As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

From a survey of several folks in the US,
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158032,00.html

Since, those, who in the past have derided gun control as going after
the wrong probelm by asking "what are they going to ban next, knives?"
have now been justified in their line of questioning, the following should
cause woodworkers, and particularly the woodworkers in this group,no little
concern:

Someone with whom I have never agreed in my life actually asked the
following question, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?" wondered
LaPierre's erstwhile opponent, Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign to Prevent
Gun Violence" Of course, he said this tongue in cheek, but still ....

The keeper of the Pointy Stick web page better take care, he may be
considered a violence enabler in the future.


;-)





+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Sun, 29 May 2005 18:37:58 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:


Since, those, who in the past have derided gun control as going after
the wrong probelm by asking "what are they going to ban next, knives?"

Yes, I actually have said that for nearly 40 years.

The keeper of the Pointy Stick web page better take care, he may be
considered a violence enabler in the future.

Maybe in the past. Nowadays they'll arrest him as a terrorist and
process him under the Patriot Act (should be called the Kafka Act).

--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

LRod wrote:

On Sun, 29 May 2005 18:37:58 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

Since, those, who in the past have derided gun control as going after
the wrong probelm by asking "what are they going to ban next, knives?"

Yes, I actually have said that for nearly 40 years.

The keeper of the Pointy Stick web page better take care, he may be
considered a violence enabler in the future.

Maybe in the past. Nowadays they'll arrest him as a terrorist and
process him under the Patriot Act (should be called the Kafka Act).

--
LRod

Get it while you can folks - The Pointy Stick Compendium Project

http://home.comcast.net/~charliebcz/...OfContent.html

As for gun control, I'm more inclined towards bullet control.
Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people.

I propose a compromise gun control. Everyone can have as
many as they want. But each must be a) taller than the person
carrying it and b) be limited to a single shot. If you can't
disable an assailant with one shot you probably shouldn't
have a firearm anyway. If you're worried about mulltiple
assailants then carry two or three firearms of the type and
size suggested.

Now will someone please explain why a private citizen
should be able to , and perhaps use, armor piercing
bullets?

charlie b
donning his Poo Suit

In article ,
charlie b wrote:

Now will someone please explain why a private citizen
should be able to , and perhaps use, armor piercing
bullets?

To discourage the manufacture, sale, and _use_ of *cheap* armor?

Now will someone please explain why a private citizen
should be able to , and perhaps use, armor piercing
bullets?

I hope you are kidding!
If you ban armor piecing bullets, it is just a hop skip and a jump to
banning other gun related items.
And then where would we be?

As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?

"toller" writes:


[...]

If you ban armor piecing bullets, it is just a hop skip and a jump to
banning other gun related items.
And then where would we be?

Totaly in the unsafe region. You'd be absolutely screwed up if a moron
came down on you with his tank and you unable to get him with you DU
ammo firing gun...
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23

"toller" writes:


[...]

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?

It would also keep you from having some nasty accidents, and there are
very nice knifes without a point, e.g
http://www.dick.biz/cgi-bin/dick.sto...ct/View/719040
or
http://www.dick.biz/cgi-bin/dick.sto...ct/View/719055

--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23

On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:09:41 GMT, "toller" wrote:

Now will someone please explain why a private citizen
should be able to , and perhaps use, armor piercing
bullets?

I hope you are kidding!
If you ban armor piecing bullets, it is just a hop skip and a jump to
banning other gun related items.
And then where would we be?


In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:21:01 +0200, Juergen Hannappel
wrote:

"toller" writes:


[...]

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?

It would also keep you from having some nasty accidents, and there are
very nice knifes without a point, e.g
http://www.dick.biz/cgi-bin/dick.sto...ct/View/719040
or
http://www.dick.biz/cgi-bin/dick.sto...ct/View/719055


Yeah, neither one of *those* knives could do any damage to someone during
a "crime of passion". Seems that someone who is angry and seeking to do
mayhem would not be deterred by the lack of a sharp point. I can see it
now, person in rage, rummaging through kitchen drawer, "Where are those
points, dang it! Ah well, guess I'll just have to enroll in anger
management instead. Sorry honey, please forgive me." Far more likely they
will grab one of the above and use it in a slicing motion about various
important body parts of the victim. As the second item above indicated,
"... have blades with a straight cutting edge and a shape similar to early
*Japanese swords* (dating from the Nara period). ... and are truly razor
sharp." Nope, no chance of serious damage there.

I'm amazed that there are people who actually see this idea as a rational
response to violence. The fact that one person may not have used the point
in years of using chef's knives does not mean that no others do. In my
original posting, the link indicated that there were a number of English
chefs (recognizing of course the oxymoron in the preceding) who felt that
this was an essential tool being taken away from them.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Mark & Juanita writes:

On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:21:01 +0200, Juergen Hannappel

[...]

It would also keep you from having some nasty accidents, and there are
very nice knifes without a point, e.g

[...]

important body parts of the victim. As the second item above indicated,
"... have blades with a straight cutting edge and a shape similar to early
*Japanese swords* (dating from the Nara period). ... and are truly razor
sharp." Nope, no chance of serious damage there.

See? No point in this discussion...

--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23

Greetings and Salutations...

On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:13:10 GMT, "toller" wrote:



As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?


Well, I have to say that it does not sound silly at all to
me...but it DOES sound rather sinister and misguided. It is part of
that continuing trend towards making life "safe" and not scary.
However, the problem with that is that life *IS* dangerous and scary
and that will never change. I think it is a far better course
of action for us to accept that, and learn to use caution and
treat dangerous things with respect, and, to find ways to build
impulse control in our citizens. That will go a lot further
towards truely making life safer for all of us.
Too...there is the problem that the last time I looked,
the criminal elements that would misuse tools as weapons are
not deterred by laws making it illegal. The danger of punishment
is simply looked upon as a cost of doing business, and, in some
cases, being caught and punished cranks up their reputations.
As for using the point or not...I, too, have been cooking
and baking for decades, and, while I might not use the point EVERY
time I pick up a knife, I have to say that I DO use it to start
cuts quite often. So...my solution, if this silly law were to
go through, and if I happened to NEED a new knife, would be to
go out to the shop, and put a nice point on it with my grinders,
etc.
Just remember that it is NOT doing anyone a favor to
wrap them in cotton wool to "protect" them from the difficulities
and dangers of life. At some point they will have to deal with
it, and, the older they are when that happens, the harder it will
be for them to adapt to the needs of the moment. Teaching folks
about the uses and dangers of a tool, and, its proper use is very
important. Also, of course, as mentioned earlier, teaching impulse
control from a very early age is vital, otherwise we will become
a herd of animals, randomly and instinctively striking out when
irritated...not dealing with other folks on a more rational
level.
Regards from the voice crying in the wilderness.
Dave Mundt

Showing off yur soft brain again?

"toller" wrote in message
...

.."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?

Wait till they ban rocks.

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:09:41 GMT, "toller" wrote:

In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.





+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough


+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+

Mark & Juanita wrote:
In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.

I'm more worried about my mechanics tools, 'specially the 3/4' and 1"
drives. My turning tools come to mind. Wood splitting equipment,
chainsaws, pry bars, and, oh yeah, the jawbones of asses.

Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.patinatools.com

CW wrote:
Wait till they ban rocks.

Ya know, Clint, every once in a while you say something that I agree
with whole-heartedly. This is one of those times. This PC crap has to
stop, hopefully before we're overrun by the barbarians.

Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.patinatools.com

On Mon, 30 May 2005 18:45:30 GMT, "CW" wrote:

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:09:41 GMT, "toller" wrote:

In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.

Wait till they ban rocks.


Man, if they do that, I'm in deep trouble, my house and property sit on
nothing but rocks with a little bit of dirt in between them.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Mon, 30 May 2005 20:08:24 GMT, Dave in Fairfax wrote:

Mark & Juanita wrote:
In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.

I'm more worried ... snip ... and, oh yeah, the jawbones of asses.

... and heaven knows there's no shortage of those.


Dave in Fairfax



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...

As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

From a survey of several folks in the US,
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158032,00.html

Since, those, who in the past have derided gun control as going after
the wrong probelm by asking "what are they going to ban next, knives?"
have now been justified in their line of questioning, the following should
cause woodworkers, and particularly the woodworkers in this group,no
little
concern:

Someone with whom I have never agreed in my life actually asked the
following question, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?" wondered
LaPierre's erstwhile opponent, Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign to Prevent
Gun Violence" Of course, he said this tongue in cheek, but still ....

The English bill of rights [after which the US one was modeled] was signed
into law around 1680.

In it the individual had the right to bear arms for "self
protection"......This right was overruled by the UK government based on a
case in Dumblain Scotland 10 or so years ago

Now only the crooks have guns which they use liberally . Since the
individual no longer is allow to have a gun, gun crimes have
skyrocketed....mjh

CW wrote:
Wait till they ban rocks.


They will never ban rocks. Otherwise Parliament would have nothing to stuff
their heads with to avoid that "hollow" sound when you thump them.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

Mark & Juanita wrote:
... and heaven knows there's no shortage of those.

My thoughts exactly.

Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.patinatools.com

In article , "mike hide" wrote:

The English bill of rights [after which the US one was modeled] was signed
into law around 1680.

In it the individual had the right to bear arms for "self
protection"......This right was overruled by the UK government based on a
case in Dumblain Scotland 10 or so years ago

Now only the crooks have guns which they use liberally . Since the
individual no longer is allow to have a gun, gun crimes have
skyrocketed....mjh

I very much wish that the "keep and bear arms" language in the U.S.
Constitution were more like that in the Constitution of my State (Indiana):

"The people shall have the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of
themselves and of the State."

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

On Mon, 30 May 2005 13:32:19 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

On Mon, 30 May 2005 20:08:24 GMT, Dave in Fairfax wrote:

Mark & Juanita wrote:
In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.

I'm more worried ... snip ... and, oh yeah, the jawbones of asses.

... and heaven knows there's no shortage of those.

Don't you need a pointy knife to separate the jawbone from the ass?

Lee

Lee DeRaud wrote:
I'm more worried ... snip ... and, oh yeah, the jawbones of asses.

... and heaven knows there's no shortage of those.

Don't you need a pointy knife to separate the jawbone from the ass?


With government officials, you generally use a crowbar.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

If the knife is properly sharpened, which it should be so as to negate the
need for a point to beging a cut, it would be a savage weapon in a crime of
passion. African nations with strong gun laws and few guns have seen
machetes used to hack people to death. Where there is a will there is a
way. Blugeoning by toaster or electric can opener would be better? We are
an ingenious species and will use whatever is at hand.


"toller" wrote in message
...


As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article , "mike hide"
wrote:

The English bill of rights [after which the US one was modeled] was
signed
into law around 1680.

In it the individual had the right to bear arms for "self
protection"......This right was overruled by the UK government based on a
case in Dumblain Scotland 10 or so years ago

Now only the crooks have guns which they use liberally . Since the
individual no longer is allow to have a gun, gun crimes have
skyrocketed....mjh

I very much wish that the "keep and bear arms" language in the U.S.
Constitution were more like that in the Constitution of my State
(Indiana):

"The people shall have the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of
themselves and of the State.

That was it's intent but they didn't feel the need to spell it out. They
assumed, incorrectly, apparently, that people's reading comprehension would
do nothing but improve over the years and a concept that was that easily
understood at the time would be crystal clear in the future.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Lee DeRaud wrote:
Don't you need a pointy knife to separate the jawbone from the ass?

Geez, I usually use my 45. Or I try not to vote for them. Neither
seems to work too well though. %-(

Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.patinatools.com

On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:09:41 GMT, the inscrutable "toller"
spake:

Now will someone please explain why a private citizen
should be able to , and perhaps use, armor piercing
bullets?

I hope you are kidding!
If you ban armor piecing bullets, it is just a hop skip and a jump to
banning other gun related items.
And then where would we be?

Unarmed victims like the Brits and Aussies? Now that's scary.

I hope charlieb reads some books like "The Coming Anarchy", Crichton's
"State of Fear", and anything by Gary Kleck, such as "Armed--New
Perspectives on Gun Control" for a bit of perspective. I used to be
anti-handgun until I did more research on it. Talk about a lot of
propaganda to cut through before finding the truth. Michael Crichton
blows away all sorts of other false truths in his book. It's quite a
ride, and though it's a work of fiction, it is LOADED with sources for
getting to the truth.


--
If you turn the United States on its side,
everything loose will fall to California.
--Frank Lloyd Wright

On Mon, 30 May 2005 10:24:18 -0700, the inscrutable Mark & Juanita
spake:

On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:09:41 GMT, "toller" wrote:

Now will someone please explain why a private citizen
should be able to , and perhaps use, armor piercing
bullets?

I hope you are kidding!
If you ban armor piecing bullets, it is just a hop skip and a jump to
banning other gun related items.
And then where would we be?


In a few years hence, discussing the banning for pointy knives, probably
followed by pointy sticks, then various pieces of sports equipment that
could cause blunt force trauma; say things like baseball bats or golf
clubs.

....followed by things which could strange you, such as all rope, wire,
belts, bandanas, even long-sleeved pants! The horrors!


------------------------------------------------------------
California's 4 Seasons: Fire, Flood, Drought, & Earthquake
--------------------------------------
http://www.diversify.com NoteSHADES(tm) glare guards

If we can't have points on knives, how am I going to put new holes in my belts as I get fatter? Utility knife, and "Exacto" knife companies will have to go out of business because they are worthless without a point. I guess I will also have to give up my skew chizels also!

Greetings and salutations...

On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:13:10 GMT, "toller" wrote:



As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?


Actually, it reminds me of a time when, in a D&D campaign, one
of the players saw two guys beating the living daylights out of each
other. Being a peacemaker, she ran up to the fighters and yelled
"Stop it! This Violence is Pointless!". From the middle of the
whirlwind of fists, maces, etc, a chorus came: "It had BETTER be...
we're both Clerics!".
Now after this moment of geekiness...back to the topic
at hand...
Regards
dave mundt

In article , Dave Mundt
wrote:

"It had BETTER be...
we're both Clerics!".

ROFL! I got that first time through!

--
~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~
------------------------------------------------------
One site: http://www.balderstone.ca
The other site, with ww linkshttp://www.woodenwabbits.com

toller wrote:



As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?

One normally uses the edge of the saber, not the point. And a skilled hand
with the saber can make anyone not similarly armed or wearing armor messily
dead in about 5 seconds.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Mon, 30 May 2005 21:48:35 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

In article , Dave Mundt
wrote:

"It had BETTER be...
we're both Clerics!".

ROFL! I got that first time through!


Scary isn't it? Signs of a geekspent youth. ;-)




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Sun, 29 May 2005 18:37:58 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:


As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

From a survey of several folks in the US,
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158032,00.html

Since, those, who in the past have derided gun control as going after
the wrong probelm by asking "what are they going to ban next, knives?"
have now been justified in their line of questioning, the following should
cause woodworkers, and particularly the woodworkers in this group,no little
concern:

Someone with whom I have never agreed in my life actually asked the
following question, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?" wondered
LaPierre's erstwhile opponent, Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign to Prevent
Gun Violence" Of course, he said this tongue in cheek, but still ....

Ick. From the various snippets I've heard about wood harvesting in
England, it may already be a non-issue, but I can't imagine that'd
make it any easier to get a chain saw!

The keeper of the Pointy Stick web page better take care, he may be
considered a violence enabler in the future.


;-)





+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Prometheus wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2005 18:37:58 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:
[snip]

Someone with whom I have never agreed in my life actually asked the
following question, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?"
wondered LaPierre's erstwhile opponent, Peter Hamm of the Brady
Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence" Of course, he said this tongue
in cheek, but still ....

What is tongue in cheek about this? My two-inch elementary school scissors
were taken last time I went on an airplane. The ends were no more pointy
than the non-business end of a ballpoint pen. "Dangerous" was what I was
told. If I'd been wearing open-toed shoes would they have made me clip (or
remove) my toenails?

Josie

On Tue, 31 May 2005 00:15:42 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:
toller wrote:



As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?


HAH! EVERYONE knows that the best stabbling knife is the boning knife,
which MUST be pointy.

In article ,
toller wrote:


As many of you may be aware, (from the "you can't make this stuff up
department"), several physicians in England are advocating that "long
pointy knives" be banned from the general public's availability, saying,
"Government action to ban the sale of such knives," they wrote, "would
drastically reduce their availability over the course of a few years."

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30
years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller
knives, but never on the big ones.
If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few
crimes of passion; why not?



Lets not forget that we would have to license and register the owners
and users of grinders and sharpening devices of all types. lest they
illegally convert round-nosed knives to pointed ones.


--

Larry Wasserman Baltimore, Maryland

Greetings and Salutations....

On Tue, 31 May 2005 09:35:10 -0400, "firstjois"
wrote:

Prometheus wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2005 18:37:58 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:
[snip]

Someone with whom I have never agreed in my life actually asked the
following question, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?"
wondered LaPierre's erstwhile opponent, Peter Hamm of the Brady
Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence" Of course, he said this tongue
in cheek, but still ....

What is tongue in cheek about this? My two-inch elementary school scissors
were taken last time I went on an airplane. The ends were no more pointy
than the non-business end of a ballpoint pen. "Dangerous" was what I was
told. If I'd been wearing open-toed shoes would they have made me clip (or
remove) my toenails?

Josie


Now that we have had several years of these unconstitutional
collections, and, the Feds have displayed (with amazing pride) the
millions of nail files, blunt scissors and other items that they
have collected "to make travel safer", I wonder if anyone has
considered (or cares) that before 9/11 travellers were carrying
all these and more lethal items, yet, how many incidents of
folks being attacked and wounded or killed on airline flights
where there? How many flights have been hijacked by idiots
wielding blunt scissors, nail-files or zippo lighters?
But then, I am one of those "gun nuts" who believes that
the problem on 9/11 was not that there were too many weapons
on those planes, but, that there were too few. I suspect that
having a few folks on the plane with CCW permits AND their
weapons would have changed the outcome of the event considerably.
I also think that this "airport security" thing is more
smoke and mirrors, designed more to make the citizens THINK that
something is being done, rather than a strong effort to actually
improve safety in America. It is also getting us used to the
idea of random searches as being acceptable and normal...part of
that slippery slope towards totalitarianism that America seems
to be on. I could be wrong, and, it could be that these
unreasonable searches and siezures have foiled a number of
hijack plots involving nail files and blunt scissors...but I doubt
it.
About the only thing that I can see that has really helped
the situation is the increased quality of the door and partition
between the cockpit and the rest of the plane. Making it impossible
(or at least very difficult) to get in there to take over the
controls goes a long way towards changing the threat of a hijacking.
The bottom line is that there was a time, not that long
ago, when travel in America was a pleasure and a recreation. Now,
though, it is a difficult chore that few folks look forewards to
getting caught up in. That, I think, is a sad fact that means
that the terrorists DID win.
Over this past Memorial Day holiday, I spent some time
meditating on the sacrifices made by so many Americans both for
this country and for countries around the world. I can only
hope that the citizens of today will, somehow, have it dawn
on them that security is not the responsibility of the government,
but the responsiblity of every citizen. We need to take back
responsibility and not push it off on the Feds, as that is the
only way America can survive and stay on a positive track.
Regards
Dave Mundt

On Tue, 31 May 2005 17:06:47 GMT, Dave Mundt wrote:

But then, I am one of those "gun nuts" who believes that
the problem on 9/11 was not that there were too many weapons
on those planes, but, that there were too few. I suspect that
having a few folks on the plane with CCW permits AND their
weapons would have changed the outcome of the event considerably.

Absolutely correct. It's absolutely mind-boggling that people get in a
tizzy about the thought of - gasp - pilots arming themselves if they
choose to. Hell, we trust 'em with a plane full of people, I _think_
they can be trusted with a firearm, FFS. There seems to be a common
thread; people see the object as the threat, rather than the person
using it. It's cliche', but dammit, the machine doesn't do anything
it's not told to do. In the criminal/terrorist's hands, it's a danger
to you. In my hands, it's a danger to _them_.

Me, I'd prefer to keep our criminals and terrorists ...uneasy...