UK legal knives

[Spencer Lee]

Well that's not very nice.

If you take a deep breath and read the 88 act, you will see that a 'normal folding pocket knife' which is defined as a non locking folder with a blade less than 3" is specifically excluded from the act. If you cant be bothered then the relevant part, which has already been quoted here numerous times, is:

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

You must remember that we are talking about the law here, there is nothing practicable or reasonable about it. Also there are usually numerous offences relating to one set of circumstances, but with regard to the OPs original question, the knife he wants to buy is excluded from the 53 act.

As for football matches, there may well be specific legislation relating to football grounds as there is for schools.

And if you take a deep breath you will notice that the OP did not ask about the CJA 88 act, he ask about the legalities of carrying a knife, specifically into a Pub so, even if the knife is 'legal' iaw CJA 88, it is illegal under the The Prevention of Crime Act 1953 which prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
The term "offensive weapon" is defined as: "any article made or adapted for use to causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use".

[Huertecilla]

You must remember that we are talking about the law here, there is nothing practicable or reasonable about it.

Sadly true.
From the pov of the average citizen that is.

One should fear a ruling system which fears citizens being able to defend themselves.
We can see it happening in the States; the second amendment is because of this; ironically primairily against English colonial rule, and it is hollowed out as the State seeks controll using security as the main argument.

Same thing in Europe. Our safety is given as the reason why we cannot carry an Opinel pocket knife....
Has anyone researched the relations between crime and arms control laws? It does not seem to have much effect on London gangs nor Latino street gangs in madrid or gipsy clans over here.

[Reeny]

The 88 act where the knives are exempt is only one law.

The exemption does not extend to The Prevention of Crime Act 1953 which "prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon".
An offensive weapon is one where there is an intent to harm (regardless of how it was made or adapted).

I thought a wooden stick or your fists can be considered as an offensive weapon.
The police may need to question you about your intent (and therefore your reasons) to possess a UK "legal to carry" knife.

Summary:
- Legal to carry knives can be taken into public places.
- Legal to carry knives can be considered as an offensive weapon.
- The police are entitled to ask questions if there is a need to establish "an intent to harm"
- Taking them into a pub by accident and leaving it in your pocket isn't a problem (but taking it out and flashing it around to show your mates could be a major problem)

[Huertecilla]

And if you take a deep breath you will notice that the OP did not ask about the CJA 88 act, he ask about the legalities of carrying a knife, specifically into a Pub so, even if the knife is 'legal' iaw CJA 88, it is illegal under the The Prevention of Crime Act 1953 which prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
The term "offensive weapon" is defined as: "any article made or adapted for use to causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use".

Thank you.
How does this affect self defense.
Carrying an object made or adapted to minimise causing injury to the person and intended for personal defense only.
That takes the ´offensive´ out of the equasion.

[london lad]

And if you take a deep breath you will notice that the OP did not ask about the CJA 88 act, he ask about the legalities of carrying a knife, specifically into a Pub so, even if the knife is 'legal' iaw CJA 88, it is illegal under the The Prevention of Crime Act 1953 which prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
The term "offensive weapon" is defined as: "any article made or adapted for use to causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use".

I so sorry but yet again you are wrong. If you read my posts above on the 53 act you will see that a knife (not a bayonet or sword) is not an offensive weapon per se under the 53 act as it is not made or adapted for causing injury.

The law (unfortunately) is not a simple set of rules that everyone can easily understand. The basic offences are massively complicated by definitions of wording, exceptions, sub sections, defences and case law. For example, the definition of 'public place' varies massive dependant on which act or section of law you are considering.

Anyway to sum up, a sub 3 inch non locking folder is not an offensive weapon per se under the 53 act as its not made or adapted for causing injury. If the person who has it with him in a public place intends to cause injury with it the the offence is complete. This is for the police to prove. I'm assuming the OP doesn't intent to stab anyone so no offence in his case.

I have been a serving police officer and also studied this and other criminal legislation at length.

[london lad]

Thank you.
How does this affect self defense.
Carrying an object made or adapted to minimise causing injury to the person and intended for personal defense only.
That takes the ´offensive´ out of the equasion.

A whole new can of worms but in basic terms in the UK you are not allowed to carry anything for self defence in a public place. By doing so you would fall foul of the 53 act as you would have something 'intended' to cause injury. A weapon of self defence designed not to cause injury would in theory be OK but I cant think of one other that dye sprays but even that's a debatable point.

[Huertecilla]

A whole new can of worms but in basic terms in the UK you are not allowed to carry anything for self defence in a public place. By doing so you would fall foul of the 53 act as you would have something 'intended' to cause injury. A weapon of self defence designed not to cause injury would in theory be OK but I cant think of one other that dye sprays but even that's a debatable point.

[london lad]

They are both specifically prohibited in the UK under yet more separate legislation!

[Spencer Lee]

I so sorry but yet again you are wrong. If you read my posts above on the 53 act you will see that a knife (not a bayonet or sword) is not an offensive weapon per se under the 53 act as it is not made or adapted for causing injury.

The law (unfortunately) is not a simple set of rules that everyone can easily understand. The basic offences are massively complicated by definitions of wording, exceptions, sub sections, defences and case law. For example, the definition of 'public place' varies massive dependant on which act or section of law you are considering.

Anyway to sum up, a sub 3 inch non locking folder is not an offensive weapon per se under the 53 act as its not made or adapted for causing injury. If the person who has it with him in a public place intends to cause injury with it the the offence is complete. This is for the police to prove. I'm assuming the OP doesn't intent to stab anyone so no offence in his case.

I have been a serving police officer and also studied this and other criminal legislation at length.

The physical structure of the weapon does not make it offensive, it is the context of the carrying of the weapon that makes it offensive and, unless you have a good reason to be carrying it in that context, you have nothing to fear but if not, the Police are onto a winner. I'm thrilled to bits you are an ex Police officer and you have applied yourself to these studies but if you don't read what people have written you will not understand them.

For the record, i am not, nor have been a Police Officer or expert in the law but have been making, selling and collecting knives for the last ten years.

[london lad]

If any one is really interested here is a link to a Law Society Gazette article on the 88 and 53 acts.

It shows how the law is an evolving thing and as this was written in 1989 some of the case law quoted has since been overturned.

It gives a good indication as to how complex legislation is and how difficult it is to interpret.

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/off...al-justice-act

[london lad]

The physical structure of the weapon does not make it offensive, it is the context of the carrying of the weapon that makes it offensive and, unless you have a good reason to be carrying it in that context, you have nothing to fear but if not, the Police are onto a winner. I'm thrilled to bits you are an ex Police officer and you have applied yourself to these studies but if you don't read what people have written you will not understand them.

For the record, i am not, nor have been a Police Officer or expert in the law but have been making, selling and collecting knives for the last ten years.

Yes it does! As I've already written above but will repeat:

For the 53 act the item has to be made, adapted OR intended by the person having it with them for causing injury.

So items made or adapted for causing injury are offensive weapons per se without any intention being required.

A bayonet with a blood groove is an example of an item made for causing injury. It is an offensive weapon per se regardless of your intent to cause injury

An orange with razor blades stuck in it is an example of an item adapted for causing injury. It is an offensive weapon per se regardless of your intent to cause injury

An ordinary knife is not an offensive weapon per se as it was not made or adapted for causing injury, it was made for cutting things, so intent is required.

You are confusing the definition of an offensive weapon with the 'defence' of 'good reason' they are two separate things.

I too am a collector.

[Huertecilla]

They are both specifically prohibited in the UK under yet more separate legislation!

´Interesting´ isn´t it?!

[Spencer Lee]

Yes it does! As I've already written above but will repeat:

For the 53 act the item has to be made, adapted OR intended by the person having it with them for causing injury.

So items made or adapted for causing injury are offensive weapons per se without any intention being required.

A bayonet with a blood groove is an example of an item made for causing injury. It is an offensive weapon per se regardless of your intent to cause injury

An orange with razor blades stuck in it is an example of an item adapted for causing injury. It is an offensive weapon per se regardless of your intent to cause injury

An ordinary knife is not an offensive weapon per se as it was not made or adapted for causing injury, it was made for cutting things, so intent is required.

You are confusing the definition of an offensive weapon with the 'defence' of 'good reason' they are two separate things.

I too am a collector.

JESUS WEPT! OK we'll walk through this by stages and if you don't understand, well work with it.

The physical structure of a knife which has a blade of les then 3" and is not a fixed or locking blade does not make it offensive. It is legal to carry in a public place.

If you are in a public place and, for some reason, the Police elect to stop you and search you, they should have a reasonable reason to do so, yes?

OK, if the Police believe you do not have a good reason to be carrying it they can a) arrest you, b) confiscate it or c) request you return it home.

This is the context i refer to. You cannot walk down the street playing with a folding knife with the thought that it is legal and you can carry it without fear of contradiction.

So, the physical structure of the knife itself is mute; it may be a legal, non-locking folder but the context of the carry dictates whether it is offensive or not.

The other thing is, you keep missing a bit off the end of PCA 53:

The Prevention of Crime Act 1953 prohibits the possession in any public place of an offensive weapon without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
The term "offensive weapon" is defined as: "any article made or adapted for use to causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use".

'or intended by the person having it with him for such use' is the bit where the Police can have reasonable cause to question the reason why the individual is carrying the knife.

[Huertecilla]

I use a folder quite a lot on the farm and having to use two hands to open it is not very handy to say the least. An automatic locker would be very much a practical knife. They can be bought over here but they are VERY tricky to own and carry. So tricky that I have disposed of the one I had.

[london lad]

JESUS WEPT! OK we'll walk through this by stages and if you don't understand, well work with it.

The physical structure of a knife which has a blade of les then 3" and is not a fixed or locking blade does not make it offensive. It is legal to carry in a public place.

If you are in a public place and, for some reason, the Police elect to stop you and search you, they should have a reasonable reason to do so, yes?

OK, if the Police believe you do not have a good reason to be carrying it they can a) arrest you, b) confiscate it or c) request you return it home.

This is the context i refer to. You cannot walk down the street playing with a folding knife with the thought that it is legal and you can carry it without fear of contradiction.

So, the physical structure of the knife itself is mute; it may be a legal, non-locking folder but the context of the carry dictates whether it is offensive or not.

You are now confusing and mixing up different bits of the 88 and 53 acts. 'Offensive weapon' is only applicable to the 53 act and the 'sub 3" non locking folder' is the definition of a 'folding pocket knife' from the 88 act. Two completely different offences.

Quote: The physical structure of a knife which has a blade of les then 3" and is not a fixed or locking blade does not make it offensive. It is legal to carry in a public place. YES

If you are in a public place and, for some reason, the Police elect to stop you and search you, they should have a reasonable reason to do so, yes? YES

OK, if the Police believe you do not have a good reason to be carrying it they can a) arrest you, b) confiscate it or c) request you return it home. NO

This is the context i refer to. You cannot walk down the street playing with a folding knife with the thought that it is legal and you can carry it without fear of contradiction. YES YOU CAN IF IT'S A SUB 3" NON LOCKING FOLDER (subject to what you mean by 'playing with it')

So, the physical structure of the knife itself is mute; it may be a legal, non-locking folder but the context of the carry dictates whether it is offensive or not.

Again you are mixing the two offences up. The sub 3" folder will NEVER fall foul of the 88 act, you don't need 'good reason' to carry it, it's excluded.
It would fall foul of the 53 act if your intention was to cause injury and that would be for the Police to prove.

PLEASE read the law Society Gazette article I linked as it explains both acts quite well.

[SlimJim16v]

The physical structure of a knife which has a blade of les then 3" and is not a fixed or locking blade does not make it offensive. It is legal to carry in a public place.

OK, if the Police believe you do not have a good reason to be carrying it they can a) arrest you, b) confiscate it or c) request you return it home.

With these two points, you are contradicting yourself, with the second one being WRONG.

[Groundrush]

London Lad is correct. Sub 3" slip joint folding pocket knives are exempt from CJA 1988 so you do not need any excuse to carry one in a public place. PCA1953 is only contravened if there is intent to cause injury. But don't take my word for it, read the Home Office guidelines: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publica...fo?view=Binary

[Barryboy]

Now I regularly carry my 8 function Victorinox penknife - it's amazing how often I use it and I take it anywhere, including the pub. I don't consider it as a weapon... in a pub scenario a broken glass or beer bottle or even a chair is a much more readily available weapon should I be stupid or desperate enough to want such a thing.

I am interested in the definition of a 3 inch blade.... Is the "three inches" so often quoted:

1) The length of the entire blade, from the tip to the very base even though the last 3/8" is contained in the handle of the knife

2) The length of the blade from the tip to the pivot point where it is fixed to the knife

3) The length of the blade form the tip to where it meets the handle of the knife when fully opened, or

3) The length of the part of the blade which is actually sharpened to an edge

If the answer is actually number 1 then I could possible be breaking the law as I'm not certain if the measurement of my knife is 3"" or 3 1/16"


I'm not particularly worried either way because as I said I don't consider this a weapon, but I would be interested all the same

Rob

[Hubs]

I'm sure I've read pivot to tip as the defining length for three inches. It has the benefit of being easily repeatable as a measurement.

[Kris]

Now I regularly carry my 8 function Victorinox penknife - it's amazing how often I use it and I take it anywhere, including the pub. I don't consider it as a weapon... in a pub scenario a broken glass or beer bottle or even a chair is a much more readily available weapon should I be stupid or desperate enough to want such a thing.

I am interested in the definition of a 3 inch blade.... Is the "three inches" so often quoted:

1) The length of the entire blade, from the tip to the very base even though the last 3/8" is contained in the handle of the knife

2) The length of the blade from the tip to the pivot point where it is fixed to the knife

3) The length of the blade form the tip to where it meets the handle of the knife when fully opened, or

3) The length of the part of the blade which is actually sharpened to an edge

If the answer is actually number 1 then I could possible be breaking the law as I'm not certain if the measurement of my knife is 3"" or 3 1/16"


I'm not particularly worried either way because as I said I don't consider this a weapon, but I would be interested all the same

Rob

Whilst it isn't definitively specified in law, it is generally and reasonably taken to be The length of the blade form the tip to where it meets the handle of the knife when fully opened.

[london lad]

I don't think its been tested yet, some say the length of the cutting edge, which of course can be longer or shorter than the length of the actual blade.
I have also seen 'the forward end of the handle to the tip of the blade' quoted but I've not seen any test cases.

Ops Kris beat me too it

[SlimJim16v]

The 3" is specified in law, as actual cutting edge.
How that's measured though, is a different matter.

[Spencer Lee]

You are now confusing and mixing up different bits of the 88 and 53 acts. 'Offensive weapon' is only applicable to the 53 act and the 'sub 3" non locking folder' is the definition of a 'folding pocket knife' from the 88 act. Two completely different offences.

Quote: The physical structure of a knife which has a blade of les then 3" and is not a fixed or locking blade does not make it offensive. It is legal to carry in a public place. YES

If you are in a public place and, for some reason, the Police elect to stop you and search you, they should have a reasonable reason to do so, yes? YES

OK, if the Police believe you do not have a good reason to be carrying it they can a) arrest you, b) confiscate it or c) request you return it home. NO

This is the context i refer to. You cannot walk down the street playing with a folding knife with the thought that it is legal and you can carry it without fear of contradiction. YES YOU CAN IF IT'S A SUB 3" NON LOCKING FOLDER (subject to what you mean by 'playing with it')

So, the physical structure of the knife itself is mute; it may be a legal, non-locking folder but the context of the carry dictates whether it is offensive or not.

Again you are mixing the two offences up. The sub 3" folder will NEVER fall foul of the 88 act, you don't need 'good reason' to carry it, it's excluded.
It would fall foul of the 53 act if your intention was to cause injury and that would be for the Police to prove.

PLEASE read the law Society Gazette article I linked as it explains both acts quite well.

I don't give a damn about the acts, i'm talking about the legalities. Yes it is leagal to carry, i do not dispute this, what i am saying is if it is seen to be inappropriate the Police may want to know what good reason you have to be carrying it. If you cannot give a good reason this may been seen as falling foul of the 53 act and therefore the context of the carry is questionable.

The OP asked about the legalities not the specific acts.

With these two points, you are contradicting yourself, with the second one being WRONG.

How so? WRONG just does'nt cut it (no pun intended). OK, 21 yr old guy walking down the street, pulls a sub 3" non locking folder out of his shell suit bottoms and starts to open and close it. Lets say he is sat on a park bench. Police man walks past. Does he question the young man as to why he is carrying the knife or just walking past smiling as the little scamp is carrying a EDC legal knife?

Sorry, this is winding me up. When supposed experts and academics are embroiled in which act this and which law that. Get your heads out of books and off Google and look at real time contexts.

[SlimJim16v]

Because a sub 3" non locking folding knife is specifically exempt from the law requiring good, or any reason to have it with you. It is my legal right to carry one.

i do agree though that having one in a pub or at a football match might not be a good idea, under most circumstances.

In fact the locking knife not being legal without good reason only came in later, where a legal precedent was set.

[london lad]

I don't give a damn about the acts, i'm talking about the legalities. Yes it is leagal to carry, i do not dispute this, what i am saying is if it is seen to be inappropriate the Police may want to know what good reason you have to be carrying it. If you cannot give a good reason this may been seen as falling foul of the 53 act and therefore the context of the carry is questionable.

The OP asked about the legalities not the specific acts.



How so? WRONG just does'nt cut it (no pun intended). OK, 21 yr old guy walking down the street, pulls a sub 3" non locking folder out of his shell suit bottoms and starts to open and close it. Lets say he is sat on a park bench. Police man walks past. Does he question the young man as to why he is carrying the knife or just walking past smiling as the little scamp is carrying a EDC legal knife?

Sorry, this is winding me up. When supposed experts and academics are embroiled in which act this and which law that. Get your heads out of books and off Google and look at real time contexts.

He may want to know but they are not entitled to know and you are not obliged to have any good reason. No you would not fall foul of the 53 act.

We are just going to have to disagree on the this but I really do suggest you read the article I linked which will clarify it for you.

[Hubs]

Intriguing to watch a debate with an ex-policeman about how a policeman would react...

[GraniteQuarry]

My next career just decided: knife lawyer!

[Kingstepper]

I've just read that from April 25 the TSA will allow folding knives < 6cm aboard planes.

Said to 'bring the United States in line with international rules'. Rather strange, didn't know that knives were allowed on planes elsewhere.

[Hubs]

BA still giving out plastic cutlery, so it will be handy to have something that will cut!

[Glamdring]

^
If they'd ever read 'Shibumi' they'd ban everything on board a plane. (One of the best thrillers ever written.)

[Huertecilla]

I've just read that from April 25 the TSA will allow folding knives < 6cm aboard planes.

Said to 'bring the United States in line with international rules'. Rather strange, didn't know that knives were allowed on planes elsewhere.

And 6 cm. is not in line with anything either.

[Corporalsparrow]

There are some new norks up in the boys room. Some of you really need to head over there.

[media_mute]

thanks very much, will likely do

First things first - buy the same knife from Heinnie, it's £13 cheaper.
http://www.heinnie.com/UK-Penknife-F...de/p-0-0-6081/#
With the money saved, get yourself a 4" pouch to use as a "tool box"
http://www.heinnie.com/product.asp?P...istory=related#
Then you won't be carrying a knife ready to use - it will be hidden away out of sight.
It might put your mind at rest.



The 7-inch £3.95 fleece lined carry cases can be used as travel bags for watches
http://www.heinnie.com/Knife-Care-&-.../c-1-377-1197/

[seffrican]

Firstly, to people talking about bayonets with a "blood groove": that's a myth and a misnomer. It's called a fuller, and it has noting to do with blood and everything to do with engineering.

Secondly, interesting perspectives here. The fear of knives in the UK seems to have spread to the forum, so that some of us seem to believe that a little Victorinox was designed as an offensive weapon. Or that having a knife is somehow outlandish.

I don't expect that everyone will feel the need to carry a knife, but it's a little blinkered not to understand that a Victorinox Classic, for example, comes in handy several times a day.

To give a different perspective, in Switzerland, Victorinox knives are sold in the supermarkets, often in the kitchen section, and can be bought second hand in charity shops. If you want to buy booze or cigarettes at the supermarket, you will probably have to show your ID, but not to buy an everyday swiss army knife.

And the flea markets often have stands selling all kinds of military surplus, including bayonets. Although I don't think anyone needs to be told that carrying one everywhere is not a good idea.

of course, this may be the most useful of all:

[WatchScout]

Yes it does! As I've already written above but will repeat:

For the 53 act the item has to be made, adapted or intended by the person having it with them for causing injury.

So items made or adapted for causing injury are offensive weapons per se without any intention being required.

A bayonet with a blood groove is an example of an item made for causing injury. It is an offensive weapon per se regardless of your intent to cause injury

An orange with razor blades stuck in it is an example of an item adapted for causing injury. It is an offensive weapon per se regardless of your intent to cause injury

An ordinary knife is not an offensive weapon per se as it was not made or adapted for causing injury, it was made for cutting things, so intent is required.

You are confusing the definition of an offensive weapon with the 'defence' of 'good reason' they are two separate things.

I too am a collector.

Fuller.

Sorry - pet peeve.

[seffrican]

Fuller.

Sorry - pet peeve.

One of mine too...I said the same thing about the same time. We must try to be sympathetic to our less fortunate comrades to whom engineering is a mystery, I suppose.

Lister: I mean, I never had a chance, no money, no family, no education.
Rimmer: No education?
Lister: Yeah. I went to Arts College.

[london lad]

Firstly, to people talking about bayonets with a "blood groove": that's a myth and a misnomer. It's called a fuller, and it has noting to do with blood and everything to do with engineering.

Secondly, interesting perspectives here. The fear of knives in the UK seems to have spread to the forum, so that some of us seem to believe that a little Victorinox was designed as an offensive weapon. Or that having a knife is somehow outlandish.

I don't expect that everyone will feel the need to carry a knife, but it's a little blinkered not to understand that a Victorinox Classic, for example, comes in handy several times a day.

To give a different perspective, in Switzerland, Victorinox knives are sold in the supermarkets, often in the kitchen section, and can be bought second hand in charity shops. If you want to buy booze or cigarettes at the supermarket, you will probably have to show your ID, but not to buy an everyday swiss army knife.

And the flea markets often have stands selling all kinds of military surplus, including bayonets. Although I don't think anyone needs to be told that carrying one everywhere is not a good idea.

of course, this may be the most useful of all:

Fuller.

Sorry - pet peeve.

One of mine too...I said the same thing about the same time. We must try to be sympathetic to our less fortunate comrades to whom engineering is a mystery, I suppose.

Lister: I mean, I never had a chance, no money, no family, no education.
Rimmer: No education?
Lister: Yeah. I went to Arts College.

Wow OK Fuller. You learn something every day :-)

Let me use another example, a knuckle duster. My point being that such an item falls into the 'made' for causing injury under the 53 act and therefore no intent is required to complete the offence.

[WatchScout]

One of mine too...I said the same thing about the same time. We must try to be sympathetic to our less fortunate comrades to whom engineering is a mystery, I suppose.

Lister: I mean, I never had a chance, no money, no family, no education.
Rimmer: No education?
Lister: Yeah. I went to Arts College.

I managed to miss your post on the subject of fullers.
I just saw the 'blood groove' term and commented on that.
I thought, I was the only one bothered about that

Firstly, to people talking about bayonets with a "blood groove": that's a myth and a misnomer. It's called a fuller, and it has noting to do with blood and everything to do with engineering.

Secondly, interesting perspectives here. The fear of knives in the UK seems to have spread to the forum, so that some of us seem to believe that a little Victorinox was designed as an offensive weapon. Or that having a knife is somehow outlandish.

I don't expect that everyone will feel the need to carry a knife, but it's a little blinkered not to understand that a Victorinox Classic, for example, comes in handy several times a day.

To give a different perspective, in Switzerland, Victorinox knives are sold in the supermarkets, often in the kitchen section, and can be bought second hand in charity shops. If you want to buy booze or cigarettes at the supermarket, you will probably have to show your ID, but not to buy an everyday swiss army knife.

And the flea markets often have stands selling all kinds of military surplus, including bayonets. Although I don't think anyone needs to be told that carrying one everywhere is not a good idea.

of course, this may be the most useful of all:
(--PIC--)
.

I agree.
Further more, I quite often carry a SAK and find it very useful.
Funny, how people are different; in a thread about a member seeking advice about which torch to buy, the thread overflowed with torches and torch advice.
Someone commneted, that it was strange to have more than one torch .....or even a torch at all - some people cant wrap their minds around, why a torch might come in handy or why anyone would have more than one single Tesco cheapo torch.
Soon some will come along and wonder, why others even bother carrying a pocket knife

[rfrazier]

Soon some will come along and wonder, why others even bother carrying a pocket knife

As long as their lack of imagination doesn't lead to law, fair enough.

Best wishes,
Bob

[london lad]

As long as their lack of imagination doesn't lead to law, fair enough.

Best wishes,
Bob

This is exactly why I get so concerned with people being told by well meaning 'police' friends and others, that the existing law is more restrictive than it actually is.

[sheepsteeth]

i have very much enjoyed this thread so far.

I carried a bayonet for 6 months (and never needed it even a single time) and was not aware that the blood groove was actually a fuller. We soldiers have been taught about the virtues of a blood groove in very formal lessons for decades. i will do my best to avoid being a smarty-pants during my next skill-at-arms session!

I quite like knives, I just bought a knife from a forum member, mainly because i think it looks good, it brings my total number of folding locking knives to 7 but i never carry them anywhere with me (unless im am on excercise or operations) and have never found the necessity for a knife that required me to carry one in my pocket.

I walk in the countryside everyday, i go camping, i open parcels every few days or so, i go mountain biking and my job is quite outdoorsy but i never feel the need to carry a knife in my pocket.

that said, im in a bit of a minority as clearly, lots of folks use their knives really frequently.

[seffrican]

I managed to miss your post on the subject of fullers.
I just saw the 'blood groove' term and commented on that.
I thought, I was the only one bothered about that

I think you were typing your reply as I was posting mine.

As long as their lack of imagination doesn't lead to law, fair enough.

Nicely put.

i have very much enjoyed this thread so far.

I carried a bayonet for 6 months (and never needed it even a single time) and was not aware that the blood groove was actually a fuller. We soldiers have been taught about the virtues of a blood groove in very formal lessons for decades. i will do my best to avoid being a smarty-pants during my next skill-at-arms session!

The mythical stuff about the function of the "blood groove" is a story made up to explain the incomprehensible. The fuller is part of the structure of the blade for reasons of optimising strength and weight and material used. The made up story about it being blood groove was invented by the same kind of guy who told you that rain falls because god is sad that some of us carry a SAK all day long.

[Huertecilla]

This is exactly why I get so concerned with people being told by well meaning 'police' friends and others, that the existing law is more restrictive than it actually is.

The problem with the poice is two-fold:
1. Not all are aware of the intricacies of the law as the result of confliting economic and controll interests
2. They wánt to give the answer that all is prohibeted and that thét have the power to enforce it.

The second aspect is a bit like asking a hair dresser if you need a hair cut or.... a knife seller what is allowed. The seller wants to sell as much as the police wants you not to carry one.

This topic is about knives, so .... about knives but the exact same applies to screw drivers. You are not allowed to carry a screw driver in your pocket at sports events, restaurants etc.
This applies to ALL pointed objects that can be used to inflict bodily damage. You can only have/use these in the confines of your home and at the working place if it is a tool of your trade.
Yes, it applies to a ´tactical´ pen too.

As to the confusion about a sub 3" no locking folder, the Fällkniven site is cristal clear. In the blurp about their 6 cm. non locker folder they state that this in most countries makes it legal to carry in your pocket EXCEPT at sports events, in restaurants etc.

[SimonK]

It seems there is a conflict between the two acts and I suppose a judge would have to decide which was applicable in a given set of circumstances.

There is law against 'going equipped for stealing' but it does not mean every AA patrolman should be arrested because he in possession a tool designed to jemmy open a locked car door, so surely not everybody carrying a pocket knife automatically falls foul of the letter of the law on pocket knives.

A question then, for the learnèd gentlmen of this thread, presumably the test of mens rea keeps AA patrolmen out of gaol, would it also apply to the pocket knife question.

[Huertecilla]

A question then, for the learnèd gentlmen of this thread, presumably the test of mens rea keeps AA patrolmen out of gaol, would it also apply to the pocket knife question.

The AA man a rotund NO as he legitimately has tools of ghis trade.

The rest is both no and yes.
Like when an electricia bona fide forgets to take his electricians folder out of his pocket when popping into a restaurant fo lunch. It is nó excuse but he will most likely be told to put the thing in his car whereas in other situations the situation itself assumes criminal intent. Like not being an AA man and walking about with a burglars tool kit at 3 AM. In thát case you will have to come up withy a pretty solid argument.
Also take walking the dog. Letting one off the leash in a forest cán get you a caution but if it is a lurcher/whippet after dark that changes the picture whether you are bona fide daft or not.

[SimonK]

Thank you for your opinion, but I was using the word 'learned' as a prenominal to mean one who is a member of the legal profession.

[Huertecilla]

Thank you for your opinion, but I was using the word 'learned' as a prenominal to mean one who is a member of the legal profession.

Ever so polite....

[london lad]

It seems there is a conflict between the two acts and I suppose a judge would have to decide which was applicable in a given set of circumstances.

There is law against 'going equipped for stealing' but it does not mean every AA patrolman should be arrested because he in possession a tool designed to jemmy open a locked car door, so surely not everybody carrying a pocket knife automatically falls foul of the letter of the law on pocket knives.

A question then, for the learnèd gentlmen of this thread, presumably the test of mens rea keeps AA patrolmen out of gaol, would it also apply to the pocket knife question.

Yes as far as the 53 act is concerned. Unless the item in question is 'made or adapted' for causing injury mens rea or guilty thought is required to complete the offence.