Measuring 3 inches (non-locking); law and practice?

[Fadcode]

In all the years I have been married to a lawyer I have learned 2 things, never ever discuss anything legal with wifey and the law and logic have nothing in common, no intersection whatsoever. On the third hand I do not understand the UK legal system so I really do not have an opinion on that. If used for stabbing A would make sense, if used for slashing none of those (it does not make a difference).

If it was determined on the ability to stab, then all of those measurements wouldn't matter, as even a blade less then 3 inches could stab and kill someone, I know they had to draw the line somewhere, but the law does state, a knife or sharp implement, so in theory the length of the knife wouldn't matter or how big your pen, screwdriver, chisel, etc, etc was, the determinating factor would be why you have it, and what you intended to do with it..
Saying that, a good defense would be the way the Law is written, the following is copied from the Govt website, and you can see just how misleading it is.

It’s illegal to:

• sell a knife to anyone under 18, unless it has a folding blade 3 inches long (7.62 cm) or less
• carry a knife in public without good reason, unless it has a folding blade with a cutting edge 3 inches long or less
• carry, buy or sell any type of banned knife
• use any knife in a threatening way (even a legal knife)

You can see that point 1, does not refer to carrying, yet point 2 does, yet they both conflict each other regarding the length of the blade.
which in truth puts you in a precarious position if stopped and searched, and probably your attitude would be the important factor.

 

[demographic]

I'd interpret it as A but then again personally I just use smaller folding knives anyway.
Some that meet the legal criteria are damn ugly and almost guaranteed to draw attention so I see the Lansky World legal contraption as offensive.
Not so much illegal, just offensive.

I took a file to a Svord Peasant and shortened it by knocking on a quarter of an inch but the damn thing is still a bit numb to cart about in my back pocket.
One day I'll maybe modify the handle and round that weird pointy bit off but the whole thing is still a bit long for my needs anyway. Realistically I should have started out with a Mini Peasant.

I'm generally carrying a small locking folder at work (not into pubs and nightclubs) in addition to a stanley knife.
The Stanley for cutting plasterboard (well scoring it actually) and DPC against concrete as its cheap enough that I can just replace the blade but its handy to have a small properly sharp knife for opening the packaging on things, sharpening carpenters pencils and whatnot.

 

[petrochemicals]

a screwdriver is not a bladed article; (R v Davis [1998] Crim L.R. 564 CA);

nail file, tooth pick chopstick haven't been tested in court but I would imagine just like pencils and umbrellas they would use the same legal argument as a screwdriver

.

A screw driver is not a bladed article in the sense of slash cutting (it is called a screwdriver blade, but then again so is grass etc), but it is a pointed article over 3 inches in length, so it does not count as a blade but counts as a pointed article over 3 inches in length. A stanley is illegal based upon its fixed nature.

 

[Corso]

A screw driver is not a bladed article in the sense of slash cutting (it is called a screwdriver blade, but then again so is grass etc), but it is a pointed article over 3 inches in length, so it does not count as a blade but counts as a pointed article over 3 inches in length. A stanley is illegal based upon its fixed nature.

Why reply to my quote of Case law with your opinion? - Its not my opinion its the courts interpritation of the law and currently the final word on the subject, until the subject gets raised again in a higher court or the law changes

read about it here, I've even quoted the relivant parts for you

https://swarb.co.uk/regina-v-davies-cacd-1998/

'The court was asked whether a screwdriver fell within the prohibition of section 139(2). It was apparently an ordinary screwdriver with no sharp point, but it had what the trial judge had described as ‘blades positioned on each side of the driving head’.

The common sense assumption that lies behind that section is that Parliament sought to prevent or deter the carrying of what might be broadly called sharp instruments in public, not any article that has a blade — even if a screwdriver can be so described — but an article with a blade that falls within the same broad category as a knife or a sharply pointed instrument. That follows not only as a matter of common sense, but by looking at the specific items that are mentioned in the section, that is to say sharply pointed instruments or folding pocketknives, and inferring from that what the nature of the bladed article is to which Parliament was referring.
It seems to us, in that comparison, that it would be quite unlikely, indeed in our view impossible, that Parliament intended an article such as a screwdriver, just because it has a blade, to fall into the same category as a sharply pointed item or a folding pocketknife.

 

[TLM]

"‘blades positioned on each side of the driving head’."

That is a very weird screw driver.

I think that the smallest knife that was used for killing some one in the Finnish Police's Crime Museum is 50mm long.

 

[Tony]

The law states cutting edge, if it was the whole blade length they could have just said blade length...

 

[Corso]

The point of that statement being quoted was the judge had interpreted the legislation by stating

'The court was asked whether a screwdriver fell within the prohibition of section 139(2). It was apparently an ordinary screwdriver with no sharp point, but it had what the trial judge had described as ‘blades positioned on each side of the driving head’.

The Judge had ruled it wasn't a pointed article.

 

[Nice65]

I’ve often wondered if the law is deliberately slightly ambiguous to allow a certain amount of discretion for police officers and courts. There’s a big difference between a gardener who forgets they have the knife on them when they pop in the shop at lunchtime and those who are carrying the knife or spike for nefarious means.

 

[Corso]

CPS decides if a case meets two criteria

Is there enough evidence against the defendant?
Is it in the public interest for the CPS to bring the case to court?

 

[HillBill]

The wording of the law should be changed. As it stands in its current wording, you could have a 5" blade non locking knife, so long as only 3" or less is a cutting edge. Which would be legal by the word of the law.

 

[Corso]

I'm no expert at all but took a bit on an interest on how courts work after I was called up for Jury service - found the whole thing quite fascinating.

From what I understand there is a common sense approach to how laws are applied that gets sorted out in case law and that example would probably fall fowl of the mischief rule and be dismissed by the judge.

The main aim of the rule is to determine the "mischief and defect" that the statute in question has set out to remedy, and what ruling would "suppress the mischief, and advance the remedy". In applying the mischief rule, the court is essentially asking what part of the law did the law not cover, but was meant to be rectified by Parliament in passing the bill.

And the one that <3" locking blade fell foul of IIRC

It is one of three rules of statutory interpretation traditionally applied by English courts.

The other two being the plain meaning rule and the golden rule

 

[petrochemicals]

Why reply to my quote of Case law with your opinion? - Its not my opinion its the courts interpritation of the law and currently the final word on the subject, until the subject gets raised again in a higher court or the law changes

read about it here, I've even quoted the relivant parts for you

https://swarb.co.uk/regina-v-davies-cacd-1998/

'The court was asked whether a screwdriver fell within the prohibition of section 139(2). It was apparently an ordinary screwdriver with no sharp point, but it had what the trial judge had described as ‘blades positioned on each side of the driving head’.

The common sense assumption that lies behind that section is that Parliament sought to prevent or deter the carrying of what might be broadly called sharp instruments in public, not any article that has a blade — even if a screwdriver can be so described — but an article with a blade that falls within the same broad category as a knife or a sharply pointed instrument. That follows not only as a matter of common sense, but by looking at the specific items that are mentioned in the section, that is to say sharply pointed instruments or folding pocketknives, and inferring from that what the nature of the bladed article is to which Parliament was referring.
It seems to us, in that comparison, that it would be quite unlikely, indeed in our view impossible, that Parliament intended an article such as a screwdriver, just because it has a blade, to fall into the same category as a sharply pointed item or a folding pocketknife.

This has GOT to be a wind up.

 

[Broch]

The law states cutting edge, if it was the whole blade length they could have just said blade length...

So, on that basis, you feel you are within the law to carry a 100mm total blade length folding knife with a 20mm sharpened section (or any other sharpened edge less than 3")?

 

[SaraR]

The law for England and Wales states:

139 Offence of having article with blade or point in public place.
(1)Subject to subsections (4) and (5) below, any person who has an article to which this section applies with him in a public place shall be guilty of an offence.

(2)Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding pocketknife.

(3)This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches.
(my emphasis)

(4)It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had good reason or lawful authority for having the article with him in a public place.

....ETC...ETC...ETC....

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/33/section/139

There seem to be three ways to interpret this. The law says cutting edge, which could be Method B or C below, but most people (including the police and security) I have met would use Method A and measure "Blade Length". In discussions Method B is usually downplayed since it can greatly increase the "length" for blades with a lot of belly and people say it isn't used...anyone here say otherwise?

by Last Scratch, on Flickr

The knife pictured is sold as UK EDC legal.

A = 3 3/16 or 3.1875" or 81mm
B = 3 1/32 or 3.03125" or 77mm
C = 3 inches or 76.2mm (in this case, distance from tip to heel is same as shown)​

• Do you think this is is UK legal EDC?
• Would you be confident/comfortable carrying this knife EDC in the UK?
• Would you be confident that IF you encountered police or security, they would measure using C and not A?

I know that we have at least three police on here and would be interested in their view.

It seems like it is j..u..s..t legal (or will be after a sharpen or two), but I would expect to have a hard time with police if I were in a situation where it got measured.

Thoughts?

I've wondered about this too, after buying a "UK legal carry" that when measured has a length C that is at the legal limit, meaning that length A is longer or course.

 

[Janne]

When you buy a knife described, advertised and sold as 'UK legal carry' should that not be enough for them to pass scrutiny?
Are those knife models seen and approved by an authority, or is it just an unqualified opinion by the manufacturer/importer?

Just wondering.

 

[Stew]

I've wondered about this too, after buying a "UK legal carry" that when measured has a length C that is at the legal limit, meaning that length A is longer or course.

just because the seller has told you it's uk legal carry, doesn't mean it is.

 

[Stew]

This has GOT to be a wind up.

Not at all. It's very much the sort of thing that happens in court.

 

[Corso]

This has GOT to be a wind up.

Why because you don't like it?Or are you not sure about the link i posted

its here in black and white on the CPS website

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/offensive-weapons-knives-bladed-and-pointed-articles

Possession of Blades / Points
Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 1988 prohibits having an article with blade or point, in a public place (including a folding pocket knife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 7.62cm (3 inches)).

Section 139A of the 1988 Act extends the geographical scope of both of the above offences to school premises.

For the purposes of sections 139, 139A and 139AA of the CJA 1988:

• a butterknife, with no cutting edge and no point is a bladed article; (Booker v DPP 169 J.P. 368, DC);
• a screwdriver is not a bladed article; (R v Davis [1998] Crim L.R. 564 CA);
• a "lock knife" does not come into the category of "folding pocket knife" because it is not immediately foldable at all times; (R v Deegan [1998] 2 Cr. App. R. 121 CA).

If you read the judgement in full it makes a lot more sense than either of the other two judgments, Booker V DPP or the famous R v Deegan

If they had ruled in favour of a screwdriver falling foul alot of other ordinary objects would be banned too - pens,pencils, umbrellas

you have to remember this doesn't change the fact if it was modified or is brandished in a certain way if wouldn't fall foul of the offensive weapon act - thats a completly seperate law

So, on that basis, you feel you are within the law to carry a 100mm total blade length folding knife with a 20mm sharpened section (or any other sharpened edge less than 3")?

See post #31 - The Courts would see that as an attempt to get round the legislation and you'd be in alot of trouble with the Judge - expect a stiffer sentence than if you'd had been procecuted for having a >3" cutting edge slipjoint

 

[Broch]

See post #31 - The Courts would see that as an attempt to get round the legislation and you'd be in alot of trouble with the Judge - expect a stiffer sentence than if you'd had been procecuted for having a >3" cutting edge slipjoint

Exactly, so why would anyone assume that is what the law meant?

 

[Corso]

Exactly, so why would anyone assume that is what the law meant?

you've lost me? The law states what it states its up to the judiciary to apply it

I will say it again - ALL legislation is sorted in the end by case law