Cops in Clifton, New Jersey, earlier this week cuffed two ninja vigilantes dressed in black SWAT-style vests and carrying knives, throwing stars, swords, nunchucks and a bow and arrows, who were apparently on their way to deliver cease-and-desist letters to local drug peddlers, AP reports. The self-styled "Shinobi warriors" were …
weapons possession rap?
Surely in America most peopel are walking around armed to the teeth with guns? why should a pair of nunchucks bother anyone
Can I be the first to say
Mine's the black one with the balaclava.
as a practicing, and vocal, martial artist* to distance myself from these idiots. I'm sure most genuine martial artists out there will do the same. They cause us nothing but problems with the Daily Heil readership types, in the same way as some kid going berserk then blaming GTA4 gets bad press for the entire gaming community. It was this kind of idiot that got throwing stars banned in the UK.
Unfortunately, these types seldom get hit by Darwin's Laws, and never seem to hit their own eyeballs with an arrow. Assholes.
*See? THAT'S how to use commas.
Re: Weapons Possession rap?
Yep, in some States it is perfectly legal to carry a licensed gun, but illegal to carry a knife/Ninja Star etc. 'Cause, you know, that would just be dangerous!
Flocko Would Put a Cap in Their Silly Asses
Especially in New Jersey.
The cops saved their silly lives.
or it didnt happen
For their own protection?
I'm guessing the police did this for their own protection.
Let's face it - nunchucks and katanas might beat automatic weaponry in anime and Hong Kong kung fu flicks but it's probably not going to work so well on the mean streets of New Jersey...
Or maybe that's thirded, forthed, or fifed(?) by the time my comment shows up after several other peoples that are not currently visable.
Lots of people have registered guns in America, but thats it, they are registered. If these weapons were not registered and they had no legal reason to be carrying them then (Going to a ninje expo or something) then it is illegal, even though they appear to be acting in a good natured way
surely you can get some pix of the scene.
Because in the USA, "arms" has been determined to mean "firearms". So whereas it's probably legal to give 8 year olds functioning semi-automatics to take to school for "self defence", it's illegal to carry any weapons that do not create profit for the American weapon makers each time they are used.
So, what happened to the drug dealers?
I mean, just out of interest.
I realise that's only a distraction, but I would assume there's a reason these chums were underway for some serious vigilante action (and a possible hail of bullets in the style of Indiana Jones - try beating x bullets/sec with a couple of throwing stars)..
Now there was a game! I'm going all misty-eyed as I type...
Just the sort of chuckle I needed for a friday afternoon after the pub.
mine's the black one with the nun-chucks.
I blame Michael Winner
Someone's been watching too many 'Something's gotta be done to clear up this mess' films. Michael Douglas, Charlie Bronson and Marion Wayne would be proud.
They want to thank God for the police.
Seriously, sending C&D letters to drug dealers? Threatening them? Out here (UK) you might get some laughs, in the US they'll just shoot you and move down a block.
Guns vs. Ninja weapons
If they'd been busted carrying a carload of guns to go "persuade" drug dealers to cease their activities, I'm certain they'd have been busted for that, too. The issue isn't weapons, it's vigilantism, which is illegal no matter the methodology.
There seems to be a huge misunderstanding about the US and guns-- yes, they're legal to own, sure, but it still remains illegal to shoot people without justification, and it really doesn't happen all that often.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but adjusting for population size difference, don't the US and UK have a fairly equal murder and violent crime rate?
@Fab De Marco
"Registered" what now?
I never had to register a firearm, and I own several. Yes, I had to go through a background check (the data from which is *supposed* to be destroyed within a certain timeframe) and sign the firearm over into my ownership from the dealer. However, that record of ownership is something which can only be accessed by the government with proper legal reasons, from what I understand.
As I understand it, there is no firearms "registry" in the US. The NRA-types would throw a fit.
Your not alone. I put so much money into that game, it puts supporting a drug habit to shame. Time to fire up xmame.
They're going to fight a criminal scourge, and law enforcement arrests them
The RIAA/MPAA do it for an unproved civil infringement, and law enforcement bends over backwards.
I think the drug vigilantee people should maybe turn on the riaa/mpaa so then the cops have more time to deal with the druggies
Sad, sad , sad.
Is it just me or is the mental image of two grown men in full ninja costume with a massively under-inflated sense of their own mortality pootling along in a Ford Mondeo, surreal, depressing and funny all at the same time.
There has to be a scene from a film there. Anyone?
Paris because hopefully the ninja outfit would muffle her voice.
In the US, all legal weapons sales (except for C&Rs) are run thru a load of paperwork with the weapon's serial number, the buyer's ID info, fingerprints, etc. Each seller is required to have this data available for years for whenever ATFE decides they need to go thru them all. If even a T is miscrossed, or heave forbid, a "ditto" is used, the fines and fees are tremendous and the dealer is shut down and his records confiscated. Which means stored for however long the ATFE and it's masters decide, in their own facility, with little or no oversight.
So what's the difference then, of your records being stored at multiple locations, or confiscated by ATFE, or in some central "registry"? What about major states with "microstamping" laws with the serial number database to be accessable by LE whenever "necessary"? Is it not "registry" just because Democrats say it's not? A rose by any other name, and all that.
We won't even get into the "accessed with proper legal reasons" issue. Any activist judge can come up with a hundred "reasons" and his signature alone makes it "legal" thru warrants. "Think of the Children!" "OMG White Supremacist!" "Eek Evil Terrorist!"-there's three that are guaranteed to work anywhere under the 9th Circuit Court and anywhere near Mayor Boomberg's influence.
I love theses idiot comments. In most states you cant carry a knife over 1.5 inches . The charge is carrying a concealed weapon, not fire arm but weapon. So any thing that's defined as weapon including a gun is illegal to have concealed. Instates that allow you to open carry you can have a knife . In states that allow to have a permit its call a CCW. The W is weapons. So if you are going to bag on a country for their laws now what t he law actually is . But hey its fun to hate on yanks
@Sad, Sad, Sad
Try..."Beverley Hills Ninja".
Haru: [Joey is chasing a chicken] Keep practicing, Joey, and someday you will choke that chicken.
Haru: Do not worry. A ninja knows when he is in danger.
[Tanley and his men fire machine guns at them]
Haru: Now we are in danger. We are really in danger.
Haru: I am sure you would like to know who I am and what I do, but as part of my creed, I cannot tell you. See my identity must remain mysterious and my mission secret, I cannot reveal it to you.
Boy: Why not?
Haru: Because I would then have to kill you.
...coming from the state where it is illegal to pump your own gas
Ever been to new jersey? Try pumping your own gas. All gas stations are full service by law for "safety and insurance purposes." New Jersey is a little piece of the UK ('nanny state') in the USA... A tribute to the 'protection' we so envy of our funny speaking counterparts across the atlantic.
I live in KS where guns + beer = weekend fun... my ex-g/f from NJ was shocked when she discovered that people 'actually do that in the midwest,' 'own guns!', 'don't hurt themselves'. Ninjas with swords and stars sounds like fun though, i'll have to see what I have going on next weekend.
skull and crossbones because I'm going to shoot my eye out.
@Fab De Marco
What are you talking about? This "registered" thing you speak of it foreign to me. Where I'm from in the US the original purchaser is the only person who must register the firearm. Afterward is can be sold/transferred to another owner without any sort of paperwork (they asked you to file a form but you aren't required to do so).
If you have ever purchased a firearm in the past you can pay a $50 fee and get through the background check in 6 hours (the background check doesn't apply to rifles and shotguns anyway - which is silly because those are the really dangerous guns. Most people with a pistol aren't very dangerous to the person they are aiming at)
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but adjusting for population size difference, don't the US and UK have a fairly equal murder and violent crime rate?"
Okay. I'm correcting you, you're wrong. No, they don't. :)
Here's a handy list for murders:
U.S scores 0.042802 per 1,000 people, U.K. scores 0.0140633 per 1,000 people . So that's almost exactly 3x higher in the U.S. Canada scores 0.0149063 per 1,000 people.
Violent crime is similar, IIRC.
@AC "Correct me if I'm wrong, but adjusting for population size difference, don't the US and UK have a fairly equal murder and violent crime rate?"
The murder rate in the US more than twice that in the UK.
Aren't democrats the ones who are trying to make people give up their guns?
And, by the way, secondary sales aren't inherently illegal, and don't leave any traces beyond what the two parties consider fair. IE, I give you money, you give me a gun.
It is up to the seller to make sure the buyer is legit, but that doesn't include any sort of background check where I come from if it's two private parties (and not a gun store/gun show).
I could sell one of my firearms to a friend and there would be no record except that in our heads. As far as I'm aware, that's also perfectly legal where I live.
@coming from the state where it is illegal to pump your own gas
You should live in Finland.
In my usual state (drunk, in bed) it's not unusual for me to "pump my own gas". Trouble is, 'She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed' then tells me to "Open a fuc*king window"!
There's nothing more tedious than hearing a bunch of people spout off about US weapons laws when they know little about them. NJ has the second tightest weapons laws in the US: http://www.stategunlaws.org/viewstate.php?st=nj
"in some States it is perfectly legal to carry a licensed gun, but illegal to carry a knife/Ninja Star etc"
It all depends on the law in the particular state (and city). See non-official summary here: http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/USKnife.pdf
I believe (and IANANJL) that in NJ, there are no blanket prohibitions on knives, so long as there is a lawful reason for carrying the knife (gutting deer, carving chess pieces, cutting roofing felt) you'd be OK. Living out your Charles Bronson fantasies probably doesn't come under that category.
"it's illegal to carry any weapons that do not create profit for the American weapon makers each time they are used."
Complete gash - see above.
"Lots of people have registered guns in America, but thats it, they are registered."
It depends from state to state again. In Vermont, (IIRC) you don't have to register anything with anyone to buy, own or carry a gun. In Virginia, you don't have to have to register owned guns with the state and you don't have to get a licence to carry a gun openly (although you do have to have a licence to carry it in a concealed fashion).
There are plenty of arguments to made for/against gun laws in the UK/US contexts - but they can at least be made on the basis of facts...
In any case, depending on the content of the letters and what the two tools proposed to say to the dealers, even if they were not armed, their (planned) activities might have been illegal.
Black helicopters because the UN World Overlord Army is coming to take everyone's guns away.
to shoot or not to shoot...
I'm not sure how it is in parts of the U.K., however, for the US it's a hodgepodge. There are federal regulations, state regulations, counties within in the state regulations, city regulations/ordinances, etc..
You don't have to register a gun to own it legally in the US, assuming you purchased it second-hand, or before those laws took effect. However, automatic weapons are have to be registered to be legal in several states, and in most others are outright illegal. Concealed weapons permits are given out like candy in a few states, and in others you need to be giving the governor reach-arounds for several years to get one, and that still doesn't cover transporting over state lines. And I always love the "feel good" laws they pass on guns and magazines, restricting the amount of ammo they can hold, or the weapon itself. They tend not to mention the fact that none of those are retro-active, so you can pick up those "banned" items at gun shows dirt cheap normally. For anything else you could consider being used as a weapon there are laws of similar natures times a hundred.
I would love to see that amendment simply amended/repealed all together, wouldn't break my heart in the slightest. I can't see how it would really effect much since it's already outright trounced anyway in my view. "The right to bear arms", does that not mean carrying a firearm is a right, or did someone flip two pages at once on me? The only reason it hasn't happened (other than politicians making money off the lobbyists as usual) is the Southern states will start a civil war part 2 before they ever allow that right on paper to go away, in fact, just about any state with a significant rural section of it's populace.
Arrested is better then dead.
Those who live by the sword get shot in the chest by a drug dealer with a pistol.
Being arrested by the cops probably saved these idiot's lives.
So "the right to bear arms" refers only to guns then? I assumed "arms" would cover any weapon.
Right to bear arms does not mean the right to wave a gun about in public.
The right to bear arms does not give you the right to carry said arms around in public. There are concealed carry laws for that, and they are much stricter then the laws around obtaining a firearm.
The second amendment does not specifically say firearm, but it's read that way because who uses a sword these days except for dumbass kids? You're allowed to own a sword but if you go brandishing it in public, you're gonna be thrown in jail the same as you would if you openly carried around a shotgun or pistol.
Think of it this way. The second amendment says that you have a right to keep a gun at home so that when the zombie invasion comes, you will be ready to defend yourself.
Paris because some of your UK people have some stupid ideas about US law.
"I would love to see that amendment simply amended/repealed all together, wouldn't break my heart in the slightest. I can't see how it would really effect much since it's already outright trounced anyway in my view."
Hitler believed the same thing about guns. They were dangerous and only the military should possess them.
"All gas stations are full service by law for "safety and insurance purposes." New Jersey is a little piece of the UK ('nanny state') in the USA..."
And yet, strangely, here in the very nanny state UK of which you so knowledgeably speak, we're invariably expected to pump our own gas. I haven't seen an attended petrol station in a great many years.
So how do we account for this? Could it be that this particular example of nannying is in fact New Jersey's very own brand, and that in fact, your reference to the UK was for no particular reason after all?
so they can easily catch the "vigilianties" but can't just easily go out and arrest the scum they were after? this planet is screwed man. or corruption rules. which is the same point again...
It's no wonder that so many Americans are killed by arms each year. With a right guaranteed in law that the population is allowed bear arms.
If the US government amended the law removing the right to bear arms and instead completely banning it then maybe the bears wouldn't get so angry and keep on killing hikers!
Ok, Ok! I'm going, just let me get my coat!
...It's what's for Dinner
Sounds like some boys were looking to get sliced, diced, and served (to pit bulls). Lucky for them the cops caught 'em.
"'The right to bear arms', does that not mean carrying a firearm is a right..."
Actually, um, that's exactly what it means. "Keep" as in possess/own, "bear" as in carry on your person, unless you think they were making an ursine reference.
To feel comfortable with the Second Amendment requires that 1) You presume your neighbors to be reasonable and responsible people, and 2) You realize that a firearm is no more intrinsically evil than an automobile or a kerosene lamp. And no less dangerous when used by the careless or malicious.
...and in other news!
Maybe the local drug lords gave the police a heads-up. Since most of the police are probably in the employ of these American 'entrepanours', I would expect nothing less (as long as they pay their taxes).
In the USA it is against the law to carry certain types of weapons, but to possess a gun is to be part of the fabled 'American way'.
Paris, is she not American (tenuous, I know)?
Your argument runs thus:
Hitler was a bad guy.
Hitler believed $SOMETHING.
Therefore, $SOMETHING is wrong.
Spot where it falls down.
An automobile is designed to get you from A to B. A Kerosene lamp is designed to illuminate. Any deaths resulting from these objects are accidental, and generally result in a redesign of said automobile or lamp to minimise the chance of it happening again - think seatbelts, crumple zones etc.
On the other hand a firearm is designed to kill things. That's it's purpose.
"evil" is a loaded word, but given that most things that are killed don't wish to be and that a firearm is absolutely, categorically "more intrinsically" designed to kill, then it's not a great leap is it? Bagging the odd rabbit for dinner excepted as only PETA think that's evil.
As for no less dangerous, discounting target shooting (which doesn't require you to carry a gun about in public), please explain to me how you can use a firearm - not just carry one, but use one - and have it *not* be dangerous? They're SUPPOSED to be dangerous, that's the point. See above.
"Dangerous to whom?" is the pertinent question. A military or police force loyal and beholden to its served civilian populace is dubbed a necessity. Either is certainly dangerous to those discerned as malefactors by the protected and, despite any statistical possibility of circumstance of being turned against the intended masters, considered a necessity all the same. The citizen bearing personal arms merely brings the same argument to the level of the individual rather than the group*.
It's a matter of self reliance. Some people are happy taking the bus or metro to work. Others would rather depend upon themselves and drive, work from home, live over shop, etc.
"Evil" was used as shorthand for worthy of dread or contempt. I've personally seen fires kill people and utterly destroy lives. I'm careful that I don't burn my house down, but I'm not contemptuous of fire. I'm careful. And since the vast majority of my neighbors aren't ablaze, I'm assuming they're no less careful.
Bearing all this in mind, why do I have the feeling that the drug dealers are still on the corner while a group of impetuous, rash, and foolish youths were attempting to do what the community as a whole should have? Thugs should be afraid of the ire of the townsfolk, not the other way around. *Never* the other way around. That is neither progress nor civilized.
*I might have written "The citizen bearing personal arms merely brings the same argument *back* to the level of the individual *where it naturally lay* rather than the group" to be more in tune with the mindset that holds reliance primarily on the man in the mirror as a basic personal responsibility and the other side of the coin of claiming personal rights.
Ninja's not that tough
Dear Vulture fans,
Basil Baxter would like to caution against giving Ninja’s undue media attention. Basil Baxter has had dealings in the past with Ninja’s and they never ended well; for the Ninja’s.
As Basil Baxter has frequently commented on his blog; there is no kick, jump or blow designed to counter a Chainsaw. (Polly would like to amend that; a ‘high quality’ chainsaw. She gets ever so jealous when Basil Baxter tests other girls.)
These two miscreants were obviously on their way to wreak havoc on Basil Baxter’s master plan to distribute narcotics to toddlers and thus lay the groundwork for world domination. All Basil Baxter can say, in their own retarded lingo; MASSIVE FAIL!
Besides, had Basil Baxter, in all his benevolence, not decided to loan Ussama Bin-Laden his SS20 nuclear missiles which where en-route to the Ninja headquarters at the time; the Ninja’s would have been less than no more. (Basil Baxter also quite regrets not disarming them at the time, anyone travelling to Pakistan is advised to bring Geiger counters.)
In any case; Basil Baxter is not an unreasonable person. He quite admires these two’s audacity and therefore has decided to bust them out. Unfortunately Basil Baxter has never had to measure Semtex quite as precisely as needed to only blow a mere hole in a wall so perhaps some causalities might ensue. Ah well, Basil Baxter feels that it is the thought that counts.
And remember: Babies stop crying if you shake them. Death comes to us all but only sometimes does it wear sunglasses.
Secretgeek: Ford Products
In North America the Mondeo is either the Ford Contour or the Mercury Mystique...
I don't know why I'm writing this, no one cares, least of all me.
@ Mike Crawshaw
Commas can't be used before "and". This be because "and" already is a comma. Don't get me stared on starting sentences beginning with "And!"
Mine has I heart Lynn Truss on the back.
and on the subject of grammer..
The plural of nunchuk (they in fact only come in plural by definition) is "nunchaku".