[Emanuel]

Hello _Soldier,

Here in Canada, Sikh men are also allowed to wear the kirpan as a religious symbol. I myself have been around such persons, fully conscious of the reason for the kirpan being worn, and aware that it is not intended to do harm.

However, in most - if not all - western nations, the wear of a knife or any weapon is distinctly threatening and perhaps even offensive unless condoned by occupation requiring weapons (say police or army). It doesn't matter that there haven't been any incidents involving Sikh using the kirpan. It only matters that it is a knife-like object being worn/exhibited in public. I'm afarid that until the kirpan and its wear maintain any resemblance to that of a knife, people will feel threatened by it. I think a Tibetan phurpa would cause just as much of a stir, as long as it has some semblance of a blade.

While the religious rights of immigrant populations must be respected, the social norms of the host country must also be upheld. The Sikh man in question in this thread - and perhaps other like him - should understand the court's rulling not as an attack against his faith, and he should understand the reasons for it and accept the social limits imposed by Denmark. I believe that host nation and immigrant group should work to reach a common ground: perhaps change the look of the kirpan enough that it is not identified as a potential weapon with an usable blade, while educating people about its cultural meaning.

The question of what runaway governments are doing to collectors through idiotic laws is another matter, and has been discussed here before ...unfortunately. The belief that people will stop being violent the moment all blades have disappeared is beyond me...it's a total farce.

Best regards,
Emanuel