Uk Sword Ban

[paulb]

Just to keep everyone updated, the Uk Home Office today published its consultation document relating to banning "Samurai Swords". Initial revue of this document suggests the civil servants responsible for drafting the legislation have taken on board many of the points made by the various interested parties from the collecting and martial arts fraternity. As a result their stated prefered solution is to proceed with the ban but with exemptions which protect legitimate collectors and martial arts practioners. If this proceeds as currently outlined I do not believe it will impact on the legitimate collection of real Japanese swords or the purchase and use of practice weapons for martial arts.

The consultation period runs until the end of May and it will take a further 3 months following this to draft a paper to put before government.

We are not there yet, but the results so far are very encouraging. I would like to thank everyone on the board who has contributed to our progress by contacting the Home Office over the past twelve months.

I will keep you updated of future developments

[Rich T]

this is how it runs in Victoria and I believe it is pretty smooth and seamlees for the most part.

 

Well done for all your efforts

 

Rich

[Henry Wilson]

That is good news Paul and thank you very much for all your tireless work.

 

Do you know how far will the exemption go? What I mean is are gendiato and shinsakuto (non - antique blades) being considered for the exemption as well?

[paulb]

Henry,

so far in the discussion docs antique blades (over 100 years old) and military swords made prior to 1953/4 would be exempt as would swords made by licenced smiths after 1954. Therefore showa-to, gendaito and shinsakuto would all be covered by exemption.

I must stress however that this is still in consultation stage and could change. However the document makes it clear that this is the governments prefered option.

[Mark C]

Hi Paul,

 

Thats good news and thanks for the update.

 

Just for interest, an article appeared in todays Sun newspaper, It reads:

 

"Samurai swords , used in more than 80 crimes in four years, are to be banned by the end of this year.

Owning, importing or hiring them could mean six months jail and a £5000 fine. Real martial arts experts will be exempt.

Home office minister Vernon Coaker said: "Dangerous weapons will be out of circulation"

Owning a samurai sword is leagal now as long as it is not brandished in public"

 

 

Many thanks

 

Regards

 

Mark C

[Stever]

Article on the beeb:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6419913.stm

[Rich T]

From offensiveweapons@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk It appears to have a consultation paper attached in a link (PDF) I am unsure if our British friends have this already or not.

 

Rich

 

 

Dear Sir/ Madam,

 

I am writing to let you know that we published a consultation paper on Monday 5 March regarding a possible ban on 'samurai swords' and other weapons which have no legitimate use.

 

This can be found on the Home Office website at:

 

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-ban-offensive-weapons-0307

 

You will see from the document that we have suggested possible exemptions for collectors and martial arts enthusiasts and I would welcome your comments on these. Please note that the closing date for the consultation will be Monday 28 May.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

 

Regards,

 

Offensive Weapons Section.

SC1 (Public Order and Police Co-Operation)

5th Floor,

Sout East Quarter,

Fry Building,

2 Marsham Street,

London,

SW1P 4DF [/url]

[Ford Hallam]

Just to stir the pot, as is my want, i will offer some additional thoughts.

 

The suggestion that collectors ought to be exempt, is typical of a view of society that implies that if you have money you are trustworthy. Just because you may not actually have the financial resources to buy genuine antique Japanese art swords doesnt mean you are any more ( than the wealthy) likely to commit mayhem with a cheap piece of cast aluminium. I wonder why automobiles ( and alcohol for that matter ) don't fall prey to the same sort of political opportunism? That was obviously a rhetorical and sarcastic question. and now that I think about it, why dont they ban craft knives, like the ubiquitous Stanley knife? You can be sure they have inflicted far more injury than the occasional "samurai sword" weilding nutter. :?

 

To be honest, I'd be the first to suggest an absolute ban on replica Japanese swords, after a few tipples! , but why should anyone have the right to dictate what anyone else values? Further, to imply that merely purchasing one of these poor copies marks one out as a socially dangerous individual is profoundly lazy, both morally and intellectually!

Typical of the sort of political discourse we have earned.

 

regards, Ford

[paulb]

Ford,

Sorry but I think this situation is now beyond academic debate and making political points. ther situation is as follows

1. There has been an increase in violent crime using bladed weapons which have been bought at low cost over the internet or in some high street shops.

2. Regretably the uneducated media in the UK has decided to describe all these attacks as using a "Samurai Sword"

3. By the governments own admission the number of attacks are low but they are high profile when reported. As is the habit of this administration they want to be seen to be taking action which will be equally high profile. The fact that the publication of the consultation document has been reported on national TV and at least 4 nation papers demonstrates they have succeeded.

4. when faced with this situation we had the choice of either a) ranting about the injustice of it or b) try and minimise the damage any legislation might do. We chose th latter not least because having made such a big thing about taking action there was no way the government would back off and do nothing.

5. The result of more than 12 montha efforts from a number of people and instituations over here is that if the exemptions go through as described the collection and preservation of something which is dear to all of us will be achieved.

This was not done as some elitist academic exercise to prevent those on lower incomes owning replicas, it was not done with the thought that the wealthy do not commit crime it was done a a pragmatic way to prevent the distruction of an important piece of history.

While I agree with much of what you say I do not believe now is the time for clever political retoric. We can waste much time and effort banging our socialist drum, or we can keep focussed on the main aim here which is to prevent the government ( all be it for the wrong reasons) banning the ownership and possession of Japanese swords.

Sorry for the rant I think I have been fighting this a bit too long. Being this close to getting what we aimed for I am afraid of muddying the water.

[Ford Hallam]

Hello Paul,

 

My apologies if my comments caused you some affront. I have no political, socialist or otherwise, agenda. What I find disingenuous is the superficial way in which governments deal with serious social issues. By this I mean the meaningless tinkering with the symptoms.

 

The situation as you've described it is perfectly accurate however the entire exercise is missing the fundamental truth of the situation.

 

The increase in violent crime in our society is not as a result of easily obtainable and cheap weapons, certainly that may facilitate their use but the causes lie elsewhere. It is the singular lack of courage to recognise and acknowledge that the proliferation of extremely violent video games and films is probably the most significant element in the complex mix of causes. A diminished sense of personal responsibility, declining levels of consideration for others and thanks to the media I've cited, a glorification and trivialization of violence. We'd probably be better off banning Quentin Tarantino

 

I also recognise your extremely well meaning efforts to protect that which you love. I would like to counter however that I am also engaged in preserving a similarly valuable cultural asset, namely Japanese classical metalwork. I have been involved in this way for over 25 years now. My feelings regarding Japanese swords and the related artistic heritage are as deep and sincere as any-ones . I simply don't accept this sort of lazy, knee-jerk response which ignores the truth and will probably only lead to an increase in the sales of cheap kitchen knives.

 

One last point, there is an assumption that these cheap replicas have no legitimate use, so why do people actually buy them? Surely not all intend some illegitimate use. I suspect that the vast majority are proudly displayed by their owners who derive great pleasure from them. I don't think the case has been made that justifies us, as a society, in depriving them of the legitimate and peaceful enjoyment of what they can afford and appreciate.

 

If we follow this logic then it would be entirely proper to ban alcohol and cars because of the terrible damage to society that a minority inflict by their abuse.

 

cheers, Ford

[John A Stuart]

Hi Guys, Isn't this always the case? The government has to appear like their legislation is an effective way of controlling the coarser elements of our society. It matters not a whit if a minority is affected by legislation to their detriment as long as the legislators themselves are outside of that group. Violent crime is a symptom of the loss of social propriety fostered by media that show it as the appropriate way to solve issues. Look at the mayhem in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi, where cheap machetes were the weapon of choice. Gun legislation does not prevent violent crime and neither will this. I believe in strong government but band-aid legislation is counter-productive. Locking up those thugs and get them working for the state and stopping the revolving door policies will abate crime. John

[paulb]

Ford,

I have no argument with what you are saying, just your timing. I agree totally that this legislation is a knee jerk attempt to appear to be dealing with an increasing social problem. In fact, and its a view that is supported by many senior Police Officers, this is treating a symptom and ignoring the illness. So having agreed that, what do the government do? they take the path of least resistance that looks to the greater public that they are, and I quote "being tough on crime and being tough on the causes of crime" and respond to the high profile and inaccurrate reports coming out of the press. Nearly all of their recent 43+ new laws have been based on similar inaccurrate foundations.

So being faced with this situation I believe many, me included, took the view that we could gain nothing by continuing to point out how stupid this legislation was (the previous 43 laws were sufficient evidence to support this) We believed we would do better to try and work with the Home Office and establish effective exemptions within the proposed ban which would protect the majority of interested parties. I think all those involved have done a great job in getting those suggestions into the proposal published this week.

My biggest fear at the moment is that if we start again pointing out the futility or stupidity of the proposed legislation, some hard-nosed minister might say "you're right lets just ban the lot". Hence the reason for my over sensitivity and I am sure overeaction to your post.

I look forward to getting through this later this year and being able to return to the main subject which like you I have spent many years supporting.

cheers

Paul

[sencho]

Treat the symptom and the illness together as far as I am concerned.

 

A sword ban with a sensible licensing system for collectors of historical artifacts and legitimate martial artists, is fine by me!

 

Cheers!

[Brian]

It's not fine by me. Not by a long shot. I could write a few pages about why, but this isn't the time or place. I agree with Paul that what is done is done, and they can only seek to reduce the impact, and what they are doing is the best action right now. They have done very well to get some recognition and preserve the collecting of Nihonto, and I think that is the main thing.

The main problem comes in the next round of legislation years from now. Having begun the process...the next time they will narrow the loopholes and ban them totally.

You are all familiar with the first ban on hanguns in the UK. Then later came a ban on co2 "brockock" air pistols. And now failing a decrease in crime, they are busy banning replica handguns. Next will be toys. This is the trend, and I only use this as an example of what WILL eventually happen sooner or later. The same thing will happen in Victoria Australia eventually. It will only take one or 2 incidents of genuine swords being misused, and it will happen.

As long as they leave some items out of the legislation, the govt's of the world will have something to blame when crime does not cease. They then keep narrowing the laws until they eventually blame some other impliment, and shift their focus.

Paul and others..this does not change the work you guys are doing, and without an entire population putting their foot down and saying "enough is enough" there is little other action you can take.

Getting the concesions it looks like you will get is an important step, and we are all behind you on this.

I hope my expressing my views does not detract from your tireless work on this subject, and note that they are my personal opinions and not the views of the NMB. If they endanger the current situation regarding the legislation, then I will gladly remove the post.

 

Regards,

Brian

[paulb]

Hi Brian,

I fear your view of the future may be correct, but as you say we can but work with what we have at present. If we can see this through with the current exemptions intact I beleive we will have achieved the best result we could. When the time comes I hope there will be as many committed people as there have this time round to take care of the interests of law abiding people who want to collect and study and those who wish to practice martial arts.

I do not believe your views or post needs to be removed or will have a negative impact on progress on this bill, but thanks for the offer.