1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Offensive and Dangerous Weapons - New Legislation

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by nox_uk, Dec 1, 2017.

  1. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,109

    Location: On the hoods

    You can’t swing a bread knife the same as one of those zombie knives. A bread knife is for sawing, not hacking.
     
  2. Hotwired

    Soldato

    Joined: Aug 17, 2009

    Posts: 7,100

    Bread knife > banned knife.

    Kids will have to make do with impressing their peers with mere kitchen and garden implements such as machetes and cooks knives.
     
  3. nox_uk

    Hitman

    Joined: Sep 12, 2006

    Posts: 626

    The current laws are perfectly adequate. There is no logic in banning something thats kept in private that is not as dangerous as a regular kitchen knife/cleaver.

    Sentences need to be enforced more strongly when the current laws are broken
     
  4. kedge

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 5, 2010

    Posts: 3,681

    Whilst the gov is at it perhaps they could step up the Nonproliferation Policy of nuclear weapons, it's a massive threat to mankind. I'm all for laws on the disarmament of offensive-dangerous weapons, seems somewhat hypocritical of authoritative entities making huge profits on selling offensive-dangerous weapons to other member states like the UAE and then make legislation on offensive-dangerous weapons? lead by example and not for profit?.

    Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance | Arms Control Association


    There are several tonnes of plutonium in our biosphere, a legacy of atmospheric weapons testing in the 1950s and 1960s.

    Plutonium - World Nuclear Association
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2017
  5. nox_uk

    Hitman

    Joined: Sep 12, 2006

    Posts: 626

    Those are definitely offensive and should be banned at home (without suitable licence) :D
     
  6. h4rm0ny

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 25, 2011

    Posts: 5,475

    Location: Yorkshire and proud of it!

    Worth remembering that we live in the country which required the cartoon Teenage Ninja Mutant Turtles to be renamed Teenage Mutant HERO Turtles and cut a scene from the movie in which one of them swings a string of sausages around because it was an allusion to nunchucks. The state's bizarre hang-ups about anything "ninja" are well-documented.
     
  7. kindai

    Soldato

    Joined: Aug 9, 2013

    Posts: 6,491

    Location: Bromsgrove

    The 50 cal legislation makes no sense, especially when you have calibers like the 338 Lapua which remain supersonic upto 2km away. Seems very ill thought out.
     
  8. Angilion

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Dec 5, 2003

    Posts: 16,394

    Location: Just to the left of my PC

    I'm not convinced that thought was involved. This is the legislation that classes fishing rods and skipping ropes as weapons so offensive that it's illegal to even own them and is obsessed with fantasy ninjas. I'm not joking about either of those things. The definitions of the prohibited weapons are publically available and fishing rods and skipping ropes very clearly meet the definitions, as do many other things.

    Also, ninjas. About half the banned "offensive weapons" are "ninja" weapons. Ninjas are everywhere, but you can't see them because of their supernatural stealth powers. Well known fact.
     
  9. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,109

    Location: On the hoods

    The legislation doesn't strictly say that, but then this is the problem with writing legislation like this. The legislation in question, SI 1988/2109, includes the phrase that you say describes a skipping rope or whatever, and in a sense it does, but that is in the context of describing something that is a type of weapon. The problem, then, is that "weapon" is not defined in legislation so far as I can see. You are only referring to a description of a specific type of weapon, but no one looks at a skipping rope and determines it to be a weapon, so you don't get to the issue of whether or not it meets a very specific definition of an offensive weapon that it's an offence to even own.

    Could you even define what a weapon is in law? I don't think that would be very easy. You could use all sorts of things as weapons if the fancy took you, so it's very hard to define.
     
  10. h4rm0ny

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 25, 2011

    Posts: 5,475

    Location: Yorkshire and proud of it!

    Out of curiosity, I've had a look through the "offensive weapons list" in the consultation. Is it me or do they really have a strong anti-Asian bias. At least half the weapons listed are oriental. Right down to curved swords being illegal but not straight ones. So if I read it right, the first one is illegal and the second not:
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Am I interpreting this correctly? Or do I have it wrong?

    Similarly this first is illegal but the second not:
    [​IMG] [​IMG]

    I mean, I'm something of an English Nationalist so I'm not entirely unsympathetic but even to me this seems less about rational consistency and more about a bizarre fear of "ninja". Have I read all this right?
     
  11. hyperseven

    Soldato

    Joined: May 1, 2013

    Posts: 6,296

    Location: M28

    Well you wouldn't, they're Ninja's :confused:
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2017
  12. Nasher

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 14,078

    But there must be one which IS legal, that they forgot to put on the list :D
     
  13. Angilion

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Dec 5, 2003

    Posts: 16,394

    Location: Just to the left of my PC

    It's the "ninja" thing. Really. All of the Asian weapons referred to are (a) Japanese and (b) associated with "ninjas". As an aside, there are European weapons with curved blades. Sabres, for example.

    No, both are illegal because they have a hard weight attached to a handle by a chain. I've no idea if the law is enforced equally on them, though.

    Yes. It's about "ninjas". I think it would have given real ninjas a good laugh. Part of what they did was spread propaganda about their own abilities so that people would tend to be more wary of them. If it went pear-shaped, a ninja would have a better chance of escape if the people chasing them were at least a bit worried that the ninja had powerful secret weapons or maybe even supernatural abilities. Centuries later in a faraway land and it's still working.

    On the less ridiculous side, there have been media campaigns against "ninja" weapons. Shuriken, claws, etc. So the government's "offensive weapons" rules could be seen as a politically justifiable response to media campaigns rather than an actual fear of "ninjas". It could also be seen as some sort of somewhat odd campaign against accidental injuries from people, especially children, using weapons that they don't know how to use and without reasonable safety precautions.

    Bah! I just looked at Wikipedia to check dates for real ninjas. Right at the top is the usual guff: "Their covert methods of waging irregular warfare were deemed dishonorable and beneath the samurai-caste, who observed strict rules about honor and combat."

    The samurai's rules about honour and combat were not modern ones and not always adhered to, rather like the code of honour of medieval European knights. But more importantly for this purpose, some ninja were samurai. The two weren't even mutualy exclusive, let alone in conflict. Also, the bulk of what is now known as a samurai code of honour came later, after the last real ninjas, when the main role of samurai changed from fighting to maintaining order in peacetime. In the heyday of the ninja, Japan was in almost constant internal conflict and the focus of honour for samurai was to fight for and be loyal to their lord.
     
  14. Nasher

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 14,078

    Yep the silly thing is a real "ninja" doesn't need a actual weapon. They will kill you with whatever is to hand. That is what they teach :p
     
  15. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,109

    Location: On the hoods

    There was moral panic in the 80s about ninjas. Hence we ended up with Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles, for example.
     
  16. h4rm0ny

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 25, 2011

    Posts: 5,475

    Location: Yorkshire and proud of it!

    Got to love the State's kak-handed attempts at social manipulation. "Ninja's are popular! Our children are about to become crazed killers! Ban stuff now!". To be fair, I do remember a boy in my class knocking himself in the forehead with a nunchuck he brought in one day and crying. Odd thing is at the time I don't remember finding it funny but now looking back I do. I think I may have actually become a worse person with age.

    So did anyone here actually fill out the proposal response form and send it back? If so, what did you say?
     
  17. kindai

    Soldato

    Joined: Aug 9, 2013

    Posts: 6,491

    Location: Bromsgrove

    Quite, this seems like a hysteria "OMG 50 CAL IS UBER DANGEROUS BAN BAN BAN" knee jerking. Frankly, if youre hit at close range by any rifle round youre pretty screwed.
     
  18. wolfie138

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 8, 2013

    Posts: 2,976

    the rules are a p-take. i love knives and swords, but apparently i'm unable to buy swords now as they're banned due to being over a certain length. so as per the BBFC trying to censor and ban films "just in case", i'm not allowed to have anyting that i and i alone will have access to? total garbage.
    "swords, including samurai swords - a curved blade over 50cm (with some exceptions, such as antiques and swords made to traditional methods before 1954)" ~ so that includes replicas of movie swords etc? interesting, given the last time i was a the LFCC there were numerous sellers selling all kinds of knives, many of which fit descriptions in the banned list, and at least two had a huge selection of swords, both traditional and movie replicas.

    i'm all for making the world safer, but as usual they just seem to go for the irrelevant/easy targets so the dumb public are sure to understand.
     
  19. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 64,509

    The .50 cal stuff is ostensibly about its ability to compromise body armour - level 5 (and even to a degree level 4 plate) type stuff will stop a typical rifle round like 7.62/.308 even black and silver tips, etc. even at fairly close range - but end of the day .50 type stuff is designed for anti-material work sure it will make a nasty mess against a soft target even with body armour but there are other, probably easier to obtain both legally and illegally, rounds that are efficient against body armour.

    The whole thing has been dreamed up by someone trying to look like they are doing something, going for an easy target, without actually accomplishing anything except inconveniencing a small number of people who legally have access to such hardware for valid reasons and an incredibly tiny chance of something bad resulting from them.

    EDIT: Oh you did mention 338 lapua further up.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2017
  20. =XDC=FluphyBunny

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 16, 2010

    Posts: 4,512

    Location: North East England

    The proposed ban on the .50 cal and MARS system rifles is a complete nonsense.

    The .50 cal proposed ban is apparently sparked by the theft of a .50 cal rifle (which was recovered).

    Essentially banning guns that are only used by people who abide by the law. Honestly this is like proposing to ban of trucks/vans following their use in terrorist attacks.