Obviously I voted NO. I wonder if this is the start of a new "anti" craze. Like the anti gun people who never think about the lives saved, rapes and kidnappings aborted, because the intended victim was armed. As I understand it, we are in the rebirth stage of the fascination with swords. As swords become ever the more popular are we going to be faced with anti sword people trying to thwart our rights to our passion of swords? In truth I have been kind of wondering about this, there have been a few articles in newspapers in the U.S. about criminals armed with swords, one wherein the criminal was in some form of armor with shield and sword and tried to attack police.
Crazy as it sounds, but as swords regain their rightful place in popularity we may well be face with the anti sword nuts.
Well, they will take my swords out of my cold dead blue hands!
Bob
| Micha Hofmann wrote: |
| But i disagree regarding Stevens post about swords not being weapons. |
Swords are not weapons. They used to be weapons, but they aren't now.
A weapon is something which is intended to be used to hurt people (in addition to this, any item actually used to hurt someone becomes a weapon by definition, but this is irrelevant to the discussion). No sword made today is intended to be used to hurt people. Just as Bill's examples, they are cultural oddities. We call them weapons because they used to be weapons, but they're not weapons in the modern world. Guns are intended to hurt people and animals, and sometimes happen to be used for other purposes. Therefore they are weapons. No sword is made with the intention that it will be used to damage a living thing. Therefore swords are not weapons. Axes, hammers, bill hooks etc. were all weapons at one stage, but if you went into a gardening store and looked at a woodchopping axes and remarked to the salesman that it was a weapon, he'd look at you like you were mad. Nobody regards an axe as a weapon, despite the fact that a sharp axe is a fearsome thing. Swords aren't quite in this category yet, because they don't have the same obvious tool value as knives or axes. Therefore we need to work to place swords into this category, of items which are certainly dangerous if misused, but which are necessary tools in a number of activities that we would like to continue to have.
I stress that this stance is based on three years of political lobbying on behalf of sword owners in three separate countries. Let them make it a weapons issue and you will lose. You must never mention the sword in relation to violence. Guys, this should be easy. I've never seen a violent act with a sword, but I handle swords every day of my life. In 27 years of serious training with swords, swordsmithing and sword collecting, I've never seen a sword used as a weapon. How many people here have seen violence with a sword? How many people have seen constructive activities with swords? We've all read of many, many violent acts with swords, when they were weapons, and that makes us think of them as weapons. But they're not, not any more. They're items used for sports, dancing, theatre and a host of other harmless activities.
Incidentally, this is how swords were made legal again in Japan after WWII. It was successfuly argued that theye were an item of art and cultural heritage, not weapons.
Banning weapons seems to have become a new political vogue. If we are to survive this madness then we must be smart. A successful strategy has been established by trial and error. For it to succeed, sword owners must learn the message and stick to it. An insistence that swords are weapons isboth factually incorrect and something likely to get swords banned. Do we want this?
I understand Stephen's point and I suspect in places like Britain, the British Commonwealth (or indeed most of Europe) that the approach that he is suggesting may be on of the only recourses to those who wish to own swords. I don't know how effective it will be in the long run because all it takes is some loon hacking someone in the high street with the omnipresent stainless japanese style "samurai" sword to highlight to the general populace that swords are indeed weapons. Couple that with the fact that apparently some places in Europe hoplophobia has become so far advanced that they are talking about banning knives (to be fair theres some of the same "thought" process going on in California and New York) and where does that leave you? A couple of katana hacking incidents and all your work to promote the " a sword is not a weapon" idea is washed away in a tide of hysteria. In the long term I think the only real solution is to turn around the anti-weapons mindset that exists in these hoplophobic places... if that's even possible. However you play the hand you have been dealt.
Here in the States hoplophobia is not so well established. I believe that we still have the opportunity to hold the line against hoplophobes and that we need to do it on the modern weapon front. Regardless how you feel about guns supporting organizations like the NRA is probably our best hope. Right now the hoplophobes are focused on taking guns out of the hands of private citizens. Until that happens they aren't going to give a lot of thought or at the very least expend a lot of their energy (with some notable exceptions) to extending their irrational fears to other items. You don't have to make swords a big issue here, not yet. Rather quietly support pro gun groups, they are your bulwark against hoplophobia. If that fails we still have the option of going the "a sword is not a weapon route."
I hope this post is not inflammatory it is not intended as such. I hesitate to even post it, as I don't typically discuss politics here.
Here in the States hoplophobia is not so well established. I believe that we still have the opportunity to hold the line against hoplophobes and that we need to do it on the modern weapon front. Regardless how you feel about guns supporting organizations like the NRA is probably our best hope. Right now the hoplophobes are focused on taking guns out of the hands of private citizens. Until that happens they aren't going to give a lot of thought or at the very least expend a lot of their energy (with some notable exceptions) to extending their irrational fears to other items. You don't have to make swords a big issue here, not yet. Rather quietly support pro gun groups, they are your bulwark against hoplophobia. If that fails we still have the option of going the "a sword is not a weapon route."
I hope this post is not inflammatory it is not intended as such. I hesitate to even post it, as I don't typically discuss politics here.
I think Stephen makes many good points about what constitutes a "weapon" and what doesn't. His theme of buying an woodchopping axe at a gardening store made me think of something else too: Look at all the other "weapons" that have been glorified in one way or another in Hollywood horror films (mechete knives, khukris, chain-saws, chef/butcher's knives, 'Rambo' knives, even scalpels). All these things you can buy at any hardware store, department store, or flea market.
My point is that the anti-whatever community should consider the primary purpose of the object they're trying to boycott. For instance, if swords are being used as murder weapons, put a stop to the murderers -- not the swords -- and educate the rest of us why medieval swords are still being made in the 21st century. The same approach can be applied with guns, can it not?
My point is that the anti-whatever community should consider the primary purpose of the object they're trying to boycott. For instance, if swords are being used as murder weapons, put a stop to the murderers -- not the swords -- and educate the rest of us why medieval swords are still being made in the 21st century. The same approach can be applied with guns, can it not?
Hell, if they wanted to disarm criminals, go for the baseball bats instead.... NOONE (oh, well, some. Maybe. Not aware on any teams in norway...) over here plays baseball. Still there is a steady sale of bats... No balls, no gloves, just the bats...
Shady elements are obviously VERY easily influenced by movies...
Shady elements are obviously VERY easily influenced by movies...
OK, my .02 cents.
I have to respectfully disagree. Swords are weapons and are designed to be so. Unlike a modern axe or kitchen knife they do not possess a secondary, utilitarian, tool-like purpose. An axe or kitchen knife can be used as a weapon but that is not their primary purpose. A sword's primary purpose is to kill. That doesn't necessarily mean that anyone designing, producing, purchasing, or possessing a sword intends to use it for that purpose. Quite the contrary in our modern society.
This is true, but the key word here is "practical". Swords are no longer relevant as weapons in our society. They have lost all military significance on and off the battlefield except as symbols of the warrior ethos. But that being said it doesn't make them cease being weapons. I have an old Atari 800 computer sitting in a closet. I can't hook it up to any peripherals, jack it into the internet or do any real work on it anymore. It is a relic. But that doesn't mean that it isn't a computer. It still retains that function (and thus that title) and I can still turn it on and edit txt files or play a game of pong. It can still, if need be, fulfill its intended function. It just does it far more inefficiently than a modern PC or Mac.
Now, all that being said I completely agree with the strategy of framing swords as non-weapons in the arena of public perception. The last thing I would want to see is a partial or complete ban on swords or any antique weapon. So I completely understand this philosophy and the need to perpetuate it.
But swords are weapons. To call them anything less is to not give them the respect that they deserve.
Like I said, just my .02 cents.
| Stephen Hand wrote: |
| Swords are not weapons. They used to be weapons, but they aren't now. |
I have to respectfully disagree. Swords are weapons and are designed to be so. Unlike a modern axe or kitchen knife they do not possess a secondary, utilitarian, tool-like purpose. An axe or kitchen knife can be used as a weapon but that is not their primary purpose. A sword's primary purpose is to kill. That doesn't necessarily mean that anyone designing, producing, purchasing, or possessing a sword intends to use it for that purpose. Quite the contrary in our modern society.
| Stephen Hand wrote: |
| Basically the sword is not a practical weapon in today's society |
This is true, but the key word here is "practical". Swords are no longer relevant as weapons in our society. They have lost all military significance on and off the battlefield except as symbols of the warrior ethos. But that being said it doesn't make them cease being weapons. I have an old Atari 800 computer sitting in a closet. I can't hook it up to any peripherals, jack it into the internet or do any real work on it anymore. It is a relic. But that doesn't mean that it isn't a computer. It still retains that function (and thus that title) and I can still turn it on and edit txt files or play a game of pong. It can still, if need be, fulfill its intended function. It just does it far more inefficiently than a modern PC or Mac.
Now, all that being said I completely agree with the strategy of framing swords as non-weapons in the arena of public perception. The last thing I would want to see is a partial or complete ban on swords or any antique weapon. So I completely understand this philosophy and the need to perpetuate it.
But swords are weapons. To call them anything less is to not give them the respect that they deserve.
Like I said, just my .02 cents.
Last edited by Mark Mattimore on Tue 14 Feb, 2006 2:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Stephen Hand worte:
"We call them weapons because they used to be weapons, but they're not weapons in the modern world. Guns are intended to hurt people and animals, and sometimes happen to be used for other purposes. Therefore they are weapons. No sword is made with the intention that it will be used to damage a living thing. Therefore swords are not weapons."
How do you fit the rifle or revolver of a US Civil War re-enactors to your definition? :wtf: Or the matchlock musket of a English Civil War re-enactor? Are they just waitng to hurt someone?
How do you fit the 220,000 US Dollars Holland and Holland shotgun into your definition? Is that not a work of art? Was the craftsmen laboring on it for years just hoping to hurt someone? Was he any less of an artist than the swordsmith who labors to build that custom sword?
How do you fit the 50 pound high end target rifle into your definition? Do you really think the designers of that weapon started off to hurt someone, and just stumbled into a good tool for 1000 yard target shooting?
In my opinion your argument is weak that swords are not weapons but firearms are. Firearms, swords, polearms, knives, clubs, staffs, axes, bows, slings, hammers, wrenches, and all the rest are just tools. Nothing more, nothing less. I would agree some tools are more dangerest than others. For example my hunting knife is less dangerest than the WW2 machine gun a Czech friend of mine owns. But neither is going to run off on it's the own a hurt anyone or anything. The problem the sword/armour collecting community is going to have is not a problem over use, but one of public opinion. And taking the tactic that swords are not weapons is not going to work.
It is very easy to make a adult person who dresses up as a knight, and viking look like a extremist to the eyes of the majority of voters. Lets remember that to the majorty of US voters dress up is a game played by children. As long as they have their sport, and beer/drugs they are happy. Politicians need an issue to control their masses. In recent years in the the UK , Canada, Australia it was firearms. (Ok also Fox hunting in the UK) Those evils are now gone. (From what I read firearms are being removed even from the museums in Australia, and the UK. For safety of the public, of course.) That issue has been less successful in the US, but the battle is still new there. (In the past what California gets, the rest of the US gets about 10 to 20 years later. Strict gun control.) Now that the masses are safe from firearms, your hobby is the next target issue. And the sword and armor communities are going to lose in the UK, maybe the other nations of the British commonwealth too. And when the issue becomes a target in the US the community loses too, first in California, and New York, and then followed quickly by the other "progressive" states. Maybe they let you keep unsharpened swords, maybe not. The masses will support those that give them the most social services everytime. And right now the political Left-wing in most western nations is none too supportive of anything war-like. Whether you call it a weapon or not.
And in the opinion of some you are going to get what is coming to you. You did not support the right of a groups that you thought odd (Gun owners in this case.), and now when your head is on the block no one cares to help. Of course you could just buy a six pack and watch a sports game, and be normal.
And I would not use the Japanese as an example. Thier culture is just to different than any western nation's. There is no way the sword collecting community in Australia or, the UK, or the US is going to be successful saying swords are part of their culture. To the ruling parties of many western nations those ideas are part the problems. Those ideas are just reminders of pointless wars, racism, Imperialism, social class and so on. They are trying to destory those things, to build a fair, safe, classless, raceless society.
Of course that is just my 28 cents US.
"We call them weapons because they used to be weapons, but they're not weapons in the modern world. Guns are intended to hurt people and animals, and sometimes happen to be used for other purposes. Therefore they are weapons. No sword is made with the intention that it will be used to damage a living thing. Therefore swords are not weapons."
How do you fit the rifle or revolver of a US Civil War re-enactors to your definition? :wtf: Or the matchlock musket of a English Civil War re-enactor? Are they just waitng to hurt someone?
How do you fit the 220,000 US Dollars Holland and Holland shotgun into your definition? Is that not a work of art? Was the craftsmen laboring on it for years just hoping to hurt someone? Was he any less of an artist than the swordsmith who labors to build that custom sword?
How do you fit the 50 pound high end target rifle into your definition? Do you really think the designers of that weapon started off to hurt someone, and just stumbled into a good tool for 1000 yard target shooting?
In my opinion your argument is weak that swords are not weapons but firearms are. Firearms, swords, polearms, knives, clubs, staffs, axes, bows, slings, hammers, wrenches, and all the rest are just tools. Nothing more, nothing less. I would agree some tools are more dangerest than others. For example my hunting knife is less dangerest than the WW2 machine gun a Czech friend of mine owns. But neither is going to run off on it's the own a hurt anyone or anything. The problem the sword/armour collecting community is going to have is not a problem over use, but one of public opinion. And taking the tactic that swords are not weapons is not going to work.
It is very easy to make a adult person who dresses up as a knight, and viking look like a extremist to the eyes of the majority of voters. Lets remember that to the majorty of US voters dress up is a game played by children. As long as they have their sport, and beer/drugs they are happy. Politicians need an issue to control their masses. In recent years in the the UK , Canada, Australia it was firearms. (Ok also Fox hunting in the UK) Those evils are now gone. (From what I read firearms are being removed even from the museums in Australia, and the UK. For safety of the public, of course.) That issue has been less successful in the US, but the battle is still new there. (In the past what California gets, the rest of the US gets about 10 to 20 years later. Strict gun control.) Now that the masses are safe from firearms, your hobby is the next target issue. And the sword and armor communities are going to lose in the UK, maybe the other nations of the British commonwealth too. And when the issue becomes a target in the US the community loses too, first in California, and New York, and then followed quickly by the other "progressive" states. Maybe they let you keep unsharpened swords, maybe not. The masses will support those that give them the most social services everytime. And right now the political Left-wing in most western nations is none too supportive of anything war-like. Whether you call it a weapon or not.
And in the opinion of some you are going to get what is coming to you. You did not support the right of a groups that you thought odd (Gun owners in this case.), and now when your head is on the block no one cares to help. Of course you could just buy a six pack and watch a sports game, and be normal.
And I would not use the Japanese as an example. Thier culture is just to different than any western nation's. There is no way the sword collecting community in Australia or, the UK, or the US is going to be successful saying swords are part of their culture. To the ruling parties of many western nations those ideas are part the problems. Those ideas are just reminders of pointless wars, racism, Imperialism, social class and so on. They are trying to destory those things, to build a fair, safe, classless, raceless society.
Of course that is just my 28 cents US.
I wish I hadn't brought this up. Don't you people realise that anyone can come here and read these posts.
Do you want swords to be banned in the UK? If so, keep talking the way you are.
"taking the tactic that swords are not weapons is not going to work"
It has worked and it is working!
Let me put this bluntly. I have been lobbying politicians for three years now against anti-sword legislation. I have been involved in four separate campaigns to ban swords and one to ban armour. I have even written a letter to a mainstream media outlet in the US who was conducting a scare campaign against a swordsmith working out of a suburban backyard. I know what works and what makes things worse, and this seems to be true even in the US. I am getting really, really sick of Americans who just don't get it, practically writing the anti-sword legislator's next speech for him. I am getting more than sick of people who tell me that the tactics that I see working won't work, and that tactics that I have seen do us harm would work instead. If you're not actively involved in campaigning against anti-sword legislation, then you don't know what you're talking about and you need to shut up before you do any more harm than you already have.
UK residents should be aware that the front page story of today's Exeter Echo refers to actual plans to ban swords. I've copied the text below. UK sword owners should look at writing to, or seeing their local MP. If you do this, could I please, please ask you to consider the approach outlined in my posts above. Focus on the peaceful and constructive uses of swords and what would be banned if swords were banned. They mention exemptions. Comment on the fact that exempting everyone who owns a sword for legitimate purposes means all collectors, all re-enactors, all fencers, all martial arts groups, all actors, all Highland and traditional English dancers etc. How many millions of people are they going to exempt? What sort of farcical law do they intend to have? Do not at any stage mention swords and violence. Do not even refer to violence.
If anyone is interested, I can draft a form letter that people could send.
Oh, and could Americans please, please please just keep their strange views to themselves and not damage this campaign any more than they already have?
SWORDS BAN IS A STEP CLOSER
12:00 - 14 February 2006
The Echo's campaign to ban the sale of samurai swords will be used to draw up new laws by the Government.
The Home Office has written to the Echo to reveal that it is now considering adding the swords to a list of dangerous weapons.
It was asked to look at a ban by Prime Minster Tony Blair after the Echo's 1,500-name petition was handed in to Downing Street.
In its letter, a spokesman for the Home Office said: "The Government is considering banning samurai swords due to their use in violent crime, but it is also looking at providing exemptions.
"It is an offence under section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to sell, manufacture or import any of the offensive weapons listed in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988.
"There are currently 17 weapons listed in that order. If we do ban samurai swords, they will be added to that order."
The Home Office said the Echo and its readers would be given the chance to further influence decision-makers when the legislation is drawn up.
The spokesman said: "Interested parties will be given an opportunity to comment on the details of any ban and I will ensure that you are given an opportunity to make further comments."
The Echo's campaign was launched following the death of Sidmouth man Matthew Stiling.
The 33-year-old electrician was stabbed with a samurai sword in July last year.
The campaign has been backed by Mr Stiling's family, leading police officers in Exeter, council leaders and city MP Ben Bradshaw.
Lord Jones of Cheltenham - whose aide Andrew Pennington was killed in a samurai sword attack - has also endorsed the campaign.
The Echo is calling for the weapons to be banned to all but legitimate users, such as martial arts groups.
Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw said the Home Office was listening to public opinion on the issue.
He said: "I welcome this response from the Home Office.
"I am pleased the Government is considering whether the law on the sale of samurai swords needs to be tightened."
The commander of the city's police force, Chief Inspector Adrian Brigden, has also welcomed the move.
He said: "I think this response from the Home Office is very encouraging. It is in line with the Government's stated aim of tackling knife crime head on."
He said he was particularly hopeful that samurai sword owners would hand in their blades.
He said: "In my opinion, you wouldn't use a samurai sword to chop up vegetables in your kitchen.
"They have only one purpose, the one they were made for - to kill.
"So anyone who wants to get rid of their knives and samurai swords is asked to take them to their local police station."
Do you want swords to be banned in the UK? If so, keep talking the way you are.
"taking the tactic that swords are not weapons is not going to work"
It has worked and it is working!
Let me put this bluntly. I have been lobbying politicians for three years now against anti-sword legislation. I have been involved in four separate campaigns to ban swords and one to ban armour. I have even written a letter to a mainstream media outlet in the US who was conducting a scare campaign against a swordsmith working out of a suburban backyard. I know what works and what makes things worse, and this seems to be true even in the US. I am getting really, really sick of Americans who just don't get it, practically writing the anti-sword legislator's next speech for him. I am getting more than sick of people who tell me that the tactics that I see working won't work, and that tactics that I have seen do us harm would work instead. If you're not actively involved in campaigning against anti-sword legislation, then you don't know what you're talking about and you need to shut up before you do any more harm than you already have.
UK residents should be aware that the front page story of today's Exeter Echo refers to actual plans to ban swords. I've copied the text below. UK sword owners should look at writing to, or seeing their local MP. If you do this, could I please, please ask you to consider the approach outlined in my posts above. Focus on the peaceful and constructive uses of swords and what would be banned if swords were banned. They mention exemptions. Comment on the fact that exempting everyone who owns a sword for legitimate purposes means all collectors, all re-enactors, all fencers, all martial arts groups, all actors, all Highland and traditional English dancers etc. How many millions of people are they going to exempt? What sort of farcical law do they intend to have? Do not at any stage mention swords and violence. Do not even refer to violence.
If anyone is interested, I can draft a form letter that people could send.
Oh, and could Americans please, please please just keep their strange views to themselves and not damage this campaign any more than they already have?
SWORDS BAN IS A STEP CLOSER
12:00 - 14 February 2006
The Echo's campaign to ban the sale of samurai swords will be used to draw up new laws by the Government.
The Home Office has written to the Echo to reveal that it is now considering adding the swords to a list of dangerous weapons.
It was asked to look at a ban by Prime Minster Tony Blair after the Echo's 1,500-name petition was handed in to Downing Street.
In its letter, a spokesman for the Home Office said: "The Government is considering banning samurai swords due to their use in violent crime, but it is also looking at providing exemptions.
"It is an offence under section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to sell, manufacture or import any of the offensive weapons listed in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988.
"There are currently 17 weapons listed in that order. If we do ban samurai swords, they will be added to that order."
The Home Office said the Echo and its readers would be given the chance to further influence decision-makers when the legislation is drawn up.
The spokesman said: "Interested parties will be given an opportunity to comment on the details of any ban and I will ensure that you are given an opportunity to make further comments."
The Echo's campaign was launched following the death of Sidmouth man Matthew Stiling.
The 33-year-old electrician was stabbed with a samurai sword in July last year.
The campaign has been backed by Mr Stiling's family, leading police officers in Exeter, council leaders and city MP Ben Bradshaw.
Lord Jones of Cheltenham - whose aide Andrew Pennington was killed in a samurai sword attack - has also endorsed the campaign.
The Echo is calling for the weapons to be banned to all but legitimate users, such as martial arts groups.
Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw said the Home Office was listening to public opinion on the issue.
He said: "I welcome this response from the Home Office.
"I am pleased the Government is considering whether the law on the sale of samurai swords needs to be tightened."
The commander of the city's police force, Chief Inspector Adrian Brigden, has also welcomed the move.
He said: "I think this response from the Home Office is very encouraging. It is in line with the Government's stated aim of tackling knife crime head on."
He said he was particularly hopeful that samurai sword owners would hand in their blades.
He said: "In my opinion, you wouldn't use a samurai sword to chop up vegetables in your kitchen.
"They have only one purpose, the one they were made for - to kill.
"So anyone who wants to get rid of their knives and samurai swords is asked to take them to their local police station."
Stephen, I appreciate and agree with your sentiment. I also support your campaign. I ask that you keep your tone professional and calm. I do not want to see the bashing of people based on the country in which they live. I find that offensive.
I'd prefer to keep all rants off this site. Discuss viewpoints. Discuss counterpoints. But keep the rants off this site. When the campaign becomes a crusade, the line has been crossed.
If you are finding a particular viewpoint disagreeable, by all means discuss it. Do not lump it onto a nation. Not here. This is simply not as compelling of an argument as countering the actual viewpoint itself.
A ranting fanatical tone does as much to harm the campaign as does the other short-sighted conversations happening in this topic.
I respect others to disagree with me and have their own opinion, so long as they express it appropriately here and are able to handle a counter-opinion expressed to them. I want you to as well.
We need to discuss these things calmly, professionally, objectively, and without an irate tone. I appreciate you adding to the context of the situation, as I don't believe others in this topic have seen the greater picture, but please continue to do so in a different manner.
Thank you.
I'd prefer to keep all rants off this site. Discuss viewpoints. Discuss counterpoints. But keep the rants off this site. When the campaign becomes a crusade, the line has been crossed.
If you are finding a particular viewpoint disagreeable, by all means discuss it. Do not lump it onto a nation. Not here. This is simply not as compelling of an argument as countering the actual viewpoint itself.
A ranting fanatical tone does as much to harm the campaign as does the other short-sighted conversations happening in this topic.
I respect others to disagree with me and have their own opinion, so long as they express it appropriately here and are able to handle a counter-opinion expressed to them. I want you to as well.
We need to discuss these things calmly, professionally, objectively, and without an irate tone. I appreciate you adding to the context of the situation, as I don't believe others in this topic have seen the greater picture, but please continue to do so in a different manner.
Thank you.
Adding to what Stephen Hand has said, I'd like to encourage those participating in this topic to look at the larger picture and consider their future interest in the arms and armour hobby. I've attempted to build this site to add legitimacy to our related hobbies and make it more appealing and palatable to the general population. This is a specific goal of myArmoury.com: to make these related hobbies seem less objectionable to the world. Please consider this goal in your own actions.
Steve I understand exactly what you mean and my interest in swords for instance is one of an artistic and historical interest. Whether studying swords or practicing the use of them it is purely of an artistic and historical interest. The sword was an integral impliment in deciding borders, ruling kingdoms, kings, etc.
The changes developed in swords to meet different needs including the improvement of armor, it's all part of history and is in part what made the culture we live in today. As it did contribute in the dominating kingdom which would one day land on the eastern shores of North America. Although a huge part of that was decided in the Spanish Armada of 1588 and that was cannon fire, but I am talking of what gained power for England in the preceeding centuries.
So to me the sword is an interest of art and history.
Bob
The changes developed in swords to meet different needs including the improvement of armor, it's all part of history and is in part what made the culture we live in today. As it did contribute in the dominating kingdom which would one day land on the eastern shores of North America. Although a huge part of that was decided in the Spanish Armada of 1588 and that was cannon fire, but I am talking of what gained power for England in the preceeding centuries.
So to me the sword is an interest of art and history.
Bob
Stephen,
I regret the tone of my first post. I was not trying to make light of your willingness to fight for your beliefs. But your comments on guns being only for hurting people or animals refects an opinion that greatly upsets me, and I reacted badly. I reject your opinion on guns, but that does not excuse the way I replied. Please except my apologies.
I can understand your passion for your hobby. I am very passionate about my hobbies too. I also get upset when persons of other nations butt in to my nations internal politics. Much like the pro-gun ban groups funded by some European nations do, or the UN .
I am interested in the letter you wrote the US media outlet. What was the outcome? Did they print your letter?
But fundamentally what I stated is true you do not have a problem with the misuse of swords, but a problem with the public opinion of swords and there owners. Like the example in your post from the UK. How do you stop the government / media from shading the the issue to fit their agenda? Is there some sort of nation wide group organizing the community in the UK, or a they going to be like the Fox hunters or target shooters?
The problem I have with your definition is not one with your end goals. I also hope the UK does not ban swords, because I understand that if successful there it is another battle I have to fight here. The problem is that I do not believe swords are not weapons. I believe they are, which is why they interest me, both in there design and historical use. I believe many weapons can be art forms, for example a fine custom sword, or a best grade english shotgun. Now if you are defining them as non-weapons for a public relations campaign I can understand need for that, but otherwise I do not.
One final thought. In my post I put forth some points, and personal opinions. Those ideas and opinion were based on the best information I had at the time. I do not believe that every opinion I have is always correct. I am always open to have my ideas questioned and changing them if I find them incorrect. You did not do that. You launched an attack on my ethnic background. Is that how you convert people to your point of view? Make fun of their ideas, and their race? Would it not have been better to simply address why I am wrong in your opinion? To address each point in honest debate? To respectfully point out how you felt my opinions could give ideas to the other side? Maybe you could have had a convert.
Sincerely,
Mr. Michael A. White
I regret the tone of my first post. I was not trying to make light of your willingness to fight for your beliefs. But your comments on guns being only for hurting people or animals refects an opinion that greatly upsets me, and I reacted badly. I reject your opinion on guns, but that does not excuse the way I replied. Please except my apologies.
I can understand your passion for your hobby. I am very passionate about my hobbies too. I also get upset when persons of other nations butt in to my nations internal politics. Much like the pro-gun ban groups funded by some European nations do, or the UN .
I am interested in the letter you wrote the US media outlet. What was the outcome? Did they print your letter?
But fundamentally what I stated is true you do not have a problem with the misuse of swords, but a problem with the public opinion of swords and there owners. Like the example in your post from the UK. How do you stop the government / media from shading the the issue to fit their agenda? Is there some sort of nation wide group organizing the community in the UK, or a they going to be like the Fox hunters or target shooters?
The problem I have with your definition is not one with your end goals. I also hope the UK does not ban swords, because I understand that if successful there it is another battle I have to fight here. The problem is that I do not believe swords are not weapons. I believe they are, which is why they interest me, both in there design and historical use. I believe many weapons can be art forms, for example a fine custom sword, or a best grade english shotgun. Now if you are defining them as non-weapons for a public relations campaign I can understand need for that, but otherwise I do not.
One final thought. In my post I put forth some points, and personal opinions. Those ideas and opinion were based on the best information I had at the time. I do not believe that every opinion I have is always correct. I am always open to have my ideas questioned and changing them if I find them incorrect. You did not do that. You launched an attack on my ethnic background. Is that how you convert people to your point of view? Make fun of their ideas, and their race? Would it not have been better to simply address why I am wrong in your opinion? To address each point in honest debate? To respectfully point out how you felt my opinions could give ideas to the other side? Maybe you could have had a convert.
Sincerely,
Mr. Michael A. White
Nathan, I salute your diplomacy. Your words were far more carefully chosen than those which were coursing through my brain, after reading Stephen's post.
I'd like to offer one comment inspired by your second post, in which you mention the 'big picture' and 'related hobbies.' I submit that the honorable ownership and use of arms is a timeless discipline that transcends the item itself, be it sword or gun. There should be no difference in philosophy or responsibility, and for enthusiasts from either group to consider the other 'strange' is narrow-minded and counter-productive.
I'd like to offer one comment inspired by your second post, in which you mention the 'big picture' and 'related hobbies.' I submit that the honorable ownership and use of arms is a timeless discipline that transcends the item itself, be it sword or gun. There should be no difference in philosophy or responsibility, and for enthusiasts from either group to consider the other 'strange' is narrow-minded and counter-productive.
Gentlemen,
I appreciate that for the most part, other people's view points should be respected and debated calmly. However, in some cases this is not appropriate. If someone in my salle wishes to debate a point of interpretation I discuss it with them calmly. If someone starts doing something that might result in harm then the time for diplomacy is past. They get roared at.
It has been calmly explained why swords are not weapons and why treating them as weapons is likely to see them banned. If people cannot appreciate the seriousness of arguing against this position then they are acting to harm the sword community and they need to be told to stop.
I will repeat, hundreds of thousands of swords are created every year. Not one of them is created with the intention that it be used to hurt people. Ergo, swords are not weapons, regardless of the fact that they used to be.
If you want to argue to the contrary, please do not do so in a public place where your words could cause harm to other members of the sword owning community.
I apologise for my comments about Americans. I should have directed my comments to the individuals, not to a whole country.
Please consider that this forum is a public place and that comments made here can affect the rights of other people to pursue their hobbies. Trying to use the same tactics as used by gun lobbyists is disastrous when lobbying in favour of continued sword ownership. Those of us actively lobbying politicians, bureaucrats and the media are developing an ever more slick set of arguments and approaches to this problem. To have these arguments undermined by our own constituency is very upsetting.
I appreciate that for the most part, other people's view points should be respected and debated calmly. However, in some cases this is not appropriate. If someone in my salle wishes to debate a point of interpretation I discuss it with them calmly. If someone starts doing something that might result in harm then the time for diplomacy is past. They get roared at.
It has been calmly explained why swords are not weapons and why treating them as weapons is likely to see them banned. If people cannot appreciate the seriousness of arguing against this position then they are acting to harm the sword community and they need to be told to stop.
I will repeat, hundreds of thousands of swords are created every year. Not one of them is created with the intention that it be used to hurt people. Ergo, swords are not weapons, regardless of the fact that they used to be.
If you want to argue to the contrary, please do not do so in a public place where your words could cause harm to other members of the sword owning community.
I apologise for my comments about Americans. I should have directed my comments to the individuals, not to a whole country.
Please consider that this forum is a public place and that comments made here can affect the rights of other people to pursue their hobbies. Trying to use the same tactics as used by gun lobbyists is disastrous when lobbying in favour of continued sword ownership. Those of us actively lobbying politicians, bureaucrats and the media are developing an ever more slick set of arguments and approaches to this problem. To have these arguments undermined by our own constituency is very upsetting.
Steve, I see your point and have agreed with it all along and in my opinion what you are saying is exactly correct! I also know the purpose of this website is to share and learn about the history of swords, the various arts of how the sword was used in conjunction with the various kinds of swords as well as the era of these swords.
To my knowledge, myArmoury is the most informative website on swords inclusive of what I just said. To me, this is an educational website for the purpose of learning from a historical, martial art and artistic standpoint and all this makes myArmoury a very valuable website.
It is also very true that what is said in here can be read by just about anyone and an emotional post that focuses on negative issues which is not what the purpose of this forum is for in my opinion, can be misconstrued by someone and utilized by persons who are uninformed or unsympathetic with our interests.
myArmoury is very important to me in my learning process and interests from an historical and various aspects of an artistic focus.
Steve, I for one am grateful of your efforts and teachings of what the sword really is and means to us and what it correctly represents so as to not be misconstrued by others.
Thank you Steve,
Bob
To my knowledge, myArmoury is the most informative website on swords inclusive of what I just said. To me, this is an educational website for the purpose of learning from a historical, martial art and artistic standpoint and all this makes myArmoury a very valuable website.
It is also very true that what is said in here can be read by just about anyone and an emotional post that focuses on negative issues which is not what the purpose of this forum is for in my opinion, can be misconstrued by someone and utilized by persons who are uninformed or unsympathetic with our interests.
myArmoury is very important to me in my learning process and interests from an historical and various aspects of an artistic focus.
Steve, I for one am grateful of your efforts and teachings of what the sword really is and means to us and what it correctly represents so as to not be misconstrued by others.
Thank you Steve,
Bob
| Stephen Hand wrote: |
| Gentlemen,
I appreciate that for the most part, other people's view points should be respected and debated calmly. However, in some cases this is not appropriate. If someone in my salle wishes to debate a point of interpretation I discuss it with them calmly. If someone starts doing something that might result in harm then the time for diplomacy is past. They get roared at. It has been calmly explained why swords are not weapons and why treating them as weapons is likely to see them banned. If people cannot appreciate the seriousness of arguing against this position then they are acting to harm the sword community and they need to be told to stop. I will repeat, hundreds of thousands of swords are created every year. Not one of them is created with the intention that it be used to hurt people. Ergo, swords are not weapons, regardless of the fact that they used to be. If you want to argue to the contrary, please do not do so in a public place where your words could cause harm to other members of the sword owning community. I apologise for my comments about Americans. I should have directed my comments to the individuals, not to a whole country. . |
Steven.
It has been calmly explained, why some people disagree with your "swords are not weapon"-point of view.
And i strongly object to suppressing different opinions, just because they might harm your agenda, even if it might be my agenda too.
Ends do not always justify means.
With that, i withdraw from this discussion.
| Stephen Hand wrote: |
| If you want to argue to the contrary, please do not do so in a public place where your words could cause harm to other members of the sword owning community. |
Stephen
I definitely do not want to harm your good works. I think what you are doing is extremely valuable and I support you wholeheartedly.
But what we're doing on this board is also very positive and constructive. Open, honest discussions and free debate is never a bad thing. And nothing said on a public forum like this could realistically damage your campaign.
Those who are anti-sword are not going to have their minds changed by anything that they read here. Nor will they be empowered with anything new. And those who are pro-sword won't be converted to the other side.
We are not saying anything here that the anti-sword community doesn't already believe. We're not giving them any ammunition. It's not like we’re keeping some kind of secret in the closet that they could use against us. Messages just don't travel that way.
With that I wish you the best of luck in your campaign. I hope we can continue discussing these interesting subjects further in the future.
Mr. Hand,
I have read and reread your posts on this topic. I could not disagree with you more on your basic ideas. In my 14 years of professional military experience, including service in combat, my experience is that anything ever designed to be, or designed to look like a weapon is a weapon, and should be treated that way. With respect. If your tried to get through my check point with a sword or an AKM you get treated the same way. I think you are wrong to want to close debate., but maybe that is a cultural difference between your people and mine.
Also I have printed your posts, and many of the others here on this subject. I have shown them to many members of my Gun, and Rod Club. (A Target shooting, historical weapons collecting and sport fishing Club.) The officers of the club agree that the banning of swords is silly. We have a lobbying arm, and one of our members is an elected State Senator. I will be putting forth the idea at the next general meeting that the clubs offical position be that of, "Opposed to the banning of ownership, collecting, tranportion of any weapons, historical or modern to include firearms, bows, crossbows, knives, swords, and other historical weapon forms ." If aproved by the majority of the memebership the club's Legislative team in the State capitol will state taking an offical position on any pending bills.
In this case debate was helpful. If you had not engaged in this debate I would not have known anything about this subject, or cared enough to get involved. I hope you are more successful the the gunowners of your nation were. I would hate to see photos of piles of swords, axes, and polearms waiting to be destoryed, like I did firearms a few years ago.
Have you look into US Federal law reguarding foreign involment in domestic affairs? I would not want you to get in any legal trouble.
My work is taking me to your fine nation once more this summer. I you find yourself in Perth or Sydney in July look me up I will buy you a beer.
Mr M A White
I have read and reread your posts on this topic. I could not disagree with you more on your basic ideas. In my 14 years of professional military experience, including service in combat, my experience is that anything ever designed to be, or designed to look like a weapon is a weapon, and should be treated that way. With respect. If your tried to get through my check point with a sword or an AKM you get treated the same way. I think you are wrong to want to close debate., but maybe that is a cultural difference between your people and mine.
Also I have printed your posts, and many of the others here on this subject. I have shown them to many members of my Gun, and Rod Club. (A Target shooting, historical weapons collecting and sport fishing Club.) The officers of the club agree that the banning of swords is silly. We have a lobbying arm, and one of our members is an elected State Senator. I will be putting forth the idea at the next general meeting that the clubs offical position be that of, "Opposed to the banning of ownership, collecting, tranportion of any weapons, historical or modern to include firearms, bows, crossbows, knives, swords, and other historical weapon forms ." If aproved by the majority of the memebership the club's Legislative team in the State capitol will state taking an offical position on any pending bills.
In this case debate was helpful. If you had not engaged in this debate I would not have known anything about this subject, or cared enough to get involved. I hope you are more successful the the gunowners of your nation were. I would hate to see photos of piles of swords, axes, and polearms waiting to be destoryed, like I did firearms a few years ago.
Have you look into US Federal law reguarding foreign involment in domestic affairs? I would not want you to get in any legal trouble.
My work is taking me to your fine nation once more this summer. I you find yourself in Perth or Sydney in July look me up I will buy you a beer.
Mr M A White
Dear Mark,
I'm sorry, but you're being a bit naive. I have been in two situations where journalists have signed onto mailing lists I was on and quoted from posts.
This is not an issue of convincing hoplophobes. It is an issue of convincing politicians, media and ordinary people. There are statements on this thread that could do us a great deal of harm if they appeared in a newspaper article.
Yes, I am grumpy and uncompromising on this, but I ask everyone here, do YOU want to be the person who gets swords banned in the UK? I know that regarding swords as something other than a weapon is a paradigm shift that many people find hard to accept, but I fail to see how anyone can realistically regard the hundreds of thousands of swords produced every year, as weapons, when not one of them is made with the intention that it be used as a weapon.
I'm sorry, but you're being a bit naive. I have been in two situations where journalists have signed onto mailing lists I was on and quoted from posts.
This is not an issue of convincing hoplophobes. It is an issue of convincing politicians, media and ordinary people. There are statements on this thread that could do us a great deal of harm if they appeared in a newspaper article.
Yes, I am grumpy and uncompromising on this, but I ask everyone here, do YOU want to be the person who gets swords banned in the UK? I know that regarding swords as something other than a weapon is a paradigm shift that many people find hard to accept, but I fail to see how anyone can realistically regard the hundreds of thousands of swords produced every year, as weapons, when not one of them is made with the intention that it be used as a weapon.
Stephen, I want to thank you for your response and emphasize that I agree with you and share your concern about specific viewpoints being openly discussed on a venue like this. As you know and regardless of what others may think, there is a danger to playing devil's advocate on specific points without regard to the full picture in a venue like this. myArmoury.com enjoys a tremendous amount of exposure and traffic on the Internet. If people are to believe that it has not been used to fuel both sides of this argument, they are kidding themselves. It has.
We, as enthusiasts for historical arms and armour, are fighting an uphill battle. These items are not considered politically correct any longer by the masses and we are constantly charged with putting them in the right context. Many companies have this site barred by their firewall, museum displays for arms and armour are shrinking or disappearing, traveling exhibits of such items are criticized by the press, martial arts and reenactment events are routinely discouraged, and the discussion of legislation for these subjects is growing all the time. We have a lot in front of us.
Having said that, I have to say that running a site like myArmoury.com is a difficult thing. I want to be able to have all viewpoints discussed, even when they differ from my own or stray from this site's goals and opinions. I do expect them to be discussed professionally and with respect to others.
I'd to make comment based on this:
I completely understand and would likely have the same methodology were I to be in your position as an instructor. In fact, I know that I would. However, in the position of a participant on this forum, it's a very different context. I define what is appropriate behavior on this site and nobody else. I've been very clear about my expectation of respect and calm debate. I emphasize that now.
We, as enthusiasts for historical arms and armour, are fighting an uphill battle. These items are not considered politically correct any longer by the masses and we are constantly charged with putting them in the right context. Many companies have this site barred by their firewall, museum displays for arms and armour are shrinking or disappearing, traveling exhibits of such items are criticized by the press, martial arts and reenactment events are routinely discouraged, and the discussion of legislation for these subjects is growing all the time. We have a lot in front of us.
Having said that, I have to say that running a site like myArmoury.com is a difficult thing. I want to be able to have all viewpoints discussed, even when they differ from my own or stray from this site's goals and opinions. I do expect them to be discussed professionally and with respect to others.
I'd to make comment based on this:
| Stephen Hand wrote: |
| I appreciate that for the most part, other people's view points should be respected and debated calmly. However, in some cases this is not appropriate. If someone in my salle wishes to debate a point of interpretation I discuss it with them calmly. If someone starts doing something that might result in harm then the time for diplomacy is past. They get roared at. |
I completely understand and would likely have the same methodology were I to be in your position as an instructor. In fact, I know that I would. However, in the position of a participant on this forum, it's a very different context. I define what is appropriate behavior on this site and nobody else. I've been very clear about my expectation of respect and calm debate. I emphasize that now.
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum