Carrying an Axe/Knife and the Law

[Toddy]

Brambles I agree with you about that blasted petition, I simply used it for the figures.
I'm not allowed to discuss politics on the forum, but I didnae vote for the man
I actually found the disparaging comments from other political parties and pundits about the carry a knife go to jail proposal rather heartening. They too found it nonsensical, especially in it's blanket application.

cheers,
M

 

[British Red]

Reply to British Red

You're conflating issues......

Not really Mary...I'm replying to your posts of "most people believe" or "the majority". I honestly don't believe you speak for the majority of the UK. I believe the majority of the UK are sick to death of people passing laws that punish the law abiding to try and get to the law breakers. The law breakers ignore laws. Thats what makes them law breakers.

I published the Radio 4 survey to show this point... and then showed it represents far more peoples views than "Radio Tay" - which cannot even be heard by most of the population.

I argue with you because you say things like "most people" or "the majority". I don't believe that the opinions you post actually represent the public or their views. Simply stating "most people think...." does not make that a fact. That is why I post attrbution to the posts I make that show the majority do not actually believe the things you say they do. I have to note you do not show any evidence of what "the majority believe".

In case anyone mistakes what I am posting here - I do not believe in Mary's political posts, but I DO believe in Mary. There is no animosity in my posts - I think Mary is a fantastic asset to this site. However I think most people in this country (which is still the United Kingdom) do not believe in punishing the rights of the majority in a vain attempt to restrict the criminal intent of the minority. As much as I love Mary to bits, I won't let that view go unchallenged!

Red

 

[Toddy]

I agree, I really do, but the majority vote is the one the politicians are listening to, and that's who is making the law. The law reflects the majority.

I do not dispute in the slightest that there are many who disagree, I do, but I do understand 'why' this course of action has been taken.
Until there's a better one on offer, one that will actually work, and convince folks, the majority of folks, that it will work, this is the one we're stuck with.

This particular community, right here, is rather unique in mainstream society. I stand by the assertion that most folks find the issue of knives being banned not to be a problem. Indeed most seem to approve of it.

Personally I think that shifting the categories, as brambles explained above, is a good thing. It means that those who actually commit a crime do the time. Hopefully rational commonsense will come into play and 83 year olds with pocket knives can be left to meander along in peace.

...........and for the record, I can argue the bit out with Hugh, but I would defend his right to voice his opinion to the last breath

cheers,
M

 

[santaman2000]

Regarding your statement on the primary caus of death in the Dark Ages and the effectivness of certain arms or tactics as a defense against an attacker with an edged weapon

......Most folks of the time died of disease and malnourishment.

Pole arms are incredibly effective in pre gunpowder battles. Shiltrons took down the charges of armoured mounted knights. Once the knights were down the men at arms simply butchered them

Well it might well be true that the majority died from disease or malnurishment; but the disease (apart from plague) was caused by said malnurishment and said malnurishment was in turn caused by the farming class (sers0 being held to relinquish half or more of their crops and livestock to armed bodies of nobles or foreign raiders.

As for using pole arms or shiltrons as a defense; Hmmm. I wonder just what a policeman might think (bear in mind that you've said they get antsy if they find you carrying a knife) when they see you walking down the street with a pole-axe or in a phalynx formation? Ialso doubt very seriously if you'd be able to actually swing said poled weapon once your attacker was within a few inches? I really seriously doubt so. You're still just bringing up fantasies.

 

[santaman2000]

How about 30,000 people signed the petition for the carry a knife go to jail ?....

30,000 people? Really? That's all?

 

[santaman2000]

Reply to British Red

You're conflating issues...... I have no doubt that if someone broke into my home while I was in, (s)he'd either get out sharpish or I'd start flinging things......but I still have no problem with not being allowed to carry a knife when I'm going shopping.

As to whether flinging things at a home invader is advisable or not, I think that's another thread and discussion

On thinking on it; I might have to Mod myself for encouraging illegal behaviour

cheers,
M

Sooner or later the mod hat's going to have to come out. But not for encouraging illegal behaviour. None of us (least of all you) would do that. Instead we're debating whether something "should be" illegal or not (namely the right of self defense or home defense) and using our natural instincts (our likely reaction if placed in such a situation) to reason through that. I'm not particularly a Glock fan but this advertisement of theirs sums up my view: www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQHWTfFV3Vc Especially when it comes to MY daughter!

Rather, sooner or later the thread will inevitably become political; but thus far we've avoided that I think.

 

[boatman]

Being a supporter of "One law for all" it seems iniquitous that one might be treated differently in different parts of the two countries. I also resent the idea that as a semi-respectable looking 66 year-old I can do and carry things, quite legally, that the police are likely to ignore or not even look for that younger people must be more circumspect about even though they also acting legally. It is unfair on them and fairness is critical.

The law is simple and clear, "Reasonable excuse" covers all that people want to do with sharp things as tools. It even covers stopping off in a pub for lunch your way back from the woods, this is what "inns" are for. What is needed is better education for police and magistrates.

 

[Toddy]

Santaman 2000 I am no fantacist. Our population is about 5m. That's it.

The majority of people in the Dark Ages were not 'heroic warriors' but farmers......sorry BR but there's that majority word again .............and their weapons of choice were simply their daily tools. In a world of allegiances, of summary jurisprudence, of cultural mores that were very different from those nowadays, people just got on with life as best they could. Like third world countries of the very recent past (or even ours within the last few centuries) most babies born didn't live long enough to see their fifth birthday. No antibiotics, basic personal hygiene, (tooth decay alone can end life) and a physically demanding lifestyle.
Didn't mean the sun didn't shine, that they didn't enjoy music (no radio 4 though ) or colour, or family and friends, of the comfort of home, of faith, or the satisfaction of a job well done.

I'm on the dinosaur of a windows computer just now and can't open youtube....this is a discussion about the application of knife law in Scotland....we banned hand guns, they are genuinely not an issue here.(sorry BR, it's the majority rule thing again)
I realise that that is a problem for some of the Americans who are frantically scrabbling to justify their right to carry them, in a supposedly civilised society, but the UK is on the whole a peaceful place where our police do not routinely bear arms.....they do wear anti stab vests though.


Oh, and while we are at the 'majority' bit anyway......Radio4 doesn't hold the majority in Scotland either, the figures you quoted are greater than our entire population.........neat trick with the statistics though

You'll all be pleased to hear that I'm headed to the dentist later to get my aching jaw sorted out (blessings upon the wonders of modern dentistry , I think it could have made a huge difference in the Dark Ages ) so I'm sure I'll be in a much better mood in due course.

atb,
Mary

p.s. Boatman, I so agree with you about the education of the police on the details of this issue. I think though that it ought to be extended to everyone else too though.
M

 

[British Red]

Ahh theres the difference though Toddy - Scotland is a relatively small part of the UK and most laws are enacted by the UK parliament - particularly firearms laws. So for most people to believe something, it needs to be most of the UK - not most of Scotland (and I haven't seen any evidence yet that supports the assertion that most Scots do in fact believe this). The one thing according to the polls that only a small minority want is an independent Scotland. So, by the rule of the majority, laws need to reflect the wishes of the majority of the UK- not the majority of less than 10% of the UK population - which is in fact a tiny minority of the UK population.

 

[santaman2000]

Being a supporter of "One law for all" it seems iniquitous that one might be treated differently in different parts of the two countries. I also resent the idea that as a semi-respectable looking 66 year-old I can do and carry things, quite legally, that the police are likely to ignore or not even look for that younger people must be more circumspect about even though they also acting legally. It is unfair on them and fairness is critical.

The law is simple and clear, "Reasonable excuse" covers all that people want to do with sharp things as tools. It even covers stopping off in a pub for lunch your way back from the woods, this is what "inns" are for. What is needed is better education for police and magistrates.

You mentioned a few keywords. Among them were "reasonable excuse" and "fairness." With those examples and the implied legal pholosophy behind them, let me give you another keyword and concept taught to police:

"Reasonable suspicion." Simply explained it means that police cain't just stop someone and search because they want too. Rather they need either a proper warrant, or more commonly when on patrol, "reasonable suspicion." What does that mean? Especially in the context of your comments? Simply put it means that a police officer seeing a 65 year old dressed conservitively isn't likely to arouse any reasonable suspicion that would give them justification to believe that they were armed and planning to assault someone (as would be needed for the officer to stop, question, search, and arrest said person) On the other hand a 19 year old wearing a hoodie with gang insignia imprinted on it and an arrogant attitude would very easily rise to that level of 'reasonable suspicion." The whole concept is indeed based on fairness derived from another key phrase, the "totality of the circumstances."

I'm sure the exact terminology and legal phrasing is different in the UK; but I'm equally sure that the underlying concepts are very much the same.

 

[santaman2000]

....we banned hand guns, they are genuinely not an issue here.(sorry BR, it's the majority rule thing again)
I realise that that is a problem for some of the Americans who are frantically scrabbling to justify their right to carry them, in a supposedly civilised society

That right is inscribed in the constitution. No further justification is needed. And no further explanation is owed. Asking "why do you need a gun?" is essentially no different from asking Rosa Parks "Why do you need to ride at the front of the bus?" In both cases the proper answer is, "Because it's my right."

 

[santaman2000]

Santaman 2000 I am no fantacist. Our population is about 5m. That's it.

The majority of people in the Dark Ages were not 'heroic warriors' but farmers....

Never disputed that. In fact I never claimed that there were ANY heroic warriors. What I claimed was/is that that majority were under the direct control of he armed elite (although that armed elite was in a minority) and at the mercy of armed foriegn raiders (which were also likely a minority) That's the whole point. They were unarmed and mostly helpless.

 

[Toddy]

No, they were not unarmed, they simply had the tools of their labours to hand....that became the pole arms, the pikes, etc., that were effective enough to stave off and slaughter armed, mounted knights. The shiltron was the development of the drilling given to those tools. There are skeletons that clearly show that spears (of some variety or other), not swords inflicted a great many of the wounds on those few skeletons that are found to have belonged to individuals who died violent deaths.

Society's structure, whether it be band, tribe, clan or kingdom, is a different thing entirely. Armed raiders caused grief for a short period, then society, in it's 'galgael' terms simply settles down. Mind too, the 'armed foreign raiders' didn't get most of our lands here. The Picts & Scots beat them back, then beat back their descendants and Northumbrian mixed armies too.

Anarchy is not in any way a long term survival strategy. Authoritarian structure of one form or another reasserts itself.
If the farmers can't farm in peace, everybody dies.

Toddy

 

[mrcharly]

I'm getting rather tired of every thread about "can I carry my bushcrafting sharps" degenerating into a discussion of how 'mericans can have guns in their nappies and we can't.

There is no such thing as 'knife crime'. That's a soundbite-phrase invented by journalists and politicians. There are violent assaults committed, sometimes with a knife. The vast majority (I assert purely on my own gut feeling from reading the news) of the assaults that involve a knife are committed by a scared teenager, who stuck a knife in their pocket either to look tough or because they are scared.

The fact remains that my tattoed 20-yr-old son with face piercings can walk around with a bag full of knives (for work) without a problem. I can carry a knife in a bag, get stop and searched without it being a problem. My friend Ellen could walk into town, take the train with a sword sticking out of her bag without it being a problem. Her boyfriend could carry an axe and polearm through Birmingham without it being a problem.

There isn't a problem.

 

[bigroomboy]

The problem and solution is clearly evident after watching an episode of police interceptors................ 1 hour of carnage, crime, outrageously dangerous behavior, theft and criminal damage. All costing innocent people in money and frustration, always followed by one parting sentence......... All of the people caught in connection with today's clearly criminal and dangerous behavior were released without charge.............. "" But we did catch an OAP cutting up an apple with a lethal weapon (Opinal No 3) on platform 6 so our quota is filled"" *


* I have made this part up for added excitement but to demonstrate a point. Stop taking away the rights of ordinary people to use tools and start charging the ones actively involved in dangerous and violent crimes with sentences that will make them think twice about doing it in the first place!

 

[rik_uk3]

Out of curiosity, how many members have been stopped and searched?

 

[Ivan...]

Myself and Savagebushcraft, were stopped separated questioned and searched in the middle of a 300 acre wood in Devon, after being reported by a dog walker, as two army types, setting up camp, two traffic officers approached carefully, baton and tazer drawn, shouted from a distance, were we armed!

Once they realized we were wild camping, and we were not terrorists, they thoroughly searched us, commented on the catty,two moras and a gb small forest axe, and were satisfied we weren't a threat to the general public, asked us to leave early in the morning and left, to be honest i don't think the knife/axe thing bothered them, or they did not understand the law themselves,anyway because we were polite and answered all of their questions, they were fine, but still a little unnerving being approached by two coppers in all their gear, as if we were criminals.

 

[rik_uk3]

They were following up a report and lets be honest the sight of a couple of blokes dressed in their finest bushcraft outfit is not something seen everyday by most folk hence the report.

Looking through this thread there is a lot indignant posts

in·dig·nant

/inˈdignənt/
[TABLE="class: vk_txt ts"]
[TR]
[TD]Adjective
[TABLE="class: ts"]
[TR]
[TD]Feeling or showing anger or annoyance at what is perceived as unfair treatment.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Synonyms
[TABLE="class: ts"]
[TR]
[TD]resentful - angry[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

The 'perceived as unfair treatment' bit of the definition is applicable here as in reality very very few of us are actually stopped, the perception held my many here is a falsehood. All the irate posts are based on a lot of 'what if's' or 'they could' and not on what happens in the real world.

My personal view is that there is no reason for any of us to walk around with a blade, you don't one day to day; sure, if you have one the liklihood is you'll find and excuse it but your don't really need it. If its a tool then put it in your toolbox...just my pennies worth.

 

[mrcharly]

My personal view is that there is no reason for most of us to walk around with a blade, you don't one day to day; sure, if you have one the liklihood is you'll find and excuse it but your don't really need it. If its a tool then put it in your toolbox...just my pennies worth.

Some of do. I used to live on a boat. Sometimes (7-15 times a year) I'd arrive home to risen floodwaters, tangled ropes, etc. My EDC knife is a multi-tool; I cycle a lot and commute by bike. The tools on the knife have been pressed into service many times.

 

[Laurentius]

Nearest I have come recently is when one of those temporary knife arches was set up at Coventry bus station. (I posted a warning about here) The police did not select me to go through it though.

Life was more "interesting" when I was in my twenties though. Whatever the actual letter of the law was, I was often stopped for being on the streets late at night if a cop car happened to be passing. I was also once the subject of an armed response call out because an over zealous security man at the University of Warwick had described me as some kind of gun carrying Ninja, since he had apparently been following me when I "disappeared"

I had no idea I was being followed at the time and had simply took a short cut through familiar Woodland as I always did. It was somewhat of a surprise to see a whole line of police cars draw up, with the dawning realisation that you were the only thing around they could be looking for. They went on there way having determined that the security guy needed to get himself a new pair of glasses. I might have been carrying a penknife on that occasion, It certainly wouldn't be unusual for me to have been carrying one which would come out when you turned out your pockets. Police back then were more concerned about something more substantial than that, such as an obvious weapon or the tools for breaking and entering.

I remember as recently as the 1990's being allowed into the House of Commons lobby with an SAK. I put it on the tray with my keys and other stuff and they just handed it back, they were more concerned at the time about the flute I was carrying, being of the keyless variety you could easily mistake for a gun sticking out my pocket. They still regard flutes as a bit iffy, I was refused permission to take a concert flute to 10 Downing Street for a reception last year but I got my revenge, I took a whistle instead