“In the aftermath of last month’s rampage killing at a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, some members of the religion are considering arming themselves in order to defend against future attacks,” businessinsider.com reports. No way! C’mon. Really? “I think that being able to legally obtain and carry a gun is the best thing any Sikh can do, especially after 9/11 where there have been over 800 documented cases of harassment and violence against us,” Sim J. Singh told foxnews.com. As opposed to hundreds of thousands of cases of harassment and violence against Jews, African-Americans, OFWGs, Asians, gays and other Americans who aren’t Sikhs? Anyway, gopher it. But why is Fox News searching the country for pro-gun control Sikhs? Check this . . .
Still, some Sikhs support stricter gun laws in the hope that it will prevent dangerous people from getting guns. Sim J. Singh and Rajwinder Singh both said that reliable background checks and some limits on firepower seemed reasonable. Others went further.
“A gun can harm somebody. I never even think about owning a gun,” said Maninder Arora, a practicing Sikh in Hartford, Conn., who owns a Liberty Tax Services franchise.
“I know the gun lobby is strong. But at least they should put restrictions on the size of the gun, or the quantity of guns. My cousins — they have 3 or 4 guns, which is not right,” he added, saying that he would rather put his faith in the legal system.
“We have a system where cops can arrive anywhere in a few minutes. In the [Wisconsin shooting] situation, the officer was there in about four minutes.”
Gurdev Singh Mann, the president of a Sikh temple in Renton, Wash., agreed about gun laws.
“Gun laws should be more strict. When giving guns to people, it’s better if we check with a judge, look at their behavior and everything,” he said.
Not to put too fine a point on it: why should we care about a few of pro-gun control Sikhs in Connecticut and Washington state when the real story is about Sikhs in Wisconsin who WENT THROUGH HELL and decided that they DON’T WANT TO GO THERE AGAIN?
Needless to say, Fox ends with a pro-gun statement, grammatical errors and all. From the Gunshine State (Florida), ‘natch.
Sim Singh, however, said that he personally carries a gun because he cannot rely on police arriving soon enough.
“Sometimes the police are not able to arrive in time,” Sim Singh said.
“I do not believe stronger gun control is the right solution, as it ends up hurting the law-abiding citizens from having the option to defend themselves with guns when necessary.”
How about ending with a quote from a Sikh who saw the end result of civilian disarmament up close and personal? Note to Fox: balanced doesn’t always mean fair.
Good on them. I guess the four minutes it took for the cops to get there saved so many lives.
Hi, sikh religion considers weapons as saints. A sikh is not born a sikh but is born of actions.
Anyone calling for the restriction placed on weapons, and the ability for Sikhs to be battle ready is not a Sikh.
Please do not use our name in vain, thanks.
The cops response time was good enough. It’s not like that many people died in the four minutes amiright!?!
/sarcasm
Sim has it right. The Sikhs suffered much in their own country. Regardless of the slant of the media, the fact remains a few minutes is to long!
A person’s reaction to a crisis or trauma is what truly exposes what kind of person he/she is.
Four minutes is a life time if your being raped, beaten to death, or shot at. Im sure most of these people have never even held a gun.
i choose to not be critical of the sikh’s. instead i wish to encourage them to be proactive in thir own security. i watched the dash cam footage from the cop cars in the wisconsin shootings just today. except by a hopelessly outgunned but brave man the killer had free reign until after the first cop got there. and the first cop was shot down before he was able to influence the outcome any.
the sikh’s should consider keeping rifles and shotguns at their temples to be accessed in an emergency.
Was at the range on Sunday and there was a Sikh gentleman who I hadn’t seen before teaching his kid how to shoot. Is it weird to say it warmed my heart? I’m in pretty unfriendly territory as far as the 2nd amendment is concerned and I know it’s not politically correct to say this but any time I see women, or really anybody who isn’t a OFWG or a young white male (my club) out there shooting it’s a rush. I count it as another person on the team. We’re all in this together and it’s so awesome to see gunners that break the stereotype. Has me believin’ in this thing called America we got goin’ on.
i’m an ofwg and i agree with you.
+1 Totally not weird. Especially when it’s a father teaching his kids.
I’m glad it warms your heart. I encountered a Sikh at the range once, but he was not treated very well at all. In fact, he was gone within ten minutes. I think it’s because many people assumed he was a Muslim (as if that should make any difference) because of the turban. For some reason people associate turbans with Islam, whereas in western countries it’s almost certain that an individual wearing a turban is a Sikh.
That’s our western ignorance for you. People completely uneducated in religion. Turbines are almost always sikh, which is probably one of the most peaceful religions in the world.
Sorry we are not peaceful, but we do not hurt innocents.
This shows a bunch of things, but to me, a somewhat devout Methodist, and from a vry clos minded regions, shows th underlying quality of th Sikh religion.
One thing most Sikhs take very seriously is their religious duty to protect all, regardless of religion, nationality, caste, etc. You can see this represented in the Indian armed forces. They make up a *massively* disproportionate number of soldiers, pilots, officers, etc. You can also see this at their temples. Regardless of who you are, you can always count on the fact that they will be happy to feed you and give you shelter at any time.
I live within 10 minutes of the Oak Creek temple. Some of the guys at the gun club I belong to provide training. At pistol league tonight one guy was saying a club member had been contacted to train 6 people at the temple for security purposes. Hopefully they are taking their own safety in their own hands.
Happy shooting, dv
“How about ending with a quote from a Sikh who saw the end result of civilian disarmament up close and personal?”
To what do you refer exactly? If the Sikhs were unarmed, it was their own choice, as Wisconsin law has always allowed open carry and there has been concealed carry for a year. Sounds like this temple has gottent he message that it is time to act on their rights.
The other day I saw a young Sikh family where the father and his young son were both wearing ball caps over their turbans. You could still see the turbans underneath but it was enough to blend in and I was impressed by their idea. Of course, at the same time I’m rather sad that they have to resort to cloaking their religion for fear of reprisal.
I don’t believe they were cloaking their religion. Turbans don’t have a visor. All the Sikhs I know are very open about their religion.
But yes, unfortunately we have a lot of ignorant bigots running around, but I have never know a scared Sikh either.
If they were wearing something on their turban that is not a weapon please inform local sikhs. It is against our code, as it is disrespectful to the crown.
Politicians with a Hero Complex who want the masses of sheeple to laud them as their modern saviors and protectors are actually very dangerous shepherds that strip away the self-reliance attitude and self-protective skills of the people to defend themselves from the wolves when they attack. The shepherds, as always, are away somewhere else when needed.
Ahimsa vs. Himsa. Schism in 3…2….1
The Sikhs were ruthless fighters for the British Empire. Consider pro-CCW Sikhism a software update rather than “an oppressed minority finally taking no guff” with all the implied smugness in that statement.
Also the first religious group to knock out a 747.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182
The War Nerd pays tribute to the ruthless religious Rambos here:
http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-classic-in-praise-of-sikhs-the-coolest-warrior-tribe-around/
But at least they should put restrictions on the size of the gun…
So a S&W 500 is bad, but a Springfield (1911?) 9mm like the one used in Sikh temple shooting is ok?
History has proven the Sikhs to be great warriors and good on those who choose to carry on that tradition by supplementing the tried and true Katar with a firearm.
Stop with the imaginary hate crimes stuff.
The whining about getting maligned as a hate crime is ridiculous.
Conservative, Christian, Pro Life. Become that and you will truly know what its like to be maligned on national news every night.
Wow. It must be a really hard life to be a member of a group that makes up about half the country. How do you possibly manage such hardship?
Being trash-talked on the evening news is not a hate crime. A hate crime is, to begin with, a crime – under the federal statute, it must be a violent crime.
Wow, getting dissed on the news is equal to being shoot and killed by some racist ass white dude who thinks your a muslim. You sir are a complete and utter fool.
“We have a system where cops can arrive anywhere in a few minutes. In the [Wisconsin shooting] situation, the officer was there in about four minutes.”
And some intruder can strangle you to death, cut your throat, bash your head in, or shoot you in the face in less than 30 seconds and be gone. My (un)sincerest apologies to all those in the anti-Second Amendment crowd, but there’s no way in f**king hell I’m going to rely completely on someone else to ensure my and my family’s safety when there’s no guarantee that person will get there in time, whereas I can have my SIG out and ready to go in less than 10 seconds.
They should tell the Sikhs killed that it was OK because the cops were there in 4 minutes.
The pro-gun control Sikhs are violating a fundamental principle of Sikh culture, i.e,. protection of the innocent. A true Sikh carries the weapon that is approppriate for defending innocent lives. In the modern world that is a handgun.
This.
“saying that he would rather put his faith in the legal system”
Maybe you should move to Chicago, D.C., NYC, or California. They have plenty of “legal system” for you. You should feel more than safe enough in any of those places.
What are the specific religious reasons that Sikhs carry the ceremonial knives (I don’t know the name of the knife)
It’s called a Kirpan. You can read the wikipedia article about it to get a better understanding, but it’s part of their duty to be a “saint-soldier”. They must first learn and practice the virtues of a saint. Then, when they are baptized, they carry the Kirpan as a reminder of their religious duty to defend the rights of all who are wrongfully oppressed or persecuted irrespective, of their colour, caste or creed.
Yeah thats what I thought….Sounds like their religion almost requires them to carry a gun.
It does it’s after the Hindus betrayed the Sikhs and sold out their kingdom that the British took over and installed gun control.
Sorry for run kn, the five traditional weapons worn by sikhs are the musket, pistol, pike, sword, and bow arrow. Now days guns obviously. Give it about a decade the free sikhs state carved out of India will give you your information. 😛
Until now, I knew nothing about Sikhs other than that they’re frequently mistaken for fundamentalist Muslims. I just now looked up some information (thanks, Internet!), and it turns out they’ve got a really impressive code of ethics going. I like the way these guys roll. As far as I’m concerned, America could use more people like them.
America needs to take away Nixon ban on beards in military. Roosevelt I think gave the quom (community) full blessings.
America and napolenic Europe were the Khalsa rule ‘ greatest allies.
Look up Alexander gardner soldier he was actually from Wisconsin. Died fighting with and for the Sikh kingdom.
Many westerners (whites) went back and died fighting when the British tried to invade the Sikh kingdom unsuccessfully
“Our English cavalry with their blunt swords were most unequally matched against the Sikhs with tulwars so keen of edge that they would split a hair…
I remember reading of a regiment of British cavalry charging a regiment of Sikh calvary. The latter wore voluminous thick puggries round their heads, which our blunt swords were powerless to cut through, and each horsemen had also a buffalo hide shield on his back. They evidently knew that the British sword was blunt and useless, so they kept their horses still and met the British charge by laying flat on their horses’ necks, with their heads protected by their thick turbans and their backs by their shields; and immediately the British soldiers passed through their ranks, the Sikhs swooped round on them and struck back-handed with their sharp, curved swords, in several instances cutting our cavalry men in two”.
(Sgt. William Forbes Mitchell (93rd Sutherland Highlanders)
Sikhs are one of America’s best friends and that is no joke. The skinhead moron who committed this atrocity proved he was not only a bigot but a very stupid one at that.
Limit the number of guns? What’s that going to do? It’s not like they bring their gun collection with them, and they almost always act alone. So how does that help anything?
4 minutes is a very very long time for victims of a crime but 4 Minutes is a fast response time for police. However, response times aren’t that fast in most parts of the country, geographically. If you’re talking population density, that’s a different story. But most of rural america has very long response times. There’s a reason why almost every house in Montana has a firearm. You’re lucky if police get there in an hour.
I think seeing an actual three-gun competition might just blow this guy’s mind.
Comments are closed.