Ever wondered why Japan has no gun rights movement?

Consider that the ready access to explosives has been only restricted in the US for less than one lifetime. How many civil rights RKBA activists even try to get access to explosives and various tools containing them (grenades, mines, detcord, satchel charges, RPGs) less restricted? Now consider that non-government Japanese have been denied all arms for at least five hundred years, and you can see why few would bring up the topic in polite company.

And yet, this is a topic that has to be brought up. As the world-wide experience with modern warfare shows, civilians with only small arms can’t take on even light armor, dooming them to retreat after retreat until there’s no place to run. Just as the 1570s samurai learned that bows may be useful but cannot replace muskets, we should understand that even accurate rifles with a decent rate of fire cannot do the job of Claymores, RPGs and mortars. And US gun owners are as far behind the power curve as the Plains Indians were in the 1880s. Denied not only the more potent weapons but also the training and maintenance know-how, the Indians couldn’t have made much use of a Gatling even had they captured one, and American civilians by and large cannot use a mortar, a personnel carrier or even a Claymore safely and effectively.

This entry was posted in civil rights, rkba, weapon. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Ever wondered why Japan has no gun rights movement?

  1. Mr Galt says:

    IMHO, no one has to make a habit of “taking on light armor” (although it seems to me the goat copulators of Afghanistan have done OK in that regard).

    Lets try a little thought experiment. We know the politicians and we have well identified their LEO enablers and their equipment. But how many have considered that aside from leadership and their pretorian guards, who are the folks that really do the day-to-day stomping on the faces of the American people?

    It is the bureaucracy.

    It is this army of sniveling unimaginative room-temperature IQ paper pushers that really carry the weight of Uncle Sam’s dictates. So the leadership issues their tyrannical dictates, the bureaucracy carries those orders out, and LEO provides the muscle. LEO is the tip of the spear for the recalcitrant non-compliant – the resistant 3 percent.

    But what happens if instead of facing LEO and the military head-on, one were to direct their efforts towards the bureaucracy, which I can tell you, is a soft, soft target indeed? How long would it take to get those folks to quit showing up for work? As the gears of financial collections and stifling regulations ground to an abrupt halt, wouldn’t the leadership then be compelled to turn their spear point into a shield for their paper-pushing grunts? This would, if properly executed, force leadership into a defensive posture, taking pressure off the most active resistance, and I would posit, invoking sympathy from much of the populace (who hasn’t been screwed by the bureaucracy?).

    This could, (hypothetically, as this is just a thought experiment) dramatically shift the momentum of the struggle. Force the bully to deploy his heavy weapons to protect those that feed the beast, and you have blunted his sword.

    • Keith Glass says:

      You’re describing the Bracken Scenario, aka “What I Saw at the Coup”. . .


    • HSR47 says:


      An insurgency doesn’t need to worry much about having anti-armor or anti-air weapons.

      The reason for this is that insurgents historically spend most of their time blending in with society; This in turn tends to make sabotage a fairly widespread tactic.

      Stateside, the key would be to oppose an army of occupation by first attacking it’s chain of command (both military and civilian/political); This has the effect of forcing the occupation force to expend significant resources protecting it’s chain of command. Those resources are finite, which means that it has a net effect of reducing overall combat effectiveness. Second, the key is to focus on going after soft targets, and sabotaging as much material as possible. Here, the key is to cause the occupation force to expend the majority of it’s resources defensively, rather than offensively.

      Given the size of the country, the size of the military/militarized police forces, and the overall population, it seems to me that a small and dedicated percentage of the overall population could drive the establishment to it’s knees relatively quickly. Keep in mind that our ability to fight long and costly insurgencies in SE Asia and the Middle-East has relied heavily on our political establishment (and their supporters) being entirely removed from the action.

      • Kirk Parker says:

        As a case study, look what two partially-trained individuals (Mohammed/Malvo) or one formerly-trained individual (Dorner) managed to do as far as tying law enforcement, and everyone else, in knots.

    • Junior law dog says:

      You nailed it! The sociopathic management groups think they are untouchable gods! The people of this economy so need their jobs that they are willing to be directed, not led, off the cliff of violating their oaths. Also, we have to cut the stump out from under the politicians as they work for us and are supposed to do our bidding, not the other way around!

  2. Jim says:

    I wholeheartedly agree with taking the fight to the sycophants and apparatchiks of the machine. That tactic would bleed the system in short order.


    You forget that there are literally millions in the US who have learned small unit tactics, heavy weapons, and counter insurgency from literally the most dominant and powerful military that has ever existed. These millions all pledged an oath to protect the Constitution. Though many would not be front line troopers, they have the knowledge. The martial skills are perishable for stand up fighters but an insurgency has no need for a stand up fight.

    • Mr Galt says:

      The other thing I think I should point out, is that from my experience, bureaucrats prefer the lowest of low hanging fruit (being the lazy cowardly bastards that they are). Raise the branches, and watch them fold. They will happily sit doing absolute zero or find other vocations (or just grab an EBT card and stay home).

      Not sure where you were going with the counter insurgency line of thought – I suppose you mean well-trained military personnel would turn on the rebellion and they would be difficult to contend with. Not surprising at all really, I don’t expect many to do the right thing. If they were capable of that sort of independent thought they would realize that they had long ago ceased to defend the Constitution and they would do the right thing. But I’m certainly not counting on that. In the end, most humans no matter what their training, toughness or vocation, will cover their own asses and make what they think is their best expedient deal.

      I also find it interesting that LEO at all levels (Fed and State) are grabbing these guys up as their terms of service expire. I’m familiar with an officer type that ran snipers, who went into the service of DHS to keep all his “special privileges”. Nice deal if you can get it. Scratch that guy off the list of wanting to do the right thing.

      Look at it this way – in the end they lost in Afghanistan (or at least they did not win), and once the public gets a snoot full of their abusive murderous deeds all under the color of “just following orders” they will find themselves transformed quickly from heroes to villains. Those that have integrity (and I know a few of those too) will know those counter insurgency tactics, and just may lend a very helpful hand.

      • LarryArnold says:

        [Entirely theoretically as a thought exercise.]
        I suppose you mean well-trained military personnel would turn on the rebellion and they would be difficult to contend with.
        There are lots of veterans who are not “snatched up.” There are lots of State Guard, National Guard, and Reserve personnel who live most of their lives in the civilian world. There are a lot of civilians who have demolition training. And you only need a few people to actually make explosives, and even fewer to teach people how.
        “Defend the Constitution” != “Protect the sitting administration.”

  3. LarryArnold says:

    Now consider that non-government Japanese have been denied all arms for at least five hundred years, and you can see why few would bring up the topic in polite company.
    True. You bring up a good point. I agree. In Japan.
    However, catch Japanese on vacation and, “In Guam, gun tourism is big business.”

    • me says:

      Indian, Chinese and Arab tourists visiting the US seem to be intensely curious about firearms also. An indoor range I frequent is getting more and more out-of-towners on Friday afternoons.

    • Cargosquid says:

      While deployed to Guam, we were told by our Gunner’s Mate to NOT go to the gun ranges, as the guns had a high probability of “malfunctioning.” Catastrophically.

      However, to the Guamanians, who remember WWII…don’t care if the Japanese have a problem. The only thing that was changed is that the lawyers made them bolt the guns, in some places, to the shooting tables….so the Japanese could not point them at their heads for suicide. Didn’t help. Contortions ensue…then …bang.

      I got this from the local Guamanian police.

  4. Weer'd Beard says:

    also one must note that any nation (Japan is one of them) that has declared the reason for owning guns as “Sporting Only”, as Japanese who DO own firearms own them for hunting and for protecting livestock and crops from pests, quickly lose their rights.

    Its understandable. There are other ways (better or not) to cull pests such as poison and traps, and nobody truly needs to target shoot.

    And it is about NEED, because those who attack rights never care about rights.

    Still the US is being strong by pointing out that indeed we DO own guns to kill PEOPLE. Petty criminals, and governments acting as criminals.

    For this task you do indeed NEED guns.

  5. Ray says:

    There are a few basic things wrong with this Idea. The US Military and DHS don’t have the “combat power” to occupy Texas. The heavy divisions (the M-1 MBTs the M-2 and M-3 Bradly AFVs ) are for the most part, in the DRMO or depot storage. The Air Force no longer has fuel to train.(The bulk of its aircraft have been sent to the “boneyard”) Manpower numbers have been cut to pre WW-2 levels. After almost thirty years of Deployment , War, Downsizing ,and budget cutting, The US Military is a shell of what it was just fifteen years ago. It is all Myth and Memory. Its a Bluff. The US Military you remember no longer exists. The DHS- LEO and FLEA are NOT solders and have almost no motivation to “die fighting for a cause”. They are bullies that will scream for backup and run at first contact . Then go hide until The Army Guys come to the rescue. Add to that the VERY American trait of quietly ignoring(and often breaking) laws, and you would quickly see that there is no way to equate Japan and the US–OR the Middle East. You see Oleg ; Where you grew up , people quietly and peacefully comply with the law (for the most part) . Here ; Not so much.

    • Y. says:

      >>You see Oleg ; Where you grew up , people quietly and peacefully comply with the law (for the most part) . <<

      You do remember he grew up in Russia?

      • Oleg Volk says:

        I’d say that Russians are generally unaware of laws and seldom care about complying with them. Americans are compulsively law-abiding.

        • me says:

          There seem to be considerable cultural differences in different parts of the country.

          In the rural South, in areas with a lot of Scots and Irish and West Country English settlement, everybody’s a natural-born anarchist and rules don’t count if the Man ain’t looking. Go up to the Volksrepublik of Massachusetts, and everybody quivers and trips over their own feet rushing to obey whenever some jumped-up postal clerk or librarian demands to see der papieren. I tell myself it’s because of the German settlers up that way.

          • bill says:

            It’s not the German settlers, think back to the history you were taught, Massachusetts was people by puritans “searching for religious freedom”: in fact they were looking for somewhere to establish a totalitarian religious state. The gene driving that need has survived but the Deity they worship now has morphed into the state, that’s their new god.

        • Cargosquid says:

          The mind set has disappeared, and has been gone for over a hundred years. And unorganized private citizens, that feel alone and isolated, are sitting ducks.

          Thus…..another reason why Congress has not reorganized the militia after the Dick Act, for domestic security.

          An armed, ORGANIZED citizenry, cognizant of their rights and responsibilities, armed with even light weapons, cannot be oppressed, especially by the petty tyrants that America seems to breed.

  6. Dave says:

    The problem, Oleg, is that by saying we need to bring up the topic of militarily-credible arms, you’re about three steps down the road from the root of the problem. The reason nobody is agitating for looser restrictions on more potent weaponry is the same as the reason very few would own such things even if they were legal. If you want the People to be a credible force against a corrupt Government, then first they need to get into the mindset that they’re supposed to be. Even if you go to a gun show, if you talk to a hundred people at random and tell them that the Second Amendment is there to protect our right to shoot Senators, not squirrels, you’re going to get a lot of strange looks and have people thinking you’re about half-a-bubble off plumb. This, despite the Parker court holding explicitly that the Second Amendment protects resistance ” the depredations of a tyrannical government” (the Supreme Court did not reverse this finding in Heller, so it is technically good law).

    Which, of course, goes back to the beginning of your post: the mindset has rotted away.

    • The Jack says:

      It may be turning around

      Consider Gun Culture 1.0 (Fudd friendly, guns are for huntin’ and collectin’ and self defense was quietly talked about if at all)
      Gun Culture 2.0 (Self Defense and CCW)

      As Weerd said, once you get the idea of using a gun against one type of criminal it gets easier to use ’em against another.

      It’s certainly easier than if the idea that your life is worth defending with your own hand isn’t in play.

      • me says:

        Gun Culture 1.0 is a product of another era, before the cities turned into lawless Third World jungles, before the State turned against the people who pay its taxes and fight its wars, I think.

        A hundred years ago anyone, almost anywhere in the US, who stood on principle and went armed with a concealed firearm, just in case, wherever he went, would have been in violation of neither law nor custom. It would have been perhaps a bit eccentric–what was the need of such things, back when New York City had four murders per year instead of eight hundred? what was the need to speak about the Gadsden Flag when your Congressman might have been a crook but never a Red? Unfortunately, things changed.

  7. Joe S. says:

    The initial premise proposed in Oleg’s article is flawed in that armed insurrectionists in foreign countries either seize armories or create IED’s. Elements of military or paramilitary also generally realign support to a group opposing the ruling government as well.
    As for the paranoid comments of seizing government control, room temp. IQ’s and LEO/Military being lackeys or pastes…Wild statements from a hidden distance show imprudence and lack of reasoned caution. Put into the meat grinder of an actual insurrection what follows behind that isn’t as bad?
    If you want to make a difference than run for office, become a LEO, join the Guard or Reserve, write letters and support promising politicians who embrace free thinking ideals.

    • Mr Galt says:

      Indeed, because voting our way out of this has worked so incredibly well so far.

      • HSR47 says:

        Admittedly, a large part of our current problem is due to the vast majority of “the press” as well as our schools, being entirely in the tank for the left.

        At least in regard to the press, that trend almost looks like it as been shifting for the better; Authorized journalists seem to be finally coming to the realization that the emperor has no clothes.

        As long as that trend continues, trying to use anything other than the first three boxes (Soap, ballot, jury) seems entirely premature.

        Furthermore, if it DOES NOT continue, and our government continues to spend as recklessly as it has been doing, we will likely come to the point where our economy collapses. That would likely be the opportune moment to open the fourth box of political discourse..

  8. Pingback: Peaceful uses of explosives | VolkStudio Blog

  9. Dan says:

    While the gist of your postion….that the average citizen in America has not had access to and become familiar with many of the tools mentioned the situation is not as bad
    as one might imagine. Millions of civilians in America once were experts at the use of
    such tools…..before leaving the military and resuming normal life. That expertise did
    not magically evaporate. Claymores, Detcord, C4 and many other tools available for
    use after being liberated from an opponent will be readily useable by the countless people who used them in a prior life and still have that knowledge. And ANYONE with the ability to read can learn from a number of sources the fundamentals of using
    these devices and materials. In addition a very significant number of people who work in mining, farming, construction and other industries will have fresh current
    experience in the use of such materials. Only a handful of the most modern iterations
    of .mil weapons will be unfamiliar and cumbersome to those not trained in their use.

  10. Pingback: SayUncle » Ever wondered why Japan has no gun rights movement?

  11. Mark Dietzler says:

    The targeting of the soft underbelly that is the bureaucracy is also known as Clinton Rules, first promulgated when then President Clinton went after the Serbs in Kosovo. Supporters of the regime were declared legitimate targets, as well as media and other types of people who provided ideological “cover.”
    Think your local media mouthpiece is more…accessible…than your local politician? You betcha. So is the local college professor who is a known marxist loudmouth, or the local assistant US Attorney who prosecutes crime.

    • Kristophr says:

      Or that retard hippie with a Coexist or an Obama2012 sticker on his Volvo. A bunch of those are going to end up as bullet-riddled street ornaments.

      The left has no freakin’ clue just how dirty things will get once they throw the rule of law out the window.

  12. Detcord says:

    But, but, isn’t that what Timothy McVeigh did?

    The collateral damage has him demonized.

    The operations would have to be surgical to minimize collateral damage.

  13. Kristophr says:

    One angry man with a rifle and a lot of prep can keep a battalion tied up all freaking day. A bunch of them forced the Russian army completely out of Grozny, and forced the Russian command to level the city with aircraft. Russia now has a permanent insurgency as a result.

    Once our federal government has to level our cities to get guerrillas, they are finished.

    And, as other mentioned, our experience in Afghanistan invalidates your statement.

  14. Scott_S says:

    I’ve considered getting my FEL – I’ve got to finish the barn and build a magazine for storage before I apply though. Objectives: 100+ feet of detcord, 50+lbs of semtex and other explosives, 500 detonators.

    I’m solely interest in this much boom boom because it can be used for quickly clearing forested property my family owns.

Comments are closed.