Knives/Machetes Transportation

[wanderingblade]

Getting back to the OP - One thing that could be important is where you are going. You mention you are off to a forest but is this private land / forestry commission / council owned etc. And crucially, do you have permission to be there and do what you do?

It is perfectly legal to carry a fixed blade in your pack if you have a legitimate reason. If you don;t have permission to do what you are doing then you will not have a legitimate reason.

 

[Matt.S]

I couldn't agree more. Man has always carried and used knives, both as tools and weapons. In many cultures around the worlld the public carrying of blades is part of their cultural identity.

Yes, like Scots' sigan dubh and dirk, or Sikhs' kirpan. I believe that followers of the Norse deities are allowed to carry a kniv for religious purposes. Perhaps we of Saxon descent should EDC a seax to indicate our status as freemen?

The fact is anything can be a weapon: A shoelace...

Interesting factoid: the American Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms ruled several years ago that a shoelace is a machinegun (yes there is a backstory).

Until we stop legislating the innocent for the misdeeds of the guilty our police officers will continue to make enemies of law abiding citizens.

I believe that the average police officer acts in what they believe to be the public's interest. However an increasing body of legislative and policy decisions are influencing their decisions and reducing their powers of discretion. I assume this is your meaning also?

We seem to believe that putting weapons only in the hands of law enforcement makes us safer. On the contrary, it makes our world far more dangerous. It means that we put sole responsibility for our protection into the hands of these individuals. When they can't or won't protect us (such as in the case of Fiona Pilkington) then what recourse is left to us?

When I lived in the states there was much more emphasis placed on the responsibility of the home owner or head of the family to protect himself and his property. Law enforcement was seen as an aid to that end, but not the end itself. The ethos among Americans is that any power given to the state should also be accessible to the individual who finds himslef under that state's governance. By this priciple the people are never at the mercy of the state; rather the state must find amicable ways in which to work with the people. I'm sure the American users here will correct me if I'm wrong.

No one in Britain ever seems to question the fact that our police are routinely armed. They carry batons and pepper spray with the sole purpose of using them as weapons. You may say that these weapons are there for our protection, but who will be the judge of that? It will inevitably be the police officer who ends up using it.
Our jaundiced view of weapons in this country makes our streets less safe, and breeds a culture of fear in which the carrying of a knife creates panic, but the act of driving a car is routine (despite cars being the most commonly used weapon in the world).

Couldn't agree more. As the old axiom goes, I fear the government that fears my weapons. Not that I consider knives to be a good choice as a defensive weapon -- mine are all tools -- some fancy, some plain, most sharp, all working or crafting tools. But remember that tasers and pepper spray, both routinely issued to police officers, are prohibited weapons. I can more easily obtain a centrefire rifle, a small cannon or a cap-and-ball revolver legally than I can one of these non-maiming defensive tools. Heck if I carried an umbrella, cane or a stick intending to use it to fend off attackers in extremis I would be guilty of an offence.

 

[_mark_]

Threads such as these get me down, they remind me of how absurd and strange the UK is becoming.

 

[budgetbus]

Threads such as these get me down, they remind me of how absurd and strange the UK is becoming.

This is a fact for me also.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

I believe that the average police officer acts in what they believe to be the public's interest. However an increasing body of legislative and policy decisions are influencing their decisions and reducing their powers of discretion. I assume this is your meaning also?

I think you're right. The police, of course bear no responsibility for the enacting of laws which may or may not rescind our freedoms. However, as you said, much of the enforcement of these laws hinges on officers discretion. I worked in security of the railway for a while, and worked closely with police officers. I have seen the best and worst of modern policing, and witnessed far too many officers basing their approach on superficial stereotypes such as race, gender, class, dress, age, etc. In my opinion these things should not affect an officers discretion, but they invariably do. Ask any black bushcrafter how often they've been searched for knives. Ask the same person if he got his knife back when he explained the "reason" for carrying it.
In my experience when an issue is left up to an officer's discretion there is generally a huge disparity in how such cases are dealt with.
Unfortunately the officer is merely enforcing the laws, laws which are made by politicians who have no idea how they will affect the public, politicians who have personal body guards and never need to worry about who will protect them, politicians who have never been searched twice in one day simply because the law allows the police to do that. When it comes to the crunch a politician will always lobby for a change in the law if it means more positive media coverage and the posibility of re-election.

 

[nigeltm]

I know a few Police Officers and the majority would prefer to use their discretion, but they can't. They give two reasons for this;

First, the fear of having the nice, respectable looking gent with the penknife walk away from them, down the road to his estranged wife's house where he proceeds to kill her and then himself. The Officer will then be held responsible by the media and the political elements within their force.

Second, despite the protestations of the politicians and senior management within the forces they do have a target culture and must justify their existance by recording detections. For example, and officer based in a London airport was called to attend a person who had a lock knife in their hand luggage. No real reason, just that they had forgotten it was in a side pocket (as many of us here have also done). He would have been happy to allow the knife to have been disposed of or posted back to the owner's home address. Unfortunately as the report had gone through channels and was recorded it had to be fully processed and now the knife owner has a criminal record.

So as others have said, don't blame the Police (in most cases). It's the blame and media driven culture we have allowed to develop in this counrty which is responsible.

Back to the original question. It is legal to carry almost any knife with a good reason. If you are worried, just as many have said here, keep them out of site and don't be a plonker and bring attention to yourself. That way you won't have to have a talk with a Police Officer in the first place!

 

[ged]

When on the railways ... the owner is entitled to forbid the carrying of knives ... and in this case ... there might be grounds for arrest by British Transport Police.

I'm not sure it's that cut and dry ... If you know of a particular bylaw then I would be interested.

I started searching through the Bye-laws but quickly found myself losing the will to live. Here's the BTP Website instead:

http://www.btp.police.uk/passengers/issues/knife_crime.aspx

"Operation Shield" started in 2006 I think.

 

[_mark_]

Personally I have found the UK police, while their job has become more demanding, have a greater professionalism and seem more inclined to use their own judgment?

The knife laws are absurd and don't hold up under scrutiny, I can buy a 10" kitchen knife from so many shops or a screwdriver or hammer and easily justify my reason for having it at almost any time, they're all lethal! I can also buy a newspaper and turn it into a Millwall brick or use it to set a fire! If your intention is to do harm weapons are commonplace.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

These were the byelaws we operated under when I worked on the railway. They allow for a huge amount of interpretation and hinge on the discretion of the authorised person(s) enforcing them.

2. Potentially dangerous items
(1) Except with written permission from the Operator or an authorised person, no person shall bring with him, attempt to bring with him or allow to remain on the railway any potentially dangerous item.

(2) A potentially dangerous item is an item which, in the reasonable opinion of an authorised person, may or may be used to threaten, annoy, soil or damage any person or any property. For the avoidance of doubt, a potentially dangerous item may include, but is not limited to:
(i) a loaded weapon of any kind;
(ii) any flammable, explosive or corrosive substance; and
(iii) any item which is or may become dangerous.

(3) If any person in charge of an item in breach of Byelaw 2(1) is asked by an authorised person to remove it and fails to do so immediately it may be removed by or under the direction of an authorised person.

 

[South Downs]

I saw a photo last year of 'blades & knives' siezed by police in a dodgy borough of London. ~70% were kitchen knives / stanley knives / half pairs of scissors. The other 30% were ridiculous flamboyant swirly knives (yobs trying to impress their mates). Not a single one was a sensible working / buscraft knife.....

I carry my fixed blade 'open carry', with my name on it, it's so abused from workiing on a farm 24/7 that i'd hope that along with the wellies, I have just cause for carrying it. Going into London changes everything though.....