Under the 1958 federal Switchblade Act, switchblade knives are not importable into the United States, and may not be shipped across state lines. On May 21, U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) proposed the revocation of four previous Ruling Letters; the effect would be a drastic expansion of the definition of non-importable knives. The organization KnifeRights warns that revocations would outlaw approximately 80 percent of the current market in folding knives.
The federal law does not apply to the mere possession or carrying of knives, but as KnifeRights explains, many state and local bans on possession or carrying are parasitic on the federal definition. Accordingly, if the proposed Customs change goes into effect, many millions of people who own or carry pocketknives would instantly be defined as criminals.
The National Rifle Association and other Second Amendment groups have issued alerts about the proposed change, but the KnifeRights website is the key source for detailed information. Founded in 2006, KnifeRights is still a fledgling organization; they do good work, and I am pleased to be a member.
[Note: I added text to clarify that the 80% figure is for folding knives.]
Obama administration moves to ban 80% of folding knives:
.
80% is claimed to represent the fraction of imports that are one-hand opening or spring assist. I would guess that one hand opening is the vast majority of that 80% figure.
KnifeRights just made up the number, and Kopel just passed along the made up number as if there was some actual data to support it because he opposes the change. Just more noise from the zealots in the blogosphere, nothing to see here. Too bad, I might have been interested if there was reasonable commentary on the issue.
Would these people be eligible for trial in Article III courts, or simply rounded up and shot?
.
The press release describes another category of folding knife, in addition to spring assisted opening.
They would be kidnapped by Obama's
socialistfascistsocialist ACORN-piloted Black Helicopters, and would be placed in Guantanamo, which is why B. HUSSEIN Obama is making room there by sending terrorists to America's heartland.That about right Mr. Kopel?
The problem is that the proposed interpretation of the rule is not limited to spring-assisted knives.
Pretty much any knife with a thumb stud or hole in the blade can be opened with a bit of pressure on the stud and the assistance of gravity or a flick of the wrist. That's what makes the proposed rule cover so many knives.
Are you saying this as nothing to do with the FEMA camps?
Obama needs to muzzle that woman, once and for all. No sense going looking for trouble, on stuff that means nothing, and might cost him politically.
That about right Mr. Kopel?
I'll remember this the next time guys like you are whining about the GOP burning books or something that actually has zero chance of happening, as opposed this this, which actually is in the works.
Just because Jon Stewart makes a few million bucks cheesing for the camera and arguing against caricatures doesn't mean it works for everyone. Take a note.
Ahhhh, now it makes sense. I read that the 9/11 hijackers' weapons, though often described as "box cutters", were in fact Leatherman multi-tools.
Terrorists don't hijack airliners... multi-tools hijack airliners.
I'm not sure who "guys like you" refers too, but if you want to cite a respected liberal voice predicting book burning in 2004 or so please do so.
I do remember a lot of "guys like me" predicting that Bush would ruin our standing in the world and that the Iraq War would become a huge intractable mess. Boy we were fools!
Making nonsensical unsupported claims does not equal to well-documented instances when the GOP administration abused the power, including issuing subpoenas to libraries re books people were reading. Take a note.
It seems to me that the goal is to eliminate/reduce the number of "one handed folding knives." They are compact enough to fit in a pocket, and easily converted into super scary action mode.
I look forward to Diane Feinstein adding criteria to expand the definition, so that all scary looking knives are banned. This will end the menace of knives which:
(1) are black
(2) have handles made out of "invisible to x-ray machines" plastic.
(3) have blood grooves in the blade
(4) are cheaper than $100
My right to keep and bear arms includes exactly the kinds of weapons described in this bill. More than that, there is no constitutional authority for Congress to forbid the possession of anything, or transport across state lines of anything not being traded. Our personal possessions are not commerce, the power to regulate is not the power to prohibit, or to impose criminal penalties, and there is no power to regulate something because it has an effect, substantial or otherwise, on interstate commerce.
The good news is that the Democratic Congress is making it easier for us to organize and recruit people to oppose them. There is little constituency for thus restricting knives, but a lot of people who have them and intend to keep them.
.
Maybe this is an attempt to jazz up knife sales, to accompany the jazzed up gun and ammunition sales.
.
I agree that the policy change is directed to one-hand operated folding knives. No conversion is necessary to get them into scary action mode. With a modest amount of practice (30 to 90 minutes), one will obtain the skill to go from folded to open and locked in a quarter of a second or so. From the opinion letters, none of the folding knives are amenable to "springing open." The hand must power the opening action.
.
Perhaps Congress will be lobbied to amend the switchblade/gravity assist folding knife ban, to add one hand openers. I'd suggest too, a ban on pointy sticks, pointy scissors, steak knives, and blunt rocks.
But Kopel's the one wearing the tinfoil hat for simply reporting on an actual measure. Right, Tugh? Because that's so much easier to deal with.
You know Barack's The Man now, right? To paraphrase Stewart from the election, it's okay to admit that maybe he just did something stupid.
.
Interesting. But guess what? The traditional razor-blade box cutter utility knife is clearly a one-hand operated device. Push the catch down, advance the blade, release the catch. I find this action easier to operate than any of the one-hand openers that I've practiced with, and that are the subject of Customs intention to block from entry. Buy 'em up now, the price is going to go up faster than the coming inflation.
I can't buy my 11-year-old son a pocket knife for fear that he may accidentally leave it in his pocket when he goes to school. We are becoming less free every day.
.
I'm going to guess the answer will come back in the negative (not a respectable author, or some other excuse), but this line made me LOL, and I like Joe Walsh:
My Spyderco is a little different in that it has a hole for your thumb to pull the knife open with, but it's functionally identical.
Expanding the definition of "switchblade" to cover knives like this will ban a hell of a lot of commonly carried pocket knives.
Additionally, this appears to ban every kind of knife that is equipped with a thumb stud. Anyone who has shopped around for a folding knife within the past 5 years or so knows that nearly every knife being sold on the market is some variation on the "thumb-stud assisted opener" theme.
They're just trying to ban anything they can. IMO, switchblades shouldn't be illegal in the first place and we shouldn't be having a stupid debate over folding knives. They were only banned in the first place out of animus towards certain racial minorities.
"The scary bad people are making paranoid charges again.
"What they are predicting could not possibly happen and no one wants it to.
"But since they are afraid of it or opposed to it, it would be a good thing if it really did happen."
The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli.
Seriously, the guy's a creampuff, and I can't imagine there's a malevolent bone in his body.
You can burn Springsteen, Foreigner, AC/Dc... no big loss. But Joe Walsh, leave this genius be.
"Kids, take a good long look at these guys, if you do drugs you'll end up like them, but without the money."
This wouldn't be particularly worrisome on its own. However, the 4 rulings they are repealing refer to gravity assist and inertia assist as comprising a category of knives that are not switchblades. The ambiguous language above combined with the repeal of the rulings setting gravity and inertia assist outside of the scope of the law make it look like those areas are now going to be treated as being included in the law.
If you read it to include all the thumb stud folders that use gravity, inertia or spring assist, that's possibly 80 percent of the folder market. I wouldn't be surprised if they were trying to scare their constituents, but customs is pretty obviously trying to antagonize the cutlery fans.
I'm not a knife nut myself, I collect guns.
There, fixed that for you!
In other related news, a group such as KnifeRights is apparently necessary.
Meh.
Based on my reading of a novel by British author Dick Francis, England has extremely strick laws governing knives, and yes, swords. If the British laws were applied to Americans perhaps millions would be in violation.
What kind of a right wing terrorist child needs a pocket knife anyway. Anything that needs cutting will be cut in due time by the authorized government representative using the best practices of safe cutting.
"I can't buy my 11-year-old son a pocket knife for fear that he may accidentally leave it in his pocket when he goes to school. We are becoming
less freemore safe every day.There, fixed that for you!"
You have got to be kidding me.
Pathetic.
This strikes me as an exceedingly stupid law, most likely passed in response to the trumped up fears of people who had seen "Rebel Without a Cause" and "The Wild One" and taken them way too seriously. Congress ought to take this one off the books.
That said, the text seems pretty straightforward to me and I don't realy see any basis for the CBP not to enforce the statute as written.
So, instead of carrying my folder, I'll carry my 5" hunting knife on my belt. No biggie, that one is easier to draw anyway.
Are these "machine knives" that the government can prohibit, because they are scarce because the government prohibits them, or are these the kind of day to day tools that everybody who ever a cub scout has had at one time?
Is there any "doesn't apply at the border" exception to the 2nd amendment? Perhaps this would be a good question of the day for the gentleman from Texas to ask.
Howard Dean quoted in 2004 as saying the Bush administration "cares more about burning books than reading books."
HuffPo
Carl Pope (2006) "The Administration is not yet burning books, but they are getting very close."
How about these? Is Howard Dean still a "respected liberal"? (I know nothing of Pope)
A google search on these two phrases together, "Bush administration" and "burning books", returned 3,190 links (319 pages). I just went through several pages to find these two, and most were blogs I had no knowledge of, so I ignored them, though some may have also quoted other respected liberals. But it is interesting that there would be so many hits when searching for those two exact phrases together, non?
There were also a ton of them about how the Bush admin plans to consolidate the EPA library were akin to the book burning of the Nazis, and implying that they would burn people next. (I dared not search for "Bush" and "Nazi" and "Hitler" together for fear of locking up my computer.)
The two phrases ""Bush Administration" and "Banning books" returned over 12,000 hits, but many were about how, after the Wasila librarian refused to torch the library, Palin had her waterboarded and summarily executed, and I was tired so I stopped looking further.
That's only searching on those two exact terms together. The way searches work when in parens is you don't get most of the variants, like the ones that would have "burned books", "burn books", etc. Changing the terms to "George Bush" and "______ books" would probably have gotten even more hits.
When confronted by a mugger with a switchblade, the Crocodile Dundee solution works best - "That's notta a knife, THIS is a knife."
Here is an interesting recent post about the VFW, Veterans of Foreign Wars, being ordered to divulge and register all weapons they may have. For those who aren't familiar with the VFW, it is a place where mainly old soldiers go to get away from their spouses and have a beer or two. Their weapons may include plugged rifles from World War I or an old cannon from the Spanish American War and so forth.
http://www.thecitizen.com/~citizen0/node/37365
This regulatory decision will put hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans out of work. Most folders today meet the criteria in the ruling, except for most slipjoints. The convenience of a one-hand opening knife shouldn't be discounted as trivial.
That's what the original ruling said, relying on the importer's representations. But if you look at the letter repealing that specific ruling, it seemes to hinge at least in part on the conclusion that the facts are not as the importer originally stated:
You can find the knife on Amazon.com and see how the mechanism works. It's not your standard thumb-button or thumb-hole folder.
A close reading of the text suggests to me that CBP is not attempting to reach the typical folder operated purely by manually operating a thumb-stud or thumb-hole. For example, CBP goes out of its way to say that,
Frankly, nothing about the words "inertia" and "gravity" necessarily implies a spring assist. I can open my Benchmade thumb-stud folder with a flick of my wrist -- purely by inertia. Pretty much anyone can learn to do this, I think. (If the factory fit is too tight for you to overcome with a flick of your wrist, it's a simple matter to buy a TORX screwdriver and loosen the hinge screw just a tad.) Under the plain language of the statute, I think that knife could very reasonably be classified as a switchblade. The same is true of just about every one-handed opener I've handled. If CBP intended to reach all thumb-hold/-stud openers, I think they could easily do so without continually referring to the spring mechanisms in AO knives. The fact that they do focus on the springs suggests to me that the ruling is intended to be narrower than the activists are claiming. I'm not completely certain about this, but I think it's pretty plausible.
David, can you offer a few concrete examples of state or local laws that are likely to import CBP's new definition to bar mere possession or carrying of my Benchmade?
Let me be clear in saying that I think regulation of switchblades is really stupid; they're no more lethal than your average kitchen knife. This is the edged weapon equivalent of "assault weapon" bans -- but perhaps even a little dumber. That said, CBP's new interpretation seems to me to be pretty consistent with the plain language of the statute. I also suspect it's narrower than the activists are claiming, though time may prove me wrong. And while I might be persuaded that this definition will imported into state and local law, the bare assertion isn't going to do it.
One-armed fishermen should sue under the ADA.
And I'm with hardbeliever--mcbain wins the thread! Priceless!!
I'm guessing they, like "saturday night specials", get banned mostly because the "wrong sorts of people" (and you know who I mean, right?) are thought to own them.
-m@
Why doesn't the government worry about ceramic knifes which (if you get the right one) will pass through metal detectors with triggering an alarm? Isn't that more of a problem than a fast draw pocket knife?
Actually, Joe Walsh is a poster child for being too close to a plate modulated AM transmitter...
If they come for my snazzy kitchen knives, though, there's going to be a fight.
The Iraq war did require a strategy/tactics change in order to resolve (how unusual in warfare!), but considering that last month had fewer Iraqi civilian deaths than any time since the 2003 invasion, I'd say that yes, you were fools.
I bet The Fonz carried a switchblade.
When knives are outlawed, only outlaws will have knives.
Yeh, I know it is assisted opening knives. Actually, the debate seems to center on what the hell the proposed legislation actually intends to regulate. My honest response is "Holy Hell, people! There are terrorist groups planning to use radioactive bombs on the US and you are wasting your damn tax-supported time regulating knives? How f-ing dumb are you?"
.
They have announced their intention to enforce the statute beyond what the statute authorizes. The spring-assist Gerber F.A.S.T. knives don't meet the statutory definition. The spring prevents opening until the user powers the blade through about 30 degrees of swing. Pushing the handle button does not cause the blade to spring open, and a flick of the wrist (inertia) will not open the knife.
.
-- Why doesn't the government worry about ceramic knifes ... --
.
It does. Titanium too.
Folding knives are often kept in pockets. Also kept in pockets are folding, money concealing devices known as wallets. When our nanny-overlords are reaching deep into our pockets in search of wallets, finding scary folding knives is, frankly, scary.
In my profession (building contractor), I can tell you that being able to open a knife using only one hand is not only convenient, but in many cases safer (think high ladders, or tight crawl-spaces) than opening a knife that requires two.
Truly, the government needs to stay OUT of my pockets. My knife (and wallet) are much safer without their attention.
.
Not stupid. Determined. Today's action is just further along the "path of progress" established by past precedent and success - mostly in the area of firearms, but not only there.
.
It's not about "smarts." It's about power. The government has it, the public does not.
In fact, the US Air Force's issue survival knife for aircrew was for years (and may still be) a switchblade, on the theory that someone in a survival situation may have an injured hand. (Presumably, a fixed-blade knife was thought too bulky.)
Of course, some of them sneered at the idea of a knife as a weapon altogther, and said a cane, baton or other long club was a better weapon. Can't say to what degree any of them where levelling with me, but I heard the same answer often enough from different people that I tend to believe them.
Nah. O's friends in Hollywood are taking a bath on one expensive, flop movie after another. A new approach to getting interest in buying more copies of classic movies is needed. This is really just the first step in the PR campaign for a re-release of a 47th anniversary re-mixed edition of West Side Story (with comments by Robert Wagner, husband of the late Natalie Wood, who'll try to sell you a Reverse Mortgage at the same time).
"Knives don't kill people. Dancing guys in tight pants . . . ."
For example, it is standard advice that anyone crewing on a sailboat of any size carry a knife. Many of the popular knives are made by companies mentioned in this thread. (For sailing, knives with sharp points are discouraged.) If you need your knife for some emergency reason in rough seas, it's a nice thing to be able to open it with one hand while hanging on with the other. ("One hand for yourself, one for the ship.")
Just recently, the City of Worcester, MA tried to pass a law limiting the size (blade length) of knifes that could be safely carried. The law needed a bunch of qualifying and exception-created clauses to leave it legal to bring a steak knife home from Bed, Bath &Beyond.
Thumb stud knives are probably the most common form of "one handed" knives. The blade is opened by continually pressing a stud with the thumb to swing the blade open. This is a continuously manual operation. Alternatively, the stud and back of the blade can be pinched between the thumb and forefinger and the blade opened with a flick of the wrist.
The references to inertia opened knives, is also troubling. Most folding work knives without a thumb stud, or even a hole on the blade spine, can be opened by pinching the back of the blade between the thumb and forefinger, and flipping the wrist causing the inertia of the handle to open the knife. This maneuver is often referred to as the "biker flip," and is possible on nearly every folding knife except small, light jackknives and pen knives.
By revoking HQ 116315, CBP has essentially defined 90% of folding knives as switchblades.
Again, as has been mentioned above, tradesmen, boaters, outdoorsmen, and others routinely use one handed folders, and consider them to be a safety item. I always wear a one handed knife any time I'm working with ropes or lines where there is a chance of entanglement, particularly around water.
If that's true, it's troubling. But CBP claims to believe that, "if speed is the order of the day, you can simply trigger the blade’s sudden release with your index finger." (That's a quote from the Gerber website, by the way.) And, "[t]he knives at issue open via inertia – once pressure is applied to the thumb stud (or protrusion at the base of the blade), the blade continues in inertial motion (caused by the combined effect of manual and spring assisted pressure) until it is stopped by the locking mechanism of the knife." Finally, "[t]he knife at issue can be instantly opened into the fully locked and ready position with one hand, simply by pushing on either of the thumb tabs. Although the knife is marketed as a 'release-assist' model, it nevertheless opens via human manipulation and inertia. See Taylor, supra, at footnote 1 on page 5. Further, it is possible to 'lock' the safety of the knife, adjust the blade (by pushing it 'against' the safety button) and to instantly deploy it by depressing the 'safety' button in a manner indiscernible from a 'traditional' switchblade (and in a manner which can be considered to be insignificant preliminary preparation; see 19 CFR Part 12.95(b), above)."
There may be a factual dispute about whether F.A.S.T. knives really do open in the way CBP says they do. I can't resolve that dispute, because I haven't handled one of these knives. (Though now I'm tempted to buy one.) But CBP seems to believe they do, and if they're right I have a hard time seeing the overreaching here. There might be a problem with CBP's version of the facts, but I'm not convinced that there's a problem with their version of the law.
Maybe I've spent too much time in the patent world, but the hand-wringers seem to have missed the limitation of automatic opening, in addition to gravity or inertia. A user pressing a tab with her thumb isn't automated in any meaningful way.
I am curious whether any switchblade prohibition survives Heller.
True dat. A person who trades liberty for security deserves neither. Or that's what I used to think. But that was then, this is now, and that was only what we believed during the Bush Administration where trading away liberty for illusory gains in security was a bad deal. It's a totally different situation now, what with the folding knife menace, global
warmingclimate change spiraling out of control, and theend ofcontinuation ofnormalization of Gitmo andrendtionimportant tools for combattingterrorismcrime. If we do not prevent the importation and possession of handy, easy-opening pieces of utility cutlery, theterrorists... er, man-caused disasterists will have won.It's good to see that the infantilization of the American people proceeds apace. For a while there I thought the throwing out of Republicans was Americans taking charge of government. Now I realize it was just a bunch of people getting upset because they were only being made dependent at "X" rate, when in fact most of us desire to become government dependents at 2X or 3X rate.
Whew! Just in time!
I bought *my* son a Leatherman for his 11th birthday last month. Fortunately, we home school, so there's little danger of his getting suspended when the knife is discovered in a strip search.
God bless the Internet.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=937594357939809469
I don't know, man. Give a little shove on the thumb stud and the knife takes over and does the rest for you by inertia. The line drawing around this issue is necessarily arbitrary, as I said before. But calling that thing a switchblade doesn't seem like an outrage, even if we limit ourselves strictly to the statutory definition.
"You kids cut it out!"
"He stabbed me."
"He pulled a knife on me."
"Shut up and sit down. Now, the angle between the hypotenuse ..."
Today, we'd have SWAT cops rappelling in through the windows.
Aren't we glad the world is so much safer, now?
Still, props to Mr. Kopel for allowing comments — it shows readers he's not trying to be a hack, unlike some other posters.
From what I'd gathered, the actual estimation (without any evidence on the numbers) was that 80% of the folding knives market could be banned. Yet the headline indicates that the Obama administration moves to ban "80% of knives", which indicates to me all knives. Seems like a majority of my knives would still be safe.
Let me know if I'm missing something — I'm no expert on knife laws.
And if they make the restrictions cover even my Skeletool as well... best not to go there.
Put the two of you together and here's what you get. It's 20 inches long, folded up.
.
On the Gerber F.A.S.T. system, complete opening is not via inertia. Some 100-150 degrees of opening rotation can be completed by spring power. The internal spring can be commanded to take over (that's the button on the handle), but that "take over" requires first the manual rotation of the blade through 30 or so degrees. The energy stored in the spring imparts inertia to the blade as the blade rotates to the open/stop position. That is, the blade rotation isn't caused by inertia (and many "inertia open" moves are technically inertia of the handle as the blade is held and the assembly is flicked)
.
The Gerber F.A.S.T. knives do not meet the following statutory definition:
Operating the button or other device on the handle does NOTHING, until after the user has manually opened the knife part way using manual effort, and that manual opening cannot be obtained by holding the handle and flicking the wrist. In the closed position, the spring assist urges the blade into the closed position - while in a switchblade, the "spring assist" is always urging the blade into an open position, ready to spring open when the catch is released.
.
Customs seems determined to interpret the statute to sweep in at least the spring assist opening models, which move will provoke litigation on the point. A Court is apt to be as disingenuous as Customs is, and uphold the decision by Customs. I doubt Congress would be interesting in clarifying the statute to reverse errors by Customs or the Courts, especially when the issue is one of permitting the people to have dangerous objects.
Parody. That is what is great about you leftists, your level of self-awarness is really, really low.
OK, you've got me there. Fixed knives are not covered.
Mike S.:
I think the Leatherman and its ilk would be OK. You can flip the handles open like a butterfly knife, but all that gives you is a set of pliers. The knife requires another action to open it from the handle. I know of no prohibition of Switchpliers.
But "designed for a craft or hobby" is highly subjective. It is too easy to say, "No, that's not a craft knife, it's a weapon." Probably the most common "work knife" found on many many construction tradesmen's belts, is a simple 4-inch folder, often with a thumb stud.
Is this, or is this not, a sufficient feature to violate the new proposed rule? Because last I checked, I could--with much greater difficulty--open my Swiss Army boy scout knife the same way, by use of the thumb-nail notch cut into the blade.
I watched the video. With a tiny thumb movement no greater than that required to operate a conventional switchblade (I carried a Benchmade AFO for several years when I was active duty military), the spring launches the blade into the locked position. The fact that some (obviously minimal) human intervention is required to initiate that process doesn't, in my view, alter the fact that the blade opens and locks through as a result of inertia generated by spring tension. Whatever you think of CBP's motives or the likely outcome of a court challenge, I simply do not agree that this is an outrageous misreading of the plain language of the statute.
Knives are arms. The Constitution protects the right of the citizenry to bear arms. Why is this difficult to practice?
I'm pretty sure that nuclear weapons count as 'arms', and yet I doubt the Constitution protects my rights to a mini-nuke.
Obviously that's an extreme example, but hopefully it shows that the 'right' isn't to be taken as broadly as possible.
"Any person who knowingly manufactures, sells, transfers, possesses, or transports a pocket knife in the State shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." A "pocket knife" is "a knife with a blade that folds into the handle and which is suitable for carrying in the pocket." Blade length doesn't seem to matter. Wrong crowd. It was the James Dean kid with a flattop or ducktail and a cigarette pack rolled into the sleeve of his white T-shirt. See Blackboard Jungle or West Side Story. Hepcats and “daddy-o” were the longhair beatniks who scarred a generation of our precious children with bongo drums. It’s a headline. The essay is the part that follows. The last “assault weapon” legislation contained a provision along the lines of “just because a firearm is used for sporting purposes doesn’t mean it’s ‘suitable for sporting purposes’.”
"The Hawaii Senate is working on Senate Bill 126: Dangerous Weapons; Pocket Knives; Sale." OK, but that's completely independent of CBP's action. It's stupid -- insane, even -- but it's some members of the Hawaii Senate being stupid/insane. I'm asking for an example in which this action by CBP will, without additional action by state or local legislatures, affect the lawfulness of mere possession under some state or local law.
CBP's claimed justification is that they've taken conflicting positions over the years regarding whether or not assisted-opening knives are switchblades, and they need to sort it out once and for all. Whether there's some more insidious, secret motive at work here I really can't say.
.
If CPB is honestly representing that its letters HQ 116315, HQ W116730, HQ H016666 and HQ H032255 all include a spring or release assist opening mechanism, and it is these specific letters that are to be reversed.
.
Letter H043122 covers the Gerber F.A.S.T., and concludes it is a switchblade.
.
I believe your knife requires the application of external rotational force throughout its opening stroke; whereas a spring-assist opening requires the application of external opening rotational force through only 30-45 degrees of the nominal 180 degrees that accompany unfolding.
Now THAT's how to rewrite a statute. A new (additional) switchblade has been defined, and has the elements of "require minimal human intervention" plus "spring assist to fully open and locked."
Um. Any knife with a reasonably long blade that's strong enough to be used to stab someone is a weapon. It may also be a tool, but these are not contradictory concepts. In any case, knife bans in schools generally do not limit themselves to switchblades, so this ruling has zero effect on such bans.
Seen from this perspective, the knife ban is coherent with the leftist anti-individual-rights agenda, which collectivizes our individual rights in the name of public safety and then limits those "approved" rights in order to nullify them.
"I'm asking for an example in which this action by CBP will, without additional action by state or local legislatures, affect the lawfulness of mere possession under some state or local law."
Virginia statute does not define a switchblade. I don't have the ability to check the caselaw at the moment, but I think it's reasonable to believe that the Federal definition would stand in court, and be used by the Commonwealth's Attorney.
Virginia's law on switchblades is a bit weird. Simple possession is not specifically banned, only possession "with the intent to sell, barter, give or furnish." The catch? Simple possession is prima facie evidence of intent to sell, barter, give or furnish. (Va Code Sec. 18.2-311).
Thanks. I agree that the federal definition could serve as persuasive precedent for state courts trying to define switchblades. But it's far from a foregone conclusion that they will necessarily treat federal law - let alone what seems to be the equivalent of a letter ruling by a federal agency - as controlling.
When the Virginia Supreme Court needed a definition of a switchblade in Wood v. Henry Co. Public Schools, 255 Va. 85 (1998), it didn't look to federal law. It looked to the dictionary. Id. at 94, n.6. And in Richards v. Commonwealth, 18 Va. App. 242 (1994) the Virginia Court of Appeals (rather strangely) relied on a Hawaii case for the definition of a switchblade, id. at 245; that Hawaii case, in turn, cited the Hawaii statutory definition (which is identical to the federal statutory definition). In re Doe, 73 Haw. 89, 91 (1992). Then there's State v. Riddall, 112 N.M. 78 (1991), in which the court looked at statutes from Nevada, Hawaii, Texas, Wisconsin, Maine, Washington and New York for assistance in determining what the term "switchblade" meant as used in a New Mexico statute. You know what it didn't mention? Federal law.
But even where state courts do choose to look to federal law in defining switchblades, as in the Hawaii case I just mentioned (and note: that court seems to have mentioned federal law only in passing, not as a basis for its ruling), they look to the federal statute -- which has been around since 1958 - and cases interpreting that statute. I would not expect them to rely on letter rulings issued by federal agencies in very different legal contexts (an ex ante administrative ruling on the lawfulness of importation, vs. an ex post criminal question of the lawfulness of simple possession/carry), probably issued many years after the adoption of the statute that the court happens to be interpreting.
I'm not saying the chance that the CBP ruling will affect mere possession under some state's law is zero. It's possible that a state court somewhere will give it some weight. But a quick survey of the top Westlaw results for cases defining the term "switchblade" does not give me much reason to think that's going to be a big problem. Meanwhile, the Knife Rights guys (and Kopel) are claimining as a foregone conclusion that, "if the proposed Customs change goes into effect, many millions of people who own or carry pocketknives would instantly be defined as criminals." I think that conclusion is, well, perhaps "hysterical" is too strong a word. But so far it certainly seems unwarranted.
Let me reiterate, by the way, that I think the whole idea of switchblade bans is mind-bogglingly stupid. I might even vote for irrational, if I were a judge with power to decide the issue.
I am appalled that children are taught that claims of collective rights to illusory safety concerns can so readily supercede their actual individual right to be considered innocent until proven guilty.
I am appalled that litigation concerns have driven schools and those who run them to enact zero tolerance policies whose only apparent effect, other than helping the school avoid lawsuits, is to demonize legitimate uses of tools.
I am appalled that most commenters here think the federal and state switchblade bans actually are laws worth the paper they are written on, and do anything to prevent any crimes.
I'm not really sure most commenters here think either of those things -- especially the latter.
You only carried a pocket knife through high school? Heck, I carried mine from about fifth grade on. (Mine was also a Victorinox Spartan.)
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
They are intended, and quite effective at exactly the opposite. They create crimes. If you create crimes, you create criminals. That gives the stare a lever by which to control people.
At its least pernicious level, it allows the state an opportunity to punish someone it does not like, by finding a crime they have committed. The more crimes you have on the books, the easier it is to find one someone has committed. We're not quite sure what you were really up to, so we will persecute [sic] you for carrying a knife.
Be polite to the nice secret policeman, now, y'hear?
At its most pernicious level, it allows the state to control everyone, because everyone is a criminal, somehow. If you offend your Masters, you will be punished. Be polite to the nice politician, y'hear?
This is not accidental. It is deliberate.
When everybody is a criminal, no one has any rights, only privileges.
Professor Chaos, it's not a conspiracy. It's more of a movement. But the trend is in that direction, nonetheless.
I don't care about mini nukes as long as I can keep my phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range. I mean, seriously, there's no legitimate sporting purpose for a nuclear weapon.
Here is Texas Penal Code dealing with dangerous weapons: here
I have asked this question before but I am, yet, to receive an answer: if we did not have a Bill of Rights, no 2nd amendment, would the Federal government have the Consitutional authority to cofiscate and ban fire arms? Me think not. Therefore, from where the FedGov gets the authority to deal with knives?
.
It doesn't have the authority, legitimately. It asserts the authority by sophistry backed with brute force. Act contrary to their edicts and you'll find their power. There are so many of them, how can they be wrong?
This was one of the arguments against the adoption of a Bill of Rights. It was argued that it would be used to limit our basic rights. I can't answer whether we would have been better off without the Sacred Ten, but that argument has been borne out by history.
But look at what happened here and elsewhere. The Bill of Rights protected shreds of the rights in it. Without the BOR we'd have most of the 1st, portions of 4-8, and maybe rifles allowed if you could prove you were a hunter. Oh, and the 3rd because it never came up.
Arguments that the Bill of Rights could be used to limit rights only make sense when those rights+more are respected.
I guess the only real answer is eternal vigilance, and perhaps a bit of the watering of the tree of Liberty.
If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.
Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.
We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.
And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.