blades taken by police - advice please

[shaggystu]

You don't even have to have the item (knife or brick) on your person, let alone use it, for it to be an offensive weapon. There was the case a couple of years ago where a man in a pub threatened to use a knife he had in his car as a weapon against another person (there is a very long thread on BCUK about it). He was stopped by Police while driving away and breath tested. During the stop the Officer found a Buck lock knife in the car. This was sufficient grounds for arrest and conviction in court. The knife was in a public place (in law your car is a public place) and he had shown intent by threatening another person and mentioning the knife......

so then, does the threat have to be exressed or merely implied? if, in the example that you've given, during the altercation in the pub what if the man had simply stated that he had a knife in the car without actually threatening to use the knife. surely within the context of the situation the threatening behaviour combined with the mention of a knife could reasonably be taken as using a knife in a threatening manner. would the person then stand the possibility of being charged with possession of an offensive weapon? (irrespective of the length, style of the knife) if they would, then does it not follow that a person behaving in a threatening manner who happens to have a knife visible on their belt would also be liable for prosecution for possession of an offensive weapon, even if they never directly threaten to use it?

 

[rg598]

make sure you pout everything in writing

keep a log of all events

ALSO !!!!

i studied law @ A level and I know this for a fact ...

to commit a crime you need ... the mensrea and the actusrea.

mensrea is the forethought of commiting a crime.

actusrea is the action of committing a crime.

you've already stated you dont know the laws so no crime has been committed.

so until you're actually told something is illegal its not.



ik its a long quote but i have a feeling you might find many answers here ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_legislation#United_Kingdom


just after reading the last 2 paragraphs i have a good feeling you'll get them back ;0)

PS.

STOP SPECULATING AND LOOK AT THE FACTS.

Um...yeah...Like others have said, this is completely inaccurate. Mensrea does not mean intent, nor does it mean knowledge of the law. You can be guilty of a crime without either of those elements being present.

Internet advise...you get what you pay for. Talk to an attorney if you have a legal question.

 

[Silverclaws]

So many time I hear we live in a free country, yet we have situations like this where people who believed from their understanding of the law regarding their activities to be legal, being put through all this, why do we have to suffer this wavy line of law when it comes to what we understand is our rights, do we live in a free country or not ?

Sure one might say we do if we abide by the law, but what is the law when it appears it is open to so much interpretation as you will notice nothing is defined in this country, it is all for arguing about.

For us to be comfortable and secure we need to understand what is the law, the law needs to be defined.

 

[darrenleroy]

The law is an bottom. And unfortunately, as time goes by more laws are created by politicians who reflect the heaving morass of humanity, for all its genius and (more often than not) mediocrity. Some few laws enable society to progress while many serve to stagnate and confuse. It is the latter category the current knife laws fall into.

 

[Silverclaws]

The law is an bottom. And unfortunately, as time goes by more laws are created by politicians who reflect the heaving morass of humanity, for all its genius and (more often than not) mediocrity. Some few laws enable society to progress while many serve to stagnate and confuse. It is the latter category the current knife laws fall into.

Well without attempting to be political as I despise the lot of them the last administration was responsible for making 3000 new laws, nearly a new law for every day of their governance and the very administration that this abortion of a law regarding sharps came from. What 3000 new laws actually did was reduce our freedoms and has created this uncertainty regarding the tools we need to use to live our lives as even tradesmen get hassled by brownie point seeking young coppers these days for having the audacity to resort to one of the most primitive tools to do their job, as just like there is a pedophile around every corner these days there necessitating children be wrapped in cotton wool and denied their childhood, everyone that has access to knives are killers that have yet to be caught, as if that is not the supposition, what else can it be ?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...nce-for-every-day-spent-in-office-412072.html

 

[Mesquite]

And we now go into the realms of politics... which means the thread will probably get locked fairly soon

 

[shaggystu]

And we now go into the realms of politics... which means the thread will probably get locked fairly soon

pass that round steve, i'm gonna sit and join you

 

[Wildgoose]

Offensive weapons 1953, points and blades 1988, so not exactly new law.
Saw a firefighter in tesco's today with a gerber tool on his belt. He was in his blues not his fire gear. I thought of this thread and nearly jumped on him for the safety of the public but decided against.


I'll get my coat.....taxi!

 

[Shewie]

Let's try and keep it on topic please folks

 

[Silverclaws]

Offensive weapons 1953, points and blades 1988, so not exactly new law.
Saw a firefighter in tesco's today with a gerber tool on his belt. He was in his blues not his fire gear. I thought of this thread and nearly jumped on him for the safety of the public but decided against.


I'll get my coat.....taxi!

No, it is not new law, just updated law with new teeth and as we are discovering, a mess, whereas before it was brought up to date, most knew where they stood and could exist without hassle.

But what these legislators don't understand or even seem keen to address, is it is not the tool that is the problem, it is the mentality of some behind it, as even if sharps were not available, the mentality that would seek a sharp to offend will seek a sharp to offend, but instead those not of a criminal intention are punished yet again for the minority, what happened to democracy ?

But one will notice when knife crime is mentioned, when it is the case of a kitchen knife was used, most media sources fail to report that fact, yet they are all suddenly so keen when it is a recreational knife that is used, do we see the education being enacted on us ?

And have knife crime figures fallen since the majority were legislated against, or is it business as usual for those that would use a weapon to offend ?

 

[Ed]

Please got off of the politics or you will find a mod will lock this thread.

As many have stated the best course of action is to get legal advice. I have had a few run ins with the police over my 'tools' but everytime I got my stuff back after a solicitor sent a nice letter to the local station.

Ed

 

[nigeltm]

Better get in quick before the thread is locked!

so then, does the threat have to be exressed or merely implied? if, in the example that you've given, during the altercation in the pub what if the man had simply stated that he had a knife in the car without actually threatening to use the knife. surely within the context of the situation the threatening behaviour combined with the mention of a knife could reasonably be taken as using a knife in a threatening manner. would the person then stand the possibility of being charged with possession of an offensive weapon? (irrespective of the length, style of the knife) if they would, then does it not follow that a person behaving in a threatening manner who happens to have a knife visible on their belt would also be liable for prosecution for possession of an offensive weapon, even if they never directly threaten to use it?

This is where we get in to a really grey area!

Speak to 5 different coppers and you'll get 5 different answers on whether or not a Leatherman on the belt of an aggressive person is an offensive weapon, even if it has not been specifically used or suggested as a weapon. Some Officers believe that "all knives are designed to kill" (direct quote from an Officer on UKPoliceOnline!) and would take every opportunity to take a deadly weapon off the street. In some cases comments have been made that suggest the Officer would not be totally honest and would mislead the person in to handing the knife over for disposal as the Officer would be doing them a favour and keeping them out of trouble. Even though there is no basis in law for the knife to be confiscated!

Unfortunately, in this era of backside covering and passing the buck there is a general concensus that if a potential weapon, especially something sharp is involved, the Officer will arrest first and let the CPS sort it out. If the Officer can justify an arrest they have the right to do so and in this example it'll be an easy sell. They would then hand the situation and evidence to the CPS for a charging decision. This is where it gets really dicy as you're now in a system that appears to be politically and media sensitive. There is a strong possibility that it would result in a charge and you're then at the mercy of a magistrate (who also has personal opinions and is politically influenced). If they feel strongly enough about the matter it could be referred to Crown Court, which has more significant sentencing powers.

Basically, in that situation you roll the dice and keep your fingers crossed!

I'm not an agressive person, so I don't expect to get in to a situation where I'm the bad guy, so I don't expect to be in this sort of position. That said, I do leave my Leatherman at home if I go out of an evening for a few bevvies!

Mods - any chance we can avoid a lock? It's an interesting thread and it would be a shame for it to be closed down on account of a small number of dodgy comments or members who have expressed an opinion!

 

[Riven]

A vehicle is classed as a public place, so by the policeman telling you to put them there was fair enough. Unless he didn,t realise that!
I would not however walk into a police station with said knives. This country is getting paranoid.
Riven.

 

[Wildgoose]

Sadly, sometimes the term bushcrafter is misused. Knives make up a very small part of my kit. Some kit lists on here consist of several knives, axes, machetes and catties, but no spare socks or food!
I hate the way the media portray outdoorsmen following a shooting or stabbing, normally a photo of a male in full combats with a massive shiney unpractical knife holding aloft a dead bunny or similar.
As for the original OP, perhaps if it was just a mora the situation would have been different.

 

[Bigfoot]

Better get in quick before the thread is locked!



This is where we get in to a really grey area!

Speak to 5 different coppers and you'll get 5 different answers on whether or not a Leatherman on the belt of an aggressive person is an offensive weapon, even if it has not been specifically used or suggested as a weapon. Some Officers believe that "all knives are designed to kill" (direct quote from an Officer on UKPoliceOnline!) and would take every opportunity to take a deadly weapon off the street. In some cases comments have been made that suggest the Officer would not be totally honest and would mislead the person in to handing the knife over for disposal as the Officer would be doing them a favour and keeping them out of trouble. Even though there is no basis in law for the knife to be confiscated!

Unfortunately, in this era of backside covering and passing the buck there is a general concensus that if a potential weapon, especially something sharp is involved, the Officer will arrest first and let the CPS sort it out. If the Officer can justify an arrest they have the right to do so and in this example it'll be an easy sell. They would then hand the situation and evidence to the CPS for a charging decision. This is where it gets really dicy as you're now in a system that appears to be politically and media sensitive. There is a strong possibility that it would result in a charge and you're then at the mercy of a magistrate (who also has personal opinions and is politically influenced). If they feel strongly enough about the matter it could be referred to Crown Court, which has more significant sentencing powers.

Basically, in that situation you roll the dice and keep your fingers crossed!

I'm not an agressive person, so I don't expect to get in to a situation where I'm the bad guy, so I don't expect to be in this sort of position. That said, I do leave my Leatherman at home if I go out of an evening for a few bevvies!

Mods - any chance we can avoid a lock? It's an interesting thread and it would be a shame for it to be closed down on account of a small number of dodgy comments or members who have expressed an opinion!

I agree that on any given day and depending on circumstances, you will get a different opinion from as many police officers as you can encounter in a camping trip My own experience (at least in Scotland) is that if you are doing outdoorsy stuff with a knife or an axe (in a "proper" outdoors location, in its appropriate context and not "flashing" it, so to speak) then that is your reasonable excuse for having and using the tool in question. That includes transporting from home and back again - if it is stored out of sight and ideally located in a pocket, secondary bag or other place that does not allow immediate access, then it would be regarded as safe and proper conduct for the activity in progress (NB - lying uncovered in a car boot may not be regarded as a sufficiently suitable security precaution). I wouldn't go on to a family camp site and start chopping and cutting stuff - that is just plain daft and asking for trouble, especially if you have a small arsenal of blades at your disposal.

The Police are not looking to criminalise bushcrafty folk if they act responsibly in appropriate locations - however they do not want to allow potentially dangerous weapons to be aired in non-appropriate situations. (like don't arrive in the city with an axe strapped to the outside of your rucksack). If you stop off at the pub on the way home and insist upon showing off your edged tools (ie potential weapons) then that will drop you right in it in terms of your average police officer. Forgive me if I am stating the obvious.

 

[cbr6fs]

A vehicle is classed as a public place, so by the policeman telling you to put them there was fair enough. Unless he didn,t realise that!
I would not however walk into a police station with said knives. This country is getting paranoid.
Riven.

Inside the vehicle is not a public place, other wise a policeman would not need either your permission or a good reason to search it.

 

[Riven]

According to the police when I renewed my shotgun licence it is.
Riven.

 

[Graham_S]

No more politics please.
Stick to the matter at hand.
Thank you.

 

[Barn Owl]

Inside of your vehicle when it is in a public place is deemed a public place.

 

[Wook]

The Police are not looking to criminalise bushcrafty folk if they act responsibly in appropriate locations - however they do not want to allow potentially dangerous weapons to be aired in non-appropriate situations. (like don't arrive in the city with an axe strapped to the outside of your rucksack). If you stop off at the pub on the way home and insist upon showing off your edged tools (ie potential weapons) then that will drop you right in it in terms of your average police officer. Forgive me if I am stating the obvious.

I'm not sure I agree with you here. Your use of the word "appropriate" implies a degree of judgement the police no longer habitually exercise. The police will not go out of their way to make a criminal out of you, but I would not expect much in the way of latitude or sympathy from them. They will legalistically hold you to the very letter of the law.

The law is what it is in this country. It is there, we have to live with it and it should be obeyed. But that doesn't mean I have to like it or approve of it.

Frankly the law in this country has very little to do with what is appropriate or not appropriate behaviour, and everything to do with being seen to be "doing something" in order to assuage fear. For example, there is absolutely no reason why someone like me should not be free to wear my Mora Bushcraft on my belt 24/7, because I would never use it to hurt someone. However the sight of it would make people frightened, even though they were not at risk. Consequently, the law targets me as an easy way to reduce fear.

Conversely, the local neds who wander around with dull kitchen knives stuffed down their trackie bottoms do not engender as much fear as the sight of my Mora Bushcraft would, even though they present a far greater risk. They do not let you see their knife till they're about to stick you with it. The law cannot regulate their behaviour as easily as mine because they come from a group that is almost impossible to police without locking them up.

So we end up with the rather perverse state of affairs where the law spends its resources regulating the "good guys" because it is largely powerless to do anything about the real "bad guys".