Japan T comments

AND in his parents home! There are a lot of people who will have a very hard time living with this. What a waste.

@Eddie Landberg

There is of course the law as written and the law as practiced. Your use of "excuse" instead of "reason" leads me to believe you know this.

My spouse, Japanese, found an article in Japanese talking about this. It is against the law for Jcops to stop and search a JN without probable cause. HOWEVER, refusing a Jcops "request" to search your bag gives them probable cause to search your bag...according to the article.

Aparently, they can not use any kind of force to compel a JN to allow a search. If a JN just stands there and refuses to comply, all that can be done is prevent him from leaving and a waiting game ensues. Actually saw a guy do that for a couple of hours.

It being the law should never be the end of any discusdion of what the law should be. Turning in those different was the law under Nazi control.

Besides, as others have pointed out, many of these stops, especially those of Japanese nationals, are not legal and thus are not the law.

Just because it is done elsewhere does not excuse bad practice. Two wrongs don't make a right.

@Gary Raynor

Do you have a y stats to back up this statement? "..but it isn't an aggressively institutionally racist society like the USA, where you could get shot quite easily for sticking out".

@Nakanoguy01

When you are stopped on the street, everyone takes note. If this is not near your home or your workplace, maybe no problem. If in front you child's school or classmate's parent and you can expect problems.

Not to mention the trouble being forced to miss your train may cause.

Three generational families are not at all uncommon nor is it uncommon for children to live with their grandparents while their parents work in Tokyo or Osaka.

I have been stopped twice. Once in Shinjuku and was asked if I had anything that could cut, such as knife or a pair of scissors.

The other time was in Shin Urayasu, Chiba when I was stopped and asked such important questions as who do I work for and their contact information, which country was my favorite, what was my favorite food, etc. The police officer asked in English and I answered in Japanese

I have also witnessed many, many streeet searches of Japanessee meen by the police. Caught a dozen or so my camera. Haven't seen this n a while though.

The system didn't work because it is built upon a flawed premise, that Japan is safe.

Rule #1. Japan is Safe.

Rule#2. If faced with a sitution that appears to be unsafe, refer to rule #1.

Japan is safe, no further action required.

@Strangerland and @Tamarama

"... if you really think a citizen and the government are equivalent, you are kidding yourself."

In our form of government, the government is subservient to the citizenry. That's the law. Hence the term "Public Servant". Our government is there to serve the citizen, to govern with the consent of the governed.

"The answer is so frighteningly simple. Remove the guns. Change the laws. Ban people from owning them and being able to access them anywhere. Of course it's possible."

How do you eliminate guns? The same way drugs have been eliminated, or alcohol was during prohibition? Remember, if you will, that it is a right guaranteed by the constitution. The only legal way to repeal it is through a constitutional convention.

How is the NRA responsible for this? Have ambushes of police been this common during the entire existsnce of that organization? If not, has that organization recently changed its mission? Please show us where you have heard or read the NRA calling or the death of cops, for anybody.

Stating such truths does not in any way put me on the side of these cop killers.

Below are from three different sources.

Heather Mac Donald's most recent book, "The War on Cops," points out some devastating and sobering statistics: "Blacks were charged with 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of all murders, and 45 percent of all assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, while constituting roughly 15 percent of the population in those counties. From 2005 to 2014, 40 percent of cop-killers were black. Given the racially lopsided nature of gun violence, a 26 percent rate of black victimization by the police is not evidence of bias."

From a different source. Police Shootings

One of the main arguments behind the Black Lives Matter movement is that blacks are being slaughtered at the hands of police. The wife of Philando Castile, a Minnesota man who was shot during a traffic stop last week, said, “It’s just like we’re animals. It’s basically modern-day lynching.”

The Washington Post’s database of police shootings in 2015 will be used for the purpose of this section.

The numbers show that black people are more likely than others to be the victim of a fatal police shooting. But a deeper look at the individual incidents shows that they were not primarily of defenseless people.

Of the 990 people shot fatally by police in 2015, 49.8 percent were white, 26 percent black, 17.3 percent were Hispanic, and 6 percent were other or unknown.

Of the 990 shooting deaths, 73.7 percent were made during an “attack in progress.” This would include a shootout, charging with a knife or a physical struggle. The Washington Post also has a category called “other,” 216 total, which consists of 21.8 percent of fatal shootings.

While this includes incidents of unarmed six-year-old children getting caught in the crossfire of bullets, it also includes the shootings of people driving their cars toward police officers, which would seem more appropriately described as an “attack in progress.”

There is also a category called “undetermined,” 44 people, which includes two people who were in shootouts with police.

Of the 260 “other” and “undetermined” victims of police shootings, 212, 81.5 percent, were either brandishing a weapon, had attacked a police officers or were charging at them, were ramming, or had rammed them with a car.

Gun ownership and crime

A Congressional Research Service (CRS) report shows that while gun ownership climbed from 192 million firearms in 1994 to 310 million firearms in 2009, crime fell–and fell sharply. According to the report, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate was 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993. Following the exponential growth in the number of guns, that rate fell to 3.6 per 100,000 in 2000.

This rate rose from 2004 to 2005 and got as high as 3.9 in 2006 and 2007, but it then resumed falling in 2008, the year the Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that individual firearm possession is Constitutionally protected–particularly for self-defense. This figure fell to 3.2 per 100,000 by 2011.

In other words, as the number of firearms almost doubled over a nearly 20-year period, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate was more than halved.

Additionally, the overall murder rate dropped from 9.0 per 100,000 in 1994 to 4.7 in 2011. The overall number of estimated murder victims fell from 23,326 in 1994 to 14,612 in 2011. For estimated firearms-related murder victims, those numbers are 16,333 in 1994 and 9,903 in 2011.

The firearm category that led the way from 1994 through 2009 was handguns. And these were “mostly pistols, revolvers, and derringers,” the most concealable types of guns.

So after after all the pro-gun control grandstanding and the relentless focus on how the so-called easy availability of guns drives up crime, the CRS report shows that more guns–especially more concealable guns–has actually correlated with less crime.

Oh, and at least one of the shooters was a member of the New Black Panthers.

Below are from three different sources.

Heather Mac Donald's most recent book, "The War on Cops," points out some devastating and sobering statistics: "Blacks were charged with 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of all murders, and 45 percent of all assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, while constituting roughly 15 percent of the population in those counties. From 2005 to 2014, 40 percent of cop-killers were black. Given the racially lopsided nature of gun violence, a 26 percent rate of black victimization by the police is not evidence of bias."

From a different source. Police Shootings

One of the main arguments behind the Black Lives Matter movement is that blacks are being slaughtered at the hands of police. The wife of Philando Castile, a Minnesota man who was shot during a traffic stop last week, said, “It’s just like we’re animals. It’s basically modern-day lynching.”

The Washington Post’s database of police shootings in 2015 will be used for the purpose of this section.

The numbers show that black people are more likely than others to be the victim of a fatal police shooting. But a deeper look at the individual incidents shows that they were not primarily of defenseless people.

Of the 990 people shot fatally by police in 2015, 49.8 percent were white, 26 percent black, 17.3 percent were Hispanic, and 6 percent were other or unknown.

Of the 990 shooting deaths, 73.7 percent were made during an “attack in progress.” This would include a shootout, charging with a knife or a physical struggle. The Washington Post also has a category called “other,” 216 total, which consists of 21.8 percent of fatal shootings.

While this includes incidents of unarmed six-year-old children getting caught in the crossfire of bullets, it also includes the shootings of people driving their cars toward police officers, which would seem more appropriately described as an “attack in progress.”

There is also a category called “undetermined,” 44 people, which includes two people who were in shootouts with police.

Of the 260 “other” and “undetermined” victims of police shootings, 212, 81.5 percent, were either brandishing a weapon, had attacked a police officers or were charging at them, were ramming, or had rammed them with a car.

Gun ownership and crime

A Congressional Research Service (CRS) report shows that while gun ownership climbed from 192 million firearms in 1994 to 310 million firearms in 2009, crime fell–and fell sharply. According to the report, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate was 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993. Following the exponential growth in the number of guns, that rate fell to 3.6 per 100,000 in 2000.

This rate rose from 2004 to 2005 and got as high as 3.9 in 2006 and 2007, but it then resumed falling in 2008, the year the Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that individual firearm possession is Constitutionally protected–particularly for self-defense. This figure fell to 3.2 per 100,000 by 2011.

In other words, as the number of firearms almost doubled over a nearly 20-year period, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate was more than halved.

Additionally, the overall murder rate dropped from 9.0 per 100,000 in 1994 to 4.7 in 2011. The overall number of estimated murder victims fell from 23,326 in 1994 to 14,612 in 2011. For estimated firearms-related murder victims, those numbers are 16,333 in 1994 and 9,903 in 2011.

The firearm category that led the way from 1994 through 2009 was handguns. And these were “mostly pistols, revolvers, and derringers,” the most concealable types of guns.

So after after all the pro-gun control grandstanding and the relentless focus on how the so-called easy availability of guns drives up crime, the CRS report shows that more guns–especially more concealable guns–has actually correlated with less crime.

Oh, and at least one of the shooters was a member of the New Black Panthers.

The answer is easy. Now with FATCA,all ordinary banks and many Japanese citizens will need to comply with American tax and finamcial reporting requirements. Create a need and someone will fill it.

@Strangerland and Nemrut Dagi

"This story making national news, is just further evidence that Japan is a safe country. In other countries, this would only make local news - to much other crazier stuff that fills the news before anything like this would come along."

"Stats are only as accurate as what is being reported, and by and large in Japan, theyre pretty accurate based on most peoples experience. "

Where are the stats to back up these claims? Stories like this DO make it to national news in the States, can't speak for other countries. You really think that all such crimes in Japan make to the nightly news or the news papers? For one who is always calling for stats, you provide very few yourself. Why do you not even respond when stats are provided?

When close to 90% of unnatural deaths are not autopsied, when known murders are not investigated, when children die in school judo classes and not a single case brings about a criminal prosecution, these being only a few, with only one ME per 743,080 people (Japan's population divided by the around 170 doctors nation wide who perform autopsies) it can not be said with any creditability that Japan is safe. It may appear to be safe, but it is not. And the constant drum beat of it being safe leads far too many to not be as careful as they should be.

You can not use Japanese stats as evidence that Japan is a safe place. The stats are FAR from complete. Check out the article on Osaka's uninvestigated crimes and a similiar one from a year or so ago. Add to these, personal experiences shared here and elsewhere. But here is a biggy, only one ME per 743,080 people is a stat that should cause all stats on murder to be discounted. (Japan's population divided by the around 170 doctors nation wide who perform autopsies)

That's what I mean by saying that you can not use Japanese stats as evidence that Japan is a safe place. The stats are FAR from complete. Having one ME per 743,080 people is a stat that should cause all stats on murder to be discounted.

Over 50,000 a year going to hospital for heat stress and they are not going there because of the temp differences between the hot trains, hot class rooms, hot offices, hot stores and the hot out side. Why is everyone concered about the couple of degree differences between the outside and an improperly cooled office being super heated by the sun through the windows and not the more extreme differences from those hot offices and the extremely hot bathrooms, hallways and elevators that receive no ventalation? How many times a day do you actually leave the office building and go out side compared to how many times a day you go in and out of inadequately cooled rooms and those whichbat not ventalated at all?

Will he get the same very light sentence that female boss got a little while ago for killing her employee, I wonder?

"I know it happens, but to happen 'more than [he] can count'? That's a lot. And considering it's literally never happened to me, and I'm in Tokyo same as most/many others here, I would suspect that someone making this claim is either grossly exaggerating, or has some own personal responsibility in the matter."

It has happened to me more times than I can count, too. Doesn't happen so much now that I stop my foot to make a very load sound to cuase them to look up, but even then, those with ear phones on can't hear and I don't have 360 degree vision.

@Strangerland

"Really? You must be Singaporean then (which I believe is the only country that has a lower crime rate than Japan)"

Lower REPORTED crime rate.

@Strangerland

"I was describing snow to them and they refused to believe that there was such a thing." from The King and I.

I am fairly experienced, seemingly having many that you do not, yet I do not automatically disbelieve people who have experienced things I have not. Even the most experienced has not experienced it all.

Idiot phone zombies are a problem the world over, not a Japan thing. Not that matters to those of us living in Japan.

While I have witnessed all the situations listed above, the one that has really stuck with me is from before the iPhone era. As I was walking along side a street that was without sidewalks, a young mannon a scooter came around the corner and right at me. In his right hand was a cell hone which he had up to his ear. Coming around the corner, faster than he should and with only one hand on the handle bars, he fell over as he tried to swerve to miss me. He then just laid there, wide eyed, hand still on the throttle, the rear wheeel spiining fast with out the resistance of the pavement and never moved the phone from his ear! I walked past, staring at the knuckle head who almost ran me over and after walking some distance and still hearing the engine running I walked back to ask if he was OK. He was still on his side with the phone to his ear!

@Strangerland,

How can it be a persons fault for being walked into by phone zombies when one is standind still at a traffic crossing, or in line for a bus, train or taxi?

Thank God they weren't shot!

@DB

Hmmm, that is a possibility I didn't think of but does fit with what little is reported here.

Asked a group of female Freshman university students this morning. None of the ten knew of this case, only three know of the case of the young woman who fell asleep on the train and was confined for two days by the guy who took her home and only three knew anything of the Kreis Tennis Club mass drugging case from a couple of years ago.

They do not read newspapers nor watch tv news. They are completly clueless and many seem content to leave them that way.

"Common sense is something we all have, but some people & societies are so warped."

Not when everyone around them are telling them over and over that Japan is Safe, that nothing bad can happen here. I teach at a female only college. Each year I give them a safety talk. It is rare that as many as a single student has ever been told about any dangers by anyone before myself. They are completely clueless about what can happen to them when they go out drinking with male students from their intercollegiate clubs.

They buy in to the myth that Japan is safe and have never given a single thought to their own personal safety. Why would they when are taught that they do not have to. Safety takes effort.

@nishikat

Yes, and if they had been better armed....

"When she told him her destination, he said he was going there as well and suggested they share a taxi. At the risk of victim-blaming, this is unbelievably gullible behaviour."

No, just a product of hearing that Japan is "safe" for the twenty years she has been alive.

"Home invasions are very very rare in Japan. " I am sure the survivors of these attacks take great comfort in this.

"But we are talking about making the future sales of semi autos." No, your talking about something that can NOT be accomplished legally.

"No, I am responding to the above poster." No, you are not. You keep ascribing beliefs to me that I do not have.

"Portable rocket launcher?" Yep. Doesn't mean you can carry it on your person or even in you vehicle, but yes. For the reason of protection against one's own government. For those of you who believe this is strange thinking, study history. More people have died at the hand of their own government than by their fellow citizens.

"And how about people under 18? " If a state says it is "OK" then it is in that state.

"They get their operator's license at 16." Not in my state. The law requires them to either be 18 or if enrolled in school 16. If they drop out of school after getting their DL at 16 and before 18, they lose their DL.

"But it seems Trump is insulting his way out of the presidency as he hates all non-white people." Evidence?

"Should they be able to carry semi autos at 16 if they do all the proper procedures?" You are all ver the map. Sales, carry, ownership. These are different issues. Carry means to have a loaded firearm on your person, safely secured but at hand if needed. You don't carry long arms for defense. You buy them, and keep them at home for home protection. Any weapon, firearm or not, drawn in public should invite the utmost attention. Larger items, for protection against what ever the gov. may wish to apply against its citizens, the same.

"Shall not be infringed means shall not be infringed and this is set in stone as the founders intended." If you understand this, why are you arguing against it? It IS set in stone.

Good on the mother of one of the bullies for calling the school to find out what her kid was up to.

@Smithinjapan

Guns do have a purpose. A woman weighing 125 has littke hope of fending off even an unarmed attack by a man weighing 225. The only hope for most women being attacked is to have a firearm close at hand. If the man is armed with a knife, even more so. If he is armed with a firearm, more so still.

The recent home invasion attack here in Japan is a great example. If they were allowed to have and had a firearm, then the death toll in that attack would have been fewer. Probably only the daughter and her attacker, and possibly just the attacker.

But no, heaven forbid law abiding citizens be allowed to defend themselves.

Guns are in the US in very large supply. Banning them will not make them dissapear. Besides, as I have stated many times, the legislature CAN NOT legally ban them. There is only one legal way to do so under US law and that is for the States to call a Constitutional Convention to repeal the second amendment. That is the Law in the US. Any talk of banning guns in the US ignores the legal realities of this, the second of the ten rights protected by the Bill of Rights.

Why are mass murders worse than multiple single murders?