PDA

View Full Version : Sikh's now allowed to carry Kirpins. Bill just passed house


Scold
09-02-2009, 5:14 PM
Link http://sikhsangat.org/2009/09/california-house-passes-%E2%80%98kirpan%E2%80%99-bill/


California House passes ‘kirpan’ bill
Published on Wednesday, September 2, 2009 by Azaad

In a landmark legislation, the California State Legislature has unanimously passed a bill to train law enforcement personnel about Sikhs and the religious significance of ‘kirpans’. The legislation (AB 504) was unanimously passed by the California State Legislature. The bill moves to Governor Schwarzenegger, to sign it into law.

“AB 504 is an important bill that recognises the state’s responsibility to protect religious freedoms, while ensuring public safety,” said Assembly member Warren Furutani, who introduced the bill in the state legislature this year.“The Sikh community should not live in fear of arrest by law enforcement for carrying the kirpan,” he added.

The bill defines a kirpan as a blade that resembles a sword and is required for the practice of the Sikh faith.

While several police and sheriff’s departments have recognised the need for this type of training and have been conducting it on an ad hoc basis, the bill would standardise the process statewide, the legislation said.

The training would specifically advise officers “how to recognise and interact with persons carrying a kirpan.” The Sikh Coalition, a Sikh advocacy group, hailed the passage of the bill as a historic occasion.

“Should it become a law, this would be the first law pertaining to kirpan in the US,” the Sikh Coalition said.

It said the legislation arose out of a number of Sikhs being arrested for carrying kirpans because the police mistakenly believes them to be in violation of concealed weapons laws.

“Our hope is that being educated about kirpan and its religious significance will decrease the number of wasteful arrests,” the coalition said.

“Given Sikhs’ long history in California, as well as the fact that this state has the highest number of Sikhs nationwide, it is entirely appropriate that California take this pioneering step,” said Neha Singh, Western Region Director of the Sikh Coalition. “We hope that the education will help reduce the number of Sikhs needlessly being arrested for practicing their faith and focus the energy of law enforcement on actual threats to the public safety,” Singh said.

The bill requires the commission on peace officer standards and training within the Department of Justice to make available to all the law enforcement agencies training content on how to recognise and interact with persons carrying a kirpan, as specified.

It requires that the training content includes instruction on how arrests of Sikhs carrying a kirpan have historically been treated and the alternatives to those arrests and detentions that have successfully been used.

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:15 PM
We need a religioin called "The Holy House of Calguniths" and we should have mandatory carrying of AR15's and concealed handguns at all times.

dantodd
09-02-2009, 5:20 PM
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?

drewg13
09-02-2009, 5:23 PM
:mad: What a load of bull. Can I now carry my Ka-Bar? My private religion I practice at home requires me to.

grammaton76
09-02-2009, 5:23 PM
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?

Not having read it, that's my thought as well.

I would be perfectly fine with a law that says ANYONE may carry a Kirpin, but not a law saying Sikhs are allowed and everyone else remains under the same restrictions as before.

...on a side note, I find it very interesting that this training program creates a prime example that the state can and SHOULD work on officers' weapons education, including open carry...

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:24 PM
but we live in the most progressive state right? Right....? *crickets*

Roadrunner
09-02-2009, 5:24 PM
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?

Exactly! In fact Christ instructed his disciples to sell their cloaks and buy a sword if they didn't already have one. I hope they don't ding me for obeying God.

Dr Rockso
09-02-2009, 5:25 PM
How does carrying a Kirpan concealed not violate the current interpretation of 12020? The only way I can see that argument is if it has been agreed that a Kirpan is not "capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death." If that's the case then anyone carrying a Kirpan should be good to go. I expect to see Cheaper Than Dirt selling the EXTREME TACTICAL KIRPAN USED BY INDIAN SPECIAL FORCES within the week.

Super Spy
09-02-2009, 5:25 PM
I guess this allows the carrying of a weapon so +1....but it loses that point fast because it discriminates against non Sikhs by not allowing them to carry.

I'm with Scold...time to start a new religion.....

Nessal
09-02-2009, 5:25 PM
Not having read it, that's my thought as well.

I would be perfectly fine with a law that says ANYONE may carry a Kirpin, but not a law saying Sikhs are allowed and everyone else remains under the same restrictions as before.

...on a side note, I find it very interesting that this training program creates a prime example that the state can and SHOULD work on officers' weapons education, including open carry...




Bingo!

dantodd
09-02-2009, 5:26 PM
but we live in the most progressive state right? Right....? *crickets*

Sikhs, cricket..... I get it.....

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:31 PM
Sikhs, cricket..... I get it.....

.:)

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:33 PM
I love how some small sect gets special treatment yet our rights that are DOCUMENTED IN THE CONSTITUTION are infringed upon daily in this state. Sigh...

Steyr_223
09-02-2009, 5:33 PM
I say we should all have quality before the law! I need guns and ammo on my person at all times..

I want my rights as a Grammaton Cleric First Class of the Tetragrammaton Council respected..

1923mack
09-02-2009, 5:35 PM
So does one have to be a card carrying Sikh to qualify for the Kirpin carry, or can any Joe?

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:35 PM
I say we should all have quality before the law! I need guns and ammo on my person at all times..

I want my rights as a Grammaton Cleric First Class of the Tetragrammaton Council respected..

If you were a woman I would marry you based on the Equilibrium reference alone.

grammaton76
09-02-2009, 5:35 PM
I say we should all have quality before the law! I need guns and ammo on my person at all times..

I want my rights as a Grammaton Cleric First Class of the Tetragrammaton Council respected..

Get in line, I've been ordained longer! :)

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:38 PM
So does one have to be a card carrying Sikh to qualify for the Kirpin carry, or can any Joe?

This opens up a who new bag of worms. Are there going to be "degrees" of Sikh's that get this privilege? Like, lets say you only practice their religious ceremonies around the holidays that they celebrate, are you then allowed to carry? Or what if you disagree with organized religion, but follow that faith on your own, are you excluded? This is going to be such a cluster ****

Sunwolf
09-02-2009, 5:39 PM
Sounds like this opens up a whole new can of worms.

anthonyca
09-02-2009, 5:41 PM
When do we file an equal protection lawsuit?

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:42 PM
Where's a Lawyer when you need one?

wellfedirishman
09-02-2009, 5:50 PM
Can I carry a shelaleigh now since it is part of my cultural heritage as an Irishman?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shillelagh_(club)

And no, that is not me!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cQb2tKyozEQ/ScvAlfs1ghI/AAAAAAAABGk/7UAap3jfF9Q/s400/finlay_shillelagh.jpg

Fair play to the Sikhs for getting this recognized, I respect their right to carry for religious reasons. Just make sure this will get expanded to other religions/cultures too.

lomalinda
09-02-2009, 5:53 PM
http://www.ancientarms.biz/catalog/kirpan.jpg

ITZJT
09-02-2009, 5:55 PM
I had recieved an e-mail about this.... but never got a chance to send my vote glad to see it got passed :) just goes to show some of the laws can be changed

ITZJT
09-02-2009, 5:56 PM
http://www.ancientarms.biz/catalog/kirpan.jpg

http://www.ancientarms.biz/catalog/kirpan.jpg

Turo
09-02-2009, 5:57 PM
Hold on, isn't a kirpan recognized by CA law as a fixed blade knife?
The only state restriction on carrying a fixed blade knife is that it be openly carried... (plus some school-related things)

Is there some part of the Sikh's doctrine that requires them to carry the kirpan concealed? or am I missing something?

Scold
09-02-2009, 5:59 PM
Hold on, isn't a kirpan recognized by CA law as a fixed blade knife?
The only state restriction on carrying a fixed blade knife is that it be openly carried... (plus some school-related things)

Is there some part of the Sikh's doctrine that requires them to carry the kirpan concealed? or am I missing something?
Not sure if it is stated that they have to carry it concealed, but if you read my original post, you will see that the concept of carrying it concealed is what this is all about.

grammaton76
09-02-2009, 5:59 PM
Is there some part of the Sikh's doctrine that requires them to carry the kirpan concealed? or am I missing something?

I suspect that it's a matter of practicality... clothing may cover it, etc.

It sure would be a shame if this bled over to open carry and "accidental concealment", huh? :)

Dr Rockso
09-02-2009, 6:01 PM
Hold on, isn't a kirpan recognized by CA law as a fixed blade knife?
The only state restriction on carrying a fixed blade knife is that it be openly carried... (plus some school-related things)

Is there some part of the Sikh's doctrine that requires them to carry the kirpan concealed? or am I missing something?
The article makes it look like this bill did not change any laws, just added training so that police don't 'mistakenly' arrest any Kirpan-carrying Sikhs. To me this means one of two things; either the Sikhs are carrying the Kirpan openly and the cops don't know the law, or it has been decided that Kirpan's are not subject to 12020 as "capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death" (perhaps due to their blade shape?). If the latter they (or anyone else) could carry the Kirpan concealed even though it is a fixed blade.

Glock22Fan
09-02-2009, 6:03 PM
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

George Orwell, "1984."

Turo
09-02-2009, 6:07 PM
Not sure if it is stated that they have to carry it concealed, but if you read my original post, you will see that the concept of carrying it concealed is what this is all about.

I only saw the part about "in violation of concealed weapons laws" Which can, and has been, strewn every which-way in courts and by LE.

Nowhere in the link given, or what I could find googling the bill, said anything about concealment.

Dr Rockso
09-02-2009, 6:07 PM
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

George Orwell, "1984."

Wrong book

Turo
09-02-2009, 6:09 PM
To me this means one of two things; either the Sikhs are carrying the Kirpan openly and the cops don't know the law, or it has been decided that Kirpan's are not subject to 12020 as "capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death" (perhaps due to their blade shape?). If the latter they (or anyone else) could carry the Kirpan concealed even though it is a fixed blade.

If it's the prior, I have no qualms about it. Educate as many LEO as possible about openly carrying fixed blades, as I do it daily.

If the latter is true, they better extend the same exemption to everyone, or else someone's gonna get reamed.

Scold
09-02-2009, 6:10 PM
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

George Orwell, "1984."

Animal Farm

Shotgun Man
09-02-2009, 6:11 PM
As near as I can tell, they are worn in sheaths. People wear them concealed and openly. http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kirpan

The bill does nothing other than specify sensitivity training for cops.

This would have been a great opportunity to amend 12020 to delete the concealed dirk or dagger prohibition or at least provide that a knife carried in a sheath in not a dirk or dagger.

Typical Sacramento. I'd like to catch the police giving special treatment to the Kirpan-wearing Sikh on 12020 violations, and then urge CGF to launch a lawsuit providing for such special treatment for everyone.

Scold
09-02-2009, 6:11 PM
Link http://sikhsangat.org/2009/09/california-house-passes-%E2%80%98kirpan%E2%80%99-bill/


California House passes ‘kirpan’ bill
Published on Wednesday, September 2, 2009 by Azaad

In a landmark legislation, the California State Legislature has unanimously passed a bill to train law enforcement personnel about Sikhs and the religious significance of ‘kirpans’. The legislation (AB 504) was unanimously passed by the California State Legislature. The bill moves to Governor Schwarzenegger, to sign it into law.

“AB 504 is an important bill that recognises the state’s responsibility to protect religious freedoms, while ensuring public safety,” said Assembly member Warren Furutani, who introduced the bill in the state legislature this year.“The Sikh community should not live in fear of arrest by law enforcement for carrying the kirpan,” he added.

The bill defines a kirpan as a blade that resembles a sword and is required for the practice of the Sikh faith.

While several police and sheriff’s departments have recognised the need for this type of training and have been conducting it on an ad hoc basis, the bill would standardise the process statewide, the legislation said.

The training would specifically advise officers “how to recognise and interact with persons carrying a kirpan.” The Sikh Coalition, a Sikh advocacy group, hailed the passage of the bill as a historic occasion.

“Should it become a law, this would be the first law pertaining to kirpan in the US,” the Sikh Coalition said.

It said the legislation arose out of a number of Sikhs being arrested for carrying kirpans because the police mistakenly believes them to be in violation of concealed weapons laws.

“Our hope is that being educated about kirpan and its religious significance will decrease the number of wasteful arrests,” the coalition said.

“Given Sikhs’ long history in California, as well as the fact that this state has the highest number of Sikhs nationwide, it is entirely appropriate that California take this pioneering step,” said Neha Singh, Western Region Director of the Sikh Coalition. “We hope that the education will help reduce the number of Sikhs needlessly being arrested for practicing their faith and focus the energy of law enforcement on actual threats to the public safety,” Singh said.

The bill requires the commission on peace officer standards and training within the Department of Justice to make available to all the law enforcement agencies training content on how to recognise and interact with persons carrying a kirpan, as specified.

It requires that the training content includes instruction on how arrests of Sikhs carrying a kirpan have historically been treated and the alternatives to those arrests and detentions that have successfully been used.

This is the part that made me post this here. If it was openly carried i wouldn't care, but the fact that concealed carry is mentioned is what ruffled my feathers.

Dr Rockso
09-02-2009, 6:15 PM
If the latter is true, they better extend the same exemption to everyone, or else someone's gonna get reamed.
I really can't imagine them trying to argue that a Kirpan is not "capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death" when it is being carried by a Sikh, but it is when carried by anyone else.

LAK Supply
09-02-2009, 6:17 PM
Wow... they want "separation" with religions they hate (Christians) and protection for everybody else?

Miltiades
09-02-2009, 6:18 PM
A couple of more Kirpan pictures I Googled - it looks like a pretty significant big knife.

http://worldsikhnews.com/19%20December%202007/Image/kirpans.jpg

http://khalsakirpans.com/photos/ProdKirpan.jpg

grammaton76
09-02-2009, 6:20 PM
If they do in fact give an exemption to concealment issues that isn't tied to religion, I can imagine a lot of "tactical kirpins" coming out of knife shops catering to the CA market... :)

If they do tie it to a religion, they just gave us ammunition. Life is good...

Steyr_223
09-02-2009, 6:27 PM
If they do in fact give an exemption to concealment issues that isn't tied to religion, I can imagine a lot of "tactical kirpins" coming out of knife shops catering to the CA market... :)

If they do tie it to a religion, they just gave us ammunition. Life is good...

This is win in so many ways. Good things ahead..

thedrickel
09-02-2009, 6:31 PM
They vary in size and shape, I have seen them short (2-3") to very long, over a foot. Usually worn in a sheath and slung under clothing. I think it was Governor Wilson that signed the law that said they could be worn in schools.

dantodd
09-02-2009, 6:51 PM
Can I carry a shelaleigh now since it is part of my cultural heritage as an Irishman?


Whew. for a minute there I thought you wanted to carry around a Shalalah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Shalala)

dantodd
09-02-2009, 6:52 PM
I'm not sure who but didn't one of the presidential candidates in this past election talk about the connection between guns and the Christian religions?


Oh yeah.... Now I remember: DTxXUufI3jA

GuyW
09-02-2009, 6:55 PM
I wonder how much mordida the Sikhs had to come up with??

.

GuyW
09-02-2009, 6:58 PM
or it has been decided that Kirpan's are not subject to 12020 as "capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death" (perhaps due to their blade shape?).

I don't think so - a pencil meets the legal definition of a dirk or dagger....

I remain concerned that sport fencing "blades" meet the same definition, and are typically carried concealed in public in gear bags...

.

Glock22Fan
09-02-2009, 7:00 PM
Wrong book

You are, of course, correct. All I can do is apologise and blame today's workload, which has me tearing my hair out.

It is, of course, Animal Farm.

Scold
09-02-2009, 7:00 PM
You are, of course, correct. All I can do is apologise andarm. blame today's workload, which has me tearing my hair out.

It is, of course, Animal Farm.

You are forgiven sir :)

dantodd
09-02-2009, 7:04 PM
I don't think so - a pencil meets the legal definition of a dirk or dagger....

I remain concerned that sport fencing "blades" meet the same definition, and are typically carried concealed in public in gear bags...

.

Sport fencing blades are typically blunted (and most with a push button on the tip) are they not?

GuyW
09-02-2009, 7:13 PM
Sport fencing blades are typically blunted (and most with a push button on the tip) are they not?

They still can cause serious-to-fatal injuries - hence all of the protective gear that fencers wear...
.

tankerman
09-02-2009, 7:14 PM
My religion requires me to carry a flame-thrower.

dantodd
09-02-2009, 7:15 PM
They still can cause serious-to-fatal injuries - hence all of the protective gear that fencers wear...
.

Yes, but the blunting is specifically there to make them not "ready use as a stabbing weapon."

GuyW
09-02-2009, 7:17 PM
Yes, but the blunting is specifically there to make them not "ready use as a stabbing weapon."

Got any case law to back that up? I'm totally sceptical...

.

bohoki
09-02-2009, 7:20 PM
i love how new your handled it

In New York City, a compromise was reached with the Board of Education wherein the wearing of the knives was allowed, as long as the knives were secured within the sheaths with adhesives and made impossible to draw.\

we should allow them to carry them only if they are encased in a block of lucite

allowing only them to carry one sure does sound unconstitutional

grammaton76
09-02-2009, 7:35 PM
In New York City, a compromise was reached with the Board of Education wherein the wearing of the knives was allowed, as long as the knives were secured within the sheaths with adhesives and made impossible to draw.

Hmm, perhaps thedrickel can answer on this - wouldn't this be a violation of Sikh doctrine?

My understanding is that the Sikhs are required to have a usable weapon on them at all times... if it's been disabled permanently, does that satisfy the religion's requirements?

dantodd
09-02-2009, 7:36 PM
Got any case law to back that up? I'm totally sceptical...

.

Case law to back up the intent of blunting? If you fence surely you know the reason for blunting. To make the weapons less likely to cause a stabbing wound.

El Gato
09-02-2009, 7:47 PM
I'm not sure who but didn't one of the presidential candidates in this past election talk about the connection between guns and the Christian religions?


Oh yeah.... Now I remember: DTxXUufI3jA

So now will we get a "clinging to their kirpin's and religon speech"?

blerg
09-02-2009, 7:49 PM
Where do you read that only Sikhs can wear one?
I read the Bill as follow: Kirpans are important to Sikhs because of religious reasons. Therefore they are legal. Legal for everybody. I do not think that you have to disclose your religion to a police officer that stops you because of a Kirpan!?

Am I wrong here?

Turo
09-02-2009, 7:49 PM
Case law to back up the intent of blunting? If you fence surely you know the reason for blunting. To make the weapons less likely to cause a stabbing wound.

The reason he asked is not a practical one. You and I and everyone else on these boards realizes that blunting would be to lessen the stabbing risk, but as the law exists, practicality/common sense don't really mean a whole lot.

GuyW
09-02-2009, 7:57 PM
The reason he asked is not a practical one. You and I and everyone else on these boards realizes that blunting would be to lessen the stabbing risk, but as the law exists, practicality/common sense don't really mean a whole lot.

+1. Gunnies on CalGuns should realize this better than most...

.

Glock22Fan
09-02-2009, 8:27 PM
If I convert to Rastafarian, do I get to legally own ganjaweed?

HondaMasterTech
09-02-2009, 8:32 PM
I'm always amazed at this world in one way or another.

artherd
09-02-2009, 8:34 PM
This has me feeling quite religious :)

SwissFluCase
09-02-2009, 8:37 PM
This is going to open a hole big enough to drive an armored truck full of hi-caps through...

Regards,


SwissFluCase

yellowfin
09-02-2009, 9:09 PM
I'm thinking a kirpin would make an excellent deer cleaning knife. Anyone here used one for such?

bohoki
09-02-2009, 9:25 PM
I'm thinking a kirpin would make an excellent deer cleaning knife. Anyone here used one for such?

it looks like it would be easy to put a guthook on it with a chainsaw file

bombadillo
09-02-2009, 9:25 PM
I'm going for my pastor now and ask him to start preaching the need for concealed weapons. I can record them, send them to the state and require that they allow my beliefs be allowed to carry concealed loaded anywhere I please because its my religion. What a bunch of garbage. :rolleyes:

thedrickel
09-02-2009, 9:26 PM
You're not supposed to remove them from the sheath except for religious purposes or an emergency. The people that are religious enough to carry them definitely follow that rule. The % of Sikhs that are actually baptized and follow those rules is very small.

.454
09-02-2009, 9:28 PM
I worship the almighty, all powerful and most merciful Gaston Glock.
Can I carry one of his beautiful creations?

vandal
09-02-2009, 9:37 PM
Are kirpins available in 2 3/4" length with reverse edge? Something like this?

http://www.shivworks.com/articles/ClinchPick/ClinchPickLarge.jpg

ITZJT
09-02-2009, 10:09 PM
its actually "kirpan"

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kirpan

Casey
09-02-2009, 10:37 PM
Looks like the good Guru was ahead of the founding fathers by 77 years.

"In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Gobind_Singh) told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Baisakhi) Amrit Sanchar (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Amrit_Sanchar) to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defence which together with the other 4 Kakars (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kakars) formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Hukam) of the tenth master.
This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenseless person when all other means to do so have failed. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth. It is the cutting edge of the enlightened mind."

Scold
09-02-2009, 10:40 PM
its actually "kirpan"

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kirpan

Whatever....

alex00
09-02-2009, 10:57 PM
This bill angers me in so many ways. The law makers are forcing sensitivity training on cops, because of a person's faith. The law does nothing to exempt this group from 12020, but urges law enforcement not to make unnecessary arrests. Wasn't the intent of assault weapon ban to prevent gang violence and school shootings? Where is the bill urging sensitivity for those individuals clearly not involved in gangs?

It looks like the law makers have essentially nullified 12020. The state would have to prove one is not Sikh, and that the concealed dagger was not a Kirpan. Good luck with that. I sure hope the powers that be can take this bill and ram it down the state's throat to get some of our rights back. How is this not clearly a violation of equal protection and separation of church and state?

dantodd
09-02-2009, 11:05 PM
The reason he asked is not a practical one. You and I and everyone else on these boards realizes that blunting would be to lessen the stabbing risk, but as the law exists, practicality/common sense don't really mean a whole lot.

Yes, and the law includes the word "readily" for a reason. The blunting and the scoring button (or whatever it is called) is clearly there for the express purpose of lessening the risk of causing a stabbing wound. So, yes as written the law addresses the practicality of the likelihood of the tool causing such an injury. Is there case law? Probably not because cops don't arrest and DAs don't prosecute fencers who are transporting their weapons to and from events. Now, if some bad guy steals a fencers bag and ultimately uses a foil to shishkabob a cop you might get a prosecution out of it but that would be no different than a screwdriver being prosecuted. If you are a law abiding citizen not using a fencing sword to attack someone you won't get arrested for carrying it in my opinion. If you are aware of police staking out fencing schools please let me know.

Meplat
09-02-2009, 11:31 PM
Nope, that was Orwell's "Animal Farm".

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

George Orwell, "1984."

wellfedirishman
09-02-2009, 11:38 PM
Crap, she looks a lot more threatening than a knobby wooden stick!


Whew. for a minute there I thought you wanted to carry around a Shalalah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Shalala)

truthseeker
09-02-2009, 11:48 PM
How are they going to be able to tell who is part of that religion and who is not?

Well, looks like I get to carry a cool looking knife now!

navyinrwanda
09-02-2009, 11:52 PM
The California Legislature didn't change any statues regarding knives or how they might be carried. There's no "statutory" exception for edged weapons that are carried concealed per one's religious faith (which is what Sikhs do with kirpans).

Instead, the Legislature changed the standardized curriculum for law enforcement training. Henceforth, LEOs will be taught that a Sikh carrying a concealed kirpan shouldn't be arrested, even though they would be in violation of PC 12020(a)(4).

Whether or not a non-Sikh could challenge an arrest for violating PC 12020(a)(4) on an as-applied equal protection basis is a question best answered by sharper legal minds than mine. But this all sounds a bit too clever — did Irwin Nowick have his hands in it?

nick
09-03-2009, 12:05 AM
Looks like the good Guru was ahead of the founding fathers by 77 years.

"In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Gobind_Singh) told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Baisakhi) Amrit Sanchar (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Amrit_Sanchar) to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defence which together with the other 4 Kakars (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kakars) formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Hukam) of the tenth master.
This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenseless person when all other means to do so have failed. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth. It is the cutting edge of the enlightened mind."

Great, so our most benevolent overlords would rather observe the Sikh version of the 2nd Amendment than that of their own country. How fitting.

Dr. Peter Venkman
09-03-2009, 1:08 AM
Never a better time to be a Sikh. Do they accept applications?

Merc1138
09-03-2009, 2:28 AM
If it was a law to teach officers that openly carrying knives was something people shouldn't be arrested or even detained for, fine.

Instead it's to teach officers that they shouldn't arrest members of a religion for concealed carry of a weapon specified for "defensive" use(meaning, a weapon rather than a tool)...

Why?

Now I've been an ordained minister with the Universal Life Church for years now(was kind of funny, plus in the event I need to perform a wedding I can... *shrug*). So if the state has to recognize me as a minister, and so long as my beliefs don't infringe upon others, why can't I get a following that begins every gathering by eating a slice of tactical bacon (http://www.thinkgeek.com/caffeine/wacky-candy/c399/), and conceal carry loaded pistols for ceremony(the weekly ceremonial meet at the range) and defense of our beliefs? Who is the government to tell me what my faith can and cannot be?

colossians323
09-03-2009, 4:07 AM
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?


As long as it is not the Christian religion that is being favored, it is ok!;)

Mulay El Raisuli
09-03-2009, 6:59 AM
There's really nothing new in this. Peyote is illegal for everyone except SW American Indian tribes. No one can give wine to a 14 y/o except Catholics & Jews. I'm sure there are other examples of exceptions for other religions regarding other things. All have been ruled Constitutional. This is just one more.

The Raisuli

missiondude
09-03-2009, 7:18 AM
Exactly! In fact Christ instructed his disciples to sell their cloaks and buy a sword if they didn't already have one. I hope they don't ding me for obeying God.

Running around naked with an edged weapon is a good way to get shot:D

Pelican
09-03-2009, 8:00 AM
Never a better time to be a Sikh. Do they accept applications?

Looks like you don't even need to file one:
http://www.sikhs.org/reht1.htm#art1

I was looking into joining a while back. Sikhism seems like a really egalitarian,
weapons-based religion. Maybe as a response to the caste system, everyone,
regardless of social standing, is welcome to eat at the table. The recognition
of a weapon as an essential part of religious and secular life is pretty cool also.
And they've got their own martial art: http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Gatka
Couldn't you refer to any edged weapon as your "kirpan"?

gun toting monkeyboy
09-03-2009, 8:29 AM
A few things...

First, sit back and keep your mouths shut until this thing passes. Don't call up your local law makers to complain. This is a very good thing. If we can get a law on the books saying that people, any people, are not to be arrested for carrying a concealed knife, it is a big win for us. Not because we all want to become Sikhs, though there is nothing wrong with that. But because the big brains behing our grand legal stratagies will be able to pummel the hell out of the State with it. You can't make laws that grant privileges to one group of people based on their religion. That would be ILLEGAL. So for this law to apply to the Sikhs, it would HAVE to apply to the rest of us as well. And remember, the Kirpan is for defensive purposes only. Something carried to help protect the defenseless and stop oppression. Hmmm... what other kinds of weapons might fall under that heading? I wonder what a lawyer would come up with if this law passes, and some other people want to carry their personal choice of weapon for the same purpose...

Second, swords are not considered dirks or daggers because of their size. IIRC, you CAN carry a sword, concealed or non-concealed because it's too big to be considered easily concealed. Just like long guns. I went wandering around CSULB with a real cavalry sabre for a speech class project, and the campus police didn't say boo. I know a guy that used to walk his dog regularly while carrying a katana. The police stopped him once or twice, but they never arrested him, nor did they take it away. Fencing swords are not weapons because they are blunted. The reason for all of the protective gear is mainly in case the blunt tip breaks off. In which case, you do have something that can and will skewer you like a shish kabab. And to try to minimize the welts and bruises that you normally get from fencing.

Third, the poor guy already gave a mea culpa about getting the Animal Farm quote wrong. We all know it was atributed to the wrong book. Let it go please.

-Mb

Glock22Fan
09-03-2009, 8:57 AM
Nope, that was Orwell's "Animal Farm".

Yes, it was just a senior moment caused by pulling a 16 hour shift yesterday, as I know both books quite well.

However, it has already been corrected by several other people and already acknowledged by me, several pages ago, so I would appreciate it if people stopped rubbing my nose in it. Thank you.

Aldemar
09-03-2009, 9:16 AM
Let's start a church called "Gunpowder".

One of the requirements shall be that each member is required to carry the sacred powder in a brass enclosure capped by lead. There shall be no limit to the amount of capsules that may be carried.

An automatic dispenser for the sacred capsules shall be carried so as not to antogonize non-believers or to overtly accounce your membership in the Gunpowder Church.

The sacred capsules may only be used to convert overlty hostile non-believers and may be dispensed as many times as the Member deems necessary.

Amen

GuyW
09-03-2009, 9:24 AM
Fencing swords are not weapons because they are blunted. The reason for all of the protective gear is mainly in case the blunt tip breaks off. In which case, you do have something that can and will skewer you like a shish kabab. And to try to minimize the welts and bruises that you normally get from fencing.

Actually, I can cite instances of fencers being stabbed (ie, thru the skin / into meat) with non-broken epees and foils, through protective gear....
.

bwiese
09-03-2009, 9:44 AM
Folks, let's not jump on the Sikhs for this situation.

We probably have quite a few friends in the Sikh community - they have a large presence in the farming/ranching trade up in "North Norcal" (some operations have been run for generations) and are likely very sympathetic to gun/arms ownership.

This might offer exploitable opportunities in the future, however - even more so in knife rights struggles concerning "dirks and daggers".ha

liketoshoot
09-03-2009, 10:10 AM
Looks like the good Guru was ahead of the founding fathers by 77 years.

"In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Gobind_Singh) told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Baisakhi) Amrit Sanchar (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Amrit_Sanchar) to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defence which together with the other 4 Kakars (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kakars) formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Hukam) of the tenth master.
This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenseless person when all other means to do so have failed. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth. It is the cutting edge of the enlightened mind."


As I read this, I felt like I was reading a form of our 2nd A, so if this does pass then we have a chance of getting our fight thru for the right to protect ourselves. Sorta what bweise said.

tiki
09-03-2009, 10:11 AM
Yes, it was just a senior moment caused by pulling a 16 hour shift yesterday, as I know both books quite well.

However, it has already been corrected by several other people and already acknowledged by me, several pages ago, so I would appreciate it if people stopped rubbing my nose in it. Thank you.

I don't think people are rubbing your nose in it. I think that they pull the trigger on the reply before reading through all the posts.

MasterYong
09-03-2009, 10:11 AM
That's funny... my religion requires me to carry a concealed pistol and openly carry my M1A everywhere I go. It is a supreme sin for me to do anything else.

Can I be protected by my beliefs now? Please? No? Is it 'cuz I'm white???

gadjeep
09-03-2009, 10:37 AM
Wow, sounds a lot like "an armed society is a polite society" eh?

Looks like the good Guru was ahead of the founding fathers by 77 years.

"In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Gobind_Singh) told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Baisakhi) Amrit Sanchar (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Amrit_Sanchar) to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defence which together with the other 4 Kakars (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kakars) formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Hukam) of the tenth master.
This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenseless person when all other means to do so have failed. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth. It is the cutting edge of the enlightened mind."

yellowfin
09-03-2009, 11:32 AM
Now you just need someone to make a nice 3" 1911 model they call the Kirpan.

thefinger
09-03-2009, 11:36 AM
Now you just need someone to make a nice 3" 1911 model they call the Kirpan.

ahahahahhaa YES

dantodd
09-03-2009, 12:24 PM
hmmmm..... Bobtail Kirpan.....

Decoligny
09-03-2009, 1:39 PM
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 504
Introduced by Assembly Member Furutani
February 24, 2009
An act to add Section 13515.45 to the Penal Code, relating to peace officers.
legislative counsel’s digest AB 504, as introduced, Furutani.
Peace officers: training. Existing law establishes the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training within the Department of Justice. Under existing law, the commission is required to develop and implement trainings for peace officers relative to certain areas of criminal law or procedure. This bill would require the commission to create and make available to all law enforcement agencies as part of basic training a training component on how to recognize and interact with persons carrying a kirpan, as specified. This bill would define a kirpan as a blade that resembles a sword and is required to be carried as an integral part of the practice of the Sikh faith.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares the following:
(a) The United States was founded on the core principles of religious freedom, diversity, and equality for all.
(b) Sikh Americans form a vibrant, peaceful, and law-abiding part of the United States community. California was one of the first places that Sikhs settled in this country over 100 years ago. Today, California is home to a large number of the nation’s 500,000 Sikhs.
(c) Sikhs are mandated by their religion to keep five articles of faith on or as part of their person at all times. These articles of faith are physical manifestations and reminders of core Sikh spiritual values which include honesty, remembering God, and providing service to humanity.
(d) The five Sikh articles of faith include the kirpan. A kirpan is a religious article resembling a sword, which is integral to the practice of the Sikh faith. The kirpan is carried in a shoulder strap known as a gatra, as mandated by the Sikh Code of Conduct. The kirpan acts as a constant reminder to its bearer of a Sikh’s solemn duty to protect the weak and promote justice for all. The kirpan is also an allusion to spiritual knowledge that cuts through ignorance and sin.
(e) In the years since the attacks of September 11, 2001, Sikhs have experienced an unprecedented increase in prosecutions for carrying the kirpan.
(f) It is the responsibility of the Legislature to protect religious freedoms, while ensuring public safety. Keeping those obligations in mind, it is the Legislature’s goal to promote education and awareness of the carrying of the kirpan by Sikhs in California when its possession is in accordance with an integral part of the recognized religious practice of the person carrying it and there is a benign intent in carrying it.

SEC. 2. Section 13515.45 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
13515.45. (a) The commission shall, upon the next regularly scheduled review of a training module relating to weapons violations and cultural diversity, create and make available training content on how to recognize and interact with persons carrying a kirpan. The training content shall be designed for, and made available, as part of its mandatory basic training, to peace officers employed by law enforcement agencies that participate in, and comply with, training standards set forth by the commission.
(b) For purposes of this section, “kirpan” means a blade that resembles a sword and is required to be carried as an integral part of the practice of the Sikh faith.
(c) The training course shall be developed by the commission in consultation with appropriate subject matter experts. The commission shall make the course available, as part of its mandatory basic training, to California law enforcement agencies that participate in, and comply with, training standards set forth by the commission.
(d) In addition to the duties contained in subdivisions (a) and
(c), the commission shall electronically distribute, as necessary, a training bulletin to law enforcement agencies participating in the commission’s program on the topic of the kirpan.

Seesm
09-03-2009, 3:48 PM
pic of kirpan?

383green
09-03-2009, 3:50 PM
pic of kirpan?

A couple so far, in this thread.

KWA-S
09-03-2009, 4:26 PM
@AB504

I love the smell of a equal protection suit in the morning.

nicki
09-04-2009, 3:57 AM
My view is that if it is part of their religion and their right to practice their religion is a fundamental right. Certainly state restrictions on their ability to carry religious arms should be done in the least restrictive manner possible.

Perhaps I need to form my own church and as part of my religion, it is required to be armed with ceremonial functional(loaded)defensive arms.

Nicki

bloodstainedking
09-04-2009, 4:04 AM
May Allah commit a Jihad on the balls of all you INFIDELS!!!

otteray
09-04-2009, 6:20 AM
May Allah commit a Jihad on the balls of all you INFIDELS!!!

Sorry; but Sikhs are not Muslims, if that was what you were attempting to say...:confused:

socal2310
09-04-2009, 7:19 AM
That is incorrect. To my knowledge, there is no exception in the California drinking age law for communion wine. Giving communion wine to a person under 21 is exactly as illegal as serving them a glass of wine in a commercial bar.

Source: An ABC (California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control) training class I was subjected to as part of my job.

Which would make this exactly like the situation with kirpans. The carry of a concealed dirk/dagger remains illegal per the p.c. but police will be trained not to detain/cite/arrest Sikhs for their violation of the law. I have yet to see or hear about an arrest (much less prosecution and conviction) for underage consumption of alcohol during communion.

For the record, there are numerous protestant groups who celebrate communion with wine as well - grape juice was foisted upon American Churches by Thomas Welch who ironically:rolleyes: was a staunch advocate of Prohibition.

Ryan

jamespres2001
09-04-2009, 7:46 AM
Point 1. How many people does this really affect? 500,000 Sikhs in the U.S. maybe 40,000 in Bay Area. The particulars of the 'training' are not mentioned. As noted the Laws are not changed.

Point 2. A small group making small changes over a period of time will create a big change. Sounds like the antis - 10 round mags. transfer no more than 50 rounds person to person, No gun show at Cow Palace, etc, etc.

Point 3. What would happen if a US Marine in Dress Uniform WITH A SWORD was to walk through a Shopping mall. I don't know, just curious. I am not a marine so don't slam me on particulars of how this would work.

We should learn from this.

glbtrottr
09-04-2009, 8:28 AM
I *am* a former Marine, Mameluke Sword in tow.

What this bill advocates is unequal application of the law.

You are effectively asking the Police to look the other way.

This is garbage.

gun toting monkeyboy
09-04-2009, 9:14 AM
Fisrt, the law is unequal. But since it passed, I am sure that the legal people on our side are already cooking up something to turn it to our advantage.

Second, a marine, or anybody else for that matter, wandering around while wearing a sword, isn't normally breaking any laws. If you pull it out and play with it, it becomes brandishing. But swords aren't illegal here. As I have said before repeatedly, our gun laws suck. Our knife laws are really good.

-Mb (who wonders if a 1911 with the word "kirpan" engraved on it would meet the religious doctrine for a true kirpan. After all, it is only there for self-protection and the defense of the helpless...)

MrSigmaDOT40
09-04-2009, 9:14 AM
We need a religioin called "The Holy House of Calguniths" and we should have mandatory carrying of AR15's and concealed handguns at all times.


:D Took the thoughts right out of my head.

HazeyWolf
09-04-2009, 10:55 AM
I've heard that Jeff Cooper once claimed he intended to start a church called "The Resurrected .45" and have open carry of "religious Objects".

I've thought about doing somethings similar... Law pertaining to Religious Freedom are interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act
Free Excercise Clause: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Exercise_Clause

SCOTUS Chief Justice Roberts first case ended in unanimous favor of a New Mexico church’s right to use Ayahuasca as Sacrament ( [http://www.miqel.com/entheogens/supreme_court_ayahuasca_tea.html), and the Native American Church can legally use Peyote... its only a matter of time before pot and other "consciousness raising" drugs may achieve similar legal status as "sacred" substances for "religious use."

Gay marriage, polygamy, polygyny, and group marriage may be challenged at some point as well. There are polygamous marriages among Muslims who have immigrated to the in the US, and they may force the issue on religious grounds.

The US Constitution (Bill of Rights) guarantees inalienable rights US citizens under the Constitution - those rights are ascribed to be "natural' rights that all human beings are born with; endowed by "the Creator." Beyond its historical significance in Common Law, the concept of natural rights is rooted in the Declaration of Independence and mentioned natural rights in his speech presenting the Bill of Rights to the 1st Congress.

Based on past legal presidents upheld by the SCOTUS, those "natural rights" may have the potential to be construed as being protected as religious belief.

As preposterous as it may seem, the Seventh US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Oct ’05 that Atheism may be considered as a religion and protected form of religious expression:

- ( From http://www.atheism-analyzed.net/aap2.htm ) -

"This decision was predicated on several previous Federal Court decisions that declared Atheism legally to be considered a religion. Here are some excerpts from the decision, which reference a few previous decisions that also discerned Atheism to be a religion:

U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh District Circuit Court,

Chief Judge: Crabb
Circuit Judges: Bauer, Wood, Williams
Kaufman v. McCaughtry
Document 04-1914; Aug 19,2005.
Excerpts: “The Supreme Court has said that a religion, for purposes of the First Amendment, is distinct
from a “way of life,” even if that way of life is inspired by philosophical beliefs or other secular concerns. See Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 215-16 (1972).

A religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being (or beings, for polytheistic faiths), see Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495 & n.11 (1961); Malnak v. Yogi, 592 F.2d 197, 200-15 (3d Cir. 1979) (Adams, J., concurring); Theriault v. Silber, 547 F.2d 1279, 1281 (5th Cir. 1977) (percuriam), nor must it be a mainstream faith, see Thomas v.Review Bd., 450 U.S. 707, 714 (1981); Lindell v. McCallum, 352 F.3d 1107, 1110 (7th Cir. 2003).”

“Without venturing too far into the realm of the philosophical, we have suggested in the past that when a person sincerely holds beliefs dealing with issues of “ultimate concern” that for her occupy a “place parallel to that filled by . . . God in traditionally religious persons,” those beliefs represent her religion. Fleischfresser v. Dirs. of Sch.Dist. 200, 15 F.3d 680, 688 n.5 (7th Cir. 1994) (internal citation and quotation omitted); see also Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333, 340 (1970); United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 184-88 (1965). We have already indicated that atheism may be considered, in this specialized sense, a religion. See Reed v. Great Lakes Cos., 330 F.3d 931, 934
(7th Cir. 2003) (“If we think of religion as taking a position on divinity, then atheism is indeed a form of religion.”).Id. at 52-53.

In keeping with this idea, the Court has adopted a broad definition of “religion” that includes non-
theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as theistic ones. Thus, in Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, it said that a state cannot “pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can [it] aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as
against those religions founded on different beliefs.” “Id. At 495. Indeed, Torcaso specifically included “Secular Humanism” as an example of a religion. Id. at 495 n.11.”

In light of such interpretations, the Second Amendment (and the entire Bill of Rights) may be considered a matter of religious belief founded in the concept of inalienable natural rights endowed by a creator - whether by God as Creator or nature as manifest creation (or, absurdly, even as a Secular Humanist, Atheistic or Agnostic "religious" belief) and those beliefs may constitute protected religious practices, as they do with the Sikh kirtan.

The key to this argument is not whether natural rights exist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_and_legal_rights ) or that the Second Amendment is guaranteed as a natural right (incorporated under the 14th Amendment), but rather whether the right to "bare arms" (guns, swords, knives) and right to defend one's life (self defense) may be upheld as a religious practice, in the same way that CA has proposed a Sikh armed with a Kirpan is practicing a protected religious right.

Glock22Fan
09-04-2009, 10:59 AM
The key to this argument is not whether natural rights exist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_and_legal_rights ) or that the Second Amendment is guaranteed as a natural right (incorporated under the 14th Amendment), but rather whether the right to "bare arms" (guns, swords, knives) and right to defend one's life (self defense) may be upheld as a religious practice, in the same way that CA has proposed a Sikh armed with a Kirpan is practicing a protected religious right.


So, open carry is a religion? That figures, with the fervor that some defend it.

MasterYong
09-04-2009, 11:47 AM
Fisrt, the law is unequal. But since it passed, I am sure that the legal people on our side are already cooking up something to turn it to our advantage.

Second, a marine, or anybody else for that matter, wandering around while wearing a sword, isn't normally breaking any laws. If you pull it out and play with it, it becomes brandishing. But swords aren't illegal here. As I have said before repeatedly, our gun laws suck. Our knife laws are really good.

-Mb (who wonders if a 1911 with the word "kirpan" engraved on it would meet the religious doctrine for a true kirpan. After all, it is only there for self-protection and the defense of the helpless...)

There's not much good about our knife laws either.

Did you know that if you have a fixed blade hunting knife on your camping box in the back of your truck you are guilty of carrying a concealed weapon? If it's folding that's OK but if it's fixed it's not.

What's good about that again???

HazeyWolf
09-04-2009, 11:49 AM
So, open carry is a religion? That figures, with the fervor that some defend it.

lol - yeah, thats fer sure. But not just open carry - CC too, of any defensive weapon as a sacred duty, profession of faith, or protected "religious" excercise (ie; an enacted philosophical conviction) of pre-ordained, inalienable rights that are merely guaranteed by the Constitution, not derived from it.

"Originalist" Constitutional interpretation about legal matters of original intent suggest that natural rights are ordained "by creation" on humankind and inalienable to all people by their (un-named) Creator.

A literal interpretation of that notion based on originalist intent suggests a religious concept.

Its bizarre (and though technically irreligious and based on contemporary "living Constitution" interpretations and judicial activism), secular humanist, atheist, or agnostic views have seen equal protection as religious thought and practice in past SC legal precedents and may serve as personally held "religious" values with legal protections as well... http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/gaynor/050820

"We hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth that religion, or the duty which we owe our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence. The religion, then, of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man: and that it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate." - James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance to the Assemby of Virginia.

nicki
09-04-2009, 1:12 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan

Provides nice guideline for creating our "Gun Religion".

Also it shows that we really should be outreaching to the Sikh community, they already considered "Armed self defense" non aggression.

Nicki

bohoki
09-04-2009, 1:24 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan

Provides nice guideline for creating our "Gun Religion".

Also it shows that we really should be outreaching to the Sikh community, they already considered "Armed self defense" non aggression.

Nicki

yes but their definition of armed self defence may include knifing women who wear pants because it is an affront to their person

Flopper
09-04-2009, 1:41 PM
yes but their definition of armed self defence may include knifing women who wear pants because it is an affront to their person

For the last time, SIKHISM IS NOT ISLAM!

Sikhism does have a spiritual ancestor in Islam (along with Hinduism), but Sikhism is about as close to Islam as Unitarianism is to Hassidic Judaism.

It's important to get this distinction correct not only because this religion is a natural ally to the RKBA, but because the Sikhs are by and large model citizens, and are full of integrity, courage, honor, and generosity.

(No, I'm not a Sikh, but I know and deal with many since I live in the Bay Area:D).

gun toting monkeyboy
09-04-2009, 2:02 PM
For the last time, SIKHISM IS NOT ISLAM!

Sikhism does have a spiritual ancestor in Islam (along with Hinduism), but Sikhism is about as close to Islam as Unitarianism is to Hassidic Judaism.

It's important to get this distinction correct not only because this religion is a natural ally to the RKBA, but because the Sikhs are by and large model citizens, and are full of integrity, courage, honor, and generosity.

(No, I'm not a Sikh, but I know and deal with many since I live in the Bay Area:D).

He is right. They are SO not Muslim. You really need to get the whole "furrin-heathen-religion" thing out of your system before you post on here. Sikhs are not Muslims in any way, shape, or form. Heck, most Muslims aren't the radical nutballs we hear about all the time either. Take a deep breth, and relax already.

-Mb

cbn620
09-04-2009, 2:20 PM
Can I carry a shelaleigh now since it is part of my cultural heritage as an Irishman?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shillelagh_(club (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shillelagh_%28club))

And no, that is not me!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cQb2tKyozEQ/ScvAlfs1ghI/AAAAAAAABGk/7UAap3jfF9Q/s400/finlay_shillelagh.jpg

Fair play to the Sikhs for getting this recognized, I respect their right to carry for religious reasons. Just make sure this will get expanded to other religions/cultures too.

You sir, can carry the shillelagh. I see no law that prohibits you from carrying a walking stick! :D

Mulay El Raisuli
09-04-2009, 2:31 PM
That is incorrect. To my knowledge, there is no exception in the California drinking age law for communion wine. Giving communion wine to a person under 21 is exactly as illegal as serving them a glass of wine in a commercial bar.

Source: An ABC (California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control) training class I was subjected to as part of my job.



Not to doubt you, but I see this happen every week. No one gets arrested. Was your class a long time ago?

The Raisuli

Rekrab
09-04-2009, 2:39 PM
EArlier, someone quoted the SikhWiki on the carrying of the kirpan and it's purpose.

Reading further on though, I found this bit:

To suggest that the Kirpan is a weapon is both incorrect and misleading. If it was instituted as a weapon, then would Sikhs not be expected to carry guns today? Guns were in common use during the time of Guru Gobind Singh. If the Kirpan was purely a soldiers weapon for Sikhs, than why do they not also carry a shield as well or other armour? Why do modern armies and soldiers carry swords on ceremonial occasions? Because it is symbolic of their military tradition and heritage. In the same way Sikhs carry the Kirpan at all times because it is symbolic of their religious tradition and heritage.


So I have to wonder, if this is a commonly held opinion, what the Sikh's would think about us carrying handguns or longguns.

JimmyD
09-04-2009, 2:46 PM
I'm loving all the FUD people are willing to believe. Sikhs aren't getting special treatment. Sikhs are not Muslims.

Rekrab
09-04-2009, 3:00 PM
Sikhs aren't getting special treatment.

Care to expound on this?

bloodstainedking
09-04-2009, 3:03 PM
Sorry; but Sikhs are not Muslims, if that was what you were attempting to say...:confused:

It's called a joke, lighten up a little bit.

JimmyD
09-04-2009, 3:18 PM
Care to expound on this?

All the law is doing is to standardize training for law enforcement officers to recognize that people carrying kirpans are not carrying concealed. you do not have to be Sikh for this law to apply to you. The law is not making an exception but a clarification as the article mentioned "It said the legislation arose out of a number of Sikhs being arrested for carrying kirpans because police mistakenly believe them to be in violation of concealed weapons laws."

ITZJT
09-04-2009, 3:27 PM
yes but their definition of armed self defence may include knifing women who wear pants because it is an affront to their person

SERIOUSLY get your info straight before making ignorant comments :rolleyes: if you dont have a clue dont speak on it very simple

cbn620
09-04-2009, 3:37 PM
Wow, I can't believe some people really believe this stuff about Sikhs. Is this 9/12/01?

Sikhs have been a great ally of those who believe in personal liberties and self defense. The Sikhs are like the Irish of the middle east. These guys fought back against genocidal tyrants, not for them like some of the Muslim armies fighting for Islamic warlords. The kirpan is a symbol of defense of the weak against tyranny. The Sikhs do not have anything even close to sharia law in their traditional cultures and societies, and the traits of peacefulness in their religion far surpasses that of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism combined.

I think the Sikhs are the least of anyone's worries.

If this was law establishing protection for one particular religious view I'd see your point. Sikhs carry legally, and all this is doing is training officers who are mistaken on the law to deal more fairly with people exercising their fundamental liberties.

Steyr_223
09-04-2009, 3:51 PM
Wow, I can't believe some people really believe this stuff about Sikhs. Is this 9/12/01?

Sikhs have been a great ally of those who believe in personal liberties and self defense. The Sikhs are like the Irish of the middle east. These guys fought back against genocidal tyrants, not for them like some of the Muslim armies fighting for Islamic warlords. The kirpan is a symbol of defense of the weak against tyranny. The Sikhs do not have anything even close to sharia law in their traditional cultures and societies, and the traits of peacefulness in their religion far surpasses that of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism combined.

I think the Sikhs are the least of anyone's worries.

If this was law establishing protection for one particular religious view I'd see your point. Sikhs carry legally, and all this is doing is training officers who are mistaken on the law to deal more fairly with people exercising their fundamental liberties.

But But, in there been many reports of violence. They are no better or worst then
Christianity, Islam, and Judaism..IMHO. Human is Human.

http://sfgate.info/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2000/01/24/MN81284.DTL
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=47369&catid=2
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/news/singh_vs__singh/Content?oid=286147
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2009-05/2009-05-25-voa12.cfm?CFID=290471690&CFTOKEN=71558209&jsessionid=6630e0dc8c3c119233252187167544e255f5
http://www.austriantimes.at/news/General_News/2009-08-18/15673/Sikh_temple_shooting_investigation_leads_police_to _Spain_

MasterYong
09-04-2009, 3:53 PM
All the law is doing is to standardize training for law enforcement officers to recognize that people carrying kirpans are not carrying concealed. you do not have to be Sikh for this law to apply to you. The law is not making an exception but a clarification as the article mentioned "It said the legislation arose out of a number of Sikhs being arrested for carrying kirpans because police mistakenly believe them to be in violation of concealed weapons laws."

Does that mean that I may now legally conceal a Kirpan without being a Sikh???

http://www.khalsakirpans.com/

:43::43::43:

ITZJT
09-04-2009, 4:08 PM
But But, in there been many reports of violence. They are no better or worst then
Christianity, Islam, and Judaism..IMHO. Human is Human.

http://sfgate.info/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2000/01/24/MN81284.DTL
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=47369&catid=2
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/news/singh_vs__singh/Content?oid=286147
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2009-05/2009-05-25-voa12.cfm?CFID=290471690&CFTOKEN=71558209&jsessionid=6630e0dc8c3c119233252187167544e255f5
http://www.austriantimes.at/news/General_News/2009-08-18/15673/Sikh_temple_shooting_investigation_leads_police_to _Spain_

were any of these commited with a kirpan by any chance? ;)

mblat
09-04-2009, 4:17 PM
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?

Even in Soviet Union certain minorities were allowed to carry blades, similar to Kirpins ( in functionality, not how they looked) as "part of national costume".
Even people who had no respect what so ever for neither religion or traditions were forced to back off certain groups.

I do not know if would be Sikhs one of the, though.

cbn620
09-04-2009, 5:05 PM
Geez, sometimes I just have to shake my head. How a person can take what I said and assume I meant all Sikhs are better people than any other variety of human just defies basic reading comprehension and even the most informal of logic.

And I simply said their religion is not a violent one, it has far less violence in it than do many of our modern religions combined. Take from that what you will, if you must.

Furthermore, Sikhs involved in crime does not apply to this discussion in any way, shape or form. Whether Sikhs are involved in crime of all types to any or what degree does not have anything to do with the need for training police officers to understand legal open knife carry by the Sikh population.

GoodEyeSniper
09-04-2009, 6:05 PM
Interested in seeing if it actually pertains to concealing them, like most previous posters assumed. Or if it's simply openly carrying them, like some are saying now.

Open carry laws are ridiculous though. I went hiking with the dog today, decided to strap on my new knife from Frosts of Mora (really great, inexpensive knives to boot). Can't help but notice how easy it is for your shirt to cover up most of it, leaving a few inches of sheath poking out... Also the trail gets dangerously close to the city college, who knows what sorts of terrorism one could do with a small fixed blade on a college campus....

Pvt. Cowboy
09-04-2009, 6:37 PM
If we can get a law on the books saying that people, any people, are not to be arrested for carrying a concealed knife, it is a big win for us. Not because we all want to become Sikhs, though there is nothing wrong with that. But because the big brains behing our grand legal stratagies will be able to pummel the hell out of the State with it. You can't make laws that grant privileges to one group of people based on their religion. That would be ILLEGAL.

Sure. Logically and rationally, sure. I agree.

And then the 9th Circuit Court will just pull some exceptional ruling out of their butts.

This is California you're talking about, remember.

If this is signed into law, every CalGuns member should go buy a Cold Steel tanto-point Kirpan. If you get stopped, tell the cops you're Sikh ... of their Shiht.

GoodEyeSniper
09-04-2009, 6:39 PM
If you get stopped, tell the cops you're Sikh ... of their Shiht.

bwahaha

Pvt. Cowboy
09-04-2009, 6:45 PM
Wow, I can't believe some people really believe this stuff about Sikhs. Is this 9/12/01?

... The Sikhs do not have anything even close to sharia law in their traditional cultures and societies, and the traits of peacefulness in their religion far surpasses that of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism combined.

I think the Sikhs are the least of anyone's worries.

Uh huh:

Sikh Terrorism (http://www.milnet.com/tgp/data/sikh.htm)

Sikh extremism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikh_extremism)

Your scientific data with graphs and charts that proves peacefulness in the Sikh religion far surpasses Christianity, Islam, and Judaism combined, please.

Otherwise, you're just making stuff up again that sounds good to you and very few else for God only knows what reason.

GoodEyeSniper
09-04-2009, 9:37 PM
two stories proves it?

Without knowing the facts I'd say the Sikh religion is easily less violent than both Islam and Christianity. But that's pretty easy to do when you're talking about two religions with probably higher kill counts than anything else in our history.

Mulay El Raisuli
09-05-2009, 7:03 AM
(... about communion wine ...)


In the early 2000s sometime.

Lack of enforcement does not mean that something is legal. Enforcement always has some leeway, to ignore minor infractions that don't violate the spirit of the law.

When was the last time you saw the police arrest a parent for their teenage kid having a little bit of wine at the Thanksgiving dinner, or a few sips of beer at a summer weekend barbeque? Hardly ever happens. Same with the tiny sip of communion wine.

When was the last time you saw the CHP ticket every driver who is going slightly over 66mph on Hwy 85 or 280 (or whatever the equivalent race track is down in LA)? Also hardly ever happens.

On the other hand, we regularly hear about criminal prosecution of bars or liquor stores that habitually sell liquor to juveniles, or of drivers who go insanely fast. Even on 85 and 280, going 90mph is pretty risky.

The world is not black and white. Nor is the legal system.



That would explain it then. Thanks.

The Raisuli

locosway
09-05-2009, 9:20 AM
I don't think it's a matter of treating people differently, however you should always respect someone. Knowing their religion and views is good, but why do we need a bill for this to happen? Shouldn't the departments already be training people in proper procedure when dealing with certain people?

cbn620
09-05-2009, 12:29 PM
Uh huh:

Sikh Terrorism (http://www.milnet.com/tgp/data/sikh.htm)

Sikh extremism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikh_extremism)

Your scientific data with graphs and charts that proves peacefulness in the Sikh religion far surpasses Christianity, Islam, and Judaism combined, please.

Otherwise, you're just making stuff up again that sounds good to you and very few else for God only knows what reason.

The Sikhs have never conquered whole countries, or gone on war crusades to kill all who oppose their religion. The Sikhs have shed less blood for their religion than any of the big three. That is my point, and it's a simple one. I don't think it needs "scientific data with graphs and charts." When you state an open fact such as that, there is little to do to prove it.

Mike's Custom
09-05-2009, 12:39 PM
This is a totally prejudicial law. If this passes we need to start a religion for carring firearms. One that allows conealed carry anywhere in the USA. It could also include full autos and any item on the NFA list. I can see it now, Praying to guns like mankind prayed to "the Bomb" in Planet of the Apes.". They allow one religion they have to alow them all.

mtptwo
09-05-2009, 8:18 PM
I don't think it's a matter of treating people differently, however you should always respect someone. Knowing their religion and views is good, but why do we need a bill for this to happen? Shouldn't the departments already be training people in proper procedure when dealing with certain people?

Why not? We have a constitutional amendment banning gays form marriage. Singling out certain people for special treatment via laws is a way of life for both sides of the spectrum.

bodger
09-05-2009, 8:42 PM
...never mind.

Those idiots in Sacramento make me puke. That is all.

Cali-V
09-05-2009, 9:18 PM
Looks like the good Guru was ahead of the founding fathers by 77 years.

"In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Gobind_Singh) told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Baisakhi) Amrit Sanchar (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Amrit_Sanchar) to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defence which together with the other 4 Kakars (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kakars) formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam (http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Hukam) of the tenth master.
This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenseless person when all other means to do so have failed. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth. It is the cutting edge of the enlightened mind."


All relevant today and if the kirpan is symbolic of today's defensive weapons; an eloquent justification for CCW issuance...

GoodEyeSniper
09-05-2009, 10:56 PM
This is a totally prejudicial law. If this passes we need to start a religion for carring firearms. One that allows conealed carry anywhere in the USA. It could also include full autos and any item on the NFA list. I can see it now, Praying to guns like mankind prayed to "the Bomb" in Planet of the Apes.". They allow one religion they have to alow them all.

Is it, though? I still can't determine if they are saying, "Hey, let these guys carry a concealed blade and get away with it." or if they are simply saying to handle OPENLY carried blades to be treated with respect...

But I guess the latter wouldn't make sense, since we can all openly carry a blade anyways, and a cop would have no right to be checking it out anyways... hmm. If they worded it a little more specifically, this could be very good for us. I HATE our concealed blade laws here...

Harrison_Bergeron
09-06-2009, 9:27 PM
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?

When I read the article I see it as being more related to the DOJ refusing to educate local LE on gun laws. The article doesn't say that the legislature made it legal for them to carry the knives, it says that the legislation made it mandatory for LE to acknowledge that carrying them is already legal. It is like UOC practitioners getting a law stating that UOC is legal and that harassment of people who UOC is unjust.

Edit: I committed one of my own pet peeves and posted based on the first page without realizing there were 14 more.

Steyr_223
09-06-2009, 10:08 PM
The Sikhs have never conquered whole countries, or gone on war crusades to kill all who oppose their religion. The Sikhs have shed less blood for their religion than any of the big three. That is my point, and it's a simple one. I don't think it needs "scientific data with graphs and charts." When you state an open fact such as that, there is little to do to prove it.

The greatest villian in the Star Trek Universe was a genetically enhanced Sikh name Khan Noonien Singh aka just Khan.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Khan_Noonien_Singh

http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Entertainment/Images/khan-on-star-trek-tos.jpg
http://www.cinemaretro.com/uploads/ricardo.jpg
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/7/72/Khan_Noonien_Singh%2C_2267.jpg/292px-Khan_Noonien_Singh%2C_2267.jpg
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Khan_art.jpg

Gray Peterson
09-06-2009, 10:10 PM
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0501-0550/ab_504_bill_20090825_amended_sen_v97.html

Gray Peterson
09-06-2009, 10:11 PM
The greatest villian in the Star Trek Universe was a genetically enhanced Sikh name Khan Noonien Singh aka just Khan.


Seriously? A TV character? I don't know whether to point and laugh or cry?

mtptwo
09-07-2009, 1:34 PM
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0501-0550/ab_504_bill_20090825_amended_sen_v97.html

A kirpan
is a religious article resembling a sword, which is integral to the
practice of the Sikh faith. The kirpan is carried in a shoulder strap
known as a gatra, as mandated by the Sikh Code of Conduct.

http://j.photos.cx/pink_kirpan-7cb.JPG

There is nothing in the rest of the bill dealing with concealment.

mtptwo
09-07-2009, 1:36 PM
The greatest villian in the Star Trek Universe was a genetically enhanced Sikh name Khan Noonien Singh aka just Khan.



Please tell me that this was sarcasm.

woodsman
09-07-2009, 6:03 PM
[QUOTE=Steyr_223;3027244]The greatest villian in the Star Trek Universe was a genetically enhanced Sikh name Khan Noonien Singh aka just Khan.

HA! That made my day...

Live long and prosper!

FeuerFrei
09-08-2009, 2:49 PM
Kirpin???
It's still a freaking knife ain't it!
More "special" laws for "special" people.
I just have to wonder how much this legislation cost in bribes to get this passed.
Pay to play the Cali way!

Decoligny
09-08-2009, 3:24 PM
[QUOTE=Steyr_223;3027244]The greatest villian in the Star Trek Universe was a genetically enhanced Sikh name Khan Noonien Singh aka just Khan.

While possibly a descendant of the Sikh, Kahn was obviously not a practicing Sikh.

He has no beard.

This violates the first of the five Ks of the Kakkaar.
The Kesh - The hair, including the beard, must remain uncut
The Kanga - a small symbolic comb must always be carried
The Kara - a small steel bangle must be worn symbolizing no beginning or end to God
The Kaccha - ceremonial undergarment must be worn
The Kirpin - The warriors sword is worn as a symbol of dignity and self respect. It demonstrates power and reminds sikhs that they must fight a spiritual battle, defend the weak and oppressed, and uphold the truth.

ITZJT
09-08-2009, 4:27 PM
The greatest villian in the Star Trek Universe was a genetically enhanced Sikh name Khan Noonien Singh aka just Khan.

While possibly a descendant of the Sikh, Kahn was obviously not a practicing Sikh.

He has no beard.

This violates the first of the five Ks of the Kakkaar.
The Kesh - The hair, including the beard, must remain uncut
The Kanga - a small symbolic comb must always be carried
The Kara - a small steel bangle must be worn symbolizing no beginning or end to God
The Kaccha - ceremonial undergarment must be worn
The Kirpin - The warriors sword is worn as a symbol of dignity and self respect. It demonstrates power and reminds sikhs that they must fight a spiritual battle, defend the weak and oppressed, and uphold the truth.



lol Wikipedia says it so you must be right! :rolleyes:

I have a Shaved head & I wear a Kara I am a still a practicing Sikh... by me not having a turban and beard does not change my beliefs there are just different degrees of how religous you are my FIL & MIL follow the religion to the T but my wife her siblings and their children do not....we are still all practicing Sikhs ;)

Decoligny
09-08-2009, 8:58 PM
lol Wikipedia says it so you must be right! :rolleyes:

I have a Shaved head & I wear a Kara I am a still a practicing Sikh... by me not having a turban and beard does not change my beliefs there are just different degrees of how religous you are my FIL & MIL follow the religion to the T but my wife her siblings and their children do not....we are still all practicing Sikhs ;)

Perhaps I should have said "not an orthodox Sikh".

sreiter
09-08-2009, 10:00 PM
Isn't that a violation of the "wall between church and state" doctrine? Afterall can you have a law that treats Sikhs differently than members of other religions?

tell that to the tim leary followers who were pissed because the native american church uses peyote as a sacrament and it legal for them only

dantodd
09-08-2009, 10:29 PM
Seriously? A TV character? I don't know whether to point and laugh or cry?

Perhaps a lack of humor is rooted in genetics.

dantodd
09-08-2009, 10:48 PM
tell that to the tim leary followers who were pissed because the native american church uses peyote as a sacrament and it legal for them only

1) I posted that immediately upon reading the OP and before the text of the bill was posted, it obviously is just a feel good bill and doesn't directly give additional concealed rights to Sikhs, it just forces more time in training to be devoted to PC content rather than silly things like the law and self-protection.

2) The peyote exemption is an odd issue, SCOTUS has said that it is permissible but not constitutionally required Employment Division v. Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith)and the lower courts appear to be divided on the basis of the exemption. Some use 1st amendment and others suggest it is the pseudo-independent status of the Native American Tribes.