Balisong Nuts are harmless ?

[Chris "Anagarika"]

I got this from the Blade Discussion Forum: http://www.bladeforums.com/ubb/Forum41/HTML/000442-2.html

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The more open they are the easier it is to show other people that we are harmless collecters and knife users and not murderers who exchange tips on how to slice people up. And the more people the merrier the discussions.</font>

I think this applies to us also, Baliswingers around the world. Any suggestion on assuring sheepies that we are not manstabber? I suggest invite them into the forum!

 

[ChungSan]

I suggest showing your family and friends exactly what you do with your balisong(most of them have that negative image as well). If you can get them to understand your obsession the rest of the world should be easy.

P.S. Most of my family still doesn't understand

------------------

Chung San

 

[Don Rearic]

I think a concerted effort must be made to draw a clear distinction between killing and murder. There is a difference, all of the difference in the World as a matter of fact.

All murders are killing, but not all killing is murder. Sometimes, it is entirely legitimate and justified to kill.

The problem, as I see it, is one of legitimacy.

If someone asks you, "Would you use that thing on someone?"

You can say as I do, "If I had to, yes. I'm a human being, right? I have a right not to be killed and to defend myself. However, I don't want to have to use a weapon such as this in a world of Hepatitis B and AIDS either. I'm not quick to do that at all..."

You have to except the fact that alot of people will always look at knives as weapons. Excepting that fact, you have to give it legitimacy.

You don't have to paint any knife solely as a weapon, but you do have to except it and add an air of legitimacy to it.

Otherwise, people look at some knives and they say, maybe silently, but they will say it nonetheless, "This guy is a FREAK, that is NOT for whittling sticks...that's a WEAPON."

This is a real hot-button issue, but you have to legitimize Self-defense because the History of Edged Weapons cannot be taken away.

If you attempt to do that, you look like a liar and a fool.

------------------
"You are no more armed because you are wearing a pistol than you are a musician because you own a guitar." ~Jeff Cooper
And the same goes for a knife...
And, I'm a Usual Suspect.
Some of my Knives and other neat things

 

[Lothar.OTHP]

Well, yeah, that's a point, Don, but I think tryint draw a line may be misconstrued as an attempt to legitimize. Self defense as a plea is well recognized already, but most serious martial arts types will tell you that it still should be unnecessary. Whether you read Sun Tzu, who says that the acme of skill is to win without fighting, or listen to some of the street fighting types who will tell you that a fight is best and most skillfully done by inflicting the minimum amount of damage required to win a fight, the bottom line sems to be that if you're cornered and have to resort to killing, true it is nice to have the skill if it's come to that, but you've already screwed up pretty badly if things have gone that far.

Better the image of the harmless knife collector than the "serious weapon carrying martial artist."

 

[Lothar.OTHP]

Well, yeah, that's a point, Don, but I think tryint draw a line may be misconstrued as an attempt to legitimize killing. Self defense as a plea is well recognized already, but most serious martial arts types will tell you that it still should be unnecessary. Whether you read Sun Tzu, who says that the acme of skill is to win without fighting, or listen to some of the street fighting types who will tell you that a fight is best and most skillfully done by inflicting the minimum amount of damage required to win a fight, the bottom line sems to be that if you're cornered and have to resort to killing, true it is nice to have the skill if it's come to that, but you've already screwed up pretty badly if things have gone that far.

Better the image of the harmless knife collector than the "serious weapon carrying martial artist."

 

[Kyui Su Kim]

Yeha I agree. My little sister says that I don't treat my Bali as a knife but more of a stress releiver. Also I can say that most of us here probably don't like to hurt things and have a little more respect for life than some. Personaly I could never really hurt anything.(Except myself:

------------------
I have a sword in my pocket!

 

[Don Rearic]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lothar.OTHP:
Don, but I think tryint draw a line may be misconstrued as an attempt to legitimize killing...[1] The bottom line sems to be that if you're cornered and have to resort to killing, true it is nice to have the skill if it's come to that, but you've already screwed up pretty badly if things have gone that far.[2]

Better the image of the harmless knife collector than the "serious weapon carrying martial artist."[3]</font>

Lothar, please take note of the numbers in brackets.

I think you missed the point entirely.

[1]That point being that some killing is indeed legitimate. 100% legitimate. Killing in Self-defense if need be, is indeed a legitimate act. I feel no need to defend that view as I wish to live. To each his own.

[2]I reject that as Eastern, philosophical mysticism, entirely. I am NOT responsible for the actions of a crackhead when that crackhead attempts to severely injure me or kill me. Life is not the "Kung Fu" Series with David Carradine.

[3]Yes, and the rights of "Harmless Collectors" are next in Britain, the right to carry almost any knife in public is GONE. Why? Because the British Subject did not stand up and declare that Self-defense was a legitimate act. He instead relied on the "Harmless Collector Defense." Well, they cannot carry them now and soon, won't be able to own almost anything either.

You see, a Politician that supports Gun Control has a specific agenda in mind, that agenda is disarming you. He does not care if you are a "harmless collector," because being such is not a "defense" for owning what they consider to be "killing weapons."

 

[Don Rearic]

I posted an excerpt from this essay in the Emerson Forum a while back, people might enjoy it here as well.

The link is provided at the bottom of the excerpt, it is lengthy reading.

The link to the whole essay is provided at the bottom.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Today, as a result of Parliament's 1967 abrogation of the common law rules on justifiable use of deadly force, should a person use a firearm for protection against a violent home intruder, he will be arrested, and a case will be brought against him by the Crown Prosecution Service.[173] In one notorious case, an elderly lady tried to frighten off a gang of thugs by firing a blank from her imitation firearm. She was arrested and charged with the crime of putting someone in fear with an imitation firearm.[174]

With gun ownership for self-protection now completely illegal (unless one works for the government), Britons have begun switching to other forms of protection. The government considers this an intolerable affront. Having, through administrative interpretation, delegitimized gun ownership for self-defense, the British government has been able to outlaw a variety of defensive items. For example, non-lethal chemical defense sprays, such as Mace, are now illegal in Britain, as are electric stun devices.[175]

Some Britons are turning to guard dogs.[176] Unfortunately dogs, unlike guns and knives, have a will of their own and sometimes attack innocent people on their own volition. The number of people injured by dogs has been rising, and the press is calling for bans on Rottweilers, Dobermans, and other "devil dogs." Under 1991 legislation, all pit bulls must be neutered or euthanized.

Other citizens choose to protect themselves with knives, but carrying a knife for defensive protection is considered illegal possession of an offensive weapon. One American tourist learned about this Orwellian offensive weapon law the hard way. After she used a pen knife to stab some men who were attacking her, a British court convicted her of carrying an offensive weapon. Her intention to use the pen knife for lawful defensive purposes (p.436)converted the pen knife, under British legal newspeak, into an illegal "offensive weapon."[177] In 1996, knife-carrying was made presumptively illegal, even without the "offensive" intent to use the weapon defensively. A person accused of the crime is allowed "to prove that he had a good reason or lawful authority for having" the knife when he did.

Early one evening in March 1987, Eric Butler, a fifty-six-year-old executive with B.P. Chemicals, was attacked while riding the London subway. Two men came after Butler and, as one witness described, began "strangling him and smashing his head against the door; his face was red and his eyes were popping out." No passenger on the subway moved to help him. "My air supply was being cut off," Butler later testified, "my eyes became blurred and I feared for my life." Concealed inside Butler's walking stick was a three-foot blade. Butler unsheathed the blade; "I lunged at the man wildly with my swordstick. I resorted to it as my last means of defense." He stabbed an attacker's stomach. The attackers were charged with unlawful wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon. The court gave him a suspended sentence, but denounced the "breach of the law which has become so prevalent in London in recent months that one has to look for a deterrent."[178] Butler's self-defense was the only known instance of use of a swordstick in a "crime."[179] Home Secretary Douglas Hurd, using powers granted under the 1988 Criminal Justice Act, immediately outlawed possession of swordsticks.[180] The Act has also been used to ban blowpipes and other exotica which, while hardly a crime problem, were determined by the Home Secretary not be the sorts of things which he thought any Briton could have a good reason to possess.[181]

No prosecution for defending oneself is too absurd. Consider a report from the Evening Standard newspaper in London, dated October 31, 1996:

A man who uses a knife as a tool of his trade was jailed today after police found him carrying three of them in his car. Dean Payne, 26, is the first person to be jailed under a new law making the carrying of a knife punishable by imprisonment. Payne told ... magistrates that he had to provide his own knife for his job cutting straps around newspaper bundles at the distribution plant where he works .... Police found the three knives--a lock knife, a small printer's knife, and a Stanley knife--in a routine search of his car.... The court agreed he had no intention of using the knives for "offensive" purposes but jailed him for two weeks anyway.(p.437)

....

[The magistrate said] "I have to view your conduct in light of the great public fear of people going around with knives...I consider the only proper punishment is one depriving you of your liberty."

At the dawn of the twentieth century, Great Britain was the great exemplar of liberty to continental Europe, but the sun has set on Britain's tradition of civil liberty. The police search people's cars routinely. Public hysteria against weapons is so extreme that working men are sentenced to jail for possessing the simple tools of their trade. The prosecutions of a newspaper delivery men who carries some knives, or a business executive who saved his own life, would likely have horrified the British gun control advocates of the early twentieth century. There is no evidence that most of these gun control advocates, who only wanted to keep firearms out of the hands of anti-government revolutionaries, ever wanted to make it illegal for tradesmen to carry tools, or for women to stab violent predators. The gun control advocates of 1905-1920 could distinguish a Communist with a rifle from a tourist with a pen-knife. But while the early weapons control advocates made such a distinction, they could not bind their successors to do so as well. Nor could the early weapons controllers understand the social changes that they would unleash when they gave the right to arms the first push down the slippery slope.</font>

http://www.2ndlawlib.org/journals/okslip.html

 

[e_utopia]

The only truly victory in a fight is the one where the fight is avoided. Other outcomes are acceptable, but still fail to be ideal.

Don, remember when I told you that I study psychology? That is why I study psychology.

--JB

------------------
e_utopia@hotmail.com

 

[GuyInBlack]

Great laws we've got over here huh?

FYI knife-wise we aren't allowed to own balisongs, push daggers or automatic/gravity knives. As for what we're allowed to carry without a good reason, well we're limited to a 3" cutting edge on a non-locking blade. Think about that the next time you're moaning about your liner lock being loose.

Shootings still happen here of course. As do knife attacks, and attacks with sprays and stun guns and the like.

Please don't let things go the same way in your country that they have here - at least then us Brits can take consolation in the fact that us losing our rights prompted you all to protect & keep yours.

BTW they're coming after our online freedom of speech now!

 

[Don Rearic]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by e_utopia:
The only truly victory in a fight is the one where the fight is avoided. Other outcomes are acceptable, but still fail to be ideal.

Don, remember when I told you that I study psychology? That is why I study psychology.

--JB</font>

Joe,

The conflict that we have had is one based on painting with a broad brush.
[The Emerson Conflict]

As for studying psychology, I fail to see where one has to study psychology to understand street conflict per se. I have no idea why you tossed that out at all.

I have said it many times, I don't want to be taking a bath in someone's vital fluids. That speaks volumes.



------------------
"You are no more armed because you are wearing a pistol than you are a musician because you own a guitar." ~Jeff Cooper
And the same goes for a knife...
And, I'm a Usual Suspect.
Some of my Knives and other neat things

 

[Don Rearic]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by GuyInBlack:
Please don't let things go the same way in your country that they have here - at least then us Brits can take consolation in the fact that us losing our rights prompted you all to protect & keep yours.

BTW they're coming after our online freedom of speech now!</font>

Yes, we are trying to avoid that. This is why I despise Illegal Entry into this country and then granting Illegal Aliens, "Amnesty" to court their vote. As I stated in the General Forum a couple of weeks ago.

I actively encourage legal immigration to this country of people who wish to be free.

The reward for that is not only freedom, but keeping this country the shining light of Liberty in a world that will go dark when this country falls.

If every Canadian, European, Australian and Japanese, just to name a few areas, that wanted to own a firearm, regardless of type, or wanted to own a knife, again, regardless of type...immigrated here...think of the possibilities.

There would be no gun control or knife control.

There would be a vast majority of people in this country that simply understood that blaming inanimate objects for the acts of criminals is a dead end road.

And maybe we could change, take a step back to a better time.

It's a dream...but one of the nicer ones I have.

 

[Lothar.OTHP]

Don,

I'm with you on the anti-gun control thing, absolutely, and I'm all for keeping our civil liberties.

The point I was trying to make is that using "legitimate killing" as your headline can put us in a bad light. In extreme circumstances, yes, as I said, it's good to be able to defend yourself. That's why I said it. I won't argue the crackhead example with you. But there are also times when a little common sense will go a long way. I'm sure you'll agree that running around in a neighborhood run by gangs or full of crackheads is dangerous... that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. That kind of hazard you can avoid.

In such a case self defense is perfectly justified, and most courts of law will back you up IF you've gone out of your way to avoid such a conflict. (Well, maybe not California, but that's why I don't go there.)

What I was trying to say is that running around advocating "legitimate killing is ok" will be an argument that will get turned on us by the weapon control people who will point and say "See? They think killing is ok!" And not make the distinction. Nor will they provide the context to grant the legitimacy you're looking for. You may be completely right, and legitimate in your argument, but how you're portrayed can still be vastly different from the truth.


Unfortunately for those of us who enjoy collecting knives or guns, the issue has turned into a political circus, and the media has become the ringmaster. Do I like it? ABSOLUTELY ****ING NOT. I can tell you don't either. But that's the scenario we're dealing with, and in terms of self-defense, going straight to the punch by talking about killing people, whether in self-defense or not, can give us a bad image. The advocates won't mention self-defense, nor will they differentiate between self-defense and murder.

I know you're pissed. I don't like it either. But the situation is what it is, and we need to legitimize the knife, not the usage.

Our image is just as important as our beliefs. Balis were banned because of a bad image. Crappy reason, true enough. But it happened. Talking about killing so bluntly will give off a bad image... and we've seen what bad images can do. I know that wasn't your intent, I was just trying to suggest you guard your words more carefully. Trust me, I feel as strongly as you do.

Whether you believe it or not, I agree with you on most of your points. I'm all for keeping knives legal, and getting balis more accepted both in public and in law.

Mechanically, they are more stable and safer than any other folding knife. They will hold open more strongly, and a latched bali can't open accidentally in your pocket.

We also have the right to defend ourselves to whatever degree the circumstances call for. Police can't come to the rescue when the situation is immediate, so it's necessary to maintain our second-amendment rights.

But in an age where it's all too easy to get mis-quoted and have your words used against you, it's important to guard your words as you would guard your liberties and your life. The battleground we're fighting on, and the war being fought won't be won with blades or bullets, but with words, and there's no such thing as "friendly fire."

Forgive me if I offend, or if you managed to misconstrue my intent. If the public thinks we're dangerous, they'll take steps to nullify any danger they perceive. Thus my aversion to the "serious, weapon-carrying martial artist." Better to look harmless, IMHO, because it will keep the public on our side. Stand up for your right to carry, yes. Just please be careful you don't word it in such a way that could be misconstrued as fighting for your right to kill.

 

[Gibberish*]

All i can say is that i'd trust a knife nut more than a gun nut... I know not all gun nuts are crazy but after some gun/military obsessed kid tried to shoot my girlfriend with a .44 2 weeks ago i just don't see the point in handguns. It's off the subject but this is a f'd up world we're living in when you can own a friggin HANDGUN but you can't own a knife that you flip to open? Hell, i don't even understand why auto's are illegal. I asked my dad (a lawyer) why the hell handguns are legal but balis aren't, and he said "because there are a lot more gun nuts out there than knife nuts waiting to complain".. He's right.-
-Gibberish*

 

[Draxil]

If the man that attacked your girlfriend had chosen to attack her with a knife instead of a gun, she'd probably be dead. He was, apparently, not very skilled with his weapon to have missed her from an (assumedly) moderate distance. It takes far less skil to use a knife from 2 feet than it does to use a handgun at 15 or 20 feet. Society only harms itself when it takes guns and knives from honest citizens, because a robber or murderer obviously doesn't care if his weapon is illegal.

 

[Don Rearic]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lothar.OTHP:
I won't argue the crackhead example with you. But there are also times when a little common sense will go a long way. I'm sure you'll agree that running around in a neighborhood run by gangs or full of crackheads is dangerous... that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. That kind of hazard you can avoid.</font>

Lothar,

I am going to disagree with this for two reasons that are painfully obvious in Maryland, and I would imagine in other parts of the country as well.

For one thing, you don't have to go to a "crack neighborhood" in Baltimore City proper anymore, it is everywhere. The people who do these things, it has spread into the suburbs to the point you have to be careful wherever you find yourself.

To use a quaint, old saying of many Old Timers, "sh!t floats."

For a little personal story. When my Son was born, he turns 5 this month...he had a platelet problem. They did not quite know what the deal was. They hinted at cancer which made my heart drop as he was about one week old.

Now, he was born at St. Agnes Hospital in Baltimore and while people do get shot and knifed in the surrounding area near St. Agnes, it is tame compared to other places in Baltimore City.

But that is not the worst part of the story Lothar, he was diagnosed with that problem at St. Agnes, and they wanted to send him to see a Specialist and they gave me 2 choices, Children's Hospital in Washington, D.C. and Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore City.

I know for a fact that Johns Hopkins in Baltimore City is located dead center in Crackhead Central. I knew that because I worked in and out of those neighborhoods for years with an Alarm Company.

I know some might find it rather odd that a world renown hospital like Hopkins might be in such a terrible place, yet, it is true.

There was no good parking for Patients/Visitors then, nor is there now. The Staff have a nice parking garage though. Go figure.

You literally had to walk up the street through a not-so-nice, drug infested area where people are routinely shot and knifed.

So, here I go, chunking up through this crappy environment with my Wife and a child that is about a week old.

He did not have cancer, he had my platelet type and his Mother' blood type and his Immune System became confused and attacked his own platelets during birth...one in 6 million children this happens. I believe The Professor of Pediatric Surgery wrote a paper on my Son, he was talking about it anyway. So everything turned out OK. But I am chunking through this crapped out "Hood" and did not like it much. I had to do it for work alone all the time. Did not like to do it with a newborn.

The point is, sometimes you have to go to places you don't want to.

He stayed overnight and was discharged at 2:00PM the next day when the CT Scans came back negative on The Big C.

One hour after we left, someone was shot and killed in front of the Emergency Room, they carried the person into the hospital, it was that close.

On the other points, yes, we do agree. I'm not advocating killing outright, however. What I am arguing is, that when someone accuses you of wanting to own a killing weapon, sometimes you cannot run from that, because to run from that is to court disaster. Sometimes you have to say, "Yes, it can be used like that, and I would if I have to, but..." blah blah blah, you know what I mean.



[This message has been edited by Don Rearic (edited 05-12-2001).]

 

[Don Rearic]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gibberish*:
All i can say is that i'd trust a knife nut more than a gun nut... I know not all gun nuts are crazy but after some gun/military obsessed kid tried to shoot my girlfriend with a .44 2 weeks ago i just don't see the point in handguns.-Gibberish*</font>

Not to be terribly confrontational, but hoping you will see the light of truth in the matter and court logic as you step away from the emotion and heat of the situation...

So, let's ban handguns. Let's ban most rifles and shotguns as well.

Where will be?

Well, for one thing, guns will always be accessible because they would be manufactured underground or smuggled into the country.

Exactly like drugs are.

For another thing, Boston, about three months into this year, had more knife fatalities than gun fatalities.

That is a warning sign that we are doing the wrong thing, as a Country.

What I want to "challenge" you on is this, if we could theoretically ban all firearms, and a Loved One of your's was attacked with a knife, would you remain consistent and blame the "easy access" to knives as you do handguns?

With all due respect, this is what we are talking about, blaming inanimate objects for the acts of Human Beings that we refuse to deal with in a meaningful way.

On a more basic level, again, with all due respect, I have a Constitutionally recognized Right to Keep and Bear Arms. I could provide documentation on that by the truckload by peer-reviewed Constitutional Scholars. They outnumber the Antigun Scholars by about 36 to 3 I believe.

As for Manufacturing Handguns "Underground" in this country, should a ban ever happen, do not think for one second that this will not happen. It is a simple law of supply and demand.

In the Philippines, there is one small area where illegal firearms are manufactured, it is the whole economy of the area.

I'm not talking about Zip Guns either Dude, but rather good copies of Smith & Wesson handguns. In any event, a Coroner would not be able to tell what handgun did it, if you get my drift, they will kill you just the same.

I will try to find the article on line and post it here.

The problem is, when it comes to guns, knives and other things, we are sugar coating the problem. The one portion of the populace says they want a Proactive Approach to the problem which means controlling what the criminals use, yet, they ignore the fact that handguns can be manufactured and smuggled into this country and that will happen in the event of a ban.

What will happen then is...business as usual, the criminals still have firearms, yet good people will not.

Not my idea of progress. I'm sorry.

 

[Don Rearic]

Gibberish,

Well, the town is even more advanced then I remembered.

Here is an excerpt and the full article. The final thing that I have to say in this matter is, if anyone thinks that this cannot happen in The United States, you are sadly mistaken. Are we going to have a waiting period for a lathe next? Think people.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">From the article:
"Here, in the relaxed, breezy atmosphere of a small seaside town, gun aficionados can choose from fake Ingram machine pistols, Smith and Wesson revolvers, Colt .45s, Berettas, Ithaca shotguns and, depending on one's firepower requirements, Uzi sub-machine guns.

Ten years ago, the biggest customers were Japanese yakuza crime gangs. "A Japanese guy and his Filipina girlfriend came here once in the early 1980s in a taxi from Cebu, just roaming about without knowing anyone," says the affable Dodong Giango, the epitome of the small-time Filipino gangster.

"They drove past a few times and eventually I signalled to them, 'You want one of these?', demonstrating a gun. He bought 232 pieces, mostly revolvers. He was very gutsy."
Sporting a turquoise vest with the legend "California - where life's a beach", two gold medallions, a pair of shorts and flip-flops and packing a fake Beretta he bought from a friend for 18,000 pesos ($685), Giango is one of the town's leading underground gun-dealers.
Next week he faces arraignment for the possession of a Colt .45, but the prospect of his first brush with the authorities in 23 years of firearms trafficking leaves him unruffled.

'As far as I know, no one has ever been convicted of either the illegal possession or manufacture of firearms. In fact, these days the police are our main customers, along with businessmen, gun-runners and politicos.'"</font>

For the Full Article, Click Here.



[This message has been edited by Don Rearic (edited 05-12-2001).]

 

[Lothar.OTHP]

I can see your point, Don. Most places I've been haven't been so randomly dangerous. Even Boston wasn't quite so bad. There are parts to avoid, which most folks do. And that's what I was talking about.

As for the ordeal with your son, I hope things turned out well. It's not the first hospital I've heard of in a nasty part of town, but I would have done the same thing.

 

[Don Rearic]

Lothar,

Specifically, without turning this into "Medical Chat," he had a spontaneous hemorrhage in the adrenal gland located above the right Kindey. Even though they were aware that his platelets were low (and coming back up by one week old) they were concerned because it was a mass, where the "bleed" happened. And it is an area that is often the site of Pediatric, Abdominal Cancers...that is why he had to go to Hopkins. Your platelets are what clots [coagulates] your blood. He had a low count and spontaneously bled in that area [internally, creating the mass on Ultrasound] as his Mother's immune system attacked his, crossing the placenta. That's that in a nutshell, he's fine now 5 years later and loves to watch Dad flip BaliSongs in the living room, from a safe distance.

The point being, we cannot live in these imaginary "safe zones," for the simple reason, the criminal element plays by no rules.

Added to that, man, you can never tell where you have to go in life. It's just that simple.

Let's just say I want to go to Florida on my vacation, man, I don't know what areas I am going to have to pass through on I-95, what if something happens to the car? What if, what if, what if?

A prepared individual just leaves nothing to chance. It's not about being "paranoid" or some other derogatory descriptor some people like to hang on people like me, it is reality.

I'm glad you could see where I am coming from. The reality of life is, you don't know where you are going to be seven days from now or what situation you might find yourself in.

I know that firearms, knives, batons and the martial application of them are extremely unpopular things to some people. You have seen it in this very thread. I don't care. I will always be armed as it is not only my right, but my responsibility to do so, if not as a Citizen, then as a Husband and Father. If people don't like that, that's fine too. They can watch Rosie O'Hypocrite and have a Coke™ and a Smile.