Jump to content
singhbj singh

Today I was not allowed to enter the United States Embassy in London because I was wearing Kirpan

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, SoulSingh said:

At this point, only Texas does, Cali (where I'm from) lost it with the rise of liberal ideas

Don't exaggerate, bro. Texas is not the only state that allows the right to bear arms. Every state does, with some variations. 40 states have the right to bear arms in their state constitutions.

That's in addition to the Federal constitution's guarantee. 

California has restricted magazine size, but that's far from saying they have banned guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

If you compare gun-rights to the Rural Midwest and the Rural South, to the Suburban regions, there's a huge disparity between gun rights.

While that's true, it doesn't matter that much. Generally, you don't have the right to pop off your gun at your pleasure in suburban areas, but in such areas, you don't have a lot large enough to do target shooting. The main thing you care about in such areas is simply keeping a gun somewhere in the house to defend against an armed invader. And defending yourself in such a situation is generally legal.

What I'm saying is target shooting or pleasure shooting is illegal in the suburbs, but you couldn't do it anyway even if it were legal, so what does it matter?

If you want to shoot for fun, you either go to a target range for the day, or you buy a farm/ranch outside the suburban area. And that's fine, I think. 

What's your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Yes. But that has never extended to government buildings. What planet is this guy on?

ehh not sure if that was directed at me or the gentlemen in the OP. I was referring to the US as a whole, I'm well aware it doesn't apply to government buildings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
2 minutes ago, BhForce said:

While that's true, it doesn't matter that much. Generally, you don't have the right to pop off your gun at your pleasure in suburban areas, but in such areas, you don't have a lot large enough to do target shooting. The main thing you care about in such areas is simply keeping a gun somewhere in the house to defend against an armed invader. And defending yourself in such a situation is generally legal.

What I'm saying is target shooting or pleasure shooting is illegal in the suburbs, but you couldn't do it anyway even if it were legal, so what does it matter?

If you want to shoot for fun, you either go to a target range for the day, or you buy a farm/ranch outside the suburban area. And that's fine, I think. 

What's your opinion?

Quote from Ron Paul:

"

 

Gun-free zones don't make any difference

Gun-control advocates tell us that removing guns from society makes us safer. But that is simply an impossibility. The fact is that firearm technology exists. It cannot be uninvented. As long as there is metalworking and welding capability, it matters no what gun laws are imposed upon law-abiding people. Those who wish to have guns, and disregard the law, will have guns. Paradoxically, gun control clears a path for violence and makes aggression more likely, whether the aggressor is a terrorist or a government. I don't really believe "gun-free" zones make any difference. If they did, why would the worst shootings consistently happen in gun-free zones such as schools? And while accidents do happen, aggressive, terroristic shootings like this are unheard of at gun and knife shows, the antithesis of a gun-free zone. It bears repeating that an armed society truly is a polite society. Even if you don't like guns and don't want to own them, you benefit from those who do."

There should be no restrictions on gun rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, monatosingh said:

You mad fam? what u on?

We have COUNTLESS katha's over here and nothing has happened.

Anyways I don't wanna start up a fight over countries. Sikhi is everywhere.

 

No, bro, I'm not mad. Tell me this: Was or was not the Sikh Channel brought up on charges when it had a discussion about 1984?

I'm not talking about COUNTLESS kathas on pedestrian topics like not cheating or stealing. I said katha about specific sections of Bani. Since I mentioned the word Islamophobic, you should be able to guess the sections I"m talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

It bears repeating that an armed society truly is a polite society. Even if you don't like guns and don't want to own them, you benefit from those who do.

Your whole quote is at once 1) something I agree with, and 2) not to do with what I asked.

What I asked is your opinion of the banning of pleasure shooting in suburban areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kira said:

ehh not sure if that was directed at me or the gentlemen in the OP. I was referring to the US as a whole, I'm well aware it doesn't apply to government buildings. 

No, bro, I believe you are on this very planet that I am also standing on. The Twitter guy is who I'm asking where he's coming from. Why is he being all faux-outraged that he can't take a kirpan into the embassy to get a visa to come to the US?

He does realize that after he gets the visa, he'd have to take his kirpan off to get on the plane to come to the US, does he not?

Again, I'm not saying we should take our kirpans off. Hats off to those Singhs who do not. But none of this false outrage, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
21 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Your whole quote is at once 1) something I agree with, and 2) not to do with what I asked.

What I asked is your opinion of the banning of pleasure shooting in suburban areas.

If they aren't shooting people, I'd go with letting people train. But where I don't agree with is banning guns. The rights of our, (American), constitution allow people to own guns in the 2nd Amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

But where I don't agree with is banning guns.

Sure. Bina shastan naran bhed janhu.

1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

If they aren't shooting people, I'd go with letting people train.

But how do you do this in a suburb where your house is 10ft from your neighbor's?

How do you train? If you set up a target in your back yard, if you happen to miss, (or even if you hit the target), the bullet is going right through your fence to your neighbor's house, or maybe your neighbor's body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
5 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Sure. Bina shastan naran bhed janhu.

But how do you do this in a suburb where your house is 10ft from your neighbor's?

How do you train? If you set up a target in your back yard, if you happen to miss, (or even if you hit the target), the bullet is going right through your fence to your neighbor's house, or maybe your neighbor's body.

:/

What's your solution to SubUrban Shastar owners or Urban people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

:/

What's your solution to SubUrban Shastar owners or Urban people?

1. Go to a target range (which are, of course, located in rural areas) to have fun shooting.

2. Go hunting (of course, in a rural area, there's no wildlife in suburbs or cities)

3. Buy a farm/ranch.

Otherwise, keep a weapon of some sort for home defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bhforce jio_/\_,

What about the GOOD LAW IN UK THAT RESPECTS SIKHS' RELIGIOUS RIGHTS MORE, BY ALLOWING KIRPAN ji?  

The UK law on no freedom of speech, hatred spreading...is what PROTECTS SIKHS vs the number killed in usa since 911.

There are MANY GURMUKHS IN UK AND CANADA, vs USA, due to UK and Canada religious freedom and honor, vs USA pressure to live as majority...thus, i assume usa sikhs put bhagti on lowest of to do in their lives, that my local Gurduara gyani works outside Gurduara, kirpan not visible on him, even on Gurduara Sunday, and family, mostly, do not attend Gurduara?_/\_

Edited by sitokaur
typo errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also bhforce ji,

usa is pro gun ownership, pro freedom of speech, pro immoral living...but anti kirpan(symbol of righteous living reminder), think about it...if you think you are really free in this free jesu is rab, thus sikh governor in south carolina denounce Sikhi for jesu spouse, because gorey pressured her publicly to declare jesu her rab?  And i am constantly being monitored being only dastaar Sikh female, trying my best to keep up with kanio tiki _/\_

Edited by sitokaur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have liberty to wear kirpans outside. We can't wear it to theme parks such as Disney land, six flags and neither we can wear in sourthouses etc. US Embassy in Delhi India also does not allow kirpans. We Sikhs without our country has many restrictions to freely enjoy our religious freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Guest Kaur 2
      VJKK VJKF I completely agree with this. If we don't stop then how will the later generations cope with this nonsense? They are already being ruined by the western world and we don't need to plant this seed of castes into their brains. We can help change the future generations...   VJKK VJKF
    • Watched the video and it's really good... for heavenly sake it's not a film about Sikhism ....i thought it highlighted the modern typical Asian family.  And definitely a good film to teach others about Sikh diaspora
    •     1.  Where did I say that we should not be protesting?  Where did I say that I say that what happened to him is okay?  You have put words into my mouth.    2.  You say that "no one expects to be kidnapped in the middle of the day for airing your own opinions on a website in the "largest democracy" in the world".  This statement is absurd.  Anyone who has any familiarity with the human rights violations in Punjab over the last 40 years would know that such things can happen.  What happened to Jaswant Singh Khalra? 
    •   Do you have a problem with reading comprehension?  Where did I suggest I was better than others for being a sardar?  I was talking about something completely different.  One poster asked why, given his background, Jaggi took a risk in going to India.  ANY answer would be speculative, and I speculated that being a mona who doesn't deal with being identified as a Sikh 24/7, maybe he was not as vigilant as he should have been.  Nowhere in there did i say anything about me being better than him or him being worse than me.  You took what I said and completely twisted it and made it into something else.   You call me a nindak, but you are a liar for lying about what I did and did not say.
    •   Another poster posed a question: given his background, why would Jaggi take the risk in going to India? ANYONE who attempts to answer such a question is going to be assuming something.  Nobody knows.  I speculated based upon what I know about him.  Any answer ANYONE would have given would have consisted of speculation.  Obviously, nobody knows exactly what was going through his mind except him. Stop getting so emotional.  We are just having a conversation on this form, and speculation and assumptions are going to form a part of any conversation, especially when such questions are posed.
×