I know this is off subject from the post but I do ask this question.  Lowell, can you tell me when people started murdering other people.   Was it before or after the invention of guns?  Should you have been in existence in the stone age, would you have pushed for a ban on sticks and stones, the most common murder weapons of that age?

Back on subject, this is a little ridiculous.  You can bring in one weapon but not the other which happens to be more deadly when put in the hands of someone who wants to hurt someone.  A little out there.

it's when Cain slew Abel.  I don't believe that was with a gun. :)

PS If you don't believe in the Bible, my guess is that it was one Neanderthal smashing another Neanderthal over the head with a rock after arguing about a cave.  But that's just my personal theory.

...Sampson used the jawbone of an ass to slay a thousand Philistines.  That is a weapon commonly found throughout the General Assembly.

looks like we need to close the jawbone of an ass loophole!

But how do they feel about spears?  I think it would be completely within my right to carry a spear, javeline or even the occassional pole axe for my own personal defense, and moreover, a spear is traditionally a hunting weapon.  We shouldn't restrict sportsmen who want to bring their hunting weapons with them to lobby the GA.

I think all bloggers should wear swords to the General Assembly.

I like the whole "Three Musketeers"/"Count of Monte Cristo"/"Cyrano de Bergerac" thing.

I can just imagine the my-sword-is-bigger-than-yours-fest that would break out.

So that it dragged the ground when I walked: "clang, clang, clang" reminding everyone that my (sword) was the longest.

n/t

but of course, I'm female, so that whole "my sword is longer than yours" doesn't apply, notwithstanding Dr. Freud's opinion about women and ... er ... and, uh, how they're so envious about ... um ... some things ;)

I mean really, this anti-sword policy is discriminatory against ninjas, fencing teams and of course pirates. Although, we never know when a sword may accidently go off in a statehouse or someone resorts to swashbuckling when they get angry.

The only thing I could think of that would defend allowing handguns but not swords would be the issue of training and certification of safe handling.

In order to get a concealed weapon permit, you are required to take an approved course in safe handling of firearms. There are accepted standards for firearms education that the NRA has long since established. When someone in Virginia gets a CWP, they tend to be pretty responsible with the weapon. Certainly more responsible than if we were just handing out the permits with no educational requirements at all.

So how about safe handling of swords? Even modern fencing classes do not ever use actual blades. There is no standard, accepted course of instruction in the safe carrying and handling of swords. So what if this guy had a CWP and has been trained to use handguns safely?  That tells security absolutely nothing about his ability to safely handle a sword.

They expressed their reasoning poorly, but I think it makes sense.

I used actual blades in all of my martial arts classes.  It's a lot harder than one might think to make a cut deeper than a couple of inches if you haven't practiced appropriately.