Lammy sagt, dass Sikhs‘ Klinge nach dem Tod von Henry Nowak das Privileg entzogen werden kann
Lammy says Sikhs’ blade ‘privilege can be taken away’ after Henry Nowak death
Von kiyomoris
Lammy sagt, dass Sikhs‘ Klinge nach dem Tod von Henry Nowak das Privileg entzogen werden kann
Lammy says Sikhs’ blade ‘privilege can be taken away’ after Henry Nowak death
Von kiyomoris
24 Kommentare
No one should be walking around with weapons. Religion shouldn’t be part of the conversation
Honestly feels like a no brainer. I know people will say well he wasn’t killed with one of them but it’s still mental to me that you can walk round with a knife just because of your religion
It is worth noting that the Kirpan wasn’t used in the stabbing
We shouldn’t be making exceptions to any laws for any made up belief
I think I heard somewhere, be it online or back in school, many Sikhs wear a necklace of one, like christians and the cross, but a miniature blade.
Whether or not thats true idk
Could there be a compromise where sharp blades are banned entirely but something like a rubber replica equivalent is OK?
David Lammy saying something sensible? I’m sure that’s one of the signs of the apocalypse
[removed]
Will I guess if we don’t want to ban this, the only way to stop a bad guy with a knife, is with a good guy with a knife.
Someone who’s planning on stabbing someone isn’t going to follow the law anyway, like all the other people that carry banned weapons.
So this isn’t going to change anything.
Imo it’s just like hungerford etc.
Certain guns were fine, until they weren’t.
No reason there can’t be a compromise where you just carry a non sharp/bolted shut/rubber knife or whatever.
Honestly all they have to do is change the law to make it so that all these daggers must be sealed into the sheath if they are carried in public. As in stuck inside the sheath with glue or something. Thats a fair compromise that i imagine most people would be ok with.
Let them have pen knives that fit into the law. They have their blades but they have them in a useful form instead of a dangerous form.
Again this gov seems so fucking reactionary to everything in the papers, yes a kid got killed and the police fucked it up, but for fucks sake take 5 minutes to think shit through before going to the press, it’s like we’re being governed by twatting Mumsnet.
See I gotta walk around with my axe because if I don’t die in glorious battle I won’t got to Valhalla
I’ve never seen a good reason why Sikhs are allowed to avoid the offensive weapon laws, and now we have a high profile case where it got someone killed. As other commenters have said, Sikhs in other countries do just fine with a ceremonial blunt kirpan, and they don’t need one bigger than the penknife I’m allowed to carry on me as a non-Sikh.
In general religious or cultural groups shouldn’t get preferential treatment under the law, and I don’t see a good reason why this one should remain.
Same rules for everyone it’s as simple as that.
This the UK not the Punjab.
Sikh’s are most definitely not the issue.
But Tiered rule and divide clearly is.
I think they just need to suck it up.
Reasonable people and very reasonable religion so I think it should just be accepted.
Wear a plastic symbolic one if needs be
Tbh I find this a tad reactionary.
People are misquoting exceptions left right and centre, ignoring the fact we have multiple exceptions where every tom, dick and harry can carry a knife down the street.
We’ve had laws giving exceptions to Sikhs for around 200 years with few if any issues with the Sikhs carrying blades.
It’s also taught generally pretty much as standard in RE at school. Everyone in the UK was pretty much aware of the allowance given to Sikhs in regards to knives, and never batted an eyelid.
I think while a compromise can be found, it would be better to get the Sikh community directly involved to find a decent middle ground.
So decades of Sikh’s proving they can be trusted is undone by one guy that might not actually have been a full Sikh, using an illegal blade, not a Kirpan, to murder a kid?
I think it’s for the best, it hardly seems unreasonable when many observant fellas just have a charm sized version.
I don’t want us to go to the extremes of france, but that requires reasonable compromise
How many Sikhs uses their religious tool for murder each year ?
So are we going to trample on religious rights because of one criminal?
I could use my belt buckle to beat someone to death ? Does that mean we should be banning belt ?
Let’s not be reactive and be sensible and look at the stats .
Over the past ten years ,how many similar cases ?
I do think the rules for a Kipran should be defined a lot more clearly. But as written they certainly would not have stopped a police officer from arresting someone for threatening someone with a knife or a court banning someone like Digwa from carrying one.
Even most Amritdhari Sikhs don’t carry a knife, and the ones that do follow legal guidelines out of common sense. A complete ban would be bigoted overkill, given how aberrant Digwa’s behavior is.
Digwa was a massive sinner by the standards of the religion he claimed to follow just for drawing a knife unnecessarily, let alone murdering an innocent with it. Kirpan means ‚grace and defence‘. They are meant to be carried with the highest of responsibility.
Obviously there are circumstances where specific individuals can and should be banned from carrying a Kirpan entirely, for example neither prisoners nor guards are allowed them within prisons. But the state should be careful not to persecute someone’s religion unnecessarily.
But the law should never be murky, not when it comes to weapons. There should be a specific size limit. Notably the law will not stricyly protect a Sikh for anything other than *possession* of the weapon. Threatening behaviour is still a crime whatever your religion. But maybe the exact definition of when the Kirpan can be exposed should be legally defined.
I do think it’s a bit much that one idiot with a knife is causing people to argue for the rewriting of one of the religious/cultural exemptions which has generally worked perfectly fine: There’s a lot of knife crime out there and statistically it is just not being caused by Sikh Kirpans.
The truth is this kind of altercation and killing happens fairly commonly, especially when drinks involved: Someone says something or lightly teases another person who flips out because they’re young, drunk or stupid (or all three) does something that ends up killing the first guy. It’s a terrible thing – and yet sadly also not that noteworthy or unusual, and aside from the circumstantial in this one particular case has bugger all to do with Sikhs or their Kirpans.
The part of this story that IS unusually noteworthy is what happened after the police turned up. That is what needs to be investigated for whether further action is needed, because Henry Nowak’s final moments were undignified and terrifying because of it. Mistakes were obviously made, and it needs to be determined if those mistakes were due to poor training, incompetence, laziness etc or if it was a situation where Digwa’s deceit is solely to blame. This kirpan stuff to me feels like it’s just distraction from that.
Going to do the same for Scots who can wear a knife on their Kilt?
Out of how many Sikhs in the country, how many times has their knife been used in a knife attack?