Transporting a practice sword in the UK

[D.M. Procida]

A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
"samurai sword").

He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
transport.

Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
Order apply to it?

The sword will be used for teaching and demonstration purposes only. The
instructor will have with him documentation attesting to his purposes, a
letter of invitation, etc.

Does <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110810324/contents>
apply?

Thanks,

Daniele
--
Django Weekend Cardiff, the first-ever Django conference in the UK
Three days of Django/Python talks, tutorials and code sprints

<https://djangoweekend.org/>

[Peter Crosland]

On 06/12/2013 21:15, D.M. Procida wrote:
> A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
> metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
> "samurai sword").
>
> He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
> transport.
>
> Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
> Order apply to it?
>
> The sword will be used for teaching and demonstration purposes only. The
> instructor will have with him documentation attesting to his purposes, a
> letter of invitation, etc.
>
> Does <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110810324/contents>
> apply?

I would suggest the first thing he needs to do is check with his airline
as to their requirements. I assume it needs to be in hold baggage.


--
Peter Crosland

[Gefreiter Krueger]

On Fri, 06 Dec 2013 21:15:04 -0000, D.M. Procida <real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> wrote:

> A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
> metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
> "samurai sword").
>
> He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
> transport.
>
> Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
> Order apply to it?
>
> The sword will be used for teaching and demonstration purposes only. The
> instructor will have with him documentation attesting to his purposes, a
> letter of invitation, etc.
>
> Does <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110810324/contents>
> apply?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Daniele

Only the plane should be a problem, nobody checks on internal public transport. Conceal it!

[D.M. Procida]

Carrying it by air is not going to be a problem - people carry these
things all over Europe all the time.

However, the UK has a special relationship with knives, so it's getting
it into the country and around the country that might be a problem.

[Roger Dewhurst]

The outcome may well depend on the relative stupidity of the official delegated to deal with him.

[Peter Crosland]

On 06/12/2013 23:05, D.M. Procida wrote:
> Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 06/12/2013 21:15, D.M. Procida wrote:
>>> A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
>>> metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
>>> "samurai sword").
>>>
>>> He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
>>> transport.
>>>
>>> Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
>>> Order apply to it?
>>>
>>> The sword will be used for teaching and demonstration purposes only. The
>>> instructor will have with him documentation attesting to his purposes, a
>>> letter of invitation, etc.
>>>
>>> Does <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110810324/contents>
>>> apply?
>>
>> I would suggest the first thing he needs to do is check with his airline
>> as to their requirements. I assume it needs to be in hold baggage.
>
> Carrying it by air is not going to be a problem - people carry these
> things all over Europe all the time.
>
> However, the UK has a special relationship with knives, so it's getting
> it into the country and around the country that might be a problem.

Nevertheless he needs to check with his airline because they should be
able to advise him what the their experience is. Otherwise why not get
him to ask the British Embassy.


--
Peter Crosland

[steve robinson]

If the Sword wether blunt or not is carried in a public place he is
going to attract attention. These incidents will usally result in armed
response officers attending.

Carrying cases are available and it might be advisable that he purchase
one.(shotgun cases may be suitable)

It might be prudent to notify the local plod of any demonstrations he
intends to give possibly invite them along.

[Paul Rudin]

real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) writes:

> A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
> metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
> "samurai sword").
>
> He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
> transport.
>
> Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
> Order apply to it?
>
> The sword will be used for teaching and demonstration purposes only. The
> instructor will have with him documentation attesting to his purposes, a
> letter of invitation, etc.
>
> Does <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110810324/contents>
> apply?

Not something that I've looked at before, but a quick look at Archibold
suggests as follows.

The main relevant offences are having an offensive weapon in a public
place contrary to s1 PCA 1953 or having an article with a blade or point
in a public place contrary to s139 CJA 1988. The sword probably counts
for both purposes. A butter knife with no cutting edge and no point has
been held to be bladed article for the purposes of the latter offence.

However there are a "reasonable excuse" and "good reason" defences
available, which would presumably apply here. There is no significant
difference between the two defences. In the case of the latter offence
there is also a specific "for use at work" defence.

There is also an importation of offensive weapons offence, but that
doesn't yet seem to be in force as far as I can tell. There may be other,
more specific, air travel provisions.

This must be a common issue for such instructors, perhaps the relevant
national organisation has guidance?

[Nightjar]

On 07/12/2013 08:35, steve robinson wrote:
....

> Carrying cases are available and it might be advisable that he purchase

> one.(shotgun cases may be suitable)...

There are specialised katana carrying cases. I would be surprised if
somebody who travelled extensively with a katana did not have a suitable
case to protect the sword.

Colin Bignell

[steve robinson]

The sword however should still be carried in such a manner has not to
cause alarm when being transported as nightjar has already said you can
buy cases for these swords.

It would be akin to me carring a broken shotgun over my shoulder
through new street station , wouldnt go down to well

Given the trial at present where lee rigby was attacked the ops guest
needs to take as many precautions as possible.

>
> There is also an importation of offensive weapons offence, but that
> doesn't yet seem to be in force as far as I can tell. There may be
> other, more specific, air travel provisions.

The act does make provision for some'weapons to be imported on a
tempary basis

>
> This must be a common issue for such instructors, perhaps the relevant
> national organisation has guidance?

Not as common as one would think, we are one of a few countries within
the world that has such strong restrictions.




--

[Stuart Bronstein]

"steve robinson" <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

> If the Sword wether blunt or not is carried in a public place
> he is going to attract attention. These incidents will usally
> result in armed response officers attending.
>
> Carrying cases are available and it might be advisable that he
> purchase one.(shotgun cases may be suitable)

That was my thought, too. Would having it locked be additional
protection from the charge of carrying a weapon?

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[steve robinson]

Yes, if the weapon is secured

--

[D.M. Procida]

I don't think so. Certain classes of weapon are restricted and some are
banned.

A practice sword of this kind seems to be restricted. The clearest
guidance I've found is
<https://www.gov.uk/import-controls-on-offensive-weapons>.

It doesn't make issues of possession any clearer.

This question of attracting attention is a bit of a red herring - the
question's about how the law applies.

[s_pick...@yahoo.com]

On Friday, 6 December 2013 23:05:03 UTC, D.M. Procida wrote:
> Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 06/12/2013 21:15, D.M. Procida wrote:
>
> > > A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
>
> > > metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
>
> > > "samurai sword").
>
> > >
>
> > > He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
>
> > > transport.
>
> > >
>
> > > Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
>
> > > Order apply to it?
>
> > >
>
> > > The sword will be used for teaching and demonstration purposes only. The
>
> > > instructor will have with him documentation attesting to his purposes, a
>
> > > letter of invitation, etc.
>
> > >
>
> > > Does <http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110810324/contents>
>
> > > apply?
>
> >
>
> > I would suggest the first thing he needs to do is check with his airline
>
> > as to their requirements. I assume it needs to be in hold baggage.
>
>
>
> Carrying it by air is not going to be a problem - people carry these
>
> things all over Europe all the time.

Playing with sword is very much a minority activity these days in Europe.

[s_pick...@yahoo.com]

Unless police ask you to go through a metal detector at a railway station. It sometimes happens if certain teams play whose fans have a reputation for violence.

[Adam Funk]

On 2013-12-07, steve robinson wrote:

> D.M. Procida wrote:

>> Carrying it by air is not going to be a problem - people carry these
>> things all over Europe all the time.
>>
>> However, the UK has a special relationship with knives, so it's
>> getting it into the country and around the country that might be a
>> problem.

> If the Sword wether blunt or not is carried in a public place he is
> going to attract attention. These incidents will usally result in armed
> response officers attending.
>
> Carrying cases are available and it might be advisable that he purchase
> one.(shotgun cases may be suitable)

Ummmm, because the shotgun case won't draw attention?

[Gefreiter Krueger]

I thought all fans had a reputation for violence.

[Stuart Bronstein]

(D.M. Procida) wrote:

> This question of attracting attention is a bit of a red herring
> - the question's about how the law applies.

My thought was that having it in a locked carrying case makes it more
time consuming to get to, thus making it less of a usable weapon.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[steve robinson]

A gun bag might a wooden case is unlikely to

--

[Matt Larkin]

Surely this is no different from heading into Tesco's, buying a large and very sharp kitchen knife (for domestic culinary use) and carrying on public transport in a plastic bag on the way home.

Matt

[steve robinson]

A very large and very sharp kitchen knife will have a blade of around
12 inches max, its itended use is not for fighting. The sword on the
other hand is designed for combat probably a lot larger too

--

[D.M. Procida]

steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

> Matt Larkin wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, 7 December 2013 12:05:02 UTC, steve robinson wrote:
> > > Paul Rudin wrote:
> > >
> > > > real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida)
> > > > writes:
> > >
> > > > > A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his
> > > > > iaito - a metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the
> > > > > form of a katana (a "samurai sword").
> > >
> >

> > Surely this is no different from heading into Tesco's, buying a large
> > and very sharp kitchen knife (for domestic culinary use) and carrying
> > on public transport in a plastic bag on the way home.
> >
> > Matt
>
> A very large and very sharp kitchen knife will have a blade of around
> 12 inches max, its itended use is not for fighting. The sword on the
> other hand is designed for combat probably a lot larger too

As I explained, the sword is not designed for fighting or combat, but
for practise. It has no cutting edge, and it's made from a soft metal.

If it *did* have a proper blade manufactured in the traditional way from
steel, it *wouldn't* be subject to the same restrictions, despite being
a real weapon.

[D.M. Procida]

Matt Larkin <matthew...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, 7 December 2013 12:05:02 UTC, steve robinson wrote:
> > Paul Rudin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) writes:
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito
> > > > - a metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a
> > > > katana (a "samurai sword").

> Surely this is no different from heading into Tesco's, buying a large
> and very sharp kitchen knife (for domestic culinary use) and carrying
> on public transport in a plastic bag on the way home.

It's different because the iaito is not for domestic culinary use; it's
a sword, albeit one without a sharpened blade (it's completely blunt).

It's also different because that kind of sword is specifically
restricted by the legislation.

It's about as dangerous as a metal shovel, which is to say pretty
dangerous if you're going to hit someone with it, and not dangerous if
you aren't. In that respect it's not very different from a knife either.

[Matt Larkin]

That was my point.

[D.M. Procida]

Matt Larkin <matthew...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That was my point.

What was your point?

If you don't quote what you're replying to, no-one can tell what you're
talking about.

[Matt Larkin]

Apologies, didn't realise GG on Android failed to quote.

My point was that carrying a kitchen knife home from the shops with innocent intent is the same as carrying a specifically prohibited (but blunt) item. Though the harm which could be caused by either is probably fairly signficant, in the same way that harm could be caused by using a spade.

It's the intent that crystallises the offence, isn't it?

[Roland Perry]

In message <87lhzsa...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 12:10:03 on Tue, 10
Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:

>> It's the intent that crystallises the offence, isn't it?
>

>No, unless you arguing that one can be unaware of carrying a prohibited
>blade (which is different from being unaware that the blade you are
>carrying is prohibited).

Can of course be both. I've seen people pulled over at airports unaware
*both* that a particular 'sharp item' was prohibited *and* that they had
the particular example lost in a fold in the bottom of their luggage.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <878uvsa...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 13:10:02 on Tue, 10

Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
>>>> It's the intent that crystallises the offence, isn't it?
>>>
>>>No, unless you arguing that one can be unaware of carrying a prohibited
>>>blade (which is different from being unaware that the blade you are
>>>carrying is prohibited).
>>
>> Can of course be both. I've seen people pulled over at airports
>> unaware *both* that a particular 'sharp item' was prohibited *and*
>> that they had the particular example lost in a fold in the bottom of
>> their luggage.
>

>However, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139 makes no mention of doing
>it "knowingly": "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." Simp,y having the item is an
>offence, even if you are unaware of having it.

Excellent way to incriminate someone - just slip a suitable penknife
into a dark corner of their car, then arrange for it to be stopped by
the police.
--
Roland Perry

[Francis Davey]

Le mardi 10 décembre 2013 13:20:05 UTC, Roland Perry a écrit :
>
> Excellent way to incriminate someone - just slip a suitable penknife
>
> into a dark corner of their car, then arrange for it to be stopped by
>
> the police.
>

A more extreme example is in Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent where a conviction for being found drunk in a highway was upheld even though the defendant was taken there unconscious by the police:

http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/courses/la205_criminal_law_and_procedure_1/cases/Winzar_v_Chief_Constable.html

It makes more sense in context of course, but it is rather weird.

Francis

[Paul Rudin]

Matt Larkin <matthew...@gmail.com> writes:

> Apologies, didn't realise GG on Android failed to quote.
>
> My point was that carrying a kitchen knife home from the shops with innocent
> intent is the same as carrying a specifically prohibited (but blunt) item.
> Though the harm which could be caused by either is probably fairly signficant,
> in the same way that harm could be caused by using a spade.
>
> It's the intent that crystallises the offence, isn't it?

Not quite - it's whether you have a reasonable excuse (or good reason)
for carrying the item in question in a public place. AIUI the offence
doesn't have a mens rea element - you can commit it simply by performing
the actus reus of having the item in a public place.

If I habitually carry a knife with absolutely *no intention* of ever
using it I commit the offence if I don't have a good reason why I'm
carrying it.

On the other hand if I carry a knife because (for example) I'm going
hiking and I know that it's handy for cutting an ad hoc walking stick on
the way then that may well count as a good reason so the defence might
apply.

[Matt Larkin]

On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 13:10:02 UTC, August West wrote:

> However, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139 makes no mention of doing
>
> it "knowingly": "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." Simp,y having the item is an
>

> offence, even if you are unaware of having it. [(4) is the "good reason
>
> or lawful authority" defence, and (5) is the work or religious reasons
>
> and national costume defences.]
>
>
>
> The only room for doubt in this section is the precise meaning of
>
> "public place" (the definition in s.139(7) notwithstanding.)
>
>
>
> --
>
> you're still doin' things that I gave up years ago

Is there a (practical) difference between committing an offence with a valid, statutory defence, and not committing the offence?

e.g. the practice sword can be carried in a public place (offence committed) with the "valid reason" defence. Result = no conviction <> no offence committed.

The kitchen knife analogy is the same - CJA88 makes it illegal to carry an offensive weapon in a public place without valid reason. S139 describes the offence of carrying "any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed" but then offers statutory defences in terms of "good reason" or "lawful authority" (plus named defences in terms of work, religion or national costume). No different in practice to the large sword example other than as the sword may fall into the category of offensive weapons the sanction is more significant and the categories of potential defence are more narrowly (and explicitly) stated.

Matt

[Steve Walker]

"D.M. Procida" <real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> wrote in
message
news:1ldh68i.15wto6g15eil84N%real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk...

> A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
> metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana (a
> "samurai sword").
>

> He will be travelling to the UK by air, and in the UK by public
> transport.
>
> Are there going to be problems? And how would the Offensive Weapons
> Order apply to it?

Box it and send ahead by DHL, would be simplest.

[Chris R]

>
>
> "August West" wrote in message news:878uvsa...@news2.kororaa.com...

>
>
> The entity calling itself Roland Perry wrote:
> >

> > In message <87lhzsa...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 12:10:03 on Tue, 10
> > Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
> >>> It's the intent that crystallises the offence, isn't it?

> However, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139 makes no mention of doing
> it "knowingly": "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." Simp,y having the item is an
> offence, even if you are unaware of having it. [(4) is the "good reason
> or lawful authority" defence, and (5) is the work or religious reasons
> and national costume defences.]
>
> The only room for doubt in this section is the precise meaning of
> "public place" (the definition in s.139(7) notwithstanding.)
>

Is that confirmed by case law? I don't know, but usually the statute will be
interpreted to include an element of mens rea - eg in drugs possession
cases, if I remember rightly, you have to know that something is there even
if you don't know it is a controlled drug.
--
Chris R

========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======

[Chris R]

>
>
> "August West" wrote in message news:87y53r7...@news2.kororaa.com...

>
>
> The entity calling itself Chris R wrote:
> >
> >> However, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.139 makes no mention of doing
> >> it "knowingly": "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." Simp,y having the item is an
> >> offence, even if you are unaware of having it. [(4) is the "good reason
> >> or lawful authority" defence, and (5) is the work or religious reasons
> >> and national costume defences.]
> >>
> >> The only room for doubt in this section is the precise meaning of
> >> "public place" (the definition in s.139(7) notwithstanding.)
> >>
> > Is that confirmed by case law?
>

> I don't know of any cases wither confirming the absolute nature of the
> lse, or reading in a "knowingly" (and if I did, it would irrelevant to
> you, as it would be Scottish). In the recent climate of blade crime
> panic, the interpretation of knife laws, at least in Scotland, are
> pretty harsh. And that's all the way up, from police to COPFS to bench.

>
> > I don't know, but usually the statute will be interpreted to include
> > an element of mens rea - eg in drugs possession cases, if I remember
> > rightly, you have to know that something is there even if you don't
> > know it is a controlled drug.
>

> That generalisation is, I think less true in Scotland (the two criminal
> systems are only coupled at the top, via common legislation; otherwise
> they go entirely different ways).
>
> Anyway, since the blades in question are (a) above 3" long, (b) normally
> carried on the person, I suspect that convincing a judge (as it's
> usually a summary offence, at least in Scotland) that you "didnae ken
> aboot it" is little more than a distant hope.
>
Indeed; it's the "even if you are unaware of having it" I was querying, but
I don't know the answer.
--
Chris R

[Roland Perry]

In message <87y53r7...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 12:10:02 on Wed, 11

Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:

>Anyway, since the blades in question are (a) above 3" long, (b) normally
>carried on the person, I suspect that convincing a judge (as it's
>usually a summary offence, at least in Scotland) that you "didnae ken
>aboot it" is little more than a distant hope

Didn't someone get stopped in Central London with a similarly sized item
in the boot of his car? Which could have been put there without him
knowing.
--
Roland Perry

[Martin Bonner]

On Friday, December 6, 2013 9:15:04 PM UTC, D.M. Procida wrote:
> A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
> metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana
> (a "samurai sword").
>

> Are there going to be problems?

I asked a friend who does medieval reenactments. He says:

"I've travelled by air and put weapons in the hold luggage with
suitable supporting paraphernalia (medieval clothes, flyer for the
event I'm going to just in case) - my swords are also blunt. I'm
not aware of an issue. Never had any issues - although mail in
hand luggage confused them a bit as it is a big black blob on xray.

In the UK a blunt sword is treated as sporting goods - don't wave
it around in a public place. It really is just a decorative baseball
bat. In a sports hall or travelling to and from it's going to be fine."

Note: That's a practical analysis rather than a legal one.

[Roland Perry]

In message <87ppp37...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 12:55:05 on Wed, 11

Dec 2013, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:

>I susopect you were thinking of the Nicky Samengo-Turner case. He was
>found not guilty.

That's the one.
--
Roland Perry

[D.M. Procida]

Martin Bonner <martin...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Friday, December 6, 2013 9:15:04 PM UTC, D.M. Procida wrote:
> > A visiting instructor to the UK wishes to bring with him his iaito - a
> > metal practice sword, without a cutting edge, in the form of a katana
> > (a "samurai sword").
>

> I asked a friend who does medieval reenactments. He says:
>
> "I've travelled by air and put weapons in the hold luggage with
> suitable supporting paraphernalia (medieval clothes, flyer for the
> event I'm going to just in case) - my swords are also blunt. I'm
> not aware of an issue. Never had any issues - although mail in
> hand luggage confused them a bit as it is a big black blob on xray.
>
> In the UK a blunt sword is treated as sporting goods

... unless it's in the form of a katana, unfortunately!