Assault knife ban...

S

Spyderman

New member
Since Amercians today are "plagued" with the edged weapon violence "crisis", I propose an Assault Knife ban to prevent such atrosities in the future and put an end to "edged weapon violence" on our streets. The recent attacks on people such as George Harrison, formerly of the Beatles, put this "crisis" in the fore-front of the minds of the American people. We must act while this tradegy is still fresh in the minds of the general public. Immediate action such as this will prevent such acts of edged weapon violence by reducing the number of assault knives on our streets, thereby eliminating there use, since these are the edged weapons of choice by gangbangers and criminals.
The following is a list of specific knife models/manufacturers that are considered Assault Kinves and are not particularly suited to sporting use.

1. Spyderco
2. SOG
3. Hibben
4. Gerber
5. Buck

Also prohibited from private ownership would be any knife that meets the following criteria.

1. Any "consealable" knife; this includes any folding knife or other type of knife that allows the blade to be fully or partially enclosed within the handle.

2. Any knife with an irregularly serrated edge such as spyderedge or other similar designs.

3. Any knife that has a point or spike that protrudes conspicuously below the hand grip.

4. Any knife that has a guard that fully or partially covers the hand.

5. Any knife that is in excess of 7 (seven) ounces in weight.

6. Any knife which has a blade in excess of (five) inches.

7. Any knife which has a handle designed for or large enough for two handed use.

Exceptions will be granted to Law enforcement and military personnel, as well as professional meat/poultry handlers.

Any knife manufactured prior to 1900 will be excluded as having significant historical value, but will require the owner to apply and be granted at his/her own cost a "Historical Weapon" permit to be issued by the BATF.

All of the above listed Assault Knives must be relinquished through local law enforcement channels within 90 days of enactment of this law, with the exception of those owned by the previously mentioned exclusionary groups. Those in such groups must apply and be granted an Assualt Knife permit and must register their knives with the BATF.

We should also initiate a class action lawsuit against these assault knife manufacturers in order to recover damages caused by the irresponsible marketing of a dangerous and deadly product to those who intend to harm others.

Yes, this is a joke, but is makes about as much sense as most of the garbage spewed by the likes of HCI and friends.
 
Its not really a joke. Legislation has been proposed in England to outlaw the Possesion of "dangerous" knives.

[This message has been edited by Hard Ball (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
No joke here in Western Australia either.

Get caught carrying even a pocket knife here without "just cause" and you're in deep shi --- err, sheep dip.

Double-edged blades are just plain prohibited.

B
 
Correction to Hard Ball, they passed a knife bill banning advertisements for combat knives. The original Bill to ban combat knives failed because they couldn't define what a combat knife was.

After the church incident there are murmurs of a Bill to ban swords. Last year there was talk of a national knives register where the purchase of a knife would be reigstered. The Home Office claims a pilot scheme in Coventry reduced knife crime.

Switchblades and flick knives are illegal.

And if you are searched by the police, which they can do at will thanks to the Criminal Justice Act, and you are found with a knife they can charge you with posession of an offensive weapon (unless it is a tool used in a trade).

It is not unknown that if they do search you and find a lock knife, even if it is used as a legitimate tool, the police will attempt to confiscate it and intimidate you into signing a form relinquishing your rights to your property.

Thanks to the dangerous dogs act you can't have a guard dog anymore, and if an intruder is bitten by your dog you are in effect a criminal for failing to prevent it.

And of course this does b***** all to reduce crime but makes politicians look like they're doing something.

Someone once said a statesmen is a dead politician, lord knows we need more statesmen.

------------------
"Quemadmoeum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
("A sword is never a killer, it's a tool in the killer's hands.") -
Lucius Annaeus Seneca "the Younger" (ca. 4 BC-65 AD).
 
Spyderman, you cut close to the bone but, may need to hone the legalities to make your proposed legislation the greatest thing since sliced bread - not to put too fine of edge on it. 'Course, it could cut both ways.

But, I've been accused of having a sharp tongue.
 
The only legal way to force the turn-in of these evil, horrible bad-nasty knives (or any other bad-nasty item) is to use the power of eminent domain. "The taking of private property for the good of the public at large".

The only way to do this is via payment of fair market value. It is quite possible to request a jury trial to establish the fair market value.

Now, if one multiplies the cost to government of a jury trial, times the number of bad-nasty items...

Orange County, Kalifornia's bankruptcy was chump-change...

:), Art
 
The legislation is not just proposed, it is a fact. A man was arrested for brandishing a knife. He was cutting the string from a bundle of newspapers. This thing has been in effect for a number of months. This is not a joke. Do not get caught taking a knife on your person or baggage into GB.
 
ak9:

Take a knife into GB!? Heck, I don't even intend/want to leave the US, and there are significant parts of that I don't really want to travel to - Kali, IL, DC, NY, MA come immediately to mind. Really anywhere that doesn't give reciprocity for my CCW.

JimR
 
What's next in GB, large sticks?

I can find several items on my desk right now that could be used to kill a man, not including the knifes and guns.

Let's see, yeb got a pencil, it's sharp, I bet if I stuck it someone's ear they would be seriously injured or killed. Hmmmm....got a nice big lamp...if I knocked someone in the head with this I bet they would be seriously injured or killed-especially if I hit them on the temple....ok, oh yea the lamp has got a three foot cord. I bet I could take it and wrap it around a mans neck and pull it real tight they would be seriously injured or killed.

See my point? Pretty soon all you got left is is Nerf balls and pillows...oh no wait, if I took that pillow and held it against a man face I bet he would be seriously injured or killed.

The fact is guns, knifes,pencils, lamps, lamp cords or pillows don't kill people.
People kill people. Now when they outlaw people, the murders will stop.

------------------
The new guy.

"I'm totin, this pistol because my dang SKS won't fit in my holster"
 
This is seldom mentioned.

When weapons are outlawed (or otherwise unavailable), the physically weak become the undefended prey of the strong.

My youngest daughter recognized this early - but that's another story.
 
Yes, Dennis.

God made man.
Sam Colt made them equal.



------------------
The new guy.

"I'm totin, this pistol because my dang SKS won't fit in my holster"
 
Dennis, I try to make that point with anti-self defense women. When they say it would be a better world without guns, I walk them through how they will do against a large, determined BG, who happens to be unarmed. Unfortunately, most of them appear unwilling to actually consider the reality of that situation. Others, thankfully, begin to open their eyes.

Lone Ranger, are you kidding about that 'dangerous dogs act'? Oh boy.
 
It has been a few years since I read the numbers so please excuse me if these numbers may be a little off. Take 125 lbs.(avg) man and 125 lbs.(avg) woman. The man will be anywhere from 10 to 30% stronger. 150lbs. man will be 50-70% stronger then the 125Lbs woman. 185 lbs man will be 100-150% stronger. There were numbers for larger men, but one of the numbers I do remember was was the punching power of a 210lbs. man vs 185 lbs. man. Twice as much. That is why the weight divisions were realigned for boxing. The average woman has never been assaulted by even a mid sized male in full fury, let alone a 210 lbs. + male. Most women have this vague notion that reason can always be applied to ward off force or that some LEO is only a cell call away to protect them. The Simpson case ought to have sent red flags up in the female community to the absurdity of this reasoning, but we men have helped condition them to it. How long did it take to have her head nearly severed from her body even after a spirited, but ineffectual defense by her average male protector? Having lost a sister to one of these predators, you are doing a terrible disservice to those women you love if you do not encourage them to consider their own defense requirements. You may not be able to lead a horse to water and make it drink, but at least it may be forced to consider its own reflection.

[This message has been edited by ak9 (edited December 31, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by ak9 (edited December 31, 1999).]
 
ak9, your figures re: relative force are very interesting to me. I would like to explore this logic further - do you know of any good source for such data? This would be powerful information in a debate or presentation. Thanks.
 
I don't know which universe politicians reside in, but for those of us who live in the real world, we know that it ain't all peace, brotherhood, and happiness out there.
Bad people do, and will continue to, exist, no matter how many laws are passed against their activities. The best we can hope for is to minimize criminal activity, and one way to do that is to recognize a person's right to protect himself, whether it be with a gun, or a knife, or a guard dog, or a big stick.

As far as I'm concerned, any government that does not recognize your right to self-protection has no moral right or reason to exist.

AK9, your figures on size vs. strength are interesting. I'm on the small side, and I'll be damned if I'm going to even try to go toe-to-toe with someone who's bigger than me. If retreat is at all a possibility, then I'll run like hell. But if it's not an option, and there is someone intent on doing me harm, regardless of whether they appear to be armed or not, rest assured that I'll take whatever means necessary to save my skin. Politicians act as if it's a level playing field out there, but people come in all shapes, sizes, and strength levels, and this needs to be factored into their idiotic "thinking" when they pass anti-weapon laws.

If politicians recognized the size/strength disparity which exists in the population, maybe we could do away with weight equipment in prisons that allows convicts to pack on large amounts of jailhouse muscle, creating even stronger potential criminals.
DAL

------------------
Reading "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal," by Ayn Rand, should be required of every politician and in every high school.
 
My recollection was that it came out of the study the pentagon had commissioned when when women in combat units first came to light. The contention was that women could be built up to strength to equal the men. It was from this that they developed the compromise that no extraordinary strength was require to fly modern combat aircraft due to boosted hydraulic controls and allowed the women into the cockpits. Since then a new study came out(4 or 5 years old now, which was subsequently supressed-read that destroyed) that indeed many hydraulically boosted controlled aircraft required extraordinary strength to fly when faced with the loss of the boosted hydraulic controls, especially helicopters and that all female crews that were tested did no do well at all when tested. If I told you where I got em I'd have to...., just kidding. You might try the Army, Navy, Marine Corps Times publications. I think they had a synopsis in there. That would go back to 1990 or 91 at least. The numbers appeared in other offical publications, but I could not begin to tell you where to look for those. Remember these numbers are not PC, so you will probably get the runaround. I'm sure the military did not do all the testing and that the info was supplied by outside medical sources. There is a website which specifically deals with the issue against women in combat. They might have that info. I will see if I can find it for you and get back to you. Remember, those numbers come from a few years ago, and I'm not getting any younger. Maybe someone else remembers the study and can shine a little more light on the numbers.
 
Sorry guys but I wasn't kiddding, there is a Dangerous Dogs Act in the UK and this makes attack dogs illegal.

------------------
"Quemadmoeum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
("A sword is never a killer, it's a tool in the killer's hands.") -
Lucius Annaeus Seneca "the Younger" (ca. 4 BC-65 AD).
 
Attack dog laws? Not just in GB, we've got some new ones here in Kali!! If I remember right, these don't specify breed or anything, just whether or not the animal is "agressive". Better hide your attack poodles folks!
-Spyderman
 
LOL, I have recently been smitten with the "knife bug" and cannot leave em alone. I try to collect the most rare and dastardly looking evil blades I can find, ( along with a little knowledge ) many are not the most expensive... yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top