Hey, a civilian could be a PTSDing hard-as-nails combat vet. Who will cut off your genitalia and put it in your mouth after he kills you.

Or he could be a PTSDed combat vet who cries in his sleep, take 3 kinds of anti-anxiety medications, and nearly has a heart attack everytime someone slams a door.

Yeah. Rambo is not reality. PTSD doesn't make you a badass, PTSD robs you of some of your basic fucking humanity.

There's a reason why the corpsman who helped raise the second flag on Iwo Jima never told his family about the Navy Cross he earned or even really talked about the war. It probably has something to do with the fact that he still had nightmares 30 years after the war.

Well, I once knew someone who told me about the time that his roomate was a Vietnam vet who had a pretty dangerous startle reaction. This fellow always carried a handgun with him and basically if you startled him he'd very quickly draw and point the handgun at you. I recall another story about one fellow who if you startled him awake he'd reflexively punch your teeth out. I was thinking more about the twitch reflexes.

There's plenty of people who'll do that, regardless of their status as a combat vet or not. I knew a woman who accidentally maced someone when he jumped up in front of her at her surprise party. Heck, I nearly flattened one roommate of mine when he startled me, and I'm far from an expert combatant. Twitch reflexes are not created under combat conditions; they're virtually reflexes, after all, and reflexes are ingrained.

But to bring things back on target, martial arts training is supposed to help train your twitch reflexes, and some form of martial art is also part of the standard gym curriculum for Japanese students. It may not be hardcore MMA or Krav Maga self-defense, but it's decidedly more combative than swimming or racquet sports.

To point back to the article the author did state that there is no such thing as a witness relocation plan, or any kind of protection for those who want to speak up against the Yaks. If this is so then maybe everyone can see them as soft, but if you get shot by one of the Yaks and live.... well why say anything? Fessing up to the crime just means that you and your family are already dead. If there is a lot of cover ups on the violence in Japan then maybe there are a lot more shootings and hits then we can imagine. In the U.S. there is a problem with crime, but people are generally more willing to testify, because they know that the government can help them out if they are willing to "do the right thing." Hell I hate to sound mean but if I saw someone get shot right in front of me, and knew that if I testified it would mean the death of me and my loved ones... well to hell with that. One guy rots in jail for ten to life while everyone I know and love is dead? I think the author was mainly saying that the system is broken, and no one in their right mind is willing to help a system that basically supports organized crime.

There are at least second generation Yaks in America that I know of, and it strikes me as odd that there is not a single tie back to Japan. There are all kinds of ways to procure firearms, as well as other illegal and sundry items under the radar. You know the right people, you ask the right questions, and slowly with enough pressure you can find what you are looking for in any situation.

The last thing I have to say about the whole "who is more badassed" I find that although maybe the militia man in Sudan might have more use firing off their weapon, they might not ever receive the proper training on how to use it. If your given an AK, told how to shoot it, and given the amount of time it takes you to shoot a target thats 20 ft. away without any combat stress is that proper training? Even if they survive for years fighting in combat will they ever suddenly know exactly what stance you should take, how to properly hold your weapon, and the fastest way to fix your gun if it jams? Maybe some of it, but the guy who receives army special training for a year + and after he is finished goes and trains his other Yak friends? I would rather take the Yak over the militia man in Sudan. Sure that Yak might not have the combat experience, but hell at least he is well trained.

On a side note though my uncle has a love for oriental dragon tattoos and has them covering almost his entire body. At one point he decided to live in Japan for a few years. He said that the first time he went to a public bath house in Japan with two of his friends he took off his robe and reveled that he was covered in dragon tattoos, the place emptied in under a minute. Picture a tall white guy with tons of dragon tattoos flanked by two Japanese guys (who had yet to take off their robes) created so much fear that the entire place silently and quickly emptied. After that experience my uncle never went to a public bath house.

And it didn't occur to anyone to explain to him (or to the police) that he probably shouldn't be carrying a gun then? I realize that Americans are fonder of guns than most other western countries, but I'm pretty sure that would be adequate cause for having you license revoked.

American laws are different. It's not easy to remove someone's right to bear arms. They basically need to have been convicted of a violent felony before that can happen. You don't even need a license to carry a firearm; you just need one to carry it concealed.

Of course, stories like that guy tend to be second-hand: someone you know has a cousin, who heard it from a friend, who has a connection, etc, etc. There's not a lot of people who actually admit to knowing someone like that firsthand.

Pointing a gun at people without provocation is a violent felony. Also you might or might not need a permit to carry a firearm depending on the state, but even if you live in a state where you don't need a permit I can't imagine they'd allow obviously unstable people to carry guns. American laws are not that different.

"Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell who you are". Yeah I imagine that people might be reluctant to admit to associating with that kind of people.

Being startled is reasonably sufficient justification to draw and aim a firearm, though insufficient to fire.



With heroes, you mean? With people who risked their lives to keep theworld safe from Communist aggression without whom we wouldn't enjoy the ability to post on message boards about a game in which capitalists run the world? I imagine that most people would be proud to admit such association.

You're obviously unfamiliar with the NRA, aren't you?

I've personally witnessed eight-year old children with rifles at hunting events, and teenagers with handguns at a range. What's more, these events aren't even abnormal. No one even batted an eye. My half-brother was nine when he first went duck shooting, using a 20-gauge shotgun. He was hardly the youngest kid there, too. So, if *kids* can carry firearms openly, what makes you think that adults cannot as well?

You do not need a permit to carry a firearm anywhere in the US. You do need a permit to carry concealed, but that doesn't prevent people from carrying openly.

When I was on board my ships, if you wanted a violent reaction from me when I was sleeping in my Rack, you shook me. Proper method to deactivate violent response was to merely place your hand lightly on me, and call my name.

One found this out the hard way, he was in the rack above me, he dropped his tape player down the wall into my bunk, rather than wake me he thought he could reach in past my privacy curtains and feel around for the player. His screams woke most of the compartment. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) He had several weeks of physical therapy for repair the injury. He also got a attitude realignment from his Chief about reaching into a sleeping persons rack while they are sleeping and feeling around. Most in my compartment felt I should have ripped his arm off.

I served with many VN Vets who you had to learn the methods of awakening them and how not to surprise them.

As for drawing when startled I agree with Hyzmarca.

WMS

This is why I favor top racks.

As an added benefit drunk people have a lower chance of puking into or around your rack. Or randomly crawling inside and falling asleep naked, covered in vomit.

Fear the bottom "drunk" rack.

Well for my size, they preferred me to have the middle rack, and my rank agreed with them. When I came out of top rack, pity any underneath me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

WMS

Pfft! Give me my perch on high to tangle my smelly feet over the heads of my comrades. Lets the yak's come get me there!

Different states have different laws on carrying guns in the open. There are places where it is illegal, but no one cares. A law is only as good as it is enforced.

If someone would pull a gun on me whenever they are startled I would probably try and move out asap. I feel sorry for what that man went through to be that twitchy, but having him carry a gun and doing that is a time bomb waiting to go off. Those are the types of people I don't want carrying around a gun. Period.

EDIT: To preserve the peace. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Not sure if this is completely true. For instance, in DC any weapon in your possession must be thoroughly locked up. Maryland has laws on transporting firearms, and while I haven't tried walking around with them openly, I suspect the cops would frown on such.

However, in no Constitution-abiding part of the US is open carry restricted.

Here goes the thread.

Wait for it... wait for it...

Robert A Heinlein! Hitler!

There, we've already debated this flame bait to death. Let's move on. Holy crap weblife have you used the internet before? You should have thrown some links to furry porn while you were at it ;p

Shall we just call this Godwin 2 ? Or has anyone coined a term for this scenario yet?(IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Doc, I've removed my post, if you delete the quote this can pass silently.

You are correct, I should not have been baited. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

No offense, but I really tend to doubt that. Granted, DC doesn't have any places to go hunting; but it should have gun ranges. Transporting a gun to and from a range is considered legal everywhere that I know of, and you can always claim you were coming back from a range, but had to run a few errands.

As a counterpoint to that: As I understand it the definition of "thoroughly locked up" can, in some places, be satisfied by being in your trunk, in your locked glove compartment, and yes, even in a paper bag which has been stapled shut.
There's always room for legal bull****. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

In a word, No.

§ 7-2507.02 Firearms required to be unloaded and disassembled or locked

Except for law enforcement personnel described in § 7-2502.01(b)(1), each registrant shall keep any firearm in his possession unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device unless such firearm is kept at his place of business, or while being used for lawful recreational purposes within the District of Columbia.

http://dcguncase.com/blog/dc-gun-laws/

Oh, and there is NO exemption for self-defense that allows you to load a gun at home. And people HAVE been prosecuted for using a firearm at home in self-defense.

Sometimes when you are transporting a gun you have it locked in a case, in the trunk of your car (which is generally locked as well.) Some guy walking with a gun in toe to a gun range might be suspect.... anyways it is all about how law are enforced. If there is a law against talking on your cellphone while driving and no one ever gets pulled over then that law is useless. Same with anything to do with guns. If your local police force is fine with people walking around with guns willy nilly then guess what? It might be illegal, but that might as well mean squat if no one is willing to enforce the law..... anyways back on point I thought the author was insightful and gave a further depth on the darker side of Japan that I appreciate.