[quote]lucasa wrote: June 8, 2001 - Mamoru Takuma forced his way into Ikeda Elementary School in Osaka, Japan, stabbed to death eight students and injured 13 others. Takuma, who had a long history of mental illness, pleaded guilty to the crimes.
Makes Harris and Klebold look like amateurs. Funny how Japan’s police state didn’t stop something like this.
[/quote]
Japan doesn’t have a police state anywhere near the magnitude of the United States of America. There just isn’t the need for it.
Murder is still rare enough here to make the national news, but do you know what the number-one murder weapon of choice is in the Land of the Rising Sun?
A fruit knife.
A crummy little cheap-ass made-in-China fruit knife that practically anyone can buy at 7-11 for about a buck eighty-five, tax included.
Oh, and here’s a postscript to the Osaka massacre:
Mamoru Takuma, his history of mental illness notwithstanding, was found guilty of multiple counts of first-degree murder, and hanged by the neck until he was dead.
Japan doesn’t have a police state anywhere near the magnitude of the United States of America. There just isn’t the need for it.[/quote]
I apologize as I’ve never lived there, but isn’t it 2009 when you guys actually start trying people by jury? My understanding is that the prosecution is way overpowered in its ability to hold and question (torture) suspects and has a 99% conviction rate based overwhelmingly on “confession”. Illegal search and seizure is unheard of, No?
Just because they don’t field as many officers doesn’t mean it’s not a police state. I understand they are tightening the laws after the Mayor’s murder? What’ll it be? Two mandatory annual inspections of armed citizens? Annual inspections of all citizens for anything at any time?
[quote]Murder is still rare enough here to make the national news, but do you know what the number-one murder weapon of choice is in the Land of the Rising Sun?
A fruit knife.
A crummy little cheap-ass made-in-China fruit knife that practically anyone can buy at 7-11 for about a buck eighty-five, tax included.
Try banning that.[/quote]
Agreed, it’s about as everyday ordinary household item as they come, and apparently one person is capable of taking down quite a few schoolmates with them, if so inclined.
Anyone know who’s the world record holder with regard to time between the hanging and the dying?
Assuming A) one hell of a strong neck and B) that the guy is able to talk and swallow, can he request water and food while he’s hanging?
[/quote]
Yeah, breathing (surprisingly) is about third on the ‘to do’ list afterward. Eating, drinking, and speaking probably much lower;
[i]Long Drop
This process, also known as the measured drop, was introduced in 1872 by William Marwood as a scientific advancement to the standard drop. Instead of everyone falling the same standard distance, the person’s weight was used to determine how much slack would be provided in the rope so that the distance dropped would be enough to ensure that the neck was broken.
Prior to 1892, the drop was between four and ten feet (about one to three meters), depending on the weight of the body, and was calculated to deliver a force of 1,260 lbf (5,600 newtons or 572 kgf), which fractured the neck at either the 2nd and 3rd or 4th and 5th cervical vertebrae. However, this force resulted in some decapitations, such as the famous cases of “Black Jack” Tom Ketchum in New Mexico in 1901 and Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti in 2007. Between 1892 and 1913, the length of the drop was shortened to avoid decapitation. After 1913, other factors were also taken into account, and the force delivered was reduced to about 1,000 lbf (4,400 N or 450 kgf).[/i]
But yeah, I bet suspension by the neck isn’t a hotly contested record.
[quote]lucasa wrote:
Guns, when used properly and responsibly, are no more deadly than a necktie or a kitchen knife.
[/quote]
You don’t bring a knife to a gunfight.
[quote]
Guns spend 99.999999% of their lives not firing and otherwise harmless. Knives are always cutting, ties spend a good portion of their time strangling to varying degrees, people slip and fall in bathtubs all the time, cars kill people by the minute, but guns are the most dangerous inanimate object on the face of the earth and the average human is incapable of owning or handling one without killing someone.
To treat guns as different because of their designed purpose perpetuates a flawed myth about them and shows a flawed perception of human thought, humans have always, and will always be using inanimate objects for something other than their intended purpose. Cain killed Abel with a ploughing stick.[/quote]
“To treat guns as different because of their designed purpose perpetuates a flawed myth about them”
There wouldn’t be a 2nd Amendment if a gun was in the same class as a knife or necktie. Guns are treated differently because the 2nd Amendment treats them differently.
“ties spend a good portion of their time strangling to varying degrees”
[quote]Michael570 wrote:There wouldn’t be a 2nd Amendment if a gun was in the same class as a knife or necktie. Guns are treated differently because the 2nd Amendment treats them differently.
[/quote]
Note that the Second Amendment does not specify that it is only the right to keep and bear firearms that will not be infringed.
The amendment protects the right to be armed. Whether you choose to arm yourself with a hickory fighting stick, a Ka-Bar combat knife, an 18-inch machete, a Kimber .45, a Springfield M1A, or even an M25A1 phased plasma rifle in the 40-watt range, the 2nd Amendment prohibits Congress from saying you can’t.
check out Gun Control – Just Facts
interesting statistics, anyways its my understanding that most violent crimes are commited with illegally obtained firearms. How will we defend ourselves against bears or worse yet the Cincinnati Bengals when we dont have guns?
There is also something about a shooting in a school in the appalachians and those hillbillies had guns in there vehicles and were able to subdue the prick. I dont remember were i read that. It might be in justfacts but i am not sure.
I apologize as I’ve never lived there, but isn’t it 2009 when you guys actually start trying people by jury? [/quote]
Yes. 2009. Whether you consider this a good thing or a bad thing depends, I suppose, on whether you consider it worse for an innocent man to end up behind bars, or for a guilty man to walk free. In the United States, a good many truly guilty criminals are walking the streets because their hotshot shysters were able to hoodwink the twelve ignorant bozos who heard the case.
As has been said, if you’re innocent and want to get to the truth, a tribunal is in your favor. If you are guilty and you want to escape justice, a trial by jury is the way to go. Just ask O.J.
The conviction rate in the States is around 89%, probably because Japan has a minuscule number of lawyers compared to the US, and fewer loopholes in its laws. This also accounts for its lack of litigiousness: it’s nice to be able to live in a place where you don’t have to worry about a lawsuit every other day.
Illegal search and seizure sometimes happens here, just as it does in the US. However, we don’t have civil forfeiture like you do there, whereby the cops can confiscate your property (including your car or your house) if said property was suspected in being used in a crime (i.e. your brother-in-law smokes a joint in your bathroom without your knowledge, and is busted by a cop snooping outside the window).
Not only are the police not as numerous, they are far less threatening as in the States. The sit in their little koban (police box), ready to give directions or help fix your bike. They are ordinary people and members of the community, and I know most of the officers around here by name. They certainly do not prowl the night in helicopters shining their searchlights in people’s windows (like they do in LA). Police brutality and “accidental” killings are also way lower here than there.
The mayor of Nagasaki was shot by a high-ranking gangster using an illegally smuggled pistol. All the gun laws and mandatory inspections in the world would not have prevented this shooting, nor will they prevent future ones.
The police already have annual house-to-house visitations, but it’s not nearly as sinister as it sounds. A cop comes around, asks the householder who’s living in the house, and if there’s any trouble in the neighborhood. He chats a bit about safety precautions against theft and burglary, maybe accepts a cup of tea if the householder provides it, and is on his way. He doesn’t even enter the house unless invited in. Like I said, the police are not viewed as a threat here.
An interesting anecdote: my house is somewhat of a legend around here, because the guy who lived in it before me was a big-time marijuana grower. I have a glass room on the second story that he used prolifically for that purpose. Everyone in town knew about it, even the cops, probably.
But on the day of the annual police visitation, the guy was stupid enough to leave one of the plants on the porch, and the cop saw it. So the cop was like, “you know, it was kind of dumb to leave that plant on the porch. Now I’m going to have to take you in.” And the grower was like, “yeah, I guess so. It can’t be helped.”
The cop never drew his gun, no handcuffs were involved, and the grower became another statistic in your 99% conviction rate.
Note that the killer in the Osaka stabbing spree was not a student, but an ex-janitor.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
stuff about Japanese “police state”[/quote]
All true. Driving around, many, many days here you are lucky to even see a cop car, much less be stopped by one.
There is, in general, far, far less crime here, hence the small number of police. And the few there are around certainly don’t seem to give people any trouble.
You also don’t feel unsafe walking around alone at night, even in a big city. This ‘feeling’ is hard to justify and certainly not quantifiable, but if you have the experience of walking around Tokyo or Osaka you will notice the difference.
Anyway, this is getting into hijack territory and I am seriously enjoying this discussion so…sorry.
[quote]shawninjapan wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
stuff about Japanese “police state”
All true. Driving around, many, many days here you are lucky to even see a cop car, much less be stopped by one.
There is, in general, far, far less crime here, hence the small number of police. And the few there are around certainly don’t seem to give people any trouble.
You also don’t feel unsafe walking around alone at night, even in a big city. This ‘feeling’ is hard to justify and certainly not quantifiable, but if you have the experience of walking around Tokyo or Osaka you will notice the difference.
Anyway, this is getting into hijack territory and I am seriously enjoying this discussion so…sorry.
[/quote]
Yes, this is true, but then you don’t have huge populations of other cultures in Japan all with a different set of values all thinking they have the right to “do their thing”. In Japan you pretty much just have Japanese. Do you think an illegal alien can go to Japan and get a legal drivers license or put their child in public school? Hell no. This gun issue is minor compared to other areas of concern here in the states. And its near impossible to compare USA to other nations. It’s almost always an apple-to-oranges situation.
Yes, this is true, but then you don’t have huge populations of other cultures in Japan all with a different set of values all thinking they have the right to “do their thing”. In Japan you pretty much just have Japanese. Do you think an illegal alien can go to Japan and get a legal drivers license or put their child in public school? Hell no. This gun issue is minor compared to other areas of concern here in the states. And its near impossible to compare USA to other nations. It’s almost always an apple-to-oranges situation.
[/quote]
All good points, PGJ.
Right now the percentage of non-Japanese living in Japan is something like 3 per cent, with the largest foreign ethnic groups being Korean and Chinese (big friggin’ cultural divide, right?) You’ve got your assorted Caucasians, your Latins (including Brazilian and Peruvian Japanese) and Africans (not too many American blacks, though, except military), but when you mention “illegal aliens”, two races always get mentioned: the Iranians and the Filipinos.
It’s hard to get into Japan illegally, although people do. There is a very brisk business, controlled by the Yakuza, of course, in smuggling people from Mainland China, Viet Nam and other places, into Japan using small craft launched from ships disguised as fishing boats. A few years ago there was a huge manhunt along the beach not far from where I live, with the Coast Guard catching twenty-seven Chinese illegals in the woods.
What most people do, though, is enter legally on a tourist visa or some other visa, then “forget” to go home. It’s easy to get along without a driver’s licence here (I survived for ten years without one), and there is always someone willing to rent apartments and arrange utilities and so forth for illegals (at highly inflated prices, of course). And the jobs generally available to illegal aliens (manual labor, prostitution, and selling Thai silver jewelry on streetcorners) is not exactly the kind of work you declare on a tax return. So it is sometimes years before the Ministry of Justice catches up with them.
So yes, comparing the US and Japan is like comparing Red Delicious apples and mandarin oranges. But someone always seems to want to on these gun control threads.
This is a truth: when you sacrifice your life, you must make fullest use of your weaponry. It is false not to do so, and to die with a weapon yet undrawn.
Dead is dead, by knife, sword, necktie, gun none of them kills you more than the others.
You misunderstand, the Second Amendment doesn’t say “guns”, it says “arms”. As I said, the Founding Fathers weren’t stupid, if they mean torches and pitchforks they would’ve said torches and pitchforks. They said “arms” to deliberately associate an armed civilian or militiaman with an armed soldier.
This is a truth: when you sacrifice your life, you must make fullest use of your weaponry. It is false not to do so, and to die with a weapon yet undrawn.
Dead is dead, by knife, sword, necktie, gun none of them kills you more than the others.
There wouldn’t be a 2nd Amendment if a gun was in the same class as a knife or necktie. Guns are treated differently because the 2nd Amendment treats them differently.
You misunderstand, the Second Amendment doesn’t say “guns”, it says “arms”. As I said, the Founding Fathers weren’t stupid, if they mean torches and pitchforks they would’ve said torches and pitchforks. They said “arms” to deliberately associate an armed civilian or militiaman with an armed soldier.
[/quote]
Damn, Lucasa…I’m begining to like you.
Keep and bear arms (guns, swords, bow and arrow…) “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Do you realize your “redneck” comment is every bit as biggoted and intolerant as Imus’ “ho” comment? Do you believe only “rednecks” own guns? Because in your elitist liberal mind the Constitution is “old fashioned” you think it should be abolished? Your ignorance and intolerance is staggering.
[/quote]
That’s becasue I am a bigot in certain regards. Everyone is. Though I am still tolerant of people I find ignorant. Redneck is a “slang term, usually for a rural white southerner who is politically conservative, racist, and a religious fundamentalist”. Having lived most of my life around them I have a certain disdain for them. Why would anyone want to be a redneck?
The constitution will never be abolished by the US government. Do not mistake me wanting it amended for being abolished. Though, I couldn’t care less if it were.
[quote]lixy wrote:
MisterAmazing, a question: If every single country had nukes, do you think the world would be safer? You seem to make the case for guns being the “great equalizers”. How’s an A-bomb any different?[/quote]
B I N G O!
Somehow guns in everyone’s hands make people safe but nukes in everyone’s hands do not.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
3. I suspect that much of the military has a very strong civic duty to the government, but once the government “turned” on its people (in our very fantastical example), I do believe their would be a breakdown in discipline and loyalty, at least enough to cause serious logistical problems that the military relies on. Then, of course, Team Citizen gets legions of trained soldiers joining up.
[/quote]
So then in your assessment wouldn’t this render the 2nd Amendment pointless? If the military remains loyal to the citizenry, thus nullifying the government’s ultimate will, does that then mean I have no need to arm myself to protect myself against my government? Having served in the military I cannot see a soldier or marine attacking their own.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
lixy wrote:
MisterAmazing, a question: If every single country had nukes, do you think the world would be safer? You seem to make the case for guns being the “great equalizers”. How’s an A-bomb any different?
B I N G O!
Somehow guns in everyone’s hands make people safe but nukes in everyone’s hands do not.[/quote]
Here is where the gun and the A-bomb are "kinda"different. The A-bomb in the hands of rational governments did make the world safer. You have the cold war as proof of that. There is a distinct difference between being on the potential brink of disaster and being at war. We did not “feel” safe during the 50’s-90’s, but MAD meant that we were at least safer than without the bomb.
Unfortunately though, when something like an A-bomb gets in the hands of a rogue player, instead of taking out a few dozen people in a classroom, you end up with a hundred thousand dead.
However, when a gunman opens up on a group of people he can take out a few dozen. Since you cannot respond to gunfire in a school by dropping an A-bomb on it you must respond with gunfire. You can rely on the valor of a group in flight to take down a gunman, but I would rather rely on the valor of the lone individual who is armed and prepared to protect.
To state that the citizens attending V. Tech should not have been armed due to almost ANY reason is an assertion that the police as well should not have been armed. A policeman is a man like any other. His training at times is better than the average citizen, but at times it is worse. What in your estimation makes a cop special?
For reasons I still cannot grasp, students at my school (University of Idaho in tiny Moscow) “feel” safe in spite of a recently murdered student, a man found with 95lbs of stolen panties, 2 women “accosted” on campus, an armed robbery by one of football players and two people assaulted and mugged at knifepoint (one of which was stabbed, the other with the knife put to his neck) while in the bathroom in the commons. They “feel” safe, yet the idea that I, a former Marine, nor any one else that undergoes a background check to get a CCW license would leave students feeling “unsafe”. To that all I can say is to hell with feelings. It is high time students and members living under the delusionary shield of academia got their heads out of their little fantasy land and into the real world.
