You can get pre-paid credit cards (is that an oxymoron?), anyway, you can get em and you dont have to be 18. There are too many ways round it.
Another Knife Law (Age)
- Thread starter Logical
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
You can get pre-paid credit cards (is that an oxymoron?), anyway, you can get em and you dont have to be 18. There are too many ways round it.
The only thing they could be charged with Robin, is possession of an offensive weapon. A swiss army knife is not designed as a weapon, it's not adapted for use as a weapon, that leaves just intent to use as a weapon. That boils down to their behaviour. If they are well trained and act responsibly, then they are not committing any offence and the police would have an impossible time proving otherwise. Of course if they start waiving the knife at people in a threatening manner, that changes everything.
It's a good idea to take them through a little role play of what to say to a policeman if they get asked about their knives.
I've read this a few times and as far as I can see there is no reason legal or otherwise for me NOT to carry my leatherman wave on my belt.
Am I right or just not reading correctly?
Me too, got a debit card, but how hard would it be for them to add an age check. The banks should do it for some good PR.
The Wave locks so classed as a fixed blade need a good reason to carry it. I carry my charge when on my bike, because that seems to be a good reason to have that. Otherwise stuck with the SAK Huntsman.
There are two laws that could be used against you for this.
The first is case law - Harris v DPP. The Leatherman Wave is a lock knife, it's not illegal per-se, but following "Harris" all lock knives are now viewed in law as being equivalent to a fixed blade knife. So carrying your Leatherman Wave, is no different in legal terms to carrying a Frosts Mora. That means when asked, you must give a police officer a good reason for having it on your person. If the police officer agrees that your reason is a good one, he will let you on your way. If he does not agree your reason is a good one, he can arrest you for possession of a bladed article contrary to section 139 of the 1988 criminal justice act. The obvious problem with this is that some officers will agree with you and let you go, while some officers wont. It's a judgement call on the part of the officer.
The second law you could fall foul of, is the Prevention of Crime Act 1953. This states that...
Obviously a Leatherman wave is not an article made for causing injury, nor is it adapted for causing injury, but it could be intended for causing injury.
This law can be applied to any knife or any object at all. So even if you are carrying an otherwise perfectly legal knife - say a swiss army knife - you can still be arrested for carrying an offensive weapon. However, the police have a very difficult time proving "intent" because they need to show what is in your mind. They usually do this, from the context of the arrest and/or your actions and words - or from a confession "It's fer self defence mate" etc. But ....if the context is benign, you are not agressive or threatening in any way and nobody has had cause to feel threatened by you and you have not made an impromtu confession, this becomes almost impossible to prove.
To complicate matters, if the police have arrested you for possession of an off-weap, but on closer examination realise that there is no evidence to convict you of this, they may offer you a police caution. This gets you home for crossroads, but it comes at a price. What people dont realise is when they get "let off" with a caution, they have to sign a piece of paper "accepting the caution" - which means you are accepting you are guilty - even if their is no evidence. This caution then remains on your police record indefinitely - and would show as "cautioned for possession of an offensive weapon" on a CRB check. You absolutely were in possession of an offensive weapon (because in your eagerness to get home for crossroads, you signed to say you were guilty when you accepted the caution) and you therefore cannot later argue your innocence. So if you are ever offered a caution for carrying an off-weap - REFUSE IT - unless of course, you actually were carrying it as an off-weap, in which case a caution would be getting off lightly. If you refuse the caution and the polce have no evidence, then there is no crime and the police will have to let you go - and return your knife to you - though it may cost you 24 hours in a cell while they think about it - a small price to pay IMO.
Last edited:
I believe this case of accepting a caution would also make it impossible for you to gain your FAC or shotgun licence in later life if you chose to do so, so it is well worth remembering that piece of info. I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't interfere with CRB checks too!
X-posted Phil (while I was editing to insert CRB check info), but you are absolutely correct. No FAC, no shotty licence, no working with kids, no working anywhere a CRB check is required ....and a police caution is not a criminal conviction so it is not subject to the rehabilitation of offenders act ..which means that it never gets scrubbed from your record.
That is a new bit of information, ouch. People have taken cautions for carry legal SAKs.
I think the only exception is if you receive a caution as a minor, it used to get scrubbed after you hit 16 or 18. Can a copper expand/confirm/deny?
I think it's down to each individual force to decide how they manage their cautions, even for minors. I dont think there is any requirement for them to scrub it though - a postcode lottery. I'm not 100% on that though.
nothing gets scrubbed from your record ever with a CRB check anyway, rehabilitation or offenders act or not,
they just show up as SPENT (they are still there, the dates are usially there, and it is noted that they are classed as spend under said act)
wether you are allowed to take spent convictions into account depends on the job but they still show up
they just show up as SPENT (they are still there, the dates are usially there, and it is noted that they are classed as spend under said act)
wether you are allowed to take spent convictions into account depends on the job but they still show up
Your right, nothing ever leaves your record, even more worrying should be on enhanced checks even int on you can be dragged up.
Well there is a response to my question.
Grumpy275 and Pete have confirmed that the summary is broadly correct. It is legal for a teen to carry a knife within the same restrictions (EDC 3" slipjoint or any other with reasonable excuse). Most relevant is Sect. 139A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 prohibiting any person (adult or child) from carrying a bladed article on school grounds without a VERY good reason. So there is no reason not to carry a blade in the right circumstances (as long as you don't play silly buggers with it!).
I bought my friends two girls SAK Mini Champs (which they both chose as being the most suitable) and their schools wouldn't allow them on camping trips!
I also bought my little crew member (one of the above) a Gerber E-Z Out Rescue knife for her PFD, the E-Z out is a blunt tip lock knife recommended by the Royal Yachting Assn.
Whenever I've had official inquiries as to why I carry an SAK and Leatherman tools, in belt holsters, I've responded "for their lawful, intended purpose!"
I also bought my little crew member (one of the above) a Gerber E-Z Out Rescue knife for her PFD, the E-Z out is a blunt tip lock knife recommended by the Royal Yachting Assn.
Whenever I've had official inquiries as to why I carry an SAK and Leatherman tools, in belt holsters, I've responded "for their lawful, intended purpose!"
Funnily enough, S.139a actually states "Any person who has an article to which section 139 of this Act applies with him on school premises........."
So in the true tradition of our carelessly worded laws (written by buffoons), it is legal to take a sub 3" folding pocket knife to school, without any reason being necessary.
According to the Police forum and Ross' comments on BBlades there is no real difference to England & Wales.
That was my understanding of the Act also. However, it's main result is being a specific instance in relation to the Act where your reasonable excuse needs to be very good, even if you have a legal EDC blade.
Similar threads
