Huzzah for Nunchakus

[ecosophia]

I'm not sure how many people these days outside of the martial arts scene even remember the nunchaku, the iconic Okinawan weapon that Bruce Lee made famous in the Western world. It started out as a rice flail, a tool farmers used to crack open rice husks before winnowing the husk from the grain; like other farmyard implements, it got pressed into service as a weapon once Okinawa came under Japanese rule and laws that prohibited commoners from owning swords were enforced by the new government; like other farmyard implements, it then got taken up by an assortment of local combat arts that, over time, evolved into the various schools of modern karate. 

(No, it was never a ninja weapon. The people who came up with those cartoon turtles apparently either didn't know much or didn't care much about martial arts history -- all the weapons the turtles use are Okinawan peasant tools that became standard karate weapons; only one of them, the bo (a six-foot staff), was as far as I know used in traditional ninjutsu at all.  The moral to this story is probably not to take advice on martial arts history from adolescent chelonians.)

For reasons that still make me scratch my head, the state legislature of New York banned nunchaku in the state -- as in, you couldn't even have one in the privacy of your own home. Recently, though, a martial artist named James Michael Maloney got busted for having a nunchaku, and sued. His case finally reached a ruling, and the judge found the law unconstitutional, pointing out that the Second Amendment doesn't specify firearms and therefore martial artists who wanted to work out with this elegant and effective device were free to do so. 

This strikes me as good law, and it's also nice to see a certain very common sort of Puritanism -- "it might hurt someone, we must ban it absolutely!" -- get taken out with the legal equivalent of a good hard side kick to the head. Kudos to Judge Pamela K. Chen for a crisp judicial knockout of a law that badly needed clobbering -- and congratulations to the karateka of New York State, who can break out their bootleg nunchaku and get to work learning nunchaku kata for the first time in more than four decades. 

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

By New York’s logic, you couldn’t have scissors, sandbags, or kitchen knives either! Harrumph.

[ecosophia]

As far as I know, they didn't ban any of those. It was just those scary martial arts weapons that might get into the hands of gangs -- not that the gangs in question are short of other weapons, mind you!

I think Massachusetts has a similar law -- one of many reasons Sara and I ruled out MA from the get-go when we looked for a place to move last year. I hope karateka in Massachusetts get their nunchaku back, too.

[(Anonymous)]

One of our nation’s biggest problems is that we seem to be ruled by 22-year-old girls who know everything and are afraid of, well, darn near everything, and I don’t know that we have the time to wait for them to grow up.

I don’t recall being afraid of everything 37 years ago when I was 22. Not sure what changed since then to cause the present predicament.

[wire_mother]

Considering that these sorts of laws go back to the fear stoked by yellow journalists in elderly people of "juvenile delinquents" at a time when women were rare in government, I'd suspect that it's frightened old men—or, more likely and to be more kind, old men with untreated PTSD—who were and are the problem rather than 22 year old girls.

[(Anonymous)]

There’s something to that, but these days the 22-year-olds are the bigger problem, the old guys having mostly died off.

[(Anonymous)]

How’d you end up picking Rhode Island?

[ecosophia]

Did a bunch of research on Providence for the fifth volume of The Weird of Hali, liked what I saw, did more research (including checking out the laws and the tax structure), visited, and got offered a very nice apartment at a comfortable rent by a lodge brother during the visit. That latter settled it!

[(Anonymous)]

I’m female. Is there any way I can get lodge brothers, whom I can help and be helped by, as you were? I’m too old to have a likely chance of marrying in. My grandfather was a Mason, that’s the only family connection I know of.

[peter_van_erp]

Don't be so sure about RI: the legislature is just as interested in banning anything those people might use as a weapon. The relevant law is here:

https://law.justia.com/codes/rhode-island/2017/title-11/chapter-11-47/section-11-47-42/
"No person shall carry or possess or attempt to use against another any instrument or weapon of the kind commonly known as a blackjack, slingshot, billy, sandclub, sandbag, metal knuckles, slap glove, bludgeon, stun-gun, or the so called "Kung-Fu" weapons.

(2) No person shall with intent to use unlawfully against another, carry or possess a crossbow, dagger, dirk, stiletto, sword-in-cane, bowie knife, or other similar weapon designed to cut and stab another.

(3) No person shall wear or carry concealed upon his person, any of the above-mentioned instruments or weapons, or any razor, or knife of any description having a blade of more than three (3) inches in length measuring from the end of the handle where the blade is attached to the end of the blade, or other weapon of like kind or description."

I have noticed that there is nothing specifically about swords in the law, so carrying a rapier must be legal. I better ask for one for Christmas! Also, further down, the law allows a licensed martial arts instructor to posses Chinese Throwing Stars for the purpose of instruction.

[ecosophia]

Ah, but you forgot about next section of the law, which reads:

"The provisions of § 11-47-42, so far as they forbid the possession of certain instruments or weapons, shall not apply to any person who possesses or is making a collection of the weapons as curios or for educational, professional, scientific, or any other lawful purpose, without intent to use the instrument or weapon unlawfully. Nor shall the provisions of § 11-47-42, so far as they relate to the possession or carrying of any billy, apply to sheriffs, town constables, police constables, police, or other officers or guards whose duties require them to arrest or to keep and guard prisoners or property, nor to any person summoned by those officers to aid them in the discharge of their duties while actually engaged in their duties."

I discussed this passage with a RI police officer I knew via Masonry, and he assured me that the section you quoted is used to throw the book at anyone who uses such a weapon to commit a crime or threaten other people, or carries one around ready for use, since pretty much anyone else can make a claim to be collecting martial arts weapons "as curios or for educational, professional, scientific, or any other lawful purpose."

[peter_van_erp]

The law leaves a lot of discretion in the hands of the police to determine intent. They tend to come down hard on young black men, while ignoring the longer than 3" bladed knife I almost always carry. (I believe that's that middle aged white man privilege all the SJWs are complaining about)

[ecosophia]

Oh, sure. Most jurisdictions give police a lot of leeway, which they then tolerably often abuse. As long as you keep your nunchaku at home or in the dojo, though, you should be fine!

[(Anonymous)]

I love the part that says "or any other lawful purpose". The legislature didn't think of it, but it's a lawful use, so you're still good!

Nunchaku

[(Anonymous)]

JMG: Are you proficient with the nunchaku?

[auntlili]

Oh good grief. That makes as much sense as banning knives. Yes, it's an arm, but it's also a kitchen implement. A nearly identical instrument called a flail in English is has been used at least since the middle ages to thresh wheat. Kudos to Judge Chen.

ban knives? Not as absurd as we'd like to think.

[(Anonymous)]

"Ban on home deliveries of knives in government crackdown after surge in London stabbings" This was from The Independent, London, in April 2018. Just search for "knife ban UK", and you'll see the sad truth.

It's the "pointy knives" they're worked up about (at this time). If your knife has a blunt, rounded tip, you can still slice tofu with it, so what's the big deal?

Lathechuck

(PS: ... is pseudo-markup language, expected to be presented literally... if it goes through.

[(Anonymous)]

I personally would take anything an adolescent chelonian tried to tell me with a very large grain of salt! Not because it's a chelonian, but have you met many adolescents these days? ;)

[fluiddruid]

Ah, nunchakus! I used to own a training nunchaku. It's a weapon that requires quite a bit of dexterity which I admittedly don't have.

And I'm all for rolling back nanny state laws, since they are going to be impractical in our resource-constrained future. I can see local militias armed with nunchakus patrolling the neighborhoods. Police officers have been using nunchakus for quite a while, until it was ultimately replaced by tasers. Though apparently some are still using nunchakus.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3291915/Small-California-police-department-use-nunchucks.html

[(Anonymous)]

I'm a stage hand on the West Coast and we regularly hear horror stories from our NYC brothers and sisters getting arrested for carrying tools on the job and running into the wrong cop. Thanks to repeated vetoes by rabid anti-constiutionalist Gov Cuomo someone working a Broadway show can still get cuffed and hauled away because they have a knife that they can open with one hand while dangling precariously off some rigging hundreds of feet in the air.

Also it's absurd how many times I have to defend myself to people who think it looks scary and paranoid to have a knife in my pocket, and then 5 minutes later they want to borrow it to cut something. I used to let them use it and hope they would learn, but they never do and end up giving it back to me with broken tips, dull, or covered in scratches and schmutz. No more.

If the media covered successful defensive shootings with the same zeal that it covers successful murders this nightmare of misinformed Safetyness would be over rather quickly. But apparently the goal is not to make us all safer but disarmed and helpless against an increasingly violent totalitarian police state and the permanent criminal underclass it uses to justify it's budgets.

numchuka

[ritaer]

After watching my stepson practice with a homemade set years ago I would nickname them "numbnuts". Talk about a painful learning curve.

By the same logic laws against swords and personal defense knives should be found unconstitutional. The Founders certainly would have recognized them as arms within the meaning of the law.

Re: numchuka

[ecosophia]

I've trained extensively with nunchaku. They're very good at teaching you how not to be stupid with them! As for swords and knives, also true.

[(Anonymous)]

Good to know. I used to be quite proficient back in the day with nunchaku (or numchucks as the other kids used to say) and now I can stop hiding my secret stash and get back to practicing, perhaps after I finish crafting my Druid sickle; nowadays that's more where I'm at (but don't tell NYS about the sickle either!).

[drhooves]

Well, hopefully it won't be long before three-wheeler ATVs and lawn jarts are available for sale again, but I'm not holding my breath.

Today the Trump administration banned "bump stocks", which allow for a semi-automatic firearm to (sort of) become fully automatic. The ban does not grandfather in existing owners of bump stocks, and while a rather useless accessory for a gun (it actually makes it a far less reliable tool), the ban will probably result in more black market bump stocks hitting the streets than being destroyed.

The nanny-state mentality is a slippery slope, IMHO, and grants the government more authority to abuse power. One woman was quoted on NPR stating the bump stock ban was, "a good start", so I suspect the assault on the Second Amendment to continue. With rather dire side effects...

[(Anonymous)]

I'd just like to say...Bring on the black market lawn jarts, okay? It's time. I'm ready.

I spent a lot of pleasant summer nights in cutthroat jart tournaments when I was a kid. Now that I have kids of my own, I'd like to give them the same experience--but the good jarts are all gone.

You spend your youth thinking the jarts will always be there, you know? If only we'd all taken the time to cherish them while they were here, perhaps we'd have never lost them.

-Dudley Dawson.

Jarts and three wheelers

[drhooves]

I played lawn jarts too as a kid, and yes - they were dangerous. I believe I read somewhere it was a father whose daughter was killed by an errant lawn jart toss that lobbied Congress to get them banned. And here it is:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-u-s-government-ban-lawn-dart-sales/

Sad that a child dies, but even sadder that a single individual's stupidity can spoil it for the rest of us. It may be crass to think so, but it's another interruption of nature doing its proper process of Darwin's Law. Three wheelers (which are much more fun to ride than four wheelers) were banned for similar reasons - injuries to kids that were untrained and unprotected from the relatively unstable vehicle.

I'll respectfully disagree

[(Anonymous)]

I used to be so much of a gun-rights activist that I argued that law-abiding citizens should be able to own automatic weapons, or devices that create a similar effect. With great regret, I've changed my mind. Too many mass shootings have convinced me that too many Americans lack the mental capacity to wisely handle the power to "spray and pray."

That kind of rate of fire has no serious legitimate civilian uses. It is virtually never needed for real-life home defense scenarios, nor is it legal or desirable for hunting. There are many circumstances in which one may need a rifle. You ask someone to give you a scenario in which he would really need a bump stock, and you are likely to hear some form of fantasy in response.

I'm sure demolishing an inanimate object at a range with a rifle equipped with a bump stock is fun for those who can afford it. Their fun is not, perhaps, worth the extra shots per minute that someone else will get off when firing into a crowd at a bar, church, or music festival.

- Dewey

Re: I'll respectfully disagree

[drhooves]

I'm not sure exactly what you're disagreeing with, since I wouldn't argue that bump stocks are useful. But I would argue that banning them, in an era where laws are often not enforced and have the opposite of the desired effect, is not going to have a positive effect. And I'd point out that making a bump stock in a reasonably equipped workshop is rather trivial.

Firearms used for home defense have very rarely needed more than 3 or 4 rounds to be effective. But many will argue that home defense, self defense, hunting and target shooting is not the intent of the Second Amendment. The intent is to allow an armed militia to exist to prevent government tyranny, and thus the line where restrictions, if any, with small arms can be argued. Small arms level the playing field to an amazing degree - just observe the Taliban and ISIS, and many more examples of rebels, guerrillas, and "freedom" fighters in history, which succeeded or held up well against far "superior" forces.

I hope you meant "mental stability" versus "mental capacity". You don't have to be unintelligent to misuse a firearm. But it should be noted that some sources indicate use of psychiatric medications, usually SSRIs, by the perps. The power of Big Pharma seems to hush up that info pretty quickly.

The bottom line, IMHO, is that the media and government are pulling on all the emotional strings here, rather than taking an honest and unbiased look at the problem. The result is ineffective "feel good" laws on one side, and a perceived assault on Second Amendment rights on the other. There appears to be no middle ground, and yet another polarizing issue will fragment and destabilize our society to an even greater degree - and how much more of that can we stand?

Re: I'll respectfully disagree

[(Anonymous)]

I respectfully disagree that banning bump stocks is an assault on the Second Amendment. It's long been accepted that the Second Amendment does not guarantee civilians the right to own full-auto weapons, and gizmos that make a rifle simulate full-auto are reasonably treated similarly. The number of people who illegally convert rifles to full-auto is certainly lower than the number who would do it if there were no restrictions, so a ban on bump stocks should at least somewhat reduce the number of available bump stocks.

Anyone envisioning a future in which he and his pals make war against the U.S. Army needs to accept that, as is always true in industrial-era insurgencies, they will not begin with comparable armaments. If you did have automatic rifles, they'll have grenade launchers. If you get a grenade launcher, they'll have a tank. Get a tank, they can call in an airstrike. You can't store your own F-16 or Apache for a future coup d'etat opportunity; where would you park it? Having military-grade small arms in hand might encourage you to imagine you could win an open battle against real military units, which would make for a very short uprising.

As for the SSRI issue, that seems to be the case for some, but not all. By "mental capacity" I meant the ability to function consistently as a rational being rather than a violent animal - which is not strongly related to IQ.

- Dewey

Re: I'll respectfully disagree

[(Anonymous)]

And who is winning in Afghanistan?

[(Anonymous)]

The nunchucks origin as a farm tool is interesting. Other farm tools have doubled as weapons in the hands of angry peasants. Consider the pitchfork used for tossing hay or other plant material. It also has served as a symbol of protest (along with tar and feathers). Maybe there's a hidden fear of the lower class types (formerly peasants) getting restless that underlies the nanny state efforts to ban anything that potentially could be used against it.

JLfromNH

I hope this ruling spreads far and wide, quickly

[https://openid-provider.appspot.com/bryanlallen]

I was horrified a couple of years ago to find out that in two of the National Parks I frequent, doing multi-day hikes, that bear spray or pepper spray is classified as a weapon and is expressly forbidden. The parks in question are Sequoia-Kings Canyon & Yosemite. In Yellowstone and Glacier NPs hikers are encouraged to carry bear spray. The absurdity is that, with a valid permit, you can conceal-carry a firearm in all the National Parks (a Supreme Court ruling in 2010 nullified the prohibition of legal weapons in National Parks), and if you had to use deadly force against an attacking bear or attacking human in Yosemite (very rare, but both have happened) that’d be OK but using very effective and non-lethal bear spray or pepper spray would be a citeable offense. Absurd.

[(Anonymous)]

You are so fortunate to have the second amendment. Without it this variety of insanity runs absolutely rampant without any remedy.

Right on!

[(Anonymous)]

"Adolescent chelonians" is my :-D for the day. Hee hee!

My local TV station warned that women here [especially, they didn't need to say, minority women] could be jailed if the cops found them carrying an advertised key ring with a rounded claw shape that you can put your fingers through and use like brass knuckles against a rapist. But you can legally [if you can jump through the right hoops] carry a high-caliber handgun. It would be darned hard to kill or permanently paralyze an attacker with the key ring. So the message - which I largely support - is that if you are at risk of rape and your employment doesn't prevent it, carry a gun and do a lot more damage!

- Dewey

[(Anonymous)]

A nice device. Especially the massive wooden ones with a leather cord. No sounds except for the constant swoosh of air interrupted by more or less frequent outcries measuring the practicioners skill. Look out for very painful hits from very unexpected directions when training with one of those. ;)

You are not allowed to even own one in Germany, by the way.

Cheers,
Nachtgurke

[(Anonymous)]

Re farm implements used as weapons, I'm a working gardener and my tool kit is stuffed with tools that could cause harm - sickles, scythes, slashers and lot of others with sharp pointy ends. We also have various pieces of wood that look like they'd make good shillelaghs. I can kind of see why the PTB would be concerned about peasants having all these things but, really, so many things can be put towards such uses (even my new recorder, not that I'd want to use it for that). Maybe that's partly why smart phones and the like are encouraged.

James Bond

[(Anonymous)]

In a similar manner James Bond’s Wather PPk was banned from importation in the 1960s as being too sexy for Americans.

[(Anonymous)]

"One of our nation’s biggest problems is that we seem to be ruled by 22-year-old girls who know everything and are afraid of, well, darn near everything, and I don’t know that we have the time to wait for them to grow up."

http://esfinges.net/