Self Defence Weapons?

Discussion in 'Weapons' started by yuen, Dec 23, 2011.

  1. Sketco

    Sketco Banned Banned

    That was actually more directed at bunny than you. I respect your views Hannibal but I wasn't sure what sort of internal understanding you have of the culture especially concerning the reasons people deal, and the context of the related aggression and violence.

    But the cultural climate I was in was likely very different from where you are in several ways.
     
  2. LilBunnyRabbit

    LilBunnyRabbit Old One

    That's still advocating a criminal activity.

    Whether it was fun at the time or not is irrelevant, it was still despicable and your comments about it sound, quite clearly, like boasting.

    No, I'd say I do have an idea what respect is in that environment. Same as in any brute-based society, and not actually respect.

    A criminal society is not a culture. Sure, if I were trying to prevent is as an LEO then making an effort to understand scum would be valuable. I'm not trying to prevent it as an LEO, and therefore I do not need to empathise with drug dealers.

    So...you're saying that you're not coming from the idea that it's all about finding ways to skirt the law by lying about the purpose of carrying a weapon, instead it's all about finding ways to skirt the law by lying about the purpose of carrying a weapon?

    Private First Class? Programmable Fieldbus Controller? Public Flow Control?

    There's a reason that the law tries to keep weapons out of people's hands - some people if they can get weapons, and carry them legally, will have a somewhat easier time going around, beating people up and smashing/torching their cars. The law will have one less charge to slap them with.

    Yep - and you're the one who's decided that you know my entire life story, and exactly what I do and don't know. I think my assumptions are a little more reasonable.

    In some countries they practice female castration as a matter of course. In others they still practice slavery. Yes, they are dirty heathen savages in a more broken society which needs to be fixed. I am not ignorant in the least for actually having values.

    No, there aren't. There may be some desperate people who are just trying to get by, but they are still drug dealers, and they are still therefore profiting off other's suffering and misery. They are not decent people at all - if they were then they wouldn't be doing it.

    Not at all - the Vietnam vets did not make their living on the suffering of other people, nor did they break the law and then suggest it was done out of some twisted sense of respect.

    Emotion doesn't come into it. They're not scum because I hate them - they're scum because they profit from other people's suffering. Simple really.

    You know that argument gets trotted out a lot. I'm not saying things are black and white in the world of illegal drug dealing - I'm saying that they're black, with a few varying shades and a few who are redeemable.

    Why do I have to do this, exactly?

    I don't disagree with you because you used to sell drugs - if you're no longer doing it then well done to you. I'm disagreeing with you because you're trying to suggest that these parasites who feed on human misery are decent people.

    And again - if I were in a place where my comments and thoughts on the matter would potentially make a difference then I would be making an effort to empathise. Absolutely anything to try and reduce the amount of harm. My view of whether it's despicable or not would not change in the least.

    See above. I agree with the safe injection clinics, but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing - just less bad than the alternative.
     
  3. Sketco

    Sketco Banned Banned

    Illegal yes. Immoral no. Pot is more harmless than alcohol and most of the issues related come from the fact that it's illegal. I see it as breaking an unjust law just like the bootleggers in prohibition. It's one of the few recreational drugs I think should be legal.

    Then you've read them differently than I intended them. I was only using them as examples of weapons which are very effective yet excusable.

    You're only partially right. The other part is far more complex.

    Whether you like it or not by any anthropological measure it is a culture.

    I'm saying that circumstances aside if you have to carry a weapon to save your life do it, but don't get picked up by Johnny law because you were dumb enough to walk around with a machete hanging on your hip downtown in a big city. If you have to carry, be smart about it.
    Discussion about being on the right or wrong side of the law is a another matter entirely.

    Private F'n Civilian. As opposed to being a cop, or being on the bad side of the law.

    True. And I agree with weapon control. But I also agree with being prepared. I carry my knife, gloves, and a pencil as tools. I would only use them as weapons if absolutely necessary but it's still nice to know I have force multipliers.

    You keep showing that you only understand as an outsider and acting like that's the only valid perspective. I'm not making assumptions about your entire world view, just on this particular subject. So no, your assumptions are not reasonable. You're assuming that you know my whole view based on a few tidbits. I'm taking what you've put here and telling you that presuming, as an outsider, to judge all aspects of a culture you don't understand internally is very shortsighted.

    And you can judge that based on sound moral reasoning, but you wouldn't tell them their barter system, or cultural values of beauty, or the different roles of men and women are wrong when you just showed up on their shore and are looking form the outside in.


    Your ignorance is showing.

    No. Some of them volunteered, some of the were conscripted, but they were all showered with poop the same. You are, without any insider knowledge, presuming to place judgement on people whose actions you do not fully understand.

    You're oversimplifying a very complex issue.

    When you understand the culture behind it a lot more of them are. At the end of that ethnography Bourgois outlines ways (some which have been implemented) which can be used to get people to stop selling and using drugs. Those which have been implemented have been successful but only were because someone took the time to understand the culture from the inside. If he'd presented those ways of helping at the beginning of the book they would not have made sense because the reader wouldn't have the understanding as to why they work.

    You don't. But bringing outsider views to a culture and then claiming to understand them is very ignorant.

    A lot of them are. What they're doing I don't agree with. Personally there are a select few recreational drugs I think should be made legal under very specific guidelines, and the rest banned. But if you understand why these people do what they do then you can begin to help them. It's called compassion and understanding.

    Yes. Certain drugs are very harmful. Spreading harm is not good. The drugs are despicable in most cases but there are reasons people do it which are not.


    Like I said. If you want to understand, read the book. The entirety of this subject is very complex and the book does a wonderful job explaining it.

    I'm done here.
    Peace
     
  4. LilBunnyRabbit

    LilBunnyRabbit Old One

    There are laws I disagree with as well, that doesn't give me the right to break them. Fortunately I do have the right to protest them, fight for change and similar.

    One way is both moral, and legal, the other is not.

    I think it was probably the comment about having used them to smash up people's cars. You then went on to point out that when you had used a cane to defend yourself, you were mid-deal - somewhat off topic and a bit jarring.

    No - I'm not saying it's the only valid perspective. Just that it's the only perspective I recognise. I don't agree with moral relativism.

    Do you also accept that as an insider your view is biased?

    Not what's happening here. You cannot compare drug dealing to a barter system or cultural values of beauty (unless, say, those values involve young girls having their feet hobbled). I'm not pointing out that the savages wear the wrong colour, I'm pointing out that they are actively causing suffering for their own personal gain - similar to cannibalism.

    So your argument is that good, decent people can still be criminal scum profiting off misery?

    Step back there. Whether they volunteered or were conscripted is utterly irrelevant. They did not go out in order to deliberately and actively wreck people's lives in the pursuit of a few bucks. Whether or not you agree with the Vietnam war itself is irrelevant to the soldiers who were employed to do a job, and did not have a choice.

    So...they're not profiting from people's suffering? Please, explain why not.

    My views do not necessarily reflect my actions. I am a pragmatist. I do have high ideals, however in order to achieve those (were I to be put in a position to do so) I would be quite happy to put more moderate, less savage controls in place and work towards those ideals.

    However I would see such as a moral compromise, and acknowledge that is purely for pragmatic reasons rather than moral ones.

    Arrogant, not ignorant.

    I am not in a position to help them. If I were, as I keep saying, I'd be more than happy to compromise in order to help as many as possible. But that does not mean that the dealing itself, that profit from addicts and desperate people, is anything other than evil.

    Actions which do harm, but are taken for supposedly good reasons, are still harmful actions. It is still a choice made.

    I have better things to do than try to sympathise with drug dealers, and there is currently no benefit to me doing so as it would not give me any way to lessen the problem.
     
  5. robin101

    robin101 Working the always shift.

    it appears the ultimate self defence weapon to carry is in fact....Bas Rutten
     
  6. ninjedi

    ninjedi Valued Member

    I don't have the patience to read through the entire thread, but I recommend learning hanbo/stick techniques and carrying a cane. As long as it has a rubber tip on the end, nobody can claim it to be a weapon or take it away from you. You can even carry it onto an airplane.
     
  7. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

    Whilst probably a good idea you really should point out that the above may not be true in certain countries, states etc
     
  8. ScottUK

    ScottUK More human than human...

    How should it be carried? Like this?

    If I do not need to use a stick to aid my walking, I certainly ain't going to pretend like I am using it for a walking stick just for that 0.0000001% chance I am going to need it.
     
  9. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

    They can actually get in the way too.

    One simple disagreement and those watching will note you've been waving around a stick, when all you were doing was talking with your hands in a "heated debate".
     
  10. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member


    I think Joshbrown has been listening to Mr Seago of the Bujinkan San Francisco, difference is Mr Seago, IIRC, has a legit reason for having one.

    Over here in the UK I would imagine you would need to back up your need for having one on you or at least be able to effectively articulate to the Police why you had one and why you used it.

    If you carry with intent to use on another person and it can be shown then you're going to be in trouble.
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2012
  11. ninjedi

    ninjedi Valued Member

  12. ScottUK

    ScottUK More human than human...

    Like you, I don't have the patience to view the links.
     
  13. Dean Winchester

    Dean Winchester Valued Member

  14. ScottUK

    ScottUK More human than human...

    www.sentoshi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/scan0032.jpg

    Ill-fitting hakama? Check.
    Deliberately-aged black belt worn over the hakama?* Check.
    1000-yd stare? Check.
    All-natural setting for camera pose? Check.
    Crap sword? (take a look at the ito) Check.
    Tshirt under keikogi? Check.
    Haori? (cos it looks cool) Check.

    (* I know some koryu do this but he doesn't know that)
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2012
  15. ScottUK

    ScottUK More human than human...

    Can't tell from here (mobile phone web browser) but what is that just above his left hand?
     
  16. Kuma

    Kuma Lurking about

    For selling, it's mostly because they're either supporting their own habit or greedy and enticed by the easy money. That covers about 99% of it. Either way, nothing to be proud of nor something that you can't control.
     
  17. 47MartialMan

    47MartialMan Valued Member

    The "Perfect Self Defense Weapon";

    [​IMG]
     
  18. StevieB8363

    StevieB8363 Valued Member

    Its not true in Australia. Unless you have a legitimate reason for carrying something like that, it's a weapon - and you're facing criminal charges. That's why I don't carry a cane despite training in LaCanne. (That and the fact that it would be inconvenient and I'd probably end up forgetting it somewhere.)

    A maglite is legal to own, but try explaining to a cop why you're carrying one down the street.

    If you're into stick arts the best you can do is probably the combat umbrella. I think it's been mentioned already.
     
  19. ludde

    ludde Valued Member

  20. adouglasmhor

    adouglasmhor Not an Objectivist

    Looks like a brass belt buckle.
     

Share This Page