Laws only inconvenience those that obey them, disobey them subtly enough and you've got no problem. 
Carrying an Axe/Knife and the Law
- Thread starter Switch
- Start date
-
Come along to the amazing Summer Moot (21st July - 2nd August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
- Status
Still along way to go, and waste of public money for a case that should never have gotten that far.
In large part the answer depends on how you count the statistics. If someone uses said weapon (and in that case it would indeed be a weapon) in self defense, do you count that act as a homicide? If so then the numbers go up (with that case at any rate) and the problem looks bigger. On the other hand if you don't count those cases that are "justifiable by reason of self defense" then no, it doesn't escalate the problem.
In almost every state over here where "shall issue" laws were inacted regarding CCW, the violent crime rate has gone down. Contast that to Chicago having a total ban on CCW and the highest murder rate in the country per capita.
Consider that Switzerland actuall issues fully automatic militry rifles to it's entire adult male population and has the lowest violent crime rate in the industrialized world. Mexico has an almost total ban on private ownership of firearms but an almost universal ignoring of said bans and the highest rate of gang murders with out and our gang warfare (and they have true gangs of organized criminals, not wannabes)
Consider that international piracy has gone down in the last year since the commercial ships began arming themselves.
Last edited:
and the Swiss don't have the ammo......
their govt keeps hold of that.
We are among the least policed countries on the planet; we have a very law abiding population. We are among the most urbanised nations on the planet too, but despite there being four nations (+ assorted small traditionally self governing island groups) we do not have much in the way of civil dispute. This is thankfully neither the high seas or Mexico
The knife issue is far more complex than just issue everyone with a ruddy great bowie knife to go to Tesco or Asda
Where the hang to teenage pregnancies come into this ?? That one's easy; boys want to have sex, girls want to have babies; it's hormones. Most folks are inclined to think that things can be an awful lot worse than a baby coming
Toddy
their govt keeps hold of that.We are among the least policed countries on the planet; we have a very law abiding population. We are among the most urbanised nations on the planet too, but despite there being four nations (+ assorted small traditionally self governing island groups) we do not have much in the way of civil dispute. This is thankfully neither the high seas or Mexico
The knife issue is far more complex than just issue everyone with a ruddy great bowie knife to go to Tesco or Asda
Where the hang to teenage pregnancies come into this ?? That one's easy; boys want to have sex, girls want to have babies; it's hormones. Most folks are inclined to think that things can be an awful lot worse than a baby coming
Toddy
Last edited:
and the Swiss don't have the ammo......
Actually no. They may not be "issued" ammo but rather they buy it. Shooting the issued weapon in regular civilian matches is preferred to paid drills to maintain proficiency.
Crime is caused by political, social and economic reasons. The tools of violence are never the cause.
Politicians will never tackle the root causes of crime because 1) it is very difficult and complex 2) it would infringe on some wealthy business or bank persons right to exploit the poor for profit and endanger the system.
As a result there will always be crime and people will always cry for something to be done. What will be done? They will attack the tools of crime and ban them which does nothing. So they will skew the data in complicated graphs and lie to say that something is being achieved.
In America, there are many that want to take away firearms. It is the same fallacious argument. The political social and economic disparity is the real problem as it creates crime and people who fall through the cracks and lash out. We once lived in a world without firearms. It was called the dark ages. A world where a man with a steak knife could rape and murder a woman in front of several witnesses and nothing could be done. If you have ever tried to stop a man with a knife you know what I mean by nothing can be done.
In essence this is a bit like the landscape in the UK today. The benefits of being a criminal out weigh the down side by several orders of magnitude. The criminals do not discuss silly laws and interpretations of laws on their forum.
Politicians will never tackle the root causes of crime because 1) it is very difficult and complex 2) it would infringe on some wealthy business or bank persons right to exploit the poor for profit and endanger the system.
As a result there will always be crime and people will always cry for something to be done. What will be done? They will attack the tools of crime and ban them which does nothing. So they will skew the data in complicated graphs and lie to say that something is being achieved.
In America, there are many that want to take away firearms. It is the same fallacious argument. The political social and economic disparity is the real problem as it creates crime and people who fall through the cracks and lash out. We once lived in a world without firearms. It was called the dark ages. A world where a man with a steak knife could rape and murder a woman in front of several witnesses and nothing could be done. If you have ever tried to stop a man with a knife you know what I mean by nothing can be done.
In essence this is a bit like the landscape in the UK today. The benefits of being a criminal out weigh the down side by several orders of magnitude. The criminals do not discuss silly laws and interpretations of laws on their forum.
....We are among the least policed countries on the planet; we have a very law abiding population. We are among the most urbanised nations on the planet too, but despite there being four nations (+ assorted small traditionally self governing island groups) we do not have much in the way of civil dispute. This is thankfully neither the high seas or Mexico
Thank you Mary. You just made my point for me. The rate of violent crime has nothing to do with the availability of weapons. Rather it's the willingness of criminals to use them. And that is largely a product of their culture.
The point however is where do you stop? If you inconvenience the law abiding majority to prevent law breaking idiots having the mechanism for violence, you can go on forever.
The governments own statistics show that over 40% of all crime and the majority of violent crime is alcohol related. This is a far, far higher proportion of crimes than relates to knives.
If the objective is actually to reduce crime, and violence, banning alcohol would have a far higher effect than banning carrying knives. Sure it would inconvenience the majority of law abiding alcohol users, but alcohol is not necessary to daily life. Banning knives inconveniences the vast majority of law abiding knife users after all.
If this is about providing the police with the means to anticipate and halt violent crime, they can all carry a breathalyser. One hint of alcohol and it can be a custodial sentence - just in case you turn violent. No real difference than a trip to pokey in case you use that knife violently.
The difference of course is that alcohol related violence is far more prevalent than knife violence and removing it would save far more lives though both attack and physical harm caused by alcohol to the drinker.
So there we have it - a way to reduce phsical violence that would be far more effective than banning carrying knives. If the process of locking people up in case they commit an act of violence is logical, locking up anyone who has a glass of wine is logical - indeed more logical than banning carrying knives.
Of course if the law is about playing on peoples fears and not tackling the real causes of crime, then perhaps the current laws make sense
The governments own statistics show that over 40% of all crime and the majority of violent crime is alcohol related. This is a far, far higher proportion of crimes than relates to knives.
If the objective is actually to reduce crime, and violence, banning alcohol would have a far higher effect than banning carrying knives. Sure it would inconvenience the majority of law abiding alcohol users, but alcohol is not necessary to daily life. Banning knives inconveniences the vast majority of law abiding knife users after all.
If this is about providing the police with the means to anticipate and halt violent crime, they can all carry a breathalyser. One hint of alcohol and it can be a custodial sentence - just in case you turn violent. No real difference than a trip to pokey in case you use that knife violently.
The difference of course is that alcohol related violence is far more prevalent than knife violence and removing it would save far more lives though both attack and physical harm caused by alcohol to the drinker.
So there we have it - a way to reduce phsical violence that would be far more effective than banning carrying knives. If the process of locking people up in case they commit an act of violence is logical, locking up anyone who has a glass of wine is logical - indeed more logical than banning carrying knives.
Of course if the law is about playing on peoples fears and not tackling the real causes of crime, then perhaps the current laws make sense
It's actually easy to remove a knife from anyone, you just use a big enough bit of cloth or leather.
I don't know what dark ages the Americans seem to think we lived in, but I can tell you truthfully that the Dark Ages were simply ones where writing wasn't prevalent. From the physical evidences we have, their society seems to have just gone along as usual. Farming happened, settlements happened, change happened, folks lived, married, reared families, built and traded; *and* as always, some people rose to positions of authority where jurisprudence, the administration of justice, was their responsibility.
Where you create not justice but vigilanty rules, then you have anarchy.
Toddy
or leather.I don't know what dark ages the Americans seem to think we lived in, but I can tell you truthfully that the Dark Ages were simply ones where writing wasn't prevalent. From the physical evidences we have, their society seems to have just gone along as usual. Farming happened, settlements happened, change happened, folks lived, married, reared families, built and traded; *and* as always, some people rose to positions of authority where jurisprudence, the administration of justice, was their responsibility.
Where you create not justice but vigilanty rules, then you have anarchy.
Toddy
I know you're being facetious about banning alcohol BR but you bring up something serious. We tried it almost a century ago. It didn't work. Not only did it NOT rduce crime, but it caused the immediate expansion of organized crime by giving them a lucrative market. Weapons bans have the same net effect.
British Red, I dare you ....go on, you stand for govt with those policies 
and see how you get on
I agree that the relationship between drink and violence is there. It's pretty pathetic really
If the imbibing is done for pleasure, what the hang does that say about the violence ?
cheers,
M
and see how you get on I agree that the relationship between drink and violence is there. It's pretty pathetic really
If the imbibing is done for pleasure, what the hang does that say about the violence ?cheers,
M
No, you miss the point. Those who commit assault with bladed implements are generally not in any other way criminals. They grow out of that knife culture stupidity.
The intent is to break the culture of carrying a knife 'just in case'. It's this link that needs snapped. If there are no knives, and mind we don't generally have guns all over the place here...........I know of no woman who carries one in a handbag for instance
...........then the temptation to use the knife on fellow idiot when a dispute rears, is removed.Trying to stop folks having a rammy is a forlorn hope
M
It says that its there, and it always happens.
Sadly it also said that the laws passed are not logically through or even consistent. They are not aimed at reducing violence - but at getting elected. The absurdity of believing banning carrying knives will actually prevent someone from committing violence is the same as believing only selling paracetamol in small packets prevents suicide.
I recall heariing that deaths by paracetamol had gone down so the policy was succesful. Note that suicides aren't down - just one particular method. To me this means that a poor soul bent on ending it simply does it another way. Rather like banning different tools - those bent on committing acts of violence simply use a different tool. Time was that a cutthroat razor was a weapon of choice. Personally though I don't believe that the Gillette Mach 3 has reduced violent crime very much - they just use something else now.
It really is beyond absurd
Sadly it also said that the laws passed are not logically through or even consistent. They are not aimed at reducing violence - but at getting elected. The absurdity of believing banning carrying knives will actually prevent someone from committing violence is the same as believing only selling paracetamol in small packets prevents suicide.
I recall heariing that deaths by paracetamol had gone down so the policy was succesful. Note that suicides aren't down - just one particular method. To me this means that a poor soul bent on ending it simply does it another way. Rather like banning different tools - those bent on committing acts of violence simply use a different tool. Time was that a cutthroat razor was a weapon of choice. Personally though I don't believe that the Gillette Mach 3 has reduced violent crime very much - they just use something else now.
It really is beyond absurd
No disagreement there BR
I think they're trying to find a way of removing temptation/ potential from those who might use a knife against someone else.
I don't think they've yet found a very good way of doing it.
To do nothing though.....well.....no, that doesn't sit well with most of the population. We're a tiny minority who actively use knives as tools nowadays outside the kitchen or dining room.
M
I think they're trying to find a way of removing temptation/ potential from those who might use a knife against someone else.
I don't think they've yet found a very good way of doing it.
To do nothing though.....well.....no, that doesn't sit well with most of the population. We're a tiny minority who actively use knives as tools nowadays outside the kitchen or dining room.
M
No, you miss the point. Those who commit assault with bladed implements are generally not in any other way criminals. They grow out of that knife culture stupidity.
The intent is to break the culture of carrying a knife 'just in case'. It's this link that needs snapped. If there are no knives, and mind we don't generally have guns all over the place here...........I know of no woman who carries one in a handbag for instance
Nice delusion. Unfortunately it has no bearing on reality. They ARE criminals. The culture WILL imbed more deeply. That's reality.
...we don't generally have guns all over the place here...........I know of no woman who carries one in a handbag for instance
You will. Give it time. For that matter, even now, just because you don't know of it, that doesn't mean it isn't happening.
They tried that in the US back in the 20's and it was one of the most violent periods in the countries history.
It's actually easy to remove a knife from anyone, you just use a big enough bit of cloth
I don't know what dark ages the Americans seem to think we lived in, but I can tell you truthfully that the Dark Ages were simply ones where writing wasn't prevalent. From the physical evidences we have, their society seems to have just gone along as usual. Farming happened, settlements happened, change happened, folks lived, married, reared families, built and traded; *and* as always, some people rose to positions of authority where jurisprudence, the administration of justice, was their responsibility.
Where you create not justice but vigilanty rules, then you have anarchy.
Toddy
Actually there was plenty of writing, it was just not sophisticated or latin. The art was more stylized and symbolic and gradually became more and more realistic into the latter middle ages and the Renaissance. The artistic simplicity of the dark ages was not seen again until the time of Picasso.
Politically socially and economically there was more and less freedom in various ways. The highest taxed person in the British isles had to supply so many days labor to the land owners. Most western countries today are taxed to the point where they work well into June or July simply to pay the taxes to the government. There was a great deal more leisure time too especially in the winter.
The main thing that made life reasonably unbearable is the fact that the world was ruled by the strong, the young and the violent. The criminals were in charge and had the power. Violence was common place and as an attacker coming into a farming village, you could be reasonably assured you and your Viking buddies would be assured of victory every time as long as you got back to the boat with your slaves and silver before the other violent men with swords showed up.
With the introduction of gun powder violence decreased dramatically and the knight and armour became extinct. A humble peasant with a matchlock with minimal training could from a distance address the threat from the mounted warrior (who trained all his life) with lethal results. In time the benefits of violence war and crime became fewer and fewer and culminating in world War One, people began to see that diplomacy and negotiations were preferable to crime, war and violence. Due to gun powder we are living in a relatively peaceful era in history, again in spite of current and recent conflicts. We do not have marauders in the forest and attacking our coastal towns.
As for disarming a person with cloth or leather, I will assume that was in jest. Martial artist fantasies aside, anyone faced with a weapon or multiple attackers is statistically likely to lose the encounter and when you face down a knife, even in the hands of someone that does not know how to use it, you are going to get cut up. Don't believe me? Give an 8 year old girl a painted stick, tell her to hit you with it and try to take it away from her.
It's actually easy to remove a knife from anyone, you just use a big enough bit of cloth
When you've finished watching your Kung fu movies you can come with me down to the police station for real armed defense training (yes even though I'm retired I keep my skills current) You NEVER! NEVER! NEVER! allow someone with a knife closer than 12 feet. Once they're within 12 feet you cain't react fast enough to prevent them from "closing the gap" and probably winning their attack. Once they produce a knife you are IMMEDIATELY authorized to use deadly force.
Last edited:
Similar discussion in paddling circles when carring a rescue knife. Some prefer a folding knife carried in their bouancy aid pocket but you need to be able to reach it and open it with either hand (possibly when upside down under water and your face being bumped down a river bed) or my prefered option, a permenent blunted blade attached the a shoulder strap of your BA so you can grab and use.
Damned if you do, possibly drowned if you don't
Andy
Damned if you do, possibly drowned if you don't
Andy
Up here we call it "reactionary gap" and having gone up against determined attackers with bottles and knives on 5 occasions at work I was cut 4 times. The 5th time I surprised the guy about to attack someone else.
My last use of force simunition training taught me that once the bad man is inside that 12 feet you may as well stay in your holster because you probably just lost.
My last use of force simunition training taught me that once the bad man is inside that 12 feet you may as well stay in your holster because you probably just lost.
- Status
Similar threads
