Whats "legal" in the UK.
Cybermoose
What is legal to carry in the UK? Ive been told that a lock knife (im right
in thinking this is a knife whos blade folds into its handle and "locks"
into position when not in the handle) with a 3inch or less blade is ok to
carry.
Thanks.
Jeepnik
UK is to die. Should you protest in any manner the attempt to take your
life, you WILL be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
"Cybermoose" <Cyber...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:lcQN8.14407$sC4.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
Scott Leckey
"Cybermoose" <Cyber...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:lcQN8.14407$sC4.1...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
From the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (HMSO website):
Articles with blades or points and offensive weapons
Offence of having article with blade or point in public place.
139.-(1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) below, any person who
has an article to which this section applies with him in a public place
shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any article
which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding pocketknife.
(3) This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the cutting edge of
its blade exceeds 3 inches.
(4) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under
this section to prove that he had good reason or lawful authority for having
the article with him in a public place.
(5) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (4) above, it
shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section
to prove that he had the article with him-
(a) for use at work;
(b) for religious reasons; or
(c) as part of any national costume.
(6) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) above shall be
liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard
scale.
(7) In this section "public place" includes any place to which at the
material time the public have or are permitted access, whether on payment or
otherwise.
Although not specified above, my understanding is that "folding knife" means
just that, i.e. the blade does not, repeat not lock in the "open" position.
Essentially, your Swiss Army knife is legal (unless used criminally, but
that's another story....); your CRKT M16, Emerson Commander, Cold Steel
Recon etc. are NOT legal.
Best wishes,
Scott Leckey
Mike Y.
because "All Lockknives are illegal in the UK". I carried it
throughout my weeklong trip through london, it was only a problem when
my bags were scanned getting onto the eurostar back to paris and I was
given the option to surrender it or face arrest for weapons charges...
hth
Mike Y.
kalis
> In April, my ~1.5" spyderco dragonfly was taken by british police
> because "All Lockknives are illegal in the UK". I carried it
> throughout my weeklong trip through london, it was only a problem when
> my bags were scanned getting onto the eurostar back to paris and I was
> given the option to surrender it or face arrest for weapons charges...
>
> hth
>
Can't we all just yell, "Oh Bloody 'ell" !
Mike
Carl.
news:ae9kat$kg9$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Although not specified above, my understanding is that "folding knife"
means
> just that, i.e. the blade does not, repeat not lock in the "open"
position.
Since when does "folding knife" mean it doesn't lock?
Simon Rose
dangerous to ones fingers!
Simon
"Carl." <Kronk...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:H89O8.8296$9b.5...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
Lou
"Chris Malcolm" <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ah7ahq$sps$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> mye...@hotmail.com (Mike Y.) writes:
>
> >In April, my ~1.5" spyderco dragonfly was taken by british police
> >because "All Lockknives are illegal in the UK". I carried it
> >throughout my weeklong trip through london, it was only a problem when
> >my bags were scanned getting onto the eurostar back to paris and I was
> >given the option to surrender it or face arrest for weapons charges...
>
> arrest" with a Spyderco Endura twice (both a lock knife and > 3 inch
> blade). In each case when they saw that I knew the law they declined
> to arrest me and I kept the knife.
>
> I suspect that no UK police and very few UK lawyers actually know the
> law.
> --
> Chris Malcolm c...@dai.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 650 3085
> School of Artificial Intelligence, Division of Informatics
> Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/daidb/people/homes/cam/ ] DoD #205
Some cops in the US try to twist the law and confiscate knives too,
especially if they like the knife. Cops must have some pretty big personal
knife collections.
Carl.
I hope you don't have any knives bigger than your hand, as every cop "knows"
that would be illegal!
Lou
I once had a cop tell me that he could confiscate any knife if I "had a bad
feeling" about the person carrying. It was, according to him, totally up to
his discretion.
Carl.
The problem is that cops are (apparently) not required to read the penal
code. A bit of law school would help too. Not a doctorate mind you, but
maybe one of those crummy 2-year community college certificates or
something. It seems as if they are trained at the academy to be better at
arresting/harassing people than they are at being able to tell if someone is
actually a criminal.
Scott Leckey
"Chris Malcolm" <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ah7ahq$sps$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> mye...@hotmail.com (Mike Y.) writes:
>
> >because "All Lockknives are illegal in the UK". I carried it
> >throughout my weeklong trip through london, it was only a problem when
> >my bags were scanned getting onto the eurostar back to paris and I was
> >given the option to surrender it or face arrest for weapons charges...
>
> arrest" with a Spyderco Endura twice (both a lock knife and > 3 inch
> blade). In each case when they saw that I knew the law they declined
> to arrest me and I kept the knife.
>
> I suspect that no UK police and very few UK lawyers actually know the
> law.
> --
> Chris Malcolm c...@dai.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 650 3085
> School of Artificial Intelligence, Division of Informatics
> Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/daidb/people/homes/cam/ ] DoD #205
Although not specified above, my understanding is that "folding knife" means
just that, i.e. the blade does not, repeat not lock in the "open" position.
Carl.
> (b) for religious reasons; or
We need to start a religion in which the only requirement for eternal
paradise is that we carry a 10" dagger in the mortal world.
Kit Lewis
Scott Leckey wrote in message ...
>
>Although not specified above, my understanding is that "folding knife"
means
>just that, i.e. the blade does not, repeat not lock in the "open" position.
>Essentially, your Swiss Army knife is legal (unless used criminally, but
>that's another story....); your CRKT M16, Emerson Commander, Cold Steel
>Recon etc. are NOT legal.
That's about the best summary of the law as it stands, except to say that
you can have a locking knife on your person if you have a 'good reason'.
It's worth noting that the non-locking law makes it technically unlawful to
carry my Leatherman wave unless I have a 'good reason'.
Regards
Kit Lewis
Wraith
"Kit Lewis" <k...@kitlewis.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ahdrq6$8b$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
If you don't mind my asking, do you carry the Wave regularly, and have you
ever gotten any grief for doing so? I carry a Wave constantly, and I've
been thinking about going back to the UK for some sightseeing, but I'd
rather not get arrested.
Wraith,
It's just a quirk of mine.
Robert Kiessling
> This is how they frighten you. I've faced dwon the "surrender or face
> arrest" with a Spyderco Endura twice (both a lock knife and > 3 inch
> blade). In each case when they saw that I knew the law they declined
> to arrest me and I kept the knife.
Which "good reason" did you provide for carrying the knife?
Robert
Gyppo
<wrai...@sc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>If you don't mind my asking, do you carry the Wave regularly, and have you
>ever gotten any grief for doing so? I carry a Wave constantly, and I've
>been thinking about going back to the UK for some sightseeing, but I'd
>rather not get arrested.
As I've said before when this question crops up
about legality and everyday carry in the UK.
Discretion, discretion, and more discretion.
There aren't that many metal detectors in everyday
use, and what the law can't see the law can't grieve -
or give you grief - over. Getting in past customs may
be a different problem though.
Gyppo
John Craggs Writer - Adult Tutor - Storyteller
and All Round Rogue
Need a laugh? Then subscribe to The Monday Silly Digest
Mail to: gy...@cwcom.net MSD SUB as Subject line, please
Jason Ediger
Gyppo wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:32:59 GMT, "Wraith"
> <wrai...@sc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >If you don't mind my asking, do you carry the Wave regularly, and have you
> >ever gotten any grief for doing so? I carry a Wave constantly, and I've
> >been thinking about going back to the UK for some sightseeing, but I'd
> >rather not get arrested.
>
> As I've said before when this question crops up
> about legality and everyday carry in the UK.
>
> Discretion, discretion, and more discretion.
>
> There aren't that many metal detectors in everyday
> use, and what the law can't see the law can't grieve -
> or give you grief - over. Getting in past customs may
> be a different problem though.
Wrap it up and tell them it's a gift for a friend. You then have a legitimate
reason to be carrying the knife. Afterall, it's not illegal to possess. Just
to be carrying in public without a good reason.
J
Andrew McGleish
"Scott Leckey" <sc...@leckey302.fsnet.co.uk>
snipped >
> Although not specified above, my understanding is that "folding
knife" means
> just that, i.e. the blade does not, repeat not lock in the "open"
position.
> Essentially, your Swiss Army knife is legal (unless used criminally,
but
> that's another story....); your CRKT M16, Emerson Commander, Cold
Steel
> Recon etc. are NOT legal.
>
As a Leatherman Wave user I'm interested to find out more about the
locking blade issue since the Act itself doesn't specifically mention
it, Are there any legal precedents etc online?
Andrew
Scott Leckey
"Andrew McGleish" <amcg...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:ahhcrt$n8v$1...@chilli.nntp.netline.net.uk...
I hope the article below answers your question,
All the best,
Scott Leckey
HARRIS v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS; FEHMI v SAME
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
[1993] 1 All ER 562, [1993] 1 WLR 82, 96 Cr App Rep 235, 157 JP 205
HEARING-DATES: 21 July 1992
21 July 1992
CATCHWORDS:
Crime -- Offensive weapon -- Article with blade -- Lock knife -- Capable of
being folded only on pressing button to release lock -- Whether "folding
pocketknife" -- Criminal Justice Act 1988 (c 33), s 139
HEADNOTE:
For the purposes of section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 a "folding
pocketknife" is a knife which is readily and immediately foldable at all
times simply by the folding process.
Where, therefore, defendants were each convicted of an offence contrary to
section 139 of having with him in a public place without good reason or
lawful authority a "lock knife" which could only be refolded by the pressing
of a button to release a locking mechanism, and the defendants appealed on
the grounds that the knives were folding pocketknives which, being less than
three inches in length, could lawfully be carried in a public place:-
Held, dismissing the appeals, that lock knives were not folding pocketknives
for the purposes of section 139 and the defendants had been rightly
convicted (post, p 87E-F).
CASES-REF-TO:
No cases are referred to in the judgment or were cited in argument.
INTRODUCTION:
HARRIS v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION
CASE STATED by the Wells Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate.
On 31 December 1990 an information was preferred by the Director of Public
Prosecutions against the defendant, John Harris, that he on 3 November 1990
at Prebend Street, Islington had with him without good reason or lawful
authority an article which had a blade or was sharply pointed, namely a lock
knife, contrary to section 139(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
The metropolitan stipendiary magistrate, Mr Alan C Baldwin, heard the
information on 15 February 1991 and found the following facts. (a) A police
officer saw the defendant in a motor vehicle in Prebend Street at about 8.30
pm on 3 November 1990. (b) The motor vehicle was stopped by the officer who
asked to search the defendant and his car. (c) The defendant then produced a
silver pointed lock knife, which was less than three inches long, from his
inside jacket pocket.
The statement of Police Constable 355 ND Alan Earl was tendered in evidence
under section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967. His evidence was that on
Saturday 3 November 1990 at about 8.50 pm he was on duty in full uniform
with WPC 529 ND Vie driving an unmarked police car in Basire Street, London,
N1. He saw a grey VW Gold GTI motor car index D819 OWG travelling south in
front and indicated for the car to stop. When the vehicle stopped he
observed that there were two occupants, the defendant who was the driver and
a female passenger. He saw the defendant who appeared to be fiddling or
concealing something near the handbrake area. PC Earl spoke to the
defendant, and advised him that he was going to search him and the car for
anything he may unlawfully have hidden. He asked the defendant to empty his
pockets, and the defendant produced a silver three inch long pointed lock
knife from his inside jacket pocket. This knife was produced to the court as
exhibit 1. The officer took the knife, opened it and saw that it had a
pointed blade and that it locked in the fully open position. The defendant
was cautioned and was asked why he had the knife. The defendant said that he
had it for cutting leaves in the garden. The defendant was dressed in a very
smart blazer, shirt and trousers, and confirmed that he was going out for
the evening. The officer invited him to explain why he had the knife with
him, and said to him "Well I think it's for your own protection." The
defendant replied "Yeah, if you want." The defendant was arrested for
possession of an offensive weapon, cautioned, and made no reply. He was then
taken to Islington Police Station where he was
charged and cautioned. (Although the defendant was originally charged with
the offence of possession of an offensive weapon, contrary to section 1(1)
of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 and elected jury trial, the prosecutor
offered no evidence in relation to that charge and preferred a charge
contrary to section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The prosecutor
made a formal admission under section 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967
that the weapon exhibited had a blade less than three inches long. The
evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecutor was not disputed by the
defendant.
At the conclusion of the prosecution case, the defendant submitted that
there was no case to answer, on the basis that the knife was a folding
pocketknife and that the cutting edge of its blade was less than three
inches in length, so that the knife did not fall within the provisions of
section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
The magistrate was referred to the definition of a pocketknife and a
penknife as set out in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed (1944),
vol II at pp 1530 and 1464 which are as follows. Pocketknife: "A knife with
one or more blades which fold into the handle, for carrying in the pocket."
Penknife: "A small knife, usually carried in the pocket, used originally for
making and mending quill pens. (Formerly provided with a sheath; now made
with a jointed blade or blades which fit inside the handle when closed.)"
The magistrate was of the opinion that it could not be said that this lock
knife was a folding pocketknife. Accordingly the magistrate rejected the
submission advanced on behalf of the defendant. The defendant called no
evidence, and the magistrate convicted him in relation to the information.
The question for the opinion of the High Court was whether the magistrate
was right in law to find that a folding knife carried in the pocket having a
pointed blade of less than three inches in length and capable of being
secured in an open position by a locking device was not a folding
pocketknife within the meaning of section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act
1988.
FEHMI v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
CASE STATED by Thames justices.
On 2 November 1990 an information was laid by an officer of the metropolitan
police against the defendant, Ahmet Fehmi, that he on 14 September 1990 at
Bethnal Green Road, London, E2 had with him in a public place without good
reason or lawful authority an article with a blade or sharp point namely a
blade, contrary to section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
The information was heard by the justices on 3 October 1991 when the
justices were asked as a preliminary issue to examine the knife the subject
of the charge and to rule whether they considered it an article the carrying
of which in a public place was prohibited by section 139.
The justices examined the article and found as facts: (a) that the article
was a knife with a blade the cutting edge of which was less than three
inches; (b) that the blade was capable of being folded; (c) that when the
blade was fully opened it automatically locked in that position; (d) that to
fold the blade back into the handle it was necessary to activate a button
triggered mechanism; (e) that the knife was not a folding pocketknife within
the meaning of section 139(3); (f) that the knife was an article which had a
blade or was sharply pointed within the meaning of section 139(2).
It was contended by the prosecutor that the mechanism which locked the blade
in the open position was such as to render the knife not one which the
provisions of the said section permitted to be carried lawfully in a public
place.
It was contended by the defendant that the knife was one which could
lawfully be carried in a public place notwithstanding the existence of the
locking mechanism. If Parliament had intended otherwise, the statute would
so state.
The justices were not referred to any cases.
The justices found as a fact that the knife was one the carrying of which in
a public place was an offence under section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act
1988. The justices directed that the knife be retained by the prosecutor so
that it would be available for any further proceedings. The justices
convicted the defendant.
The question for the opinion of the High Court was whether the justices'
finding that the knife was one the carrying of which in a public place was
an offence was a correct determination or decision in law.
COUNSEL:
Bryan McGuire for the defendant Harris; Laurence Giovene for the defendant
Fehmi; John McGuinness for the Director of Public Prosecutions.
PANEL: McCowan LJ, Popplewell J
JUDGMENTBY-1: MCCOWAN LJ
JUDGMENT-1:
MCCOWAN LJ: These are two appeals by way of case stated which have been
heard together because they raise a single point. The first is an appeal by
John Harris. In his case an information was preferred by the Director of
Public Prosecutions against him, that on 3 November 1990 at Prebend Street,
Islington, he had with him without good reason or lawful authority an
article which had a blade or was sharply pointed, namely, a lock knife,
contrary to section 139(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. At the
conclusion of the prosecution's case, the defendant submitted that there was
no case to answer on the basis that the knife was a folding pocketknife and
that the cutting edge of its blade was less than three inches in length, so
that the knife did not fall within the provisions of section 139 of the Act.
The case was heard by Mr Alan C Baldwin, metropolitan stipendiary
magistrate, sitting at Wells Street on 15 February 1991. In the case stated
he says he was: "of the opinion that it could not be said that this lock
knife was a folding pocketknife. Accordingly I rejected the submission
advanced on behalf of the defendant. The defendant called no evidence, and I
convicted him in relation to the information."
The question for the opinion of the High Court is:
"whether [the magistrate] was right in law to find that a folding knife
carried in the pocket having a pointed blade of less than three inches in
length and capable of being secured in an open position by a locking device
was not a folding pocketknife within the meaning of section 139 of the
Criminal Justice Act 1988?"
The other defendant is Mr Ahmet Fehmi. In his case an information was laid
against him, that on 14 September 1990 at Bethnal Green Road, London, E2, he
had with him in a public place, without good reason or lawful authority, an
article with a blade or sharp point, namely a blade, contrary to the same
section 139 of the same Act. The case is stated by justices for the Thames
Division who tried the case on 3 October 1991. They were asked as a
preliminary issue to examine the knife, the subject of the charge, and to
rule whether they considered it an article, the carrying of which in a
public place was prohibited by section 139. They did examine it and they
found these facts:
"(a) that the article was a knife with a blade the cutting edge of which was
less than three inches; (b) that the blade was capable of being folded; (c)
that when the blade was fully opened it automatically locked in that
position; (d) that to fold the blade back into the handle it was necessary
to activate a button triggered mechanism."
It appears that it was contended by the prosecution that the mechanism which
locked the knife in the open position was such as to render the knife not
one which the provisions of section 139 permitted to be carried lawfully in
a public place. The justices found that the knife was one, the carrying of
which in a public place was an offence under section 139, and they state the
question for the opinion of the High Court is:
"whether in finding as we did that the knife was one the carrying of which
in a public place is an offence was a correct determination or decision in
law?"
We were shown one of the knives in question, there being no difference
between the two. What we observed was that when you first open it manually
you cannot then fold it back. You have first to press a button on it in
order to fold it back, so that when fully opened, the result is that it
requires to be unlocked.
I look next at section 139 in so far as it is relevant:
"(1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) below, any person who has an article
to which this section applies with him in a public place shall be guilty of
an offence. (2) Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any
article which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding
pocketknife. (3) This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the
cutting edge of its blade exceeds three inches."
Appearing for Mr Harris, Mr McGuire said that the only question in the case
is whether the presence of the locking mechanism is sufficient to prevent it
being a folding pocketknife. He points out that this is a penal statute and,
accordingly, he submits, clear words are required. They are not, he says.
There is nothing in the section which says that the presence or absence of a
locking device affects the matter. The court asked him how far he took the
argument. What, for example, of a knife which required a screw driver to
undo a screw before it could be unlocked and folded back into the closed
position? His answer was that it would be still a folding knife because it
could be, albeit by a somewhat lengthy process, folded away. Again, the
court asked him what he submitted was the thinking behind the statute. He
accepted in this context that it does make a difference if the knife can be
folded readily away. He accepted that it is obviously a more effective
stabbing weapon if it is locked, for the very plain reason that without a
lock there is a dangerous tendency, dangerous, that is to say, from the
point of view of the wielder, to fold on to the wielder's hand.
Mr Giovene appeared for the other defendant, Mr Fehmi. His arguments were
somewhat different. He stressed the other side of the coin. He submits that
it is not more dangerous for being locked. He says that from the point of
view of the user, it is much safer because it will not come back upon his
hand. Mr Giovene went so far as to describe it as a safety device. Again, he
would not agree with Mr McGuire about the screw to which I referred a little
while ago, because Mr Giovene says that the section covers manual folding,
and if it is necessary to use a screw driver in order to undo the locking
device, then, this is mechanical folding and not manual folding. There was
some discussion about what is called a switch blade. As I understand it,
that means that by pressing a button a blade will automatically fold
outwards and, again, by pressing a button, it will automatically fold in
again. Since this is a pivotal device and Mr Giovene was stressing the
element of pivoting, I asked him why that would not cover the switch blade.
His answer is that it does not cover the switch blade because the section is
concerned to cover manual folding and not mechanical folding.
For my part, I cannot accept his argument in this respect, because that
would certainly involve importing a number of additional words into the
section. His basic argument, as I have already indicated, is that to fold
the blade it has to have a pivot. If it is pivoted, he asked rhetorically,
how can it be said that because it has a locking device it is no longer a
folding pocketknife? Two hands, he stresses, are required to open this type
of knife. That sharply differentiates it from a flick knife. The locking
device, he submits, cannot change the nature of the animal. The question is
whether it folds open and folds shut.
For the Director of Public Prosecutions in each case, Mr McGuinness answers
the question from the court as to the thinking behind the statute by saying
this. When the knife is locked it becomes in effect a fixed blade knife and
the intention of the statute is to prevent the carrying of such a knife. I
accept that point.
In my judgment, the right approach to the matter is this. To be a folding
pocketknife the knife has to be readily and indeed immediately foldable at
all times, simply by the folding process. A knife of the type with which
these appeals are concerned is not in this category because, in the first
place, there is a stage, namely, when it has been opened, when it is not
immediately foldable simply by the folding process and, secondly, it
requires that further process, namely, the pressing of the button.
For these reasons, I would give the answer to the questions in each case,
that the tribunals were right to find as they did, and I would dismiss the
appeals.
JUDGMENTBY-2: POPPLEWELL J
JUDGMENT-2:
POPPLEWELL J: I agree.
DISPOSITION:
Appeals dismissed.
SOLICITORS:
Rance & Co; R Voss & Son; Crown Prosecution Service, Inner London.
Andrew McGleish
Oh Bum, back to the Swiss Army Knife then!
Andrew
Cybermoose
>
>
> Oh Bum, back to the Swiss Army Knife then!
nah, carry your favourite knife that aint to scary. If you get caught with
it, justify how it wont be used to commit crime cause you would be carrying
your "insert big scary knife name" for that.
dskmanch
Hi guys - got into this a bit late.
According to the letter of the law - it is illegal to own either a
butterfly knife or flick knife (ie spring driven blade). It is not
illegal to own any other knife including lock knives. It is, however
illegal to carry any knife with a blade that locks. So even my Spydie
ladybug on the keys is technically illegal. It is also illegal to
carry any fixed blade knife with a blade longer than 2 inches. Of
course, carrying your kitchen knife with the intent of using it
illegally would be illegal too - try explaining to the friendly copper
why you need a 12" carving knife at 2am and you'll be doing better
than I.
The other way around it is to justify carrying it. So a folding,
locking knife like Spydies fisherman would be fine as long as you were
going fishing. If you were in the medical profession I would argue
that even something like the CRKT bearclaw (with blunt tip) could
easily be justified in casae you came across an accident scene and
needed to cut someone out of their seatbelt. There are other knives
intended for this purpose which should be just as easy to justify. The
little ladybug could then be justified - in the event you happened
across a choking person and the Heimlich manoever did not work - you'd
have to perform an emergency cricothyroidotomy.
The best bet is to carry something small that could be justified and
to know the letter of the law.
Regards
David
Wraith
"dskmanch" <dsoc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8158853.02072...@posting.google.com...
> Robert Kiessling <Robert.K...@de.easynet.net> wrote in message
news:<x5u1mtd...@doncamillo.local.easynet.de>...
> > c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
> >
> According to the letter of the law - it is illegal to own either a
> butterfly knife or flick knife (ie spring driven blade). It is not
> illegal to own any other knife including lock knives. It is, however
> illegal to carry any knife with a blade that locks. So even my Spydie
> ladybug on the keys is technically illegal. It is also illegal to
> carry any fixed blade knife with a blade longer than 2 inches. Of
> course, carrying your kitchen knife with the intent of using it
> illegally would be illegal too - try explaining to the friendly copper
> why you need a 12" carving knife at 2am and you'll be doing better
> than I.
>
Interesting...would that mean than an Ernest Emerson "La Griffe" (see
http://www.quickknife.com/emlagrifblac.html) would be legal?
Thanks,
Wraith
dskmanch
Hi
Interesting - it's a lovely looking knife. Very similar to the
bearclaw by CRKT. Technically it is legal to carry this knife. You
could say as it is plain edged it is used to skin your apple or
whatever. If they made one with a blunt tip it could be more easily
argued that it was in case on emergencies with seatbelts etc.
Cheers
David
Wraith
"dskmanch" <dsoc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8158853.02072...@posting.google.com...
> "Wraith" <wrai...@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:<gwX%8.26442$vB3.1...@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
> >
> > http://www.quickknife.com/emlagrifblac.html) would be legal?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Wraith
>
> Hi
>
> Interesting - it's a lovely looking knife. Very similar to the
> bearclaw by CRKT. Technically it is legal to carry this knife. You
> could say as it is plain edged it is used to skin your apple or
> whatever. If they made one with a blunt tip it could be more easily
> argued that it was in case on emergencies with seatbelts etc.
>
I agree - it IS lovely looking. I'm beginning to see the loopholes in this
law. Thanks much for the advice.
Regards,
Wraith
Scott Leckey
The "La Griffe" would *not* be legal for every-day carry. I repeat below the
section of the act that's relevant:
"Offence of having article with blade or point in public place.
139.-(1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) below, any person who
has an article to which this section applies with him in a public place
shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any article
which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding pocketknife."
If the blade does not fold, its length is academic. It is illegal for
every-day carry. If the blade does fold, its maximum length is 3". There is
no mention in the law of a length of 2".
Hope this helps,
Scott Leckey
dskmanch
Hi Scott
Thank you for that. I did read through the law. A policeperson friend
of mine told us about the 2" thing.
However, if you were medical or in the emergency services, I'd
definitely challenge the cop stopping me to the law. The knife in that
case could be justified easily. I'm not talking about Spyderco's
Civilian, but one of the rescue knives they sell for that very
purpose.
I'll have to look into this again - this is just not right at all.
What's that old saying about the law proctecting the criminals. And
the other about if they make guns/knives etc illegal only the bloody
crooks will have them.
Sighs and slopes off to read.
Thanks for the info though.
David
Bill
>"Wraith" <wrai...@sc.rr.com> wrote
>> Interesting...would that mean than an Ernest Emerson "La Griffe" (see
>> http://www.quickknife.com/emlagrifblac.html) would be legal?
>
>Interesting - it's a lovely looking knife. Very similar to the
>bearclaw by CRKT.
If I have my timelines correct, Fred Perrin did this knife first, then
Emerson, then CRKT. And you can still buy all three.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong ;-)
--
Bill H.
my "reply to" address is real