Aussiecommies try sword control.

SWPIGWANG · Post by **SWPIGWANG** » 2004-06-12 09:29pm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=38896 even if I know how to dress my links

nuff said

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-06-12 09:31pm

I'd love a blanket ban on WorldNetDaily and Newsmax threads.

jenat-lai · Post by **jenat-lai** » 2004-06-12 10:11pm

Shit... I might have to talk to Elli about that. She has a sword...

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-06-12 10:14pm

Hasn't this been mentioned before? I seem to remember something like this being posted earlier.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-06-12 10:16pm

I'll wait for confirmation from a source other than Raving Whack-a-Loon Digest, thanks.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-06-12 10:58pm

This is really old... IIRC they banned possession swords in one province, but people who already have them in their homes have been ignoring the ban. Apparently after guns were banned there were so many gang swordfights in the streets that this was considered a good idea.

jenat-lai · Post by **jenat-lai** » 2004-06-12 11:20pm

Province?

You must be a Canadian

Is it just a Victorian thing?

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-12 11:20pm

jenat-lai wrote:Shit... I might have to talk to Elli about that. She has a sword...

I've got a sword too, and a massive bow/arrow setup.

Seggy, any idea which state they were banned in?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-06-12 11:42pm

Gang swordfights? That would be interesting to see.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-06-12 11:56pm

Gandalf wrote:I've got a sword too, and a massive bow/arrow setup.

Seggy, any idea which state they were banned in?

Seems like only Victoria

official document

Post by **Gandalf** » 2004-06-12 11:59pm

Seggybop wrote:
Gandalf wrote:I've got a sword too, and a massive bow/arrow setup.

Seggy, any idea which state they were banned in?
Seems like only Victoria

official document

Phew, good thing I live in New South Wales.

Good luck trying to ban swords here, they're sold in corner stores.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-06-13 12:58am

Seggybop wrote:This is really old... IIRC they banned possession swords in one province, but people who already have them in their homes have been ignoring the ban. Apparently after guns were banned there were so many gang swordfights in the streets that this was considered a good idea.

How far can they carry that though? I mean if it goes down to it, they could still beat the shit out of each other with their fists.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2004-06-13 01:02am

Seggybop wrote:This is really old... IIRC they banned possession swords in one province, but people who already have them in their homes have been ignoring the ban. Apparently after guns were banned there were so many gang swordfights in the streets that this was considered a good idea.

Gang swordfights? Now this is something I've got to have a news story to!

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-06-13 01:08am

neoolong wrote:
Seggybop wrote:This is really old... IIRC they banned possession swords in one province, but people who already have them in their homes have been ignoring the ban. Apparently after guns were banned there were so many gang swordfights in the streets that this was considered a good idea.
How far can they carry that though? I mean if it goes down to it, they could still beat the shit out of each other with their fists.

Or they could use kitchen knives. I can't see any credible government attempting to ban kitchen knives.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-06-13 01:59am

Well I think banning swords is plain stupid. There are a lot of things that can be fatal. Even a pieace of rock would be deadly if it is used to bludgeon someone to death. That does not mean we should ban rocks.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2004-06-13 02:11am

evilcat4000 wrote:Well I think banning swords is plain stupid. There are a lot of things that can be fatal. Even a pieace of rock would be deadly if it is used to bludgeon someone to death. That does not mean we should ban rocks.

I can think of more than a few practical applications for stone. A sword on the other hand will have one of two functions:

1) Look extremely cool as it sits somewhere in someone's house.

2) Kill people.

While there is a fine line between weapons and tools in some cases, it isn't nearly as gray an area as some would make it out to be. It's true that no one needs a sword. You can't even use the self defense argument on such an overwhelmingly obsolete weapon type. It's either for display, or it's for no good. Note that the law still accomodates the former.

Although I can't believe this is such a problem as to require a ban...

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-06-13 02:40am

Lazy Raptor wrote: I can think of more than a few practical applications for stone. A sword on the other hand will have one of two functions:

1) Look extremely cool as it sits somewhere in someone's house.

2) Kill people.

While there is a fine line between weapons and tools in some cases, it isn't nearly as gray an area as some would make it out to be. It's true that no one needs a sword. You can't even use the self defense argument on such an overwhelmingly obsolete weapon type. It's either for display, or it's for no good. Note that the law still accomodates the former.

Although I can't believe this is such a problem as to require a ban...

With regardss to self defence with a sword, depending on the type, they can be very suitable for selfdefence due to reach. the question that needs to be asked is that if swords are regulated to this degree whats to stop people useing baseball bats? etc etc

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2004-06-13 02:47am

Stuart Mackey wrote:With regardss to self defence with a sword, depending on the type, they can be very suitable for selfdefence due to reach. the question that needs to be asked is that if swords are regulated to this degree whats to stop people useing baseball bats? etc etc

Again, a baseball bat and whatever else you have on your infinate list of potential weapons are NOT weapons. They are not designed, produced and purchased specifically to cause bodily harm.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-06-13 02:50am

Lazy Raptor wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:With regardss to self defence with a sword, depending on the type, they can be very suitable for selfdefence due to reach. the question that needs to be asked is that if swords are regulated to this degree whats to stop people useing baseball bats? etc etc
Again, a baseball bat and whatever else you have on your infinate list of potential weapons are NOT weapons. They are not designed, produced and purchased specifically to cause bodily harm.

hmm true. Of cource, if one want to one can make a sword, unless you know how it will be a sharp POS but that will do for the criminal element.
I guess it does come don to what are ones rights to effective self defence in Aussie?

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-06-13 03:06am

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:Gang swordfights? Now this is something I've got to have a news story to!

If you're willing to take my word for it, there have been news reports of sword violence being the latest 'chic' thing among malcontents. There was at least one news report where two kids were chased from a particular night club by guys with swords, and to escape them they jumped into the yarra river where they drowned. Another news report had a guy in a sword fight who's hand was severed; they found the hand still holding the sword, and reattached it. That last one... I might be misremembering it though.

Lazy Raptor wrote:Again, a baseball bat and whatever else you have on your infinate list of potential weapons are NOT weapons. They are not designed, produced and purchased specifically to cause bodily harm.

They're not marketed as weapons, I agree. That doesn't change the fact that a baseball bat is nothing more than a club, and some models are much better than a wooden club because they're made of metal. The difference between a sword and a club? With a sword you kill someone by slashing them from a distance. A club you kill someone by bludgeoning them to death. It seems contradictory to outrightly ban one but not the other. (I do concede swords make it easier to kill someone than a bat, making them more dangerous)

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-06-13 03:14am

Stuart Mackey wrote:I guess it does come don to what are ones rights to effective self defence in Aussie?

As far as I know it's the same old 'reasonable force' that says you can defend yourself, but you have to deliberately put yourself at risk to do so. In other words you can't kill someone with a gun if they have a knife, at least that's my poor understanding anyway. And if you do have a weapon, even IF you're completely justified in defending yourself, you'll in all likelihood get in trouble with possession of a weapon.

I've been told by someone else that getting a weapons licence is bureacratically difficult down here. He works as a security officer and pt MP for the reserves, but at the same time I always thought he was a bullshit artist. In any case, I have no trouble believing him about this. Everything down here seems to rely on an excessive amount of paperwork.

Lastly I confess I don't know too much about this subject, all I have is personal observations. Guns are strictly regulated down here, but I don't know how hard it is to get one. Also, swords are in the same boat, but my brother could buy a set of shitty katana wannabes for a measily $30-50. If one were so inclined you could sharpen them, but he never bothered (making them a true ceremonial piece).

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2004-06-13 03:20am

Stofsk wrote:They're not marketed as weapons, I agree. That doesn't change the fact that a baseball bat is nothing more than a club, and some models are much better than a wooden club because they're made of metal. The difference between a sword and a club? With a sword you kill someone by slashing them from a distance. A club you kill someone by bludgeoning them to death. It seems contradictory to outrightly ban one but not the other. (I do concede swords make it easier to kill someone than a bat, making them more dangerous)

Not only is it easier to kill someone with a sword than with a bat, unlike the bat, killing is the only thing a sword does. There are no swordball games, no giant cucumbers or anything that any reasonable person would need a sword for. That's why you can ban swords, which are weapons and only weapons, and not bats, sticks, rocks or automobiles.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-06-13 03:32am

Lazy Raptor wrote:
Stofsk wrote:They're not marketed as weapons, I agree. That doesn't change the fact that a baseball bat is nothing more than a club, and some models are much better than a wooden club because they're made of metal. The difference between a sword and a club? With a sword you kill someone by slashing them from a distance. A club you kill someone by bludgeoning them to death. It seems contradictory to outrightly ban one but not the other. (I do concede swords make it easier to kill someone than a bat, making them more dangerous)
Not only is it easier to kill someone with a sword than with a bat, unlike the bat, killing is the only thing a sword does. There are no swordball games, no giant cucumbers or anything that any reasonable person would need a sword for. That's why you can ban swords, which are weapons and only weapons, and not bats, sticks, rocks or automobiles.

Well to be exact they are not banning them, just regulating them..allthough the settlement of 1688 should overide it if someone feels like challenging it.

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2004-06-13 03:33am

This reminds me of the gang warfare in Hong Kong in Deus Ex...

Heh, life imitates art.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-06-13 03:45am

3rd Impact wrote:This reminds me of the gang warfare in Hong Kong in Deus Ex...

Heh, life imitates art.

More probably criminal life reverting to pre-firearms technology