UK legal every day carry multitool - the perfect solution.

[Countryman]

Seems to be a lot of confusion on this topic.

I hope that everyone is clear that you are allowed to carry no more than a pen knife with a non locking blade under 3" unless you have a good reason to do so. Camping, fishing etc are good reason to carry a larger folder, lock knife or fixed blade only while you are doing them. Going to buy petrol or coffee from a shop or services whilst going to or from one of these activities is not good reason to be carrying one.

Any form of lock on any sort of blade constitutes a fixed blade and could put you in bother. This was written into law probably to stop retractable Stanley knives but potentially sweeps into it a lot of blades.

In a places such as a pub or school or court or airplane you shouldn't even have an otherwise legal blade.

Our laws are not aimed at the average family man heading off for some time in the green but at the kind of thug that thinks he must carry a knife to defend themselves.

Expect some common sense from our police force but don't put yourself in an ambiguous situation where what you are carrying could be considered a weapon.

If you have a knife from any of the above activities in your car then pack it away in the boot or even a locked glove box. Do not let be said that you have it in reach in your car for self defence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Joonsy]

That's why there is case law. Then the court clarifies what is and is not included.

When a case goes to court and the sentence a judge can pass if a person is convicted is mostly governed by ''Precedent'', precedent is the term used for what has happened in previous cases of a similar nature, those previous cases will determine that you will be judged and sentenced if convicted in the same way as those previous cases. Judges are not as neutral as one might think, they must judge and sentence you by ''precedent'' even if they disagree with a previous court ruling themselves. Rarely does a case go to court without precedent (which means no such case has ever been tried in court) and as such these cases are called test cases. Judges do not like tests cases because they know that in judging them they are setting a precedent for the outcome of all future cases of a similar manner, the ruling and sentencing of a test case sets a ''precedent'' that all future judges have to abide by in similar cases. Therefore if you are ever tried in court what happens to you is not really decided by the judge in court on the day but by the judge who set the precedent on a previous case. A judge does not pass sentence by what he considers is right himself, he passes sentence based on ''precedent'' and his hands are tied in that respect.

 

[Buckshot]

The other thing to bear in mind is that so far we've mainly been talking about the knife act (or whatever it's called)
There's also several other laws that can have a bearing on the case - the offensive weapons act for one which allows someone to be arrested for carrying an umbrella or comb for instance

So be careful and don't put yourself in that situation

 

[breacher]

The other thing to bear in mind is that so far we've mainly been talking about the knife act (or whatever it's called)
There's also several other laws that can have a bearing on the case - the offensive weapons act for one which allows someone to be arrested for carrying an umbrella or comb for instance

So be careful and don't put yourself in that situation

Offensive weapons -

3 types -

1 - Made - An article made for attack such as a truncheon - no other use.
2 - Adapted - A snooker cue shortened to truncheon length or a copper pipe filled with lead shot.
3 - Intended - An otherwise "ordinary" article carried with the intent to use it as a weapon.

You can ONLY be arrested for a comb or umbrella if you ADMIT you are carrying it intending to use it as a weapon. Or if you had adapted it by sharpening the point perhaps.

As long as you have not adapted your multitool or state that its carriage is for self defence, there is nothing on it that can be classified as an offensive weapon.

 

[Countryman]

Not absolutely right I'm afraid Breacher.

Most multitools have a locking method. So the person carrying it would need to show good reason.

Pull out an otherwise inoffensive item and brandish it as a threat and just about anything can be classed as a weapon.

This is sometimes the turning point from assault to aggravated assault and from manslaughter to murder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dwardo]

Leatherman Juice for me. Carried one for about 5 years now.
Eye watering expensive for the size but a very good tool with no worries about having to explain why you have it within reason.

 

[Laurentius]

Leatherman Juice for me. Carried one for about 5 years now.
Eye watering expensive for the size but a very good tool with no worries about having to explain why you have it within reason.

Absolutely, before I lost mine in a car park, I used it to break back into my own home after I had locked myself out, in the presence of a policeman I might add.

 

[breacher]

Not absolutely right I'm afraid Breacher.

Most multitools have a locking method. So the person carrying it would need to show good reason.

Pull out an otherwise inoffensive item and brandish it as a threat and just about anything can be classed as a weapon.

This is sometimes the turning point from assault to aggravated assault and from manslaughter to murder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is pretty much what I said !!

Yes, if you brandish your multitool as a threat you have just shown intent and therefore the otherwise legal tool now becomes an intended offensive weapon.

But, as long as you DONT brandish it / have intent, DONT adapt it, then nothing on the tool is MADE as a weapon.

Oh - and having a lock is NOT what makes one require a reason - the LACK of a lock on a POCKET KNIFE is exempted.

That does not mean that a can opener that locks into position requires a reason to carry.


On another matter when it comes to reason - if I were ever challenged about why I carry a bladeless multitool 24/7 ( ie not fishing or camping or the usual reasons ) I would simply say its reassuring to have it when its needed.

I have carried a spare wheel for over 30 years of driving. Not once have I ever used it. But I carry on carrying it anyway. I have worn a seat belt for 30 years of driving and not once actually needed it. I carry a hi-viz jacket in the car and have never needed it.

Carrying a folding pocket knife and / or a multitool is merely being prepared for emergencies.

I intend to carry on carrying 24/7 and wish to comply with the law relating to lock knives which is why I went bladeless on the tool.

As to the other pointed bits on a multitool - if they were regarded as contravening Sect 139, I would imagine that at least ONE case would have come to court by now. Especially considering how common these tools are becoming. But not one person has been prosecuted because his corkscrew or screwdriver or can opener part of the tool was considered a pointed article !!!!!

 

[Countryman]

Point is that if you are carrying a knife over the prescribed 3" you are potentially committing an offence no matter the purpose, intent or innocence of your thought process. It would be for you to persuade a magistrate of the legitimacy of your good reason as a defence.

Waving anything at someone would probably be assault and it just gets worse from there.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mrcharly]

But not one person has been prosecuted because his corkscrew or screwdriver or can opener part of the tool was considered a pointed article !!!!!

That's not true.
I've read of one case of prosecution based on the corkscrew on an SAK. OK, it was a daft prosecution and mostly because the defendant utterly failed the attitude test, but that is at least one prosecution. If I've read of one, there will be more I haven't heard of.

 

[breacher]

That's not true.
I've read of one case of prosecution based on the corkscrew on an SAK. OK, it was a daft prosecution and mostly because the defendant utterly failed the attitude test, but that is at least one prosecution. If I've read of one, there will be more I haven't heard of.

That's very interesting - do you have a link ?

 

[Laurentius]

I am somewhat surprised that Leatherman, Gerber and the other multitool makers do not make more tools without locking blades for the UK market. I still do not see any problem with a Juice, unless of course the pliers are too small for what you require and the only alternatives have locking blades. In that case though, just carry a pair of pliers, I expect there are folding ones to be had somewhere, just as there are folding secateurs, if it is compactness you are after.

For my part my SAK farmer is something I use as a tool on a very regular basis, not something I carry just because I have the right to do it. I think however it would be better if the screwdriver locked. Likewise when I still had my juice it was tool I used for a multitude of small tasks, indeed I lost it in a car park after having used it to tighten a loose nut on my car.

 

[janso]

I know it's technically breaking the law but I've carried my leatherman supertool 300 for years on my belt regardless and the early model before that not long after they came out. I'm not saying that it's right, I'm just saying that if you do carry and have no 'official' reason to back it up, then look out and take your chance. I recently asked a friend off duty about it and he described exactly what the law constitutes bit also the mitigating circumstances...


Sent from my hidey hole using Tapatalk... sssh!

 

[mrcharly]

That's very interesting - do you have a link ?

It was on British Blades. You'd have to search the site I'm afraid.

 

[John Fenna]

A while ago I was chatting to an on duty police officer (actually a Sargent I think) and it came around to multi tools. I asked him if he carried one and he said he did. I asked him if it was issue kit and he said it was not. I asked him if it had a locking blade and he said it did. I asked him if he had a reason to carry it and he said it was "just in case he needed it".
I asked if that was really a valid reason that I could use if asked by an officer and he said it was not.
Soooo I asked if Police were above the law as applied to civilians and he said they were not, so I pointed out that he was therefor carrying a "weapon" without a reasonable cause and could be arrested ... and he said "technically yes!"

I do not think that some newly passed out constable would have arrested him.

I pointed out that as we were chatting I was carrying both locking bladed tools and a fixed bladed knife but as I was off to use them in my woods I was acting in a lawful way while he was not - and he agreed.
We then went on to chat about axes, machetes and billhooks (which he had never heard of!) until he got a call on his radio and had to motor off to uphold the law.

 

[Nice65]

That's very interesting - do you have a link ?

Here. It's a long read, but it does illustrate the effect of a problem attitude with regards to pointed objects.

http://www.britishblades.com/forums...screw-is-a-pointed-object&highlight=Corkscrew

 

[breacher]

Here. It's a long read, but it does illustrate the effect of a problem attitude with regards to pointed objects.

http://www.britishblades.com/forums...screw-is-a-pointed-object&highlight=Corkscrew

That was not an attitude to pointed objects - that was a police officer who was being taunted by a complete bottom and took the bait.

When the op FINALLY gave the full story he confirmed he was sitting in his car "letting it warm up" before driving home. An officer spoke to him. He replied -

Originally Posted by corkscrew_2012 

a policeman approached and engaged my friend in conversation. He then asked me where I was going. I told him it was none of his business and that I didn’t speak to the fuzz

He goes on to say he locked up the car and was then going to walk home ? WALK ? A min ago he was warming up the car to drive home !

He then got arsey when asked for a breath test and was arrested.

The alcohol test was passed at the station. There no doubt he insulted the Sgt "fuzz" too !!! And all concerned charged him purely to inconvenience him.

Is that proper ? No ! Is it unfair ? Damn right. But play silly games and you get silly prizes.

I note the op also got arrested previously ? For sec 5 ? Sounds like he has issues in how he speaks to police ?

I am still of the belief that "pointed article" does not cover the toothpick on my SAK or the scissors, or the corkscrew. Or indeed my pencil. And that if stopped by police and refrain from silliness, common sense will be applied.

 

[Corso]

Here. It's a long read, but it does illustrate the effect of a problem attitude with regards to pointed objects.

http://www.britishblades.com/forums...screw-is-a-pointed-object&highlight=Corkscrew

look at #395 - case was dropped

frankly most of the worry we have surrounding pointed objects or 'blades' is as much our own doing as law abiding citizens as anyone else - I stopped worrying about it a long time ago....

 

[Robbi]

frankly most of the worry we have surrounding pointed objects or 'blades' is as much our own doing as law abiding citizens as anyone else - I stopped worrying about it a long time ago....

spot on matey

 

[British Red]

It is surprising how much attitude goes to smooth the way. Had a puncture once and had to move stuff out of the boot at the roadside to get at the spare. The old Bill turned up as I was putting half a dozen cased rifles, ammo cans etc. on the road side. I immediately checked my ticket was handy expecting them to get a bit highly strung. They never even asked to see it - just asked if I needed help Nice guys.