And hopefully my common sense will still be intact.
The moment I start forgetting I have blades in my pocket when I enter a courtroom is the day the grandkids break off a couple of ice-floes
Grand father arrested for carrying a knife
- Thread starter jojo
- Start date
- Status
The moment I start forgetting I have blades in my pocket when I enter a courtroom is the day the grandkids break off a couple of ice-floes
If he was at court for a speeding matter then surely he prepared and put his best suit on. I wouldn't have thought he'd then go on to his next job in that suit !!
If his intention (rather than the excuse he thought up later for having the knife) was to go straight from court to his next job why didn't he take his hammer / chisels / tape measure etc to court as well? Perhaps he left them in his van, where his knife should have been.
The guard and police did the right thing, its up to the court to decide if his intentions were illegal. I would dare to say that no one has ever been arrested for sitting in the woods making a spoon, taking a knife (or any other prohibited weapon) in to court was a daft move (wether intentional or not).
I think it was right to deal with him for the knife in the way they did but i also think more effort should go in to targetting the small majority (ones who carry knives with illegal intent).
Rant over, back to more pleasant things like whats for dinner??
:sulkoff:
If his intention (rather than the excuse he thought up later for having the knife) was to go straight from court to his next job why didn't he take his hammer / chisels / tape measure etc to court as well? Perhaps he left them in his van, where his knife should have been.
The guard and police did the right thing, its up to the court to decide if his intentions were illegal. I would dare to say that no one has ever been arrested for sitting in the woods making a spoon, taking a knife (or any other prohibited weapon) in to court was a daft move (wether intentional or not).
I think it was right to deal with him for the knife in the way they did but i also think more effort should go in to targetting the small majority (ones who carry knives with illegal intent).
Rant over, back to more pleasant things like whats for dinner??
:sulkoff:
Just a few of quick points.
Firstly, for all of those who took the opportunity to have a pop at the Police, Mr Read himself said, "The police treated me with respect and I have no gripe with them for doing their job."
Also, the article said that after receiving a caution he faced a "costly legal bill." ABSOLUTE TWADDLE! He was arrested and taken to the police station, where he was interviewed and later received a caution, Probably all in the same day. He would have had FREE ACCESS to a solicitor at the police station (as would anyone who's been arrested), so assuming he didn't decide to privately retain the services of "Mr Loophole" his legal bill would have been zilch, nada, nowt, zero, nothing!
Remember, anything you read in a newspaper needs to be taken with a BIG pinch of salt. From my experienece, Journalists never let the truth get in the way of a good story! Look at the way the journalist described the knife as a "banned weapon." ***! It's a TOOL, not a weapon! And, don't forget, we only got one side of the story, "sexed up" by the Journo!
Firstly, for all of those who took the opportunity to have a pop at the Police, Mr Read himself said, "The police treated me with respect and I have no gripe with them for doing their job."
Also, the article said that after receiving a caution he faced a "costly legal bill." ABSOLUTE TWADDLE! He was arrested and taken to the police station, where he was interviewed and later received a caution, Probably all in the same day. He would have had FREE ACCESS to a solicitor at the police station (as would anyone who's been arrested), so assuming he didn't decide to privately retain the services of "Mr Loophole" his legal bill would have been zilch, nada, nowt, zero, nothing!
Remember, anything you read in a newspaper needs to be taken with a BIG pinch of salt. From my experienece, Journalists never let the truth get in the way of a good story! Look at the way the journalist described the knife as a "banned weapon." ***! It's a TOOL, not a weapon! And, don't forget, we only got one side of the story, "sexed up" by the Journo!
The real problem with the country is typified by senile old duffers in their 60s who are apparently unaware of the inadvisability of carrying blades into courtrooms.
It's the lack of common sense shown by Mr Read that started this thread.
Common sense should also tell you not to flame other members here. Keep it civil.
I didn't realise Mr Read was a member - my apologies to him.
I have no idea how old others in this thread are (only people I've met IRL) so it wasn't directed at anyone in particular.
Guy's the main question is really.
The man is going to work from going to court, he is carrying a tool that he uses for work (a knife locking or otherwise is a tool) on his person, he openly gives said tool to a security officer. Should that security officer have called the police?
Options for said security guy.
Give a warning? Has a court security gaurd have the option to give a warning or caution? Probably not.
Call the police and leave it to their discretion?
The one that nobody has thought about, use a little common sense, inform the man that he is not permitted to carry a knife of any kind within the court, place said object in an envelope, seal the envelope and have the man sign across the seal. Then give the man a receipt for the item and inform him that he can pick the item up when he departs.
Use the evidence that you can see, it's a well used tool, the mans age, the fact that he offered up the knife and has given an explanation for carrying it (he's going to work from the appearance in court).
The problem that I have is that you are all looking at reasons it was wrong or reasons they were wrong.
The law is open to interpretation, the police are allowed to use their own judgement to interpret the law. Things are not just black and white.
If common sense had been applied, then this would never have happened. Firstly by the man carrying the knife, secondly by the security gaurd and thirdly by the police.
I think people need to think for themselves for a change and not just regurgitate what they are told.
The man is going to work from going to court, he is carrying a tool that he uses for work (a knife locking or otherwise is a tool) on his person, he openly gives said tool to a security officer. Should that security officer have called the police?
Options for said security guy.
Give a warning? Has a court security gaurd have the option to give a warning or caution? Probably not.
Call the police and leave it to their discretion?
The one that nobody has thought about, use a little common sense, inform the man that he is not permitted to carry a knife of any kind within the court, place said object in an envelope, seal the envelope and have the man sign across the seal. Then give the man a receipt for the item and inform him that he can pick the item up when he departs.
Use the evidence that you can see, it's a well used tool, the mans age, the fact that he offered up the knife and has given an explanation for carrying it (he's going to work from the appearance in court).
The problem that I have is that you are all looking at reasons it was wrong or reasons they were wrong.
The law is open to interpretation, the police are allowed to use their own judgement to interpret the law. Things are not just black and white.
If common sense had been applied, then this would never have happened. Firstly by the man carrying the knife, secondly by the security gaurd and thirdly by the police.
I think people need to think for themselves for a change and not just regurgitate what they are told.
No, the thread was obviously started by a member. Mr. Read did not start the thread. But clearly there are those who are in sympathy with Read. Saying Read lacks common sense is the same as saying those in this thread who are in sympathy lack common sense. Perhaps I am wrong on that but I can tell you from past experience it's these little sideways comments that lead to open flames. Or...perhaps he does lack common sense...
Let me give you an example from across the pond. A guy says, "Republicans are stupid." He didn't say you were stupid, he said Republicans are stupid. I guess if you are a Rupublican, you might take offense, eh. Of course, if you are a Democrat...
Or to be more specific, I frequently encounter a subtle brand of anti-US jingoism on this forum. But I guess it's socially acceptable so it's ok eh? After all, I wasn't personally attacked.
I've been a bit harsh on ol' Grandpa Read.
The only time this has affected me it happened just as leon-1 describes...
Several years ago I went to Wimbledon for the day with my brother - we were both early 20s but reasonably well turned-out - and my mum (bless her!) made us up a coolbox for lunch.
Included in the lunch were a few nectarines that were still slightly hard, so mum (unknown to us) packed a v. sharp paring knife with the sandwiches.
When security on the gate searched the bag they found the knife immediately - bear in mind the stabbing of Monica Seles on a tennis court was still in people's minds - so this was a big no-no.
But as leon-1 suggests, they explained why we weren't allowed it (they could tell by our reaction that we were gobsmacked that Mum could be so daft!) and put it in a named envelope to collect later.
That strikes me as the perfect solution - although the political climate was different then - and we learned a useful lesson.
Having said that, knowing the level of assault that takes place in hospitals and court buildings etc I can see why they have a zero tolerance approach to knives.
But my experience at Wimbledon shows how it can - and perhaps should - happen in reality.
Mr Read was unlucky - a year ago, or in another location, he probably would have been told he was a silly chap and to take more care next time. Unfortunately the current media-driven public hysteria over knife-crime means that this will happen more and more (although the fact it is "news" suggests it's not all that common).
So there you go... even self-righteous young whippersnappers can make the same mistakes as the older generation, and they* would no doubt whinge mightly if they received the same treatment
*by which, of course, I mean "me"
I will have to agree with Leon.
Its a silly thing to carry a lockknife into a court and i am not surprised that it went as far as it did. The security guard was only doing his job although a little too well and so was the police man/woman. Imagine if the police man had just said no worries dont be so silly and let the guy go without it being cautioned, them Mr judge finds out he could have been in a lot of trouble.
I think if this fella had of been stopped carrying this knife on the street he would have been given a telling off and let go immediately but in a court thats just daft. This is no dig at his age either as i have a lot of respect for our well traveled folk but i think a slap on the wrists is no where near as bad as it could have been, good / bad intentions or not.
On the subject of the law its self i think its more than adequate.
When it comes to day to day knife use i find a slipjoint under 3 inches perfectly suitable. The only other tasks where you may slip etc are stabbing actions and if this is needed use something else or do it more carefully. I do carry a larger fixed blade knife when bushying but its always well stowed unless i know i am off the beaten track and have a genuine and valid reason for having it.
Silly man, silly security guard and silly policeman but the blame can only sit with Mr Read.
Its a silly thing to carry a lockknife into a court and i am not surprised that it went as far as it did. The security guard was only doing his job although a little too well and so was the police man/woman. Imagine if the police man had just said no worries dont be so silly and let the guy go without it being cautioned, them Mr judge finds out
he could have been in a lot of trouble. I think if this fella had of been stopped carrying this knife on the street he would have been given a telling off and let go immediately but in a court thats just daft. This is no dig at his age either as i have a lot of respect for our well traveled folk but i think a slap on the wrists is no where near as bad as it could have been, good / bad intentions or not.
On the subject of the law its self i think its more than adequate.
When it comes to day to day knife use i find a slipjoint under 3 inches perfectly suitable. The only other tasks where you may slip etc are stabbing actions and if this is needed use something else or do it more carefully. I do carry a larger fixed blade knife when bushying but its always well stowed unless i know i am off the beaten track and have a genuine and valid reason for having it.
Silly man, silly security guard and silly policeman but the blame can only sit with Mr Read.
last words on this should sit on leons pitch very well put.Wallenstein you surprise me,a gent no less! i,m impressed I thought you was a thuglum!,my apologies,now then HOODOO. have you heard the one about the englishman,irishman and the american?.well there was this eng.....er! on second thoughts better not go there.....only joking
Hoodoo, Please rest assured I have nothing against the good old US of A or any of its inhabitants!
Now, as for the French.........................That's an entirely differnt matter!
What should or shouldn't have happened is pretty irrelevant. It's what DID happen we should be thinking about.
Come on, all of you who are defending him by saying he had a legitimate reason for carrying it (ie. he was going to work). The man was going to court. Was he in his work clothes? Presumably not. So presumably he was going to change after being in court...I think you can see where I am going.
It's not about a lack of common sense. It's about sensibilities changing. None of us are in risk of falling foul of the law by doing what we do - so let's not keep rattling our sabres and working ourselves up about the state of the country. Attitudes change. We are no longer cavemen who drag women around by their hair (at least, not literally) - are you suggesting we go back to that golden age? OK, a flippant example, but you can see my general point.
Right, here's my example of being caught with a knife. It was only about two years ago. I was leading a group of students on a trip to Windsor Castle (really disappointing, if you haven't been. I can see only so many Regency period dinner services and stay interested. Mind you, St George's chapel was fantastic). To get into the castle you have to put your bag through a scanner. 'There's a knife in that bag!' said the guard, pointing at my bag. This rather caught me out, because I didn't know there was a knife in my bag. Then the penny dropped.'Oh,' I said. 'That's not a knife, it's a wine bottle opener.' And I took it out of my bag and showed them. 'That's OK,' they said (despite the fact that it does have a 2" (unlockable) blade on it, which could still cause a lot of damage to either a human body or an expensive piece of art) and they let me keep it!
The Police and law aren't idiots. The man was in a court and he could have attacked someone. It's been done before. They don't know who he is or his history. So they did the right thing. Likewise, they would never have stopped him in his normal course of life. Unlike a group of likely looking yobs. Equally, the police will not bother a camper in the middle of the woods. So stop bleating and making out the world's gone topsy-turvy. Mr Read did something stupid, he recognises it and the law did exactly what it should've done. The new purge on knives is not to cause problems for the likes of you and me, and the Police and officials know that. And that's why people using knives in a responsible manner, in an acceptable situation have no fear of persecution.
Whether it was force of habit, or just plain stupidity on Mr Read's part is irrelevant - because no amount of debate changes the fact that he should not have been carrying the knife into a court. Easy as that.
Come on, all of you who are defending him by saying he had a legitimate reason for carrying it (ie. he was going to work). The man was going to court. Was he in his work clothes? Presumably not. So presumably he was going to change after being in court...I think you can see where I am going.
It's not about a lack of common sense. It's about sensibilities changing. None of us are in risk of falling foul of the law by doing what we do - so let's not keep rattling our sabres and working ourselves up about the state of the country. Attitudes change. We are no longer cavemen who drag women around by their hair (at least, not literally) - are you suggesting we go back to that golden age? OK, a flippant example, but you can see my general point.
Right, here's my example of being caught with a knife. It was only about two years ago. I was leading a group of students on a trip to Windsor Castle (really disappointing, if you haven't been. I can see only so many Regency period dinner services and stay interested. Mind you, St George's chapel was fantastic). To get into the castle you have to put your bag through a scanner. 'There's a knife in that bag!' said the guard, pointing at my bag. This rather caught me out, because I didn't know there was a knife in my bag. Then the penny dropped.'Oh,' I said. 'That's not a knife, it's a wine bottle opener.' And I took it out of my bag and showed them. 'That's OK,' they said (despite the fact that it does have a 2" (unlockable) blade on it, which could still cause a lot of damage to either a human body or an expensive piece of art) and they let me keep it!
The Police and law aren't idiots. The man was in a court and he could have attacked someone. It's been done before. They don't know who he is or his history. So they did the right thing. Likewise, they would never have stopped him in his normal course of life. Unlike a group of likely looking yobs. Equally, the police will not bother a camper in the middle of the woods. So stop bleating and making out the world's gone topsy-turvy. Mr Read did something stupid, he recognises it and the law did exactly what it should've done. The new purge on knives is not to cause problems for the likes of you and me, and the Police and officials know that. And that's why people using knives in a responsible manner, in an acceptable situation have no fear of persecution.
Whether it was force of habit, or just plain stupidity on Mr Read's part is irrelevant - because no amount of debate changes the fact that he should not have been carrying the knife into a court. Easy as that.
No excuse Bernie. I'm an old duffer (61) and I carry a locking folder round the house, garden and in the woods.
I always unclip it and leave it on the table if I am going anywhere else. If I don't need it, I don't take it. It becomes a habit to check and leave, no matter how old you are.
But not all old duffers think like you,some unfortunately haven't kept abreast of the times,and still think its the old days.
Bernie
- Status
Similar threads
