UK bans Japanese swords.

Rick · 17th December 2007, 10:22 PM

Are you organising a resistance movement ?
Please do .

kahnjar1 · 18th December 2007, 03:22 AM

These two words should NEVER be used together. Just to add to what I have already said about this subject in relation to our own laws in NZ, I would share this little bit which came out of the Canadian attempt to register each and every firearm (gun) in Canada.
They required that the MODEL number of the item HAD to be used, and to that end there were thousands of Ruger 10/22 rifles appearing for registration. Unfortunately for the poor sod who was doing the recording, the model number was accidently substituted for the SERIAL number, so noone actually knew who had which rifle!! And just to cap it all of, one overzealous cop DEMANDED that the owner register his WELLA SOLDERING GUN---I kid you not!!
So, if you live in the UK, get all those knives (and anything that remotely resembles a knife) ready for registration, and good luck to the STUPID politicians who dream up this crap! Its going to cost someone $$$Millions.

A. G. Maisey · 18th December 2007, 03:43 AM

I live in the state of New South Wales, in Australia. In early 2004, as a requirement under the Act, the NSW government initiated a review of the Weapons Prohibition Act. The then Minister for Police made public his intention of ensuring that one of the results of the review of this Act would be restrictions on the ownership of swords. His prime concern at the time appeared to be "samurai swords".

This review has not yet been completed.
I have been advised by a member of the reviewing body that the completion and release for public comment of the review, and its recommendations, is imminent.

When the results of this review are available I will ensure that all members of this forum are made aware of the content of the report and recommendations.

It is absolutely pointless to get emotional about these bans that are spreading across the world like a plague. This is a political matter, and the only way in which to effectively combat it is by political and legal means.If any of us wish to oppose these bans, this opposition must be mounted in a way that politicians may take note of, however, the problem here is that we are a very small minority group, and simply are not able to pose any significant threat to any political agenda.

Because of our limited numbers, perhaps the only way in which we might be able to impact upon these ill thought out political actions is to act in concert. In other words every single one of us, right across the world, should write to the relevant politician in whatever country, each time the government of a country proposes introduction of legislation that could effect our common interest.

Letters should be polite and logical, and where possible should demonstrate a quantifiable negative posed by the introduction of such legislation.

This present legislation that we are discussing is UK legislation.

If somebody in the UK can provide the name, title and address of the responsible politician, I propose that we do our best to bury this person in mail.

Jim McDougall · 18th December 2007, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I live in the state of New South Wales, in Australia. In early 2004, as a requirement under the Act, the NSW government initiated a review of the Weapons Prohibition Act. The then Minister for Police made public his intention of ensuring that one of the results of the review of this Act would be restrictions on the ownership of swords. His prime concern at the time appeared to be "samurai swords".

This review has not yet been completed.
I have been advised by a member of the reviewing body that the completion and release for public comment of the review, and its recommendations, is imminent.

When the results of this review are available I will ensure that all members of this forum are made aware of the content of the report and recommendations.

It is absolutely pointless to get emotional about these bans that are spreading across the world like a plague. This is a political matter, and the only way in which to effectively combat it is by political and legal means.If any of us wish to oppose these bans, this opposition must be mounted in a way that politicians may take note of, however, the problem here is that we are a very small minority group, and simply are not able to pose any significant threat to any political agenda.

Because of our limited numbers, perhaps the only way in which we might be able to impact upon these ill thought out political actions is to act in concert. In other words every single one of us, right across the world, should write to the relevant politician in whatever country, each time the government of a country proposes introduction of legislation that could effect our common interest.

Letters should be polite and logical, and where possible should demonstrate a quantifiable negative posed by the introduction of such legislation.

This present legislation that we are discussing is UK legislation.

If somebody in the UK can provide the name, title and address of the responsible politician, I propose that we do our best to bury this person in mail.

Alan,
I did write that letter to the Minister of Police in 2004, in exactly the manner you have described here. Naturally I never heard further, but I can only hope it had some impact. What you say is exactly correct, and quantified presentation is more likely to receive serious consideration. Naturally, here we can vent our outrage at these ridiculous legislations, but to effectively respond we must communicate objectively.
Best regards,
Jim

spiral · 18th December 2007, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

.

If somebody in the UK can provide the name, title and address of the responsible politician, I propose that we do our best to bury this person in mail.

Unfortunotly Alan the closing date for the home office consultation of this law was last May, over 13,000 sword/knife collecters petitioned & wrote to the Home Office pointing out the innefectiveness of the proposed law.

Heres the pre & post consultation documents. {including the points put over by the sword collecters & also others not so keen on swords.} It includes relevant address but says consultation finnishes may 2007.

linky home office lawmakers...

Sadley there response to sword collecters/martial artists etc was.

"We need to balance the views of the many collectors and martial arts enthusiasts against the position adopted by law enforcement agencies and victims’ organisations, reflecting the views of wider communities, who thought a ban necessary and proportionate to tackle the menace of violent crime involving these weapons."

There proposed, [not finalised.} definition of a samari sword is.

“a curved, single edged sword (sometimes known as a “samurai sword”)”.

Fearn, exceptions are made in English knife laws for the military & Police if its in pursuance of the job.

As we all know this law wont stop any outlaw, {by the very definition.} But the politiceans can sit back & say, how tough they are bieng on crime & have 2 days congratulations from the press that is bought by the unwashed masses of the public.

I think given this & any futre legislation to truly be able to feel safe with your swords , Id say make sure there over 100 years old.

But hopefully there final definition of a samari sword will be mores sensible than there first one.

Another sad year for sense in Great Britain.

Spiral

asomotif · 18th December 2007, 11:58 AM

In the Netherlands we have a similar thing happening.

The last 2 months we had some sad stabbing incidents in and around schools.

The Minister of Justice turned out to be smart person when this week he claimed that most stabbing incidents involve the use of knives

Good point, a lot of knives are suitable for stabbing.

Suggestion now is to ban knives such as stilleto's and butterflyknives, which personally I don't mind.

But as a whole this decission ofcourse is the same reaction you see in the UK. Next time somebody might us a screwdriver for stabbing.
And what are we going to do than, ban screwdrivers ?

katana · 18th December 2007, 12:58 PM

Thanks for the link Spiral

It is interesting that.....from one of the documents.....

".....Others, including a former officer with the Metropolitan and the City of London Police forces who is also
a martial arts instructor, considers that no matter what weapon is added to the Offensive Weapons Order,
it will have no effect on the UK’s knife culture. He suggests that the favourite weapons used in crime are
the knives that are cheap, readily available and easy to dispose of......."

Some 'sanity' does prevail afterall, however, it seems that professional / amateur organisations concerning collecting, martial arts etc have not been consulted 'directly'.

As for 'public opinion'......it seems in Britain (and I suspect in most other countries) the 'media' (newspapers) have a massive effect.
Sensationalising news sells papers......but distorts the story out of all proportion..... and suddenly the population is fearful of an 'exaggerated' threat. Fuelled by MPs that seek publicity by proposing extreme action in accordance to the 'manufactured' opinion of the masses.

A sad situation for any democracy......

Regards David

katana · 18th December 2007, 01:41 PM

These are very interesting...

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/phpnews/wmview.php?ArtID=1327

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:J...nk&cd=12&gl=uk

Here are some statistics of weapon related crime in the US....for some sort of comparison.

http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice...violence15.htm

A word about unreliable statistics....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nknife320.xml

Regards David

fearn · 18th December 2007, 06:05 PM

Hi Katana,

Thanks for those stats. I read the american ones and cringed. Axes are considered "knives" for those stats, knives are knives unless they are "martial arts weapons" (or is that for nunchaku?), and oddly enough, the stats for "assault with/without a weapon" is lower than that "with" a weapon, suggesting that the number on the bar graph is either a mean or median. In other words: yuck!

A. G. Maisey · 18th December 2007, 09:09 PM

Yes Jim, I know you did write, as did many other people in other countries.
The reason you have not been contacted again is because the review is not yet complete. The Department has the obligation to respond to all those who wrote to them in either support of or opposition to the proposal to legislate against swords.I have spoken with the officer who has carried out most of the review of this legislation, and I specifically asked if those people who are residents of other countries and who wrote in opposition to this proposed legislation, would be contacted. I was assured that all who wrote would be contacted. I will be monitoring this matter, and if necessary I will take whatever action I am able to take to try to ensure that all those who wrote do receive the report.

Spiral, from my perspective the definition you have quoted:-

“a curved, single edged sword (sometimes known as a “samurai sword”)”.

is a very good definition.

Effectively it says:- " a samurai sword is something that is recognised as a samurai sword"

Yes, it lends itself to ill informed interpretation by officers in the field, but when it gets into court the prosecutor will have to demonstrate that there is a widely held view that the sword in question is something that would be referred to as a "samurai sword". With a couple of expert witnesses this would be very easy to defend, should the sword in question not be a "samurai sword".

In fact, this definition parrallels Sir Richard Burton's definition.He wrote a chapter in trying to define a sword, but it all boils down to :- "well, you'll recognise a sword when you see one".

The fact of the matter is that politicians need to count votes to hold on to their jobs. If the wider community sees a threat in swords, the pollies need to do something to convince voters that they should stay in their job.

After the black operation that was the Port Arthur Massacre, our most highly respected prime minister, John Howard (who has just lost his seat---there is a God) had legislation ready within three days to ban specific types of weaponry. This was the effective beginning of increasingly restrictive laws against all types of weaponry in Australia. All across Australia concerned citizens demonstrated against these proposed laws. In Sydney there was a public rally that was attended by over 70,000 people ( this was reported in the media as something like 5,000 people). Enormous numbers of people protested against these laws. The governments of Australia took no notice of these protests and the laws were introduced.

Why did they take no notice?

Because even with the massive number of people protesting against the legislation, there were more people in the community in favour of it.

Public opinion had been manipulated in a way that did not allow any argument against the introduction of these laws.

Now, there was one good thing that did result from the goverment's extreme actions.
Firearms ownership in Australia had been politicised.
A pro-firearms political party was formed in New South Wales, and we currently have two senators in office.
At the recent federal election we ran a candidate for the first time. He was not elected, but provided we maintain our committment to our ideals, I believe that eventually we will also have a senator at the federal level.
When something is politicised, the only effective way to deal with it is by political means.
Look at the NRA.

Ranting and raving about the injustice of any legislation that affects us adversely does nothing except to direct our energies into thin air. I am extremely angry about the anti-weapon legislation that my country and my state has been saddled with, but I do not preach to the converted about it. I sit down and try to construct calmly logical arguments that will assist in softening the legislation when it is introduced---and believe me:- it always will be introduced.

What we need to do is to provide the politicians with ways in which they can have their laws, calm the community, but not affect us too heavily.

This can only be done by calm, logical argument and by going through recognised channels.

In the real world of professional criminals the weapons of choice are now, as they have always been, of two basic types:- the effective, purpose built tool designed to terminate life, for example, firearms of various types, and secondly,various everyday objects that can be used, disposed of, and have a low probability of being linked to the crime, for example, a length of pipe wrapped in newspaper.

Tools such as "samurai swords" are used by either unbalanced individuals, or by people who set out to frighten , rather than to kill. These two types of people will continue to use exactly the same tactics, even if all swords were to magically evaporate into thin air overnight.

Is there anything more frightening than somebody with a cup full of petrol and a cigarette lighter?

18th December 2007, 03:22 AM	#2
kahnjar1 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND Posts: 2,797	POLITICIANS and ARMS LAWS These two words should NEVER be used together. Just to add to what I have already said about this subject in relation to our own laws in NZ, I would share this little bit which came out of the Canadian attempt to register each and every firearm (gun) in Canada. They required that the MODEL number of the item HAD to be used, and to that end there were thousands of Ruger 10/22 rifles appearing for registration. Unfortunately for the poor sod who was doing the recording, the model number was accidently substituted for the SERIAL number, so noone actually knew who had which rifle!! And just to cap it all of, one overzealous cop DEMANDED that the owner register his WELLA SOLDERING GUN---I kid you not!! So, if you live in the UK, get all those knives (and anything that remotely resembles a knife) ready for registration, and good luck to the STUPID politicians who dream up this crap! Its going to cost someone $$$Millions.

18th December 2007, 11:58 AM	#6
asomotif Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,235	Stabbing incidents In the Netherlands we have a similar thing happening. The last 2 months we had some sad stabbing incidents in and around schools. The Minister of Justice turned out to be smart person when this week he claimed that most stabbing incidents involve the use of knives Good point, a lot of knives are suitable for stabbing. Suggestion now is to ban knives such as stilleto's and butterflyknives, which personally I don't mind. But as a whole this decission ofcourse is the same reaction you see in the UK. Next time somebody might us a screwdriver for stabbing. And what are we going to do than, ban screwdrivers ?

18th December 2007, 01:41 PM	#8
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	These are very interesting... http://www.kcl.ac.uk/phpnews/wmview.php?ArtID=1327 http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:J...nk&cd=12&gl=uk Here are some statistics of weapon related crime in the US....for some sort of comparison. http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice...violence15.htm A word about unreliable statistics.... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nknife320.xml Regards David Last edited by katana; 18th December 2007 at 02:14 PM.

17th December 2007, 10:22 PM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,345	Are you organising a resistance movement ? Please do .

18th December 2007, 03:43 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,035	I live in the state of New South Wales, in Australia. In early 2004, as a requirement under the Act, the NSW government initiated a review of the Weapons Prohibition Act. The then Minister for Police made public his intention of ensuring that one of the results of the review of this Act would be restrictions on the ownership of swords. His prime concern at the time appeared to be "samurai swords". This review has not yet been completed. I have been advised by a member of the reviewing body that the completion and release for public comment of the review, and its recommendations, is imminent. When the results of this review are available I will ensure that all members of this forum are made aware of the content of the report and recommendations. It is absolutely pointless to get emotional about these bans that are spreading across the world like a plague. This is a political matter, and the only way in which to effectively combat it is by political and legal means.If any of us wish to oppose these bans, this opposition must be mounted in a way that politicians may take note of, however, the problem here is that we are a very small minority group, and simply are not able to pose any significant threat to any political agenda. Because of our limited numbers, perhaps the only way in which we might be able to impact upon these ill thought out political actions is to act in concert. In other words every single one of us, right across the world, should write to the relevant politician in whatever country, each time the government of a country proposes introduction of legislation that could effect our common interest. Letters should be polite and logical, and where possible should demonstrate a quantifiable negative posed by the introduction of such legislation. This present legislation that we are discussing is UK legislation. If somebody in the UK can provide the name, title and address of the responsible politician, I propose that we do our best to bury this person in mail.

18th December 2007, 12:58 PM	#7
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	Thanks for the link Spiral It is interesting that.....from one of the documents..... ".....Others, including a former officer with the Metropolitan and the City of London Police forces who is also a martial arts instructor, considers that no matter what weapon is added to the Offensive Weapons Order, it will have no effect on the UK’s knife culture. He suggests that the favourite weapons used in crime are the knives that are cheap, readily available and easy to dispose of......." Some 'sanity' does prevail afterall, however, it seems that professional / amateur organisations concerning collecting, martial arts etc have not been consulted 'directly'. As for 'public opinion'......it seems in Britain (and I suspect in most other countries) the 'media' (newspapers) have a massive effect. Sensationalising news sells papers......but distorts the story out of all proportion..... and suddenly the population is fearful of an 'exaggerated' threat. Fuelled by MPs that seek publicity by proposing extreme action in accordance to the 'manufactured' opinion of the masses. A sad situation for any democracy...... Regards David

18th December 2007, 06:05 PM	#9
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi Katana, Thanks for those stats. I read the american ones and cringed. Axes are considered "knives" for those stats, knives are knives unless they are "martial arts weapons" (or is that for nunchaku?), and oddly enough, the stats for "assault with/without a weapon" is lower than that "with" a weapon, suggesting that the number on the bar graph is either a mean or median. In other words: yuck!

18th December 2007, 09:09 PM	#10
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,035	Yes Jim, I know you did write, as did many other people in other countries. The reason you have not been contacted again is because the review is not yet complete. The Department has the obligation to respond to all those who wrote to them in either support of or opposition to the proposal to legislate against swords.I have spoken with the officer who has carried out most of the review of this legislation, and I specifically asked if those people who are residents of other countries and who wrote in opposition to this proposed legislation, would be contacted. I was assured that all who wrote would be contacted. I will be monitoring this matter, and if necessary I will take whatever action I am able to take to try to ensure that all those who wrote do receive the report. Spiral, from my perspective the definition you have quoted:- “a curved, single edged sword (sometimes known as a “samurai sword”)”. is a very good definition. Effectively it says:- " a samurai sword is something that is recognised as a samurai sword" Yes, it lends itself to ill informed interpretation by officers in the field, but when it gets into court the prosecutor will have to demonstrate that there is a widely held view that the sword in question is something that would be referred to as a "samurai sword". With a couple of expert witnesses this would be very easy to defend, should the sword in question not be a "samurai sword". In fact, this definition parrallels Sir Richard Burton's definition.He wrote a chapter in trying to define a sword, but it all boils down to :- "well, you'll recognise a sword when you see one". The fact of the matter is that politicians need to count votes to hold on to their jobs. If the wider community sees a threat in swords, the pollies need to do something to convince voters that they should stay in their job. After the black operation that was the Port Arthur Massacre, our most highly respected prime minister, John Howard (who has just lost his seat---there is a God) had legislation ready within three days to ban specific types of weaponry. This was the effective beginning of increasingly restrictive laws against all types of weaponry in Australia. All across Australia concerned citizens demonstrated against these proposed laws. In Sydney there was a public rally that was attended by over 70,000 people ( this was reported in the media as something like 5,000 people). Enormous numbers of people protested against these laws. The governments of Australia took no notice of these protests and the laws were introduced. Why did they take no notice? Because even with the massive number of people protesting against the legislation, there were more people in the community in favour of it. Public opinion had been manipulated in a way that did not allow any argument against the introduction of these laws. Now, there was one good thing that did result from the goverment's extreme actions. Firearms ownership in Australia had been politicised. A pro-firearms political party was formed in New South Wales, and we currently have two senators in office. At the recent federal election we ran a candidate for the first time. He was not elected, but provided we maintain our committment to our ideals, I believe that eventually we will also have a senator at the federal level. When something is politicised, the only effective way to deal with it is by political means. Look at the NRA. Ranting and raving about the injustice of any legislation that affects us adversely does nothing except to direct our energies into thin air. I am extremely angry about the anti-weapon legislation that my country and my state has been saddled with, but I do not preach to the converted about it. I sit down and try to construct calmly logical arguments that will assist in softening the legislation when it is introduced---and believe me:- it always will be introduced. What we need to do is to provide the politicians with ways in which they can have their laws, calm the community, but not affect us too heavily. This can only be done by calm, logical argument and by going through recognised channels. In the real world of professional criminals the weapons of choice are now, as they have always been, of two basic types:- the effective, purpose built tool designed to terminate life, for example, firearms of various types, and secondly,various everyday objects that can be used, disposed of, and have a low probability of being linked to the crime, for example, a length of pipe wrapped in newspaper. Tools such as "samurai swords" are used by either unbalanced individuals, or by people who set out to frighten , rather than to kill. These two types of people will continue to use exactly the same tactics, even if all swords were to magically evaporate into thin air overnight. Is there anything more frightening than somebody with a cup full of petrol and a cigarette lighter?