Sikhs Allowed To Carry Kirpan (knives) To Olympic Events
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
Godfather 1 - Remember when in the bar one of Don Corleones men was dealing with a rival pretending to switch allegiance - The rival stabeed a knife into his hand held him and another wrapped a garotte around his neck.
Normally - a thin wire with 2 wodden handles - Quickly wrapped around a person necks and tightened equates to a very painful death - the wore cuts off air and slices into the neck. - messy .
We agrr on this one Sir Joe.
Colpy has said,: SJP really doesn't get it.
I agree, give them the benefit of the doubt.....and all the rest of us.
Issue us permits to go armed, give us the benefit of the doubt. It has worked in the USA.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt is not what is offensive here.....what is offensive is allowing one cult to exercise an ancient right, while denying that right to the rest of us."
First point - wearing a Kirpan is not being armed. Sikhism is not a cult - it's a religion as authentic as Christianity, Judaism or Islam is. Wearing a kirpan is the same as the Heredim not shaving the corners of their beards - it's a symbol of faith.
Orthodox Sikhs are obliged to wear a kirpan - it's a tenant of their faith.. Colpy doesn't see that.A kirpan is ceremonial item - some people might want to say it's like a cross but Christianity never says you have to wear a cross - it would probably be better to compare it to a kippah - the little head dress that observant Jews wear . God told the Jewish men that they had to cover their heads, Guru Nannak told Sikhs that they had to wear a Kirpan, wear their hair long, etc. nothing in the New Testament tells Christians that they are obliged to carry a rifle to be a Christian.
Here's a question - how many people have been killed by a ceremonial Kirpan as opposed to a gun?
... and round and round we go. I'm pretty sure we got to right about here last time I asked you to explain your rationale to me. Obviously this makes sense to you and even some others. I don't see how the number of potential fatalities is the deciding factor - a single loss or a plane load... is there a magic number that facilitates the banning of weaponry? What about light planes with say... 3 passengers aboard... would it be acceptable to fly a sikh in full regalia including kirpan in one of those? Ridiculous question? About as ridiculous as adding more bodies to the count to rationalize your position.
...and round and round...
The kirpan was originally a weapon, and as the pics already posted in here demonstrate, it is still a weapon. They were not instructed to wear it for any other reason than self defense. Worship had nothing to do with it, and hiding it behinds the skirts of freedom of religious expression doesn't make it so. It is a weapon. A weapon that's making a mockery of the intent to protect religious freedoms.
As an agnostic, I'd be fine with that too. But should we really have to go that far? If we could just try and breath a little life into the corpse of common sense, surely we could figure out the difference between a sacred accoutrement designed and intended to enhance religious practice... and a weapon.
I'm quite sure Colpy gets it. If you have bothered to read the entire thread you would have seen that Sikhs remove the kirpan to fly on planes so their "obligations" have limits. That's a non issue.
From the looks of it, it isn’t really much of a weapon, it surely represents one. But again, it is a religious icon, so it cannot be dismissed out of hand (as it would be if it were not a religious icon).
I am not aware that they will be allowed to carry a 3 feet kirpan to the Olympic events, Goober.
You obviously are not a mystery fan, Kreskin. Anyway, somebody explained what a garrote is in another post.
A garrote is usually a piano wire.
So people have freedom of religion at the Olympics, but not on airplanes? That's your reasoning now?
That's because it's a deadly weapon when it's on a plane but not when it's at an Olympic venue. It's not Joey's faulty logic. Most Sikhs today carry the "Ronco Super Deluxe Morphing Kirpan". It's two tools in one.
SJP
The question was
Ask your wife the doctor how much damage a blade of 3 inches can cause - Sliced throat, leg arteiries, heart average person and weight - eyes - and brain located behind eyes -
As to the ones that would take this person out - when groups are attacked the survival instinct kick in along with panic
SJP what the hell is worng with you do you argue with people just because you can argue about it? Enjoy arguing semantics?
if someone with a kirpan stabs someone else at the olympics you better hope he is another sihk, cause those christians will be grabbing there rifles, and demanding it for protection against there faith 
SJP
Stabbings do cause substantial and life threatening injuries - But your comment of not seeing 3 ft Kirpans - same type of Liberal arrogance and exaggeration - remember the Gun Registry - costed by Liberals 2 Million - Now over 2 Billion - so I can understand that the Liberal mentality has trouble grasping facts - http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/091026/canada/canada_britishcolumbia_bc_east_vancouver_random_stabbing
5 Random stabbings
Five people stabbed in Lethbridge bar fight
5 People stabbed
Five injured in Mississauga school knife fight - Posted Toronto
4 students - 1 teacher stabbed
Sure the number of potential fatalities is the deciding factor, Zan. It is called risk assessment. We do risk assessment every day in our life. If the risk is negligible, we do something, if the risk is high, we don’t. Is that really difficult to understand? Let me give you two examples.
When you get in your car, into the drivers seat, there is a finite possibility, that your brakes may fail while you are driving, your car may go out of control due to some reason, you may get hit by an out of control truck etc. and you may die (or be seriously injured in a car crash). But I assume you still drive a car.
Or when you go to a restaurant, there is a finite possibility that an insane, mentally deranged cook or waiter may spit in your food before serving it to you. What is more, if he happens to have some disease which can be transmitted through saliva, you will catch it. But you haven’t stopped going to restaurants (I assume).
Before we do something, we routinely ask the question, what is the risk involved? If the risk is negligible, we do it, if risk is substantial, we don’t.
In this instance, the Olympic Committee has decided that the risk is negligible and I respect their right to make such a judgment. Personally I think the probability of getting hurt in a car accident is much greater than becoming a victim of kirpan violence. But people haven’t stopped driving.
So yes, the number of potential fatalities (along with the consideration that there has not been a single incidence involving kirpan) is very much the deciding factor.
I just can’t believe that a bunch of strapping young men are going to turn the tail if they see somebody holding a 3 inch knife. He may be able to stab one or two before he will be overpowered.
If nothing, he will be trampled underfoot in the stampede caused by the panic that you mentioned. It is far fetched to claim that a man holding a 3 inch knife is going to cause substantial number of fatalities in a crows, comparable to a 9/11 attack.
That may be your opinion and you are entitled to it. It isn’t mine (and neither is it of Olympic Committee).