what's the point, had there been any cases of assault with a deadly weapon that would prompt this legislative action or are they just being "proactive"?

USA
Assault by sharp object 1,805 deaths
Assault by blunt object 210 deaths

Student charged in Samurai sword assault (http://www.udreview.com/news/student-charged-in-samurai-sword-assault-1.1429542)

Davenport Suspect In Sword Assault (http://www.kwqc.com/Global/story.asp?S=12071522)

Woman on probation for sword assault (http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/criminal-offenses/12205835-1.html)

Drunken nunchaku attack ends in jail (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/24/2855066.htm)

Attack with nunchakus (http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2010/03/25/136131_tasmania-news.html)

Teacher arrested for bringing nunchucks to school (http://newsandsentinel.com/page/content.detail/id/516846.html?startIndex=26)

sanjuro_ronin

05-07-2010, 11:07 AM

Their lack of understand is quite stunning.
A butcher knife will do far more damage than a sword in the hands of most people.
A lead pipe beats a nunchaku hands down.

Dale Dugas

05-07-2010, 11:21 AM

they should ban all golfing on campus as well as baseball or anything that has a stick involved.

You could take said stick and kill someone with it.

good to see more idiots making idiotic laws.

DRAGONSIHING

05-07-2010, 11:34 AM

That might include ski and hiking poles(sharp points, you know). Axes/hatchets for scouts or other outdoor folks. any piece of a tree more than a few inches long. Chainsaws (as in TX chainsaw massacre,LOL). Cattle prods, electric and non. What else can you think of? Love looking at things where the law covers things with unitended consequences. Are bows and arrows also going to be covered? Certain there are bow hunters there and we know those are very old ma items. :eek:

GeneChing

05-07-2010, 12:21 PM

You should add those to our Bad Day for Samurai Wannabes (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52919) & Bad Day for Wannabe Bruce Lees (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=56216) threads. Some might already be there.

SanHeChuan

05-07-2010, 12:21 PM

Cars.
Belts.
Scissors.
Metal rulers.
Books and book bags.
Sharp pencils and pens.

all potential weapons.

Lee Chiang Po

05-07-2010, 02:18 PM

Weapons are designed to kill or maim. Ball bats, tennis rackets, golf clubs, are not immediately designed for killing or maiming. A sack full of marshmellows could kill you if you got beaten long enough with them I think. Just because you can use something as a weapon does not make it a weapon as such. Martial arts weapons are just as dangerous as any other type of weapon in that they can kill or maim you. People keep them because of that very reason. Why else would one keep and train their use?

Shaolin

05-07-2010, 03:22 PM

While we're at it outlaw the practice of martial arts and religion, punishable by death. "All Hail Chairman Mao."

Personally I believe most laws develop from fear rather than logic.

uki

05-07-2010, 03:33 PM

let's see them ban all the tiger claws... LOL :rolleyes:

taai gihk yahn

05-07-2010, 04:28 PM

A sack full of marshmellows could kill you if you got beaten long enough with them I think.

sig worthy!

IronWeasel

05-07-2010, 04:38 PM

A sack full of marshmellows could kill you if you got beaten long enough with them I think.

Why are you bashing Tyson Durr on this thread?

uki

05-07-2010, 05:53 PM

Why are you bashing Tyson Durr on this thread?because it's the only way to really ensure he'll chime in and make another a$$ of himself. :p

CLFNole

05-08-2010, 12:41 PM

I am sorry but when is the last time you heard of a college student going postal with a kwan do on a college campus? This is beyond stupid, maybe they should lay off the Starbucks a bit.

Too many people are like our country's current administration they can't see the forest through the trees and don't have a clue about what is really important.

Lee Chiang Po

05-08-2010, 08:16 PM

The banning of weapons is not uncommon. It is designed to make the populations subservient. You can fight back with weapons. Although today you need something that has rapid fire capabilities, there was a time when people turned simple tools into weapons. The nunchuka is just a very shortened version of the thrashing sticks used to seperate grains from chafe. You can beat the stinkies out of someone with them. When I was a young person I could not carry a weapon as such, mostly because I was constantly being searched for them. No blades, brass knuckles, slap or black jacks. I had to resort to carrying half dollar coins in both front pockets. A half dollar coin is not as common today, but at one time they were, and I kept 4 or 5 in each pocket. I could knock your eye out with one at close range. Right size and weight. A silver dollar would likely be leathal if you hit someone in the head with it. With the half dollar you could ease up behind someone and slam him in the back of the head with one and he will drop like a lead ball.

SPJ

05-08-2010, 08:21 PM

1. luckily, all the schools that I went to

they did not care what practice weapons that I had

I have staves, spears, broadswords, straight swords

however, they are with dull edges. they are practice ones.

2. My kitchen wares and utensils are much sharper

are they going to ban knives and forks in the kitchen?

3. how about clothes hangers?

you may stretch the wires of clothes hangers, they are mighty strong to penetrate--

me brothers and I used to do fencing and sword play with an open wire of clothes hangers. all the moves are the same, except they are with lighter weights.

4. how about glass or plastic wares?

we may break them and make them a weapon, too?

5. how about towels and clothes, you may use it to strangle someone---

6. anything that is hard enough, sharp enough may all be made to be weapon

even rocks with sharp edges

are they going to ban rocks and bricks in the garden?

7. tree branches may be sharpened, too

are they going to ban trees in the school?

8 you may drown someone in the sink and toilet

are they going to ban the sink and the toilet?

9. you may force someone to hit his head on the wall.

are they going to ban the walls on the building?

again anything hard enough or sharp enough may all damage the fragile human body

ban them all I think?

:D

Taryn P.

05-09-2010, 06:44 AM

There have been several high-profile shootings and mass shootings here in the Seattle area in the last couple years. The sheep are scared and outraged, and the politicians are trying to find ways to make it look like they're trying to protect people.

They recently banned concealed carry in parks and community centers... bought all
the shiny new signs with our tax money.... then it got tossed out on appeal and they had to go around and rip all the shiny new signs down a couple weeks later. It's nice to know that my tax dollars are being put to good use. :mad:

uki

05-09-2010, 03:18 PM

There have been several high-profile shootings and mass shootings here in the Seattle area in the last couple years. The sheep are scared and outraged, and the politicians are trying to find ways to make it look like they're trying to protect people. high profile... LOL, but yes, the sheep are scared...

They recently banned concealed carry in parks and community centers... bought all
the shiny new signs with our tax money.... then it got tossed out on appeal and they had to go around and rip all the shiny new signs down a couple weeks later. It's nice to know that my tax dollars are being put to good use.i love stuff like this... if only everyone could point all these incidents out to them and really make them feel like dumba$$es... this country is a ****ing joke and the politicians are a bunch of lame clowns. :)

GeneChing

06-04-2010, 09:39 AM

Who practices with blow darts? Ninjas? And since when have Freddy Kruger gloves been martial arts weapons? (okay we did run a pic a someone with such gloves once in the mag, but that was tongue-in-cheek :o)

Chuck Rage is a great name for a martial arts villain.

Bill on martial arts weapons is OK'd (http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20100604-NEWS-6040371)
Still needs to be signed into law by governor
Patrick Cronin
By Patrick Cronin
pcronin@seacoastonline.com
June 04, 2010 2:00 AM

HAMPTON — A volunteer who was shot in the back in April with a blow dart from a passing car at Hampton Beach said he's pleased a bill was approved that will enable the town to make it harder to find such weapons in local stores.

"Hopefully what this will do is get this stuff off of the sidewalks of Hampton Beach and in the back of the stores and away from kids," said 70-year-old John Gebhart.

He was one of the people who spoke in support of a bill sponsored by state Rep. Nancy Stiles, R-Hampton. Blow darts such as the one that struck him while he was outside planting are being sold in a store-front window at the beach for $8.

Stiles said her bill, which was approved in the House and Senate on Wednesday, allows cities and towns to regulate the retail display and accessibility of martial arts objects.

"We were not looking to hurt business," Stiles said. "We were just looking to help those communities who want to make it less accessible."

She said it will be up to towns to decide what type of restrictions they want to put in place. Any ordinance developed by selectmen would still need to be voted on by the town.

Last year, Hampton officials looked into seeing if they could pass an ordinance to make it harder to purchase such items at the beach, but found state law didn't give them authority to enact one.

At the time, officials were concerned about the number of shops selling these items and the potential harm that could be inflicted by them.

Stiles was asked to sponsor the bill by Hampton Beach Village Precinct Commissioner Chuck Rage, who has long been critical of the sale of martial arts equipment at the beach.

"I'm very excited about this," Rage said. "Nancy Stiles is amazing. I brought this concern to her and she just ran with it."

Rage said there are about six stores on the beach that sell such items.

"I don't want it displayed on the sidewalk," Rage said. "This is a family beach. We don't need to see Freddy Krueger hand gloves with real finger tip knives gloves on display."

Rage said he hopes selectmen will work on an ordinance to be voted on at the 2011 Town Meeting.

"I know the selectmen will step up to the plate and make it happen," he said.

Items under the bill that can be regulated include throwing stars, throwing darts, nunchaku, blow guns or any other objects designed for use in the martial arts that are capable of being used as lethal or dangerous weapons.

The bill still needs to be signed by the governor to become law.

KC Elbows

06-04-2010, 09:46 AM

Wasn't Chuck Rage the one where Rutger Hauer was this blind guy fighting evil cattle barons?

sanjuro_ronin

06-04-2010, 09:54 AM

Wasn't Chuck Rage the one where Rutger Hauer was this blind guy fighting evil cattle barons?

Blind Fury
http://www.looping.se/laserfilmer/Blind_Fury.jpg

sanjuro_ronin

06-04-2010, 09:55 AM

Ban all the MA weapons you want, I can do more damage with a hammer and screwdriver.

Lucas

06-04-2010, 10:13 AM

ya seriously, take away all my martial arts weapons and i still have guns, machetes, aluminum baseballbats, saws, hammers, ropes, knives, etc...

uki

06-04-2010, 03:21 PM

The banning of weapons is not uncommon. It is designed to make the populations subservient. You can fight back with weapons.awesome post.

this is all the more reason to keep the mind open and the body toned with "unarmed" practice... when you see the banning and criminalization of self defense, you will know that it is the time to begin to understand the concepts of it. :)

Lokhopkuen

06-04-2010, 04:22 PM

awesome post.

this is all the more reason to keep the mind open and the body toned with "unarmed" practice... when you see the banning and criminalization of self defense, you will know that it is the time to begin to understand the concepts of it. :)

Yes ban them, we need MORE GUNS!!!:D

uki

06-04-2010, 05:36 PM

Yes ban them, we need MORE GUNS!!!one's enough for me. :p

SPJ

06-04-2010, 05:56 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unF1QIdwdfs

can we also ban nuclear weapon, A bomb, incindiary bomb, cluster bomb--?

can we ban war?

probably not.

weapon or no weapon

if there is a conflict between 2 people, there will be fight--

----

:confused:

Lokhopkuen

06-04-2010, 08:13 PM

one's enough for me. :p

Need a good side arm, a handy scatter gun and a high capacity rapid fire device n I'm gooda go.

Jimbo

06-04-2010, 11:24 PM

You can make a dangerous weapon of almost anything. For example, another improvised weapon used by some is to tie a combination lock to a bandana. Afterwards, the bandana can be untied and detached, as the component parts are perfectly legal to carry.

True, MA weapons are (were) designed to kill or maim and non-weapon items are not, but how many are stabbed and killed with butcher knives, paring knives, screwdrivers, awls, etc. They weren't purpose-designed for that, but that's what's mostly used. All of the practice swords I own are dull, and though you could injure someone by striking or hacking someone with them, it wouldn't be practical. A machete would be far more effective, sharper, cheaper, and more durable than virtually any CMA practice swords. And I've never heard of someone stabbed to death in modern times with a CMA spear, Kwan do, chain whip, etc.

Not sure if it's true or not, but I heard that in Britain, the gov't tried to pass a law to make all kitchen knives without sharp tips "so they couldn't be used to stab." It could be B.S., but I wouldn't be surprised by any lame idea for a law to protect the populace from itself.

Back in the '80s, a former nationally-ranked karate point fighter from Mass., Larry Kelley, who also worked for the postal service, lobbied, successfully, to ban many types of MA weapons being sent through the mail. He was worried about kids buying "ninja stars." I'm sure he meant well, but this resulted in him becoming persona non grata in the MA magazines.

ManilaCrane

06-04-2010, 11:45 PM

lol ban martial arts weapons? hah! if i want a rope dart, imma just tie me like 6 handkerchiefs together and at the end of it is like a monkey wrench. Voila, a vagabond's rope dart lol.

uki

06-05-2010, 01:20 AM

Need a good side arm, a handy scatter gun and a high capacity rapid fire device n I'm gooda go.i must say that i do love my handy scatter gun... i like anything that is semi-automatic and shoots 000 buck shot. :D

apparently the only problem with this bill is the fact that a martial artist can use ANYTHING as a weapon - ban martial arts if they want to ban martial arts weapons, but that would stir up a ****storm now wouldn't it... LOL

seems everyone has a rope dart/range weapon on the improv - i simply loop my sash or rope thru my iron ring... wala!!! instant headache maker!!! i also have a huge conch shell that is big enough to put your hand into for one hell of a boxing glove. ;)

GeneChing

01-07-2011, 10:42 AM

Because nothing says 'beach fun' like a beach towel, a beach blanket and a pocket full of shuriken (http://www.martialartsmart.com/16-12pak.html)! :D

Board backs beach weapons ban article
Legality of zoning amendment has been questioned by some (http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20110107-NEWS-101070353)
By Patrick Cronin
pcronin@seacoastonline.com
January 07, 2011 2:00 AM

HAMPTON — The town's Planning Board is supporting a petition warrant article that would essentially prevent any new stores from selling martial arts weapons at the beach by prohibiting the sale to 2,000 feet from any school, public park, recreation facility or beach.

The board voted, 4 -1, to recommend the petition zoning amendment to voters at the March 8 election after a public hearing Wednesday despite questions regarding whether the article was legally enforceable.

Since the article was petitioned by John Gebhart and 25 registered voters, the board was unable to make any amendments to the article and it will appear on the ballot as written.

Gebhart said he put forth the article because the Planning Board decided to do nothing despite requests made by Hampton Beach Village Precinct commissioners to tackle the issue.

"If they are going to drag their feet, the only way to do it is ourselves," Gebhart said.

Hampton Beach Village Precinct Commissioner June White said the sale of martial arts weapons have been a problem at the beach for several years and it's not in line with the image they want to present, which is Hampton Beach is a family beach.

"This was put forward by John Gebhart who was actually shot by one of these weapons and we don't want this to happen to anyone else," White said.

Gebhart was shot by a blow dart from a passing car in April at Hampton Beach while he was planting flowers.

White said there are six businesses at the beach that sell martial arts weapons.

"Those businesses will still be able to sell the items because they will be grandfathered," White said. "We just don't want any more."

Resident Art Moody questioned the legality of the article because there is no definition of what constitutes martial arts weapons.

"Is there any definition of mixed martial arts weapons," Moody asked. "What about a three-inch jack knife?"

Planning Board member Fran McMahon said they cannot change the article because it's a petition zoning amendment.

Town Planner Jamie Steffen said he couldn't give a legal opinion whether the article would be enforceable or how it would be included in the zoning ordinance.

Selectmen were asked to sponsor a similar article but refused for fear that it may generate a Second Amendment challenge.

Planning Board member Tracy Emerick noted that even if the article passed it might be deemed illegal. He noted that while voters approved a growth ordinance in 2006, it was later deemed illegal by a Rockingham Superior Court judge.

Board member Keith Lessard expressed frustration that the article might not be legally binding.

"I think it's a disservice to the folks who want to get some of these blow dart guns and other items that are deadly weapons off the beach," Lessard said.

"They are trying to do the right thing," said Lessard. "They asked us and selectmen and nobody did anything."

Lessard made a motion to recommend the article even with the legal questions, which the majority of the board supported.

Emerick was the only board member against it.

"This is a land use board," Emerick said. "We don't belong in the product businesses. Next time we are going have somebody else come forward with a petition warrant article regarding something they don't like."

David Jamieson

01-07-2011, 10:46 AM

Knee jerk reactionary idiocracy at work.

No further comment required really is there?

:)

Lucas

01-07-2011, 04:06 PM

"Is there any definition of mixed martial arts weapons," Moody asked"

hahahahahahahahhahahahah

Rolling Fists

01-07-2011, 04:20 PM

Gebhart was shot by a blow dart from a passing car in April at Hampton Beach while he was planting flowers.

The man is disgruntled since he's probably the first victim of being *****ed by a drive by blowing.

Syn7

01-07-2011, 07:16 PM

kind of ironic that its the North American Self-defense Association that is getting on about this... you would think it would be some daisy group of sorts...

i wonder if they mean to ban all weapons, or just ones related to asian martial arts... what about fencing? and what about this self defence course, are they gonna teach a 13 year old girl how to disarm a grown man with a baseball bat? if you are that concerned buy the girl a taser and teach her how to use it... when shes a bit older she can move on to the roscoe...

Syn7

01-07-2011, 08:08 PM

maaan, we used to make dart guns in class with a ruler, a bic pen, a pencil, scotch tape, a heavy elastic band and a sh!tload of q-tips and sewing pins, the ones with the plastic ball on the one end, for ammo... you could bury those things in the walls...

and we were like 7... if people want weapons they'll have weapons... if they cant buy them, they'll make them... and i cant think of an easier weapon to make than a blow gun...

SteveLau

01-08-2011, 11:49 PM

Banning MA weapons in formal schools is too strict. Let people keep such weapons if they have good reason, such as when are members of MA interest club in the college.

Regards,

KC
Hong Kong

GeneChing

12-17-2013, 09:36 AM

This relates to our most recent ezine article: WHEN NUNCHUK SKILLS GET YOU BUSTED: NUNCHAKU AND THE LAW (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1135) by Greg Lynch Jr.

Enforceable ban on martial arts weapons sales sought (http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20131213-NEWS-312130369)
Current ordinance poses potential legal challenges

A zoning amendment will be offered by the Planning Board at the next Town Meeting to ensure a ban on the sale of martial arts weapons throughout most of town works.

By Nick B. Reid
nreid@seacoastonline.com
December 13, 2013 2:00 AM
HAMPTON — The Planning Board will offer a zoning amendment on next year's warrant to ensure a ban on the sale of martial arts weapons throughout most of town works.

The proposed zoning ordinance amendment seeks to correct a wording mistake "by deleting the references to mixed martial arts (weapons), as such do not exist," said Planning Board member Brendan McNamara.

By definition, mixed martial arts refers to a contact sport in which combatants strike, kick and grapple using only their bodies. So, when section 3.46 in the town's zoning ordinance, adopted in 2011, refers to "restrictions on the sale of deadly MMA (mixed martial arts) weapons," it creates a problem. Officials have questioned whether the wording as is could stand up to a challenge in court.

Even if the wording were changed, any business currently selling throwing stars, throwing darts, nunchaku, blowguns or other objects designed for use in martial arts that are "capable of use as lethal or dangerous" would be unaffected. But new businesses would be prohibited from selling those goods within 2,000 feet of public, private or parochial schools; parks; recreation or sports facilities; or public beaches.

McNamara said he liked the wording but felt it important to note, "If you're on Ocean Boulevard and probably even on Ashworth Avenue, you're within 2,000 feet from a park, so you will not be selling that stuff."

Planning Board member Fran McMahon took that thought one step further. He said if you put a 2,000-foot radius around each of those entities in town, "I'd say there's nowhere" where they'd be able to be sold legally.

While the Planning Board will hold public hearings next Wednesday on all its other proposed warrant articles — including ones relating to height and setbacks in the Business Seasonal district and new zoning in the town center — the public hearing on the martial arts zoning change will be held on Jan. 15.

GeneChing

02-09-2015, 12:01 PM

State may legalize sales of ninja stars, daggers (http://www.henricocitizen.com/news/article/state_may_legalize_sales_of_ninja_stars_daggers020 8#.VNkCQi4bO_s)
By Cameron Vigliano, Capital News Service
02/08/15

Worried collectors of ninja stars and ballistic knifes in Virginia could soon feel relieved that their hobby won’t land them in trouble. A bill to legalize the sale of those weapons and others like it won a committee’s endorsement Wednesday, making way for the legislation to be heard on the Senate floor.

Under current law, it’s allowed to possess blackjacks, brass knuckles, ninja stars, switchblades, bowie knives, stilettos, ballistic knives and daggers. But selling those items is illegal and punishable as a class 4 misdemeanor.

“I haven’t heard of any rash of blackjack crime, or ninja throwing star, or even dart crime,” said Sen. Thomas Garrett, R-Hadensville, the chief sponsor of SB 1130. “I think it’s something collectors should be allowed to sell.”

Proponents say a law like this would clear the hazy area between legal possession of weapons like blackjacks and possession with intent to sell or barter. Right now, people who are suspected of intending to sell these weapons must prove they are simply a collector and not a seller.

The Senate Courts of Justice Committee held a hearing on Garrett’s bill Wednesday. The panel approved SB 1130 on a 9-4 vote split along party lines. Republicans favored the bill; Democrats opposed it.

It’s important to note that the legislation would not change Virginia’s concealment law regarding these types of weapons. It is illegal to carry these knives and other weapons in a concealed manner. The state law says:

“If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation … any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, blackjack, throwing star or oriental dart; or any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.”

It is legal in Virginia to carry a concealed handgun if you have a permit. A razor too? srsly? :rolleyes:

Oriental Dart might make a good dubstep DJ name for me someday. ;)

bawang

02-10-2015, 03:20 PM

whatever happened to that crazy hill billy?

GeneChing

02-19-2015, 12:18 PM

Senator wants to ban machete possession in NY (http://m.nydailynews.com/news/politics/state-sen-tony-avella-ban-machetes-new-york-article-1.2120874)
Lisa L. Colangelo, Reuven Blau Today, 02:30 AM

http://m.nydailynews.com/imageprocessor?image=http%3A%2F%2Fassets.nydailyne ws.com%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.2120873.1424317116%21%2Fi mg%2FhttpImage%2Fbill-ban-weapons.jpg&width=640
Anthony DelMundo/New York Daily News

Sen. Tony Avella of Queens is proposing to ban people from possessing machetes in New York.

The sale of machetes should be outlawed after several recent attacks, a Queens pol said Wednesday.

State Sen. Tony Avella plans to introduce a bill to ban the possession of the scary blades in New York.

“The fact that anyone can easily purchase this potentially lethal tool is just crazy,” he said.

Smaller knives such as switchblades and gravity knives are already banned and listed as deadly weapons under state law, but machetes are considered the same as butcher knives.

New Yorkers carrying those knives can be ticketed for a blade longer than 4 inches, an administrative code violation. They face up to 15 days in jail and a $300 fine.

If Avella's bill is approved, possessing a machete could lead to a year in jail.

Under Avella’s proposed legislation, the mere possession of a machete could lead to a year behind bars.

In movies like “Machete,” starring Danny Trejo, it’s the vigilante hero carrying the macho weapons. Not so in real life, however, and Avella’s push comes in response to an attack last summer on Long Island in which, according to authorities, a man hacked a teenager to death.

On his way to being arraigned, the suspect, David Sadler, 45, told reporters he’d bought the weapon on Craigslist.

Police say Sadler slashed Terrance Grier, 17, in the neck with the massive blade during an argument down the block from Sadler’s Hempstead home in July.

http://m.nydailynews.com/imageprocessor?image=http%3a%2f%2fassets.nydailyne ws.com%2fpolopoly_fs%2f1.2120871.1424317113!%2fimg %2fhttpImage%2fimage.jpg_gen%2fderivatives%2****ic le_970%2fmachete19n-3-web.jpg&width=320
Christie M Farriella/for New York Daily News
Greta Price holds a photo of her 17-year-old son Terrence Grier, who was murdered with a machete in July.

“I didn’t even know it was possible to buy a machete online,” Terrance’s mother, Greta Price, told the Daily News. “I had no idea that it wasn’t considered a deadly weapon. It should be.”

Price said she visits her son’s grave two to three times each week, adding, “He’d still be alive today if it wasn’t for a machete.”

Terrance wasn’t New York’s only recent machete victim. In October, an unidentified man was slashed in the neck, back, shoulder and arms during an argument in a Bronx restaurant. After the attack, police released a video showing the suspect pulling the machete from an umbrella.

The legislation is the second in a series of law enforcement measures recently proposed by Avella.

The lawmaker also wants to create a new criminal charge for suspects who vandalize police vehicles. That bill is in response to damage done to patrol cars in Brooklyn after a Staten Island grand jury voted not to indict a police officer in the July 17 chokehold death of Eric Garner.

rblau@nydailynews.com
I'd be curious to see the legal definition of machete.

Subitai

02-19-2015, 01:13 PM

I'd be curious to see the legal definition of machete.

Ok so you left that wide open...so I couldn't resist. :)

9327

curenado

02-19-2015, 02:08 PM

I don't think outlawing primitive tools is the answer, but that's a place there's no answer for. Guess hammers and screwdrivers will be next.

GeneChing

02-19-2015, 02:29 PM

Ok so you left that wide open...so I couldn't resist. :)

9327
Ha...good one brudda. Machete (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?64313-Machete-Kills) rules! You know, when I interviewed Robert Rodriguez (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1207), I did ask him about Machete in Space, but he declined to answer.

I don't think outlawing primitive tools is the answer, but that's a place there's no answer for. Guess hammers and screwdrivers will be next.
I wouldn't call the screwdriver a primitive tool. It's Middle Ages tool. Society needed to develop some level of manufacturing beyond the primitive age to have screws. But I feel what you're trying to say. :p

Jimbo

02-19-2015, 02:49 PM

I don't think outlawing primitive tools is the answer, but that's a place there's no answer for. Guess hammers and screwdrivers will be next.

A LOT more Americans are killed by automobiles in one day than are killed by machetes in a year. But unfortunately, it's easier for senators and others to blame inanimate objects than it is to address the real, underlying issues.

Brat

03-10-2015, 09:09 AM

Stupid, stupid, stupid! A good ol' Black and Decker claw hammer is the most effective martial arts weapon of all.

GeneChing

01-20-2016, 03:24 PM

A House committee has delayed action on a bill that would legalize nunchucks (http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/b55a6983cead41ca8998f03104f6e1f6/AZ--Legalizing-Nunchaku)

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: 1/20/16 12:49 pm EST - Updated: 1/20/16 12:49 pm EST

PHOENIX — A House committee has delayed action on a bill that would legalize nunchucks.

Republican Rep. Mark Finchem of Oro Valley is sponsoring House Bill 2042 to legalize the weapon popularized by martial arts expert Bruce Lee.

The House Judiciary Committee postponed the measure at Finchem's request Wednesday morning.

Former Republican Sen. Kelli Ward of Lake Havasu City attempted to legalize nunchucks last session. Her amendment to a relatively minor bill that didn't pass also included the legalization of silencers and sawed-off shotguns.

Finchem's measure defines "nunchakus" as an instrument that consists of two or more sticks, clubs, bars, or rods connected by ropes, cords, wires, or chains to create a self-defense weapon.

Silencers and sawed-off shotguns? Clearly these politicians overestimate the lethal potential of nunchuks (http://www.martialartsmart.com/weapons-nunchakus.html). :rolleyes:

SPJ

02-03-2016, 05:27 PM

Actually high voltage tasers are more dangerous.

Any sharps are banned.

But practice weapons with dull and soft edges may not be necessary to be banned.

:)

GeneChing

04-22-2021, 09:08 AM

...soon to be a free for all in North Dakota?

“Dangerous weapons” bill would exclude nunchaku, swords from state regulation in some settings (https://www.kxnet.com/news/local-news/dangerous-weapons-bill-would-exclude-nunchaku-swords-from-state-regulation-in-some-settings/)
LOCAL NEWS
by: Maddie Biertempfel

Posted: Mar 31, 2021 / 05:37 PM CDT / Updated: Mar 31, 2021 / 05:37 PM CDT

Two words in a proposed bill are taking heat from state law enforcement leaders, who say they put police in greater danger on the job. The words “dangerous weapons” were added to a bill alongside firearms to describe what the government cannot restrict during an emergency — but what exactly are they?

State law says dangerous weapons include throwing stars, nunchaku, swords, daggers, bludgeons and several other weapons. They would be added to the list of what the state could not regulate, along with guns, when not at a public gathering, which is defined as a sporting event, school, church or public building.

Fargo’s police chief testified that the bill puts police at risk during other gatherings, like protests or marches, where any number of weapons could be legally carried.

“Some individuals are not committed to peaceful protest, but to riotous criminal behavior with utter disregard for the safety of others. They often use peaceful protest as camouflage for their true intentions. There is no need to further arm these individuals by allowing them to carry a variety of dangerous weapons,” Fargo Chief of Police David Zibolski said.

The bill initially passed the House 83-11, and the Senate Judiciary Committee has not yet voted on it.

threads
http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?57188-Banning-martial-arts-weapons
Nunchaku-legalized! (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?15892-Nunchaku-legalized!)

YinOrYan

04-22-2021, 10:03 AM

Its not only bad for your business but also for the Ojibwe and Chippewa Indians (who have spear forms too).

GeneChing

10-19-2021, 09:20 AM

Opinion: 308 — The 1974 House Bill That Saved Maryland From Everybody Kung Fu Fighting (https://www.marylandmatters.org/2021/10/19/opinion-308-the-1974-house-bill-that-saved-maryland-from-everybody-kung-fu-fighting/)
By Guest Commentary -October 19, 2021
https://www.marylandmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/nunchaku-800px-Nunchaku-696x357.jpg
Wikipedia Commons photo.
By Roberto E. Alejandro

The writer has a Ph.D. in religion and theology and practices law in Maryland, but this is what happens when he also has free time.

In 1974, the Maryland General Assembly passed House Bill 308, which banned the concealed or open carrying of nunchakus (colloquially known as “nunchucks”). House Bill 308 initiated Maryland’s successful war against martial arts-based violence and remains an important lesson in the ways policy can effectively curb threats to public safety.

Just the year prior, in 1973, Warner Bros. had irresponsibly released the film “Enter the Dragon,” which introduced dangerous new ideas into the American criminal landscape. The movie stars Bruce Lee and finds him entering a secretive martial arts tournament in order to investigate the tournament’s organizer for drug ties.

With its generally too real depictions of martial arts combat, “Enter the Dragon” taught American audiences dangerous new combat and weapons techniques that would soon debut on urban battlegrounds across the country. Of particular concern, the film taught audiences across the country how nunchakus could be used safely and effectively in the commission of violence.

By 1974, everybody was kung fu fighting. See Carl Douglas’ “Kung Fu Fighting” (1974). Mastery had come quickly, with lightning-fast kicks and expert timing being used by criminals to frighten a defenseless citizenry. See id. No town was spared. Maryland was in crisis.

But as the 1974 legislative session of the Maryland General Assembly drew near, Maryland lawmakers’ hands were to some extent tied. Maryland law treated the question of expertly timed kicks as assaults. See Apple v. State, 190 Md. 661 at 664-65. The Maryland Constitution’s Declaration of Rights guarantees to citizens the English Common Law of 1776, and the common law treated assaults as misdemeanors. See Md. Const. Decl. of Rights at Art. 5; and also Hobbs v. Warden, Md. Penitentiary, 223 Md. 651 at 653 (1960).

As Maryland’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, long ago explained, “The common law declares that no arrest can lawfully be made for any misdemeanor [including assault] unless it is committed in the presence of the arresting officer or until a warrant has been issued by a magistrate.” See Brown v. State, 207 Md. 282 at 285–86 (1955). This meant that law enforcement officers responding to reports of martial arts-based violence could not make arrests in most instances, no matter how many witness accounts or corroborating signs of nunchaku use.

The Maryland Declaration of Rights was having the unintended consequences of insulating martial arts-wielding assailants from prosecution. But with everybody kung fu fighting, inaction simply was not an option. Enter House Bill 308, which represents the first appearance of the term “nunchaku” in Maryland law.

The nunchaku was clearly at the forefront of legislators’ concerns since, according to the Session Laws of 1974, available from the Archives of Maryland Online, House Bill 308 was introduced, “For the purpose of Baking it unlawful to wear or carry, concealed or openly, a nunchaku, defining the term, providing penalties, and relettering subsections.” Emphasis in the original. Usually, legislatures are content to restrict themselves to simply making laws. When they venture to bake a law, they really mean business.

With the bake underway, the Maryland General Assembly carefully defined the object of its concern, legislating that:

THE TERM “NUNCHAKU” MEANS ANY DEVICE OR PRODUCT CONSISTING OF TWO 12 TO 15 INCH LONG HARD OAK STICKS JOINED BY A CHAIN OR LEATHER STRAP, USED AS A DEFENSIVE WEAPON IN THE ORIENTAL MARTIAL ARTS AND CAPABLE OF INFLICTING DEATH WHEN PROPERLY USED, OR ANY SIMILAR OR SIMULATED DEVICE OF WHATEVER MATERIAL CONSTRUCTED.

House Bill 308 (1974) (emphasis in original). House Bill 308 then added nunchakus to the list of traditional, old-timey gangster movie weapons that the Maryland General Assembly had already seen fit to protect the public from:

Every person who shall wear or carry any dirk knife, bowie knife, switchblade knife, sandclub, metal knuckles, razor, NUNCHAKU or any other dangerous or deadly weapon of any kind, whatsoever (penknives without switchblade and handguns, excepted) concealed upon or about his person, and every person who shall wear or carry any such weapon openly with the intent or purpose of injuring any person in any unlawful manner, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Id. (emphasis in original). Law enforcement finally had the public safety tool it needed to effectively end the crush of “Enter the Dragon”-inspired street violence oppressing Maryland; and the text of the law, clearly demonstrates the General Assembly’s preoccupation with the detrimental effects of Bruce Lee-based media.

While there remains some debate among scholars, “oriental martial arts” is generally considered a legislative term of art for “that Bruce Lee movie that came out last year.” House Bill 308’s description of a nunchaku is clearly a legislative aide’s best guess as to what Bruce Lee is holding in the scene from “Enter the Dragon” where he aces everyone with a nunchaku (“it was about a foot long, maybe oak …”). Lastly, the General Assembly’s specific focus on the potential harm nunchakus can cause “when properly used” aptly demonstrates that, but for Bruce Lee’s expert demonstration of how a weapon that is clearly most dangerous to the user can be used to harm others, House Bill 308 would never have been necessary.

House Bill 308’s effect on martial arts street violence was not immediate, however. The threat of martial arts-based violence continued, and the law would eventually be updated.

In 1985, the same year that would see the release of the film “American Ninja,” House Bill 89 added the star knife (colloquially known as a “ninja star”) to the list of banned weapons Marylanders could no longer carry.

House Bill 89 defined a star knife as, “A DEVICE USED AS A THROWING WEAPON, CONSISTING OF SEVERAL SHARP OR POINTED BLADES ARRAYED AS RADIALLY DISPOSED ARMS ABOUT A CENTRAL DISK.” Emphasis in original. It is highly likely that the General Assembly’s quick action on the threat of ninja weapons such as star knives in 1985, which it managed to pass and implement prior to the release of American Ninja in August of that year, prevented a martial arts arms race that would have seen Maryland’s streets flooded with nunchakus, throwing stars, psais, katana swords, bo staffs and anything else the Ninja Turtles use to fight the Foot Clan.

Since 1985, Maryland has seen a stark reduction in martial arts-based violence.

Today, it is exceedingly rare for a Maryland citizen to find themselves staring down the barrel of a hard oak stick or on the receiving end of a star knife. Today’s crime and court reports document a dearth of ninja activity or other martial arts-based street violence.

While some advocates argue that House Bill 308 and its progeny have had a disproportionate effect on Maryland’s ninja population, anecdotal evidence suggests strongly that Maryland residents remain among the most satisfied Americans with the level of ninja and other martial arts-based violence in their communities, with the issue rarely arising in political campaigns or legislative debates.

As such, House Bill 308 serves as an important reminder that law can yet be marshaled to improve the lives of regular folk.

threads
Banning-martial-arts-weapons (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?57188-Banning-martial-arts-weapons)
Nunchaku-legalized! (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?15892-Nunchaku-legalized!)

GeneChing

02-08-2023, 10:05 AM

Throwing stars are now legal in Indiana, delighting mall ninjas everywhere
DAVID PESCOVITZ 4:06 PM MON FEB 6, 2023
https://i0.wp.com/boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/shutterstock_1834210084-scaled.jpg?fit=1&resize=620%2C4000&ssl=1
image: Zysko Sergii/Shutterstock
Axe throwing bars has become quite popular! After all, what's not love about crowds of people throwing heavy sharp objects while drinking alcohol? For those who prefer a more "exotic" variation on the theme, apparently some of the axe throwing pubs are also offering throwing stars! An elegant weapon for a more civilized age, Japanese throwing stars, aka shuriken, are actually illegal in many part of the US, including California, New York, and, for the moment, Indiana. However, if the Hoosier State's Senate Bill 77 passes, throwing stars will become legal for recreational use there.

Senate Bill 77 "actually came from a constituent who owns a putt-putt golf course called Ninja Golf," says [State Sen. Linda] Rogers. "Nearly everyone that I spoke with said, 'Hey, look, if we can throw axes, we can certainly throw throwing stars.'" […]

The bill already passed the Indiana Senate by a 48 to 1 margin. Next it goes to the State House.

From WGN9:

"It's a double-edged sword," said Richard Deschain, co-owner of Ragnarok Axe Throwing LLC in Indianapolis. He said throwing star blades can get bent and hooked over, increasing someone's odds of getting cut.

"I would say the easiest way for that to have any kind of solution is to require a layered Kevlar glove to be worn when they're throwing any other object like a throwing star," he said.

Banning-martial-arts-weapons (https://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?57188-Banning-martial-arts-weapons)
Throwing-Stars (https://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?489-Throwing-Stars)

GeneChing

02-20-2023, 11:31 AM

Through a Chinese American Lens (https://demospectator.tumblr.com/post/689538041903300608/a-sample-of-weaponry-seized-in-new-york-chinatown)
https://64.media.tumblr.com/c6eec0a6ac25583e3d660685e00c85b8/a13bb731e8b0f63e-b8/s500x750/67143d25f84efeba64473a639d23c5b8621708ef.jpg
A sample of weaponry seized in New York Chinatown during the conflict between Hip Sing and On Leong Tongs, c. 1922. Photographer unknown (from the collection of the NYPD).
Disarming Chinese America: The Exclusionary Politics of Gun Control

“The gun is mythic in the American imagination… . The gun in America is unique because it has defined, and will continue to define, membership and belonging in the polity.” – Prof. Pratheepan Gulaesekaram
The widespread use of guns in Chinese Americans communities has been lost to historical memory, and almost a half-century has passed since San Francisco Chinatown’s last mass shooting. However, in the wake of a flood of news stories about the victimization by Chinese in California and elsewhere in the US – whether by hate or criminal predators – Chinese Americans have begun asking why relatively few in their communities bear arms for the protection of persons and property. Although the acquisition of personal firearms by Asian Americans has increased, particularly in this decade of Asian hate and criminal victimization, popular consciousness generally does not associate Chinese American communities with heavy firearms usage.
Ironically, the lack of firearms in California’s Chinese communities can be traced to century-old legislation aimed at directly suppressing the Chinese community’s ownership of guns and, in a larger sense, the deepening the notion of exclusion and, specifically, Chinese exclusion, from the right to bear firearms in America.
California’s Gun Law of 1923 contained two major provisions: (1) the requirement of a permit to carry a concealed handgun anywhere in California (and that statute is the direct ancestor of California’s current concealed weapon permit law); and (2) the prohibition of non-citizens from possessing concealable firearms. The handgun ban by non-citizens was upheld by the California Supreme Court in the case In re Ramirez (1924) 193 C. 633.
A July 15, 1923, a San Francisco Chronicle article supported the racial dimension of the legislative intent, and at whom the legislation was directed:
https://64.media.tumblr.com/df0ed16713723b8af4935e46d9f12b38/a13bb731e8b0f63e-78/s500x750/d453bdaf5f8dbd04bd6ab5e7bfaab7648870f142.png
As the Chronicle reported, then-Governor Richardson had approved of the Gun Law largely on the recommendation of R. T. McKissick, president of the Sacramento Rifle and Revolver Club. Although McKissick acknowledged that banning resident aliens from owning handguns might pose a constitutional problem, McKissick indicated that ”it would have a ‘salutary effect in checking tong wars among the Chinese and vendettas among our people who are of Latin descent.’”
By invoking the specter of tong violence, the proponents of the law had invoked seven decades’ worth of fears by the white population of armed Chinese in California and throughout the American West.
The field of historical archaeology may lead to the revision of the stereotypical view of early Chinese communities as meek and victims, usually of white racist violence. The stereotype, however, has always been undermined by contemporary accounts of violent gunplay by Chinese in the gold fields and other frontier towns. Continuing excavations of old Chinese settlements by the Southern Oregon University have uncovered firearms and related accoutrements and provided evidence of Chinese use of guns to defend themselves.
However, the relatively small, legal firearms culture in the Chinese community can be attributed to the ascendancy and use by the “hatchet boys” or 斧頭仔 (canto: “fu tau jai”) of pistols, among other concealable weaponry, for advancing tong interests and conflict resolution.

https://64.media.tumblr.com/dfd5766d0c07998c8c5a6ee2bdfbb986/a13bb731e8b0f63e-33/s500x750/87ce26cf9cb36ad00743ed94d94661859890ee7c.jpg
“Highbinders’ Retreat” undated photo taken in San Francisco. Photographer unknown (from the Cooper Chow collection at the Chinese Historical Society of America).
The early gun control laws in California reflected the white community’s desire for safety from, and control over, the use of lethal force by nonwhites in their midst on the urban frontier. San Francisco enacted a gun control measure as early as 1847 to reduce violence. Coincident with the rise of anti-Chinese sentiment, the city singled out the Chinese as a focal point of violence for the balance of the 19th century and the first two decades of the 20th century, particularly Chinatown’s fighting tongs.
In 1879, California first enacted legislation to prohibit non-citizens from bearing arms. The law was fueled in major part by white perceptions of the Chinese as violent and unassimilable and thousands of lurid newspaper reports about tong violence.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/36b36c754cd0c59b4a6b013323ab0fa4/a13bb731e8b0f63e-4f/s500x750/6c209f2462f67d4ffe82c9c2abfde5a63cd34694.jpg
“The Highbinders’ Favorite Weapons,” Harper’s Weekly of February 13, 1886 (Vo. XXX, No. 1521) from the collection of the Bancroft Library.
For example, the Daily Alta California published on January 18, 1887, an article titled: “A Bold Highbinder,” which detailed the removal of a girl from a “Chinese den” and her attempted recapture. One of the Chinese men attempting to take the child “slipped and fell on the pavement, at the same time drawing a revolver.” The man, Wong Bing Lin, was arrested and charged with carrying a concealed weapon. When searched, the police found a knife. “He also wore a coat of mail made out of compressed paper pulp, which could turn a bullet.”
https://64.media.tumblr.com/dd6b20b701d7022f35161790da8242a9/a13bb731e8b0f63e-13/s500x750/dec8df2afd7f5652095141a34e897a7c2831607d.jpg
Coat of chainmail used by highbinders. Photographer unknown (from the collection of the Bancroft Library)
Increased gun violence by tong soldiers induced the city of San Francisco to enact local legislation to ban concealed weapons in 1890. As reported by the Daily Alta on February 5, 1890, Chief of Police Patrick Crowley recommended that shooting galleries be removed, “in the Chinese quarter, where nearly every Chinaman is the owner of a pistol and is handy in its use.”
https://64.media.tumblr.com/4822ad52b0e7df8a85bb52ad086a5949/a13bb731e8b0f63e-3c/s500x750/68b8dbcb2db72741c9b6916325e8a75a95761d3e.png
San Francisco police photo of weapons seized from Chinese “highbinders” c. 1900. Photographer unknown.
Violence by Chinese began to slacken, particularly in the aftermath of the federal Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, its extension by the Geary Act of 1892, and the disruption of the 1906 earthquake and fire. Chinese rarely committed homicides against non-Chinese, as the violence usually occurred between Chinese by competing organized criminal organizations. continued next post

GeneChing

02-20-2023, 11:32 AM

https://64.media.tumblr.com/be527e076f115e377d901e38fa42f1bb/a13bb731e8b0f63e-f9/s500x750/c66129f1a7415f2344bfa465c12649043c1e9ee9.jpg
“The Yellow Terror In All His Glory” (1899) depicted an anti-colonial Qing Dynasty Chinese man standing over a fallen white woman, who represents the Western world. The cartoon made explicit the white community’s fears of innocent white women killed by gunplay in the Chinese community.
With the decreased perceived threat from Chinatown, the discourse shifted to include firearms themselves and the ease in which they could be acquired. However, in 1912, San Francisco saw a string a murders of young white women, killed by young men with easy access to firearms.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/abca8b3422bfbf24facddef496a4ed88/a13bb731e8b0f63e-ae/s500x750/25ddeee74251f5edcc0fe17a8b026bfa5dc41903.jpg
“Peace Meeting in Chinatown, San Francisco, Feb. 1921, bet. the Hip Sings and Ping Koongs”. Photographer unknown (from the Jesse B. Cook collection of the Bancroft Library). The photo shows police officials mediating treaty talks between the warring Hip Sing (協勝堂) and Bing Kung (秉公堂) tongs.
Although San Francisco police and merchant associations repeatedly mediated “peace treaties,” between fighting tongs, the ceasefires inevitably broke down.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/08f84cb4d811fb728a8c644c16ff0326/a13bb731e8b0f63e-a5/s500x750/5ccbc5b79d4908002b9fc17b65e7e58530a9fda5.jpg
https://64.media.tumblr.com/bcd2ade0cdc2d021e0c818fa5b4450ee/a13bb731e8b0f63e-53/s1280x1920/4d9ccf9f5f02a69a96e92aa47535084bebafae76.jpg
The San Francisco Call, March 13, 1913, reports on gunplay as part of a statewide conflict between the Suey Sing (萃勝堂) and Bing Kung tongs. The Suey Sing Tong traced its establishment to San Francisco in 1867 when merchants formed a fighting arm to protect their property interests.
Homicide rates in the Chinese community began to spike in the second decade of the 20th century.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/49ec880775211f798eb6546041e9ddad/a13bb731e8b0f63e-78/s500x750/431da205da639bbd069389f1f81648584f064789.jpg
Chinese and white homicide rates compared (1860-1930). Chart by historian and Deputy Chief Kevin Mullen (ret.).
“Race continued to play a role in the discourse of gun control in California, as judicious men worked to disarm non-whites they viewed as threatening,” according to Josselyn Green (a.k.a. Huerta) in her monograph “ Control of Violence, Control of Fear: The Progression of Gun Control in San Francisco, 1847-1923″ (Spring 2015 Master’s thesis). “In 1923, the California State Legislature passed a second gun control bill … Most notably the new statutes stated, ‘no unnaturalized foreign born person … shall own or have in his possession or under his custody or control any pistol, firearm capable of being concealed on the person.’ Because the Chinese Exclusion Act had been extended permanently in 1902, thus denying Chinese Americans citizenship. California’s 1923 gun control law effectively disarmed the entire Chinese community.“
The denial of the Chinese community’s access to concealable firearms would remain in effect for a half-century until it was declared unconstitutional by a California Court of Appeals in People v. Rappard (1972).
As for the wider conflict between the criminal tongs, conditions began to change during the 1920′s. Crime historian Paul Drexler wrote as follows:
“The overthrow of the Manchu dynasty reduced the flow of tong members from China. As a result, Chinatown was becoming a more middle-class area. Community leaders realized they could make more money from legitimate commerce than from vice and became more supportive of The City’s government. Additionally, the Chinatown Squad, under the leadership of Sgt. Jack Manion, changed tactics and used community policing to win the trust of the Chinatown population.”
If the way of the gun represents a badge of a community’s membership, and even its rights, in American society, then the denial of the Chinese American community’s access to firearms a century ago was emblematic of its exclusion. Law professor Pratheepan Gulaesekaram has written about the gun as a badge of membership in the American polity as follows:
“Access to, and use of, firearms has helped define ideas of membership in America. The gun played a vital role in the genesis tales of the Republic itself. It was a bullet fired into a British officer by a militia man in Lexington, Massachusetts on April 19, 1775, that is credited with igniting the war for independence; it was the gun that helped tame the wilderness and battle American Indians in stories of the expanding nineteenth-century frontier; and firearms were credited with shoring up the struggle for political and racial equality during Reconstruction after the Civil War. In all of these manifestations—as a tool of resistance to tyranny, an instrument of imperialism, a method of survival and self-protection, and a pathway to political inclusion—the gun facilitated formation of, and inclusion in, the American polity.
“Concomitantly, however, the gun has also demarcated the borders of exclusion as well. …”
(Gulaesekaram, P., “Guns and Membership in the American Polity,” William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, vol. 21 (December 2012).
San Francisco Chinatown would not see a return to pervasive gunplay by any segment of its community until the 1970’s, but that is a story for another day.
Thought I'd share it here.

mickey

02-23-2023, 01:04 PM

Greetings,

This "THING" about gun violence on S.F. Chinatown is nothing more than an attempt to throw the Chinese American community up against the wall during the gentrifying process. First was the neutralization of Shrimp Boy and now this. The eagles circling in the sky looking to swoop down upon the Tongs has nothing to do with making things safer, it has much more to do with the real estate they have. The tongs should take it upon themselves to unite against those who are using anything to take their possessions from them. And this will continue to happen wherever Tongs have real estate holdings that are considered attractive to developers. NYC Chinatown is not called "Chinatown" by the new generation (by those who know). They call it "Koreatown".

Open your eyes, brothers. You are getting screwed, straight up and raw.

mickey

mickey

02-23-2023, 01:26 PM

More,

I remember posting, at KFM forums, the need to get away from the word "weapon" when it comes to what we use. The term "training tools", or "apparatus work" or "training equipment" is much better. I am open to other suggestions. But to call what we train with "weapons" is inviting trouble from a cultural preservation perspective. If we do not take the initiative to define what we use, it will be defined for us, and at great cultural cost. The question is: WHEN WILL YOU ALL LISTEN AND BE RESPONSIBLE??

I can see it now: an Asian man walks into a mall and shoots up 145 people with an automatic weapon that was made in the USA. The response: Ban all Asian martial arts "weapons".

My blood still runs hot.

mickey

GeneChing

02-24-2023, 09:16 AM

YinOrYan

02-24-2023, 02:43 PM

I hear what you're saying but you must have totalitarian control (like PRC) to change language.

Or it can be business driven. Because 'weapon' is a forbidden word the the worldwide SEO (it'll even get you banned at some vendor sites like Amazon), changed the term to 'Martial Arms'.

Yeah, 'weapons' are also forbidden in the Universities. Wushu is never going to get in curriculum unless more benign weapons become prevalent. There is too massive oversupply of personal injury lawyers in America. Their adds have even taken over the display on my radio that used to tell me what songs were playing! The Nerf company has been missing a great opportunity to make their brandname become generic like Kleenex. Nerf-sword, Nerf-saber, Nerf-spear, Nerf-daggers and so forth...

mickey

02-24-2023, 04:29 PM

YinOrYan

02-25-2023, 10:09 AM

Greetings,

"more benign weapons"??? This is the problem. What we have would fall into the category of benign. We do not have weapons. If this keeps up, we will be doing sword forms with branches and wire hangers.

mickey

Hey Mickey, they don't even allow wooden weapons on campus. They must have heard of that Samurai master that could defeat anyone with his wooden sword!

BTW There's a remix of that song about you that's gone viral with all the kpoppers on TikTok, haha

GeneChing

07-08-2023, 09:39 AM

Move over axe-throwing ranges. Indiana just made throwing stars legal. (https://www.insider.com/indiana-unbanned-throwing-stars-legal-schools-rogers-sb77-ninja-golf-2023-7)
Sebastian Cahill

https://i.insider.com/64a71a386075be0019c2e47a?width=1000&format=jpeg&auto=webp
Two throwing stars embedded in a piece of wood. Prostydio/Getty Images

A bill signed into law in April made throwing stars legal in Indiana again.

State Senator Linda Rogers said throwing stars are "like any other knife."

Rogers suggested the previous ban was due to fears about the stars that rose in the 1980s.

A recent Indiana bill just legalized throwing stars — the thin, star-shaped knives popularized in 70s and 80s ninja movies.

In an interview with Insider, State Senator Linda Rogers, who authored the bill, said the issue came up when owners of a mini-golf business in her district, Ninja Golf, reached out and expressed interest in adding a throwing stars range to their other amenities.

Ninja Golf, a "Japanese garden-style" course, includes a 27-holes of miniature golf, a nature walking path, a kabuki theater, and a karaoke lounge.

Rogers said the business referenced the growing popularity of axe-throwing ranges when they spoke with her, and likened them to their idea of using throwing stars.

"There's no reason that these throwing stars should be illegal," Rogers said.

SB 77 amends Indiana's codes to include throwing stars in their definition of "knives," which are legal in many cases, but still prevents the throwing stars and other weapons from being taken to or used on school campuses.

Previously, possession, manufacturing, or selling of a throwing star was completely banned and a Class C misdemeanor, which could hold a punishment of 60 days in jail or fines up to $500, according to Indiana law.

Authored by Rogers and fellow State Senator Liz Brown, the bill was sponsored and supported by multiple senators and representatives in Indiana's General Assembly. The bill passed through the state House and Senate almost unanimously and was signed into law by the governor on April 20. It took effect July 1.

In order to meet qualifications to have a throwing star range, as Ninja Golf planned, businesses have to take a number of steps, which may include liability insurance and having experts in throwing stars on site, Rogers said.

In speaking to the state's previous ban on throwing stars, Rogers said her colleagues brought up a number of reasons throwing stars were less lethal than other weapons that have protections under the Constitution.

Rogers suggested the law originally reacted to fears fostered in the 1980s. A story from 1984 by the New York Times interviewed police and families who called the throwing star a "lethal weapon" and part of a dangerous fad.

"This law was maybe a reaction to this panic, and maybe the eighties when we saw them in TV a lot, or in the movies — I think people got a little nervous," Rogers said. "I think since that time people have recognized they're simply like any other knife."

Shuriken (http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?70809-Shuriken)
Banning-martial-arts-weapons (https://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?57188-Banning-martial-arts-weapons)

GeneChing

08-09-2023, 07:51 AM

August 9, 2023
KNIVES OUT
How This Knife Could Upend Restrictions on Weapons All Across the Nation (https://newrepublic.com/article/174917/second-amendment-butterfly-knife-guns)
A federal appeals court ruling could have a massive impact on the future of gun safety in America.

https://images.newrepublic.com/43a2a85a1756ba9a75ed8cf691e01a344b9ca6f1.jpeg?auto =compress&ar=3%3A2&fit=crop&crop=faces&fm=jpg&ixlib=react-9.0.2&w=958&q=65&dpr=3
HEUSER/ULLSTEIN BILD/GETTY IMAGES
A Hawaii law created an absolute ban on butterfly knives like this one, but a recent court ruling could overturn that restriction—along with many others.

The Second Amendment is arguably the most interesting area of American constitutional law right now. Courts and judges have already spent more than two centuries defining the scope of what counts as free speech under the First Amendment and probable cause under the Fourth Amendment. But they did not spend much time on defining what the individual right to bear arms protects. How could they have? The Supreme Court only established it within the last 15 years.

One of the many big questions in this brave new world is deceptively complicated: What exactly counts as “arms” that someone can bear under the Second Amendment? (Please, no jokes about ursine limbs.) On Monday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals came one step closer to answering that question in Teter v. Lopez. The case involved a challenge to Hawaii’s absolute ban on possessing butterfly knives, a type of small knife with a bifurcated handle that folds upward to cover the blade when sheathed. As the court noted, an experienced user can quickly unfold it with one hand if the need arises.

Nearly all Second Amendment cases involve firearms. But the three-judge panel ruled that the same logic that protects guns under the individual right to bear arms applies to other types of weapons. “Because the possession of butterfly knives is conduct protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment, and because Hawaii has not demonstrated that its ban on butterfly knives is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of regulating arms, we conclude that section 134-53(a) violates Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights,” Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the court.

That an absolute ban on a certain type of knife has been judged unconstitutional might seem like a small matter at first glance. But Monday’s ruling could directly affect a wide swath of gun and weapon regulations in the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction, which covers most of the Western United States and roughly one-fifth of the national population. Its reasoning, if adopted by other courts, could also make it much more difficult for state and federal lawmakers to restrict access to certain types of weapons.

The case comes from a lawsuit filed by two men, Andrew Teter and James Grell, who live in Hawaii and want to purchase butterfly knives for self-defense. Barring their path is a state law that makes it a misdemeanor offense whenever someone “knowingly manufactures, sells, transfers, possesses, or transports” a butterfly knife in Hawaii. Teter and Grell attested that they owned butterfly knives before moving to Hawaii and had to dispose of them to comply with state law. They now seek the ability to own them again.

A federal district court initially ruled against the two men and held that the Second Amendment does not protect butterfly knives. They appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit, which stayed the case pending the Supreme Court’s then-imminent ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen last summer. The high court’s eventual ruling in Bruen last June laid out a new history-and-tradition test for weighing restrictions on the individual right to bear arms. In general, it required courts to determine whether there was a historical analogue for a challenged restriction and strike it down if none could be found.

“When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court. “The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s unqualified command.”

This test, as I’ve noted before, has had a dizzying array of outcomes in the lower courts. The Supreme Court is set to review one of those rulings this fall in United States v. Rahimi, where the justices will consider whether gun possession bans for people under certain types of domestic violence restraining orders violate the Second Amendment. A federal district court in Texas concluded that they were unconstitutional earlier this year, noting that early American lawmakers imposed no such restrictions in the founding era—a period when women generally had few legal or civil rights.

continued next post

GeneChing

08-09-2023, 07:52 AM

One notable limitation on the Bruen test, at least at first glance, is that it hitherto only applied to “firearms.” The Ninth Circuit panel, however, concluded that language was no impediment to the knife challenge. “Although Bruen discussed ‘firearm regulation[s],’ that was because the arm at issue in that case was a firearm,” Bea wrote. “We see no reason why the framework would vary by type of ‘arm.’” Those types of weapons, the court noted, can also be used for self-defense.

Hawaii pointed to another potential defense for its ban: District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 Supreme Court case that established an individual right to bear arms in the Second Amendment. In that decision, the high court suggested that some types of categorical weapon bans remained presumptively constitutional. The Heller justices specifically declined to overturn United States v. Miller, a 1939 case that upheld a federal law banning certain types of guns commonly associated with criminal activity, such as sawed-off shotguns and fully automatic rifles.

“We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms,” Justice Antonin Scalia explained in Heller. “Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those ‘in common use at the time.’ We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’”

The panel, however, sidestepped Hawaii’s invocation of Heller. First, it denied a motion by the state to remand the case back to the lower court so it could build a factual record for the Bruen test, which did not exist when the district court upheld the law. Then the panel concluded that Hawaii should have already built that record when it defended the ban in the district court since Heller already existed at that point, even though the Bruen test did not. Accordingly, Bea wrote, the state had “failed to present evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether butterfly knives are dangerous and unusual.”

From there, the panel declared that there was “no genuine issue of material fact as to whether butterfly knives are commonly owned for lawful purposes.” It cited some testimony during the lower-court trial that butterfly knives can be used in self-defense and that the knives’ use is part of a martial arts style that originated in the Philippines. While Hawaii cited what the panel described as “some conclusory statements in the legislative history” that butterfly knives were associated with criminal activity, Bea wrote that the court gave “little weight” to those findings. “Common sense tells us that all portable arms are associated with criminals to some extent, and the cited conclusory statements simply provide no basis for concluding that these instruments are not commonly owned for lawful purposes,” he concluded.

Nor did the panel find any of Hawaii’s purported historical analogues to be convincing. The closest match, the judges said, was an 1837 Georgia law that declared no one shall “keep, or have about or on their person or elsewhere … Bowie, or any other kind of knives.” They reasoned that it was “not apparent to us that ‘other kind[s] of knives’ would have been understood to include pocketknives.” Nor did laws banning the possession and/or carry of more eclectic stabbing implements like Arkansas toothpicks, Bowie knives, daggers, dirks, or the like persuade them because, they concluded, a butterfly knife “is clearly more analogous to an ordinary pocketknife.”

Nor did the claimed emergence of novel societal problems that were unforeseen by the founding generation persuade the panel to uphold the law. In our August issue, I wrote about how Bruen was part of a growing trend where the Supreme Court and its rulings squelch policymaking innovation by lawmakers. If I wrote that article again today, I would undoubtedly include a portion of Monday’s ruling in Teter where the panel knocked down Hawaiian lawmakers’ rationale for the ban by dialing up the degree of specificity.

“Here, the 1999 Hawaii Legislature addressed the perceived social problem of an ‘increasing trend in minors and gang members armed with knives and daggers,’ who preferred butterfly knives ‘as they are easy to conceal and are more intimidating when brandished,’” Bea wrote. “But the problem of people using easily concealable, foldable knives in violent crimes predates 1999 by hundreds of years.”

While the court only addressed Hawaii’s butterfly knife ban, its interpretation of the Second Amendment and its application of the Bruen test could apply to a variety of other statutes. The panel concluded that bladed weapons fell within the scope of the Second Amendment by citing Malachy Postlethwayt’s Universal Dictionary of Trade and Commerce. Published in 1774, that dictionary defines “arms” to include “fascines, halberds, javelins, pikes, and swords,” according to the panel.

Under that framework, a wide variety of knife-related laws could conceivably be challenged. Hawaii’s own statutes have a similar ban on switchblade knives that could run afoul under this interpretation of the Second Amendment. California, which is also in the Ninth Circuit, bans the possession of an even wider assortment of bladed weapons, including dirks, daggers, ballistic knives, belt buckle knives, lipstick case knives, cane swords, and more. If the Second Amendment is not limited to firearms, Monday’s ruling also calls into question state-level bans on weapons like truncheons, saps, billy clubs, nunchucks, and the like.

The panel’s sidestepping of Heller and Miller’s restriction on “dangerous and unusual weapons,” coupled with its stark dismissal of legislative conclusions about what qualifies as one, could potentially affect some bans on specific types of firearms. Monday’s ruling does not directly affect restrictions on these types of guns; the decision itself is limited to Hawaii’s butterfly knife ban. But its narrower approach to deciding what counts as a “dangerous and unusual” weapon could call into question state-level bans on assault rifles and other type-specific restrictions. While the federal assault weapons ban expired in 2004, other federal laws still restrict the possession of fully automatic rifles manufactured after 1986.

All of this depends on whether the panel’s ruling stands on review. Like other federal appeals courts, the Ninth Circuit has a mechanism to review panel decisions through a super-panel of sorts, which includes a random assortment of its sitting judges. Democratic appointees on the Ninth Circuit have a narrow majority in its 29 seats at the moment, but the court’s sizable bloc of Republican appointees has frequently signaled an interest in aggressively enforcing the Bruen test on gun laws in its jurisdiction.

Either way, it seems likely that the Supreme Court will have to decide at some point what weapons count as “arms” under the Second Amendment, as well as which ones are “dangerous and unusual” in a post-Bruen world. In Rahimi, the upcoming domestic violence case, we’ll get a look at whether the justices want to clarify or refine the history-and-tradition test now that they’ve seen it in practice. How the court rules in that case will shape how it addresses Monday’s ruling in Teter and the rest of the Second Amendment’s yet-to-be-explored frontier.

Matt Ford @fordm
Matt Ford is a staff writer at The New Republic.

Banning-martial-arts-weapons (https://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?57188-Banning-martial-arts-weapons)
Videos-of-butterfly-knife-(balisong)-techniques (https://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?26217-Videos-of-butterfly-knife-(balisong)-techniques)