Uechi-Ryu.com

Discussion Area
It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 6:28 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Mon May 31, 1999 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Posts: 30338
This thread has been moved here from the women's forum so as no to clutter Lori's page !
I believe that the concepts espoused here are paramount to effective programming of mind set which is , of course, the controlling thesis here !

Feel free to engage with divergent views at any time ; this invitation continues to be extended to my Uechi brother , Robb from Sacramento , who may feel free to escalate the debate at will !

Enjoy ....






Martial Arts Forums
Lori Loftus's Women & the Martial Arts


Author
Topic: HOPLOPHOBIA
Van Canna
Moderator
posted 05-30-99 12:35 AM

Robb ,

This is really my fight ! So we continue !

You wrote < Mr. Castanet:

OK, you're out. But, who in Richmond is experiencing the 50% of the
violence that hasn't been reduced? <

Well we have reached the " Pons Asinorum " of the debate !

How about defining your question ! Let me ask you another couple :
What do you perceive the difference to be between the 50% that is
out and the 50% that is still in ?
Who do you think was experiencing that level of violence before the
reduction ? Who do you think was causing the majority of the
violence before the reduction ? How do you think the reduction was
achieved ? How much violence do you think the 50% Rich Castanet
represents was experiencing before the reduction ?

------------------
Van Canna

IP: 207.180.42.216
Robb in
Sacramento
Member
posted 05-30-99 01:53 AM

Mr. Canna:

Thanks for the offer. I do, however, have some concern as to
whether this is the appropriate forum, but since Lori Sensei has not
booted us yet, what the heck.

I am deeply troubled by your most recent post. Not for the issues
you raise, but how you raised them. Answering a question with a
question. You act like you have either been hanging out with
attorneys or politicians. Please, be careful.

I owe Mr. Castanet an appology. He said that crime had dropped
50%, and since I had beed discussing violence, I made an
assumption he saw a correlation. That may, or may not, be the
case. But, in any event, whether one is discussing crime or violence,
to say there is 50% decrease is to imply there remains some level of
crime or violence. Now perhaps one can isolate oneself from crime or
violence when it drops below a certain level. Clearly the rise in home
security firms, gated communities, and electronic security leads
people to believe they can isolate themselves from crime and
violence. My question was rather direct...even with a 50%
reduction, is there not someone being victimized by crime or
violence.

To be even more direct, who pays for all this reduction. Who pays
for the prisons and the correctional officers? Who pays for the
children whose parents are locked away? Who pays for the lose of
the convicted from the workforce? Who pays when the criminal is
released? Who pays...?

Get tough. We have more people in prison today than any other
nation in the world. Yet, violent death is fast approaching as the
number one killer of all our young men, of any race or ethicity. And
while you decry the solution is to arm ourselves, the truth is we are
armed. We are armed, we are violent, and we must change if we are
to endure as a civilized people.

"Hand guns are made for killin', they ain't good for nothing else."

Peace,
Robb in Sacramento


IP: 152.163.194.192
Van Canna
Moderator
posted 05-30-99 07:54 AM

Robb,

< I am deeply troubled by your most recent post. Not for the issues
you raise, but how you raised them. Answering a question with a
question. You act like you have either been hanging out with
attorneys or politicians. Please, be careful.<

Again don't get personal ! You ask loaded questions and you tell me
to be careful ? What do you mean by that ? Careful of what ? In my
business I argue with lawyers every day ! You don't ask loaded
questions and get away with them !

And you do not answer questions { another common ploy } ! Have
you given up on the second amendment ?

I knew at some point you would be getting shrill in your "arguments"!
As DR knight pointed out yours is nothing more than propaganda BS
, not supported by any solid evidence you have presented so far !
You are bouncing all over this thread like a rabbit on a pogo stick !

< "Hand guns are made for killin', they ain't good for nothing else.">

You would not be saying that if I pulled a gun and shot two punks
holding a knife at your throat in a dark parking lot while one was
sodomizing your wife and the other telling you __ you would be next
!

Killing is not always wrong , but a pacifist like you will never
understand ! You still have not answered why you are into karate
and whether you train in Kobudo ! Just curious : who is your teacher
? Do you like full contact sparring ? Ever laid it on the line in an open
tournament ? Tell us what you are made of !

Biblical scholars tell us that in the original Hebrew , the sixth
commandment was " thou shall not murder " Not " thou shall not kill "
!

Like Contemporary American law , the scripture defines murder as
the illegal killing of the innocent by the criminals , and accepts killing
undertaken in defense of certain entities , including innocent life !
Discuss it with your religious leader , who will tell you the same .

Again , I am puzzled at what you are doing in such a fierce martial
art to start with !

Same question was asked by Gary Khoury sensei and Tracy Rose
sensei !

------------------
Van Canna

[This message has been edited by Van Canna (edited 05-30-99).]

IP: 207.180.42.220
Anthony
Administrator
posted 05-30-99 10:44 AM

Robb,

The problem in our country is not guns, it's desperation! there are
too many desperate people and that is the issue that must be
addressed. People need fireamrs to protect themselves from
desperate people. If I lived in a different place (this place is Eutopia
compared to some of the places i've been) I would probably own a
gun and would definatley stand up for my rights to own one.
Getting tough only creates more desperation, it's like shooting
yourself in the foot!

Anthony
p.s. what we really need is a good epidemic!

------------------
Anthony Licalzi, Technical Support
www.mindspring.com/~uechi-ryu

IP: 209.86.48.60
Robb in
Sacramento
Member
posted 05-30-99 12:33 PM

Mr. Canna:

No personal offense was intended. The vituperative and personal
nature of your response, however, suggests we each move to
neutral corner. Who I train with, why I train, or what I had for
breakfast won't add anything to a discussion of guns and violence
and whether stricter control on guns would lessen or increase
violence. You clearly believe we would all be better off if we all
packed a piece. I clearly believe we have too many guns in the
hands of people who should not have them. We disagree.

Peace
Robb in Sacramento

IP: 152.163.213.188
RACastanet
Member
posted 05-30-99 01:28 PM

Robb: apology accepted. I answered your question in the other
thread, and made an important note on the stats used in reports
that single out Richmond as a violent place. Please read it.

In Virginia, cities are considered discreet locals, unlike most other
areas. The greater metro area population exceeds 900,000, and
some outlying counties experience ZERO handgun murders in a
typical year. This region is a really safe place to have a family.

Regards, Rich

IP: 205.188.192.49
Van Canna
Moderator
posted 05-30-99 04:48 PM

Robb ,

You wrote < I am deeply troubled by your most recent post ,
Answering a question with a question. You act like you have either
been hanging out with
attorneys or politicians. Please, be careful. you apparently
believe the solution lies in the barrel of a gun ; you clearly feel
the police should be given free rein ; You clearly believe we would
all be better off if we all packed a piece. <


Then __ You wrote < The vituperative and personal
nature of your response…… >

As expected , you do not disappoint me !

Some of our readers might disagree with the above and then agree
that you were trying to impress us by coming off snobbish and
patronizing by your choice of words , syntax , your metaphors and
your petulance of what should, otherwise , have been persuasive !
Then you try to shift the emotional balance of the debate by feeling
victimized ! You dwell in rhetoric , and specious construction of your
verbal mirage bull s*** aimed at greasing the realities of our society
while attempting to conceal your insults !


Judging by initial reactions to our debate , it appears that after the
fluff of your argument settled , there is nothing substantial left that
would make any sense to the majority of our readers who espouse
the martial concept !

Your argument carries no "punch" as the majority of the e-mail I
have received would suggest that you do not really understand
what the argument is about ! You know , like the story of the boxer
who windmills 200 punches per round and never hits the opponent
once !


Then you write : < Who I train with, why I train, or what I had for
breakfast won't add anything to a discussion of guns and violence <

The point you are missing is that in order for you to blend and
empathize and more likely to understand and reason with other
people you deal with in very sensitive matters such as these , you
must really know who you are and convey to others matching
concerns and experiences in order to achieve some modicum of
persuasion ! You remind me of how Dukakis was done in, during his
candidacy , by the blurting out of a senseless answer to a question
of what he would do to the assailant he caught raping his wife upon
coming home one night !

As to judicious use of violence , you might keep in mind that even
Christ resorted to violence when he smashed the property of money
changers and kicked them and beat them with his strength of a
carpenter right out of his father's temple !

I fully agree ; back to our neutral corners and motion to adjourn !

Thank you for the stimulating debate !


------------------
Van Canna




------------------
Van Canna


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Mon May 31, 1999 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 28, 1998 6:01 am
Posts: 2431
Location: MARSHFIELD, MA. USA
Hello All:

Hoplophobia again.

Well--I am not afraid to put my two cents in.

The Second amendment was probably put on the record because the founding fathers had a rather deep abiding distrust for "standing armies".

Therefore, as I understand it, and whether you know it or not, we are all technically part of the "unorganized militia". Now Militia was not a politically incorect word in 1787.

That's part of the theory behind the debate.

I do not believe that everyone should pack a piece, not do I buy into the lyrics of "Saturday Night Special" by Lynrd Skynerd" as more or less quoted.

However, I believe that everyone who is law abiding should have the right to choose, short of weapons of mass destruction, the personal weapons to defend himself and his family with.

It's a matter of options. It's a matter of rights.

Sure, we have licenses to drive our cars. And if you look back into the 18th century, the Founding Fathers believed then that the people would react as poorly to loosing their personal weapons as we would on losing our "right" to drive or own our motor vehicles today.

One generations's sacred cow becomes another's "politically incorrect" and we can't even say the "g" word in public without feeling defensive.

My state rep. used to wash my windshield, now he's on Beacon Hill because the "lawyer" who previously held his seat forgot something when he signed onto the 1998 Law in Masachusetts regarding further gun control.

Good.

I don't want to be afraid to say the "g" word (as NPR phrased it).

But, that's what we have to deal with.

JOHN

------------------


[This message has been edited by JOHN THURSTON (edited 05-31-99).]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Tue Jun 01, 1999 5:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Posts: 30338
Hi J.T.,

Good post ! What the nerds continue to eschew is that the right to life is the most basic human right , but how can this right exist if the individual 's life remains at the mercy of anyone wishing to take it ?

In our Nation's Capital all guns are banned ; courts have ruled that police have no duty to protect individual citizens ; but citizens are prevented from being able to defend themselves with the most effective equalizing tool ……the gun !

One asks : how can anyone have more compassion /sympathy for violent criminals than for defenseless old men , women and children !!

Some believe that even the right to self defense should be denied ! What possible reason is there to deny the right to self defense ?

Dr. David Stolinsky , writes that it is the pacifist movement at it's most nefarious societal juncture , i.e., the latest wave of these intellectual cripples believe that defensive violence is WORSE than aggressive violence , and rather than being bystanders in the struggle of humanity , these new pacifists become participants on the wrong side ! I.e., opposing building a defense against nuclear missiles not because it may not work , but because it will __when an eleven year old boy shot invading criminals with a .22 cal rifle ; a moronic pacifist was outraged at the boy's killing the criminals but remained silent about their crime ! These incredible dimwits squander their sympathy on the criminals with none left for the victims !

In his self lobotomy induced stupor , this type of pacifist hopes that if law abiding citizens are disarmed , eventually fewer guns will be available to criminals ; but incredibly he opposes heavier penalties for armed criminals . He opposes all violence , but he protests only when a law abiding citizen uses violence against a criminal !! He is devoted to compassion and criminals rights but neglects victims rights ! He holds candlelight vigils where murderers are executed but not at the home of their victims !

This scum is all pervasive in our society and it has infiltrated the martial arts world as well !


------------------
Van Canna


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Tue Jun 01, 1999 3:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Posts: 30338
Any gun is an illegal gun in the hands of a convicted felon ,drug user or fugitive ! That is the law for the bad guys : Touch a gun , go to jail !

If existing laws against criminals with guns would be enforced , crime would be down as criminals would be off the streets !

Back to Virginia …..project exile …federal prosecutors have been cooperating with local law enforcement to take the armed criminals off the streets using Federal-criminal -with -a-gun sentencing provisions ! Now violent crime is down 50% and criminals dare not go armed anymore !

Now how do you argue against that ???


------------------
Van Canna


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 28, 1998 6:01 am
Posts: 2431
Location: MARSHFIELD, MA. USA
Van Sensei:

I enjoyed your posts. Unfortunately, I think you and I, on this issue, are preaching to the choir as between us.

Neglignece has always been the standard for liability in this country. Except in certain cases, if you weren't in some way negligent, then you were not liable.

Strict liability theory arose in certain matters. Despite Constitutional protections many cities in the country now wish to apply a "strict liability" standard to gunmakers.

They're basically using neglignece arguments and hoping the courts buy into it.

As you said, a dangerous juncture.

JOHN

------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Wed Jun 02, 1999 1:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Posts: 30338
Hi J.T.,

Well said ! However I will not let the occasion go by to engage to the fullest the intellectual dishonesty that is endemic in the anti-gun nuts !

Funny thing-- when you corner intellectually crippled hoplophobes in anti-gun debates, it unveils " the disturbing attitudes and behavior of many of
those calling for ever-tighter of gun control if not for complete
abolition. Among these are the relentless character assassination,
crude ad hominem attacks, heavy editorial bias, scaremongering
and bigoted stereotypy directed by anti-gun members of the
mainstream news media, the clergy and intelligentsia (ordinarily
so self-congratulatory about their presumably unassailable sense
of objectivity, fairness, balance and impartiality) toward law
abiding firearms owners."

" because of the revealing statistics and their
erudite presentation-__ , champion fighters of the second amendment present the sort of well-reasoned arguments and solid data that will
challenge at every turn bedrock assumptions about the nature
and impact of gun ownership. Indeed, some open minds may
even be changed."

Peace,


------------------
Van Canna


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Wed Jun 02, 1999 2:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 28, 1998 6:01 am
Posts: 2431
Location: MARSHFIELD, MA. USA
Van Sensei:

NPR was particularly one sided today, in own of their shows. I missed "Talk of The Nation", where they were going to "debate" the matter.

Well, I guess everyone has an agenda.

I think 7 out of the 8 people polled toady (by BUR at South Station) said they would never have a gun "in their house".

In retrospect I wonder how I survived my misspent qualify with an M-1 at 16 youth.

Honestly, if my daughter played with half the dangerous intrumentalities to which my Father let me use my judgement, under today's "standard's", I'd sue myself. I wonder if Dad had a thicker skin and better insurance?

John

------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Wed Jun 02, 1999 5:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Posts: 30338
Hi John ,
< I think 7 out of the 8 people polled toady (by BUR at South Station)
said they would never have a gun "in their house".>

Let's not forget where we live ; the Northeast as well as the West coast have similar delusions …Yet if it came to a vote on total prohibitionism of firearms in the northeast corridor you would get a different picture ! You certainly would get more sensible answers in the rest of the country !
Additionally , the above answer is the byproduct of clever media influence and manipulation catching people between a rock and a hard place ! People are influenced by the bias in the context of news reports with the media on the agenda of molding public opinions to their political viewpoint by using the first amendment to attack the second , which is a misuse of power and an abuse of the first amendment !

Rush Limbaugh wrote : " The media are now considered just another part of the arrogant , condescending , elite, and out of touch political structure which has ignored the people and their concerns and interests ! "

The media as " thought police" control debates and set themselves up above the average citizen feeding a steady diet of distortion aimed at making every one conform to their view point !

And as you well know , John ,guns are not for everyone just as karate isn't ! Most people will always be sheep led to the killing fields by the smart " goat " ….Not everyone should have a gun , either on the person or in the house , because some people with guns do not possess the good sense of training in the manual of arms and tactical survival ; they are total slobs ; drunks ,stupid , , negligent in storage and plain ineffective and dangerous ! You want to be a gun owner …you need to be knowledgeable, well trained and responsible !! This is one point where I am in agreement with Robb !

Yet the deterrent factor is there , for the violence -prone criminal intruder , not knowing who is the slob or who is the well trained gun owner , Who might carry /possess -- realizes that death is more likely to come from armed homeowners than the criminal justice system !

------------------
Van Canna


[This message has been edited by Van Canna (edited 06-02-99).]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: HOPLOPHOBIA
PostPosted: Sat Jun 12, 1999 12:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Posts: 30338
Here is a poignant letter from a Canadian brother :

" Hello Mr. Van Canna;

I hope that you don't mind me not addressing you as "Sensei." Seeing as how about the only
conventional martial arts accolades that I have is a dusty yellow belt from a college judo
class, I didn't think that it would be wholly appropriate. I was referred to your round table
discussion by an old friend.of mine. He and I sometimes come from two different worlds of
thought since he is the martial artist and I am the gun enthusiast. Anyway, my friend
mentioned that you had more than a few wise words about firearms and self defense. I'll be
honest with you, at first I had the reaction that my martial artist friend was poking his nose in
my area of interest. But, when he began to tell me some of the things you've mentioned and
then dropped the name of Massad Ayoob (incidently a man that I have a tremendous amount
of respect for, despite the fact that I have not read a lot of his work). After reading a few of the
discussions that you have here, I have become more and more convinced that the discipline
of self-defense is a lot more organic and inclusive than I once thought.

Being a resident of Canada and gun owner, you can imagine I've a rather experienced view of
being the subject of repressive gun control laws. So far we have had to endure legal
harrassment from the government, public condemnation, mandatory registration of all
firearms and even outright bans of all .25 and .32 calibre pistols, all hollow point pistol
ammunition, limitations of detachable magazine capacity to 5 rounds for rifles and 10 for
pistols. We are now slowly waking up to the realization that the government registration is
going to cost hundreds of millions of dollars and, at the latest estimate will take from 75 to
200+ years with a data-entry accuracy of roughly 40%. Oh, did I neglect to mention that any
inaccuarcies in a person's entry is punishable by up to 5 years in prison for the owner? At the
present moment, the Canadian gun control lobby is demanding nothing less than total and
complete civilian firearm confiscation. To all my American neighbours I say, please do not
ever take your soveregn right to bear arms for granted! Just look north to see where that will
lead. In Canada it is technically forbidden for a civilian to defend themselves using deadly
force no matter what the threat.

The reasoning? Any person who is able to use a firearm to defend themselves even in their
own home is obviously guilty of unsafe storage of a firearm (i.e. locked in a secure safe with
the ammunition separately locked) Not to mention, even non-violent defensive methods such
as pepper spray are prohibitted in Canada. Now, pepper spray is usually used most to defend
women against rape. The official Canadian police statement to women who might get raped
is now, "simply submit to the rapist and allow him to rape you. It's the best way to ensure you
survive." I hope that this little diatribe of mine was not inappropriate for this forum. If I have
intruded where my opinions have either distracted or offended, I am truly sorry. If anyone is
interested in what I have to say, I'll continue to visit this site.

Sincerely,

CP

Dear CP,

Thank you for your letter ! truly a lesson for us all ! Please join us on my forum ; you will be of much value to our readers !

Peace

------------------
Van Canna


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You 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 post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group