Jump to content

Sikhs back Obama over Gun control


Recommended Posts

US President Barack Obama has unveiled sweeping gun control measures, including background checks and a ban on military-style assault weapons, to reduce gun violence in the wake of incidents like the Wisconsin Gurdwara shooting and the Connecticut school massacre.

"We cannot put this off any longer. I will put everything I've got into this," Obama said while proposing the most sweeping gun control legislation in decades.

With relatives of some of the 20 children killed in the Connecticut rampage looking on, Obama signed 23 executive actions, which do not require congressional approval, to strengthen existing gun laws and take steps on mental health and school safety.

"The right to worship freely and safely, that right was denied to Sikhs in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. The right to assemble peaceably, that right was denied to shoppers in Clackamas, Oregon, and to moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado," Obama said yesterday at a White House event. —

Sikhs back Obama

WASHINGTON: Welcoming the gun control steps taken by President Barack Obama, the Sikh community in the US has asked the Congress to support his proposals, saying many innocent people have become victims of these senseless killings.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There needs to be a control on guns in the US. Not strict as Canada, but semi-automatic and automatic center fire assault rifles and handguns should be prohibited or should be restricted to the point where anyone see's a person carry such weapons, whether loaded or not would be reported to the police and arrested on the spot. Also their should be laws implemented about having a loaded hand gun and rifles in certain parts of the country.

The whole idea behind guns laws is not to stop the illegal market (although it does have an impact on the illegal market), but to restrict, who, where, and when a person can carry a firearm. When such control is put on a person, then other individuals would be able to report on the illegal firearm market with more certainity and the police can identify quicker who owns which type of gun in the area and how dangerous them owning a firearm is. With no control or very little control the citizens don't know if the person is carrying legally after going through testing or some gangster wannabe that is going to spare a whole magizine on a rival crew, where innocent people can be hit.

If you look into BC, Canada, many of you would be like its too restricted, but I believe BC has a right balance when it comes to ownership and control.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There needs to be a control on guns in the US. Not strict as Canada, but semi-automatic and automatic center fire assault rifles and handguns should be prohibited or should be restricted to the point where anyone see's a person carry such weapons, whether loaded or not would be reported to the police and arrested on the spot. Also their should be laws implemented about having a loaded hand gun and rifles in certain parts of the country.

The whole idea behind guns laws is not to stop the illegal market (although it does have an impact on the illegal market), but to restrict, who, where, and when a person can carry a firearm. When such control is put on a person, then other individuals would be able to report on the illegal firearm market with more certainity and the police can identify quicker who owns which type of gun in the area and how dangerous them owning a firearm is. With no control or very little control the citizens don't know if the person is carrying legally after going through testing or some gangster wannabe that is going to spare a whole magizine on a rival crew, where innocent people can be hit.

If you look into BC, Canada, many of you would be like its too restricted, but I believe BC has a right balance when it comes to ownership and control.

That's the Canadian in you talking, not the Khalsa! I went to Canada (Toronto) and had a good argument with a cousin and refuted most of his points about gun control and how it doesn't work. What we need is gun control reform, not control or banning of guns. They need to ensure that people who shouldn't have access to any form of weapon doesn't get it.

To be honest the 2nd amendment is similar to the Khalsa being shastardhari.

What gives the kalyug government a right decide such things and decide which is less bad/good?

Jeene koi gallat kam karna, ohne kive na kive karlena.

I find it funny that it's usually Canadian Punjabis who are activists for banning guns in USA lol. Have a watch my Canadian brethren

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DgmVAty6DA

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, US doesn't need a ban on guns, but needs to control guns so the wrong people are not able to get them. There should not be a federal policy control on guns as many states have different laws when it comes to guns and if one of these relaxed states goes from billy bob you can carry an automatic firearm anywhere you like to billy bob you can only carry a firearm on uncle tom's farm in the desert. Then the good the relaxed law did would be lost and cause crime to increase. I know gun control does not reduce crime all together, but it does reduce certain types of crime. Crimes of passion will be reduced with controling guns. A person who is going to do a crime out of passion will not care if he has a illegal firearm or a legal firearm, so restricting access will make it more difficult to attain a illegal and legal firearm. When i say crime of passion, its not your gangster off the block robbing a gas station while listening to 50 Cent, but when a domestic abuse escalates or uncontrolled anger leads to using firearms. The offender always tells the judge and jury that they lost control of themselves and in the heat of the moment fired off bullets at the victim. Canada has put more restrictions on handguns carrying as they are easier to conceal. But the US should do the opposit as they have more crimes involving firearms. The firearm should deter the offender by being visible on the person and not be an element of surprise, where it can be concealed. Although the concealed firearm addressing the ol'g straight in the mouth will make him shake at the knees, while urinating in his mommy nicely pressed jeans and would be a funny news story. But this won't serve the overall purpose of detering crime.

Also an interesting statistic to see in the states is how many legal firearms go "missing" or are stolen and then used in crimes. Also look up how many people end up shooting themselves or another by accident with their legal firearm.

The US gun control should be different from Canada as US has a different culture than Canada, but gun control in both countries should be based on the same principles. Protecting citizens and reducing certain types of crimes.

We can't look at the Khalsa and say the states should have relaxed gun laws because then the Khalsa can keep a gun all the time. A Khalsa is always shastardhari because we always keep our Kirpan on us. Having relaxed gun laws only makes it easier for extremist groups to unleash their hatred on innocent citizens. These extremist groups mostly keep legal firearms, where police cannot arrest them for concealing and possess illegal firearms. The US is a country that can escape being classified with Mexico. You don't have random shootings taking place everyday and a government that is corrupt to its core when it comes to protecting citizens on a regular basis. If we were speaking about Mexico, I would be with billy bob............i'm carry my automatic assault rifle in my shopping cart and two automatic handguns on my sides, while shopping for some butter and cheese.

I would prefer that the government made special consideration for the Khalsa when it came to being shastardhari, but that just is not going to slide in nations where secular governments operate as corporations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can Khalsa support Gun control?

We have to remember those calling for gun control in the media are usually from left wing mindset. Many Americans feel strongly about the second amendment:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Daas used to always think that the left wing mindset was right and right wing people were just racists. However as Gursikhs we cannot be biased and we must us our intellect, based on teaching of Guru Granth Sahib and Guru Sahibaan, to decipher truth from falsehood. No system is 100% correct i.e. socialism, conservatism, libertarianism. We should study all mats (systems) and rajneeti (politics).

Guru Gobind Singh jee made us shasterdhari and encouraged us to learn the martial arts. Actually the philosophy of Guru Gobind Singh jee is totally in line with the second amendment in the constitution created by the Founding Fathers. Every citizen should have the right to defend themselves, their property and their family. Nowadays it is the victim that get punished when they attack the robbers who enter their properties. More rights are being given to the criminals than the victims of crimes.

This is not a simple issue and daas maybe wrong. Those on the right feel that the constitution of the United Sates is being attacked and the Government is taking away freedom by creating more laws.

It is not the Gun that shoots the bullets. The underlying problem is one of the decaying morality in society as a whole. Faith in God is at an all time low and society is engrossed in maya. The governments can keep creating more laws but this will not stop the increasing epidemic of violence, drugs, rape e.t.c. It is up to the individuals to change their karams (actions) and learn about compassion, faith, ethics, morality, compassion.............................

The schools and parents have no knowledge of teachings of Guru Sahibaan, prophets and other great teachers of the past. Society is encouraging us to find happiness in money, cars, houses, intoxicants.............. When a person chases after maya and doesn't find happiness then they turn into monsters that caused the sandy hook shooting.

Bhul Chuk Maaf.

Satguru Mehar Karan.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • he was hardcore defender of Yogi Bhajan and claimed that the ladies who gave evidence against YB in court about his abuses  and later the lady who wrote the book were liars or trying to blackmail him . Pretty low behaviour . All the white 3HO core had amrit in 1970 under orders of YB to do with his visit to India to showcase his 'conversions'  
    • Wonderful topic! Sikhs shud hv good understanding of geo politics. World is getting multi polar world......
    • Not a gang, but has relevance to this thread   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-58585788 Swansea man jailed after CCTV operator witnessed rape Published 1 hour ago Share IMAGE SOURCE,SOUTH WALES POLICE image captionTurkey Al-Turkey was told he would likely be deported after serving his prison sentence A man has been jailed for more than eight years after a CCTV operator saw him raping a woman. Turkey Al-Turkey, 26, of Cwm Level Road in Brynhyfryd, Swansea, attacked the woman outside the city's Civic Centre on 18 July. Swansea Crown Court heard the victim had no recollection of the incident and a date rape drug may have been used. Al-Turkey, an asylum seeker from Iraq, was sentenced to eight years and eight months after pleading guilty to rape. The court heard Al-Turkey had been drinking limoncello and vodka with his victim on Swansea's promenade on the night of the attack. The CCTV operator said he had seen the victim was intoxicated and unable to stand by herself, before he saw the attack take place as she lay motionless. He used the council's loading bay public address system to shout: "Get off her. She's drunk. I'm calling the police." Officers arrived at 01:40 BST and were not able to rouse the victim. Al-Turkey told officers she was asleep. image captionAl-Turkey was sentenced at Swansea Crown Court At the police station, she told officers she had no recollection of the events, but was told what the CCTV operator had witnessed after that interview. Carina Hughes, prosecuting, told the court drugs had not been found in the victim's urine, but some substances, such as Gamma Hydroxybutyrate (GHB) are eliminated from the body more quickly, and their presence could not be excluded. "Due to to her level of unconsciousness on CCTV, the prosecution felt it went over and above what we expected and anticipated from intoxication," she said.   An alcohol sample measured 62mg of alcohol per 100ml of the victim's blood. Rape 'killed the carefree version of myself' A victim impact statement from the woman, who cannot be identified, was read out in court. It said: "What's happened to me cannot be erased and will remain with me for the rest of my life. "He has killed the spontaneous, joyful, carefree version of myself and only time will tell whether these traits return in full. "The only positive element all of this is that he has been caught and is now going to be dealt with so that he cannot hurt anyone else." Another statement, from the CCTV operator, said he was struggling and kept replaying events in his mind. Ms Hughes said it was "extremely rare" for attacks like this to be captured on CCTV or witnessed. Judge Paul Thomas told Al-Turkey he had "serious misgivings" about whether the victim's condition was due to alcohol alone. "She made it perfectly clear to you that she did not want a sexual relationship that evening but you plied her with drink so she became less and less able to stand or even to move unaided" he said. "You took full advantage of the situation, putting your own sexual needs before any consideration of the impact upon her." Al-Turkey was sentenced to eight years and eight months in prison and will be on the sex offenders' register for the rest of his life. Due to his early guilty plea he will be eligible for release after six years. The court was told Al-Turkey presented himself to the asylum unit in Croydon on the 19 November 2018 when he claimed to have just arrived in the United Kingdom. Mr Thomas added: "Importantly I fully expect that you will be deported from this country immediately upon your release." Related Topics
    • Anyone with any thoughts on what this means ? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-58582573 Aukus: China denounces US-UK-Australia pact as irresponsible Published 1 hour ago Share media captionWatch: Australia’s ‘risky bet’ to side with US over China China has criticised a historic security pact between the US, UK and Australia, describing it as "extremely irresponsible" and "narrow minded". The deal will see the US and UK give Australia the technology to build nuclear-powered submarines for the first time. It is being widely viewed as an effort to counter China's influence in the contested South China Sea. The region has been a flashpoint for years and tensions there remain high. Chinese Foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the alliance risked "severely damaging regional peace... and intensifying the arms race". He criticised what he called "the obsolete cold war... mentality" and warned the three countries were "hurting their own interests". Chinese state media carried similar editorials denouncing the pact, and one in the Global Times newspaper said Australia had now "turned itself into an adversary of China". ANALYSIS: Why this pact signals a major shift EXPLAINED: Tensions in the South China Sea The US is sharing its submarine technology for the first time in 50 years, having previously only shared it with the UK. It means Australia will now be able to build nuclear-powered submarines that are faster and harder to detect than conventionally powered fleets. They can stay submerged for months and shoot missiles longer distances - although Australia says it has no intention of putting nuclear weapons on them. The new partnership, under the name Aukus, was announced in a joint virtual press conference between US President Joe Biden, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Australian counterpart Scott Morrison on Wednesday evening and Thursday morning. And while China was not mentioned directly, the three leaders referred repeatedly to regional security concerns which they said had "grown significantly". "This is an historic opportunity for the three nations, with like-minded allies and partners, to protect shared values and promote security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region," a joint statement read. The Aukus alliance is probably the most significant security arrangement between the three nations since World War Two, analysts say. It means Australia will become just the seventh nation in the world to operate nuclear-powered submarines. While they are the big-ticket item in the deal, cyber capabilities and other undersea technologies will also be shared. "This really shows that all three nations are drawing a line in the sand to start and counter [China's] aggressive moves," said Guy Boekenstein from the Asia Society Australia. Boris Johnson later said the pact would "preserve security and stability around the world" and generate "hundreds of high-skilled jobs". UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told the BBC that China was "embarking on one of the biggest military spends in history... Our partners in those regions want to be able to stand their own ground." media captionWhy is everyone fighting over the South China Sea? In recent years, Beijing has been accused of raising tensions in disputed territories such as the South China Sea. It has been increasingly assertive over what it says are centuries-old rights to the contested region, and has been rapidly building up its military presence to back up those claims. The US has bolstered its military presence too, and has been investing heavily in other partnerships in the region such as with Japan and South Korea. Having the submarines stationed in Australia is critical to US influence in the region, analysts say. Tensions between China and Australia China is Australia's biggest trading partner, and in the past, the two have maintained good relations. But in recent years, political tensions have created a deep rift, stoked by Australia criticising China's treatment of ethnic Uighurs, banning some technology from telecom giant Huawei and supporting an investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Western nations have also been wary of China's booming infrastructure investment on Pacific islands, and have criticised its heavy trade sanctions against countries like Australia - last year it slapped Australian wine with taxes of up to 200%. 'A stab in the back' But France has also reacted angrily to the new pact, because it means Australia will now abandon a $50bn (€31bn; £27bn) deal with it to build 12 submarines. "It's really a stab in the back," France's Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told France Info radio. "We had established a relationship of trust with Australia, this trust has been betrayed." The European Union's foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell said he understood why France was disappointed by the deal, adding that the EU was not consulted about the new alliance. "This forces us once again... to reflect on the need to make the issue of European strategic autonomy a priority. This shows that we must survive on our own," he said on Thursday.
    • I dont think they will care tbh...can only imagine if someone said that about islams jews ...esp being from your own community. Can anyone living in Canada try to contact employers?  We really have the worst rats in our kaum
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use