Have the government said they are going to change the law???


The real question here is not should kids be allowed to carry knives, it's how can we improve the selection process for judges!!!!

 

No they have not.
That post was an answer to my rhetorical point - that as we live in a parliamentary "democracy" - it is a bit silly for people to say that if others don't like laws here they should bugger off.
The point being (lost on some) that people can effect change in law by democratic means.
As for the "Judge", well he is retired and so no longer a judge. He can say what he likes, can't he?
I must say that Cherie Blair seems to be distinguishing her self in the highlighting of poor judge selection policy though.
Maybe she should stick to a career in supermarket sweep.

 

Yes, but in other countries the law's the law
Some other countries perhaps take the law a bit too far - however they will not change these laws regardless what other nations think.

We in the UK just seem to bend over backwards to accomodate the demands of other cultures

 

In our country the law is the law, dorksters weird view that you can flaunt/break the law until it's changed as we're a 'democracy' is just plain out there!

I stand by my point of "toe the line or **** off somewhere else more suitable to your beliefs".

Easy as, next.

 

The funny thing is not a single Sikh has come on here & said, yes children must be allowed to wear Kirpans to school! Us Scoobynetter nay sayers are arguing amongst ourselves, IMO about an issue which isn't really even an issue for most Sikhs. Sikhism is a very peaceful, modern religion whose followers are usually quite conservative & dont like radicalism etc & would rather blend in & work hard in any society in which they are living. (myself being from a Sikh background)

 

Without me trawling through the thread to look for evidence, did anybody else think the thread had a sad face in the title when it was posted, yet now it has a cool one, wtf?

 

Like a lot of nsr threads it is people discussing/arguming amongst ourselves.

The issue (for me certainly) is not about Sikhs, not about religion as such, more that a judge thinks it is ok to allow knives in schools when it is oviously a stupid and potentially dangerous thing to do.

since i was at school back in the 70/80's this has been the case, no knives.

I have said this a few times in this thread and these are my last words on the subject. I know somw would be happy to turn this into a race uissue and some to play the race card but it is not what this is about.

The rules and laws are godd and sound aout knives in schools.

I send my kids to school to an enviroment which i believ is controlled and safe for them. If i found out the school had changed its policy regarding knives i would not e happy at all.

Illegal knives being carried in school is a seperate issue and one that worries me. Allowing one group of children to carry knives (irrespective of the group make up) is stupid and potentially dangerous.

It sends out the wrong messages and actually if you want to bring race/religion into it gives the likes of the BNP more ammo and credibility which is a bad thing - IMHO.

Nuff said.

 

This reminds me of the time i was not allowed to take my lightsabre into school as a child

The *******s.

 

Ok i cannot resist
You should have pointed out that you are a jedi, it is a recognised religion and taken it to court then - chances are you would have won

Anyway i thought you are a wookie so wouln't it have been you bowcaster?

 

No idea what a bowcaster is? LOL

But when i was a kid i was Darth Vader, my little brother was Spiderman (with a green lightsabre?)
I kicked his ***.

 

What sort of wookie doesn't know what a bocaster is - one that went to school in the UK that had a ban on bowcasters along with knives maybe?
StarWars.com | Wookiee bowcaster

 

I said something that could not be used as a dagger. Need not have any kind of blade. Floppy plastic would do.

How do you feel about religious persecution by the way. You appear to be against anyone living by the traditions of their religion.

Les

 

Let them wear them IMHO. The moment that someone plunges one into some poor sucker they will be insta-banned for life. It's just a matter of time. Of course, unfortunately someone has to die for this ban to happen

 

I don't think people are, Les, but when laws have to be bent, or changed to accomodate religious beliefs, (all of which are just superstitions anyway), there is something not quite right.

Laws have to take precedence, surely?

And if you don't like the laws in the land you have chosen to live in, choose another.

Otherwise we are into stuff like me choosing to live in France, but wanting shops/banks to all open all day, no lunch hour.......because they do in the UK

 

Yes, but having floppy plastic sort of defeats the purpose of the thing in the first place as its not the traditional item then - something I guess they guy in question wouldn't actually want in the first place.

No I'm not against tradition in the slightest, but if it goes against the "norm" and it means laws or the like having to be changed to suit then yes in that case I don't agree - surely thats not unreasonable?

Lets take a simple example - Alcohol
Alcohol is banned in certain countries like Saudia Aribia
Lets say Joe has a glass of wine with his evening meal - almost like tradition
Will the laws be changed to allow Joe to continue with his "tradition"

Bit of a silly example granted, however the same principles apply though do they not

 

Yes I understand your point but that is something that the Sikhs would have to come to an agreement over if they want to continue with that particular tradition. With your second point, yes its a matter of negotiation and it would require a bit of understanding on both sides to avoid breaking our laws but also we should not show unfair restrictions. As ever the good old compromise!

When it comes to alcohol over there, they do accept that Europeans working in their country do want to drink it even if it is against their laws. They allow drinking of alcohol to go on as long as it is only in authorised places by Europeans.

Les

 

No, it had a smile with sunglasses, like all my threads or posts.

Geezer

 

Exactly: In private, or in their own clubs. NOT on the streets or in public.

And carrying knives should be the same.

 

Yet another "**** off" post, but once again not really adressing the point.

OK, I'll change the thread direction towards Catholics. Should make it a bit easier for everyone. The Pope is advocating that the Catholic Church should be exempt from discrimination against homosexuals (and I presume women).

So now we have a nice British element of the population who believe their beliefs should be above the law. Why is that and should it be allowed?

Does that make it easier for eveyone now? All the "send 'em back" brigade can crawl back under their stones.

Geezer

 

What a droll and amusingly witty chap you are!
You certainly could give Oscar Wilde a good run for his money...






if only you took the trouble to learn how to read first.
Perhaps you have a literate friend who can help you with this site and when you get good at it, you might try and Wiki "parliamentry democracy".

 

Exactly - therefore not affecting the rest of the population

I suppose the post by Geezer could also be classed in the same way
Homo's - fine, but don't expect the rest of the nation to approve of your way of life

Fact of life is that the bible doesn't acknowledge homo's
Keep it behind closed doors, don't demand the law to be changed so that you can get "married" or be recognised as a married couple and in turn entitled to adopt children

 

An interesting post!

First of all, whatever you think of homosexuals, they have equality in law.

Secondly, "Fact of life the bible....." is exactly what I'm talking about. The bible, quran whatever should not dictate how you behave when dealing with others who do not share that view.

I'm not advocating that people should tolerate homosexuals, blacks, muslims or whatever their predujices dictate, but that when those predujices or beliefs should not be above the law of the land.

Geezer

 

I think you will find that if that is the case then retired Sikh judge would have a prolem with you as he openly admits he is a Sikh first and he would have resigned his position as judge if asked to go against his faith by removing his turban and accepting the tradition of wearing the white wig.

This seems to be the case for other faiths who have settled here as well so what is to be done if faith comes before country?

"The fact that I'm a Sikh matters more to me than anything else," he said.

"If, for instance, when I was appointed the suggestion had been made that I could not appear unless I wore a wig and discarded my turban, I would have refused.

"I would have said I would not accept the appointment, but the question never arose and no judicial eyebrows were raised at all."

Not looking to turn this into a sikh witch-hunt but this is what the chap stated.

 

But that's fine Paul, by doing that he recognises that he would not have been able to participate in that tradition because of his faith. To me, that is putting the law above his faith, not asking for the rules to be changed to suit him.

Of course, it's difficult to know what he would have done if the situation had been different........

However, his statement about knives is in contradiction to that, clearly saying that Sikhs should be allowed to do what others cannot.

Geezer

 

Yes - OK.
Regardless though - people should not play on "beliefs" (generalising word) to get what they want regardless of what that might be.
Yes of course all cultures are welcome in the world
Black/white/muslim/gays etc etc

Just don't try to dictate your own ways and have it forced on the rest

 

Was never gonna happen...and he knew it.

Successive governments have been desperate to get ethnic minorities into positions like his, and would have bent over forwards* rather than let him walk away from it.

* Yes, I DO mean forwards, since it involves the UK taking it up the jacksie

 

Speedy trial requested by Sikh boy accused of assault

 

"Lemieux said the weapon involved in the assault charges was indeed a kirpan. She also said the two boys were left "very scared" after the incident."

I bet they were very scared indeed
You be scared too if someone was threatened you with a big dagger

 

Yes it is, the point being black, white and no grey. Why is an ultimatum not a valid viewpoint in this thread?

It shouldn't, those Catholic retards should be subject to UK law just like anyone else, fine them, lock them up, deport them to Rome.... do whatever.

Your point is pointless, I await the next incarnation of this pointless exercise

 

The irony of referring to wikipedia as an accurate source of information

Case closed.