'Overreaction' to dangerous weapons bill

2011-09-27 09:38

Cape Town - A police official says it is "unfortunate" that there has been an overreaction to the draft dangerous weapons bill.

Major General Phillip Jacobs, of the SA Police Service's legal support crime operations division, said in a report published by the Cape Times newspaper on Tuesday that the bill had nothing to do with preventing people from playing paintball or using any weapon to defend themselves.

Rather, it would allow police to confront anyone they saw carrying, for example, a crossbow or a sword in a public space and ask why they were carrying the weapon.

"If someone is carrying a dangerous weapon in suspicious circumstances, using their private defence as an excuse will not be acceptable," he said.

Public comment

The draft bill was published in the Government Gazette for public comment on September 2, after which it will have to be approved by the Cabinet.

Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa will then be allowed to introduce the bill in Parliament.

Freedom Front Plus MP Pieter Groenewald said the bill defines a dangerous weapon and deals with the trade in toy guns, air guns, BB-guns and paintball guns.

"The bill stipulates that anyone found in possession of these guns or a dangerous weapon in certain circumstances which creates suspicion, can be arrested and can be handed a sentence of up to three years in jail," he said.

"This bill has far-reaching implications and nearly any object, from a pocket knife to a stone is viewed as a dangerous weapon."

The bill gave powers to the police to arrest people "left, right and centre".

It would seriously hamper the paintball industry and various forms of eastern martial arts, he said.

  • pragmatism - 2011-09-27 09:45

    what's the use of toy guys?

      Fiona - 2011-09-27 09:55

      like with all toys - you play with it

      GT - 2011-09-27 09:55

      Agree 100% I like guns, but HATE toy guns. Simple put guns are not toys... ever.

      Taurusaurus - 2011-09-27 10:10

      GT, so you like real guns which can be used to kill, but dislike toy ones which cannot be used to kill. That's a very brash mentality to have.

      Krush - 2011-09-27 10:12

      Often criminals use toy guns that look very much like the real thing for hijackings, robberies etc. So I can understand why it could be a problem. This article brings new understanding to the topic - but why didn't they just say it like this in the first place?

      Krush - 2011-09-27 10:20

      Hope they don't plan on arresting me for wearing high heels...

      DEVILS SON - 2011-09-27 10:30

      krush 100% reggies used to sell a glock replica bb gun, almost perfect in every way

      Markusman - 2011-09-27 14:15

      Krush, you are talking abt hijackers, do you really think they will pay attention to this law if they are breaking every other?

      Bad1hq - 2011-09-27 16:27

      I'm in the film industry and have many deactivated and toy guns which are used as props, will I now get arrested when I use them on a shoot or transport them somewhere? And by the way, all toy guns are supposed to have a orange tip so you do not confuse them with real firearms! Why don't they just enforce that policy?

  • Thor - 2011-09-27 09:49

    Ok so then I might as well carry a real gun for self defence.

      Rinus Eckard - 2011-09-27 15:24

      I would have thought you have a thunderbolt???

  • jurgens222 - 2011-09-27 09:50

    What`s the use hands and feet they are all weapons even your head is a weapon,so you may as well lock every body up

  • falcon2020 - 2011-09-27 09:50

    What are we doing about gangs of 14 guys with AK-47's - yo ugot your priorities wrong on this one, rather do someting about ACTUAL weapons - but i geuss this governmnet is only strong and powerfull when it regulates soft problem, impotent against the real challenges

      kalabafazi - 2011-09-27 12:31

      I agree falcon2020. The goverment and SAPS can not even curb the use of firearms currently defined as dangerous and/or illegal and yet they want to make the list longer. I have two paint ball arkers at home. Can I know be arrested for possibly using them in a plot to rob a bank

  • realist03 - 2011-09-27 09:50

    Well thank you for the clarification on this,,,does this mean my wife can now carry her pepper spray in her handbag? an dmay I carry my pick handle in my car for protection?

      realist03 - 2011-09-27 10:30

      Oh look the Rand is starting to recover,,,,,does this mean that the anc communist regime need to make another excuse to steal from its people and not use the weak rand as an excuse????

  • Tokkel Loshi - 2011-09-27 09:53

    Its simple criminals dont adhere tp the LAW so neither will they to this one

      Truestory - 2011-09-27 12:01

      I know its obvious to people with sense. But some stupid people in government think that making more laws to control people who don't obey the law will work. Like the firearms control act. Logic-there are too many gun related crimes, so lets make it more difficult to own a gun legally, that'll do it! Criminals don't obey the law so making more laws to control crime does not work. CONSEQUENCES WORK!!

  • Doublepost - 2011-09-27 09:57

    Listen, Mr Jacobs, we as the public have the right to self-defense, the government should have zero right to enforce any law that goes against that. That's not the government's mandate! If I want to own 20000000000000000000 guns, that's my right! If I want to have a pepper spray or a knife on my person at all times for self-defense, that's my RIGHT! Take this bill and shove it!

      Krush - 2011-09-27 10:19

      My question is, if the character "appears" suspicious and they arrest him for walking around with pepper spray - how are they going to prove he was going to use it to commit a crime? So it's easy to say "we'll arrest only those that look suspicious" but now that "all whites are criminals" would that make all women wielding a stun gun or pepper spray suspicious? Just asking..

      Doublepost - 2011-09-27 10:30

      It works like this. Police Officer: Oh look, you have pepper spray on you, what's that for huh? Girl: Oh, I'm a girl and it's for self-defense against all the rapists in this country that you as the police can never catch and hold! Police Officer: That's no excuse! According to this new bill, you're a potential criminal! You are under arrest! And that's that, if it's a crime to defend yourself or carry a 'weapon' for self-defense, then the government has taken the most pivotal natural right known to mankind. The right to survive! The government has over stepped its bounds, once again. They are there to serve, that is their ONLY mandate. We TELL THEM how many weapons and guns we want. And they must sit there and nod and state, "Yes sir"! Anything other than that and they should not be in government!

      one-way - 2011-09-27 10:34

      The problem is that you will always look suspicious to a poorly trained, well balanced personlity,(chip on both shoulders), could end up in the cells over a weekend and on top of it all get your rear reamed for good measure.

      Louis Olivier - 2011-09-27 10:39

      I agree. It is the government's duty to provide safety and protection to its citizens from criminal elements, but since they fail in providing safety...who is to protect the public, but the public themselves? Now they disarm law abiding public citizens and leave them totally vulnerable. Take away my civic liberties if you can provide me with safety...if not STFU and get out of my way because I have a duty towards myself and my family.

      Doublepost - 2011-09-27 10:39

      And Mr Jacobs, if you're reading! This is NOT an overreaction, it is the CORRECT reaction! The government is not the authority, we as the people are the authority. We the people tasked you with sorting out crime, you are incapable of doing that! Therefore, you are unfit for duty and MUST excuse yourself at the earliest convenience, i.e. NOW! When the government tries to disarm the people that's cue for genocide! When the government pushes these bills down your throat, you must stock up on weapons, the writing is on the wall! The government is illegitimate, they have overstepped their mandate countless times now. Therefore, it's no longer a crime to take up arms against them.

      Doublepost - 2011-09-27 10:57

      Here's a nice reason why you should always keep weapons for self-defense, I wonder why News 24 didn't publish this? I mean, they published a bake sale because it made Whites pay more which made the Whites' racist but they missed the story where two Whites were murdered by black thugs! I wonder why, huh?! Not really! Here, and here,

      The_Realist - 2011-09-27 11:05

      is disarming the public / preventing self-defence not another step in the committing of genocide?

  • Gandalf - 2011-09-27 09:57

    At the end of the day, the successful implementation of any of these laws depends on those enforcing them, and I'm sorry - as much as there are many great, dedicated police officers out there - the majority lack the training to allow them to enforce the law properly. I can't see this being handled properly, to be honest.

  • Cuba12 - 2011-09-27 09:57

    Does this mean that strikers will no longer be allowed to carry knob-kerries when they strike?

      Jacques Jones - 2011-09-27 10:31

      now that is a very good question.

      crackerr - 2011-09-27 10:37

      Interesting. We and of course the police and courts know that self-defense can not possibly be the reason for hordes of strikers marching and running around with knob-kieries. Interesting. Even if the police does nothing it should be possible for the average citizen to obtain a court order prohibiting trade unions and their members from arming themselves. A lawyers' paradise to test the legal system and the law. Hmmm.......

      The_Realist - 2011-09-27 11:11

      "Does this mean that strikers will no longer be allowed to carry knob-kerries when they strike" i am sure this very conveniently EXCLUDE so-called 'traditional' weapons!

      Colin - 2011-09-27 11:11

      @ Crackerr. We won't need to get an interdict to stop them carrying Knob-Kierries and pangas because according to this bill it will be against the law. So expect future protest action to be alot more peaceful. HAHAHAHAHA!

  • Badger - 2011-09-27 10:00

    How about a law that will harshly deal with police and defense force members who are "loosing" their handguns and assault rifles on such a huge scale. In my opinion this is a major source of weapons used in crimes. Why focus on toyguns if law enforcement is constantly supplying the real mccoy to criminals. Perhaps a matter of denial from the police.

  • Craig Louw - 2011-09-27 10:01

    Hey I'm a martial arts student who carries a knife, a big one. My child will be taught martial arts and in so doing learn about weapons, their use and the responsibility that goes along with it. The problem us not a toy gun. As with everything it's responsibility and education.

      InternetMan - 2011-09-27 13:51

      cool story bro

  • sefeddt - 2011-09-27 10:01

    The problem with a bill like this is it leaves interpretation of what constitutes suspicious weapons and circumstances up to the individual police officer and not all officers have the same understanding. Plenty of false arrests with counter law suits pending, costing the tax payer millions

  • runningman - 2011-09-27 10:01

    we are not overreacting...we want the law to be clear and we dont want to give excessive powers to the minister who can declare yeah or nay according to his mood something that he does not like. he serves us...not the other way around. define a weapon, and not merely an object that can cause harm. A tooth brush can make you bleed...

      Taurusaurus - 2011-09-27 10:14

      A spoon can be used to stab. Turn it around so you stab with the handle. Any conceivable object can be used as a weapon - a sponge can be forced into an assailant's mouth and thus cause them to suffocate. Pointless waste of time, effort, and funds.

  • Gibbonater - 2011-09-27 10:03

    What about traditional/ cutural weapons. Knobkirries, sjamboks, spears,half bricks etc. Like when blacks go on strike or demonstrations and they all carry these things with them. We have all seen it on the news many hundreds of times. Are these also going to be outlawed.

  • Craig Louw - 2011-09-27 10:05

    I've also had many BB guns and have never carried them in public as if they were a real gun. I think the over reaction here is on the side of law enforcement. Educate people and then if they still don't listen use the law. A toy gun is just that a toy and having had a few I see no problem with them. Teach your children respect for others and the law. Lead by example. Lead SA. I am in no way affiliated to lead SA btw.

  • runningman - 2011-09-27 10:05

    or name the bill "the prohibition of the public display of dangerous weapons (with the intent to cause harm)"- meaning you cant run down the road with a samurai sword or a kitchen knife openly displayed. covered is fine.

  • Tarux123 - 2011-09-27 10:06

    look i understand when they say "If someone is carrying a dangerous weapon in suspicious circumstances, using their private defence as an excuse will not be acceptable,". that in itself is fully acceptable. but the way they are wording it opens up a field of possiblities to arrest you when they state " any object"(emphasis on object) capable of taking someone "Out of action" whether temporary or permanently. if i can use a PEN wisely i can take a guy's eyes out while he is trying to attack me with a knife. in this case im the suspect for taking him out of action. they must really rethink the way they are stating this bill... otherwise the whole of south africa would have to walk naked in the streets.

      Tarux123 - 2011-09-27 10:10

      then also. what do they classify as self defence? when you are for some miraculous reason able to defend yourself, without any object that is capable of taking the other person out of action, and without actually taking the other person out of action, regardless of what they are doing or attempting to do to you? how is this making us feel safe? "suspicious circumstances" doesnt say anything. if i think "damn that tie on your neck looks mighty suspicious. im sure you are able to strangulate someone with that when you are angry." then they can arrest you.

  • Ian - 2011-09-27 10:07

    wow that was quick, the spin doctors at work already

  • Antoni - 2011-09-27 10:09

    This will affect the paintball community greatly. Will they be able to arrest me if I'm on my way to a paintball game with 7 paintball markers in my vehicle's trunk? Faulty reasoning is behind that bill. Disallow markers for paintballers and airsoft players, yet legally allow people to walk in the street with a 9mm on them?

  • Benzo - 2011-09-27 10:09

    The real problem is that most people do not trust the ANC or its good intentions any longer. Too much manipulation being done on the road to full dictatorship.

      Doublepost - 2011-09-27 11:13

      Lol, its 'good intentions', what have you been smoking? The ANC has no good intentions, only bad ones and it's now becoming clearer and clearer, not even the 'diversity is strength', 'we are all one' crowd can stick their heads in the sand any longer!

      Benzo - 2011-09-27 11:41

      @doublepost: I used the wording "good intentions" to avoid being arrested for using my email as a "dangertous weapon" undermining the trust in our ever so effective ANC government who is protecting all citizens against toy guns and pepperspray.

      Doublepost - 2011-09-27 11:50

      According to this new bill, that's no excuse! Your use of the internet as a method of communications is a clear violation, you are under arrest and will be sentenced to no less than 3 years in Pollsmoor, where Babba will be tasked with showing you the ropes. Kthxbye!

  • Hendrik - 2011-09-27 10:10

    So if I am a 7th dan in Karate, will they chop my hands and feet off?

      Perplexed24 - 2011-09-27 12:11

      anybody who does karate wouldn't worry them! karate is an 'art' form. A watered down version of the fighting styles of feudal Japan. Watered down so they could keep parts of their culture after WWII. They won't let any straight off martial artist compete in no holds barred fighting for a reason! Karate did very poorly in the ufc's! A belt holds up your pants- doesn't actually say how well you can do anything!- Elvis had a black belt! ooooh scary!! No, if you are 7th dan you will definitely still be safe from the law :D

      The_Realist - 2011-09-27 12:30

      @ Perplexed, the MMA fighters are in the shyte, they are going to have hands, elbows, feet, shins, knees etc removed as they are definitely lethal weapons!

      Perplexed24 - 2011-09-27 13:23

      Lol yes ,The_Realist! :D I am just wondering if Tyson will now not be able to get a visa or if he will just have to be muzzeled? Teeth of fury! :D

      CPII - 2011-09-27 14:02

      Aaarrgghh, MMA fighting very much reminds me of the crowd at ;)

  • Observer - 2011-09-27 10:17

    I would hope they would ask a person why they were carrying a sword or crossbow in a public area anyway!

      Vuzi - 2011-09-27 11:30

      Why ? Its none of their business what I carry.

  • Craig Louw - 2011-09-27 10:18

    By the way do you know why they want all martial artist to be listed on a register? So that when you kick the kack out of a criminal they can review your actions and say hey you went too far when my brother tried to rob you, you broke his arm. That's excessive force.

  • Cecile - 2011-09-27 10:19

    In the Beeld article, it says the police have to establish 'reasonable grounds' that a person could be using the 'weapon' under 'suspicious circumstances'. Sorry, but, with the amount of 'unreasonable' policing in this country, this sounds to me more like it's implementing a 'police state' where 'police opinion' is 'king'. We can fight this with our opinions. Apparently the e-mail address to send our comments to, is: Major General PC Jacobs Legal Services South African Police Service E-mail:

      dylan.lesar - 2011-10-14 21:14

      according to the bill i downloaded the contact person is Director J Slabbert, Private Bag X94, PRETORIA 0001 or email: Link to the copy I got:

  • jurgens222 - 2011-09-27 10:23

    We must thank Malema for his shoot the boer kill the farmer song

  • crackerr - 2011-09-27 10:27

    The intention by authorities to combat violence is clear. But a law that is not accurately and tightly enough worded will lead to misinterpretation (sometimes willfully) and unintended consequences. If somebody is found in suspicious circumstances it tells one that it is circumstances that are conducive to illegal activities or consequences and not for self-defense of self-protection. It consequently does not make sense that self-defense should be expressly excluded as a factor to be considered in determining if the circumstances are suspicious. If the claim to self-defense or self-preservation is really such a problem for the law enforcers the law should rather place an onus on the suspect to show such ground on a balance of probabilities. In other words, make it a bit more difficult for the suspect. But don't exclude it. Let's face it. Arrest and conviction on somebody's else's (apparent) subjective suspicion is not ideal. Surely it must be possible for any level minded law enforcement officer or judicial officer to judge whether the alleged suspicious circumstances are of such a magnitude that it (perhaps reasonably) excludes self-defense as the reason or main reason for the presence of the weapon or object. Why not then allow the accused to raise it as a defense? Whatever one may argue, it is not a great idea to give the police more powers. It is unfortunate but they will have to prove their trustworthiness first. That will not happen in many years yet to come.

      Cecile - 2011-09-27 10:30

      FULLY AGREE. Sorry, but, with the amount of 'unreasonable' policing in this country, this sounds to me more like it's implementing a 'police state' where 'police opinion' is 'king'. We can fight this with our opinions. Apparently the e-mail address to send our comments to, is: Major General PC Jacobs Legal Services South African Police Service E-mail:

  • fishycraig - 2011-09-27 10:33

    Come on people. Stop being so reactionary. There is nothing wrong with this. A friend of mine was killed with a crowbar that was used to break into his house. That crowbar was every bit as dangerous as a gun considering the outcome. They aren't going to go arresting people with paintball guns and airguns. What is wrong if there is someone carrying any "weapon" in "certain circumstances which creates suspicion" being questioned? And look, I have no problem with using a gun for self defense.

      crackerr - 2011-09-27 10:42

      We can all agree that violence must be curtailed. But we need to consider impracticalities and potential of abuse.

      toleranne - 2011-09-27 11:06

      The bill doesn't say "any weapon". It says "any OBJECT". It is up to the policeman to decide if the person is acting suspiciously, or if the "object" is potentially dangerous. This gives way too much discretion to often poorly-trained & ethically-deficient police. It is the content of the law that matters, not all the nice spin woven around it by politicians and spokespeople.

      Doublepost - 2011-09-27 11:16

      Something fishy about you, can't put my finger on it but boy does your comment stink of a@@crawling!

      fishycraig - 2011-09-27 12:46

      Wow, mature comments. What I was saying is that ANYTHING can be used as a weapon. You find some guy lurking around your house at night with a crowbar or a panga it is nice that that is now going to be considered a weapon. How many people's lives come to an end in this country with their throats being slit? I very rarely agree with what our "government" does but gotta agree with this one. It is absolute paranoia to think the police are going to be arresting people for having a paintball gun. I have a gun (and quite happy to use it if someone threatens me) so I am aware of certain factors of this bill but really people, look at the positive side of this. It is nice to know that objects other than guns can now be considered dangerous.

      runningman - 2011-09-28 08:38

      "It is absolute paranoia to think the police are going to be arresting people for having a paintball gun"...and when they do, what will you say? By then it will be too late!

  • Cire - 2011-09-27 10:36

    Another absurd bill aimed at ensuring more power to the ANC.

  • letsee - 2011-09-27 10:37

    The problem is that the gangsters will not care about the law and will become a bigger threat to those that will no linger carry arms.

  • 1eye - 2011-09-27 10:38

    This is very very concerning it means Police can pull you over search your car find anything that could potentially kill somebody (read wheel spanner) The in terms of this ACT be within their right to charge you and stick you in jail, once you in jail you at their complete and total mercy Scary shyte Man

  • Darwinian - 2011-09-27 10:40

    I have the same respect for this law as the ANC had for the hate-speech ruling...

  • AK - 2011-09-27 10:43

    They make up all these 'new bills' just to shift focus from the current failures - fix what is wrong NOW. Bloody idiots.

  • Vince York - 2011-09-27 10:43

    In Mozambique - you are BEATEN TO A PULP and jailed INSTANTLY by a variety of authorities if found with any weapon on you!

  • bonny - 2011-09-27 10:43

    I am wondering if this bill covers the carrying of sticks and knobkerries as well. Especially when being carried during toyi-toyi and protest marches..

      allie - 2011-09-27 11:03

      It seems you can carry all sorts of weapons ,as long as you don`t say you are using it for selfdefence.It makes the cops look tottie.That is why i got my shotgun license so quick. My reason was that i use it for shooting snakes.What a bunch of dodos

  • Gemma - 2011-09-27 10:55

    The problem with this bill is that it is written in such a way that our clever policemen are going to take it literally and arreste anyone found with a dagerous weapon, they need something that says specifically under what circumstances they may arrest someone. If you have something even if you are not acting in a suspicious manner, they are going to arrest you because that is what they are going to understand. I can give an example of police not having a brain and not thinking, just applying a law that was not clear. I applied for a gun license, they came to do the safe inspection, now the law says the safe must be bolted to the floor and wall, obviously so it cannot be moved, well, my safe weighs 1.5 tonnes, everyone will agree that it will not be easily moved, well I was told that they are not going to approve it because it was not bolted...I mean, wtf! In short...unclear law + stupidity = problems for all.

  • Fision - 2011-09-27 10:55

    This is just a very thinly veiled attempt to turn SA in a police state! If you want to protect the public, find another way!

  • MSGRule - 2011-09-27 11:04

    Fix police corruption first from the top down and then the police might do their jobs better. Stop adding law upon law to make the goverment do less and have more power. P!ss off.

  • christoffvz - 2011-09-27 11:04

    So i am allowed to carry my licensed pistol around in public, but not pepper spray or a tazer?

  • jannie.beirowski - 2011-09-27 11:07

    Do they really think the criminals will be abiding by the law and throw away their stones, knives, guns etc? No, the law-abiding and targeted people will be evgen further disarmed and become an even easier target for the armed criminals. Are they not already confronting anyone walking around with a crossbow or a sword? No wonder we have the highest murder count in the world if they are not doing that already.

  • Sisie - 2011-09-27 11:08

    "Unfortunate overreaction" - who are they trying to fool. Same as the stupid comment " Shoot to Kill" also got a bit heavy handed. This government must think that the whole populace of SA are uneducated & stupid.

  • guytom - 2011-09-27 11:09

    This country ... eish

  • crackerr - 2011-09-27 11:19

    "If someone is carrying a dangerous weapon in suspicious circumstances, using their private defence as an excuse will not be acceptable," he said. ______________________________________________________________________ No. The proposed law goes far too far. Anybody can concoct (even without realizing how self-deceiving) to their heart's content "suspicious" circumstances. And to then exclude self-defense as a factor for consideration is taking it beyond all reasonableness. You are in other words convicted by the law itself without a consideration of all the facts and circumstances by the officer or the court. Nobody says violence must not be fought with all the available power that can be legally mounted. But hell man, this country also consists of run-of-the-mill law abiding citizens who do not deserve to be exposed to harassment and locking up and jail time. After all, the law is supposed to benefit all of us and not just punish us. The more one thinks about this the more disconcerting it becomes. The police now appear to dismiss the concerns raised with a "it's an overreaction". Judged now by what the article says. Blame the citizenry. They are overreacting. Does it never occur to the authorities that the ordinary people could have a valid concern? The proposed law says it in printing for all to see that self-defense will not be a consideration. Intentions and goodwill are not legislated. It is the printed word that goes into legislation and what makes the rules.

  • Noc - 2011-09-27 11:19

    Who cares what a police official says... they're bloody corrupt, not to mention at the bottom of the IQ pool. This is large scale disarmament of the masses, and it's been carrying on for a long time already. For starters now, ONLY criminals will be carrying weapons, leaving good people defenseless. It's not as if we're living in a peaceful country here, but please... carry on debating about toy guns, that's exactly their biggest argument too.

  • jetman - 2011-09-27 11:20

    A great way to get rid of those traditional weapons on strikes.

  • Clarissa - 2011-09-27 11:21

    Okay, so if I get attacked in my driveway in the middle of the night, should I rather use a shampoo bottle as a weapon instead of pepperspray? Oh you plonks make me sick.

  • tripwire - 2011-09-27 11:22

    But as I said Before Kitchen Knives and Axes are Legal !! Come on people where do you stop .. BTW give me my Gun license

  • Question All - 2011-09-27 11:23

    as is the norm, ask the government to come up with a solution and they go to extremes. It is what governments do, and yet we keep asking them to intervene in most spheres of life. It is said that we have the government that we deserve!?

  • KomboKitten - 2011-09-27 11:26


  • Craig44 - 2011-09-27 11:29

    What about a woman getting Raped and she could have saved herself if she had a knife or Pepperspray. It will happen and I hope she sues the Gov/SAPS for every cent they have!!!!. The only way this dimbass Gov/SAPS are going to feel if it hurts their pockets. Stupidity evidently rules!!!

  • Craig44 - 2011-09-27 11:32

    Over reaction????!!!! If a family member or Friend is killed because they could not defend thamselves.... I'm going to come after you.... Jacobs.... Bitch!