Buddhism & Guns?

[Blue Garuda]

For what it is worth I live in a country where generally people do not own guns. Having been sexually abused by my father, gang raped and physically and mentally abused for years by a partner, not once did I ever wish I had a gun neither did I perform any act of retaliation. I have understood from any early age that there are consequences to actions I perform and committing a violent act on another human being (even in the form of self defence) never occurred to me. I am still breathing. The worst someone can do is kill me, so what? ... I am a Buddhist practitioner.

Regards,

_/\_

[gregkavarnos]

The voice of reason

TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

The Second Amendment to the Federal Constitution of the United States of America states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This amendment has been hotly debated for years between those who hate the Second Amendment and those who respect the wisdom of our founding fathers.

Senator Charles Schumer of New York and Handgun Control, Inc. with its loud mouth spokesperson, Sarah Brady, are attempting to dismantle the Second Amendment piece by piece through legislation and by orchestrating law suits against gun manufacturers. As I am writing this, Colt announced that is will no longer make most of their hand guns for the public for fear of being sued.

For many years, it appeared we were losing the battle to politicians who were more interested in their political careers than what was in the best interest of America-an armed society. As all of us know, the mark of a tyrant is to disarm its citizens. It has happened before-it is happening again.

Yet, the tide may be changing in our direction. Richard Willing reported in a recent issue of USA Today,”For the first time, a federal judge has ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to own a gun.”

What does”Individual Right” mean in legal terms?

The U.S. Supreme Court has set up three ways it will scrutinize individual rights: (1) strict scrutiny, (2) intermediate scrutiny, and (3) rational basis. In strict scrutiny, the government has to have a compelling interest to deny an individual’s right; intermediate scrutiny, an important government interest; and rational basis, the government’s interest has to be rationally related to its objective. Under strict scrutiny, the government rarely satisfies the test because it involves a fundamental right. For example living (life) is a fundamental – God given right. The government does not have the authority to deny”life’ to a citizen. However, it does reserve the right (duty-responsibility) to deny life to someone, for example, who commits murder. Thus, if owning a gun is a fundamental right as was ruled in the U.S. District Court by Judge Sam Cummings, then virtually all the present gun laws would like be invalidated.

This particular case came about when Sacha Emerson, a nurse in San Angelo, Texas filed for divorce. The local court placed a restraining order on her husband, physician Timothy Emerson, after she alleged he threatened her boyfriend, Id. Timothy Emerson owned a handgun, which automatically placed him in violation of a federal law that prohibited people to own guns under state restraining order in domestic disputes. The case never went to trial because Judge Cummings ruled that denying gun ownership to those under a restraining order was unconstitutional infringement of the “individual right to bear arms.”

Judge Cumming’s also stated that the federal law “is unconstitutional because it allows a state court divorce preceding, without particularized findings of the threat of future violence, to automatically deprive a citizen of his secondment amendment rights.”

What does Court precedence say on this issue?

The first U.S. Supreme Court dealing with the right to carry a gun was in U.S. v. Miller. In that case, an Arkansas bootlegger, Jack Miller, was indicted under the first national gun law for carrying a sawed-off shot gun across state lines. Miller argued his right was protected under the Second Amendment, but the Court disagreed and said the shotgun has no “reasonable relationship to the preservation of efficiency of a well-regulated Militia, “ and thus not protected by the Amendment. Since that decision, gun control laws have been upheld as long as there is an exemption for the National Guard and the police. Id.

However, what is interesting in all of this, is that some liberal scholars, who have backed gun control laws for years, are now beginning to see the light and are backing individual-right proponents. People like Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas Law School and the well known Lawrence Tribe of Harvard University, have changed their opinion and now say the Second Amendment includes more than a militia right, but an individual’s right t own firearms. Tribe has even included his new view in the updated version of his treatise. American Constitutional Law., id.

If the Fifth Circuit upholds the case, as it should if it has any knowledge of the history of our country, it would conflict with the other Circuits and most likely, an immediate review to the U.S. Supreme Court. Attorney Guinn, who represents Emerson said he is going to argue the Second Amendment and its promise of the “right of the people to keep and bear arms.” According to Guinn, “the people” means the people, “What else could it mean.”
By: Jason Robb, attorney – The Knights Party (Political wing of the KKK)

[David N. Snyder]

The voice of reason

TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

By: Jason Robb, attorney – The Knights Party (Political wing of the KKK)

That is an association logical fallacy. Simply because someone bad or evil makes some point, does not invalidate the whole point. He is wrong on many issues, but that doesn't make him wrong on everything. He may even believe that the world is round or that the U.S. has a larger population than Monaco, but simply because he is a member of the KKK does not mean that the world is not round and that the U.S. is smaller than Monaco.

[Josef]

We are all missing a major part of the discussion here...
Zombies people, zombies.

[Mr. G]

We are all missing a major part of the discussion here...
Zombies people, zombies.

I've got home defense covered on that:

[Josef]

We are all missing a major part of the discussion here...
Zombies people, zombies.

I've got home defense covered on that:

Genius!

[Nemo]

My opinion that learning a martial art is a waste of time really bothers you. I still suspect have never used it in a real fight. What a waste of so many years.

If you pick up my 101 Kg while I'm busting your face or breaking your bones it would be classed as superhuman.

Where did this come from? Because I said a little old lady would not be a match for a hardened attacker? But then later you say this;

I'm too old to fight and too old to care.

I brought up my martial arts training because you said this;

The 'forces' card doesn't wash with me as we used to have loads of squaddies in town,…

So I post my training and my teacher’s impeccable credentials with the World Tae Kwon Do Federation and the Korean Military. You just can't wrap your mind around someone thinking practicing pretend violence is counter productive. So you attack the messenger.

Sorry, this is McDojo bragging stuff.
and also to his puff about being trained by a 9th Dan in something called the 'wtf'.
‘Wtf' 9th Dan Black Belt does not trump 9mm. Belts are for sports egos, not self-defence.

Then to top it off you make some senseless veiled threat.

The genuine fighters there may eat you alive, or pay you a visit - yup, they do that sort of thing.

You have wasted your life practicing pretend violence for a day that never came. You see threats everywhere and have ingrained your mind to think of things like "busting your face or breaking your bones". You have poisoned your mind and you think it is nectar. I think the poison in my mind is poison and reject it. That must make me a total phony.

[gregkavarnos]

That is an association logical fallacy. Simply because someone bad or evil makes some point, does not invalidate the whole point. He is wrong on many issues, but that doesn't make him wrong on everything. He may even believe that the world is round or that the U.S. has a larger population than Monaco, but simply because he is a member of the KKK does not mean that the world is not round and that the U.S. is smaller than Monaco.

Dear Mr Snyder,

The point I am trying to make is the following: Americans are so steeped in this logic of my fire power + your fire power = democracy, it is so much a part of their culture and logic, that they have a hard time seperating it from other elements of their personal belief systems. This is why on the issue of gun ownership and use (and the concept of self-defence with firearms) many American Buddhists and all White Power activists take recourse in the same clause of the constitution to justify their beliefs.

This does not mean (of course) that all American Buddhists are neo-Nazis (though, of course, some are), what this means though is that both rely on a flawed interpretation of this clause. Now in the case of neo-Nazis it is logical that they would interpret things in this manner, I mean they are neo-Nazis after all. But in the case of Buddhists, where there are a huge number of teachings both in the Pali Canon and the Mahayana Sutras regarding harmlessness, proscriptions on the ownership, carrying and selling of weapons, non-retaliation against physical attacks, sacrifice of one body to save beings, boundless compassion, etc... well...???

I, personally, am not a pacifist, I even own a gun. But I am not going to kid myself about Buddhisms take on weapons and violence. I too am a hypocrite. I too am overcome, at times, by a fear (paranoia) regarding personal safety and the (apparent) need for the protection of weapons. I purchased my gun ten years ago when I was at the peak of my "paranoia". I now see quite clearly that the time has come to dispose of it. This is one of the lessons that Buddhism (Buddhists) has taught me: what exactly am I protecting and from who? Thank you Tara for your account, incredibly inspirational (a decisive source for my decision)! I sincerely wish that you are permanently freed from all the causes of your suffering.

As for this

...including the ad hom and emotional ones against me or others.

As I explained earlier, my statements were about the graphic (poster) you posted, the content of the graphic (poster) and the intentions of those that designed it (emotional blackmail). The only part of my statements that was directed at you was (a question) regarding your intentions behind posting the graphic, this is not an ad hom. Sorry if my language was not clear enough.

In closing (and in again in reference to the graphic) I would say that the right to bear arms is not a human right, the right to live in a world free of arms is a human right and, as Buddhists, I believe that this is what we should be aiming for: to aim for a reduction in arms ownership and use, not to become a part of the problem.

[gregkavarnos]

images3.jpg (7.4 KiB) Viewed 472 times

images1.jpg (10.84 KiB) Viewed 471 times

images2.jpg (8.95 KiB) Viewed 470 times

[Blue Garuda]

''I've gone up against martial artists, tear gas and pepper spray. Martial arts without size is just going to make me pick you up and pound you against a wall till you stop moving. Most martial artists, even the teachers, have never even been in a real fight. Unless you plan on sparring at least once a week don't waste your time. Once I physically lift you off the ground all your training is useless.''

''I did do martial arts for a few years with a Korean Special Forces Officer. Officially he was 9th Dan in Tae Kwon Do, but all the best stuff he saved for his government students. He taught our old anti terror squad pre 9/11.''

''WTF is WTF? http://www.wtf.org/wtf_eng/main/main_eng.html He is a Grandmaster in TKD, the highest rank available''

''Eventually you have to grow up and stop playing superhero in your head and do something useful with your life.

P.S. Throwing people against objects is admittedly one of my signature moves. Corners of walls, car mirrors, other attackers, cement pylons and my personal favourite parking meters. I don’t like getting my hands dirty. I of course prefer choke holds like the sleeper, but what can you do. Fighting is about improvising. But I am working hard to flush this garbage out of my mindstream. I did feel bad about the last fight I got into with a fellow soldier. A month later he kicked a homeless man to death. Then I didn’t feel so bad throwing him onto that cement retaining wall.''

I think the poison in my mind is poison and reject it. That must make me a total phony.

If youn train with a Grandmaster of a sport with competition rules etc. for a few years it does not make you an accomplished fighter, any more than attending teachings by the Dalai Lama makes you a wonderful Buddhist. I recall one Sensei in Japan uesd to send his students out to local brothels to pick fights and test what they were learning. Few came back bragging.

As for the rest of your comments I have quoted, it is just boastfulness. I have explained clearly why it is arrogant and irrelevant puff about techniques which are impractical, to which your response every time has been to question my own ability rather than to examine what you have written. This is a Buddhist forum, and I have explained that if you made these boasts on a specific fighting arts forum the members would probably ask to train with you and put the claims to the test - that's not a veiiled threat, just factual. Why would I care what you get up to?

Glad to see you are talking of rejecting the poison and I hope that future posts will not contain more boasts, and I promise to refrain from poking fun at them.

[Spiny Norman]

[quote="Seishin"]IMHO a gun is just a piece of metal without bullets. So why not own a piece of metal?

For what purpose?

Spiny

[Spiny Norman]

come on, how many here have actually been in a situation where they wish they had a gun?

Which I think is a very strong argument for not having guns.

Spiny

[catmoon]

America has itself in a bit of a pickle. It seems to me that the Constitution is saying, there is a need for militias, and so that they may exist, we here establish the unconditional right of citizens to own firearms.

Now, very many people find this causes problems, and disagree with it. But I don't see how it can be changed without a full-blown amendment to the American constitution, a very difficult thing to do. But I really don't see any other legal way to restrict firearms in the US. It actually surprises me that given the wording of the constitution, an American citizen cannot go to WalMart and buy tanks and Stinger missiles.

And that's the pickle they are in.

[Nemo]

If youn train with a Grandmaster of a sport with competition rules etc. for a few years it does not make you an accomplished fighter, any more than attending teachings by the Dalai Lama makes you a wonderful Buddhist. I recall one Sensei in Japan uesd to send his students out to local brothels to pick fights and test what they were learning. Few came back bragging.

As for the rest of your comments I have quoted, it is just boastfulness. I have explained clearly why it is arrogant and irrelevant puff about techniques which are impractical, to which your response every time has been to question my own ability rather than to examine what you have written. This is a Buddhist forum, and I have explained that if you made these boasts on a specific fighting arts forum the members would probably ask to train with you and put the claims to the test - that's not a veiiled threat, just factual. Why would I care what you get up to?

Glad to see you are talking of rejecting the poison and I hope that future posts will not contain more boasts, and I promise to refrain from poking fun at them.

But wouldn't your entire knowledge be theoretical, never having been in a real fight and all. You are a master of pretend violence.

[gregkavarnos]

Actually, according to the constitution it would make more sense if American citizens owned assault rifles, stinger missiles, hand grenades, tanks etc... than handguns. Handguns are useless for militia purposes.

Here, on the islands of Greece that are on border zones, a clause in the treaty/convention that exists between Greece and Turkey prohibits the existence of regular armed forces (on both sides of the border, not that the clause stops them, but anyway...) and allows only for militia. This means that the Greek army (in Greece we haves compulsory military service for all fit and able male citizens) handed out American WWII and Korean War surplus M1 Garand rifles, ammunition and bayonets to every male permanent resident of the border zones. Every male permanent resident of the border zones that has completed their service is called up periodically for training and military drills (as militia). Recently the rifles were recalled (probably to be sold in some third world war zone) and more modern German made H&K G3 assault rifles were handed out to younger residents. My brother, as a reserve officer, was responsible for collecting the weapons in our area of the island, half the people the M1 rifles were handed out to were dead due to old age!

The strange thing? In my fifteen years on the island there has not been a single reported instance of somebody shooting somebody dead using assault rifles. Not one. Actually, shooting deaths on the island are normally by shotgun and very rare. On the island of Crete, where they have a handgun culture that rivals even the US, people get shot and killed all the time. In Athens, again, mainly handguns and normally during robberies.

Go figure.

[Blue Garuda]

If youn train with a Grandmaster of a sport with competition rules etc. for a few years it does not make you an accomplished fighter, any more than attending teachings by the Dalai Lama makes you a wonderful Buddhist. I recall one Sensei in Japan uesd to send his students out to local brothels to pick fights and test what they were learning. Few came back bragging.

As for the rest of your comments I have quoted, it is just boastfulness. I have explained clearly why it is arrogant and irrelevant puff about techniques which are impractical, to which your response every time has been to question my own ability rather than to examine what you have written. This is a Buddhist forum, and I have explained that if you made these boasts on a specific fighting arts forum the members would probably ask to train with you and put the claims to the test - that's not a veiiled threat, just factual. Why would I care what you get up to?

Glad to see you are talking of rejecting the poison and I hope that future posts will not contain more boasts, and I promise to refrain from poking fun at them.

But wouldn't your entire knowledge be theoretical, never having been in a real fight and all. You are a master of pretend violence.

I have told you nothing about me at all, as it isn't relevant, be it 'real' or 'fantasy' you imputed, or try to top your claims with my own, as I already explained. I'm not here to fantasise about ripping out your eyes while you fantasise about picking me up. I'm actually a real wussycat, not a pretend one, and think 'getting out of the way' is the best way to deal with this off-topic chat, and give you your victory.

[xylem]

Freedom makes people free.
Safety makes people safe.
Guns shoot little metal things at high speeds.

It's really that simple.

[Blue Garuda]

My apologies for my contributions to this thread, which have added only distraction.

[Malcolm]

The strange thing? In my fifteen years on the island there has not been a single reported instance of somebody shooting somebody dead using assault rifles. Not one. Actually, shooting deaths on the island are normally by shotgun and very rare. On the island of Crete, where they have a handgun culture that rivals even the US, people get shot and killed all the time. In Athens, again, mainly handguns and normally during robberies.

Though I am not a gun owner, and do not support the wide proliferation of firearms, however there is a very interesting fact about America: since the early 1990's, the number of guns of all kinds have proliferated enormously in the US, but the incidence of all crimes, including violent crimes of with guns, has steadily declined.

This is simply a fact.

N

[David N. Snyder]

Though I am not a gun owner, and do not support the wide proliferation of firearms, however there is a very interesting fact about America: since the early 1990's, the number of guns of all kinds have proliferated enormously in the US, but the incidence of all crimes, including violent crimes of with guns, has steadily declined.

This is simply a fact.

This is especially true for those who obtain guns legally with permits, classes, etc. They very rarely engage in criminal activity. The gun regulations and laws are ignored by the criminals.

Though I am a gun owner, I do not support the wide proliferation of firearms either. Guns are not for everyone. There are some gun-nuts who believe everyone should be armed. There are a number of people who should not own guns, including those with mental health issues, ex-convicts, felons, those prone to marital strife, short-tempers, etc., and of course those who simply don't have a need or interest. I do not advocate that everyone should have a gun. But for some there may be an interest and necessity or simply a sport to shoot at paper targets.