On the 14th of this month, Pamela K. Chen, a federal court judge in Brooklyn, believed that a nunchaku ban issued by the State of New York in 1974 violated the Second Amendment to the US Constitution: Protecting Americans Have the right to carry weapons. It is understood that this nunchaku ban was when New York State worried that young people were obsessed with Bruce Lee’s film, and then imitated and used nunchakus, posing a danger.
Bruce Lee, not only a household name in China, but also a far-reaching kung fu star for young Americans at the time. Many American young people are obsessed with Bruce Lee’s movies, so the weapons used by Bruce Lee are also highly respected. As a result, many young Americans practiced nunchakus and there were many injuries. It was condemned by the public opinion of the American public at the time, so in addition to New York State, there are still many states in the United States that prohibit the holding and use of nunchakus in the form of law.
Such as California. According to the California Criminal Law 22010 (Penal Code Section 22010), no one (other than the other legal disclaimers) may not make, import, or store and sell nunchakus for sale in California; no one may give or borrow Or have a nunchaku, the offender can be sentenced to a county or state prison to serve a sentence, the sentence is not more than one year.
In 2012, a Chinese citizen was arrested by the California police for being found carrying carry-on nunchakus in his carry-on baggage.
To tell the truth, the nunchaku as a weapon does have a lot of lethality. Once used improperly, it is prone to injury. It is justifiable that the government imposed a ban on it. However, in a country where almost everyone has a gun, for safety, it is forbidden to use a nunchaku, but it is not allowed to shoot. This kind of operation is like “schizophrenia.”
Over the years, the “shooting case” has become a major problem in the United States, especially the frequent occurrence of “campus shootings” in the past two years. More and more people are calling for “banned guns.” But for the United States, the road to “ban guns” is far away.
For example, in March of this year, after a serious school shooting in Florida, the US Department of Justice did not propose a ban on guns. Instead, it hoped to legislate to prohibit the holding, sale or manufacture of firearms (a device that increases the power of guns). In the eyes of netizens, this is simply putting the cart before the horse. It is like a knife, so it is forbidden to sell the scabbard. If the United States bans guns, what are the so-called devices that enhance the power of guns?
In addition, US President Trump said that in order to eliminate the school shootings, he promised that the Ministry of Justice will provide funding for the training of school personnel. After the shooting at the Florida campus, Trump was very interested in some parents’ suggestions for getting teachers to solve problems in time. He thought that such an initiative rather than a passive defense would be cheap and efficient and worth a try. To sum up briefly, the United States decided to arm the teacher in order to reduce the incidence of school shootings.
What I have to say here is that the gun is like a fate for the United States, so it is almost impossible for the United States to ban guns and guns. Therefore, they can only use the “detour tactics” to respond to the people’s ban on guns. On the other hand, the nunchaku, to say that the nunchaku is not dangerous, is a bit self-deception, but comparing the danger degree of the nunchaku with the gun, it is undoubtedly a small witch. As for many states in the United States that ban nunchakus, perhaps because of the lack of a nunchaku association.