"Victim's mother in sword ban vow"

Discussion in 'Weapons' started by Anth, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. Keikai

    Keikai Banned Banned

    so if i kill a student with a swede do you think i can get swede's banned as an offensive vegetable??? :D
     
  2. Stolenbjorn

    Stolenbjorn Valued Member

    If you kill somebody with a swede; you're probably very strong (or the swede is very small). Since swedes have their own nation, capital and are regarded as people, they could probably rais a more hefty countercampagin against beeing banned than knives can.

    I see your point; that it's the man that kills, not the tool, but since most people are idiots (you don't need a certificate to spawn children), I like to have strong gouverments that think for us. :woo:
     
  3. Keikai

    Keikai Banned Banned

    I hope you realised i was talking about the vegetable and not the country!!! :D
     
  4. Stolenbjorn

    Stolenbjorn Valued Member

    I suspected it was somthing like that, but beeing a Norwegian, I never skip an oppertunity to make fun of Swedes (+ the fact that english is a foregin language to me, and as there are some 400 000 words in english, I'm bound to have missed some of them Swede seems to be one of them. Exactly what kind of vegitable is it?
     
  5. Lord Spooky

    Lord Spooky Banned Banned

  6. Stolenbjorn

    Stolenbjorn Valued Member

  7. tellner

    tellner Valued Member

    It's a beet and therefore disgusting in any language. Suitable only for feeding cattle.
     
  8. Jang Bong

    Jang Bong Speak softly....big stick

    Any Scots coming back on that one with a recipe for 'nepes & tatties' ?? :D
     
  9. Keikai

    Keikai Banned Banned

    When we are kids we always had it on pancake day, it was the old "if you dont eat your swede then you dont get a pancake" off my mum, it made me heave every mouthfull!!! :eek:
     
  10. adouglasmhor

    adouglasmhor Not an Objectivist

    As JB rightly pointed out we call them neeps here in Scotland. The name swede comes from thier old name of Swedish turnips, americans call them ruttabagas.
     
  11. Jang Bong

    Jang Bong Speak softly....big stick

    Under the general title of this thread, I surprised that this attack hasn't been commented on:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1837384,00.html

    Not fatal, but a young life affected in a very bad way. :( It's can be a nasty world that we live in, but I'm not sure how much of that can be fixed by BANNING things.
     
  12. Hyaku

    Hyaku Master of Nothing

    This happened in Japan last year. But what is described as a "razor knife" is a DIY retractable art knife.

    http://www.buzztracker.org/2004/06/02/cache/217112.html

    But Japan does not examine banning things. Its looks at society in general, of education at home and at school and how we can raise are kids and avoid this sort of confrontation.

    The pencil sharpener case shows just goes to show that almost anything hard or sharp can be turned into a weapon. Any kind of spray also bad if its aimed at the eyes.This is where the realms of both assualt and self defence leak into Budo.

    From a Japanese point of view its using method of education for self improvment through using fuedal weapons and it has no connection with this kind of thing. What we can learn is to resist the urge to pick things up and injure other people.

    They just banned carrying guns in the Philippines but if someone wants to do somebody else harm they will carry one. The problem is carrying anything with "intent"
     
  13. slipthejab

    slipthejab Hark, a vagrant! Supporter

    Hmm.. news to me.
    Where did you hear this? :confused:
    I have severa long time friends who are legitimate firearms dealers in Manila are still in business and still selling to firearms to private civilian citizens.

    Would you post the source of your info? :confused:
     
  14. Stolenbjorn

    Stolenbjorn Valued Member

    Well, it's a proven point that if you lessen the exposure to potental hazard, you will get a decrease in casualties.

    Brazil have very liberal gun-control, and there 36000 people die every year due to shooting. (That's 100/day!) If you ban stuff, the law abiding ones will stop having it, it will be easier to rout out the law-breakers, and statistics prove that you get fewer killed in areas with strict control.

    Baning is a pain one certain place for the ones that use it nicely, and there is allways the argument of the criminals having their way when all the law-abiders are helpless, but statistics show that this argument is outweighted by the reduction due to accidents and decreasing the violence-level.


    So it boils down to: "Should I sacrifice my right to have a sharp longsword on the wall so that the police can have an easier time controlling sharp long bladed objects, so that innocents doesn't get cut down by drug-crazed, longswordwielding criminals, and so that stupid civillians doesn't kill themselves in longsword-accidents?"

    IMHO the consern for the majority should come before my obsessive love for sharp, pointy long blades.

    The discussion is WHEN does somthing start to become a problem?
    Personally, I don't think that criminals use of longswords on the streets is such a big problem that they need to become banned (as with swedes :p ), but this is democracy; guys; the majority's dictatorship :D
     
  15. adouglasmhor

    adouglasmhor Not an Objectivist

    And Switzerland has more guns than people and has very low gun crime so if you just pull a random stat out of the ether it proves nothing.
     
  16. El Tejon

    El Tejon MAP'scrazyuncle

    Stole, that's not the case at all. Places with strict gun control have the highest murder rates: New York City, L.A., Chicago, Washington, D.C. Criminals will be criminals regardless of what laws one passes for the law abiding.

    It makes no sense to destroy the civil rights of the law abiding to attempt to "fight crime." A government's purpose is to protect civil rights, not attack civil rights.

    Gun control is predicated upon racism and control of others. Sword control is predicated upon control of others (e.g. the government controlling people), just look at the history of Japan or England (e.g. King Hank's Assize of Arms in the 12th century which instituted sword control for Jews and then the resulting Jewish massacres in English cities).
     
  17. NaughtyKnight

    NaughtyKnight Has yellow fever!

    El, are you saying that America has strict gun control? LOL

    Australia has gun control, and you may hear a gun murder once in a blue moon, instead of every day in America.
     
  18. Stolenbjorn

    Stolenbjorn Valued Member

    If you bothered to read my entire post, I said that the real question was to discuss WHEN the majority of a society decides that somthing is a problem. I live in Norway, and here -as in Switzerland, everybody have their hunting rifle and their own HK g3-rifle, but since we don't shoot eachother on a daily basis, it's decided that it's not a problem, as probably is the case in Switzerland.

    Fun that you (El Tejon) mention that we should protect citicens, and not limit their freedom; how on earth do you think it is going to be safe (for civilians as well as Iraqi/american/coalition-force military) in Iraq if the terrorists aren't restricted in their rights to field weapons? I know that bringing a civil war into the discussion is a bit extreme, but I think it proves that under the right circomstances; limiting the availebility of weapons usually reduce deaths by them. NATO-forces in Bosnia/Kosovo have had as one of their top priorities to search houses for weapons and to confiscate them or buy them, or to appeal for groups and individuals to give up their weapons, and they (the NATO-strategists) that make sure this is done probably know what they are doing, it's at least less news on the media about mass-shootings in Balkan now.

    I think that every society should have a right to introduce laws that limits the individuals rights from time to time. I don't think anybody can point to proof that killings and accidents with guns or knives have increased when stricter laws have been introduced.
     
  19. adouglasmhor

    adouglasmhor Not an Objectivist

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/2352855.stm
    http://www.stats.org/record.jsp?type=oped&ID=30
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/01/10/ngun10.xml
    http://www.learnenglish.org.uk/magazine/magazine_home_disarmament.html

    Not hard proof but sourced stats from such august bodies as the British council and the Beeb amongst others. Do you accept govt stats or are they not proof enough for you. And I did read your entire earlier post thank you very much, if you were trying to make another point other than the one I quoted I
    must have missed it, sorry :cry:
     
  20. El Tejon

    El Tejon MAP'scrazyuncle

    Naughty, yes, New York City, Washington D.C., Chicago, L.A, all have strict gun control, more strict than Australia in fact. They have extremely high murder rates.

    Stolen, we're going to have to disagree about restricting freedom. I am not a subject or a serf; I am a citizen with rights. My rights come from God, not government. I will not have my natural-born rights violated for whatever reason the government wants to give. :)

    Stole, yes, one can point to an increase in crime after gun control schemes are introduced including the UK, Australia, Washington D.C., Chicago, New York City and L.A.
     

Share This Page