Reasons for carrying a knife (in the UK).......

[Stuart]

I've a question Martyn I always have one of those steel credit card survival tools in my pocket are they classed as a knife?
Dave.

I'll answer this one to give martyn a rest for a moment.

if your steel credit card survival tool has a sharp edge then it is considered a knife, depending on its design it could also be considered a fixed blade.

 

[Nemisis]

Yes it does have a sharpened edge thanks Stuart I asked because the end of the knife edge also forms part of the tin opener too. Many thanks.
Dave.

 

[Stuart]

If you have a question concerning knives and the law please read the UK Knife Law article in the BCUK articles section to see if it provides the answers you need before posting your question here

 

[JonnyP]

Just in case no-one else says it Martyn. Thanks for your work and level headed replies to this thread.

I guess you must get fed up of answering these same questions on BB but there is value in setting the record straight over here too.

Fully agree............Thanks Martyn, I have certainly had my questions answered and I think we have all been put in the picture now. If you want to lock this one down now, go ahead, because I think you have said it all................Jon
Have one on me

 

[Mantic]

There are quite a few people here saying that they 'would never carry a knife illegally'. Remember that it is not entirely up to us to determine whether that is the case or not.

If a member of the public believe that you are carrying an offensive weapon and your reason to do so doesn't satisfy the courts, then it's illegal.

I might feel that carrying a lock knife with the intention of doing some bushcraft whilst walking my dogs, is a fine and satisfactory reason. The courts may not.

Always double check your reasons and be certain that you are 'in the right'. I would never advocate making a reason up (doing so hurts our cause more than it helps it) but to have more than one reason is entirely plausable - so think before you carry

 

[Toddy]

I think my worry about all this is that I use knives constantly, a bit like Wayland, but in a great many different contexts. It's a pain in the butt having to remember that I have actually got a billhook and an axe and a saw in the car, and a scram and a bushcrafty knife, when I'm going for messages They're just tools to me, but not to everyone else I frequently carry a small rucsac instead of a handbag, my knives are comfortable there, but I have to remember to remove them all the time

Incidentally, I have a friend who is a nurse in the A & E of the major hospital in Glasgow city centre on the Friday/Saturday nights.
The vast majority of attacks with a blade are carried out using stanley knives or cheap rip off copies, available 10 for a £1. The carpet blade cuts out a chunk of flesh that is generaly so mangled that it can't be re-attached.

Can I ask? I have a friend who is 'officially' homeless. Her home *is* her car and whatever patch of woods she's using at the time. A basketmaker to trade, she carries a machete, an axe, an assortment of knives and axes all the time. How would that fair in the event she were stopped by police. Would the, "I have no where else to leave them," reason, hold water ?

Cheers,
Toddy

 

[Martyn]

There are quite a few people here saying that they 'would never carry a knife illegally'. Remember that it is not entirely up to us to determine whether that is the case or not.

If a member of the public believe that you are carrying an offensive weapon and your reason to do so doesn't satisfy the courts, then it's illegal.

I might feel that carrying a lock knife with the intention of doing some bushcraft whilst walking my dogs, is a fine and satisfactory reason. The courts may not.

Always double check your reasons and be certain that you are 'in the right'. I would never advocate making a reason up (doing so hurts our cause more than it helps it) but to have more than one reason is entirely plausable - so think before you carry

You are correct mantic. But remember, your reason for having a knife doesnt have to satisfy everybody, it just has to be reasonable to most reasonable people.

You dont have to worry too much about some overly entheusiastic individual who views any knife out of the kitchen as a murder weapon waiting to be used. They are marginal and unreasonable people. But if such a person informs the police, the police are duty bound to investigate. You would have to offer an explanation. Bushcrafting in the woods (like wot Ray Meers does officer) is perfectly reasonable. It's extremely unlikely that you would get any bad attention for doing that alone.

What you cant do, is carry any knife you like into any situation just bec ause you feel like it.

So you have to use your head and decide what would most people think is appropriate and fair. If you can honestly say that your knife carry is for some honest task or other, you have virtually nothing to worry about at all.

Be thankfull the choice is up to you. If the law actually specified a list of circumstances that are OK, it would be far, far more restrictive as anything not on the list would be illegal.

As it stands, you can carry a knife for any legitimate and reasonable purpose, without fear.

It's common sense really.

 

[Mantic]

Well, we can carry a knife (if our reason is reasonable)... for the moment.

Anyone who was involved with firearms has probably had alarm bells ringing like made for a while now.

 

[Martyn]

Well, we can carry a knife (if our reason is reasonable)... for the moment.

Anyone who was involved with firearms has probably had alarm bells ringing like made for a while now.

Aha, but you see how many housewives had a glock 17 in the kitchen drawyer?

The point is, no houswife is going to hand in her favourite Sabatier kitchen knife to this amnesty. While every kitchen drawyer is full of the deadliest knives you can find, any amnesty is a joke. This is the problem the lawmakers have. So long as large dangerous knives are a feature of every kitchen in the country and used daily by every perfectly innocent and benign housewife, there is no more chance of them being banned, than them banning the motor car.

Handguns were a very different proposition.

 

[BorderReiver]

Aha, but you see how many housewives had a glock 17 in the kitchen drawyer?

.

Don't forget Nottingham.

 

[Mantic]

Aha, but you see how many housewives had a glock 17 in the kitchen drawyer?

The point is, no houswife is going to hand in her favourite Sabatier kitchen knife to this amnesty. While every kitchen drawyer is full of the deadliest knives you can find, any amnesty is a joke. This is the problem the lawmakers have. So long as large dangerous knives are a feature of every kitchen in the country and used daily by every perfectly innocent and benign housewife, there is no more chance of them being banned, than them banning the motor car.

Handguns were a very different proposition.

Solid response Martyn. And yes, I am probably worrying more than I should. Mind you, couldn't the law be changed making knife carrying illegal for anything other than transportation to / from the home? The press are having their usual field day and reporting every single misuse of knives. I yearn for the day when I get to see the headline 50 million knives used each day without incident.

I have fears! I worry! Please use your crystal ball and promise me that all shall be well

 

[Martyn]

Solid response Martyn. And yes, I am probably worrying more than I should. Mind you, couldn't the law be changed making knife carrying illegal for anything other than transportation to / from the home?

Yes they could, but what would be the point? It would impact on millions of people who legitimately and peacefully use knives ever day as part of thier work or hobby ...and to what end? Any mugger, yardie, hoodie, criminal or schhol kid just has to walk into the kitchen and take moms favourite Sabatier fillet knife to go do his dirty business. Fortunately, the logic of this is pretty undeniable to even the most dissinterested. Regardless of what you think of the British law sysytem, laws aren't passed that easily and any law that impacted so massively on the population would need to be the result of an overwhelming need, or theoretically demonstrate clear benefirts for society. The banning of knives does niether. It's clear another solution to knife crime must be found.

The press are having their usual field day and reporting every single misuse of knives. I yearn for the day when I get to see the headline 50 million knives used each day without incident.

I have fears! I worry! Please use your crystal ball and promise me that all shall be well

I very, very much doubt that any legislation will be passed that further restricts knife usage or ownership. The solution lies elsewhere. I would like to see much harsher penalties for the misuse of knives under the current laws - bang em up, ramp up the deterrant. That would be a sensible way forward and is far more likely to be the object of any change in law.

 

[Mantic]

I quite agree - a law which increases penalties for crimes involving knife use would be far better than trying to ban knives.

I just worry that one day, I'll have to cut a loaf of bread with a spoon. I've tried before and it really isn't all that easy

 

[directdrive]

Hi: To me, a pocket knife is a tool, period. The fact that it might be used as a weapon holds no water to me. My automobile, my umbrella, the pen in my shirt pocket, my fist or boot or any number of other things could just as easily be used for a weapon as a knife could be used. Granted, a sheath knife with a six inch blade can also be used as a tool but is generally seen as a weapon, either offensive or defensive. A pocket knife on the other hand, with a blade of 4 inches or less, especially one with more than a single blade, should be thought of as a tool. Someone mentioned the Leatherman "tool"....that's just what it is, a tool. The fact that it has knife blades does not, in my opinion, make it a weapon. Knives have gotten a bad rap because they are mis-used by scum. In turn, the rest of the people who use them responsibly, must suffer.
My thoughts on the matter.
Bruce

 

[Martyn]

The fact that it has knife blades does not, in my opinion, make it a weapon.

You are quite right. But the laws agrees with you as well. There are very few example in British law, of objects being classified explicitly as a weapon. In the vast majority of cases, a weapon is any object a person might use, to inflict damage on another.

Section 1 of the 1953 prevention of crime act, does not list any objects in it's definition of "weapon". It simply says...

..."offensive weapon" means any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by some other person.

Any object can be described as a weapon, including a knife.

If you use a knife in a threatening manner, or carry one for self defense, you fall foul of the above law and the knife will be considered a weapon by law.

 

[Martyn]

If a police officer says...

...why are you carrying this swiss army knife?

and you reply

...to defend myself from muggers.

You have just confessed to a breach of section 1 of the 1953 prevention of crime act. The officer has just recieved a verbal confession from you that you are carrying the swiss army knife for the explicit intent of using it as a weapon, in the event you are attacked by a mugger. The officer can arrest you on the spot for carrying an offensive weapon and you will be charged and summarily convicted.

If a police officer says...

...why are you carrying this swiss army knife?

and you reply

...to sharpen my pencil.

You are gulty of nothing.

Context is everything!

 

[pteron]

Many excellent points made in this thread, and I'd like to add my thanks to Martyn for his educated and considered opinions.

Whilst we can agree that the Harris ruling was a low point in recent times, I go slightly further in that I'm concerned that the law has shifted from a burden of proof on the prosecution to that of the defendant. This, in my opinion, is a fundamentally bad idea. I do, however, appreciate that we are not going to change any laws, no matter how we rail against them, so effectively my position echoes Martyn's - work within the existing laws.

If you happen to have significant resources behind you, there is at least one level of the law untested (re Harris), but I'd recommend waiting for the climate to be rather more tolerent than it is currently.

 

[Martyn]

If you happen to have significant resources behind you, there is at least one level of the law untested (re Harris), but I'd recommend waiting for the climate to be rather more tolerent than it is currently.

Ahhh, sadly no (weren't you discussing something to do with this with Danzo ages ago?).

It has been tested through the court of appeal. Deegan v Regina - Deegan lost and the Harris ruling was upheld.

It even went to appeal in the Lords...

8. Appeal Committee—The 78th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made:

Regina v. Deegan (Petitioner)— That leave to appeal be refused.

I'm afraid the Harris ruling has now been tested in every court in the land and sadly, only an act of parliament can now overturn it (I doubt that will happen anytime soon).

I'm afraid all magistrates and crown court judges are now absolutely bound to view the Harris ruling as Law.

 

[gregorach]

For those wondering what the heck the Harris ruling is, it's the decision that a lock knife is equivalent to a fixed blade for legal purposes.

 

[Martyn]

Yes, sorry, quite right.